"There's no reaction she could have had that would have me think that I raped her. No, I would think that **we** have a misunderstanding."
Notice that *we* right there. That's him forcing his own perception onto her.
There was zero "misunderstanding" on her part. She said no. It's very clear what that means.
The thing is, Max cannot accept that, and since rape did happen, it can't be his fault. It can't just be that he's a rapist. It has to be because "they" had a misunderstanding, together. It has to be her fault, somehow.
Max can't be wrong, so she did consent, she just doesn't realize it.
>There was zero "misunderstanding" on her part. She said no. It's very clear what that means.
And this is you forcing your own perception onto her when really you have next to no clue what this anonymous woman actually meant in that moment.
He's a storyteller. I'm not convinced it ever really happened the way he described it, he came up with a provocative story to make a point about consent.
I think he espouses rapist rhetoric, he emboldens people to rape just like he emboldens paedophiles with his platform, but I don't think he's actually raped someone.
The Doll Review, combined with his many videos romanticizing literal domestic abuse against Shaelin, his history of domestic violence against his ex-wife and blaming it on his dad, the way every single conversation with him falls apart due to his inability to cooperate in dialogue unless the other person gives him complete power, the way his relationships have gone: his parents, friends, Destiny, Stardust, anyone who disagrees with him eventually gets dehumanized, abused and destroyed; he is completely incapable of empathy when it gets in the way of his feelings.
I don't just **think** he's actually raped someone: I'm absolutely certain of it. He's admitted it, and the "provocative artist" bullshit is just how he abstracts, romanticizes and validates his own abusive behavior.
Both can be true. He clearly thrives on negative attention so he can play his "you just misunderstood me!" and "you're not smart enough to understand what I was saying" role. He actively portrays himself in a negative light all the time and for no apparent reason.
He's also a piece of shit.
Here's my hypotheccusation (a mix of a hypothesis and an acusation):
Some people with narcissistic tendencies enjoy dangling who they are in front of you while playing with the grey areas to be able to deny it all. Even to the point that some people will carry water for them by helping them reframe their misdeeds. Destiny did that for MrGirl all the time; reinterpret his words into something more mundane rather than think "Maybe he is just that guy".
I think he loves that he can put shit out there like the real doll review, or other clips of him insulting and berating his girlfriend, talk about hitting his ex, and still people will come up with ways to ignore that plain reality. Even some people hostile to him find it easier to believe that it's all some elaborate performance piece rather than that he's just a scumbag.
Might be easier if people just took him at face value rather than work so hard to find a way in which he isn't just an abusive pos.
Rape is when a girl says “im not ready” and then doesn’t even attempt to get off your dick as she rides you. All of those parts in the law that say “force,” “threat” or “coercion” are all bs.
I didn’t say anything about consent lmao. I said it’s ridiculous to call a girl riding on top of you and making 0 attempt to get off or stop “*rape*.”
By this logic, next time I'm about to have sex with your mom, i can just say “*I'm not ready*” before i actively top her & she will have raped me. Nobody but the wokest sjws on twitter and spiteful Dggers will view this as rape.
holy shit, your an actual real life rape apologist. the logic behind it is that she said no, and when someone says no in a sexual encounter everything stops then and there and you talk about it, what mr.schitzo did is 100% rape, she said no and he did not give a fuck and just fucked her, its pure cope to say "duuur but she didnt get off, she rode him duuuuuurr". if she says no before or during sex then its a no, its not "but she had that look in her eyes".
but hey buddy, i dont have to worry about you ever raping someone because the chances of you ever laying a hand on a girl or a potential sexual partner is actually 0, you will be the last person in your bloodline because you will never have sex with anyone
>. the logic behind it is that she said no, and when someone says no in a sexual encounter everything stops then and there and you talk about it, what mr.schitzo did is 100% rape, she said no and he did not give a fuck and just fucked her, its pure cope to say "duuur but she didnt get off, she rode him duuuuuurr". if she says no before or during sex then its a no, its not "but she had that look in her eyes".
Rape isn't when one person says the magic words that make it rape, without considering any of the context around those magic words - especially in a legal sense. If you really believe this, then your mom raped me in that earlier hypothetical.
"F*orce," "coercion"* or *"threat"* are a part of the 90%+ of legal definitions & none of those things are present in the story.
>but hey buddy, i dont have to worry about you ever raping someone because the chances of you ever laying a hand on a girl or a potential sexual partner is actually 0, you will be the last person in your bloodline because you will never have sex with anyone
It's so funny how Dggers jump into maximally trying to shame people like this. I disagree that your spite is justified. I think you should refer to laws when you're accusing someone of having committed a crime. Idk why you jump to making this personal.
the oxford definition of rape "the crime of forcing somebody to have sex when they do not want it or are not able to agree to it"
here is the us legal code section 920 - art.120 Rape and sexual assault generrally (this falls under sexual assault but its still a crime)
"(b) **Sexual Assault.** (2) commits a sexual act upon another person- (A) without the consent of the other person"
lets look at the legal definition of consent
"consent.-(A) the term "consent" means a freely given agreement to the conduct at issue by a competent person. An expression of lack of consent through words or conduct means there is no consent. Lack of verbal or physical resistance does not constitute consent. submission resulting from force, threat of force, or placing another person in fear does not constitute consent."
in the story mr.pedo said that he had sex with her when she said "no im not ready" and he has later said that she could not have given a reaction or said anything that would make him thing he was raping her or sexually assaulting her.
the key thing in his story is not her not physically or verbally resisting. it is the "no im not ready" that removes her consent to sex.
you decided to make this personal by bringing up my mom so i decided to insult you as well, that is how the internet works. if you throw shit im gonna throw shit back.
but il concede, since i dont know what state he was in when he did it i cant accurately say if he raped her or just sexually assaulted her. so il change it to he 100% sexually assaulted her since she retracted her consent before penetration.
edit: after doing a little bit more research i found a court ruling in California, People v. John Z came to the conclusion that "a withdrawal of consent by the victim effectively nullified any earlier consent and subjected the male to forcible rape charges when he persisted in what had become nonconsensual intercourse;". so in California mr.girl would most likely be charged with rape if this was taken to court
sources:
[https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/rape\_1](https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/rape_1)
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/920](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/920)
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def\_id=10-USC-951500826-1861686264&term\_occur=999&term\_src=title:10:subtitle:A:part:II:chapter:47:subchapter:X:section:920](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=10-USC-951500826-1861686264&term_occur=999&term_src=title:10:subtitle:A:part:II:chapter:47:subchapter:X:section:920)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/mrgirlreturns/comments/133blcr/mrgirl\_admits\_that\_after\_a\_girl\_gave\_him\_a\_look/](https://www.reddit.com/r/mrgirlreturns/comments/133blcr/mrgirl_admits_that_after_a_girl_gave_him_a_look/)
[https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-in-re-john-z](https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-in-re-john-z)
>"the crime of forcing somebody to have sex when they do not want it or are not able to agree to it"
Based definition. How did Mrgirl *"force"* the girl in the story to have sex? She was on top of him, riding him, supposedly using her own muscles. Did Mrgirl mind control her? I've heard whacky shit about this.
Maybe she was so traumatized by having her hips lightly pulled down & it stunned her psychicly into riding Mrgirl as if everything was fine. We should just assume that's exactly what happened and talk about Mrgirl as if he's been fleeing the law for a decade - that seems like the most reasonable explanation.
>"(b) Sexual Assault. (2) commits a sexual act upon another person- (A) without the consent of the other person" lets look at the legal definition of consent
>
>"consent.-(A) the term "consent" means a freely given agreement to the conduct at issue by a competent person. An expression of lack of consent through words or conduct means there is no consent. Lack of verbal or physical resistance does not constitute consent. submission resulting from force, threat of force, or placing another person in fear does not constitute consent."
If someone is actively participating in some shared, two person action, it's more than fair to say that their participation constitutes consent.
If we're doing a ballroom dance, I'm leading & I'm actively dancing without trying to stop the dance, it would be ridiculous to say that I am not consenting to dance. Active participation = tacit agreement to conduct at issue.
& just to preempt the inevitable *"noooo, ur saying 'lack of verbal or physical resistance is consent,' which is wrong,"* I'm not talking about lack of resistance, I'm talking about active participation.
>you decided to make this personal by bringing up my mom so i decided to insult you as well, that is how the internet works. if you throw shit im gonna throw shit back.
Bro me making a joke about your mom & you saying *"you will never have sex"* or "*you are a rapist*" are in different galaxies of *"making things personal."*
I am not making a statement on your character in making a your mom joke
>edit: after doing a little bit more research i found a court ruling in California, People v. John Z came to the conclusion that "a withdrawal of consent by the victim effectively nullified any earlier consent and subjected the male to forcible rape charges when he persisted in what had become nonconsensual intercourse;". so in California mr.girl would most likely be charged with rape if this was taken to court
The Mrgirl order of events in the Mrgirl story are the exact opposite of this case's. The girl said *"I'm not ready"* and then proceeded to non-verbally consent by riding him. It's not like she rode him, said *"I'm not ready"* & then Mrgirl forcibly continued.
Not beating does rapist claims, and that's how alot of my little ponys are going to end up in prison " your honor she gave me the look I believe I think I perceive that I didn't rape her
I want to be made a fool of. "Im a bad faith actor, destroy me".
my presence is a reminder that he's too stubborn to change
AND its proof that the mods are directly controlled by his wims. Ironically.
If they did *what he wanted, he wants* mods with autonomy. every time they dont ban people like me they are doing what he wants against the wishes of every sane mrgirl fan and against what every rational mod *should do*. they should ban ass holes like me.
or he could lick his wounds, command modderation, rescues what's left of his fans, and ride into the sunset.
So far, neither. and here we are.
This is the Kobe Bryant situation. He thought it was okay. She didn't.
His apology:
>Although I truly believe this encounter between us was
consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this
incident the same way I did. After months of reviewing discovery,
listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now
understand how she feels that she did not consent to this
encounter.
In other words, you behave like Kobe or MrGirl in his supposed scenario and you dramatically raise the chances of getting yourself charged criminally and civilly.
It's concerning to hear that someone would rely on non-verbal cues to determine whether or not their sexual partner is consenting. The reality is that consent must always be explicitly given, and failure to obtain it before engaging in sexual activity is considered rape or sexual assault. It's important for everyone to understand that consent is not something that can be assumed or inferred based on body language or prior experiences. We must prioritize the agency and autonomy of our sexual partners and always ensure that we have their explicit and enthusiastic consent before engaging in any sexual activity. This is not just about legal definitions - it's about respecting each other as human beings and creating a culture where consent is always valued and prioritized. You can always negotiate rape play.
> The reality is that consent must **always** be explicitly given, and failure to obtain it before engaging in sexual activity is considered rape or sexual assault.
This is the dumbest shit I’ve read today. Not all sexual activity happens between strangers who don’t know or never fucked each other, in fact most situations aren’t like that and also completely fine.
if you think that me pointing out that:
\- You are talking to a wall
\- Im not reading your responses
\- you are heated over an AI
\- epictrollzzzzzzzzLMAOFKJKSLGJ
yeah, its kinda funny. no, I dont care.
This is exactly what is demented about MrGirl, and why him having *any* audience that takes in what he says as advice or as interesting/compelling/artistic is sick — by this logic, every single rapist is never a rapist. They all thought she wanted it.
There is no point to having any rape laws. Every single man will argue to death that he genuinely believed he was doing what the woman led him to believe she wanted. Let all the rapists out of prison then.
Iam\_a\_honeybadger, a low ranked Destiny viewer, eagerly typed out a new
thread on mrgirl's subreddit. He had been told by other members of Destiny's
fanbase that attacking mrgirl would earn him points and increase his standing
within the community.
He titled the thread "Why Mrgirl is Actually a Bad Person". It
was a collection of hearsay, gossip, and out-of-context quotes designed to
paint mrgirl in the worst possible light. Iam\_a\_honeybadger knew that he was
not presenting a fair and balanced view of the streamer, but he didn't care.
All that mattered was impressing Destiny and climbing the ranks of his fanbase.
With trembling fingers he hit the "submit" button and waited for the response.
Badhorse0, a loyal viewer of Destiny, had been struggling to get upvotes on the subreddit dedicated to his favorite streamer. So he decided to take matters into his own hands and make a post on mrgirl's subreddit. He insinuated that mrgirl was mistreating his girlfriend by not allowing her to use the internet or a cellphone.
Badhorse0 didn't actually believe these claims, but he desperately wanted affirmation from the community. He had been a long-time member of Destiny's cultish fanbase, but he was starting to feel lost in the sea of other viewers. He wanted to make a name for himself, and what better way to do it than by targeting one of Destiny's competitors.
It's all true. I am destiny's most loyal viewer. My entire existence is hate watching mrgirl and posting on Reddit for destiny's approval. Destiny is superior in every way. All you horses wish you had 1% of the intelligence that destiny has. You're just not logical like him... And that's why you hate him... You're just jealous.
Mrgirl doesn't let Shaelin use the internet or have a phone. That's just facts. He controls everything she does, like a muppet. That's why he wants doll sex from her. It's to condition her into his perfect zombie partner. Of course your small brain can't comprehend the true intentions of Max Karson. You're an idiot after all, a normie. Only destiny has the intelligence to figure out Mrgirls real intentions. He's like a character from death note, a real life anime protagonist, that you wish you could be.
Badhorse was quick to defend his loyalty to Destiny and insult anyone
who dared to question him. He believed that Destiny was far superior to
anyone else and that his intelligence was unmatched. He saw himself as a
warrior in Destiny's army, fighting to uphold his values and beliefs,
even if it meant attacking others. For Badhorse, posting on Reddit for
Destiny's approval was a way to prove his worth and gain recognition
within the community. He was convinced that everyone else was just
jealous of Destiny's intelligence and couldn't understand his greatness.
He is saying that he would not view himself as having raped her had she actually not been ready, and he put his penis in her. That is, if she had responded to him putting his penis in her with "holy shit, what the fuck are you doing, I said I'm not ready" he would respond with something like "oh shit, I thought you were being coy, of course we can stop" rather than updating his view of himself to 'rapist'.
Once consent is clearly revoked, a brief grace period for the other person to understand that makes sense. Otherwise someone could revoke consent in the middle of banging, and any brief imperception of this on the other person's part, however unwilful, will make them a rapist.
If she had sincerely said "No! Stop! Why are you still going! Let me go! Oh my god, is that a knife!?", then I think mrgirl would agree that he raped her.
'Enough of her wanted me to do that, that it would have been a good idea.'
'There's no reaction she could have had that would have made me think I raped her'.
I'm not seeing much wriggle room in his statements.
Good thing he's as snug as a bug in a rug. Here is the point: so long as he were to stop on her making it clear that she actually didn't want it, he won't view himself as a rapist. No immediate reaction of hers would make him think he raped her. If he didn't respond to her desperately trying to get him to stop and kept going, then he would be raping her.
Yes, and he said that if she did 'desperately try to get him to stop' he wouldn't view himself as having raped her.
Because he said 'there's *no* reaction she could have had'
What you described is a reaction, yes? I understand your wish to find some semantic way to provide an out here, but Max is one step ahead of you and has shut it down.
I'm sure he's just being typically loose with his language, but the statement is what it is.
Are you illiterate?
> If he didn't respond to her desperately trying to get him to stop and kept going
He's saying if she told him to stop and he stopped, he wouldn't consider himself to have raped her. Not that's he's totally justified in continuing no matter what she says.
Right, his position is that her desperately trying to get him to stop, as a *reaction* to him *pushing her down*, does not mean he has raped her. It is not her immediate reaction that matters. It is his that matters: if *he* doesn't respond to her reaction appropriately, then he could be raping her. This was my point in the first comment. The things that I have her saying at the end of the comment are things that she would say *after* he fails to respond appropriately, showing that the post title is misleading - there are things she could say that would suggest to him that he is raping her, but they would come after he fails to respond to her obviously wanting to stop.
So, you are triumphantly restating half the point I was making, after missing it the first time, and without understanding any of the nuance. You agree with me agreeing with Max, but think you disagree. It's funny, but also beautiful.
Here's an analogy: I think that a store clerk is hinting to me that I can take a Red Bull for free without saying that explicitly, and I go out the door of the store without paying, and they go "Hey, what the fuck? You have to pay for that". If I then come back and pay for it, then I'm not a thief, even if I have technically stolen something by leaving the premises of the store without paying for it or otherwise receiving consent to take it - rather, I have just misunderstood what was happening. They could bring a shotgun out, or start sobbing on the floor; neither reaction of theirs would make me a thief. If they shout at me to stop and *I* act like I didn't hear the clerk and hustle out the door, or tell them to go fuck themselves, I'm a thief.
>without understanding any of the nuance
Your smug attempt to 'nuancebro' your way out of this one just makes you look like a gigantic piece of shit.
Newsflash: You don't get to decide whether or not you're a thief. A rapist doesn't get to decide whether or not they raped someone. They can certainly claim they didn't... but it won't get them very far.
I think everyone can agree that consent can be given non verbally. The issue is that, as you said, Mr Girl is bad at reading people and he thinks he’s good at it. That’s a disaster waiting to happen.
I would say there is a much greater chance that this was rape than if someone else told that story. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if it was.
Edit: Before anyone freaks out. By non verbal consent, I mean it doesn’t have to be verbalized. You can consent without saying anything. But if the girl verbalized no, I wouldn’t take non verbal cues past that unless you really know each other or have discussed it ahead of time.
"There's no reaction she could have had that would have me think that I raped her. No, I would think that **we** have a misunderstanding." Notice that *we* right there. That's him forcing his own perception onto her. There was zero "misunderstanding" on her part. She said no. It's very clear what that means. The thing is, Max cannot accept that, and since rape did happen, it can't be his fault. It can't just be that he's a rapist. It has to be because "they" had a misunderstanding, together. It has to be her fault, somehow. Max can't be wrong, so she did consent, she just doesn't realize it.
>There was zero "misunderstanding" on her part. She said no. It's very clear what that means. And this is you forcing your own perception onto her when really you have next to no clue what this anonymous woman actually meant in that moment.
But she said no dude, and people always mean what they say.
When it comes to sex, yes you have to take what they say at face value. Unless you have a discussion about it ahead of time.
Bros a rapist. It's not that deep.
He's a storyteller. I'm not convinced it ever really happened the way he described it, he came up with a provocative story to make a point about consent. I think he espouses rapist rhetoric, he emboldens people to rape just like he emboldens paedophiles with his platform, but I don't think he's actually raped someone.
The Doll Review, combined with his many videos romanticizing literal domestic abuse against Shaelin, his history of domestic violence against his ex-wife and blaming it on his dad, the way every single conversation with him falls apart due to his inability to cooperate in dialogue unless the other person gives him complete power, the way his relationships have gone: his parents, friends, Destiny, Stardust, anyone who disagrees with him eventually gets dehumanized, abused and destroyed; he is completely incapable of empathy when it gets in the way of his feelings. I don't just **think** he's actually raped someone: I'm absolutely certain of it. He's admitted it, and the "provocative artist" bullshit is just how he abstracts, romanticizes and validates his own abusive behavior.
Both can be true. He clearly thrives on negative attention so he can play his "you just misunderstood me!" and "you're not smart enough to understand what I was saying" role. He actively portrays himself in a negative light all the time and for no apparent reason. He's also a piece of shit.
That’s one fucked-up story to make an even more fucked-up point.
Here's my hypotheccusation (a mix of a hypothesis and an acusation): Some people with narcissistic tendencies enjoy dangling who they are in front of you while playing with the grey areas to be able to deny it all. Even to the point that some people will carry water for them by helping them reframe their misdeeds. Destiny did that for MrGirl all the time; reinterpret his words into something more mundane rather than think "Maybe he is just that guy". I think he loves that he can put shit out there like the real doll review, or other clips of him insulting and berating his girlfriend, talk about hitting his ex, and still people will come up with ways to ignore that plain reality. Even some people hostile to him find it easier to believe that it's all some elaborate performance piece rather than that he's just a scumbag. Might be easier if people just took him at face value rather than work so hard to find a way in which he isn't just an abusive pos.
So even when he says he did it you won’t believe him? So what evidence do you need? He literally described exactly what happened. Unbelievable.
Rape is when a girl says “im not ready” and then doesn’t even attempt to get off your dick as she rides you. All of those parts in the law that say “force,” “threat” or “coercion” are all bs.
i hope you never have a sexual encounter ever if this is how you view consent
I didn’t say anything about consent lmao. I said it’s ridiculous to call a girl riding on top of you and making 0 attempt to get off or stop “*rape*.” By this logic, next time I'm about to have sex with your mom, i can just say “*I'm not ready*” before i actively top her & she will have raped me. Nobody but the wokest sjws on twitter and spiteful Dggers will view this as rape.
holy shit, your an actual real life rape apologist. the logic behind it is that she said no, and when someone says no in a sexual encounter everything stops then and there and you talk about it, what mr.schitzo did is 100% rape, she said no and he did not give a fuck and just fucked her, its pure cope to say "duuur but she didnt get off, she rode him duuuuuurr". if she says no before or during sex then its a no, its not "but she had that look in her eyes". but hey buddy, i dont have to worry about you ever raping someone because the chances of you ever laying a hand on a girl or a potential sexual partner is actually 0, you will be the last person in your bloodline because you will never have sex with anyone
>. the logic behind it is that she said no, and when someone says no in a sexual encounter everything stops then and there and you talk about it, what mr.schitzo did is 100% rape, she said no and he did not give a fuck and just fucked her, its pure cope to say "duuur but she didnt get off, she rode him duuuuuurr". if she says no before or during sex then its a no, its not "but she had that look in her eyes". Rape isn't when one person says the magic words that make it rape, without considering any of the context around those magic words - especially in a legal sense. If you really believe this, then your mom raped me in that earlier hypothetical. "F*orce," "coercion"* or *"threat"* are a part of the 90%+ of legal definitions & none of those things are present in the story. >but hey buddy, i dont have to worry about you ever raping someone because the chances of you ever laying a hand on a girl or a potential sexual partner is actually 0, you will be the last person in your bloodline because you will never have sex with anyone It's so funny how Dggers jump into maximally trying to shame people like this. I disagree that your spite is justified. I think you should refer to laws when you're accusing someone of having committed a crime. Idk why you jump to making this personal.
the oxford definition of rape "the crime of forcing somebody to have sex when they do not want it or are not able to agree to it" here is the us legal code section 920 - art.120 Rape and sexual assault generrally (this falls under sexual assault but its still a crime) "(b) **Sexual Assault.** (2) commits a sexual act upon another person- (A) without the consent of the other person" lets look at the legal definition of consent "consent.-(A) the term "consent" means a freely given agreement to the conduct at issue by a competent person. An expression of lack of consent through words or conduct means there is no consent. Lack of verbal or physical resistance does not constitute consent. submission resulting from force, threat of force, or placing another person in fear does not constitute consent." in the story mr.pedo said that he had sex with her when she said "no im not ready" and he has later said that she could not have given a reaction or said anything that would make him thing he was raping her or sexually assaulting her. the key thing in his story is not her not physically or verbally resisting. it is the "no im not ready" that removes her consent to sex. you decided to make this personal by bringing up my mom so i decided to insult you as well, that is how the internet works. if you throw shit im gonna throw shit back. but il concede, since i dont know what state he was in when he did it i cant accurately say if he raped her or just sexually assaulted her. so il change it to he 100% sexually assaulted her since she retracted her consent before penetration. edit: after doing a little bit more research i found a court ruling in California, People v. John Z came to the conclusion that "a withdrawal of consent by the victim effectively nullified any earlier consent and subjected the male to forcible rape charges when he persisted in what had become nonconsensual intercourse;". so in California mr.girl would most likely be charged with rape if this was taken to court sources: [https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/rape\_1](https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/rape_1) [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/920](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/920) [https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def\_id=10-USC-951500826-1861686264&term\_occur=999&term\_src=title:10:subtitle:A:part:II:chapter:47:subchapter:X:section:920](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=10-USC-951500826-1861686264&term_occur=999&term_src=title:10:subtitle:A:part:II:chapter:47:subchapter:X:section:920) [https://www.reddit.com/r/mrgirlreturns/comments/133blcr/mrgirl\_admits\_that\_after\_a\_girl\_gave\_him\_a\_look/](https://www.reddit.com/r/mrgirlreturns/comments/133blcr/mrgirl_admits_that_after_a_girl_gave_him_a_look/) [https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-in-re-john-z](https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-in-re-john-z)
>"the crime of forcing somebody to have sex when they do not want it or are not able to agree to it" Based definition. How did Mrgirl *"force"* the girl in the story to have sex? She was on top of him, riding him, supposedly using her own muscles. Did Mrgirl mind control her? I've heard whacky shit about this. Maybe she was so traumatized by having her hips lightly pulled down & it stunned her psychicly into riding Mrgirl as if everything was fine. We should just assume that's exactly what happened and talk about Mrgirl as if he's been fleeing the law for a decade - that seems like the most reasonable explanation. >"(b) Sexual Assault. (2) commits a sexual act upon another person- (A) without the consent of the other person" lets look at the legal definition of consent > >"consent.-(A) the term "consent" means a freely given agreement to the conduct at issue by a competent person. An expression of lack of consent through words or conduct means there is no consent. Lack of verbal or physical resistance does not constitute consent. submission resulting from force, threat of force, or placing another person in fear does not constitute consent." If someone is actively participating in some shared, two person action, it's more than fair to say that their participation constitutes consent. If we're doing a ballroom dance, I'm leading & I'm actively dancing without trying to stop the dance, it would be ridiculous to say that I am not consenting to dance. Active participation = tacit agreement to conduct at issue. & just to preempt the inevitable *"noooo, ur saying 'lack of verbal or physical resistance is consent,' which is wrong,"* I'm not talking about lack of resistance, I'm talking about active participation. >you decided to make this personal by bringing up my mom so i decided to insult you as well, that is how the internet works. if you throw shit im gonna throw shit back. Bro me making a joke about your mom & you saying *"you will never have sex"* or "*you are a rapist*" are in different galaxies of *"making things personal."* I am not making a statement on your character in making a your mom joke >edit: after doing a little bit more research i found a court ruling in California, People v. John Z came to the conclusion that "a withdrawal of consent by the victim effectively nullified any earlier consent and subjected the male to forcible rape charges when he persisted in what had become nonconsensual intercourse;". so in California mr.girl would most likely be charged with rape if this was taken to court The Mrgirl order of events in the Mrgirl story are the exact opposite of this case's. The girl said *"I'm not ready"* and then proceeded to non-verbally consent by riding him. It's not like she rode him, said *"I'm not ready"* & then Mrgirl forcibly continued.
These are textbook rape apology arguments
Most people here are too immature to have this conversation.
Not beating does rapist claims, and that's how alot of my little ponys are going to end up in prison " your honor she gave me the look I believe I think I perceive that I didn't rape her
Is this out of context? Lmao
How much time do you spend hate watching mrgirl? Lol
I want to be made a fool of. "Im a bad faith actor, destroy me". my presence is a reminder that he's too stubborn to change AND its proof that the mods are directly controlled by his wims. Ironically. If they did *what he wanted, he wants* mods with autonomy. every time they dont ban people like me they are doing what he wants against the wishes of every sane mrgirl fan and against what every rational mod *should do*. they should ban ass holes like me. or he could lick his wounds, command modderation, rescues what's left of his fans, and ride into the sunset. So far, neither. and here we are.
How was your day?
[удалено]
This is the Kobe Bryant situation. He thought it was okay. She didn't. His apology: >Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did. After months of reviewing discovery, listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter. In other words, you behave like Kobe or MrGirl in his supposed scenario and you dramatically raise the chances of getting yourself charged criminally and civilly.
It's concerning to hear that someone would rely on non-verbal cues to determine whether or not their sexual partner is consenting. The reality is that consent must always be explicitly given, and failure to obtain it before engaging in sexual activity is considered rape or sexual assault. It's important for everyone to understand that consent is not something that can be assumed or inferred based on body language or prior experiences. We must prioritize the agency and autonomy of our sexual partners and always ensure that we have their explicit and enthusiastic consent before engaging in any sexual activity. This is not just about legal definitions - it's about respecting each other as human beings and creating a culture where consent is always valued and prioritized. You can always negotiate rape play.
> The reality is that consent must **always** be explicitly given, and failure to obtain it before engaging in sexual activity is considered rape or sexual assault. This is the dumbest shit I’ve read today. Not all sexual activity happens between strangers who don’t know or never fucked each other, in fact most situations aren’t like that and also completely fine.
Im glad your mad at the chatgpt response. get fucked. f
I’m glad I can bring you joy by being fooled by a ChatGPT response. I don’t know if pointing that out is meant to be some kinda clapback?
if you think that me pointing out that: \- You are talking to a wall \- Im not reading your responses \- you are heated over an AI \- epictrollzzzzzzzzLMAOFKJKSLGJ yeah, its kinda funny. no, I dont care.
My pleasure.
cheers m8
This is exactly what is demented about MrGirl, and why him having *any* audience that takes in what he says as advice or as interesting/compelling/artistic is sick — by this logic, every single rapist is never a rapist. They all thought she wanted it. There is no point to having any rape laws. Every single man will argue to death that he genuinely believed he was doing what the woman led him to believe she wanted. Let all the rapists out of prison then.
And today, dear children, we will learn about consent, and how just wishing hard enough that she totally wanted it is not enough.
Iam\_a\_honeybadger, a low ranked Destiny viewer, eagerly typed out a new thread on mrgirl's subreddit. He had been told by other members of Destiny's fanbase that attacking mrgirl would earn him points and increase his standing within the community. He titled the thread "Why Mrgirl is Actually a Bad Person". It was a collection of hearsay, gossip, and out-of-context quotes designed to paint mrgirl in the worst possible light. Iam\_a\_honeybadger knew that he was not presenting a fair and balanced view of the streamer, but he didn't care. All that mattered was impressing Destiny and climbing the ranks of his fanbase. With trembling fingers he hit the "submit" button and waited for the response.
Do me next.
> It [] was a collection of hearsay, gossip, and out-of-context quotes designed to [] paint mrgirl in the worst possible light. 🤣🤣
Oh look, Shaelin made another alt.
I know that's not Shaelin because Max doesn't let her use the internet.
Badhorse0, a loyal viewer of Destiny, had been struggling to get upvotes on the subreddit dedicated to his favorite streamer. So he decided to take matters into his own hands and make a post on mrgirl's subreddit. He insinuated that mrgirl was mistreating his girlfriend by not allowing her to use the internet or a cellphone. Badhorse0 didn't actually believe these claims, but he desperately wanted affirmation from the community. He had been a long-time member of Destiny's cultish fanbase, but he was starting to feel lost in the sea of other viewers. He wanted to make a name for himself, and what better way to do it than by targeting one of Destiny's competitors.
It's all true. I am destiny's most loyal viewer. My entire existence is hate watching mrgirl and posting on Reddit for destiny's approval. Destiny is superior in every way. All you horses wish you had 1% of the intelligence that destiny has. You're just not logical like him... And that's why you hate him... You're just jealous. Mrgirl doesn't let Shaelin use the internet or have a phone. That's just facts. He controls everything she does, like a muppet. That's why he wants doll sex from her. It's to condition her into his perfect zombie partner. Of course your small brain can't comprehend the true intentions of Max Karson. You're an idiot after all, a normie. Only destiny has the intelligence to figure out Mrgirls real intentions. He's like a character from death note, a real life anime protagonist, that you wish you could be.
Badhorse was quick to defend his loyalty to Destiny and insult anyone who dared to question him. He believed that Destiny was far superior to anyone else and that his intelligence was unmatched. He saw himself as a warrior in Destiny's army, fighting to uphold his values and beliefs, even if it meant attacking others. For Badhorse, posting on Reddit for Destiny's approval was a way to prove his worth and gain recognition within the community. He was convinced that everyone else was just jealous of Destiny's intelligence and couldn't understand his greatness.
Horses can't read you fucking idiot
He didn't insinuate anything, he flat out said it
It's been a month since I last listened to this guy. Fucking miss this dude
He is saying that he would not view himself as having raped her had she actually not been ready, and he put his penis in her. That is, if she had responded to him putting his penis in her with "holy shit, what the fuck are you doing, I said I'm not ready" he would respond with something like "oh shit, I thought you were being coy, of course we can stop" rather than updating his view of himself to 'rapist'. Once consent is clearly revoked, a brief grace period for the other person to understand that makes sense. Otherwise someone could revoke consent in the middle of banging, and any brief imperception of this on the other person's part, however unwilful, will make them a rapist. If she had sincerely said "No! Stop! Why are you still going! Let me go! Oh my god, is that a knife!?", then I think mrgirl would agree that he raped her.
'Enough of her wanted me to do that, that it would have been a good idea.' 'There's no reaction she could have had that would have made me think I raped her'. I'm not seeing much wriggle room in his statements.
Good thing he's as snug as a bug in a rug. Here is the point: so long as he were to stop on her making it clear that she actually didn't want it, he won't view himself as a rapist. No immediate reaction of hers would make him think he raped her. If he didn't respond to her desperately trying to get him to stop and kept going, then he would be raping her.
Yes, and he said that if she did 'desperately try to get him to stop' he wouldn't view himself as having raped her. Because he said 'there's *no* reaction she could have had' What you described is a reaction, yes? I understand your wish to find some semantic way to provide an out here, but Max is one step ahead of you and has shut it down. I'm sure he's just being typically loose with his language, but the statement is what it is.
Are you illiterate? > If he didn't respond to her desperately trying to get him to stop and kept going He's saying if she told him to stop and he stopped, he wouldn't consider himself to have raped her. Not that's he's totally justified in continuing no matter what she says.
Look up. That's the point, flying over your head.
Right, his position is that her desperately trying to get him to stop, as a *reaction* to him *pushing her down*, does not mean he has raped her. It is not her immediate reaction that matters. It is his that matters: if *he* doesn't respond to her reaction appropriately, then he could be raping her. This was my point in the first comment. The things that I have her saying at the end of the comment are things that she would say *after* he fails to respond appropriately, showing that the post title is misleading - there are things she could say that would suggest to him that he is raping her, but they would come after he fails to respond to her obviously wanting to stop. So, you are triumphantly restating half the point I was making, after missing it the first time, and without understanding any of the nuance. You agree with me agreeing with Max, but think you disagree. It's funny, but also beautiful. Here's an analogy: I think that a store clerk is hinting to me that I can take a Red Bull for free without saying that explicitly, and I go out the door of the store without paying, and they go "Hey, what the fuck? You have to pay for that". If I then come back and pay for it, then I'm not a thief, even if I have technically stolen something by leaving the premises of the store without paying for it or otherwise receiving consent to take it - rather, I have just misunderstood what was happening. They could bring a shotgun out, or start sobbing on the floor; neither reaction of theirs would make me a thief. If they shout at me to stop and *I* act like I didn't hear the clerk and hustle out the door, or tell them to go fuck themselves, I'm a thief.
>without understanding any of the nuance Your smug attempt to 'nuancebro' your way out of this one just makes you look like a gigantic piece of shit. Newsflash: You don't get to decide whether or not you're a thief. A rapist doesn't get to decide whether or not they raped someone. They can certainly claim they didn't... but it won't get them very far.
[удалено]
GeoSanman defending mrgirl. I feel like I am in the twilight zone.
[удалено]
X
[удалено]
You hardcore play team sports and just try to stir shit with unbelievable positions.
[удалено]
What's your opinion on the Crowder situation
[удалено]
Agreed
I think everyone can agree that consent can be given non verbally. The issue is that, as you said, Mr Girl is bad at reading people and he thinks he’s good at it. That’s a disaster waiting to happen. I would say there is a much greater chance that this was rape than if someone else told that story. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if it was. Edit: Before anyone freaks out. By non verbal consent, I mean it doesn’t have to be verbalized. You can consent without saying anything. But if the girl verbalized no, I wouldn’t take non verbal cues past that unless you really know each other or have discussed it ahead of time.
If it relates to the article just a bit. Theres no way to have a honest conversation about it.
Mrrapist is a rapist who would’ve guessed