Would rape ever be justifiable? Could a character who attempted to rape a woman ever be redeemed morally? For example, say he is trapped in an underground bunker dying from disease and will likely die within the next 24 hours. Everyone is sick, but one of the women seems to be pulling through. Now say this character has a genetic-based gift, extremely vital to the survival of humanity. He NEEDS to pass on his genes but insofar hasn't because, well, he didn't figure he was going to die so soon. He doesn't really have many options, he can't leave the bunker and he barely knows the woman, who has a boyfriend who is the one who rescued this character. Realizing there is nothing more important than doing this, he attempts to convince her to sleep with him, but failing that he pins her down and tries to force himself onto her. However the disease has made him so weak that she is able to throw him off and her boyfriend comes and beats the shit out of him, locks him in a room, and the next day they exile him from the bunker and leave him to die in the radiation. He doesn't, and continues on, eventually marries and has three children. Now, would this character possibly be defensible morally? From any standpoint? I'm not trying to be edgy, this is a real part of something I wrote, all the set pieces were there and suddenly that idea came to me as a solution and it seemed too fucked up to pass over, but later I realized I had just made a fairly virtuous character do something rather evil. I suppose it could be blamed partially on him not being in his right mind from the disease almost killing him, but that isn't really a defense.
Would rape ever be justifiable? Could a character who attempted to rape a woman ever be redeemed morally? For example...
No.
Yes.
Maybe.
Who cares?
Can you repeat the question?
Just leave it as is user, it'll make your character more interesting.
Read Rance.
You're not the boss of me.
>Just leave it as is user, it'll make your character more interesting.
Yeah I think I will.
Can a character who attempts rape, ever be considered virtuous again, given extenuating circumstances?
Are evil acts irredeemable?
>an a character who attempts rape, ever be considered virtuous again, given extenuating circumstances?
I think that could be possible from a Christian perspective.
No.
You don't "need" to put your penis in a person. You want to put your penis in a person.
No matter what, it will always be an act driven by bodily urges and an immasculine inability to master the body.
In your hypothetical scenario, it is also an act driven by fear, and, therefore, another immasculine inability to rule the body in spite of its emotional vicissitudes.
>Read Plato /thread
rape is a very good technique to pass your genes on to the next generation and it is a trait nature selects. most of your ancestors were probably raped (since most of the female ones mated at 14). it is not immasculine. that's retarded. also there are bunch of shit you can't control about your body the ones you "choose" to control is arbitrary. if you are so masculine, user, why don't you control your lungs by not breathing for 10 minutes.
Yeah, sure. Anything can be.
Absolutely vital to the survival of humanity?
Yes.
If he was sure and had no selfish motivation, was he wrong? People die for their communities all the time, you would consider this normal, but to carry a child is too terrible? In fact, governments today with all our progressive values and wisest counsel, would probably still forcibly inseminate if it came down to the survival of humanity.
However, your character probably shouldn't have done it that way. He could have tried to convince the others to help him, and went for artificial insemination with what's available or used whatever way to preserve dignity. Failing that, it would also not have been wrong to just give up. Let it be on those people in the bunker who failed to understand and cooperate that humanity should die.
You've tried hard to create a situation where it's justified and you have. No individual's sanctity comes before species survival. She and her boyfriend have acted selfishly, why are they not evil?
European judges seem to think there's a "sexual emergency" loophole when it comes to shitskins raping European children.
Actually, it is a very shitty technique for passing on your genes. Most women who are raped abort the children, or give them up for adoption - you are even at risk of the mother committing suicide. Not only that, pregnancy will not necessarily take place after a single insemination.
Even if your offspring are brought into the world, they are raised within the foster care systems, orphanages, or by traumatized mothers. Not exactly the optimal way to pass on your genes.
You are an idiot. Go back to one of your containment boards.
Oh yes I remember during the good old days(bronze age) when the state of Bedrock offered free deer antler used as coat hangers abortions to poor women who got raped and then after psychiatric consultations which ended in calisthenics, spiritual yoga sessions and placebo granite pills to help with the trauma.
>The current year
>Still believes women have moral standing
What a loaded ass question. Is spying on people justifiable? Is entrapment illegal? Is it legitimate rape? In your scenario, it still depends on so many factors. The answer is no, of course, but you are feeding into a rather ridiculous story. Consider this as well: girls are raped all the time in higher education systems. It happens. There are rapists out there who have never seen a shred of justice.
Rape isn't as bad as murder, and there are plenty of murderers, even mass murderers, who find redemption in literature.
>inb4 someone who values psychological wellbeing over continued life comes in and tries to justify their mental illness while saying that rape is literally worse than mass murder
No instead the rapist was beheaded by the men in her tribe and then any baby born to that woman was killed.
In the good old bronze age, abortions were carried out, post birth, with a toss over a ledge (or into a lake, or abandonment, etc.,...).
Not that this discussion was focused on the Bronze Age anyway, but nice try.
Back then actually they'd leave the baby for the wolves
Your argument for rape passing on genes only works for certain animal species
Reminds me of The Handmaid's Tale.
You can draw your conclusion from that association alone, I think.
>this character has a genetic-based gift, extremely vital to the survival of humanity
This isn't how genomics works, mate.
I kill babies, but rape nah not my bag.
Say you had the ability to see the future / beyond world and needed that ability to defeat the enemy. Then would it be worth it?
>You've tried hard to create a situation where it's justified and you have.
Well... the situation came up that way and suddenly it made sense for him to act that way.... then later on I sort of regretted adding that kind of dark shit to the character but it didn't really affect a lot, just made him realize he was willing to do a fucked up thing like rape to pass on his genes and so he became more serious about reproducing. It also was a wake up call for him that he was likely to die soon.
>This isn't how genomics works, mate.
It is when I apply magical plot-armor asspulls to it, but yeah you're right. I actually had to go through a lot to explain why it wasn't diluted over time by interbreeding. Actually turned that into a character trait for the MC's daughter because she has the strongest manifestation yet of it and wants to keep her family bloodline "pure" (i.e. she refuses to fuck anyone and has incest thoughts about her brother, all part of her slow descent into insanity.).
Sure. Anything can be justified.
Personally, I don't mind rape in and of itself (or murder or a lot of things). If, say, a child molestor were raped in prison, I would feel that he had gotten what was coming to him. Spousal rape also doesn't bother me too much, assuming it's not part of a pattern of prolonged abuse or anything. Not trying to be edgy or anything, but there are also women who are such monstrous cunts that I really have trouble caring at all what happens to them. Same applies to assholes of the male gender. If some girl is a ruthless bitch who abuses everyone she sees as being of inferior social status and has no empathy for others and never displays even the slightest core of humanity beneath her icy shell, would you really care if she was raped? I wouldn't.
I think most men, if they were to be honest with themselves, would have to admit that the particular horror they feel towards rape is, at bottom, rooted in 1.) a disdain for rapists themselves for being tschandala and 2.) a ressentiment against men who they fear might forcibly cuckold them and/or bring suffering and disgrace upon those they care about (wives, sisters, daughters, etc.). For most of human history, rape has been regardless as more or less a property crime. Women outside of the tribe, however it was defined (class, nation, race, etc.), were considered fair game, and crime itself was seen as being committed as primarily against the husband/father/etc (i.e., the owner of the woman in question). The Ring of Gyges is a little dated, but every guy has at one point asked their friends what superpower they would like to have if they could have any, and what do they all say? Invisibility. Why? There you go. The feminists are right. Deep down, all men are rapists.
>immasculine
Genghis Khan raped. So did Julius Caesar. So did pretty much every pre-modern conqueror and soldier in history.
>g-g-guys two thousand years ago did it!
>a-a-a barbarian king did it a t-t-thousand years ago!
>so did pretty much every pre-modern conqueror and soldier in history (completely unsubstantiable generalizations)
What an idiot.
fuck /pol/ stupid faggots you'll never infest this board fucking brainlet scum
>anyone who doesn't have naive, ahistorical views about morality is /pol/
is that really /pol/ tho? seems more liked some redditpill fag shit
Not /pol/ or into red pill stuff. I don't really care about politics at all.
This thread isn't too bad. There were only a couple blatant /pol/ posts and nobody really responded to them. It is getting annoying though. I don't come here for politics, I come here for literature. /pol/ never really discusses things or reads, they just come here to recruit. We need better moderation to deal with this shit.
To add to the discussion, in the specific situation OP established rape could be "justified," but the reader will still be disgusted by it. If you include something like that you have to tie it into the theme of the story somehow. If it's just a random occurrence, people will question the need for it to be in the story in the first place. Rape is a heavy subject so make sure you handle it well if you do include it.
Anyone can be redeemed morally dummy
Actions can not be good or bad only people can.
U r a fucking idiot