[quote=“Skald_the_Rhymer, post:60, topic:760937”]
lesbian porn is boring
[QUOTE]
I beg to differ!
That sounds more like an arranged non-date. So yes, Martha would be ethically obligated to go to the prom with Donna. There wouldn’t be anything wrong with her trying to work out a different solution. So as long as both parties have had a meeting of the minds and are in agreement it’s an ethical deal. Maybe a stupid deal, but not unconscionable.
You don’t give the time frame, but it doesn’t sound like this is happening the day of the prom either. There are circumstances where canceling a date is fine given enough lead time. But a prom isn’t likely to be that circumstance, it’s more like someone gets engaged before a New Years Eve date they planned with someone else months ahead of time. Or in the case of a prom something more important came up like a college admission interview, but just because you’d rather go with someone else isn’t good enough.
YOu realize that, except for specifying that it was Martha’s idea, nothing in the dialogue adds new information, right? All the dialogue does is flesh out details–specifying exactly how much Donna charges, that neither of them expected sex to occur, and so forth. I don’t think the dialogue even establishes whether Donna is a virgin.
I don’t see this is a non-date. It’s a first date with well-defined rules. A non-date would be somthing like “I have to go to this party for business reasons but am worried about my health, please accompany me dressed appropropriately for the party but concentrating on monitoring my symptoms.”
Bear in mind also that the thread question was “Assuming Donna does not agree, may Martha ethically break the date?” That phrasing was deliberate, and deliberately emphasized in the OP, because otherwise there is no ethical conflict. Since Martha forewent her fee only for the social reward. Saying Martha can ethically and unilaterally decide to fulfill that reward is like saying that, if she’d been paying cash on a week by week basis (and so would owe $160 for four sessions a week), she could announce on Saturday that she was only going to pay $80 because she’d spent the rest of the budgeed money on a gift for Rose.
Even going strictly by the OP, the time frame must be very close to prom. That happens at the end of a semester. The OP says that Donna has passed her class, which she canonly know for sure very late in the semester.
Of course you added new information. From the conversation we can tell it wasn’t a one sided agreement, that the circumstances weren’t coercive. I wasn’t going to condemn Martha without knowing that. If someone says “I’ll give you $1 for that candy bar” it’s pretty easy to see that that it’s a simple exchange of money and goods. When you start talking about dates and sex the details are more important.
And of course, if there is a valid reason that Martha doesn’t go to the prom with Donna she still owes for the tutoring.
From the OP, where do you get any information that indicating that the agreement was coercive? Here’s what the OP says:
Martha wants a service that Donna can provide. Donna charges for that service. Nothing life-threatening will happen to Martha if she does not get the service, and Donna had nothing to do with the creating Martha’s problem. How do you get even a hint of coercion?
Can you define valid?
As I’ve said, I tutored in high school and college, If I had made this deal and Martha had broken her leg the day before prom, or a relative had died and she had to go to the funeral, I would let her off without expecting repayment. Hell, if her beloved dog had been run over by a car the day of the prom I would let her off without penalty. But if she got the chance to go to an Alicia Keyes concert instead, I’m not releasing her from the obligation, because that is essentially her declaration that her desires trump her promises. If she inisisted I’d say “Fine, you owe me for 48 tutoring sessions at $40 an hour. Let’s goto the ATM.” And I would judge her unethical and untrustworthy henceforth, even if she paid up immediately.
I didn’t say it indicated coercion, but it didn’t counter-indicate coercion either. It’s a couple of horny teenagers making a deal which is enough reason not to take it at face value without more details.
Just using your first two examples, they are valid reasons Martha wouldn’t go to the prom, but they don’t ethically let her off the hook to compensate Donna for her tutoring services.
Where are you getting “horny teens” from? Even the abbreviated account from the op specifically rules out sex. To quote what I just quoted again:
[QUOTE=there’s a really good line from Steven Sonheim’s ASSASSINS that should go here but I forgot what it was
]
Martha cannot afford to pay Donna’s rates. At the beginning of the spring semester, the girls agree that, if Donna waives her fee, Martha will accompany her to prom. Only the date. dancing and a kiss at the end of the evening are promised; Martha does not feel ready for sex with anyone… Donna knows accepts that. She just wants to dance and be seen with Martha.
[/QUOTE]
There obviusly are not two horny teens in this part of the story, as Martha is clearly not looking to get laid. And since Donna’s motive is explicitly social–a nght with one of the cool kids–she doesn’t qualify as “horny” either.
(Pleae don’t take my hapring on this as any sort of personal attack, amigo. t does feel odd for me to be the one arguing for truth & justice in a threaad, though.)
They are teens, therefore they are horny. They are teens therefore they lie. They are teens, therefore they always have an ulterior motive. They are teens, therefore they are sub-human, and not to be treated as rational adult people.
np, I thought we were having fun.
Martha is a hot popular girl soment of at least 16 and no more than 18. She can surely get sex very easily, if she wants it. The OP says she didn’t want it.
If Donna were motivated by the desire for sex, why would she make an agreement that specifically ruled out sex AND inconvenienced her?
Well, I am. I can’t speak for you for fear that I’ve coerced you into the situation.
Horny teenagers are usually insecure also and do dumb things as a result.
You leave me no choice but to release the monkeys.
Well it’s about time. All i wanted was the monkeys in the first place.
(post shortened)
A deal is a deal. You think I don’t know the law? Wasn’t it me who wrote it? And I say that this man has broken the law. Right or wrong, we had a deal. And the law says: bust a deal and face the wheel!
-Aunty Entity
Martha and Donna had a deal. Maybe they have it in writing, maybe they don’t. Either way, they agreed to a deal and should live up to their agreement. Unless…
An outside party, Rose, wants to change the agreement. If Donna and Martha are both willing to accept new terms, so be it. If both parties do not agree to new terms, the old deal stands.
I suggest that Donna accept nothing less than 3x the amount she would have made if she had charged Martha for the tutoring. You know, for the pain, suffering, and embarrassment of being dumped at the last minute.
No, and no, not if Donna wants to stick to the original agreement (although the kiss at the end can be ethically dropped by Martha at any time, I think it goes without saying) . Martha freely contracted with Donna for an exchange of labours, she should honour all the (non-sexual) parts of that contract.
Oh, and fuck any culture that thinks teen romance takes precedence over worker’s rights.