4 ms·

> There have also been a lot of cases where sex was consensual, but later on one of the parties had regrets, and now it was considered rape Sure, "a lot". But

by muglug 9y ago

> There have also been a lot of cases where sex was consensual, but later on one of the parties had regrets, and now it was considered rape Sure, "a lot". But it is a very small percentage of all rape reports (obviously not counting the millions of rapes that are never reported). > This sort of thing is what happened with Louis C.K No it's not. Not in the least. > the women actually consented to watching him pet his monkey No they did not.

freedomben 9y ago
> Sure, "a lot". But it is a very small percentage of all rape reports (obviously not counting the millions of rapes that are never reported). Fair enough, "a lot" is most likely not accurate. It's probably a small percentage of all rape reports. > No it's not. Not in the least. > No they did not. Yes, they did. His mea culpa was essentially a statement that he believed that his asking for and receiving consent wasn't valid because he didn't realize that the women's respect and admiration for him would cause them to feel pressured to consent. I don't fully disagree with his analysis there, but if the standard is that anybody who has respect for you cannot consent, we are in some trouble.
- muglug 9y ago
  His account aggressively sugarcoated his behaviour. Read the NYTimes report again: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-sexual-misconduct.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-... He did not get consent from the women to expose himself. And even the fact that these women had to decline his earnest requests to masturbate in front of them is itself deeply offensive.
- aidenn0 9y ago
  The standard is more closely "anybody that works for you cannot consent, especially when you make the first advances" which makes more sense, because it's not always possible to tell if "I want you to have sex with me" includes the subtext "Have sex with me or I'll fire you"
- mcguire 9y ago
  "Fair enough, "a lot" is most likely not accurate. It's probably a small percentage of all rape reports." Between 2% and 8% according to the numbers I can find, similar to the rates of false accusations of other felonies.

by muglug 9y ago

freedomben 9y ago

> Sure, "a lot". But it is a very small percentage of all rape reports (obviously not counting the millions of rapes that are never reported). Fair enough, "a lot" is most likely not accurate. It's probably a small percentage of all rape reports. > No it's not. Not in the least. > No they did not. Yes, they did. His mea culpa was essentially a statement that he believed that his asking for and receiving consent wasn't valid because he didn't realize that the women's respect and admiration for him would cause them to feel pressured to consent. I don't fully disagree with his analysis there, but if the standard is that anybody who has respect for you cannot consent, we are in some trouble.

muglug 9y ago
His account aggressively sugarcoated his behaviour. Read the NYTimes report again: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-sexual-misconduct.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-... He did not get consent from the women to expose himself. And even the fact that these women had to decline his earnest requests to masturbate in front of them is itself deeply offensive.
aidenn0 9y ago
The standard is more closely "anybody that works for you cannot consent, especially when you make the first advances" which makes more sense, because it's not always possible to tell if "I want you to have sex with me" includes the subtext "Have sex with me or I'll fire you"
mcguire 9y ago
"Fair enough, "a lot" is most likely not accurate. It's probably a small percentage of all rape reports." Between 2% and 8% according to the numbers I can find, similar to the rates of false accusations of other felonies.