November 26, 2015: Multicolored Forgath

[mustache_man]

well, the deal with idle and bowst isn't rape because idle consents. Bowst doesn't have a choice in the matter, true, but idle isn't forcing him to have sex with her.

Idle is not forcing him, but he is forced nonetheless. I don't know if I'd go and call it rape, but it's certainly possible to draw the parallel. Maybe he's had a good reason to write it this way, but I'm not seeing it. So far it just seems juvenile, the sort of thing a 13 year old who just discovered porn would come up with.

[nikohl]

well, the deal with idle and bowst isn't rape because idle consents. Bowst doesn't have a choice in the matter, true, but idle isn't forcing him to have sex with her...

The whole point is that Bowst doesn't have a choice in the matter! Just because it's not Idle doing the forcing, doesn't mean that Bowst isn't being forced into sexual activity. So yes it is rape, if your definition of rape is 'non-consensual sexual activity'. Which your definition probably should be

Edit: posted at the same time as mustache_man, saying pretty much the same thing!

[Glemp]

well, the deal with idle and bowst isn't rape because idle consents. Bowst doesn't have a choice in the matter, true, but idle isn't forcing him to have sex with her. I think the revelation of this plot point could have delivered better. Like, maybe have forgath catch them in the act behind some bushes or something. It just seems odd that she'd be so frank about that with a complete stranger. Especially one that she seems to be digging on.

Well, what's the alternative? They have to do it every single day, and if seeing her die freaked Forgath out then she may well think a little warning would help stop another one.

[Arch Lich Burns]

Not having a curse that makes bowst be raped everyday? I mean, it could have been anything else.

[Liquidmark]

well, the deal with idle and bowst isn't rape because idle consents. Bowst doesn't have a choice in the matter, true, but idle isn't forcing him to have sex with her.

Idle is not forcing him, but he is forced nonetheless. I don't know if I'd go and call it rape, but it's certainly possible to draw the parallel. Maybe he's had a good reason to write it this way, but I'm not seeing it. So far it just seems juvenile, the sort of thing a 13 year old who just discovered porn would come up with.

Sure it's juvenile, but I've played campaigns that had stuff like that before. It's sort of cringeworthy for player characters to engage in, but not so much so for npc's.

The whole point is that Bowst doesn't have a choice in the matter! Just because it's not Idle doing the forcing, doesn't mean that Bowst isn't being forced into sexual activity. So yes it is rape, if your definition of rape is 'non-consensual sexual activity'. Which your definition probably should be

Edit: posted at the same time as mustache_man, saying pretty much the same thing!

Bowst doesn't have a viable choice, true, but I still don't view it as rape really. He's simply suffering from a condition that requires that he has sex or suffer the consequences. It's not a person taking his ability to choose away, it is a condition brought on by a dungeon crawl that probably gives people random curses. There are probably worse curses to have and lord knows that most people would die on day one if they had a curse like that. Of course, it could just be bowst telling idle a lie so he can bed her every night, which would be rape unless she would consent without that. When he first appeared, he kinda came off as a jealous boyfriend and she seemed way more excited about meeting a cleric that could possibly remove their curses.

Well, what's the alternative? They have to do it every single day, and if seeing her die freaked Forgath out then she may well think a little warning would help stop another one.

I don't know, it just seems like something very private and humiliating.

[Product Placement]

Well, that update was rather exposition heavy and it felt very forced. Wouldn't it have made alot more sense to have Ward relay all the information directly... well... rudely?

I mean, for what reason would Ward be giving Bowst/Idle all that very specific information about Klik-ers unorthodox healing and its possible side effects, without being prompted for that info? Since Forgath was wondering when these patches would come off, it felt like a natural point for Ward to come in and explain why he's stupid for thinking so, while freaking him out about the possibility of an evil clone growing inside him for the lulz.

Ward (ominous hands): "The worst thing is if he gets fed enough of his positive, he'll become an unstoppable demi-god, killing everything in sight!"
Forgath (turned white): "..."
Ward: "Nah, I'm just messing with you. All the Kliks who worked on you knew what they were doing."

The whole point is that Bowst doesn't have a choice in the matter! Just because it's not Idle doing the forcing, doesn't mean that Bowst isn't being forced into sexual activity. So yes it is rape, if your definition of rape is 'non-consensual sexual activity'. Which your definition probably should be

Edit: posted at the same time as mustache_man, saying pretty much the same thing!

Bowst doesn't have a viable choice, true, but I still don't view it as rape really. He's simply suffering from a condition that requires that he has sex or suffer the consequences. It's not a person taking his ability to choose away, it is a condition brought on by a dungeon crawl that probably gives people random curses.

So wouldn't that make the designer of the cursewalk the rapist? I mean, he is the one who put in the possibility for the forced sex curse. If I put down a trap that kills someone, that doesn't make me less of a murderer than the man who pulls the tricker.

[Sessine]

Is needing to have sex every day to stay alive, worse than needing to experience death every day?

These two daily curses present interesting parallels. Goblins is all about making us think through what the conventions of a D&D campaign would be like if that world were real. Someone's already noted that game-wise, Idle's curse is more like an advantage. A guaranteed resurrection if you need it! What's she complaining about? Most players would love their character to be "cursed" like that.

Similarly, to belabour the obvious, there are plenty of horny immature D&D players who'd think Bowst had totally lucked out. Sex every day! Hurr, hurr, snicker, what's he complaining about?

Part of the point of Goblins from the beginning has been to make fun of players like that. Idle hates her curse. For her, it's not just a daily dialog of "I chop her head off, as usual." "Right, and I bounce back again fully healed, as usual. There, that's that done for another day." No, she has to experience dying, over and over and over again.

I would lay serious money on Bowst hating his curse too. This page gives us a clue why he might... and where the plot's heading from here. One of nikohl's guesses rings true:

...he might secretly really like her but be horribly upset that he's had to ask this of her every single day despite her reassurances that she's okay with it and know the curses have ruined any chances of them ever having a proper relationship.

Idle's telling Forgath now, precisely so that she can emphasize, "There's no relationship." She's visibly interested in Forgath. She wants him to know she's not committed to someone else.

I think this is the initial setup for a triangle. Why? Because of that prophecy. "When the serpent becomes your prey, friends will become enemies and love will fuel hate."


...early days yet, though. This plot is only just getting started.

[Liquidmark]

Well, that update was rather exposition heavy and it felt very forced. Wouldn't it have made alot more sense to have Ward relay all the information directly... well... rudely?

I mean, for what reason would Ward be giving Bowst/Idle all that very specific information about Klik-ers unorthodox healing and its possible side effects, without being prompted for that info? Since Forgath was wondering when these patches would come off, it felt like a natural point for Ward to come in and explain why he's stupid for thinking so, while freaking him out about the possibility of an evil clone growing inside him for the lulz.

Ward (ominous hands): "The worst thing is if he gets fed enough of his positive, he'll become an unstoppable demi-god, killing everything in sight!"
Forgath (turned white): "..."
Ward: "Nah, I'm just messing with you. All the Kliks who worked on you knew what they were doing."

The whole point is that Bowst doesn't have a choice in the matter! Just because it's not Idle doing the forcing, doesn't mean that Bowst isn't being forced into sexual activity. So yes it is rape, if your definition of rape is 'non-consensual sexual activity'. Which your definition probably should be

Edit: posted at the same time as mustache_man, saying pretty much the same thing!

Bowst doesn't have a viable choice, true, but I still don't view it as rape really. He's simply suffering from a condition that requires that he has sex or suffer the consequences. It's not a person taking his ability to choose away, it is a condition brought on by a dungeon crawl that probably gives people random curses.

So wouldn't that make the designer of the cursewalk the rapist? I mean, he is the one who put in the possibility for the forced sex curse. If I put down a trap that kills someone, that doesn't make me less of a murderer than the man who pulls the tricker.

I think it would make the designer of the cursewalk a sadist, not a rapist. It's hard to get sex every day, so most people wouldn't last a week before they miss a day and die.

Anyhow, Rape is a crime where the rapist forces a victim to have sex with them. Unless the curse is something like "You must give me (sex act) every day, or die", I wouldn't call it rape. If it were then something like Pon Far in star trek is rape because a male vulcan that's going through it absolutely has to mate every 7 years or die unless they work out the tension through battle, which is extremely rare (TOS: Amok Time).

Yeah, setting a trap would make you a murderer, because you are killing someone. But rape is to force someone to have sex with you, not to force someone to have sex with anyone they choose or are available with consent.

[Arch Lich Burns]

No rape is being forced to have sex, no matter whom it was wit or whom forces you to have sex. If someone puta a gun to your head and tells you to have sex with your lover or you will die, guess what, that is still rape, with the person holding the gun as the rapist. It does not even matter if it is not with the perpetrator.

[Product Placement]

I think it would make the designer of the cursewalk a sadist, not a rapist.

Oh, I can definitely agree with the sadist part. I think we all became perfectly aware of that after learning about the death-every-day curse. But the sex curse is definitely a form of a sex crime, sadistic or not. And what is a man who commits a sex crime? What would you call me if I told you that I would personally come and kill you if you didn't have sex every single day?^*

What form of a crime would a burglar be committing, if he broke into a house of a married couple, and forced them to have sex with each other at gunpoint?

Directness adds alot to the scenario so it throws this into the philosophical territory of consequentialism. Consider the trolley problem. You're stuck in a control tower for train traffic and see a train heading towards a line where 5 workers are inspecting the tracks, unaware of the speeding train. If you press a button that diverts the train, it will go down a different line where a single worker is at and kill him. Most people would opt to press the button. However, when re-asked if they would push someone in front of a train, to stop it so that it wouldn't kill the five workers, most people opt not to. In the end, you're doing the exact same thing but in the second scenario your involvement is more direct. It's more apparent that YOU are killing a man to save 5 others.

So a man who forces others to have sex through a curse is just as bad as the one who'd do it under gunpoint.

My two cents.

^*Note: Not an actual threat.

[sunphoenix]

Well, curses aren't meant to be fun. I mean, maybe Bowst is fine with the whole thing too, so maybe it is fun for them both lol it certainly is an interesting curse. I'd like to think these curses have meaning behind them.

Perhaps Bowst cheated on his lover and his punishment is to have sex every day or die? Or maybe he raped somebody and likewise now sex is his punishment. Idle perhaps killed many people and her curse to die daily is a reminder of that. Or that she took life for granted before?

Who knows. To say these curses are meaningless to the plot is pretty ignorant. Do you write the story? Do you know the plot and know for a fact the nature of these curses are irrelevant? Just because you don't like the nature of the curse, doesn't make it pointless. Reality isn't a pretty thing. People do terrible things in real life. They rape, they murder, they lie. I for one find these curses very interesting and want to know the story behind them.

And props to Thunt for putting controversial themes in his comic. Not everyone needs their hand held and their eyes covered. Bad things happen and ignoring them doesn't make them stop.

Well put! Ditto!

[SpellsBedly]

Is needing to have sex every day to stay alive, worse than needing to experience death every day?

Well that's hard to say isn't it? Because real world people don't get beheaded and come back fully healed. It's not a thing that happens. (And when people do have near death experiences they're generally too happy about the coming back bit that they don't mind the nearly dying part that much.) People being forced into sex is a thing that happens. Sure, these specific characters are fine with it, but the idea of having such a curse exist and being treated as no real problem in the first place seems kind of misplaced in a comic that made such a big deal about surviving rape and getting over your trauma. Are we still in the same world here? I feel like I've been watching a Guillermo del Toro movie where sex, violence and the combination of those two are used to dramatic effect, to impact the viewer, and suddenly the channel switched to one of those horndog comedies where rape is funny. Those movies are cringeworthy enough in their own right, but at least you know what you're watching five minutes in and know which mindset to use when judging them. The story of Goblins so far has primed me to take this stuff pretty seriously within this comic. Again, these characters are fine with it, but this is still coming from a collection of silly curses like the "why are you punching yourself" one. I think the curse is seriously off-key in that context in this comic.

And maybe some people would feel similarly about the dying curse, I might be able to see that a little bit. But at least that one is a good curse game mechanically. You hear about it your brain starts coming up with ways to abuse it. The sex curse on the other hand would mostly get the DM chuckling about how many "wacky" shenanigans are going to occur as this character is looking for sex. There's nothing good coming out of it. At best it's a waste of playing time, at worst it will turn the character into a rapist, a rape victim (it's still rape if the universe itself is doing the forcing) or both. And the same thing goes for it being in a comic. Yeah, I'm sure Thunt has some great use for it in mind, but he will practically have to jump through hoops to get there. Getting the dying curse a cool place where it adds something to the story is easy, I'm already looking forward to it. In summary I can't really see why this sex curse with all its squicky implications ended up in the story. The only real reason I can come up with is that nothing better came to mind, which doesn't sound like a thing that would happen to Thunt.

[Liquidmark]

No rape is being forced to have sex, no matter whom it was wit or whom forces you to have sex. If someone puta a gun to your head and tells you to have sex with your lover or you will die, guess what, that is still rape, with the person holding the gun as the rapist. It does not even matter if it is not with the perpetrator.

Well, I disagree about that scenario being rape too. It's messed up but that comes off as a sadistic psycho thing to do akin to forcing someone to eat their favorite meal way past being full for the gunman's personal enjoyment.

Look, this is a curse. Curses are supposed to suck. I just chock it up to some random thing that he must deal with that's more like making him jump through hoops than levying sexual depravities against him.

What form of a crime would a burglar be committing, if he broke into a house of a married couple, and forced them to have sex with each other at gunpoint?

Are you watching while licking your lips and such or did you set up some sort of elaborate murder machine that will kill us if we stop having sex even in your absence?

The former might be some sort of sexual assault depending on your state law, I suppose.

But, in my state, this is the law:

Rape

First Degree ÔÇô engaging in sexual intercourse with another without his or her consent by force, using weapons, strangling or inflicting serious physical injury, threatening with death, serious injury, or kidnapping, or committed with anotherÔÇÖs help or during a burglary

Second Degree ÔÇô engaging in vaginal intercourse with another 1) without his or her consent by force or threat, 2) with a mentally or physically incapacitated person (includes drunk, high, or unconscious) when the defendant knows of his or her condition, or 3) the victim is under 14 years old and the defendant is at least 4 years older than the victim

The law is very specific, the perpetrator has to be committing vaginal sexual intercourse with the victim against their will.

Here's the law on sexual offense

Sexual Offense

First Degree ÔÇô engaging in a sexual act (oral or anal sex, or any object or part of oneÔÇÖs body penetrates the genitals or anus for sexual gratification, but not vaginal intercourse ÔÇô thatÔÇÖs above in rape) by force, threat, or without consent while displaying a weapon, suffocating or physically injuring the victim, or threatening the victim with death, disfigurement, or serious physical injury, or committed with anotherÔÇÖs help or during a burglary

Second Degree ÔÇô engaging in a sexual act with another by 1) force or without his or her consent, 2) with a mentally or physically incapacitated person (includes drunk, high, or unconscious) when the defendant should know of his or her condition, or 3) the victim is under 14 and the defendant is at least 4 years older than the victim

Third Degree ÔÇô includes any of the following:
engaging in sexual contact (intentionally touching the victimÔÇÖs or defendantÔÇÖs genital, anal, or other private parts for sexual gratification or abuse of either person) in any of the following situations:

Without consent while using a weapon, strangling or seriously injuring the victim, threatening the victim with death, serious injury, or kidnapping, or committed with anotherÔÇÖs help OR
-The victim is mentally or physically incapacitated (drunk or unconscious for example) and the defendant knows of his or her condition
-The victim is under 14 years old and the defendant is at least 4 years older
-Engaging in a sexual act (i.e. oral or anal sex) or vaginal sex with a 14 or 15 year old victim by a 21 year old or older defendant, AKA statutory rape

Fourth Degree ÔÇô any of the following:
-Engaging in sexual contact without the otherÔÇÖs consent
-Engaging in a sexual act or vaginal sex with a 14 or 15 year old when the defendant is at least 4 years older
-Engaging in a sexual act, sexual contact, or vaginal sex with a child under 18 who at the time of the sexual activity was a student enrolled in a school where the person was in a position of authority (i.e. a principal, coach, teacher, or counselor whoÔÇÖs at least 21 years old, employed by the school, and was in a supervisory position over the student)

I'm guessing that a person that does that would be charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon or something like that if the prosecutors don't see it as a first or second degree sexual offense, which sorta fits.

[nikohl]

This is an international forum and laws vary widely. Discussion of said laws and whether or not they are adequate is going to veer into Controversy territory, and we have a subforum appropriate for that, but suffice to say that your definition (and your state's definition) of rape is very narrow compared to many other people's, legal or otherwise.

[thinkslogically]

Rape

First Degree ÔÇô engaging in sexual intercourse with another without his or her consent by force, using weapons, strangling or inflicting serious physical injury, threatening with death, serious injury, or kidnapping, or committed with anotherÔÇÖs help or during a burglary

The law is very specific, the perpetrator has to be committing vaginal sexual intercourse with the victim against their will.

While I completely agree with Nikohl here, I would also say that your interpretation of first degree rape (based on what you posted) is not correct since it extends to ANY sexual intercourse. Given that Bowst is being forced to have sex every day or die, I would argue that the definition could fit his situation.

However, since they actually live in a D&D fantasy world, I think the only definitions that really matter are Bowst / Idle's.

[Restomak]

There is entirely not enough discussion on the fact that Forgath is, apparently, permanently multicolored and fused to his gauntlent.

Especially given the post title.

[Morgaln]

Rape

First Degree ÔÇô engaging in sexual intercourse with another without his or her consent by force, using weapons, strangling or inflicting serious physical injury, threatening with death, serious injury, or kidnapping, or committed with anotherÔÇÖs help or during a burglary

The law is very specific, the perpetrator has to be committing vaginal sexual intercourse with the victim against their will.

While I completely agree with Nikohl here, I would also say that your interpretation of first degree rape (based on what you posted) is not correct since it extends to ANY sexual intercourse. Given that Bowst is being forced to have sex every day or die, I would argue that the definition could fit his situation.

However, since they actually live in a D&D fantasy world, I think the only definitions that really matter are Bowst / Idle's.

And of course the definition of whoever Bowst is going to try and rape to survive when Idle is not there. Bowst has been introduced as a somewhat aggressive person who already tried bullying Forgath just because he happens to be higher level. He obviously felt the need to exert dominance over Forgath. A person like that shouldn't be happy with someone else (i.e. Idle) having control over him and basically holding his life in her hands. Because that is a problem: Idle can kill herslef to get around the curse if necessary; Bowst is at the mercy of other people. If a situation arises where it is rape or die, he certainly doesn't seem to be the person who will calmly accept his fate but he will do what is necessary to stay alive at the cost of others. Someone theorized that this might be punishment for rape Bowst has committed in the past; this curse is going to make him rape someone again sooner or later, so if it was punishment, it really missed its mark.

Of course this largely depends on the definition of sex for purpose of this curse. Does it have to be with a lifeform or would a sex doll count? Does the lifeform have to be alive or are corpses okay? Does it have to be a sapient being or can he just find a sheep? Obviously all of these can be played for comedy; I don't think they're funny, but your mileage may vary.

[nikohl]

You're ascribing traits to Bowst that might not be there, Morgaln. That's risky - stating he's "going" to rape someone just because he's brash and was bossy to a stranger? I know Bowst is a character not a real person, but dang dude!

I'm seeing over-compensation for a lack of confidence in Bowst's actions towards Forgath, more than anything else, but maybe I'm reading things that aren't necessarily there just like you are, except in the opposite direction. I don't see him as angry alpha male with no depth yet... I see another low-int dude like Minmax, the presumably planned parallel/contrast of which is a whole other kettle of fish I won't get into, but I see (in the current minimal development, and only from the interactions we've read) space for a gentle heart in our new grumpy dude. And there's room for him to make positive choices just like MM made when confronted with Goblinslayer's sex crimes.

I'm sticking with my theory that Bowst is more hurt by this than we've currently seen, and I'm not going to label him a probable-past-rapist or obvious-future-rapist on speculation alone :/

[Morgaln]

True, nikohl, we don't really know how Bowst will react yet. I didn't intend to say that he would certainly react that way, I'm sorry, if it sounded like that. What I intended to say was that from what we have seen of him so far (which, admittedly, isn't much), I get tzhe impression that he's more likely to put his needs over those of others if it is a life-or-death scenario. After all, desperate people do desperate things. Personally, I don't think he is a past rapist, but one never knows, and if anything can turn someone into a future rapist, this curse is a rather good way to accomplish that.
So far we don't know if Bowst is hurt/bothered by this curse at all; the conversation between Forgath and Idle completely focused on Idle's feelings on this. In fact, Forgath seems to think Bowst shouldn't be bothered by this at all, judging from the "it's more a curse for you than for him" comment. That comment annoyed me right from the start and still does because the underlying assumptions ("men want it all the time with anyone" and "sex is a chore for women") are terrible stereotypes that do a lot of harm.

[nikohl]

Yes, that is a harmful stereotype, but you yourself glossed over any possible suffering Bowst might be experiencing and went straight to "and he'll probably rape someone else soon because he's an aggressive type of person who probably doesn't appreciate a woman having power over his life through this curse", which isn't outside the realms of uncool stereotyping of guys either.

I took Forgath's response to Idle as a clumsy, quick attempt at sympathy/pre-comfort during the early stages of their conversation when he didn't know that Idle was apparently OK with the sexytimes, rather than a dismissal of Bowst's feelings on the matter. Forgath was talking to Idle about a potentially very upsetting subject; I doubt he'd have said that exact sentence if he was talking to Bowst alone or the two of them together, and I doubt he held the opinion that the sex was a problem for Idle for more than a second after she guffawed in his face and stated that it wasn't.

[Morgaln]

I don't think I was stereotyping him in that regard; I thought about how he would probably react if put into a situation like that, judging from his actions so far, and that is what I think is the most likely outcome. If he was a woman exhibiting the same character traits, I'd expect the outcome to be the same, so it isn't gender-specific for me. I can easily be wrong, only the comic will tell.
The "power of his life" thing is probably partly due to me projecting myself into his position, because I have a very hard time relinquishing control over any aspect of my life to anyone. But then I'm somewhat on the extreme end of the spectrum in that regard and it's probably easier for him.

It's somewhat difficult to judge Forgath intention in that panel since we neither see his face nor hear his tone. It came over as flippant to me, not clumsy, but it's a matter of interpretation, I guess.

[spiderwrangler]

'non-consensual sexual activity'.

Saw this recently, using tea as an analogy for consent.

"Unconscious people don't want tea."

[thinkslogically]

'non-consensual sexual activity'.

Saw this recently, using tea as an analogy for consent.

"Unconscious people don't want tea."

I love that video It's so very British and such a good analogy!

[thesilence]

Sessine and FailsWildly have made brilliant statements which we appreciate and agree with.

well, the deal with idle and bowst isn't rape because idle consents. Bowst doesn't have a choice in the matter, true, but idle isn't forcing him to have sex with her.

Idle is not forcing him, but he is forced nonetheless. I don't know if I'd go and call it rape, but it's certainly possible to draw the parallel. Maybe he's had a good reason to write it this way, but I'm not seeing it. So far it just seems juvenile, the sort of thing a 13 year old who just discovered porn would come up with.

....We cannot help but concur that it seems very much like exactly that.

How old was Herbert again? And his PCs?

[Liquidmark]

Rape

First Degree ÔÇô engaging in sexual intercourse with another without his or her consent by force, using weapons, strangling or inflicting serious physical injury, threatening with death, serious injury, or kidnapping, or committed with anotherÔÇÖs help or during a burglary

The law is very specific, the perpetrator has to be committing vaginal sexual intercourse with the victim against their will.

While I completely agree with Nikohl here, I would also say that your interpretation of first degree rape (based on what you posted) is not correct since it extends to ANY sexual intercourse. Given that Bowst is being forced to have sex every day or die, I would argue that the definition could fit his situation.

However, since they actually live in a D&D fantasy world, I think the only definitions that really matter are Bowst / Idle's.

Well, my state's law is based on common law and I've never seen an actual definition of rape that didn't involve the accused actually physically engaging in sex acts with the victim(s) or at least witnessing the act itself. Thats why i define it as something sadistic. It's just the dungeon maker doing twisted stuff to make people jump through hoops or die. In this case, acquiring sex is the hoop.

Perhaps the only definition that matters are those of bowst and idle, but they did go into the dungeon crawl and these are the consequences of whatever happened in there. I wouldn't call it rape because the person that made the curse isn't there to partake in or witness the sex act as far as we know. It's just an arbitrary condition that's placed on the characters by someone that's not present. Would it be any less bad if the curse were that bowst had to eat a whole cake every day but bowst (hypothetically) hates or loves cake? What if Bowst is a sex fiend? Sure he doesn't have a choice, but would that matter to a sex addict? We don't know how he feels about having sex but it is known that he can choose his partner and have sex with someone that he's comfortable with or close to.

What constitutes sex in the curse? Like, could Idle, you know, use her mouth to satisfy the condition or does it have to be coitus?

'non-consensual sexual activity'.

Saw this recently, using tea as an analogy for consent.

"Unconscious people don't want tea."

Ok then, this situation is like someone leaving a cake full of poison sitting on a table next to a cup of tea full of antidote inside of a locked room. You break into the room and eat the cake that was sitting next to a cup of tea and see that there's a letter under the cake telling you that the cake had poison in it and the antidote is in the cup of tea sitting next to it. Nobody is forcing you to drink the tea. You must pick the cup of tea up and drink it for the antidote yourself. It doesn't matter if you want the tea, you already consented to eating the cake and now you need to drink the tea for an antidote because you couldn't leave the cake alone.

Drinking the tea is the price you have to pay for eating the cake that you purposefully gobbled down. But nobody is actually forcing you to drink the tea. You have to pick it up with your own hands and put it to your own lips and drink. There's nobody else in the room. This situation is no different from any other where an adventurer trips a trap and has to pay the consequences. Sex doesn't get to be off-limits in a world where people have all kinds of body horrors and messed up situations happen to them for less.