I wanted to give myself a few days before I replied on this one, so that perhaps I could come up with something more eloquent than my first reaction, which was a vehement "W....T.....F?".
While the homosexuality of the story threw me for an initial loop that I quickly got over, it was the forced pedophilic sex ("I'll give you the illusion of freewill, but in the end remove your other options so as to give you no choice but to come back and do things my way") that ended up leaving me shaking my head in a "I'm not sure if I can trust the editors of this podcast" manner.
Regardless of historical precedent, this story felt like simple softcore furry slash, with an overly long and pretentious setup and an unwelcome overtone of manipulative pedophilic incestuous (hello, blacksmith and his mother) rape. Which I'm sure one could find plenty of on the internet, were one seeking such.
I understand from the other comments that is wasn't "technically" pedophilia by standards-of-the-time-oh-wait-its-fantasy-what-time-are-we-really-talking-about-here-I-don't-recall-hearing-a-date, but the overtone was unmistakable and not allayed by offhand comments about marriageable age interspersed with repeated allusions to unspoiled innocence.
The only thing that kept me listening all the way till the end was the vain hope that there would be some sort of interesting twist. But, no.
As a writer, I hate writing responses like this, because I'd hate to get a response like this to my work. So, I'm targeting this response at the editors, because while the story might have value in another venue, in this venue, it not only didn't work, but it lowered my (and from the responses I see above a lot of other people's) opinion of PodCastle.
But in the end, all those words don't come close to my initial and continuing reaction, which is still "W....T....F?"
Tim