After the rape she went back to Lauer a few times, saying it was “transactional.”
After the rape she went back to Lauer a few times, saying it was transactional.
You have to give her credit for a rare bit of honesty from a woman in this type of “relationship.”
I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that if you keep going back for more (as the female) , it’s not rape rape. It’s an arrangement.
Help me with this. She kept going back to him and said the relationship was “Transactional”. Can someone please tell me what that means?
Does that make it "quid pro ho"?