Replies

Is a 17 year old boy who doesn’t read the signals right trying to get a girl’s top off (and failing) a “sexual assault”?

Does anybody here believe that?

Is a 17 year old boy who doesn’t read the signals right trying to get a girl’s top off (and failing) a “sexual assault”?

Does anybody here believe that?

In wasn’t considered that in the 80s. It might be today. I’d advise a 17 year old boy not to do such a thing.

Is a 17 year old boy who doesn’t read the signals right trying to get a girl’s top off (and failing) a “sexual assault”?

I read at one media outlet which stated that she was wearing a "bathing suit". Well, that is like saying that you are at work wearing "underwear". Of course she said in her letter (apparently) that she was wearing a bathing suit with clothing over it, just as you would be at work wearing underwear with clothing over it. The left lies all the time so this is no different.

The eternal answer to your question which goes to the heart of her story is: when a girl chooses to attend a drunken party with 4 boys at one of the boys’ houses when parents aren't home, wearing nothing but a bathing suit with top over it, she has lost all claim to innocence. Any 15 year old girl who attends a drinking party with boys older than her knows the score. Girls know. She had no business going to that party and later blaming them for traumatizing her. No one should sympathize with her poor judgement and its consequence, which according to her was actually par for the course when it comes to nerdy, horny, drunk boys and promiscuous, overly-sexualized teen girls. This has been going on at least since the Roaring 20’s as far as I've seen documentation for (common in silent movies). This story grew legs solely due to the fact that we are in a strange moment of history when right is wrong and wrong is right.