@
Almondmagnum
No, that's certainly not what I'm doing. If the slave does not want sex, the master should not force it on her. I mean ideally, slavery wouldn't exist. But this is a fantasy world we're talking about. In some of them (for example, Death March I believe, and some others), demihumans can be attacked, captured, killed etc unless they're *already* someone's property - and then they have protection under the law.
In other isekais that I've seen (Realist hero who changed a country), slaves existed but owners were not allowed to abuse them - sexually or otherwise. (not that it never happened, but it was an illegal act).
What I am saying is that masters have the right to fuck slaves that want to fuck their masters. And in these fantasy settings, the MCs often do offer to free these girls from slavery, and they refuse - they are happy being a slave to a master that treats them well.
What it boils down to is you want to protect women who haven't asked you to protect them, and you're telling them that their judgment is impaired and you're going to substitute your own.
And just because "a pedophile could use my argument" doesn't make my argument wrong.
Also, a power imbalance does not necessarily mean there was a lack of consent.
For example - the President of the United States has the most power of anyone in the country. And yet we had Bill Clinton having sex with white house intern Monica Lewinsky. Like that's a huuuuuuuge power imbalance - this is someone who controls blacksites, is surrounded by men with guns, is the peak of political connections AND was her employer. So was Monica able to consent? It sure sounds like a greater power imbalance than, say, an 18-year-old and a 14-year-old (specifically mentioning those ages because I saw an 18-year-old get arrested for having a relationship with a 14-year-old in the news last week).
My point is that these human interactions must be judged on an individual basis, and not as some across-the-board one size fits all policy.