Another thing that isn't fun is reading endless debates about what does and does not constitute rape. Some people legitimately believe that if a woman simply regrets having sex, the man is a rapist. Regardless of her behavior during the act, she could have been 100% into it, undress the guy, push him onto the bed and jump on top, but just because she changed her mind later he's now a disgusting rapist in some people's eyes.

And then there's a whole spectrum of other definitions all the way from there to the real definitions of rape. They're generally always in favor of women, for example if a man and a woman are drunk and they have sex, he is a rapist. If the woman didn't actually want to have sex but did it anyway without clearly expressing any kind of reluctance, guess what? Rapist. He should have read the signs, taken the hints, analyzed her body language etc.

Personally I think people are responsible for their own actions. If you get drunk and do something you regret, that's on you. If you don't like it, don't get drunk. If you go along with someone else's suggestion that's on you. It's your responsibility to stand up for yourself and say no if you don't want it. Men are people too, you can't just lock up some dude for years and completely destroy his life because some girl regrets having sex with him. What a lot of these people seem to be suggesting is that it should essentially be illegal for men to participate in sex, so that any woman he's had sex with can at any time completely destroy his life on a whim.

I get that there is nuance and grey areas, statutory rape is a thing and there are many examples of men abusing their power and status to get laid. That's a difficult topic but honestly if Harvey Weinstein tells some aspiring young actress that he'll cast her in a movie or whatever if she blows him then IMO it's still on her to stand up for herself. It's not pleasant, it's not okay, but it's also not rape. I do believe that kind of quid pro quo is illegal in some jurisdictions and by all means make it illegal if you can. It's basically prostitution, it just isn't rape.

On the other hand you have women actively using sex to manipulate men, it's not like these things only go one way. There are also lots of men who have had their lives ruined just from being accused of rape with no evidence.

A rule I've found to be generally quite reliable in life is that the extremists are always wrong. Any political group exists on a spectrum, and if they're too far to one side of that spectrum then they're probably crazy. That's my view of the extreme feminists and similar groups, they're too far out and their demands are unreasonable. They're not looking to make things equal, they're looking to give women power and advantages over men.

▲ 1718627440 2 days ago | parent [-]

> if Harvey Weinstein tells some aspiring young actress that he'll cast her in a movie or whatever if she blows him then IMO it's still on her to stand up for herself.

I mostly agree with you, but this is a fuzzy boundary.

    Boss: do ... with me or maybe I don't feel like employing you anymore

In my opinion this is not voluntary. It's extortion for sex which I would call rape. But how is it different from:

    I employ you, if you ... me?

In both cases it's an ultimatum for sex -> employment.

▲

sfn42 2 days ago | parent [-]

I'm with you, like I said it's not okay. It just isn't rape, as I understand the word. Extortion sure. Despicable sure. Illegal I don't know but it definitely seems to me like it should be.

I just don't see any reason to use the word rape for it. I think people want to use it because it sounds bad and they want to express that this person is a bad person, but on the other hand it devalues the word in a way.

Like did he rape someone or did he "rape" someone? Any time I hear about some celebrity rape thing that's what I wonder. Is the guy a actual rapist or are people just putting the rape label on a less severe (although possibly still despicable) act?

▲

1718627440 2 days ago | parent [-]

> I just don't see any reason to use the word rape for it.

That's what I disagree on. What's your definition of rape? I would define it as forcing someone to have sex. Is extortion not forcing someone?

▲

sfn42 2 days ago | parent [-]

It can be, but in the situation we're discussing not really. The actress is free to decline the offer.

Here's a thought experiment, imagine the offer is way worse. Imagine it's like "I'll mow your lawn if you have sex with me" is that rape? If you really don't want the sex you just say no and that's that, you mow the lawn yourself. I don't think most people would consider that person a rapist.

The difference here is that a better offer is harder to refuse. That does change the situation in a meaningful way but it's still entirely voluntary.

	▲	1718627440 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> The actress is free to decline the offer. I'm not so sure about that. That's entirely the point here. I think the difference here is that there is a work contract, but the sex isn't mentioned anywhere. If you would write that in the contract, then you would be right it's "just" prostitution. But in the cases we are discussing, that's generally not the case. The situation between employee and and employer is generally not that of two equal-powered persons, which is why we have tons of protections there, including doubt if sex was really consensual.