TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

TossenTurn Archive

View 0 posts and 98 comments by TossenTurn on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

BTW, do you know for a fact that his dick was actually "inside her sleeping body" without her implied consent? After writing that you began describing how you imply consent with your husband by readjusting yourself, causing me to believe that you were suggesting that she may have behaved similarly while asleep and sent out "mixed signals". If that was not the case, then I'm not exactly sure what the point of that anecdote was. I don't know what exactly happened with the OP and her ONS. Neither d…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/17 08:01 AM
2

How is readjusting your body while you are asleep "implied consent?" Even if she did move her legs apart while asleep, she was asleep and unable to fully control herself or understand what is going on. Him misreading her movements while she is alseep as "implied consent" does not excuse his actions. He was not a guy who was married to a woman who is ok with being penetrated while asleep. He was a guy she had met and had sex with the night before. Your relationship with your husband is different …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/17 09:42 PM
1

So whether or not they had sex before determines if this is sexual assault, even though the woman never gave him permission to put his dick inside of her sleeping body?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/17 04:25 AM
1

I don't consider a guy waking up a woman with whom he was having consensual intercourse a few hours prior by continuing the intercourse in the morning and then stopping when she did indeed wake up and ask him to stop to be the crime of sexual assault. A few hours prior she consented to awake sex, when she was in an appropriate state of mind to give consent. Sleeping individuals are unable to give consent. ( or do tou believe otherwise?) They are unable to say "yes/no" or push someone off of them…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/17 02:32 AM
1

You want to switch from discussing an actual occurrence to hypotheticals. I don't. You're the one who first brought up a different scenario. Sleeping ≠ unconscious. This is true. I should have used "asleep" or "not awake" then. You don't consider putting your dick inside someone who is not awake and unable to consent to be sexual assault? If you want to wake someone up so you can have sex, you shouldn't just assume they would be ok with having you put your dick inside their sleeping body. Do you…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/17 07:02 AM
1

You don't think that assuming an unconscious woman would be ok with having you put your dick inside of her is rape? You don't think that assuming someone gave consent to sex is rape? You don't consider non consensual sex to be rape? What would you consider to be rape?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/17 06:19 AM
3

She expressed consent to conscious sex, not unconscious sex. Do you belive that having sex with someone once automatically gives that person the okay to do whatever they want sexually to the other person's unconscious body? Do you think that most people are ok with having their unconscious body being penetrated without having discussed it first?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/17 01:40 PM
1

You said: No longer a random and no longer get to call it rape, imo. Which would imply that his lack of randomness a his previous (and brief) sexual encounter with her affects whether or not you consider it rape, right? But this wasn't rape. This was a misunderstanding. If someone doesn't understand that putting your dick inside of an unconscious person is rape, then they need to be educated on what is and is not consent. Unconscious people can't consent unless they have expressed previously tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/17 12:36 PM
2

So it's only rape if it was a total stranger? ONS and partners can't commit rape?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/17 09:11 PM
4

You don't consider putting your dick inside an unconscious person to be sexual assault? If OP or the man in your scenario hadn't woken up, the other person would have continued. Would it be sexual assault then?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/17 08:50 PM
1

Well he is still guilty of at least sexual assault.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/16 02:56 PM
1

It was never proven that Brock stuck his penis inside that woman btw. They only found fluids on his fingers.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/16 02:07 PM
1

Ask any random person, ask your parents, ask your friends, if an unconscious person who didn't express beforehand "it is ok to do this to me while unconscious" is capable of consenting. Ask them if they think it is ok to touch/assault/penetrate them while they are unconscious. Do you think they would say yes? If you had told me that you think that your parents (the people you claimed took part in victim blaming you) would say yes had they been asked whether or not an unconscious person could con…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/16 01:43 PM
1

I'm saying you didn't answer these specific questions, you're saying you did. I'm asking you to show me where you answered my questions. It seems that you've been dodging them the whole time.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/16 10:34 AM
1

I asked you if you believed that your parents or friends would think that touching an unconscious person was ok or consensual. Where did you answer that? Be sure to quote it. I asked you why you believe that most people think that unconscious people can consent or that it is ok to touch then. Where did you answer that? Be sure to quote it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/16 08:31 AM
1

My questions: Ask any random person, ask your parents, ask your friends, if an unconscious person who didn't express beforehand "it is ok to do this to me while unconscious" is capable of consenting. Ask them if they think it is ok to touch/assault/penetrate them while they are unconscious. Do you think they would say yes? What makes you think that most people don't know that being unconscious means no? If you want to convince me that you are actually going to answer these questions please be su…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/16 05:35 AM
1

Most people assume that a lack of a no is a de facto yes. Even when they're unconscious? You're still avoiding my questions.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/16 07:35 AM
1

I asked if you thought a random stranger, your parents, or your friends would consider acts done to an unconscious person who hadn't expressed previously that they are ok with things being done to them while unconscious to be consensual or ok. You didn't answer that question. I asked you why you believed that most people don't know that being unconscious means no. You didn't answer that either.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/16 04:13 AM
1

Thanks for the advice. Are you going to answer my questions?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/16 12:43 AM
1

"Fingering" is a mild term that implies sexplay rather than a non consensual activity. When used by itself, sure. When used in the the context of having an unconscious recipient, not so much. Not many people would think "she consented, it's totally fine" when reading that. And yes, most people don't know that non conscious means no. That's ridiculous, you can't possibly believe that. Ask any random person, ask your parents, ask your friends, if an unconscious person who didn't express beforehand…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/16 11:18 AM
1

Well, in that case, you are both inaccurate and imprecise. Saying that he fingered an unconscious woman was inaccurate? Did he not shove his fingers into an unconscious woman? And no, the notion of an unconscious person being unable to consent isn't that widespread. So if you went around asking people if an unconscious person can consent to sex, most would say yes?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/16 02:40 PM
1

"Fingering an unconscious person" is inaccurate You're confusing accuracy with precision. Whether or not the actions took place determines accuracy. Whether or not all of the details are stated determines precision. as we don't know whether prior consent has occurred. Having actions done to someone who is unconscious doesn't imply non consent? Is the consensual act of fingering a woman who is unconscious the standard? Do most people think "That was consensual" when reading about someone fingerin…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/16 08:01 AM
1

So "fingering an unconscious woman" is minimizing because it doesn't have as much emotional charge as saying "digital rape of an unconscious woman" even if they are both accurate descriptions of what happened? Sure, I'll accept that if that's the case. I used the term "fingering" because the use of the word "digital" to describe fingers doesn't float around much in an average person's conversation (or at least mine). I didn't use "digital rape" by itself because it leaves out the context surroun…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/16 04:26 AM
1

Doesn't saying "he fingered an unconscious woman" imply that it wasn't consensual? Everytime I mentioned the word "fingered" the mention of the woman's unconscious state immediately followed in the same sentence. Do you think that most people would think to themselve, "yeah, that was definitely consensual," when reading those sentences? Is the digital penetration (fingering) of an unconscious woman's vagina defaulted at being consensual? It seems like you are focusing on the word while ignoring …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/16 01:44 PM
1

I know that language makes a difference. But I asked you if any of what I said was inaccurate. You said that I was mistaken. I would very much appreciate you elaborating on that.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/16 07:54 AM
1

No response?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/16 10:28 PM
3

2 people can do whatever they want. But, no, I wouldn't say they should stay together at all. I'd say if they weren't sure though, perhaps knocking boots could have waited longer. Shouldn't sexual compatibility also play a part in deciding whether or not you would want to be in a long term relationship worth someone? How long do you think someone should wait before they sleep with someone they intend to be in a monogomous relationship with? TRUE! However, if the woman in question has had 15 of t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/16 07:14 PM
2

Sure, but doing that for 2 to 3 month stints in NO WAY proves you can be monogamous over the long haul, and in that case does NOTHING to show loyalty. Or maybe it shows that the two people are no longer compatible or realize that they aren't compatible. Maybe it took them 2-3 months of being together for them to realize that they don't see a future with each other. Should two people who are not compatible stay together longer than they need to in order for them to fit in with your idea of what a…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/16 06:35 PM
1

Care to elaborate on that so I may learn? What parts of my statements are wrong and why?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/16 07:18 AM
1

Was anything that I said inaccurate? Saying that he fingered an unconscious woman is more accurate/descriptive than saying that he sexually assaulted a woman. Saying that he fingered an unconscious woman is more accurate/descriptive than saying that he digitally raped a woman. Or am I mistaken?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/16 04:15 AM
1

Why are you minimizing what he did? Does describing what he did count as minimizing what he did? What makes you think I'm minimizing his actions? No I do not think that fingering someone without there consent is ok. What gave you the impression that I believed otherwise? Anecdote here: I had friends over for my birthday. Lots of people. One of my girlfriends is pregnant, and was feeling tired and unwell, so she had a sleep in one of our spare bedrooms. She was asleep for a few hours. If someone …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/16 10:34 AM
1

So we know that he would have assaulted a woman by any means necessary based off of the fact that he fingered a woman who drank herself into unconsciousness? All we know is that he is willing to force himself onto an unconscious woman, someone who lost consciousness from her own actions, someone who is incapable of defending herself or call for help, someone he could take advantage of with little to no effort. If you had said that he would have assaulted any other unconscious woman if the origin…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/16 08:29 AM
1

I understand that if she wasn't there that he couldn't have raped her. It's just that you said that if she wasn't there that he would have raped someone else. If she'd stayed home and read her bible, he would have raped someone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/16 04:27 AM
1

Drink responsibly, with no gender component, is one of those better paths. Agreed. I take it you are also against the whole "teach men not to rape" thing? If all you're doing is promoting the idea of responsible drinking I have no issue. Cool. But telling a victim what they should have done is both patronizing and unnecessary. Agreed. But what about telling others about what a victim could/should have done? Like in a case where a heavily intoxicated individual gets taken advantage of or in a cas…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/16 05:30 PM
1

As I keep telling you, we can't retroactively control a variable. I don't know how the situation would have differed. Neither do you. You're right, I don't know. But I have a strong feeling that a guy who was so drunk that he nearly vomited on himself would have a harder time forcing himself on a sober/conscious woman than a drunk/unconscious one. To me, Brock's actions seemed a lot more opportunistic than straight up predatory. He saw an unconscious woman, someone he could force himself onto wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/16 04:50 PM
1

So random dudes online saying "there was nothing you could have done, it is within your right to get as drunk as you want, we're gonna teach men not to rape," (not saying that these are your beliefs, just giving some examples) is better than random dudes online saying "irresponsible drinking is dangerous, x y & z could happen to you when inebriated/unconscious"? Friends and family could say the former as well. Is random advice online completely useless? Should have, would have, could have. Irrel…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/16 02:46 PM
1

Changing one variable (how drunk she was) isn't something we can do in hindsight. Therefore we can't know if the outcome would have been different. I asked you whether or not you believed they still would have gotten raped, not if you knew they would. Make an educated guess. Teaching him that he wasn't entitled to that "10minutes of action" would have meant she was safe, and the other girls there were safe. I agree. I also think that her being conscious or less drunk would have also meant that s…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/16 08:02 AM
1

Your point? I know bad things happen. And when people have those bad things happen, they have to deal with the consequences. They don't need to be told the obvious. I guess my point is some people aren't listening when told the first time. Do we stop trying to reach these people? Are we comfortable having these people deal with the consequences before they finally listen? Is there a way to get then to listen? They need for the people who decided to take advantage of them to have their behaviour …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/16 07:38 AM
1

But what is it about being women that makes them easier targets? Probably has something to do with the fact that women on average are smaller/weaker than men on average. And when you look at it that way, you have to look at the side of the rapist and how to prevent attitudes where it's ok to rape someone. Again, I believe we can do both. With Brock Turner's victim, if she was a man, would have she gotten raped? Is he sexually attracted to men? Maybe. Both men and women should probably consider d…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/16 12:32 AM
1

You think telling people not to get so drunk that they are drifting in and out of consciousness is an ineffective and entirely useless guideline?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 12:56 PM
1

If she hadn't been there, he would have raped someone else. When you say "hadn't been there" do you mean the party or her state of unconsciousness? Also, when you say he would have raped someone else, would that someone else have been heavily drunk/unconscious or would they have been sober/coherent? As someone who has taught alcohol awareness, and RSA, I'll tell you something for free: young people think they're bulletproof. They don't have the frontal lobe function to connect what they've been …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 12:38 PM
1

But when it comes to figuring out what people did or didn't do wrong, you can really find anything. Sure we can find anything so we have to be sure to separate the ridiculous responses from the more reasonable ones. Encouraging people to drink responsibly is a lot more reasonable than telling people not to leave their house. It seems more reasonable to focus on the perpetrator. Again, who says we can't do both? Also, we can't control what others do, but we can control our own actions. You keep o…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 11:22 AM
1

You say everyone is taught this. But apparently not everyone listens until it is too late and something bad happens. How do we get people to listen? Is it even possible? Should we stop advocating for safe and responsible drug and alcohol use altogether? When you hear about women getting raped after consuming a lot of alcohol (no mentions of spiked drinks or being forced to drink) do you think they still would have gotten raped had they been sober or chose to drink less? Do you think Brock Turner…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 07:53 AM
1

Who were telling you these things? These are definitely examples of victim blaming. But I don't think these are the kind of precautions that OP is talking about. OP mentions drinking responsibly. I'll ask again: Do you think that it is wrong to encourage people not to drink excessively, even when we still hear stories about women getting raped after drinking themselves into unconsciousness?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 04:15 AM
1

It's almost as if people don't want to admit that mind/body altering substances can potentially have a negative affect on their life. They don't want anyone to ruin their fun.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 06:47 PM
2

I'm just saying it would be nice if people actually listened to advice the first time instead of waiting until after something bad happens.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 06:41 PM
1

What's the point of looking at the issue from the end of the victim doing something? Yes, maybe the victim could have done something different. So what? So that we can figure out what she did wrong or right. So that we can figure out what could be done to either avoid the situation or reduce the damage done. So that we can use what we've learned to inform others about what they can do to help protect themselves. If someone drank excessively, lost consciousness and was then raped I would encourag…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 06:33 PM
2

There is no easy fix to this. There will always be people who do bad things or make bad decisions. But if anything I would like if we stopped calling people victim blamers or rape apologists for acknowledging how the actions (or inactions) of an individual played a factor in their victimization. Instead of "teach men/boys not to rape" we should teach everyone empathy and the importance of consent while also talking about how drugs/alcohol can negatively affect your ability to consent and encoura…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 05:47 PM
1

What I'm saying is, at what point do we stop looking at the victim as the person with the problematic behaviour and instead look at the perpetrator. Who says we can't look at the issue from both ends? We can't control the actions of others, but we can control ourselves. We can't always predict what's going to happen, but there is always something we can do to to either avoid the danger altogether or reduce the damage done. One poster brought up how she was raped at a young age and people still b…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 05:31 PM
3

I see what you're saying, I just don't know if I completely agree with the "let them learn from their mistakes" approach. It would be best if these people never made these "mistakes" in the first place. Discouraging or shaming people for giving precautionary advice doesn't really help much.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 04:59 PM
1

A lot of people may know these things, but not everyone practices these precautions. A lot of people know the potential dangers of excessive drug and alcohol consumption, but they still do it anyway. And sometimes bad things happen that might have been avoidable had they been sober.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 04:42 PM
1

Could it have been avoided if someone got drunk and was raped? Maybe. But, what if they were at that party and did drink responsibly and still got raped? I feel people would say, well, you shouldn't have been at the party. In reality, you can go really far. If a woman didn't want to raped, she shouldn't have left her house, and not had any social interaction? Would that not be correct? This kinda sounds like a slippery slope fallacy. Telling people not to leave their house is ridiculous. Encoura…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 04:28 PM
2

What kinds of things were people saying to you that makes you believe that they held you partially responsible for your own rape? Do you think that it is wrong to encourage people not to drink excessively, even when we still hear stories about women getting raped after drinking themselves into unconsciousness?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 04:12 PM
6

But what if a 40 year old doesn't regularly look both ways or gets in an accidental after neglecting to look both ways? Should we refrain from encouraging them to look both ways so that we don't look like assholes? A lot of people say that everyone already knows the potential dangers of irresponsible drinking, but we still get stories about women getting raped after drinking excessively. What would be a better approach?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 04:01 PM
1

If there is a mistake in communication though, the person initiating the sex is responsible, so it is up to them to decide how much of a risk to take if they're not sure. What mistake in communication was there in this story?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 03:39 AM
1

Based on what? You don't know what she did or didn't do to imply consent or not. I know that she returned a kiss. I know that she kissed him long enough for things to "heat up" and result in sex. In between the kiss and the sex, we can assume that touching and clothing removal was involved. While things heated up the two parties continued to share a kiss. She didn't tell him to stop, she didn't push him away, instead she kept kissing him back. She kept kissing him while he (or they) started touc…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 03:35 AM
1

When he offered me some more and I said no thank you, he didn't proceed to pry my mouth open and pour the whole smoothie in. From what was described in the story, the man didn't pry open the woman's legs and put his penis in her after she said no. In fact, she didn't say no after "taking the first bite." He kept offering her more and she kept accepting more until she "ate the whole slice."
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/16 02:57 AM
1

She didn't describe any of her actions in any specific way other than "things heated up" so how can you say what they can or cannot be interpreted as? I probably should have said that "None of what she wrote/described after her returned kiss could be interpreted..." She doesn't tell us that she attempted to stop the sex from happening after the kiss so I can't assume that she gave a "no/stop" signal after the kiss. It's possible to have consensual sex without asking permission every step of the …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 05:46 PM
1

She verbally told him "no" specifically to having sex at the start, and did not verbally countermand that. Earlier she told him that they wouldn't have sex. Then she returned his kiss. Then the kissing progressed to sex. She didn't say no in-between the kissing and the sex. In a way, she physically/nonverbally countermanded her no. In your hypothetical situation that sounds like extremely clear body language that she does want it. My hypothetical situation followed your " didn't want to, didn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 05:23 PM
1

It wasn't necessarily rape, but it still could have been. Why are you arguing that it was, then? It has been clarified to me that she isn't saying it was rape, she is apparently *asking if it was rape. Without verbal consent that is entirely up to her mindset at the time, and who initiated the sex. I'd say that it is up to whether or not she verbally told him "no/stop" and whether or not she reciprocated. If she didn't want to, didn't consent, and didn't initiate, it was rape no matter what her …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 02:59 PM
1

You're approach to sex and consent is fine and helps to avoid grey areas. But these grey areas of consent do exist for others. None of the woman's actions after the returned kiss give off the impression that she didn't want rhings to go further. She gave in to the kiss and then the kiss progressed to sex. "Implied consent" is only valid if interpreted correctly. It is entirely the responsibility of the initiator to be certain they have consent and to confirm if they're not sure. How else is some…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 02:33 PM
1

But would you accuse the jock of stealing the nerds lunch money? If a jock walks around in a threatening and imposing way and asks a nerd for his lunch money the nerd will give him the money. But he didn't consent to it; he resented to it, because of the implied threat of violence. "Threatening and imposing" according to who? The threat of violence is all in the nerd's head. The jock didn't threaten him for his lunch money, he asked for it. Even though the jock might not have been trying to scar…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 12:03 PM
1

She earlier said no to sex. She didn't say no to kissing. Him initiating a kiss while she was trying to sleep was wrong. She then returned the kiss. She didn't say no to the resulting make out session. She didn't say no to the groping the happened as a result of the make out session after her returned kiss. She didn't say no to things "heating up" as a result of the groping that resulted from her returned kiss. Things "heating up" from kissing sounds like a natural progression to sex. He should …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 06:34 AM
1

She was sexually assaulted and then returned the kiss. The resulting make out session after her returned kiss was consensual. Everything after the make out session was consensual. She mentioned that things "heated up." What does that look/sound like to you? Does it sound like she starfished? Does it sound like heavy petting? Does it sound like she was rejecting the progression to sex or participating in the progression to sex? From the victim's side, "I was sexually assaulted, and then because I…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 06:23 AM
5

If someone asks you if you want cake, you say no, then they later move a fork-full of cake toward your mouth and you move forward to take a bite, did they person force you to eat the cake? Did you consent to eating the cake? She returned the man's kiss. During the kiss, in her words things got heated. What do you think that means? Does it mean that she starfished, or that they were both making out with heavy petting? Things "heating up" during a make out session doesn't sound non consensual. She…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/16 06:07 AM
2

I don't think "wanted" is the right word to use here. "Reciprocated" seems more acurate.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 06:28 PM
1

I think I did a bad job at explaining my point. In the gun analogy the threat of harm is more apparent. Most people seeing a gun pointed at them will think "I might get shot. My life is in danger." I am arguing that the threat of rape in the woman's story was less apparent. You said before: Typically the standard is 'did you think you were in danger of X' and also 'would a reasonable person in your position think they were in danger of X'. If someone moved over you and attempted to kiss you, wou…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 06:25 PM
4

The initial kiss wasn’t consensual, but she kissed him back. While they were making out "things heated up" to the point of sex. Everything after her returned kiss was consensual.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 05:58 PM
5

The initial kiss from him wasn't consensual. The resulting make out session after she returned the kiss was consensual. The "heating up" during the make out was consensual. The resulting sex was consensual.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 05:54 PM
6

She said no to sex earlier, she didn't say no to a kiss, which she returned. She also didn't stop things from "heating up" to the point of sex. Seems like she changed her mind there.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 05:50 PM
1

I see what you are saying, but in your gun scenario the perpetrator is actively threatening someone's life by waving around a gun. The man in the woman's story isn't actively threatening her or her vagina. He didn't hold her down or say anything, he moved over her and tried to kiss her. Would you automatically assume that a person leaning over you and attempting to kiss you was also intending on raping you? Do you believe most people would think they would also get raped?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 05:43 PM
1

She felt threatened, that doesn't necessarily mean that she was. She thought that he might rape her, that doesn't necessarily mean he was going to. In an effort to avoid a rape that she thought might happen, the woman returned the man's kiss and allowed things to "heat up" and result in sex. The initial kiss was wrong and shouldn't be considered as a normal form of escalation, but everything after her returned kiss was consensual.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 04:05 PM
2

She kissed him back and then allowed it to progress into sex. That sounds like consent to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 03:39 PM
2

The initial interaction was sexual assault, yes. But was the resulting sex rape?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 03:33 PM
0

I think we can all agree that the guy kissing the woman trying to sleep is a very bad thing, maybe even sexual assault. Though she did kiss him back and allowed things to progress to sex. In sure it was an uncomfortable situation and she has every right to feel violated, I just don't think this is really rape. Seems more like regret sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 03:18 PM
1

Kissing a woman who is trying to sleep is wrong on his part, it might even be considered sexual assault. I don't think that the actions afterward would be considered rape, though. She said that she kissed him back and that "things heated up" and they had sex. That sounds like consent to me. It also sounds like regret sex. She feared that she might get raped so she allowed things to progress. But the guy didn't threaten her. She didn't initially consent to the kiss, but she did consent to the sex…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/16 03:15 PM
1

That shouldn't be the case, though. Being accused of rape after a drunk girl pushes you onto a bed and then puts her own mouth on your dick is just silly. It would make sense if the drunk person's head was being forced down onto the sober person's genitals, but that didn't happen in Amy's story or in your hypothetical scenario. This looks more like "regret sex" than rape.
/r/MensRights21/08/16 01:29 AM
1

Where did you hear/read this? Do you have a link that says that she straddled the man?
/r/MensRights20/08/16 03:02 PM
0

Allowing a drunk guy to finger you, perform oral on you, and then have him fail to put his own penis into your vagina is considered rape now? Even if all she did was lay still on the bed and left after he passed out?
/r/MensRights20/08/16 01:11 PM
2

Just reread her story. She didn't "use his dick as a dildo while he was passed out." Where did you see this? In her story she says that the guy was humping her thigh and failed multiple times to put his penis insider her before passing out. Then she left. There was no penetration.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 12:54 PM
1

Penetration didn't even occur and all the sexual activity was initiated by the drunk male and performed on Amy. Saying it was sexual assault makes more sense to me than claiming it was straight up rape. She didn't take advantage of him. All she did was allow him to do whatever he wanted with her body before leaving after he passed out. Consent is the permission, approval, or agreement for something to happen. Where does the question of consent come into play when the male is the sole aggressor/i…
/r/MensRights20/08/16 12:40 PM
1

Not really. The guy was conscious when he pushed Amy onto the bed, gave her oral, and then failed to penetrate her. Amy left after he passed out. The "Stanford Guy" was actively thrusting into an unconscious woman. Not sure how you can say Amy is just as bad as him.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 11:19 AM
0

Eccept there was no sex and everything was initiated by the drunk person while the sober one just laid there.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 11:13 AM
1

This is different from what happened in her story. She didn't try to have sex or try to get him to give her oral. He did that on his own.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 11:11 AM
1

She didn't "bang" him. He gave her oral and then failed to penetrate her.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 11:09 AM
1

But sex didn't even occur. There was no penetration and the drunk person was the one that was touching the sober person.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 09:17 AM
2

But she didn't even do anything. The guy was the active party. He invited her over, he pushed her onto the bed, he fingered her, he put his mouth on her genitals, he attempted (and failed) to penetrate her. It's a crappy situation, but Amy did not commit a crime here.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 09:15 AM
1

She raped a guy by lying still on a bed while he performed oral on her and failed to penetrate her?
/r/MensRights20/08/16 09:12 AM
1

Continuing to lie still on a bed while a drunk male gives you oral and fails to penetrate you before passing out is most definitely rape to you?
/r/MensRights20/08/16 07:05 AM
1

Not the person who you replied to, but no she should not be accused of rape given the information she gave in her story.
/r/MensRights20/08/16 07:04 AM
1

You just described a completely different situation than the one in the comment that you originally responded to when you first mentioned "thirsty."
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/16 08:20 AM
2

You don't have to be "thirsty" to accept sex that was offered to you by someone you are physically attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/16 12:05 PM
1

I just now realized that I phrased/worded my question as a statement instead of as... a question. Forgive me for "asking" again... and adding more questions. Why would you include an act of obvious rape in your "flipped script" scenario when the original scenario(s) only had deception? I feel that it is a distraction from the debate of whether or not sex resulting from deception should be considered rape. Why did you use this scenario to respond to TRPers' makeup deception analogy? What kind of …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 04:40 PM
1

I understand that this is what you believe. I just don't understand why you would include an obvious act of rape (an act that would be considered rape with or without the added deception) into a discussion about whether or not sex resulting from deception should be considered rape. I think this might be why a lot of people have an issue with your post, unless I am mistaken.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 03:37 PM
1

So the rape wasn't due to deception like the brother scenario. It's the unwanted anal penetration that makes your scenario rape, not the deception. Right?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 02:30 PM
1

The woman consented to having sex with her boyfriend, not the brother. The man in your scenario consented to having sex with the supposed woman, but did he consent to being anally penetrated?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/16 06:53 AM
1

Support for non-offending pedophiles is a bad thing?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/16 07:28 PM
2

But not necessarily life threatening.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/16 03:59 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter