“I guess you missed Tucker’s comment.”
I didn’t miss a single thing and QUOTED THE EXACT SAME PASSAGE YOU JUST DID. I guess you MISSED THAT? I was referring, however, to this point made by Tucker:
“What a whiny country this is. I’m not kidding. You pursue an older woman and have a relationship with her and you’re a rape victim?! It defies common sense,”
which I then turned around with this:
“Tucker Carlson has several children. What if one of his daughters... *****pursued***** a 34 year old male teacher and succeeded in having a sexual relationship with him? Would that be okay?”
See the word “pursued”????
That’s how Tucker said it was not rape for a 34 year old woman to have sex with a minor boy: because “You *****pursue***** an older woman and have a relationship with her and you’re a rape victim?!”
Thus, no matter whatever other comment Tucker makes (i.e. “adding this case should not be treated the same as an older male teacher having sex with a female student”) he is caught out as a hypocrite because if his teenage daughter *****PURSUES***** her 34 year old teacher, according to his logic, it isn’t rape, and thus, must be okay.
Get it now?
I highlighted his comment because you Posted your initial response as if he didn’t say it.
He made a point to differentiate between a Teenage Girl and a Teenage Boy. You may disagree with his viewpoint, but your example is exactly what he did not approve of.
I’m not arguing whether he is hypocritical or not. I just made the point that he offered a caveat, right or wrong.
It isn’t rape.
It may still be wrong but it is abuse of the word rape. Rape is forceable. “Forceable rape” is redundant.