We still don't know what the victim said to the person who reported do we? Or what the person who reported said when they reported?

That would be key to whether or not the action was appropriate.

Most people have no idea what consent actually means. See this thread for example.

I love this series of events:

1, Ikes comes into the thread with a terrible article from reason that he doesn't believe (let's skip how he found it)
2, he says a few times "you guys I am just saying wait until we get more info I am not implicitly endorsing the defendants version of events you guys"
3, we find out sex without consent happened
4, he is now super sure it wasn't rape and so aggressively defends the accused rapist, because it wasn't legitimate rape because he didn't need to use force (colloquially speaking)
4b, ikes repeatedly states accidental rape isn't a thing, no one disagrees with him, he doesn't realise what he just said undermines his position entirely

Right, it's up to random campus employees to tell women whether they consented or not.

Her own words say she did not. Literally.

Some people here have serious ideas about rape. Consent is not some continuous thing, odds are you probably raped your wife/gf at least once if you don't literally always ask her for permission.

Her own words also say she wasn't raped. Literally. What now ?

Right. Something happened that she was not comfortable with. She told the guy to stop and he did. It is literally the opposite of rape.

No her own words deny it at every point of the process

Except for that one part of the process.

Where it's unclear at worst, which obviously doesn't override her clearly stating when directly asked that it was not rape.

Here's the thing.

Until we get to the point where we stop raping people so ****ing much, being very absolute about consent and the lack thereof is pretty important. If she says no and you keep trying, you're ****ing up and you should stop. For both her sake and yours.

Framing rape in very broad terms should serve the purpose of making men consider "could what I be doing be called rape" and making them stop. It should put the onus on men to prevent sexual assault and not rely on women to stop it.

Yes, there's a decent argument that the rape accusation in that case is very nebulous. That still doesn't make the guy's actions acceptable. The risk of being draconian in what we deem sexual assault is what? Some ****ty dudes get laid less or have to be more explicit about asking for consent? That seems like a fair trade off to you know, women not being raped.

and he did, according to both her and him.
ok whatever
This, however, is the exact same bull**** logic that people use to support draconian surveillance and terrorist polices. Taking away due process because you really don't like something happening is not OK. This case isn't just nebulous. There's no way this case should have been convicted under a 50% standard. The only two people there said a sexual assault did not happen.

I agree with those who have said that it can be difficult to judge whether certain sexual encounters meet the definition of rape. In other words, I agree that there is a considerable gray area. But i have no idea why some guys find it fun to approach that gray area.

Even if the woman technically consents, how is it fun if you have to do a lot of work (or even worse, bullying or shaming) to convince the woman to go further than she otherwise is inclined to go.

It's the pervasive notion that women want to be persuaded a bit.

Part of the reason we have to have cases like this one (which may cross the line and need testing in court) is that it's part of the process of changing attitudes.

Lol

you laugh, but a wake up BJ is sexual assault in this regime. ****in hell i've been raped by my wife.

#humblebrag

Sorry to hear that ikes

so if i'm dating someone, and i hide $500 somewhere that she finds and takes without my consent, did she steal from me?

What if i insist she isnt a burglar? does my opinion of her change what the laws are?

grunching, so apologies if this has been covered

Especially if she's 13, eh Yak?

Yaks right of course. Need an ongoing consent form. Could be a new legal market

Just because no one has mentioned this, it's worth noting that the CBS article said that she felt "wronged" by the incident. The girl may not think that this rises to the level of rape, but she apparently believes that something unsavory happened.

One of the weird things in these debates is that consent operates on a spectrum, and we describe it with a pretty aggressive binary (rape/consensual). That's why you get small armies of people trying to argue that it just didn't happen, rather than make the harder argument: that it happened, but using the description "rapist" is not super helpful, and the level of punishment doesn't reflect the gradiation that we would ideally see when the wrongdoing exists on a spectrum.

Yeah exactly. Like this bro isn't getting charged with rape. He isn't getting convicted of a crime here, ever. But people get suspended from school for stuff that's not crimes all the time! And it's perfectly appropriate.

Apparently rape has take backsies in the world of ikes and yak.

"oh you were serious about not consenting to sex, my bad but not actually my bad because nothing bad happened"

You guys he totally stopped raping her straight after she said she was serious about not consenting. Probably not the hero we want but the hero we deserve amirite.