to be serious, i've thought about that question alot

from a pure logic perspective, women typically follow a rule of 'implied permission'

lack of a 'no' to an advance, typically means at worst 'try harder' and at best 'yes'

VP Jack

who would become President within a year

bow before me

47th President

Plausible deniability

therefore, if someone cannot remember, logic would dictate consent was implied

@Labyrinth Snake wtf is that

Matt was drunk, Sarah was drunk. Sarah couldn't consent

RAaaaape

does VP stand for "Vagina Perturbed"?

or at least, it would be indistingushable from 'implied consent'

<:npc:502497359419408384>

that's false logic though, irreversal

@Jack One Punch Man

vaginal perturbation

sarah couldn't DENY consent

It is npc double standards

thus them both being drunk, reconciles the logic as 'not rape'

Vice President

Man perp woman victim

I miss Anonymous. They would go to war against Digital Censorship on the Internet e.g YouTube

@Irreversal it's actually more fundamental; women by default think with 'logic 0'

men by 'logic 1'

Somehow a man being drunk is different to a woman being drunk

women care more about FAILURE to act

men more about ACTING when not appropriate

we are hard wired to think this way and in the past, it was ok; cause we had seperate spheres of influence

now, women are trying to apply THEIR logic, to OUR world

Logic-Hi vs Logic-Lo

What is acting when not appropriate

❤️

Men see consequences of an action rather clearly. if i hit you, i GET hit back. However, failure to act when there is an existing duty isn't something we always pick up on @Irreversal

I can tell that was drawn by an incel

women are the complete opposite. if an infant gets hurt, it's because she was negligent at insuring the child wasn't exposed to unnescary risk. they tend to hold others to that same logic. Forget an anniversary rather than specific malscious action.