InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "Size doesn't matter!"

drsevarius (drsevarius) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-09-13 16:48:00

Entry tags:

char: chameleon/dmitri smerdyakov, char: michelle gonzales, creator: fred van lente, title: amazing spider-man

Fred Van Lente update on the Chameleon controversy

I got another e-mail from Fred Van Lente, that he's asked me to post.

First off, while I believe he had the best of intentions, the poster "DrSevarius" wrote me under his real name and asked me a question I thought I was answering in private, to him. He posted my response without my permission and without telling me beforehand it was supposed to be for public consumption.

If he had told me that, I would have, first off, made it clear that I am not a Marvel employee. I am not a Marvel spokesperson. I am a freelancer. I speak only for myself. That is just as true for the following statement as the previous one.

Also, if he had told me that, I may have been less coy about the following "Spoiler Alert". Anyone who cares not to have stuff that's in ASM #605 revealed now should avert their eyes.

Amazing Spider-Man #605, which went to the printer weeks ago, makes it clear that Michelle and Chameleon did nothing more than make out in the kitchen scene in #603.

There was no sex, and therefore no rape.

And I'll simply point out that in the scene in ASM #604 when Peter comes home he has no idea why, exactly, Michelle is treating him differently, only that she is. He learns why-- at least partly -- and he responds, in #605.

Thanks for listening. I appreciate it.

Best,
Fred Van Lente

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	janegray 2009-09-14 08:22 pm UTC (link)
	The argument that "if he didn't use force or the threat of force, it wasn't rape" makes no sense. Drugging somebody to get them in bed is considered rape, yet there is no actual force involved in fucking an unconscious person. They are both rape, just like robbery and fraud are both theft. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	arilou_skiff 2009-09-14 09:06 pm UTC (link)
	Drugging someone can be considered to be use of force though. (Just like drugging someone and kidnapping them is) there is precedent for feeding someone drugs being considered an act of assault, IIRC. (Reply to this) (Parent)

arilou_skiff
2009-09-14 09:21 pm UTC (link)

I'd also note that at least where I'm from robbery is *not* theft. And neither is fraud. Robbery is folded under chapter eight: "On Theft, Robbery and other crimes of acquisition" (as seen theft and robbery are two separate crimes) while Fraud is filed under "Fraud and other dishonesty".

Rape is filed under "Sexual crimes", along with a bunch of other crimes. It is specifically defined as "He who (the language is gender-neutral, but I'm not sure how to replicate that in english) through violence or threats of violence or criminal action coerces another to sexual intercourse or act which is considered to be equal thereof [actual sentencing guidelines]
The same is to be the case if the person has intercourse or other sexual act that according to the first section is comparable to intercourse by means of illegitimately exploiting that the person due to unconsciousness, sleep, intoxication or other effects of drugs, sickness, bodily injury or mental illness or otherwise taken into consideration of the circumstances is considered to be in a state of helplessness."

Note that there are other sexual crimes with wider applicability than rape.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Read comments) -