The affair between Hal Jordan and Arisia Raab is never going to be fully ethically clear or agreed upon. I understand that. A particular thread in the qward, however, does have me wanting a bit of clarity on the issue.
I am not talking about retcons or excuses. However, I am going to ask a couple of things...
I understand that we're very egocentric with our humanity and project it on to fiction quite often. Specifically races. Just look at how humanoid Arisia looks! But the fact of the matter remains that our adolescence, our neurological and physiological development that makes an affair between a teenager and an adult wrong in the eyes of many of us in the west ... how are we certain those differences exist between a teenager of Arisia's race and of a human adult?
How are we certain that they develop the same as us, and that an adolescent from their planet is of a lesser mental capacity than we are? Why would we measure them by our standards of what maturity and adulthood are?
Neurologically, teenagers are wired to take risks and unable to fully anticipate consequences to the extent that an adult can. Most, at least. Now, how are we sure the development is exactly the same for Arisia? Why are the ethical standards held to equivalency? I understand why Hal would, or why people in-universe would, but what of the readership? What of the objective viewer that sees two completely different races that age differently and have different biology?
I know why Hal was an ass to Arisia. He was a bad boyfriend, that much is certain, just like I think Kyle kind of sucked to Donna as a boyfriend. But why was what Hal did ethically wrong when all of these factors are considered?
Tell me, guys! I'm only thirteen, I don't know! Help!
I am not talking about retcons or excuses. However, I am going to ask a couple of things...
I understand that we're very egocentric with our humanity and project it on to fiction quite often. Specifically races. Just look at how humanoid Arisia looks! But the fact of the matter remains that our adolescence, our neurological and physiological development that makes an affair between a teenager and an adult wrong in the eyes of many of us in the west ... how are we certain those differences exist between a teenager of Arisia's race and of a human adult?
How are we certain that they develop the same as us, and that an adolescent from their planet is of a lesser mental capacity than we are? Why would we measure them by our standards of what maturity and adulthood are?
Neurologically, teenagers are wired to take risks and unable to fully anticipate consequences to the extent that an adult can. Most, at least. Now, how are we sure the development is exactly the same for Arisia? Why are the ethical standards held to equivalency? I understand why Hal would, or why people in-universe would, but what of the readership? What of the objective viewer that sees two completely different races that age differently and have different biology?
I know why Hal was an ass to Arisia. He was a bad boyfriend, that much is certain, just like I think Kyle kind of sucked to Donna as a boyfriend. But why was what Hal did ethically wrong when all of these factors are considered?
Tell me, guys! I'm only thirteen, I don't know! Help!
Comment