Sekirara ni Kiss - Vol. 6 Ch. 22

[Purplelibraryguy]

@Oeconomist
1. Right, Locke, my bad.
2. Your whole schtick about property and contracts is really a lousy way to try to conceptualize ethics or human relationships. If you define things in that sort of way I think you're inevitably going to end up claiming that lots of stuff doesn't exist simply because your system is unable to define it. And it's so far from the kind of, hmmm, frame I use for such things that it seems very difficult for either of us to listen to each other.
2a. Wait a minute--so the guy (or girl etc) does have property with respect to cheating (probably), but not with respect to anything else? What?! Amazingly hermetically sealed, these "contracts".
3. The way you talk about framing defines the word in ways that are so far different from how I, and I think more people than not, would define it that we find ourselves unable to do much but talk past each other, since I keep expecting "reframing" not to mean "extensively rewriting the story". And in my opinion as soon as one defines "reframing" your way you can say "reframing" does whatever you want it to and it becomes trivially true but no longer an interesting claim.

As to Tatoe Todokanu Ito da to Shite mo, if it's "the closest manga you've seen to such a reframing" (which you have repeatedly claimed to be fairly common), well, it is quite far from being one, and so if it's the closest and everything else is even farther, your claims that such stories are common is rubbish.

I'm out. For all the cleverness on display, this is stupid. All the apparent engagement is superficial; we're just wasting words.

 

[Oeconomist]

@Purplelibraryguy—

2. Anytime that one claims an exclusive right to some use of something, one is making a claim to property in that thing. The core of what you now dismiss as a “schtick” was introduced by you after your naïve attempt to invoke a Golden Rule ran into trouble. You made a claim that someone possessed something of ethical significance by virtue of being in a relationship and then you attempted to introduce and make use of Locke's theory of property. You specifically pointed to part of Locke's theory of acquisition, but that part was inapplicable because it was of how the unowned may be acquired; to discuss how one comes to own that which were owned by another, one must turn to a theory of transfer, which why I wrote of contracts. Now, acutely aware that you don't know how to proceed, you object to continuing on the path upon which you put us.

2a. No, contracts can be used to transfer a wide variety of rights. If there were a contract between Kinosuke and Chitose forbidding her to attend to Yui's attempts to woo her, then it would be cheating for her to do so, and Yui would be abetting her in that cheating. But Kinosuke certainly has made no claim that Chitose were cheating. (As I have stated elsewhere, it strikes me as implausible that Kinosuke has not asked Chitose to tell Yui to cease, but the ethics are informed by Kinosuke's not having done so.)

3. My notion of “reframing” involves little more than reörganizing the structure of presentation. But, by virtue of repeatedly misrepresenting what I've said, you attempt to make it seem as if I'm insisting on deep changes in content.

You are certainly confusing two distinct claims that I've made . The first is that it is relatively common across fiction to have stories in which a protagonist is actively trying to woo a person already in a relationship. The second claim is that Tatoe Todokanu Ito da to Shite mo is the closest thing that I've seen in manga to a reframing specifically of Sekirara ni Kiss. For example, His Girl Friday is certainly an example of a story in which the protagonist is trying to win-away a woman who is in a relationship (engaged!), but it is certainly not a reframing of Sekirara ni Kiss, and His Girl Friday is not manga.

I'm not sure how many times you're going to declare that you're finished, only to find some excuse to return to flailing here. But I'll give you two bits of advice: First, if in an argument between two people one of them has her ducks all in a row and the other does not, then the first person is going to win the argument, regardless of which of them is more intelligent. Second, you'd do better to abandon the immunizing strategies that keep you from seeing how seldom you are the smartest person in the room.

 

[kronix]

lmfao, must be some beta woman writing this garbage.

if my brother said anything about loving my girl, stealing my girl, or any sort of NTR related shit i would beat the living shit out of him until he shut the fuck up and moved on.