wilkie

5 ms·

1.
by wilkie 13y ago
um. well. basic anatomy: fingering does imply penetration. and it is clearly sexual assault regardless.
2.
by wilkie 13y ago
Have you seen this thread? Not only are people misinformed about what constitutes sexual assault, but on top of that they are ignorant of what constitutes consent . It's quite honestly TERRIFYING.
3.
by wilkie 13y ago
There are three accounts of what happened all supporting her account of what happened. There is absolutely no guarantee that the courts are a safer, or better way for her to make her accusation. It might be the opposite. Or the police won&#
4.
by wilkie 13y ago
Those all existed in her account.
5.
by wilkie 13y ago
I can assure you that my method means I do not rape people and your method means you might. And that's regardless of how many people employ my very reasonable and clear method of determining consent. Has the thought ever occurred to yo
6.
by wilkie 13y ago
Well, lawnchair larry, I have asked, and have been asked, permission to do this very thing. It's really not that uncommon nor unwise to do so.
7.
by wilkie 13y ago
Actually, pretty much every point in this is victim blaming.
8.
by wilkie 13y ago
Now this is some first-class victim blaming. :(
9.
by wilkie 13y ago
Yes, actually, I don't have any doubts about it. I'm removing the capacity for doubt by being responsibly cautious. That's my responsibility. That's our responsibility. It's not even remotely fantasy to consider thi
10.
by wilkie 13y ago
Guess which of us that makes more likely to be morally right about this issue. I'll save you the trouble; it's me. If you are wrong about what is not rape, you've raped somebody. It's not hard to get clear consent.
11.
by wilkie 13y ago
And if you are wrong in your 'psychic' ability, that's sexual assault. The ends never justify the means when you don't get consent. A woman (can we call them women instead of females?) may not care for explicit permissio
12.
by wilkie 13y ago
It highlights the fact that you are being far too general about when rape is allowed.
13.
by wilkie 13y ago
And she had to return to that job without any reason to believe that they would offer any support.
14.
by wilkie 13y ago
"Blaming the victim" means suggesting that the victim of a crime perpetrated by another was not the fault of the person who committed the crime, but rather their fault is somehow absolved by the actions of the victim. This is cons
15.
by wilkie 13y ago
"because you feel like it" ... this is a terrible thing to conclude. Let's just all 'feel like' getting consent, alright?
16.
by wilkie 13y ago
This would condone drugging your victim and is obviously and dangerously wrong.
17.
by wilkie 13y ago
easy for you to say
18.
by wilkie 13y ago
If you haven't, in a soft voice, in a comfortable place, in a responsible way ever asked someone if they would like help taking off their pants... you are missing out. It's not that hard. Really. There are lots of reasonable quest
19.
by wilkie 13y ago
I think that a person who agrees to a body shot expects that somebody drink a shot from their body, and then they get up, and then nothing directly happens as a result and they get to choose what happens next. I reject the notion that conse
20.
by wilkie 13y ago
His hand was down her pants in public... we are way passed the fuzzy moral lines. This is certainly sexual assault and I'm not sure how one can argue that she is responsible for making it clear by some unwritten protocol that all peopl
21.
by wilkie 13y ago
I'd say 0 blog posts doesn't constitute a very good defense. But it is interesting we will still give him this huge benefit of the doubt.
22.
by wilkie 13y ago
'a presence of a yes and the lack of coercion,' since sexual assault is generally defined by this. Him being her employer, and thus responsible for her career, can certainly be asserted as possible coercion, even if there is any i
23.
by wilkie 13y ago
In what you are arguing, you fail to realize that there is only one victim. And while that might be the accused, in this case where we have 3 accounts supporting the accuser... well... it's not wrong to side with either of them, but yo
24.
by wilkie 13y ago
Even without the two witnesses corroborating, this is most certainly sexual assault.
25.
by wilkie 13y ago
Not a very substantial defense. You've quoted 1 of 3 accounts suggesting a crime, and there aren't any accounts of a defense. The only defense so far is a bunch of rather ridiculous hearsay by a bunch of internet people who weren&
26.
by wilkie 13y ago
The trigger warnings suggest that those who have been sexually assaulted don't need to read the article because they already know more than what it is going to say, and it is cruel to have them read it without suggesting it may cause t
27.
by wilkie 13y ago
The fact that you think that statement is bold says a lot about how far we are from solving it and helping people.
28.
by wilkie 13y ago
Here is his post after the event explaining why he was fired (it doesn't): http://objo.com/2013/01/31/funemployment/
29.
by wilkie 13y ago
Read this slowly, you can do it-- you're good at reading: It should be expected not that victims live up to another's definition of responsibility, but that people be responsible enough not to create victims.
30.
by wilkie 13y ago
This is the painted lie that her company allowed him to make: http://objo.com/2013/01/31/funemployment/ This is the reality. I don't hold too much optimism that the police would somehow solve this p

More ›