Wait, wait, wait. I might just not be able to process this right now because there's been a lot to process in general lately, but what was that about the consent for SolasxInquisitor? I get power imbalance is a HUGE thing, so is that what it was about? Is it more complicated than that? Or am I just overthinking it? Completely possible since this just completely shook me.
Hi there dearest anon and apologies for taking forever to respond! I am very glad you asked me this question because I had already resigned myself to chafe about this internally since I figure I am in a select minority of people who feel the way I do about this particular topic; however, you’ve given me a reason to dust off the soapbox and talk about the issue that is consent in Solavellan.
Full disclosure: I love Solas and Solavellan. It is my favorite DA:I romance. However, sometimes our faves are problematic and it’s something we have think about when writing to make sure we are conveying the right messages.
For anyone who does not know, this ask is in response to a series of tweets from Patrick Weekes discussing how there was originally a Solavellan sex scene, but it was removed due to “consent issues.” While this was definitely a smart move, it stirred up some old, old feelings regarding how Solavellan is written.
Anon, you are definitely correct in referencing the power imbalance as an issue (which I will address more fully in a bit); however, I think the key issue Weekes was referencing is Solas’ deception. Lavellan believes that Solas is Solas, and the question becomes “Would she still consent to having sex if she knew his true identity?” The answer is largely unknown, which would make the consent dubious at best. Consent is not truly consent unless it is informed (just ask any legal, medical, or mental health professional!)
With that comes the argument: “But Lady Quiz can have sex with Blackwall before learning his identity. What’s the difference?” And that is where the power differential and character growth come into play. Unlike Blackwall, who is beneath the Inquisitor in rank, Solas is the great adversary of her people’s lore.
Even if, hypothetically, his status as a god did not create a power issue, then the way Solas and Lavellan are written in context of one another would. Although I don’t and never have read Solas as arrogant (he’s just knowledgeable and people keep ignoring him), he is coded so that you only get approval if you ask him questions (unless they are about him) or if you agree with him. He’s painted as always “right,” even when his viewpoints are questionable. As one of my friends said in a discord conversation about this, “There is no way [with the way it is written] that Lavellan could consent on equal footing.” Such an imbalance leads to a high potential for coercive influence, even if unintentional.
Is any of this sounding out of character for Solas? I certainly think it does, and this is what shook me in reading the tweets. I came to realize that this whole issue is simply the result of careless handling of Solas and his relationship with Lavellan (No offense, Mr. Weekes), and it could have easily been avoided with tweaks to Solas’s approval system and in Lavellan’s responses to him. Let her stand her ground! Let him be impressed that she did so! In my own [deluded] opinion, Solas would admire someone who opposed him with well-reasoned arguments.
With all of that being said, I think that it is easy for one’s perception of Solas to be warped from the grey area that is the truth due to his representation in fandom. Fanon Solas is largely dominant and predatory even (I.e the wolf/halla, hahren/da’len dynamic). Don’t get me wrong, power play can be fun, but that is only in the context of an established and consenting relationship.
It is not fun and not sexy to be coerced into doing something that you aren’t comfortable with, because you feel like you cannot say no. It is also not fun or sexy to find out that your partner is who they said they were after you have been intimate with them. Informed, enthusiastic, and uncoerced consent is sexy.
I guess, to answer the original question a little more clearly and concisely, because those were a lot of words I just used, the consent issues are both the deception and the power imbalance. The reason that I am so shook, as you are anon, is that the relationship seems to have been written this way on purpose. There need not have been consent issues. Those could have been resolved with responsible and thoughtful writing of the relationship, but that’s not what happened. I’m so happy they removed the scene, but it’s so frustrating that it was even an issue in the first place.













