The news continues to descend toward utter stultification. Here’s an example.
NPR (probably others) reported on the prominence of “situations in which a girl or woman’s first sexual experience is nonconsensual.” But Jesse Singal probed deeper into idicia of coercion:
“Were you given alcohol or drugs?” “Did you do what he said because he was bigger than you or a grown-up, and you were young?” “Were you told that the relationship would end if you didn’t have sex?” “Were you pressured into it by his words or actions, but without threat of harm?” “Were you threatened with physical harm or injury?” “Were you physically hurt or injured?” “Were you physically held down?” Participants could report more than 1 type of coercion. [bolding mine].
The vast majority of these clearly constitute coercion — how could anyone argue otherwise? But do the bolded ones? Do we want it to be considered involuntary sex — that is, rape — if A tells B he will end the relationship if she doesn’t have sex, B agrees to have sex but doesn’t really want to, and then regrets it afterward?
Would you be comfortable with A getting arrested and tried as a result of this sequence of events? If not, how can it be rape if it isn’t criminal act? If yes… Well, I don’t know what to tell you other than that I’m not sure we want the legal system intervening in situations like this, where one party involved could have uttered a Screw you and walked away safely prior to anything happening.
But you have to read Jesse Singal or someone like him to be told of this vital tidbit — and in this case, you have to be a paid subscriber to Jesse Singal.
If not, the new will leave you stupider and more afraid of a violent world that’s not so much violent as full of macho assholes with a sense of entitlement — apparently justified since they so often got the sex they wanted.