1. The second prompt is revealed! (Q2 2018)

    "Breaking into Snape's office in the middle of the night was a risky move at the best of times..."

    Deadline is June 18th, also known as the 22nd Anniversary of a seriously sad day—a tremendously black day for anyone.

    As with before you can check out the new thread discussing scoring, rules, and other such matters in the in the Story Competitions forum.

    Dismiss Notice

Is Harry/Tonks relationship morally wrong?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Don, Aug 3, 2017.

  1. Sorrows

    Sorrows High Inquisitor Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2008
    Messages:
    510
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Edinburgh
    High Score:
    1,819
    It would be nice to live in a world were parents could be universally relied on to protect their children. But we don't. I have lived places where there are no state social services and I can tell you that you would not believe that if you saw the consequences (which incidentally you can't do fuck all about because families have sole charge of their children) up close.

    Also I'm sure should someone rob/attack/harm you or people you love (or you found your 13 year old sibling/child was getting fucked by her teacher/uncle/granny) you would call the damn police and get yourself some of that state-sponsored morality you are apparently so ideologically opposed too. If you really try to tell me you wouldn't I don't think I'll ever be able to take you seriously again.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2018
  2. Sesc

    Sesc Slytherin at Heart Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Messages:
    5,247
    Location:
    Hbg., Germany
    Sorrows, you are changing my parameters. Naturally I would call the police after an attack on me or anyone else, loved or not. But what has that got to do with morality?

    Laws exist, in my view, because ultimate freedom is only possible for a single person on earth. So in order to protect my personal liberty (i.e., my right to live unharmed) we agree to curtail everyone's right to randomly harm people. Not because (and that's the important part!) this is a self-purpose, or somehow a moral imperative, but because we weighed both rights and on aggregate agreed that the former is more important than the latter.

    Morality doesn't enter this question.

    And for the other part, you invented the 13-yr-old. I'll humour you, though: For the nearly miniscule chance that it was not rape -- and I mean rape, the other side physically overpowering the struggling child -- which it virtually always will be, because children (not adolescents!) typically do not like to have sex with grown-ups that possibly are even their relatives, and which rightfully will be answered with some of the thoughest laws we have: Because you literally took away the most precious thing we have -- free will; so, for that off-chance: Indeed, I would deal with it on a case-by-case basis, and try to get into the child's head, rather than calling the authorities on the spot. What led to this? Does the child understand what's going on? Was it taken advantage of? If I determine that the child is too young to understand, what do I need to do to prevent this from happening again?

    Again, morality doesn't enter this question.

    I think it's also a pretty dumb way to deal with this, tbh. What is the better question here, and who is the better parent: The one who asks "is this moral?" or the one who asks "is this good and healthy for the child?"


    All of which wasn't my point (I was talking about incest among consenting adults) and not the point of the thread (Harry isn't 13, Harry is 15). As an aside, if you truly wanted to define "morality" as "what the law allows" -- which I think is nonsense, see above -- then all you have to do is to posit that in the wizarding world, the AoC is 15, not 16. Problem solved. But somehow, that never appeals to the morality-crowd, either.

    Which reveals their intentions: It's not about having laws that reflect a morality, it's about having laws that reflect their morality. And with that, as I noted in the quote, I have a problem indeed. Keep your judgements to yourself -- and out of my life.

    Finally:
    I think I just did ... so I'm sorry that your perception of me changed? We've both been here for ages, I thought it was clear -- we surely must've talked about these and other topics (say, security, where I always tangle with Darth_Revan -- I'd rather risk the next 9/11 than have the laws that were created after it) before.
     
  3. Sorrows

    Sorrows High Inquisitor Prestige DLP Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2008
    Messages:
    510
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Edinburgh
    High Score:
    1,819
    Yeah that was pretty snippy of me. Apologies.

    Still I think your wrong to say our laws are not governed by morality though not all morality is governed by laws. Morality is a system of values dictating 'good' and 'bad' behavior' society decided that it is morally wrong to kill/steal/maim people and have made laws that enforce that. The concept of 'personal rights' was developed as a response to developing morals about the personal liberties afforded to an individual.

    From my personal experience working with children and teens who are victims of sexual abuse and sitting in on trials involving family child abuse I can tell you that your definition of child rape is both wrong and reductive. Sure, some rape looks like that. Most does not. Children who are sexually abused by people they know do not need to be held down. The do not struggle. They do not understand what is happening to them, they trust and love the person that is doing it to them. They have no frame of reference to understand it is abuse. Often they accept it as part of life, much as you may accept a beating if your parents were into corporal punishment, painful perhaps, or just uncomfortable, but normal. They might even have been manipulated into thinking that they chose it. If you talked to them they would not frame it as rape which is precisely why they need to be protected from it. They do not have the capacity to consent.

    As for adult incest, its a murkier subject. I think if you are talking older generation/younger you still have great potential for power imbalances from shared history. Single generation incest does not have a significantly grater chance of producing genetic defects in children.
     
Loading...