I won't be attending any Linux Foundation events he's involved in organising. If I'm running any events, I won't be inviting him.
LET'S SILENCE THEM BACK! Die in a fire.
From Ted Ts'o's stuff: There is a spectrum of what can be considered "rape". One of the things which I think is dishonest is when the loosest possible definition of rape is used when creating the statistics, but when it comes down to saying how horribly women are affected by rape, the worst possible scenario is used.
I must admit, that's a good point.
Not that I'm justifying miscommunication leading to sex; but I do characterize that as being different than being raped at gunpoint.
That's when you're wrong, it is the same thing. If the person keeps saying ,,no'' and/or slaps/punches you in the face, well, it's rape. If you used violence for coercion, it's rape and assault.
But miscommunication doesn't have the same emotional impact as **rape**, so guess which term people with an agenda use?
They're the same thing. The problem is with your definition; rape is defined as non-consensual sex. There is no violent coercion criterion involved, and just because some idiotic male-hating so-called ``feminists'' decided it would be a good idea to only portray/publicize the most heinous and violent cases of rape, that doesn't change the real definition of rape, much like the fact that many people who call themselves feminists are actually sexists doesn't change the real definition either.