> 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.