[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1234[5]678910 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Thursday, January 12, 01:04:37pm
Author: Nell
Subject: Oh, absolutley (r)
In reply to: JayBee 's message, "This raises an initial question (r)" on Wednesday, January 11, 09:27:35pm

I do think that there is much in their lives that excuses and explains and contextualizes their actions so as to reduce, or in cases, eliminate any need to worry about adultery - especially as a legal problem.

I was thinking about it more as an ethical one though.

Take Michael - Elena does not know her marriage is 'fake.' To her it is real. Does Michael - not as a section operative, but as an ethical being - have any responsibility to her and her perfectly valid assumptions about the nature of her marriage? And if so, what?

And given the regularity with which section - successfully - manipulated people, inside and outside of section, using sexual betrayal or the threat of it, sexual betrayal/adultery (which is mostly how I was thinking of it I admit) also seems to exist as an emotional reality, even for section operatives - legally dead though they are.

So - to take Michael again - is it enough that it seems pretty clear, in canon, that he didn't *like* betraying his lovers sexually, even the ones he didn't love? Or is there more?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.