What's the morality on, for lack of a better term, caveman

File: 1472503183034.jpg (76KB, 600x490px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 600x490px

>>49167994
Well shit man
It seems like you've already thought about it quite a bit.

But, I suppose in this case, its not a entirely unmoral situation, although the rape addition definetly makes it decidedly not good. In a scenario where the choice is to either die, or be taken as a spouse and cared for, albeit by force, definetly blurs the right and wrong of the situation.

I'd say that in the case that it is either be a mate or die from the enviroment, it is morally better to save the mate, than leave it to die, even if it is with the express purpose of mating. It is even more morally leaning towards correct, if the mate is cared for well, and not abused. Even more points if the kidnapper simply does possess the necessary intelligence needed to understand why protecting and mating with the mate against her will is morally bad at all.

Perhaps explain what the exact situation is?

Unless this your fetish, than fuck off. I'm giving you benefit of the doubt.

A society like you're referring to hasn't developed morals and are thus basically animals. There is no law besides might making right.

If a person has no concept of morality because morality has no purpose in their environment, you can't really judge them on your morals.

If they were actively preventing the advancement of their society in favor of animal barbarism that would be another story.

>>49167994
In a situation like you describe (the super low population density and little organization beyond families and all), the most likely outcome is the man being murdered in his sleep. Females aren't at a huge disadvantage in hunting and gathering alone until and unless they have a child*, so they're probably going to try killing the dude before that happens and they get stuck with him. Spousal murder is really fucking common at this level of organization from what I've read of real world cases.

*mostly because hunter gatherers only stick around in a place as long as it's comfortable. If you've been dropped out of an airplane in a desert or some shit, things might play out differently.

>Clubs them over the head
I take that back. Dude fucks a corpse. KOs are dangerous in any case, but a club will kill you without serious luck and proper medical care.

>>49167994
Oh no dude its totally morally right to club someone in the back of the head and drag them back to your rape cave for their own good. I'm sure you only have their best interests at heart.

>>49168172
Well basically the situation is that a player character and an enemy NPC ended up stranded and isolated because of an accident in combat. The forced spouse-making hasn't occurred yet since the DM called the session once their situation was established, but the player's logic was along the lines of

>So me and her wound up here and are effectively stuck here for the time being? And there's no other people around or existence of civilization, and we're struggling to survive in this hostile environment?
>Pretty much, yeah.
>Then I'm making her my wife. I'm not going to keep her alive for nothing in exchange, we might not ever see other people, and we might as well try to tame or at least create a safe haven for ourselves, and have children to carry on our work afterward. Plus I can play as a descendent of my character if he really doesn't get rescued or find a way out for many years if ever, right?
>Yes, but what if she doesn't want any of that? She's already hostile to you, and certainly wouldn't consent to any of this.
>I don't really care, she won't be able to survive on her own, and working together and making a family is the smartest course of action given the circumstances now, even if she disagrees or doesn't understand that yet.

After that the group devolved into arguing, but the final say is to the DM who said the actions are in the player's choice, and he's physically strong enough to do with the NPC what he wants to, in this case force her to be his spouse and use her to make a family.

>>49167994
Did the guy live? Because that's not a sloth, that's sleepy dropbear!

>>49168213
In this situation though, both persons came from a civilized background, and civilzation does exist in the setting, just very far away from where they currently are.

Maybe their environment unbounds them from morality, but it's not like they themselves are or at least were unmoral people, or never experienced civilizations and morality.

>>49168339
>>49168273
>Taking it literally at face value
>Thinking anyone actually clubbed anyone over the head

It's just an expression, have you really never heard it before?

>>49168273
That's a fair point that she'd just try to kill him, a player brought that up, but the guy said if that was the case he'd restrain her while he slept if he had to, like tie her up or something to keep her from killing him.

Also the issue with the NPC is she doesn't have the skills to survive, and while it's not impossible for her to do so normally, the environment they're in is hostile jungle basically with stuff like dangerous animals and plants, as well as possible disease. The guy himself could very well have trouble surviving on his own, the DM said even if they magically became best friends and worked together every step of the way they'd have a very hard time and still very possibly die. So I figure if together they'd have it tough, and the guy alone would have it super tough, then the NPC is probably dead in the water on her own.

File: 5819132+_b719b2b435089b1ffc16d1a594470df7.jpg (12KB, 212x200px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 212x200px

>>49168352
Than that player is fucking stupid. If she's already hostile, than expect that after their little "Honeymoon", He wakes up to find her trying to slit his throat while he sleeps. Besides, thats not how you approach this situation at ALL. By doing this, your not only making it harder for the both of you to survive, but making it so that he has to support two people with the work of one, all the while trying to subdue and keep the other person from running away.

The logical course of action is to suggest the idea of the two working together, and letting nature take its course from there. Unless the player is a fucking mongoloid, he should understand that cooperation is better than doing pic related

>>49168540
That makes sense right, and that's what I suggested, that they try to cooperate and then something comes of it.

The problem is that the player came to that line of logic, sort of by an accident by the DM, where after a few days of surviving he asked how the NPC felt towards him. The DM didn't realize he had the possible relationship in mind, and so answered that she remains hostile to him because of the ongoing conflict as per the plot, as well as that she felt superior to him because of their background differences, and that her feelins on the matter weren't going to change. The only reason she hadn't run away yet or tried to attack him was because he was keeping them both alive.

So after that point and infomration, is where the player started off down the line of logic that was explained here >>49168352

>>49168510
>sleep
>tie up the other person
>the place is full of hostile wildlife
Hostile wildlife kills them both, then. Or it would if your people are at a level where anything makes sense. Otherwise, it just kills the girl. Really there's no way raping your only possible second night watch ends well if the world poses a valid threat.

>>49168730
Well he's made a little camp for them which gets better protected by the day. They got attacked by a leopard (since I think the DM was trying to evoke Tarzan, which their situation is admittedly similar to) initially, but now it's getting to a point where unless a monster happens upon them, they should be generally safe, even sleeping, if they remain in the camp, probably soon to be fort.

I mean nothing is certain of course, and the DM could try to pull something, but so far he's made a little safe haven for them. Going outside though, yeah it's a shit show.

Your player has a rape fetish and is probably a shitty person. Dictating what another person's "best interests" are to the extent that you rape and hold someone in captivity is literally rape dungeon tier, and at the same level of delusion.

>>49168805
What worries me is that other people in the group agreed with him and his actions, roughly half the group split down the middle. One of the girl players included.

>>49168772
If safety is that easily obtained, your scenario doesn't really justify anything. I mean it didn't to begin with, but it extra doesn't now. Without a safe fort, the girl might stick around for fear of the wilderness. With it, killing the dude and taking his fort is the most appealing option. Dude ties her up at night, so her best bet now would probably be to feign cooperation and poison him or close him out at the gate and drop a rock on him or something. All depending on particulars.

Basically, creating hostility between the only other human being you have access to and forcing them into proximity with you is a recipe for bad things to happen. It will probably end with one or both of you dead, and can plausibly end up with you having to keep an eye on her or rope around her all the damn time. Don't know how the latter could ever really be perceived as a "fair trade" by her.

>>49168911
Well he's not really creating hostilty since they already hate each other. I guess the normal tradeoff if they cooperated would be his survival skills and protection in exchange for her companionship, but in this case since they hate each other he's not interested in a fair tradeoff.

As for the safey situation, protection from the environment I don't think is the same as being provided for. She can kill him and still be relatively safe, but eventually she'll run out of food and such. Also even if he makes the place even more fortified and makes it sustainable with like a garden inside and some captured animals, at any point a monster can happen upon them and even working together they could be screwed. Alone she'd definitely be dead since he's actually combat capable.

>>49168994
Or I just realized that should be rephrased, he'd be creating hostility if he does what he wants to, but adding to hostility that already exists and doesn't look to be settled. Something along the lines of, if the rift can't be repaired, then why even play nice at all?

At least I'm guessing to that end, I personally think they should just try to make a boat and go elsewhere.

>>49168994
Than in this scenario, I'd just be subservient to her in this situation. There are many, many examples of men bending their own beliefs to suit those of their spouse or wanted spouse. I mean, it also depends on what kind of background she comes from. A bit more elaboration?

>>49169091
She's a noble dignitary while he's basically a commoner, so she has a superiority/arrogance complex. Because of the backgrounds though her skills are that befitting a dignitary while he has combat under his belt as well as suvival and hard manual labor.

DM did suggest that things would go easier (though not a relationship) if he acted subservient to her and basically treated her as Queen of the Fort. His problem is she executed his best friend, so he personally isn't really interested in just letting that go. Or at least his character isn't. Normally he would have just killed her in revenge, but as explained, their current situation isn't normal anymore since his own survival is at stake.

>>49168994
>>49169033
Don't know your game, but getting raped daily hostility vs. ordinary hostility are totally different games. You don't try to kill an annoying coworker. You'd probably try to kill a guy that tied you up every night and fuck you in the ass.

For a tropical setting, food gathering really shouldn't be that much more difficult for a solitary female than for a male depending on the crops. Manioc prep is pretty labor intensive, but it's done by women almost exclusively. Plantains or bananas ripen sporadically throughout their season, so they should be available pretty much continually. Root crops stay good to eat in the ground for a while. Optimal foraging strategy will force them to move periodically as they deplete local stuff, but somebody getting raped nightly probably doesn't think quite that far ahead. Moreover the more immediate danger of not knowing which plants are edible or how to tell when they're ripe should almost certainly apply equally to both of them.

>>49169168
>His problem is she executed his best friend, so he personally isn't really interested in just letting that go
This is probably the actual thing making a surprising amount of your party go for this, FYI. I don't really imagine they think rape dungeon shit is okay (could be wrong), but it's possible they just hate this NPC more than you realize.

>>49168352
How is there even an argument at that point? That's evil, period. They were both born into a society that, most likely, looks down on kidnap and rape, just because he's stranded doesn't change what's right and wrong. He should expect his character to die in their sleep when the npc bashes his skull in with a fucking rock.

>>49168409
Clubbing or not force would have to be involved

>>49169186
Still absolutely wrong of him, but I'm curious; what did the friend do to get executed?

>>49168876
>One of the girl players included

This girl read a lot of romance novels?

>>49169186
>You'd probably try to kill a guy that tied you up every night and fuck you in the ass.

The main difference though and the reason for all of this, is if she kills him, she's effectively killing herself.

As for the sustenance you said, those are all logically viable but the problem is she has literally no skills, training or experience with survival. The guy meanwhile is a descent survivalist and at least has some familiarity with jungle back home where they came from, though much more tame jungle. Again, it's not impossible that she could get by on her own, but she would have to learn everything from scratch, while under threat of running afoul of a dangerous animal or plant if she leaves the camp. If the PC is having a tough time of it, the DM said even just mechanically in terms of stats, she would pretty much certainly die from not being able to provide for herself.

>>49169219
That could very well be their actual reasoning, but a lot of the arguing was how "caveman rape" could be justified. Aside of that though not everyone hates her.

>>49169220
I agree that's the reasonable course of action, but again, he'd restrain her if his safety is a risk, and as well her killing him is tantamount to signing her death warrant.

Not like any of us would care, since if he dies, whatever happens to her doesn't matter since she wouldn't be afforded game time anymore being an NPC. But it's what's within her character's logic to do or not to do.

>>49169241
Definitely but in this situation the stronger man or woman shouldn't have a problem overpowering the weaker woman or man, without actually harming them.

>>49169243
His friend and him were conscripted to fight, and they fled in battle from what could be argued to be a suicide attack. His friend was made an example of by her.

>>49169320
No clue. She just said in a situation like this, the weaker person should be thinking of more than just themself, so in this case it might suck to be provided for and protected at the cost of rape, but they should be thinking of themselves as a tribe unit at that point, them versus the environment. All hinging of course on if there aren't other people or civilization around.

>>49169377
You're playing with a group of retards, op. No matter how fucked she is on her own there's only so much you can break a human before they act completely contrary to their self-interest just to make it stop. Hell, with how sheltered the woman may be she could just come to that point in a relatively short time. The PC is dead, he just doesn't know it yet.

>>49168352
How the fuck is creating more mouths to feed in a survival scenario the smartest fucking course of action? How is taking your only help out of commission for any length of time in a survival scenario the smartest fucking course of action? How is engendering hostility in the only help you have in a survival scenario the smartest fucking course of action?

He's a fucking idiot who is desperately making up excuses to live out his rape/slavery fantasies through your game. Sever.

>>49167994
Tell me how games aren't entrenched in a toxic rape culture again and how it's safe for women? No really, I can wait.

>>49169377
To be perfectly honest, the less competent she is the more likely she is to shoot herself in the foot for the sake of short term goals. A noble is exactly the sort of person who overestimates their qualifications in the face of adversity, and peoples' responses to trauma aren't always rational to begin with.

Anyway, "caveman rape" in the abstract is mostly the projection of contemporary values onto primitive people. IRL women get the staples while men hunt megafauna more to get laid than to provide for anyone, and abusive relationships at that level usually end in death or abandonment. Most of the time, anyway. It's not that rape doesn't happen often. It does. Just not the way you and your group are thinking about it.

>>49169454
So then if they must use force to bring their captive in, and keep the captive bound whenever they are vulnerable, where is the possibility for this to be "justified"? It's literally capturing a human being so you have someone to talk at sometimes and a hole to rape.

Pretty much one of the most morally reprehensible things I could ever think of, especially coming from a person who grew up in civilization.

Essentially, your player thinks that because he's got a problem with someone who is a woman, raping her is a good way of getting even, and the only reason why he doesn't do it is because society thinks its wrong. Don't tell me this is an IC thing; he's fucked up.

>>49169454
Than in this scenario, just tell him that his best choice of action is simply ensure their continued survival until they can leave to somewhere safer. Raping her now is only gonna make things a million times worse, and honestly, it makes more sense for him to just kill her. Makes it easier to feed yourself, and you eliminate the threat of her backstabbing you later on. But, if I were in his shoes, I'd probably do my best to try and get her to warm up to me. Maybe for romance, definetly for our continued survival. I'd also try my best to teach her /how/ to survive. Besides, I'll be honest; Is she Ugly? Because if not, I'd be more than willing than put aside my friends death in order to get some tail. He'd understand.

OP, I am someone who always gives people the benefit of the doubt that sexual things in games aren't just that plauer trying to live out their fetish, but >>49169467 has it right

>>49169456
I mean I already know they're a group of retards, I didn't need this to tell me that. I was just trying to find a way to either soundly justify or refute the situation.

>>49169467
I think he's thinking more long term. If he's looking to use her to make kids, things will be harder before they get easier. But eventually kids means more help, more distribution of duty, stuff like that. He basically said his character didn't want to end up 50 years old, still stuck in this shitty jungle, still stuck in the same camp, still stuck with someone he hates, and as an old man still having to pull the weight and provide for and keep them both alive. Since they could at any time be attacked by a monster and both die anyway and he'd have no control over that, he's willing to endure more hardship in a way that he does have control over, which is being able to provide for more than just the two of them.

But yeah, I can totally tell them to stow the stupid situation. Only small problem being that I figured the focus would shift since the guy can't expect to have the DM devote much game time to just him, but some of the players expressed a little interest in changing focus to him since they like the situation (not the possible forced spouse and rape, but the stranded in a strange new land and having to survive) and have considered making new native characters. Like some native kobolds or goblins or something who discover and come to revere the two humans as gods.

>>49169454
>No clue. She just said in a situation like this, the weaker person should be thinking of more than just themself, so in this case it might suck to be provided for and protected at the cost of rape, but they should be thinking of themselves as a tribe unit at that point, them versus the environment.

You know what tribes didn't do on a general basis? Wantonly engender hostility within the tribe you dumb cunt! How the hell are you supposed to effectively fight the environment when the enemy is in your home?!

God, I want to slap her. I want to slap half your group.

Also, dude mentioned decedents? He definitely plans on fucking his daughters, or having his sons rape her too.

>>49167994
If one individual is making another individual unhappy for largely non-utilitarian reasons, then yes I'd say it's evil/bad.

Remember the golden rule and things like this sort themselves out pretty quickly.

>>49167994
I think you are ignoring a couple key ideas here.

1. Firstly, groups or individuals supported by groups would either attack or or sneak in and kidnap the women.
2. This attack or kidnapping in of itself would show the woman that this group is in many way superior and its men are superior - consider the many societies that exist even today where this a common accepted practice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_kidnapping
3. As a result of this, women without children would likely accept the arrangement as is, as it means greater safety and protosocial status.
4. If we assume the woman is alone, she likely would willingly seek our or at least be receptive to any group that come upon them.
5. At no point during this is rape really even necessary, as less resistance has been selected for, meaning females who fought to vigorously likely died.
6. The kind of flexibility I am describing is born out in many culture and is meant to ensure that women and their subsequent children, are healthiest and most secure.
http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2016/08/22/scientists-say-women-are-genetically-programmed-to-have-affairs-its-like-mate-insurance/

>>49169661
She's extracting wealth from the guy while giving nothing in return, except open hostility. That's worse than parisitism, which is evil.

>>49169627
That's why you teach her to survive, so she can help you live.

And come on! After 50 years alone with her he's not going to hate her anymore. Human aren't wired like that.

>>49169681
How can you say she's extracting anything when literally all of it is against her will?

>>49168213
>A society like you're referring to hasn't developed morals and are thus basically animals. There is no law besides might making right.
The Romans were one of the most psychotically brutal, violent civilizations that there ever was. Part of their nation's founding myth was that the king's son raped a noblewoman (Lucretia) and that lead directly to the end of the Roman Kingdom and the birth of the Republic.

The ancient Israelites were, similarly, insanely, brutally violent and cruel; there's many cases in the Old Testament where mass slaughter (and implicit mass rape) is directly endorsed by God. In Genesis 34, two young men kill every single man in an entire city to avenge their sister's rape.

Ancient societies found rape abhorrent, like we do. They allowed it only insofar as it was either hidden and plausibly denied, or done to outsiders and foreigners and enemies (much like they allowed all other crimes to be done against The Other).

>>49169503
Good point, it's entirely within reason that she could go off the rails from her arrogance. She's basically like a female Governor Radcliffe from Pocohontas anyway, in the situation the game is in, by the plot at least.

>>49169532
I think they're justifiying it in this case because of the nature of the environment. It's not that they're just two people in the wild, but that they're actually potential settlers in this case. By this logic they're arguing that he's acting within reason if he's thinking of, and acting towards the bigger picture which is settling and taming this new land for other humans in the future to follow in their footsteps. A one player makes the case that the NPC should keep her loyalties and home in mind, and that she could do some good acting as a spouse even if it's forced, rather than just dying without accomplishing anything.

Why does he not just build a cage or a pit or something and throw her down there until she comes around? I mean she's obviously hostile towards him, and a threat. Why is he a fucking retard taking care of the needs of his enemy while she acts like a complete cunt towards him, while living in his place and most likely eating his food?

>>49169763
She's extracting the resources of safety and sustenance from him without giving anything in return. He's not forcing her to stay in the fort and eat and drink to stay alive, and he's not yet forcing her to have sex and reproduce.

>>49169641
Know what tribes did nigger?

Took female prisoners in raids.

Pretty much what she is right now, hell I'm not even defending the guy but if you're going to try and whitewash history removing all the half-consensual sex that happened in it and go 'Well obviously a man acting like that is just a frothing deviant, not someone demanding the bitch give him something in return for his resources when by all rights he should end her'
Then you retarded son.

Still an evil act mind you, but that's life.

>>49169802
Environment doesn't dictate morality and the character should expect a nice warm spot in whatever eternal damnation awaits in your setting after the NPC kills the shit out of him. And this "settling a new land" thing is complete bs, two people cannot repopulate a deserted land, there's not enough genetic diversity to keep their progeny from turning up infeasible only a few generations down the line, they and their potential offspring are doomed if they don't get back home. Likewise the woman should be concerned with serving her family, not just some rando in the middle of nowhere because he's the only one who can pump a baby into her for a thousand miles or whatever.

>>49169831
That's fucking exactly what he's doing you retard. Did you read literally none of the thread?

>>49169575
I think if he wanted to get even, he'd just kill her. He already said as much. He's not saying he wants to force her to be a spouse to get back at her, but he doesn't want to slave away for someone he hates without a reason to do so. If she were his spouse, even forced, even if they hated one another, he'd still have a reason to keep her alive and safe.

>>49169610
That was a point another player brought up and what I agreed with, to just stay the course and hope she'll eventually change and warm up to him. Setting aside though that the DM suggested a relationship probably wouldn't ever work just because of her status and personal feeling on the matter, the player himself said if it were any other person he would be content to work at things and maybe have the hostility fade (assuming they actually survived more than a few months), but he doesn't feel his character would be at all interested in playing nice and dealing with her like that, and enduring the ongoing hostility of the person responsible for killing his friend, all under the faint hope that maybe one day in the distant future she might feel it's ok to not talk to him like dirt, but even then still no possibility of a relationship.

>>49169850
They are from the same tribe in this situation. He didn't have to run off and take her, they were already together when they got here. It's them versus the world.

>>49169931
He's not done that yet, he's thinking of doing it. So far he's only kept them alive and safe.

>>49169948
See, those excuses are all bullshit because he could very well just kill her and be done with it were that the case.

>>49169948
Yeah, he want to keep alive his fucktoy.

He's dead meat, or she will be.

>>49169681
Then the golden rule still applies. She needs to pull her weight or she's in the wrong.

And no, being his fuckdoll/breeding bitch is not what I mean by pulling her weight. There's plenty of low energy but relatively high importance jobs she can do. Weaving, low intensity gathering, building structures. That sort of shit.

>>49169948
He keeps using the word spouse. Tell him to be honest and use rape slave.

>>49169948
Oh so he thinks rape is a good way of getting compensated for something he does for a woman, and still only doesn't do it because of society. Still fucked.

>>49169973
He took her as his captive by force.

>>49170060
She's not in the wrong if he doesn't allow her to do those jobs for fear of her turning on him, as op has made it sound is the case.

In the end the literal only two sensible things to do in the character's situation is get over his friend's death and cooperate with her for both of their benefit or kill her for revenge. This wishy washy "muh grey morality" shit only serves to out the faggot as a rape fetishist.

>>49169641
From what I got, her stance was that in the situation of them vs. the environment, he was in the right to force her to be a spouse and bear children if that was really her only valuable ability in their immediate situation. Basically since he was the one keeping them alive, he was of the authority to decide what was best for them, and in the NPCs case she should accept or at least not try to kill him for doing it, because the moment they wound up where they are it became "Us vs. Them" rather than "Me vs. Him". It wasn't the guy's choice to make things that way, it was the environment that did, so she should turn her hatred or anger to the environment rather than the guy.

>>49169679
That makes sense normally but there's already a standing enmity between them. Also she's got the standard noble/pesant complex. The situation for her at least, from what I guessed is that she believes rescue will be coming soon when the guy knows it won't be, and it actually won't be.

>>49170072
Took her by force in this case so far, just means took her to a camp. Beyond that it doesn't look like he's forced her to do anything at all and is keeping her safe and fed just because he's not a dick enough to shove her out to get eaten by a panther or to starve.

>>49169454
Have you ever actually tried subduing someone without harming them? It's a lot easier said. There's a reason police and psych nurses and the like need a lot of special training for this, and still manage to fuck it up.

>>49169948
Than there's really nothing to be done in this case. Whether he rapes her or not, they're both gonna die. So why even fucking bother? Its just a petty act of revenge, that'll only escelate both of their deaths. But it doesnt really matter, since apperantly, since they'll both die anyways.

So in this situation, his options are really fucking limited. He either:
A) Doesnt rape her, and they spend the rest of their short, miserable lives bickering and fighting until they die from some awful beast
B) He rapes her and ties her up; Now forced to feed both himself and her, and keep her restrained, the overhaul of work either leads to him slipping up and she escaping/killing him, or him dying while hunting and she starving to death.
C) He just kills her, leaving him alone, but with only one mouth to feed, and the crippling depression of lonelyness.
D) She kisses up to her, getting to some what of a relationship, or at least a measure of trust.

I mean, what the fuck is he gonna do? Apperantly this jungle fucking hates him, this bitch hates him, and he hates her.

My advice to the guy? Just get it over with and kill her. Because apperantly the guy in this situation is some kind of psychopath who doesnt understand how people react.

From what you've said, no positive relationship can be formed, so there is NO reason to keep her around. Currently, a she is both a threat and a burden. Just kick her out and let the jungle deal with her, if he hates her that much.

I mean, who even is this guy? A soldier?

>>49170176
It sure seems like it's the guy's choice to make it "him vs her" with the "I'll either rape or kill her" shtick.

>>49170176
What a group you have. I'm glad it's not mine.

He's not in the right in any kind of way. He took a woman prisoner, and treat her "well" for the time being, and plan on making her his fuck toy because he keep her alive.
He doesn't ask her opinions, he doesn't care about the suffering he's causing.

You don't magically become a united group with a single "Us vs Them" mindset because you're alone on a fucking island.

>>49170176
Okay, but that's still fucking stupid reasoning. He captured her and forced her not to do anything because he was afraid of her turning on him or leaving. She hasn't done nothing because of choice.

>>49170201
No, he's keeping her because he wants to rape her. The player has already stated his intention, you can't honestly think he just jumped to that at the very end and it wasn't something he'd been considering from the start.

>>49169748
I definitely agree, but he says he doesn't want to wait like 10 years for her to possibly warm up to him. Especially not when they could be dead tomorrow anyway.

Also as per this thread, if he cares about his own safety, it's probably a bad idea to teach her how to survive on her own, at least for a good long while. Otherwise then he really does have no use to her, if he built their protection and then taught her to survive on her own. Well, except for possible monster attack, but again she might not be thinking that far ahead.

>>49169830
I guess because he's looking at her as the value of her body, rather than as a person? Though keeping her alive in captivity is a pretty good point I think, like shoving her in a pit. It would probably make her come around a lot faster at least, and still treats her horrible, but without personally doing her harm or like, raping her. Pretty much just shoving her in time out until she stops acting like a bitch. Though, that doesn't change her stance of a relationship.

I'll probably suggest that idea then, if they're serious about continuing with his situation.

>>49169748
I can't imagine anyone I wouldn't hate after 50 years alone with them.

>>49170064
OP, in your next conversation about this exclusively use the term rape slave instead of the clean terms he wants you to use for this incredibly fucked up thing he's contemplating.

>>49170313
>doesn't want to spend 10 years
if I were running and the group wanted to be natives on the island, I'd probably either timeskip and let them be a bickering married couple already or actually play out the paranoia and backstabbing. The "PC abuses woman, suffers no consequences or even interesting complications" scenario probably wouldn't be as fun in practice as you're imagining.

A man and a woman who hate each other being thrown together and forced to trust and work together to survive until they fall for each other is , a classic fantasy adventure scenario, and a core element of it is the hero chivalrously refusing to rape her after though probably after some posturing about how the tables have turned and now she is his captive. Your player has failed at the simplest possible test of character and is begging for this woman to pretend to fall for him and then cut off his balls as soon as it's expedient.

>>49170313
People don't warm up to you because you're the only people on an island. There is other factos at play.

Besides, I think you underestimate what people can do when they're confronted to heavy trauma, like being alone on an island with your rapist jailer.
She's gonna break hard and fast, and she's not gonna "plan ahead" or be all like "okay I sell you my body for safety ;)" or some shit
She might try to kill him, she might become an empty shell and let herself die, she might become completely crazy and talk to people. Anything.

It's not gonna end well.

>>49169914
So does a prehistoric man who did more or less the same thing, went out and grabbed a woman he came across in the wild and forced her to be his wife, go to hell for it?

Also the settling thing, it's not like they're trying to populate the entire new continent with just the two of them, just that they can't expect rescue for several decades. So maybe they might not be rescued, but their grandkids might. And until that time they'd be taken care of in their later years by their children.

But certainly not like the guy is intending to be the Adam to her Eve and reproduce humanity themselves onto this new land.

>>49170012
Of course, but in this situation he's not looking at things the same anymore. He wants to kill her and hates her the person, but even if she is currently useless for survival purposes, her body itself still has worth. I mean even if he wanted to be just a horrible evil asshole, she has value as a sex slave, but as evil as he might be he actually wants to get a family from her.

>>49170321
If you're been alone with someone else for a long time, even if you hate the fucker, you're going to need them on some level.

Hell, Tom Hanks basically fell in love with a volley ball.

>>49170484
The prehistoric man has no frame of references. It's not wrong for him simply because it's natural for him and moral doesn't exist.

You have a man who very well know about right and wrong who decide to make a woman prisonner and rape her every day. Yeah, he's fucking going to hell.

>but as evil as he might be he actually wants to get a family from her.
So he's evil AND crazy.

>>49170064
>>49170360
lol that's a great idea, I probably will. Maybe will put him in his place.

File: Tomaru Sawagoe.jpg (733KB, 4960x1450px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 4960x1450px

>>49170484
>So maybe they might not be rescued, but their grandkids might
>but their grandkids might
>grandkids

Fuck.

File: 085883f568b559c9882c336c45dcf06d.jpg (51KB, 427x327px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 427x327px

Even in harsh environments, it seems that most hunter-gatherer societies spend a lot of their time relaxing, and find plenty of food, stopping because they don't need more rather than because they cannot find more. Rape is not particularly common.

Because of the fact that this generally means eating most of the resources in an area before moving on and letting the area replenish its resources, the bigger concern and moral question is that of infanticide and killing the elderly out of mercy because they cannot travel.

Sources: Anthropology graduate student.

More reliable source: Marshall Sahlins' "Stone Age Economics," and in particular the first chapter, "The Original Affluent Society."

>>49170522
you understand cast away was a movie, right? Please don't base real world knowledge on fiction.

>>49170536
>So he's evil AND crazy.

Yeah, that shit actually comes across creepier than if he just wanted a wet hole.

>>49170643
Castaway was a documentary and the events happened in real time.

>>49170665
Talking about d&d alignement for a second

Lawful Evil = You will be my sex slave every evening, and I will provide for you every day.
Neutral Evil = You will be my sex slave and I will keep you alive because it suits me.
Chaotic Evil = YOU ARE MY WIFE NOW

>>49170632
It's good to see one person here that knows their shit.

It's evil.

>>49170536
>moral doesn't exist.

No such thing m8.

>>49170484
>her body itself still has worth
I mean, we all probably thought this from the start, but it is becoming increasingly clear that you and "your friend" are really the same person, with the kind of mindset that sees a woman as nothing more than a body meant to be used for rape, so fuck off and fuck you

>>49168510
You got a situation where the girl has to either live a slave or choose to die.

Morality aside, I think the girl is likely to take her chances on this one.

>>49170832
> I think the girl is likely to take her chances on this one.

Depends on person.

Women are manipulative creatures who never forgets a slight and she will most likely accept to have his children, only to influence and brainwash them to kill him for her when they're old enough.

>>49170828
Why are you getting so mad?
Anon is obviously talking about fiction, so why are you projecting this fictional hypothetical onto his desires in reality?

Fuck, going by your logic you yourself are a psychotic murderhobo because you take part in fantasy that involved breaking and entering and murdering shit for it's loot.
So no, YOU fuck off and fuck YOU hypocrite. Rape isn't some kind of special crime that is super terribad and worse than any other moral atrocity that makes it exempt from being fantasized about.

>>49170855
Most people would rather live as a slave than die.
Source: All the slaves that ever existed, how many of them committed suicide or fought and even -risked- death for their freedom?

>>49170945

So you agree.

>Depends on person

Also with a splash of

>Depends on setting

>>49170913
Because you're or him are spending an awful lot of time trying to put this in a moral gray or even good area, rather than saying that it's an evil thing that my character does because they are evil, and I think it would fit, but I personally take no pleasure from this so can we just fade to black or describe it vaguely or something.

>>49170913
Because it's the exact same as a player killing a guy in combat and a player killing a guy with a very graphic description. It shows something about the person.

I don't know any sane people who would think, even in a game, "yeah, I'll totally rape her"

He's also not playing a completely crazy psycho for what the gm told us. So no prior justification "it's what my character would do!"

>>49171020
>"it's what my character would do!"

Obviously it is what his character would do! Anon clearly believe that rape is the natural form of life and it is an understandable and maybe even a reasonable response to the struggles of life.

>>49171004
Depends on the person/setting with a massive,massive bias towards choosing to live as a slave depending on how human the thing in question is.
>>49171016
>trying to put this in a moral gray or even good area
Because it's a fun thought experiment. It's common sense that we can rationalize every crime from theft, to murder, to torture. Yet we have yet to find an "excuse" to rape. The idea is interesting to explore if you would stop being triggered long enough to wonder why the former are seen as acceptable given certain criteria while rape isn't ( at least in our current culture ).
>>49171020
>I don't know any sane people who would think, even in a game, "yeah, I'll totally rape her"
Well shit I guess the vast majority of humans who ever lived weren't sane by your definition.
So does that mean for most of human history, humans were insane? Or are we the ones who aren't sane?

>>49171073
Breakthrough in anthropology, the vast majority of humans were rapists.

>>49170632
>Marshall Sahlins' "Stone Age Economics,"
https://libcom.org/files/Sahlins%20-%20Stone%20Age%20Economics.pdf
Thanks, been looking for more good reference reading and the full book showed up.

>>49171073
>Well shit I guess the vast majority of humans who ever lived weren't sane by your definition.
No, it just means that you don't understand what a frame of reference is.

In a modern, developped society, who punish heavily rape and every from of aggression, where you are taught very early that it is wrong, showing a taste for it and thinking it would be a good idea show that, by the standard of modern society, right here right now, you are not sane.

And by my standards, you're a stupid fuck because you couldn't understand that quicker.

>>49171073
>massive,massive bias towards choosing to live as a slave depending on how human the thing in question is

Ooooh because that's how humans have acted for a long time so that must be the default behavior of humans, right?

Like, there is no way there were other reasons that so many people would "choose" to be a slave. Humans naturally want to be enslaved if they are already enslaved.

>>49171073
Get out of here Mookie.

>>49168352
He should just kill her and eat her. That's the choice with the best chance for survival for him.

>>49171126
>where you are taught very early that it is wrong, showing a taste for it and thinking it would be a good idea show that, by the standard of modern society, right here right now, you are not sane.
Roleplayers confirmed for not sane. No wonder normalfags are weirded out. I actually understand now.
>>49171104
Well yeah, by most standards of rape.
Power disparity? Yep, women were distinctly inferior to men.
Forced sex? Yep, men could fuck their wives any time they wanted regardless of her will. On top of
Forced marriage? You betcha.
>>49171143
You're too triggered to think clearly.
Obviously slavery is preferable to death, or even a heightened risk of death. Otherwise slavery wouldn't work because almost all the slaves would be dead, escaped, or have freed themselves. Meaning slavery wouldn't be a thing rather than almost every civilization practicing some form of slavery.

>>49168352
That player is ether retarded or trying to justify his magical realm. Doing double duty for someone that hates you is stupid. Ether ally with her and teach her how to survive or worry about yourself and leave her to the wildness, the former being the most viable option. Once you get established in your environment and warm up to each other then who knows. But you have a solid base.

Having an untrained wife who also hates your guts that needs feeding in an unknown environment is not a solid base.

Caveman is sort of justified by primitive communication ability and ether lack of discipline or a tribe to support. If it's just two, linguistically capable, sapient people with no society to maintain, then there is no justification. Even animals know you don't make procreate when conditions are shit.


All the player has to do is be patient and see how things unfold before getting his bone on.
If he wasn't an idiot or an asshole it wouldn't be a moral dilemma

>>49171073
Thats because we've already fucking awnsered the question, you imbecile! If she doesnt want to have sex with the guy, and if the guy is smart/civilized enough to realize what he's doing is wrong, than its fucking WRONG. What more can we discuss?

Congrats! Your at a impossible impasse! Either he kills her or rapes her! Either way, he's comitting a evil act! What other "Interesting" rationalizations does this have?

Its one pissed off guy, whose stuck with a women who has done him wrong, and now he wants revenge. Raping her, killing her, etc. Are all evil things to do, but they are all reasonable things to do in this scenario, considering the circumstances and people involved.

What more do you want?

>>49171212
>Obviously slavery is preferable to death

Depends on person.

>Otherwise slavery wouldn't work

Slavery doesn't work. It's a patchjob for people who are too lazy to think up of an actual solution or have their heads stuck up their ass so far that they actually believe they are superior to others.

Just my whole two cents. Not a survivalist expert or anything close, but wouldn't it be better to just kill this hostile element and attempt to survive on you own?
Wouldn't it be better to risk the "Going mad from isolation" and "Having no backup against wild creatures", then have someone who might kill you?
Shouldn't you provide a decent, well protected shelter and make sure you can protect and feed additional young, before trying to set up this "Creepy Swiss Family Robinson" plot?
Though this player probably just wants to get his fetish on.

>>49171272
>they are all reasonable things to do

This is literally all he wanted.

He wanted to hear that rape can be justified.

Because he wants to feel assured that he can have a justified reason to rape someone.

>>49171317

But anon, humans only exist to procreate!

Why would he care about his own survival like a rational thinking creature when instead he could try to have children like some kind of psychopath?

>>49171312
>Depends on person.
Yes, it's entirely possible to be a special snowflake who prefers liberty over death. No one is disagreeing.
But the common outcome between the choice is slavery, with the reasoning that slave always has the option of death available yet they choose to remain a slave.
Move on.
>Slavery doesn't work. It's a patchjob for people who are too lazy to think up of an actual solution or have their heads stuck up their ass so far that they actually believe they are superior to others.
Slavery is literally a more successful economic model than communism. Slavery totally works. It's just less efficient than wages and employment.

>>49171400
>But the common outcome between the choice is slavery, with the reasoning that slave always has the option of death available yet they choose to remain a slave.

Yeah...it's as though they want to try and maximize their ability to not be a slave and not die.

> Slavery totally works.

Nope. It will inevitable fall under the weight of its own evil and cruelty. You would literally need magic that reshapes how humans work in order to create a human society that will indefinitely operate on slavery.

> a more successful economic model than communism

Definitely nope unless you are doing pure "I'm going to theorycraft using very specific variables that ignore the entirety of what happens during existence, essentially making my metrics completely arbitrary"

>>49171471
>Definitely nope
Nah dude
>Civilizations that had slavery and prospered:
United States, Rome, China, Greece
>Civilizations that had communism and prospered:
...

>>49171339
Well fuck that than.

No, its not justifiable. Note my use of the word "REASONABLE." Rape is never a okay thing. Its happened, is happening, and will happen. But rape will NEVER be a good thing.

>>49171471
>It will inevitable fall under the weight of its own evil and cruelty.
wew lad how's that American education working for you?
Slavery works fine when you need a large workforce but you have to actually take care of them and not be a baby-eating asshole because your slaves are valuable tools.
and frankly slavery as indentured servitude is absolutely top-tier and part of what made Rome able to integrate so many civilizations into their own.

>>49171529
>United States

Slavery divided the country. Literally caused brothers to kill each other.

>Rome

Seems like they got their shit kicked in by all the people they kept on making slaves out of, or by a bunch of other countries who would really rather not be made slaves.

>China

I'm certain that slaves caused lots of problems for the Chinese. Haven't studied their history too much but I'd be surprised if shit didn't go down as the empire weakened.

> Greece

See Rome.

>Civilizations that had communism and prospered:

It's so easy when you can blame a word for a country's downfall instead of the complexities of reality, huh?

Fuck I don't even really like "pure" communism as a concept but your argument structure is triggering the fuck out of me.

>>49171605
> you have to actually take care of them

Ah yes, the "good" slave owner. I wonder how "good" they will be when slaves start to want to leave or have their own freedom outside of their master's desire.

Because when that happens the only tool the owner has is violence and cruelty.

>slavery as indentured servitude
>when slavery we change the meaning of slavery to a completely concept, it works perfectly! But I also get to use the word "slavery"!

Also I refuse to believe that you don't think indentured servitude had its own abuses.

>>49171073
>It's common sense that we can rationalize every crime from theft, to murder, to torture.

Torture? Theft and murder, fine, if it serves some good, but torture? Well, let me just do the debate for us. Even if you mean that it is for some ostensibly good purpose rather than just to give the torturer kicks, we can run through the usual debates regarding efficacy, the effect on the torturer and the tortured, innocence and punishment, etc.

>Yet we have yet to find an "excuse" to rape.

Because it seems like there are no ostensibly good reasons to do that, when there are other methods that make one less of a monster.

>inb4 "but what if the human race was ending and the last woman left on Earth didn't want to bang me"

>>49171539
>reasonable

OOOOOH IT'S REASONABLE

RAPE IS A REASONABLE THING TO DO

THAT MAKES IT SO MUCH BETTER

>>49169475
you seem to have missed /pol/ by a mile

>>49167994

It's obviously an evil thing to do, duh. If the woman isn't agreeing, it's just rape.

>>49168352

Dude, she'll just kill him in his sleep if he doesn't keep her constantly tied up.

>>49168213
This. Morality is relative. What one culture considers moral another might consider outright evil, but you can't judge peoples behavior based on a system of morality they are unfamiliar with.

Ethics, however, are objective, and objectively, such an action isn't inherently wrong, since it's driven by an instinctual impulse to propagate. When you're talking about as far back as cave man times, it's a very different perspective on right and wrong.

>>49171690
>Ah yes, the "good" slave owner.
not my point. It's not about being a good little liberal saint, it's about being efficient with your tools. And yes, the roman system had it's own answers for "when slaves start to want to leave" and they worked very well. Rome even made laws against blatant abuse of slaves because they knew it was stupid and prevented integration.

Hell even if you look at American South slavery it only collapsed because the North had more efficient slavery in the form of wage slaves.

but yeah, keep it up Marx, you'll get your "perfect society" some day

>>49171953
>Ethics, however, are objective
Source?

>>49171978
>it's about being efficient with your tools.
Humans are not tools. To treat them as such will inevitable reveal to you why it is really fucking stupid to think of humans as tools.

> Rome even made laws against blatant abuse of slaves because they knew it was stupid and prevented integration

No. Unless one guy was literally passing all the laws, the reason they passed these laws were that a bunch of different people agreed that it was a good idea based on their own individual motives and morality.

>more efficient slavery in the form of wage slaves.

Ok so now you are just throwing around the word slave without having any meaning to it.

>"perfect society"

No shit dude. As humans communicate more and realize how fucking stupid it is to act like shit heads then we are going to come up with a perfect society. Fuck with how you are throwing around the word slave you might even think of the perfect society as one being nothing but slaves slaving away for their benevolent masters.

>>49171978
Efficient for what purpose? The glorification of Rome, I suppose. It is true that a society adopts a mode of production suited to its material conditions and social relations, but it is a far cry from saying that what is the case is what ought be the case, nor that everyone in that society benefits from that mode of production.

>>49171953

I find morality and ethics to be a useless distinction in life.

>such an action isn't inherently wrong, since it's driven by an instinctual impulse to propagate
>it's driven by an instinctual impulse to propagate

Not at fucking all. It's driven by an instinctual impulse of "when I do this it feels good." Breeding and having children is completely incidental to sex.

File: 1461742695889.gif (2MB, 624x335px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 624x335px

>>49172116
>Humans are not tools
lol

>>49172208
>humans are tools

Watch that edge

>>49171471
>Nope. It will inevitable fall under the weight of its own evil and cruelty.

Bad news for global capital, I guess.

>>49170292
>implying that a player won't make spur of the moment decisions purely on a whim

Exactly how many games have you played anon? Even if it wasn't a last minute decision not every guy immediately jumps to the rape option when forced into close proximity with a woman. Hated or not the chick is an extra set of eyes and hands that can be taught to help out once she gets off her high hors. Either get back to your feminist blog or calm the fuck down for a second and think.

>>49172208

Me and my buddy had a huge laugh about this guy.

Bonus points for "I'm more dangerous without it than with it."

He's got some sick skills with it.

File: 1471827302258.jpg (26KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 480x640px

>>49172313
I'm always watching my back

>>49172358

If it continues to be evil and cruel then.....yeah.

>>49171020
That's neglecting the fact that the player or his character wouldn't normally or ever rape or force a woman to do such things in the same situation. He's only considering doing it because it's a woman he hates.

>>49171690
Read up on the Yoruba. Sometimes slavery builds ties of fictive kinship or can be a route towards upward social mobility. Shit ain't always helots and cotton picking.

>>49172401
>"It's okay if I hate her!"

>>49172429
>slavery builds ties of fictive kinship or can be a route towards upward social mobility
>slavery builds ties that allow people to form groups to stop being slaves

Why not just skip the middle man and have people not be slaves?

That seems to be way more logical, huh?

>>49172433
You sure you want to play that card here son? You do realize that this is the place that pretty much coined the term "it's not rape if it's an elf", right?

>>49172433
He could have killed her because he hates her. Really she's lucky she's a woman, if it was a dude he'd probably already have killed him for sure.

>>49172475
I meant ties of fictive kinship with the buyers. Slave status isn't hereditary and your endgame is getting yourself and your family adopted by a richer family. In this case at least. The word slavery is applied broadly, historically. More with brown people. It's not like squires get paid, while we're on the topic of exchanging labor for social ties.

>>49172586
>"it's not rape if it's an elf"

Yeah. As a stupid joke.

>>49172652

Yeah, and any system that says "you own this person" is going to be full of abuses and people arguing about when it's okay to rape a slave, to beat a slave, to starve a slave, to kill a slave.

It seems to be a much easier solution to just say "nobody owns anybody" kind of like how the real world works.

>>49172654
And yet few remember that it's actually a joke. The point is that between that and the sheer number of questionable fetishes and magical realms you're argument isn't going to amount to much around these parts.

>>49172802

Oh, so you aren't an actual creature but rather the anonymous embodyment of /tg/?

Because if you were someone typing at a keyboard then this would be an extremely weak way of arguing.

>>49172696
Shits less common when the dude is literally family now. Interns and helots don't get paid, but they're hardly comparable.

>>49173017

Family isn't a slave though...

Again this is
>Slavery isn't bad when it's not actually slavery

>>49172877
That would imply i'm trying to argue. I'm just trying to say you're not likely to make a whole lot of progress.

>>49173157

You're implying that you are the representative of the entire will of /tg/ or at least are capable of tapping into the collective consciousness to predict the direction of it.

All of it is irrelevant if there is an argument happening between individuals.

Board culture is board culture, it will do whatever the fuck it wants.

People are people, and they are driven by logic and reason.

>>49173097
No true Scotsman is treated humanely.

>>49172644
>"I'm not going to kill you, but I am going to rape you, though no one is forcing me to do either. Aren't I swell?"

>>49173419

>when you point out that it's stupid to redefine words that literally have meanings then you are doing the No True Scotsman

File: 1363748205458.jpg (72KB, 400x299px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 400x299px

>>49171763

Triggered beyond salvation.

You're putting words and concepts in his mouth, anon. As he just said, it will never be morally justified, yet the chance of rape occuring are reasonably high in this kind of situation, therefore it is a "reasonable scenario", as in "not governed BY reason" as much by circumstances.

But Jesus man, take your pills.

>>49171808

Since he's aiming from Tumblr, it was a nice attempt still.

>>49172360

Plus, as I see the situation (mostly been lurking this topic for a while), he's willing to find a way to avenge his comrade (or find some sort of retribution on her) without getting rid of the asset she could represent.

Killing her is off the hook, since it would rid him of potential (wo)manpower, maiming her too.

In his vengeful, juvenile mind, the only thing that he could come up with that would make her suffer AND useful would be using her as bride material, as stupid as it sounds.

It might not be a well though-out idea, and the morality of it is indeed debatable (although indeniably evil by our standards), but I can follow the trail of thoughs that he might had.

Since he is too stubborn to work WITH her and yet too indecisive to get rid of her, he will inevitably face a stalemate before an inevitable mistake.

>>49173584

>yet the chance of rape occuring are reasonably high in this kind of situation

No it's not. Humans are individuals driven by their individual needs and wants that reflect their environment and their upbringing.

It makes no sense to sit around and calculate the probably of rape unless you are actively trying to hedge the bets in your favor. It is completely useless information for the sake of a roleplaying game.

>>49173776
>would be using her as bride material

You are assuming that he wants a bride.

>although indeniably evil by our standards

Nah, just evil.

> inevitably

No such thing with humans. Unless you really really really really know the person and even then it's a crapshot.

>>49172433

In a real case scenario where I would be assured that I would get scott-free 100% if I inflicted terrible pain or death to someone who would be directly responsible for the death of a loved one, I really don't know if I would be able to resist it, nor would you know. It's human nature.

It depends of the person, I guess. For that kind of revenge though, I'd probably go with a quick death. Nothing short of utilitarian.

File: 1464191912729.gif (161KB, 227x206px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 227x206px

>>49173795

I agree with your statement, yet I was reffering to this particular state of affairs, which involve a hot-defenseless-captive-woman NPC and a PC who is already trying to figure out which would be the most effective way to justify the rape of said NPC.

In this particular case, as stated, I assure you that the risk of rape is "reasonably" high.

>Risk of rape in the afternoon ! Don't forget your rapebrella today, folks.
>pic related

>>49174015
>hot-defenseless-captive-woman

This has 0 to do with rape.

If the PC wants to justify rape all he needs is for his PC to feel powerless/impotent and generally look down on women. You know, the reason people rape.

Boom, his character is a villainous scumbag and that's all that needs to happen.

File: 1470101778343.jpg (75KB, 504x370px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 504x370px

>>49174094

>hot-defenseless-captive-woman has nothing to do with rape

Phew lad.

>>49174473

It literally doesn't. Have you researched rape at all? Do you have any idea what drives humans to do horrible things? Or do you go "hurr durr nature of humanity is evil" like some stupid edgelord art student?

>>49173485
>it's not slavery if you adopt them
OP has his answer I guess.