4 ms·
I think what he's suggesting is that "at first, she was fine with it, but then somebody convinced her not to be fine with it" or some such thing. Which may have
by throwaway290232 5y ago
I think what he's suggesting is that "at first, she was fine with it, but then somebody convinced her not to be fine with it" or some such thing. Which may have some debatable merit, depending on the circumstances... except that she was a minor. Any kind of defense or explanation goes out the window when you're that kind of creep.
- KittenInABox 5y agoThat weirds me out, because it implies that she's not her own woman who can take new evidence (Celine's complaint) and go "wait a second, that thing years ago that he did to me was actually also shitty and unacceptable".
- throwaway290232 5y agoI think that is a complex and worthy thing to debate as it addresses many different points; agency, regret, information, intent, consent. I think the law deals with similar concerns by not basing a judgement on how someone feels, but rather on actions and agreements. Did they lie, cheat, steal, deceive, coerce, manipulate, intimidate, threaten, abuse, etc in context of some agreement or lack thereof. But that's just the law; obviously there is an entire world of morality/ethics that exists outside the law with different considerations. I'm just saying, he hit on a minor, and he doesn't appear to be a moron, so screw this guy.
- JulianMorrison 5y ago> somebody convinced her not to be fine with it Shouldn't be an issue. Like, if your act was so marginal that a friend saying "no seriously, that sounds like creeping to me" can tip the balance from okay to not okay, maybe you shouldn't be doing that.