If Assange truly is innocent, that's all well and good. But I for one am not okay with date rape apologists. There's no excuse, as a man, for ignoring when a woman says no.
This looks like a setup. But that's different from saying Assange is still an okay guy even if he did it.
I'm not an apologist and I'm not saying "he's an okay guy, even if he did it". I don't see how putting out statistics makes me an apologist. I think it makes me someone proposing an alternative to the dichotomies offered here of "Either he's a bad guy who goes around raping women" or "The government framed him". There is lots of room in life for other options.
>My point: I think genuinely, unquestionably consenting sex is really a quite difficult standard to meet and there are many cases of less than ideal encounters where it ends up being a judgment call on the part of the woman as to a) how she views it in her own mind ("rape" or something else) and b) whether or not to publicly accuse/charge someone.
That's what I was primarily responding to. You don't say it directly, but you're using very weaselly language to suggest that in some cases it isn't a terrible thing to ignore a woman when she says no. You're not just 'putting out statistics.'
That's what I was primarily responding to. You don't say it directly, but you're using very weaselly language to suggest that in some cases it isn't a terrible thing to ignore a woman when she says no. You're not just 'putting out statistics.'
No, not my point at all and I don't know how you are getting that. My point is that such situations are often not as cut and dried, black or white as people would like them to be. That doesn't make me an apologist and it isn't weasily language. It is just reality that life isn't always easily categorized.
This looks like a setup. But that's different from saying Assange is still an okay guy even if he did it.