DNF at 26%. Consent is a thing. I get it wasn't in Victorian London, but that doesn't mean I want to read about MCs who ignore it. Repeatedly fondling/grabbing someone's ass and cock and kissing them after they have said no multiple times and physically tried to throw you off was, at best, uncomfortable to read. I don't care if their cock got hard, that's sexual assault and it's still bothering me hours later.

The writing up til that point had been fine to good. (solid 3.5-4 star) The plot seemed interesting. It took 60 pages to get the reader caught up to the situation so I wasn't really sure how much I liked the story or not. It was just getting going.
Even that had already had me questioning consent, though. The Lord had brought the molly boy/sex worker to his home just to talk. Only it became obvious to the reader the closer that came to happening that that was not all he wanted. If the Lord wanted to hire the sex worker fine, but to say he only wanted to talk and then switch...the sex worker would not only have the social status difference, but be in the Lord's house and away from assistance. That's not really consent, but okay, I was rolling with it. We knew the Lord meant well and it was a different time period. Who knew it was the sex worker who would end up assaulting the footman.

Obviously everyone gets together in the end, but honestly I don't want anything to do with these characters now. I was surprised as this book had been recommended to me a few times. So maybe I'm the one shoving my modern concept of consent onto this Victorian book. I just think potential readers should know in advance.