Is it legally rape? I'd be inclined to say so, because if you reverse the roles it would _definitely_ be rape, and I'm not one for a double standard. Or if you had Minerva there instead.
However.
The word rape is used to describe a lot of things, many of which are much worse than others. This was not violent, not abusive, not damaging. It was degrading, yes - Hermione turns Severus into a sexual object, not much more than a dildo - but that's hardly somthing I, nor most guys I know, would object to.
If you presented the scenario to most guys - e.g. young virgin finds man twice her age incapacitated, takes advantage - the general consensus would probably be "lucky bastard." I have (male) friends who would be seriously offended and creeped out, of course, but they're hyper-conscious of social and personal boundaries.
____
I think one of the issues is that the word "rape" is a highly charged word. Generally, only 2% of rapes are done (planned) by malicious strangers, but the idea of a thoroughly evil individual kidnapping, raping, abusing, etc is rather extreme.
In those scenarios, the (generally a ) woman's choice is not only disregarded, it's actively violated. Someone says "no", they've made a choice; to violate that (force actions to "yes") is ...shocking.
In this case, the ability to give consent - to choose - was not there, so Hermione's actions were not a violation of Snape's choice in the same way a lot of rape is (except counter-factually).
I suppose you could argue that that's worse, in a way - because to violate a choice, you need a person to have made a choice; or, you need to acknowledge them capable of making a choice. That is, you recognize that they are human beings, and have the ability to make choices about their lives. In that sort of rape, part of the turn-on would be the degradation implicit in the active removal of that choice; to illustrate that a power the individual thought [she|he] had was an illusion, and the rapist has the ability to remove that choice, render it null, and in doing so deny a portion of their humanity.
In Hermione's case, she didn't even acknowledge Snape's right to choose to begin with - that is, at no point during the story did she see him, really, as a human being. She became aware of him "as a man", but that was synonymous with having a cock - not with having human dignity. Her paradigm shift was from Snape as an asexual creature, to Snape as a sexual creature; having a warm cock she could play with.
While that means Hermione's "rape" lacked the violence and violation of other forms of rape where one's choice is actively denied, the objectification was pretty complete as was the denial of the right to make a choice (lack of consent/etc).
Anyway.
I think the "Dubious Consent" warning you have on the story is entirely appropriate, and warning enough. While dubious consent was probably envisioned as drunk sex (or otherwise drug-addled), where consent was given but the ability to give consent is suspect, your story is mild enough to fit the spirit of the warning if not the definition.
It took me only the better part of two months before figuring out why it bothers/bothered me so much that readers labeled those two stories with “rape”. (Well, not all did ;-) It is simple, really: there is no rape here because I didn’t write them like that, and it wouldn't matter if the roles were reversed. My intention was sexual pleasure for both of them, a bit of cheekyness and boldness from Hermione’s side and simple joy for Snape. Had I intended rape (as I did, for example, in my story “Obliviate”), I would have written the scenes differently and there wouldn’t have been any doubt that there is no consent. But Snape, in his dreams, wants her as much as she wants him, and that, IMO, is all that counts. He might not have been able to say, “Yes, take me,” but he would have (after a moment of hesitation) had he been awake, simply because he’s lonely and aroused and she hungry and lovely and more than willing. No love - just lust, which occasionally, is much more stronger than more noble emotions.
Thanks so much for your long reply to my entry. I will post both stories at SH soon, and I’m already curious what readers there will say.
But.
Is it legally rape? I'd be inclined to say so, because if you reverse the roles it would _definitely_ be rape, and I'm not one for a double standard. Or if you had Minerva there instead.
However.
The word rape is used to describe a lot of things, many of which are much worse than others. This was not violent, not abusive, not damaging. It was degrading, yes - Hermione turns Severus into a sexual object, not much more than a dildo - but that's hardly somthing I, nor most guys I know, would object to.
If you presented the scenario to most guys - e.g. young virgin finds man twice her age incapacitated, takes advantage - the general consensus would probably be "lucky bastard." I have (male) friends who would be seriously offended and creeped out, of course, but they're hyper-conscious of social and personal boundaries.
____
I think one of the issues is that the word "rape" is a highly charged word. Generally, only 2% of rapes are done (planned) by malicious strangers, but the idea of a thoroughly evil individual kidnapping, raping, abusing, etc is rather extreme.
In those scenarios, the (generally a ) woman's choice is not only disregarded, it's actively violated. Someone says "no", they've made a choice; to violate that (force actions to "yes") is ...shocking.
In this case, the ability to give consent - to choose - was not there, so Hermione's actions were not a violation of Snape's choice in the same way a lot of rape is (except counter-factually).
I suppose you could argue that that's worse, in a way - because to violate a choice, you need a person to have made a choice; or, you need to acknowledge them capable of making a choice. That is, you recognize that they are human beings, and have the ability to make choices about their lives. In that sort of rape, part of the turn-on would be the degradation implicit in the active removal of that choice; to illustrate that a power the individual thought [she|he] had was an illusion, and the rapist has the ability to remove that choice, render it null, and in doing so deny a portion of their humanity.
In Hermione's case, she didn't even acknowledge Snape's right to choose to begin with - that is, at no point during the story did she see him, really, as a human being. She became aware of him "as a man", but that was synonymous with having a cock - not with having human dignity. Her paradigm shift was from Snape as an asexual creature, to Snape as a sexual creature; having a warm cock she could play with.
While that means Hermione's "rape" lacked the violence and violation of other forms of rape where one's choice is actively denied, the objectification was pretty complete as was the denial of the right to make a choice (lack of consent/etc).
Anyway.
I think the "Dubious Consent" warning you have on the story is entirely appropriate, and warning enough. While dubious consent was probably envisioned as drunk sex (or otherwise drug-addled), where consent was given but the ability to give consent is suspect, your story is mild enough to fit the spirit of the warning if not the definition.
Reply
Thanks so much for your long reply to my entry. I will post both stories at SH soon, and I’m already curious what readers there will say.
Reply
Leave a comment