The part that fascinated me the most was the incipient sexual tension between Rage and Billy Thunder, her beloved dog who is now a boy her own age, who loves her unconditionally and will say so. He's also described in a quite sensual manner. AND HE'S A DOG. None of this is ever explicitly thought of by Rage, but it is written in a way which I am pretty sure is meant to make the reader think it.
That could get... messy. If Billy still has the mind of a dog in a human body, I would say that Rage having sex with him is unethical (and possibly squicky). However, it doesn't sound as if that is the case. So, Billy has a human mind but still has his dog memories and emotions, translated into human terms. One could still argue that taking advantage of his feelings is unethical since as a dog he did not have conscious control over them, and it's not clear how much control he has over continuing to feel the same way as a human (particularly if he's only been a human for a short time).
On the other hand, one could argue that, as a human old enough to consent to sex (I assume), he can decide whether or not he wants to have sex with Rage, and can ignore his old doggy feelings if he chooses. Not to mention that normal humans (where by "normal" I mean "not previously a dog") have all sorts of weird reasons for wanting to have sex with particular people, and for the most part we would not consider it unethical for the other parties to consent. (I am now imagining having to challenge anyone making a pass at you with "prove that your desire for me is rational.")
Boy, was that overthinking things. I will lower the tone by noting that
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-05-15 07:12 pm (UTC)That could get... messy. If Billy still has the mind of a dog in a human body, I would say that Rage having sex with him is unethical (and possibly squicky). However, it doesn't sound as if that is the case. So, Billy has a human mind but still has his dog memories and emotions, translated into human terms. One could still argue that taking advantage of his feelings is unethical since as a dog he did not have conscious control over them, and it's not clear how much control he has over continuing to feel the same way as a human (particularly if he's only been a human for a short time).
On the other hand, one could argue that, as a human old enough to consent to sex (I assume), he can decide whether or not he wants to have sex with Rage, and can ignore his old doggy feelings if he chooses. Not to mention that normal humans (where by "normal" I mean "not previously a dog") have all sorts of weird reasons for wanting to have sex with particular people, and for the most part we would not consider it unethical for the other parties to consent. (I am now imagining having to challenge anyone making a pass at you with "prove that your desire for me is rational.")
Boy, was that overthinking things. I will lower the tone by noting that
But nothing comes of it.
could just as well have used "nobody." :)