“Weinstein claimed through his lawyers that letting the lawsuit proceed to trial means sex trafficking laws now cover all sexual activity between adults when one person holds power and influence over the other.”
Tears of a psychopath.
What is holds there? Define holds? They’re so stupid they trip themselves up in their own defense. Threat of punishment however vague (inc. stonewalling and other emotional abuse) or doing the (things) anyway is rape. You’d have to lack a conscience not to get this. That isn’t really asking, that’s telling. Telling someone how to use their body (an ownership right) is trafficking.
Sounds awfully like a whip hand, a master and a slave dynamic. That is illegal.
For any employer to induce illegal activities (workplaces don’t allow relationships) would be.
When you use the “power” to get the “sex”, that is trafficking. That is all they do!
There are rapists who use their “power” of intimidation to receive “sex” in an alley… was that consensual?
Do plush settings suddenly mean a person is magically free of the risk of harm?
Does their No hold more weight?
What did you enjoy doing to the women who told you No?
Sexual sadism is not legal, you subhuman monster.
A person who is not totally free to say no and have that respected is a slave, they cannot truly say yes either. Coercion means any consent later given is under duress – it doesn’t count! This even applies to contracts (not that your NDAs apply to illegal activities).
This has been part of the law since the Vikings, they couldn’t even kiss a woman unless it was a raid (war). If you won’t respect boundaries, where’s the consent in crossing them? And consenting to something doesn’t make it socially acceptable, you nutbar. Pretending you’re just too damn irresistible fools no one. The expected response is always No. Otherwise, I can dip into your bank account, and just assume you’re okay with it.
A person’s livelihood is how they stay alive and it’s the thing slave-owners “held” over their captives.
You’ll notice rapists like to lie about rape law. Wonder why!
And no, the “freeze” response of the nervous system, common to terrified women and children, is not consent. Actually, it’s a sign to stop and back off. Humans use their words and there’s no excuse not to. Ironically, the word “frigid” just captures that evolved response to other predators e.g. ones that hunt by motion, like a sabretooth tiger. Consent can never, ever be presumed. PTSD soldiers go frigid when thinking of battle, that’s the level.
Passivity isn’t consent or an empty house is “asking for it”. Women and children know they cannot fight off an attack, so they freeze. This is biological fact. It doesn’t “mean” anything but that. Victim blaming people for having a nervous system?
This reminds me of the weird American loophole that allows cops to rape their detained suspects, and later say it was consensual. See the part about consent =/= ethical? There should be a law that while at work you can’t “have sex with” someone, even if they’re wearing handcuffs. Passively.
You can’t drink beer, sexual matters should be off the table too. In a civilized society. Everything else aside, the power imbalance makes consent impossible. One party literally has a gun.
“oral sodomy” too, quite a term