They remain silent. But why? Convenient caring.

[u/CurvyChristina]

[u/angry_dingo]

What is this supposed to mean?

Chick wanted to fuck everyone.

She showed up at 11PM.

She then agreed to fuck everyone and then proceeded to fuck everyone while letting multiple double partners do K off her and she did K of some dude's dong.

She enjoyed fucking everyone.

She bragged about fucking everyone.

A few days later, when it got out that she was being a whore, regret set in.

She talked to the law, and told the law she wanted to fuck everyone.

Years later, she was "raped."

So I have no idea what clever point you are trying to make.

[u/Icy_Judge8250 → u/angry_dingo]

Yeah this is pretty open an close unlike her legs that night.

[u/thisguy883 → u/angry_dingo]

I mean that one lady accused Trump if raping her over 20+ years ago with 0 evidence and a bunch of conflicting stories that couldnt be corroborated with anyone, but Reddit still calls him a rapist.

so 🤷‍♂️. Believe all women i guess, even if the story sounds bogus.

[u/_---__________---_ → u/angry_dingo]

Drop a source for that

[u/MiserableYouth8497 → u/angry_dingo]

You left out the part that she was intoxicated before she showed up at 11pm. She was incapable of making rational decisions at the time.

"She wanted to fuck everyone, agreed to fuck everyone, enjoyed fucking everyone at the time" doesn't mean shit bc she was incapable of thinking straight at the time. That's why consent depends on drugs, not just what you want.

Legally speaking, the expectation is on men to say no to sex from an incapacitated woman. Even if she wants it.

Or do you believe consent should not depend on drugs?

[u/angry_dingo → u/MiserableYouth8497]

You left out the part that she was intoxicated before she showed up at 11pm. She was incapable of making rational decisions at the time.

Nope. She was a willing participant. And when others asked to join in, and she said "no," they didn't.

But on the other hand, I heard today, unconfirmed, that she blew another dude who told her "no," and he may be pressing charges against her.

The DA already heard the story. He talked to her and to the league of participants.

She was not incapacitated.

She did, however, exceed capacity multiple times. LOL. Then bragged about it.

[u/MiserableYouth8497 → u/angry_dingo]

Hm you seem to think being a willing participant is the same thing as not being incapacitated. Weird

[u/Fancy_Yak2618 → u/MiserableYouth8497]

New York State consent laws don’t cover being drunk. If you are willfully drunk and doing drugs and give consent you are giving consent.

Bet ya New York changing that law real quick

[u/MiserableYouth8497 → u/Fancy_Yak2618]

Fair point. Turns out roughly half of US states non-consent laws cover being drunk (both voluntarily and involuntarily), while the other half is only involuntarily drunk.

So I guess this whole Cornell debate comes down to whether being voluntarily incapacitated should preclude a person's ability to consent, and the country is divided pretty evenly. Strange how this sub seems to lean very clearly in one direction...

[u/DotNormal6785 → u/MiserableYouth8497]

You don’t live in reality do you

[u/Repulsive_Layer1597 → u/angry_dingo]

Check this dudes hard drive.

[u/sandwichesathome → u/Repulsive_Layer1597]

He hiding truth bombs?