Morality in Storybrooke / Social Issues: Threads Combined!

[OnceUponAJen]

I would liken this scenario to a man whose wife had an identical twin. If the twin who is not the wife deceived her sister's husband somehow, then that would be a similar situation. The man thought it was his wife, not her sister and therefore did not give consent.

[Mari]

The closest real world comparison I could come up with is an identical twin, or very similar relative, killing her twin and taking her place after there had been a medium length separation for one reason or another.

Implausible, but could happen.

ETA: ^^^ jinx!

Edited April 27, 2015 by Mari

[TigerLynx]

What the hell did these people do to my beloved Robin Hood?

 

 

I'm going with it's not Robin Hood.  He is an imposter, and has been from day one.  That's my story.  I'm sticking with it, and no one will get me to change my mind.

[kili]

One real-world analogy I could think of would be drugging him so he's incapable of telling the difference and then pretending to be Marian

 

I think it's pretty hard to find a real world analogy without it getting ridiculous fast. Say, Marian went on a trip and was kidnapped or her plane crashed in a remote jungle. Robin believed her dead and blamed himself (it was his idea she went on the trip). After 4 years (long enough for him to believably expect that she might be slightly different than he might have remembered), she is found and is returning to him. Suddenly, just before she arrives back, her long-lost evil twin leaps out of the bush, murders her and stuffs her in a wood-chipper. The evil twin then takes Marian's place and proceeds to get busy with Robin.

 

I think if we translate the crime a little, it might ge a better analogy. Marian goes on a business trip and gets killed. Her murderer then starts using her account to e-mail Robin telling him to send her money because she got robbed. Robin quickly sends the money to her via Western Union. The killer, using a fake identity, picks up the money. Would anybody seriously be arguing this wasn't theft because Robin sent the money willingly to somebody he had every reason to believe was his wife?

[Shanna Marie]

Duh, I didn't even consider the identical twin possibility. I blame the foggy brain after being at a convention all weekend and being seriously sleep-deprived. Yeah, that might be a close analogy, but it only works if the twins were separated at birth, so he's unaware of the possibility that there could have been an evil twin who took his wife's place. I do think that the evil twin sleeping with him while pretending to be his wife would count as rape.

If he knows his wife has an evil twin, I would hope he'd have learned ways to tell them apart and would be a little more conscious of the possibility that the evil twin might try to screw with him and/or his wife.

On another moral topic relating to this episode, I'm still not crazy about this whole "the devil made me do it" thing with Lily. It seems as though Emma had enough free will to make some very bad choices in spite of what was done to her. She was also a runaway, could be sullen, had her own crime spree phase, got pregnant as a teenager and went to jail, and even her career involved dealing with the underbelly of society and associating with criminals. You'd think that someone who had been stripped of all potential darkness would have been something like a missionary, kindergarten teacher, doctor, etc. She still ended up becoming a good person, but it wasn't purely because she always made good choices or because her choices all worked out well for her, and it wasn't because she's incapable of darkness. So why is Lily's life no fault of her own, because she's forced to make bad choices? She might have been more prone to making bad choices, but it seems like she would have had the same option to make good choices as Emma had to make bad choices. Unless this isn't so much about what was done to her as it was genetics. Emma turned out okay because she's the daughter of Snow and David, who are basically good people (we won't get into the evil identical twin thing, which would really muck up the genetics) and Lily is a mess because she's the daughter of Maleficent -- not because of some mumbo jumbo done to them before birth.

And then there's Regina being the voice of reason and talking Emma down from all the stuff she herself would have done. But does that mean that she's now acknowledging that she was wrong? Does she feel at all guilty about it? Is she going to apologize to the ones she wronged? It's interesting that we have a storyline about Emma running off to right a wrong she feels responsible for even though part of it happened before she was even born and to help someone who wronged her juxtaposed with a storyline about how Regina deserves a happy ending, in spite of not feeling all that responsible for the terrible things she did.

[Mathius]

It seems as though Emma had enough free will to make some very bad choices in spite of what was done to her. She was also a runaway, could be sullen, had her own crime spree phase, got pregnant as a teenager and went to jail, and even her career involved dealing with the underbelly of society and associating with criminals. You'd think that someone who had been stripped of all potential darkness would have been something like a missionary, kindergarten teacher, doctor, etc. She still ended up becoming a good person, but it wasn't purely because she always made good choices or because her choices all worked out well for her, and it wasn't because she's incapable of darkness. So why is Lily's life no fault of her own, because she's forced to make bad choices? She might have been more prone to making bad choices, but it seems like she would have had the same option to make good choices as Emma had to make bad choices.

You say "someone who had been stripped of all potential darkness", but that's incorrect. Emma was stripped of her darkness, period, with the Apprentice saying afterward that darkness (along with the potential for it) could still grow back into her if Snow and Charming didn't raise her right. And of course, they ended up not raising her at all. So Emma ended up exactly as her parents tried to keep her from ending up as: a regular human being. Lily, on the other hand, has never been a regular human being, and that is the difference.

Lily had the same options as Emma, yes, but Emma only has her OWN light and dark sides to adhere to, whereas Lily has her light side, her dark side, AND Emma's original dark side. Emma's birth darkness is what's tipping Lily's moral scale and making it so that she can't even SEE what the wrong choice is until it's too late and she's suffering the consequences for it. It isn't that Lily is incapable of light, it's that something is perpetually blocking that light from her. You may not like the writing here (neither do I), but no matter how you spin it, Lily is a character whose bad choices alone actually CAN'T be blamed for her crappy life.

[jhlipton]

One real-world analogy I could think of would be drugging him so he's incapable of telling the difference and then pretending to be Marian for long enough to get pregnant

 

Date rape is still... what's that word?  Oh , yeah -- rape.

[Faemonic]

I haven't watched 4B except for Poor Unfortunate Soul (because it's a Hook episode) and this latest one.

 

Apparently Robin was raped. So...that's what the rest of this post is going to be about.

 

And if the writers get confused about rape being the word for the event that the huntsman had his heart ripped from his chest and the guards dragged him away to the evil queen's bed chambers, and the huntsman with a look of doomed soullessness on his face...and Regina groping him with her body...

 

Well, maybe they've become more reflective since then about the unfortunate implications of--

 

https://twitter.com/ScottNimerfro/status/592519374029787136

Sad. You're the one who's applying real world perimeters to a fantasy situation that even my 11 year old daughter can distinguish between.

 

*facepalm*

 

 

Ahem. Okay... Um, I actually have mentioned the It's Fiction Firewall can be applicable to the perspective that, hey, Captain Hook actually isn't the embodiment of rape culture, actually he's a genderswapped brunet English-accented Saffron from Firefly, because beyond the It's Fiction veil, in Once Upon A Time verse, the women actually rule.

 

But I totally understand people for whom Hook's initial flirtations were less the in-universe survival strategy of a handicapped prettyboy who was thisclose to getting fed to ogres, and instead was more of a nasty reminder that men with sexual entitlement exist to dehumanize and objectify women (in real life, in fiction, and in fictions within fictions. Sucks, but, you know...I wish more Hook-haters would keep in mind that it is fiction and there are worthy arguments for alternative interpretations.)

 

And you know what? When it came to Zelena, I thought the director or editor or writer or somebody actually got it. Zelena was creepy! Rebecca Madden is stunning, and that did not matter when she's pawing our boys who very clearly Do Not Want. In 3B, the misery of those suffering from coerced consent was honored, at least when I watched it.

 

I think that was good for the show to show. It doesn't matter how good-looking the perpetrator is, and it doesn't matter what the double standards are supposed to be (female on male creepiness versus male on female creepiness)--sexually-charged encroachment of personal boundaries is full of nope. That's a message that can get out and be real even though It's Just Fiction. (Although I can only speak for myself: I'm sure there are viewers out there who considered Rumple's position enviable, or who enjoyed watching an unhappy, hog-tied Hook tickled with roses.)

 

And now there's...Robin, who was raped by fraud. The concept of rape-by-fraud isn't uncontroversial, given that customarily courtship with shorter goals than a long-term relationship are expected to not have 100% personal authenticity. But whatever line there is between that and a criminal offense, disguising as somebody in a long-term relationship with the victim and then sexing them up is waaaaay on the bad other side of that line--even with magic that means It's Fiction Fantasy And Not Real.

 

My two cents.

[Amerilla]

Like Faemonic, I've only actually watched one episode this in recent memory  - in my case because I fell asleep in front of the TV and I was too lazy to change the channel when I woke up to find it on. But, since it turns out that it's easier to quit the show than it is to quit all of you, I've been following along here.

 

I don't know that the Robin/Zelena situation is the most terrible thing the writers have done, but it's got to be in the Top 5. 

 

The rape issue is huge, of course, but this one was really the whole package: that women are sexual extortionists, two-faced liars (literally, in this case) who use sex to punish and pregnancy to entrap. It's not so much fanfiction or soap opera as a page from the Men's Right Movement playbook.

 

You can wrap it up in a "glamour spell" and call it "fantasy," but that doesn't make it any less odious as a message, particularly in a show ostensibly geared towards younger women. 

[Zuleikha]

From Fandom thread discussion of birth control in the Enchanted Forest:

 

Given what we've seen of family sizes in the Once kingdoms, I'm going to say the Enchanted Forest world has some form of readily accessible birth control. Families are too small for the alternative.

And IMHO, if Robin was used to a world with no ability to do reproductive planning, his choice to return to a sexual relationship with Marion one week after he planned to permanently leave her for Regina and while they had no jobs/were still getting used to NYC was beyond ridiculously stupid. Even if Marion had been the real Marion, they were in no position to risk having another child or a pregnancy.

I even have a tough time buying Zelena taking the risk. She has the excuse of being genuinely insane, but would she want to take risk of a pregnancy with no magic and no idea how to have a regular doctor monitoring her? She's likely to have grown up with a sense of pregnancy and childbirth as very dangerous.

[Mari]

But that is not what Scott actually said. It is also not canon that the common folk had unhindered access to magic of any kind, let alone magic birth control in fairytale land.

No, the show has never mentioned birth control, magical or otherwise. But, looking at the circumstantial evidence, there is some.

The families seem to be tiny to small. Snow is an only child, David a twin, Regina has one sibling, Rumple and Belle both seem to be an onlies, Hook had a brother. Nealfire was also an only child. The biggest family we know about that weren't hatched is The blended family of Cinderella and her two stepsisters. (I submit this list with the caveat that TS,TW and this could change at any episode.)

There is absolutely no evidence of an extremely high infant mortality rate that would explain that tiny family number.

Plus, if you look at textual evidence, there is the conversation Snow and David have well before Emma is born, where they talk about wanting children, and deciding to try for a baby. That is a conversation that is much less likely to occur when you don't have access to some form of birth control and babies just happen after you get married.

Until we have evidence otherwise, it would make sense to conclude that the Enchanted Forest had some form of birth control.

eta: well, it looks like Z was a faster typist than I was today. :)

Edited April 28, 2015 by Mari

[kili]

The rape issue is huge, of course, but this one was really the whole package: that women are sexual extortionists, two-faced liars (literally, in this case) who use sex to punish and pregnancy to entrap. It's not so much fanfiction or soap opera as a page from the Men's Right Movement playbook.

 

I actually disagree with this interpretation. I don't think that Zelena has any interest in entrapping or punishing her victim, Robin. In that way, it's quite different from the Men's Right Movement.

 

I think Zelena's actions are much closer to those *beep*holes who seek revenge on their enemies by raping their daughters. Zelena is merely using Robin as a pawn to get revenge or one over on her sister. She has "sullied" or "degraded" Regina's much desired Happy Ending and forever forced herself like a wedge in the relationship.

 

And, given how this show likes us to see every moment of Woegina's pain, I strongly suspect we will get to see a rare example of "woman-pain". Instead of focusing on how the victim suffers from the crime, we will watch in gory detail how the victim's partner suffers. Robin just found out his wife is dead (again), he's been raped and he is forever tied to his rapist - but the narrative is "Poor Regina! Can't she ever catch a break!"

[stealinghome]

Given what we've seen of family sizes in the Once kingdoms, I'm going to say the Enchanted Forest world has some form of readily accessible birth control. Families are too small for the alternative.

Medieval Europe had (sheepskin) condoms, so I've always assumed that the Enchanted Forest at least had some form of primitive condom as well. Dragonskin? :)

 

Which makes me actually find Nimerfro's comment HILARIOUS, because if you assume that condoms are likely the primary form of birth control that Robin and "Marian" are accustomed to...why WOULDN'T they be using them???? Do they even KNOW what the pill is??????? Could they afford the pill even if they knew what it was? Is Robin just really bad at the pull-out method of "birth control"?

Edited April 28, 2015 by stealinghome

[KingOfHearts]

Robin just found out his wife is dead (again), he's been raped and he is forever tied to his rapist - but the narrative is "Poor Regina! Can't she ever catch a break!"

 

That's my problem with this "twist". It's about shock value and it's about Regina. It's got nothing to do with Robin or his reaction to being violated. The writers created this to drive Outlaw Queen angst in order to bring Regina's happy ending conflict up front. It's like a repeat of Marian's return - let's ignore all the moral implications and Robin's feelings, and instead let's show how Regina is handling it. The writers like to take on critical issues like rape superficially to chug the Woegina train along. It's sad.

 

 

Medieval Europe had (sheepskin) condoms, so I've always assumed that the Enchanted Forest at least had some form of primitive condom as well. Dragonskin? :)

I just assumed there was a spell or potion or something. 

Edited April 28, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[YaddaYadda]

let's ignore all the moral implications and Robin's feelings, and instead let's show how Regina is handling it.

 

Let's also ignore that poor innocent baby because Regina's feelings must come first.  I have very little belief that the show will be addressing anything regarding Robin or the baby (if it does exist because I have some solid doubts).

Edited April 28, 2015 by YaddaYadda

[Rumsy4]

Is Robin just really bad at the pull-out method of "birth control"?

 

Thank you for mentioning this. I wasn't sure how to bring it up. :-p It's not 100% effective, but unless Robin says something like "I was careful, I didn't expect it to happen," I am going to assume that he had sex with two women within a span of few weeks without thinking of pregnancy risks. He doesn't come across as a responsible person, does he? Imagine the scenario if both Regina and Zelena were pregnant! At least A&E didn't go there... lol

[YaddaYadda]

Imagine the scenario if both Regina and Zelena were pregnant!

 

Where is the unlike button when you need it?

[KingOfHearts]

 

Let's also ignore that poor innocent baby because Regina's feelings must come first.  I have very little belief that the show will be addressing anything regarding Robin or the baby (if it does exist because I have some solid doubts).

Or even Roland. Who cares about him seeing his dead mother coming back to life, then learning she died again, then finding out she was another person this whole time, then realizing his dad is having a baby with this other person? Who gives a flip about seeing his dad flip between three women, right?

 

But how is Regina managing all this?! She's the one really suffering here!

Edited April 28, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Rumsy4]

Where is the unlike button when you need it?

 

Muahaha... 

[Zuleikha]

But how is Regina managing all this?! She's the one really suffering here!

 

She is the most core character of the affected characters, so I certainly hope she's the one most focused on.

 

I also don't think the writers are making a bad call by not trying to get the child actor who plays Roland to do a story arc about his trauma. We don't actually know how much focus Robin will or won't get, but I hope it's way less than Regina because at this point, I simply do not care about Robin's trauma. I am doubtful that there's a significant chunk of the audience who actually wants to see screentime devoted to Robin's emotional fallout. 

[KAOS Agent]

 

I am doubtful that there's a significant chunk of the audience who actually wants to see screentime devoted to Robin's emotional fallout.

 

No kidding. However, it will be immensely problematic if we see endless Regina angst about it while Robin remains fairly chill about it all. Mostly, I'd like this storyline to mean that Robin goes far, far away. Maybe he spends some time with Archie in Offscreenville and he works through the issues surrounding the Mills family murdering his wife in various timelines and then goes on to cover his rape and how he can deal with raising a child of rape (if there really is one). They both agree that Robin, Roland & potential baby would be better off getting a fresh start away from Storybrooke and Regina finds a new guy who is not a complete and utter jackass.

 

Mostly, though, I just need this show to address the fact that Zelena's actions are not just some twist to drive Outlaw Queen angst, but actually acknowledge that it was in fact rape and Robin should show some sort of realistic reaction as a consequence to being violated.

[KingOfHearts]

 

I also don't think the writers are making a bad call by not trying to get the child actor who plays Roland to do a story arc about his trauma.

 

I am doubtful that there's a significant chunk of the audience who actually wants to see screentime devoted to Robin's emotional fallout.

If the writers really want to focus on Regina and not secondary characters, then they should create plots where she's not the one least affected. If they don't want reactions to trauma by secondary characters, then maybe they should stop writing it in the first place. Let Regina be violated or hurt if she's so important. If Robin and Roland are uninteresting, then drift the story away from them. Don't hover it over them like a dark cloud then proceed to do nothing about it. That's a waste of energy that could be used on developing main characters.

 

The lack of logic in the tackling of things like rape is really what makes it stick out as a problem. Just throwing it around on characters that don't matter then promising the exploration of the wide moral complex as a whole is a contradiction. Let's say purity and wholesomeness is important, then say that trespassing it with sex is nothing to squawk at. This show.

Edited April 29, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Mari]

It would make sense if the show uses Regina as the main focus in the meatloaf fallout. She is the main character in the situation, and the one that viewers would be most invested in.

 

But, if it's going to be more than just another "Poor, victimized Regina" plotline that isn't actually about Regina's victimization (again), than Regina's focus should be on how Robin, Roland, and baby meatloaf are dealing, with Regina focused on how to help them.

 

Scenes where we listen to Regina angst about how her life isn't perfect, while any scenes with Robin have him pretty calm and mellow about it, are going to seem like they're--yet again--distorting reactions of people so that we can watch Regina cry again.

 

Scenes with Regina trying to help them, or scenes where Regina is talking to some of the other characters about Robin's options and how to help him--could be one way to handle it.

[YaddaYadda]

I could absolutely give a thousand fucks about Robin.  I really dislike the character, but they [the writers of course] thought it would be genius for him to sleep with and knock up someone while thinking someone was his wife, then it has to be addressed on some level and not on the level of him apologizing to Regina or Regina crying about it because he knocked up Zelena.

 

I'd be happy if there's an off hand comment where Regina asks him how it went with Archie and he tells her things went good and that he is sorting himself out.  Then he can go and fall into an abyss.

[Zuleikha]

However, it will be immensely problematic if we see endless Regina angst about it while Robin remains fairly chill about it all.

I don't want to see endless Regina angst about the Zelena aspect, but I do want Regina to be angry about Robin's choice to return to Marian and have a second child with her (or prevent a second child). I don't want to see Regina angst about it because I don't think Robin is worth angst. I want to see Regina move on. I don't want Robin to be chill because he shouldn't be, but I don't want there to be equivalent weight between Regina's pain and Robin's pain because they're not equivalently important characters. Robin should be a whole bundle of mixed up emotions, but I'd like him to be those generally off my screen.

 

Eergh, this storyline was such a horrible idea. I feel like with most of the WTF moments of the show, I at least got why the writers thought it would be a good idea. On this one, I don't understand how the Zelena pregnancy ever made it past the initial pitch. 

[Whodunnit]

Rape by proxy is the term, I believe, when someone pulls that switcheroo. (It carries a 30 year sentence.)

[kili]

I don't want to see endless Regina angst about the Zelena aspect, but I do want Regina to be angry about Robin's choice to return to Marian and have a second child with her (or prevent a second child).

 

Regina dated him for a week and said goodbye to him for what she herself advertised to be forever. She told him to go support his wife. At some point, he has to move on. Regina has no right to be angry when she sends her boyfriend back to his wife and he has sex with her. Once you break up with somebody, you lose the right to be upset about who they date.

 

I don't want there to be equivalent weight between Regina's pain and Robin's pain because they're not equivalently important characters.

 

Then next time, the writers should have Zelena glamor herself up to look like Robin and seduce Regina instead (don't, worry about those implications because Scott N will tell you that it is just a fantasy show and his 11 year old could tell the difference - besides, they can just pick some other returned from the dead character like Malcolm). Don't give major trauma to minor characters if you have no intent on following through with the repercussions.

 

I don't want there to be equivalent weight between Regina's pain and Robin's pain because they're not equivalently important characters.

 

But in what they showed us, nothing happened to Regina. Her spouse was not murdered. Robin did not cheat on her. Regina was not raped. And Regina was not forced to have a child with somebody else. Robin is the injured party.

 

Regina should feel sympathy for the man she loves and should feel outrage at her sister for being so cruel to another human being. She could have some misplaced guilt because he was harmed in an attempt to harm her (the old super-hero trope). But there is nothing Poor Woegina about this situation. All she has to be is a rational human being and realize that the man she loves is not sullied. He's a victim. I don't have a lot of faith in the writers to do this, though.

Edited April 29, 2015 by kili

[october]

I honestly hate this storyline. I think they've mishandled pretty much everything about it since 'Marian' came back and now they've added some non-con into the mix.

 

I have a question: is anyone else disturbed by the way this show handles most of its sexual situations?

 

As far as I can remember most sexual encounters (on screen or those we know for sure happened off screen) have happened in problematic to outright gross circumstances. For example, Snow and Charming committing 'adultery' in season 1 and Snow being shamed for it; Snow and Charming unknowingly 'cheating' on each other with Whale and Katherine respectively due to false memories from the dark curse; Regina sexually abusing Graham for decades; the infamous crypt sex; Zelena disguised as Marian violating Robin for shits and giggles; and adult Neal knocking up teenage Emma.

 

Regarding that last one, I've seen people argue on Tumblr that Emma must have been about 17 at the most when they got together and conceived Henry (the wiki says she was 17/18 but that doesn't sound right to me because Henry was already ten by Emma's 28th birthday). They met in Portland and the age of consent in Oregon is 18, which means Emma was under the age of consent when she and Neal got together. Neal was meant to be about 24 when they met (give or take 200 years of course) so he effectively had sex with a minor. If this is all accurate then I hate Snow and Charming even more for encouraging Emma to get back together with this guy.

 

I get the impression that this was a screw up by the writers and that they didn't do their research and think through the implications of the age gap, but this problem of simply not thinking about sex and consent has become a disturbing pattern. They write sexual situations where one person cannot properly consent and then act surprised and put out when people ask them about it. I want someone to sit Adam, Eddie and Scott down for some sex education or something. Maybe someone could send them a link to Scarleteen or a copy of 'Yes Means Yes'.

 

So in four seasons we've had multiple instances of adultery, rape and sex without informed and free consent. The Zelena plot is still underway, but for the rest of these examples the problematic issues surrounding them were either never acknowledged or have been discussed in woefully inadequate ways.

 

The only non-gross sexual encounter I can think of is Charming and Snow getting reacquainted with one another after the curse broke and Emma walking in on them 'resting'. I might have forgotten an example here or there, but the bad stuff sticks out so much. This is why I don't mind that Emma and Killian haven't consumated their relationship or had sex on screen. I'm starting to seriously doubt whether these writers have it in them to write an enthusiastically consensual, non-adulterous love scene. I half expect them to have CaptainSwan sleep together while under the effect of sex pollen or mind control or something.

Edited April 29, 2015 by october

[RadioGirl27]

 

As far as I can remember most sexual encounters (on screen or those we know for sure happened off screen) have happened in problematic to outright gross circumstances. For example, Snow and Charming committing 'adultery' in season 1 and Snow being shamed for it; Snow and Charming unknowingly 'cheating' on each other with Whale and Katherine respectively due to false memories from the dark curse; Regina sexually abusing Graham for decades; the infamous crypt sex; Zelena disguised as Marian violating Robin for shits and giggles; and adult Neal knocking up teenage Emma.

We don't know if they had sex (but they were in a serious relationship for eight month, so probably yes), but you can add Emma-Walsh to this list. He was lying to Emma about who he was and he was doing it for nefarious reasons.

[YaddaYadda]

One thing I was worried about was CS taking that step (if they hadn't already) while Hook didn't have his heart.  I fall in the category of people who think that CS have already sealed the deal.  I remember someone asking JMo if CS would go on their second date and her answer was that it's been six weeks and CS have gone out on multiple dates.

 

In any case, I find it really weird that this show which calls itself a family show had gone off the bend when it comes to sex.  It's been turned into something really ugly.

[Mari]

 

Regarding that last one, I've seen people argue on Tumblr that Emma must have been about 17 at the most when they got together and conceived Henry (the wiki says she was 17/18 but that doesn't sound right to me because Henry was already ten by Emma's 28th birthday). They met in Portland and the age of consent in Oregon is 18, which means Emma was under the age of consent when she and Neal got together. Neal was meant to be about 24 when they met (give or take 200 years of course) so he effectively had sex with a minor. If this is all accurate then I hate Snow and Charming even more for encouraging Emma to get back together with this guy.

 

I get the impression that this was a screw up by the writers and that they didn't do their research and think through the implications of the age gap, but this problem of simply not thinking about sex and consent has become a disturbing pattern. .

The 17/18 doesn't sound right because the math doesn't work. She met Henry on her 28th birthday, and he was already 10 years old--fairly solidly 10 years old. Before a year passes in-show, we have his 11th birthday thing. That means Emma was 17 when he was born. Since pregnancy lasts roughly 9 1/2 months, she was 16, or possibly just turned 17 when Henry was conceived. possibly even younger when the relationship started, since they were seriously talking about settling down, and even post-jail Emma took those plans seriously enough to wait for him in Tallahassee.

I think they've tried to backtrack some on that, but it's one of the few actual firm dates we've had in the show. So, no, they weren't thinking about the implications of 16ish Emma being in a relationship with 24ish (sort of) Nealfire. It would have been both more and less squicksome if they'd gone with younger actors for the flashbacks; they could've made Nealfire a more acceptable age difference, but Emma would likely have been heartbreakingly young-looking. (Since they wanted Neal Enough older to be the obvious mentor/tutor as well as boyfriend.)

[KingOfHearts]

Emma met Neal in 2001, and for Henry's birthday to lineup, they would have had to meet and conceive Henry all in January, or early February at the latest if he was premature. That pits Emma at 17 when she gave birth.

Edited April 29, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

What's happening with Robin is kind of gender-flipped fridging, where something horrible happens to a character, but it's all about exploring the pain this causes to that character's significant other. Or it's like the way rape is too often handled -- as a violation of the woman's significant other because something of "his" was taken and sullied more than it's about what the victim actually goes through. Gender flipping it doesn't make it right.

 

I could deal if it ends up being about Regina feeling bad for Robin and trying to help him through it. I will be crabby if it ends up being about Regina's woe at having her happiness always ruined. We'll see how it actually plays out.

 

But if they want to focus on Regina's suffering and her reaction to her suffering, then they need to write a story in which she, herself, is actually suffering because of things that happen to her, not because of things happening to other people so that she doesn't get what she wants.

[october]

The 17/18 doesn't sound right because the math doesn't work.

 

I know. I thought I was going crazy when I read that on the wiki. I was wondering if maybe the writers had gone back and tried to retcon things.

[stealinghome]

No, the math has never worked from the pilot on. Which, ha, in retrospect, probably should have been our first clue!

[KAOS Agent]

Emma had a sealed juvenile record for stealing the watches. They were consistent with Emma being underage and pregnant over the first few episodes. It's only when people pointed out the consent thing that they tried to pretend differently. It got worse when they made Neal several hundred years old. Hook referred to Neverland having given him experience, so it's not like they can claim life experience stopped in Neverland. There are many, many writers in that room. How is it that not one of them seems to grasp the serious problems they've created with the sexual relationships on this show?

[YaddaYadda]

I don't take as much issue with Neverland as I do with other things.  Time really moves at its own pace and since the show is a huge failure at world building, then this is the end result.  The only person on this show who is really centuries old for me is Rumple.  Yeah, I don't know.  How many days need to pass in Neverland to make it a year?

[Zuleikha]

Hook referred to Neverland having given him experience, so it's not like they can claim life experience stopped in Neverland.

 

Hook wasn't a Lost Boy, Baelfire was. Baelfire gained memories and area knowledge about Neverland, but I don't think it's a fanwank or a stretch to say that his emotional maturation was frozen at the point he became one of Pan's Lost Boys. IMHO, that matches what we saw during 3A. Heck, I would buy that Hook's emotional maturation was also frozen during the time he was in Neverland. That would explain why his grief over Milah still seemed so raw after what... a century? 

 

I think the only reason the show went older on Neal was to hide that he was Baelfire, but it's not like Jennifer Morrison was a convincing 16 or 17, even with hipster glasses. Younger actors should have played both characters, but I agree that it would have been too squicky for us as viewers to watch. 

[YaddaYadda]

I think the reason they went with the adult versions of Emma and Neal was because of the parallels they were establishing between Neal and Hook in Tallahassee. Everytime I see Abby Ross as Emma, like we did last episode, all I keep wondering is if it's after this that she met Neal.  I had the exact same reaction when they showed her running away.  I can't imagine them doing Tallahassee with a younger version of Emma with grown up Neal.  That would have been beyond skeevy.

Edited April 29, 2015 by YaddaYadda

[Shanna Marie]

I think the reason they went with the adult versions of Emma and Neal was because of the parallels they were establishing between Neal and Hook in Tallahassee.

Also, I think they were aiming for the moment of recognition when they reached Bae's place and Neal was there and made the connection between Bae and Neal. If they'd used the younger actor for the flashback, Neal would have just been that guy we saw in the season 2 premiere, without that instant recognition that he was Emma's Neal. If they'd used the same younger actor who's been playing Bae, we'd have known back in "Tallahassee" that Emma's lover was Bae. They definitely couldn't have used the adult Neal actor and the teen Emma actor without it getting really, really creepy. Though it would have helped if they'd done anything to de-age Neal for the flashback. Every other younger version played by the same actor has had some physical change to signal the difference -- Emma's ponytail and glasses, young Regina's longer, softer hair and softer makeup, Hook's lack of guyliner and jewelry (and I still think he should have been clean-shaven for that flashback because he really would have looked like a teenager). Neal was pretty much exactly the same as his 30-something self.

[stealinghome]

Also, I think they were aiming for the moment of recognition when they reached Bae's place and Neal was there and made the connection between Bae and Neal. If they'd used the younger actor for the flashback, Neal would have just been that guy we saw in the season 2 premiere, without that instant recognition that he was Emma's Neal.

This. They needed the viewers to know that the dude from Broken (2x01), and Rumpel's son (2x14), was also Emma's Neal, and you can't do that if you have someone else playing Neal in 2x06. That scene would have been waaaay less dramatic if Emma had had to spell it out for the audience--half of whom would still have missed it because viewers are dumb. Emma could have said "Neal? Neal Cassady? Is that you? You look SO DIFFERENT" and half the audience would be like "Who is this guy, does Emma know him?" The visual recognition was necessary imo.

 

That said, I agree that the costuming/makeup people did MRJ no favors, because he looked 40 in the Tallahassee flashbacks. JMo didn't look like a teen, no, but she DID look significantly younger than current!Emma to me, so unfortunately it did look like a skeevy middle-aged guy hitting on a much younger young woman. I mean, jeez, at least give MRJ glasses like they gave JMo!

[Souris]

I have a question: is anyone else disturbed by the way this show handles most of its sexual situations?

 

The only non-gross sexual encounter I can think of is Charming and Snow getting reacquainted with one another after the curse broke and Emma walking in on them 'resting'. I might have forgotten an example here or there, but the bad stuff sticks out so much. This is why I don't mind that Emma and Killian haven't consumated their relationship or had sex on screen. I'm starting to seriously doubt whether these writers have it in them to write an enthusiastically consensual, non-adulterous love scene. I half expect them to have CaptainSwan sleep together while under the effect of sex pollen or mind control or something.

 

I am absolutely disturbed by the show's handling of sex. You are right, the Snow/Charming scene was the ONLY positive, loving, healthy representation of sex the show has ever shown -- and even that was really about the awkwardness of Emma and Henry walking in on them, not romance or love. Meanwhile, there is that massive list of disturbing or iffy/no consent sexual encounters. And they refuse to let CS have sex in a loving and healthy relationship. This show!

 

Honestly, it fits right in with the show's twisted morality of villains being celebrated and heroes denigrated.

Edited April 30, 2015 by Souris

[Rumsy4]

That said, I agree that the costuming/makeup people did MRJ no favors, because he looked 40 in the Tallahassee flashbacks. JMo didn't look like a teen, no, but she DID look significantly younger than current!Emma to me, so unfortunately it did look like a skeevy middle-aged guy hitting on a much younger young woman. I mean, jeez, at least give MRJ glasses like they gave JMo!

You could even see the silver in his hair! lol They also did a terrible job in the 4A Belle flashback. She looked like her mother's aunt!

[Curio]

From the Writers thread:

To me, hope and grace have to extend to people who have done unthinkable deeds but have demonstrated a sincere commitment to change or what's the point of repentance? If people are forever going to be defined by their worst selves, why try to become better?

 

I think there's a difference between offering forgiveness to a person who has done unthinkable acts and another thing entirely whether or not that person deserves a happy ending. In real life, a person who has committed multiple murders can work towards becoming a better person and attempt to atone for their past actions, but there could be a very real possibility that this person may never be forgiven by the people whose lives they've ruined. True redemption is working towards becoming a better person for yourself, regardless of whether or not you're forgiven or get a shiny prize at the end of the road for all the hard work you've put in. That's the outcome for someone who has done truly evil acts—they could do charitable acts for other people every day for the rest of their lives, but if they're never given a happy ending or never fully forgiven, they shouldn't feel slighted by the universe. It's actually very noble for someone to work hard to become a better person and to help others knowing they will never get anything in return. When a person works to become better without any expectation that they deserve anything in return is the sign of true selflessness and a signifier that a person has changed for the right reasons. 

 

This is where I think most of the show's more evil villains should end up. I'm not saying every single villain doesn't deserve a happy ending, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere between "forgivable" and "unforgivable." Right now, the show hasn't established any moral horizon lines, so a villain could potentially kill 100 innocent people, but if they feel bad about it and try to ask for forgiveness, they're easily forgiven and the heroes will set time aside in their schedules to help give them a happy ending. So is there a point where a villain can go too far? Where's the point where the writers draw a line between "this person deserves a happy ending" and "this person does not deserve a happy ending?" Is it 101 murders? Is it rape? Is it holding a child at gunpoint? Is it all about intent? If they happen to be a nice person in the present, everything in their past can just be forgotten? I'm genuinely asking, because I have no clue based on what the show has shown us. 

Edited May 1, 2015 by Curio

[Crimson Belle]

 

Right now, the show hasn't established any moral horizon lines, so a villain could potentially kill 100 innocent people, but if they feel bad about it and try to ask for forgiveness, they're easily forgiven and the heroes will set time aside in their schedules to help give them a happy ending.

It's even worse than that.  In this show, when a villain decides that they forgive themselves (or don't need forgiveness as Regina apparently decided in her case), then the heroes are still written to turn themselves inside out, beyond what any normal person would do to grant forgiveness that hasn't even been asked for.

 

In this show, the villains expect a happy ending, not because they have put in the work necessary for redemption, not because they regret their past actions, not because they have asked for forgiveness.  No, in this show, the villains expect a happy ending because they themselves have decided they deserve one.  To quote the Esurance commercials, "That's not how it works . . ."

[Rumsy4]

In this show, the villains expect a happy ending, not because they have put in the work necessary for redemption, not because they regret their past actions, not because they have asked for forgiveness. No, in this show, the villains expect a happy ending because they themselves have decided they deserve one. To quote the Esurance commercials, "That's not how it works . . ."

That's a big problem right there. Regina and Rumple are safe from the people of Storybrooke because they have magic, and are protected by the heroes either from guilt and/or because they are "family". One heroic deed is used to clear the slate and give a fresh start to the villains. Their flip flopping is forgiven or excused, because they are "trying" or have "come so far". I get that this is a fairy tale show. But the heroes have all but lost their identities in their excessive pandering of reforming villains. It is safe to say that there is no moral event horizon in the ONCE verse.

[KingOfHearts]

It's dangerous to put a line between "forgivable" and "unforgivable" because the location of that line and where people believe it is will always differ. You can't pinpoint it and solve every moral debate that challenges it. Curio was on to something when they talked about remorse and wanting to change. If someone's heart is true and they sincerely want to change, they can repent no matter how bad their sin is. That does not mean that people will forgive them. If someone is truly repentant, they will share love without expecting stickers in return. They regret their past and they want to live rightly because they know how painful it is in the darkness. 

 

Forgiveness isn't the issue on this show. It's the characters not reacting at all to evil deeds. Yes there is forgiveness, but there are also consequences to every action. Forgiving someone doesn't mean you can't be angry at first or that the wrongdoer can do whatever they want. It also doesn't mean there isn't justice. Snowing could have forgiven Regina and still executed her. They weren't going to kill her because they hated her guts - it was for the safety of their kingdom. To let her go was a slap in the face to their citizens. That's not practicing love - it's practicing unhealthy guilt.

 

The intent of forgiveness is to free yourself of the expectation of judgement for a person. No amount of compensation can pay for the pain that Regina or any of the villains have caused. It's better to let your emotions out and move on. But the characters haven't been allowed to react, so their anger is vanishing into thin air. There's nothing organic or natural about it. That's why their reactions are so annoying and don't make any sense.

 

When villains get little to no consequences, they learn nothing to lead them into redemption. Regina can rip out hearts all day and sit snuggly in her castle. She can plan to murder Marian and kidnap Sidney, and her BFF won't bat an eye. Forgiveness and justice go hand in hand. This show gets the definitions wrong repeatedly, and it's annoying.

[Mari]

One heroic deed is used to clear the slate and give a fresh start to the villains. Their flip flopping is forgiven or excused, because they are "trying" or have "come so far".

Yes.

And to make it even more worthless, frequently the heroic deed has been a matter of his or her own survival, or came at no cost. For example, the events in Pan's final episode are frequently held up as examples of self sacrifice and heroism for both Rumple and Regina. But, stopping Pan and his curse was in everyone's best interest--him cursing them all would not just make life ugly for Snow, David, Emma, Henry, and the villagers; he was going to make life ugly for Rumple and Regina, too.

Even full blown Imp Rumple and Full throttle Evil Queen Regina would have done everything in their power--even sacrifice something they wanted--to make sure they didn't end up in a misery curse that the episode itself said would not have a way to break it.

Who'd want to live in whatever creepy, miserable existence Pan had dreamt up for those he considered enemies?

That they saved everyone else in the process was a good thing, but it was hardly an act of selfless sacrifice and redemption. It cost them nothing they weren't going to lose anyway, and they knew that going in.

[Rumsy4]

The issue is not that people like Regina, Hook, or Rumple have never done anything good. The fact that they still have a core of humanity is used to give them a lot of leeway, and that is the problem. For example, back in the EF, Snow spares Regina from execution because she recognizes that she comes from a place of pain. After she decided to spare her, she lets her go after getting a guarantee that the would never be able to hurt Snow in that realm. What kind of an idiotic plan was that?? Who will think of the safety of the common people? 

 

As another example, Emma totally takes it in her stride that Regina has enslaved Sidney in the mirror when "Marian" ruined her Happy Ending with Robin. Hook on the other hand, is still not fully trusted by the Charmings. The only difference that I see is the "family" connection. Henry is allowed to work in Rumple's shop even though Regina and Emma know that he wanted to kill Henry at one point. They just accept that he has fully reformed. That kind of naive blindness leads Emma to almost get trapped in the Hat by Rumple, who has secretly backslid in a big way. Regina and Emma are totally okay with letting Ursula and Cruella into Storybrooke based on their word alone. There's giving people chances, and there's being stupidly trusting. 

[Shanna Marie]

One heroic deed is used to clear the slate and give a fresh start to the villains. Their flip flopping is forgiven or excused, because they are "trying" or have "come so far".

That's part of the villain/hero double standard.

 

One good act by a villain counts more than all the villain's bad acts and counts more than any good acts by the heroes.

One bad act by a hero counts as more than all the hero's good acts or any bad acts by the villains.

Anything done by a hero to a villain -- even in self defense or the defense of others -- is far worse than anything a villain does to a hero -- even if it was out of selfish or evil motives.

Villains can continue to comment on the things the heroes have done to them even after they're reformed, but it's a sign that they're under a dark influence if the heroes ever even mention what the villains have done to them.

Villains get excused for trying to be good, even if they slip. Heroes who are trying to be good are considered hypocrites if they're not absolutely perfect.

 

In one of the interviews posted today, they acted like it would be weird for Lily to just get over what happened to her after one conversation with Emma, but that's exactly what's happened with Regina -- and without the conversation, really. Snow has never been allowed to have an honest reaction to the fact that Regina murdered her father (or arranged it), kicked her out of her own home, tried to arrange her murder, stole her kingdom, killed people she cared about, enacted a curse that meant Snow was separated from her baby at birth, and framed her for murder -- all because of a mistake she made as a child when she thought she was helping Regina. The only time she's ever allowed to be even slightly critical of Regina is when she's under some kind of dark influence. Meanwhile, every bad thing Snow has done relating to Regina has been repeatedly brought up. We've heard far more about Snow killing Regina's mother than we have about Regina killing Snow's father. Emma is stuck begging for the friendship of the woman who's responsible for her life being awful and who attempted to poison her.

 

In one episode, Lily has been allowed to have more of a reaction to what was done to her as a baby than Emma has ever been allowed to react to what happened to her and the person who was responsible.

 

I really don't expect Regina to be dragged over the coals (though, really, anyone in our world with her body count would likely be executed or at least have life in prison without the possibility of parole). But for me to believe she's at all worthy of redemption or has the slightest hope of a happy ending, she needs to show that she's taken responsibility for her actions, recognizes exactly where she went wrong, shows some sign of regret or remorse for what she's done, and she needs to show that she's learned some kind of empathy. She needs to be able to make the connection between what she feels and what others feel -- that's the part that seems to be really lacking in Regina, still. She doesn't seem to grasp or care about the consequences of her own actions and understand that other people suffer the way she does. She's still way too selfish, and the very fact that she's doing all this campaigning for a happy ending is a sign that she doesn't yet deserve one. If she had any self awareness, she'd be working for it by helping others, not looking for a magical solution.