Side eyee's Topics (11)

Right. If you don't like it then stop reading it?? If you didn't like it why did you finish it? Like erm.

People criticise porn all the time and it's not wrong to do that considering the weird ideas some men have of women and sex because of it.

Also this is litch a comment section, people start reading, have thoughts about it and want to express it in the comment section and I really don't see a problem with that. Not everyone is going to have the same opinion and that's why comment sections are nice, for me anyway.

frfr like the cover itself applies what type of audience its aiming for.. why do ppl just read it and critize like it aint fy if it aint.

Ik this is like a whole month ago(completely forgot that I made this and a few other comments) but I just wanted to make a quick reply. Firstly, I find counterproductive to criticise porn for being...you know...porn. Porn is just fantasy in the context of physically pleasuring yourself- there are things to critique about the porn INDUSTRY and its ethics, just not porn being hyperrealism material. Also, on the topic with men's view on women and sex...whilst there is an overlap, it's mostly coincidental. Like, men creating/consuming porn=/=they only view women intimate objects, especially porn that's drawn and written. I promise you, just because some man likes making porn, especially women in submissive situations, that doesn't mean he's a sexist- again, it can overlap but they're more mutually exclusive than most people think.

Secondly, if you consume something, critique it but disregard context- then no, I don't want to hear other people's opinions because it lacks understanding of a certain to the point of criticising it's purpose. That's like criticising the book Lolita for containing CSA themes, even though that's the whole point. At that point that's just people being dumb and obtuse on purpose- to that I say not everyone needs to share their opinion.

I'm not saying male targeted het manhwa porn is immune from criticism, but complaining that it had big tit female characters is so dumb to me.

lmfao probably not

If you don’t see rape then you lack common sense.
You are forcing your pov.
You are the one who needs to seek professional help if you can’t handle the truth or other POV. You can’t go in real life like this.

https://www.mangago.zone/home/mangatopic/14214000/

Take your own advice because you can’t be civil. You have to insult others for a pov. That would be another reason to seek professional help.

If you can’t be civil. It is a waste of time.
You can see rape but stop the insults because someone sees the truth and has a different POV.

There is no rape in this story. I will in a civil conversation. No arguments. No debates.
Explain why.

We can talk about this professionally and you can tell me your pov.
I will not see this story as rape as we see the truth.

However, the insults and attacks needs to stop. The harassment needs to stop.

No one is forcing you to change your pov. Stop forcing your pov on us.

Literally side eye.

See your pov or lack common sense.

There is no rape in this story. What is this about no sa? Why are you lying?

This story is SA and abuse.
I don’t think anyone said SA isn’t shown. I have said it over and over again. Tora has said it.

You can see rape. Stop forcing your pov on others. Stop lying.

https://florinroebig.com/sexual-assault-guide/

“ Rape is a form of sexual assault. However, not all forms of sexual assault will be considered rape. ”

Eminem, Coercion is not consent you shrek looking mf. Just say you're into rape stories and move on.

I read rape stories. This is not a rape story.

This is a Disney type story.

Here are stories with rape.

Hogu Hagyeongsu - rape
Kiraide Isasete - rape (maybe this one should be removed)
Caste haven - rape
Mob for Jack - rape
Maki-chan wa Kare to Sex Shitai - rape
falling alpha enigma the fourth bath - rape
harami bara - rape
abarenbo_honey - rape
Under grand hotel - rape

You have your opinion, I have my opinion. Stick to yours, I stick to mine. Don't attack and inject insults into people just because they don't agree with you.

Instead of being immature why don't you give your points on why it is rape?

No one lacks common sense but YOU for failing to point out facts and allow people to understand you. Thanks.

u literally just proved my point- u and many others lack common sense. So for me to make u understand my point better i'll turn it into a peel paragraph.

In 'Jinx', there is an excessive amount of SA and rape, predominantly shown at the very beginning of the manhwa. Firstly, we are introduced to Dan who is a SA survivor who is uncomfortable with the very concept of sex due to a traumatic experience when at work with a higher up whilst also the fact that he is of someone from a lower social class in Korea- he lives below the poverty line making him an extremely vulnerable individual that actually contributes to the severity of a rape case. In chapter 3, Jaekyung, who at this point is Dan's patient, asks Dan late at night to come to his house to prepare him for a match the next day- at this point Dan doesn't know what Jaekyung really means so he is met at a discomfort when Jaekyung begs for sex in exchange for money and at this point Dan was to scared to give in because he's uncomfortable having sex because obviously he hasn't recovered from SA yet even when he agrees, he's still not interested and tries to stall time but Jaekyung just happily does whatever he wants without consideration. This situation would be easily classified as rape as Jaekyung, someone of a higher social class is taking advantage of someone from that of a lower class than him even though it's clear that Dan does not want it at all but has to because of his situation but even then he shows behaviour of not wanting it and Jaekyung not caring about how Dan feels even though again he doesn't want to go through it but Jaekyung just forces himself on Dan and does whatever he wants and we clearly see that Dan is in pain and wants him to stop and literally telling him that. One thing many people don't really understand about rape is that it's not just someone forcing themselves on another person, it's simply as both parties not wanting it equally. For example, treating sex like an unwarranted transaction- it's literally stated in the website u linked me if actually read it properly; "Force can also be when one person coerces another with emotional or psychological force"- taking advantage of one's financial situation or using materialistic goods would be an example of this, rape is a deeper situation than u might think same as many others so please actually do ur research I beg, but till then I still gonna say people like u lack common sense.

Have a goodnight

read my response to tmsmyz, it's a long paragraph but u should it cause like I said u people lack common sense.

Rape is more than just forcing someone down but both parties not equally wanting sex, and the one party not being considerate of the other party's feelings when the party is not at all interested in having sex. this is literally shown in chapter 3&4 so just do ur research- until then i'm still gonna say u people lack common sense

Be respectful to others. Stop forcing your pov on others.
If you think it is rape stop degrading the other side. We can be civil. Seek professional help if you think harming others is entertaining.

It is not your pov or be lack common sense. You can’t be civil and have a conversation with us. You feel threatened your pov is challenging.

“ u literally just proved my point- u and many others lack common sense. So for me to make u understand my point better i'll turn it into a peel paragraph.”

I literally didn’t proved anything. And if it is your pov or lack common sense I am not reading anymore cyber bullying comments. You are added to my list and blocked.

Your opinion is irrelevant due to cyber bullying. There is no rape in this story. Rape is your pov. Have common sense and respect others. We could had been civil and has a conversation. But you harassed and insulted. You lost.

Read my comment first.

Hey, I'm coming. I'm gathering my points. Don't think I don't have a comeback. Just a minute. Thanks.

Sweetie, for your own good please just block them. You can say the sky is blue and they'll still argue about that. You wrote very valid points in this but you just can't communicate with a wall after all. <3

Do you think it is worth it?
TMSM considered them of the cyber bullies/ Trolls.
The use of Dan’s background information and social class was used.
The use of Dan’s traumatic attempt rape ignoring how Dan acted and not comparing Dan’s actions.
The use of Dan’s thoughts and feelings.
The use of higher/lower class.


.”Jaekyung begs for sex” begs?

“Jaekyung just happily does whatever he wants without consideration. “ doesn’t read carefully

“
This situation would be easily classified as rape as Jaekyung,” opinion

I”t's clear that Dan does not want it at all”. Is it to Joo?

“Jaekyung not caring about how Dan feels”. Completely misses chapter 4 when Dan is crying. this

“Jaekyung just forces himself on Dan and does whatever he wants”. Can I this version of this story? This is biased.
“we clearly see that Dan is in pain and wants him to stop and literally telling him that.” Key word WE.

I am a rape crisis counselor. The one thing about rape that was added was unnecessary here to say to TMSM.

I see a person biased in opinion, using facts that is irrelevant to make a point, taking the story out of context, making Jaekyung worst than he is, and degrading others who don’t see this as rape.

“if actually read it properly;” This only fit one scene. Jaekyung never “took advantage of one's financial situation or using materialistic goods.”

This is a deeper story than they think and if They actually do research and read the story they would understand it is not rape. By using Dan’s thoughts and background with other irrelevant facts that is not known to Jaekyung or if you were in the room then taken it out of context. They know they have no argument. That was a biased opinion piece.

Consented can be give and take away. It can be given and taken away not once but multiple times.


“it hurts Stop don’t …..” and at that moment makes it rape! I thought it was rape on my first reading than I read chapter 4
In chapter 4, Joo STOPS because he is CONCERNED.
“Are you crying over that? I barely put it in. “
“No, that’s not why, you just startled me”
Dan could had said he wanted to stop. He could had said I don’t want to. He did not. To Joo or anyone that would be a green light. Joo could had asked but he is toxic.
Dan says “no I can do it.” right after. He consented again.

He says “no” again. He stopped consented. Joo stopped if you pay attention.
Joo started without asking this is when we learn he thinks he is with an experience man and not an inexperienced virgin (but inexperienced virgin is details from thought bubbles). Joo is clueless because most men would had know at that point.
Joo starts again. Dan will ask him to go a little gentler.
Dan consented again.
FYI: I am straight man who was asked to analyze this by a friend. I am a rape crisis counselor. This story is toxic. I have no opinion about it. Just before you made weird arguments to justify your pov.

Just facts.

I'm going to ignore your unsightly comment in the first paragraph. That was rather unnecessary and thoughtless.

Anyway, my points;

I completely get what you're saying, hundred percent understand. I understand that consent can never be when it is coerced. Very true. I understand was rape is but it is NOT in this story. How?

You are forgetting that Dan LIED that he was experienced. That is also a loss on his part. In chapter 2, jk lured Dan to come to his home which was wrong and I admit, I'm not defending the guy. Dan found out that jk was gay for sleeping with men and when the whore insulted jk, jk smashed the guy’s head because he doesn't play with his jinx and the championship. And then jk led Dan to his room and analyses Dan. I'm sure in his mind and his expression at that moment, he thought dan was attractive. When Dan starts with the physical therapy, Jk explains to Dan about his jinx and Dan found that embarrassing but he didn't judge the guy. Until jk admits that he wants SEX with Dan. That's when Dan freaks out entirely. Dan refuses saying he couldn't do such that he was here for only the therapy then jk gets blunt with the whole situation and it triggers Dan to rethink over jk’s offer. Jk was calm, his intention wasn't to threaten him and i confirmed it from here when he says,

“I guess you don't need that 5,000 grand then.” Jk goes to grab his phone to call one of his other whores he can fuck to replace Dan. Dan then rethinks and finally decides to accept the offer because money was all he needed.

Mind you, JK did NOT know about the financial situation Dan was in. This point proves Dan consented the first time without any form of THREAT or COERCION.

Note: an agreement is an agreement, backing out is annoying especially when you and your partner had already concluded.

-chapter 3, By the time Dan agrees, jk asks Dan if he has experience, he didn't have to lie but he chose to, why? Because it was embarrassing to admit that he was a virgin at such age? No. He said it not with that intention, but just to lie( read it carefully) And Jk says,

“Since you're experienced, I guess I don't need to go EASY on you then”

That's when the roughness starts and Dan says “One second!” and jk DID stop(this also proves that he isn't inhuman and does cares about dan’s feelings-also proves he's not a rapist). Dan then says he needs to wash off the oil from him or something(cant remember). In the showers, Dan rethinks and starts to have second thoughts-after he had agreed? He knew jk would have found that quite annoying and the fact that he had consented first was also a dead one on his part. Jk then forces Dan out of the bathroom because he was in the bath for over an hour and it was quite late for jk to be having sex presuming he had to sleep well and be lively for the match. Dan knew this, HE is NOT a child.

Dan sees jk’s massive size and starts freaking out and simply says “I can't do it” and in his thoughts he also said “if he puts that thing inside me, I might die” which is understandable. Jk gets annoyed because they had come this far and says out of annoyance, “you think this is funny? You think I'm some sort of joke? If you waste my time like that last guy did don't expect to be sent home safe and sound” Jk’s intention was never to threaten him. He simply needed a fuck and Dan was being weird and unserious about it when he had agreed. Jk found that extremely annoying because he doesn't play with his jinx and dan was simply wasting his time especially when he had said that he was experienced.

Dan feels threatened but you can't say “Jk threatened and forced Dan” look at the expressions of them carefully in that chapter and then analyse the dialogues. Dan then says in his thoughts, “Right, I had already agreed. I can do this. It's the money afterall” He consented a second time and says “ but if you just put it in like that I think it's going to tear” and jk considers this, sighs and tells him “you can get yourself ready then” another point that proves he isn't a rapist.

He even adds “ This is your last chance, no more Mr nice guy after this” He specifies that it was Dan’s last chance and he even decides to add again, “If even this is too much for you, then just GET THE FUCK OUT.”

Lmao.

That is another point that proves that he notified and made Dan aware of it, he gacmve dan an opportunity to leave that specific moment but no, Dan still chose to stay because of the MONEY. Thank you, thank you very much.

When dan finally consents, jk adds, “You tell me to put it in and then clench up so tight I can't even do it.” Another point that proves he isn't a rapist. Dan lied that he was experienced and jk was unaware of the lie.

He even adds, “You think this is funny, don't say one thing and then do another.” My God how do you people not see this?

Jk then pushes in completely which leaves dan shaken, jk notices how dan was shaking and turns the guy to see he was crying and then says, “What the...are you crying? Over that? I barely even put it in.” All his sex partners must have been experienced, so he clearly assumed that Dan would also take it well.

Dan himself then says, “N-no, that's not...why...y-you just...startled me.” That was what dan said and jk says “Good grief” Another point that he is in fact considerate and doesn't does what he wants. He even adds with a neutral expression, “Youre not gonna start whining again, are you?” he said this not in a way to mock him but to be sure that he was okay.

And then dan says, “ n-no I can do this” and jk does his rough behaviour because Dan was sulking and it was making Jk annoyed and anxious, jk then drags Dan by the hair and says, “then at least breath properly” another point that he cares for the dude and has human sympathy. But he was still oblivious to the way Dan was trying to endure. He didn't know.

Just because it looks like it, doesn't mean it is. An action can look like rape and the next changes it completely. It might look like it but their dialogues, expressions and reactions changes it entirely.

I hope we can finally understand each other. And know that, assuming Dan did not lie that he was experienced, we all know things could have turned out differently because I mean why did jk ask Dan in the first place if he was experienced? He wanted to know if he could treat him like one of his whores and dan gave that consent so he has face it and take it because he approved of it just because of the money.

Jk did not coerce Dan, look at it from his part and understand both of their povs. The reason why you all are seeing jk as a monster is because most of it is in Dan’s pov.

Jk has helped dan in many ways, paid all his debts, accompanies and even has a gist with his grandma thereby making a good talk with her, he saves Dan from those Loan sharks( the real rapists), he allows dan to live in his house, he feeds and let's him have all he wants and all he asked for and needed was sex, NOT RAPE.

Anyone who isn't able to understand this points clearly has a disability in reading and understanding a context.

Thanks, please give your points to oppose, thanks for your patience.

Maybe. I hope so

I really hope you read everything through, I just want to understand you. I swear it. I'm not a rape apologist, no one is here and any one who is should seek help immediately. No one is defending jk, jk is just an asshole NOT a rapist.

Please let's understand each other professionally thanks.

I have not read the new comments. I forgot to add

Rape is not sex. Joo wants sex. If you think rape is sex. Seek professional help now.

There are a few rape apologists. The ones deny Rose is a rape survivor.

The ones that deny her being one- do need to seek help.

Who is defending JK? They claim that but I have not seen anyone defend him.

Ohh I can identify them. Such terrible people.

Also be aware that Dan doesn't even VOICE his thoughts leaving jk oblivious.

Thank you! And good day!

"Dan doesn't voice his thoughts

You read rape stories
Wtf

Just because she reads rape stories doesn't mean she acknowledges it or sees it as okay.

if you read carefully, they continue to state that the people don't have commkn sense for NOT seeing the sa/rape.

you need to read it.


Thank you! And good day!

If you read carefully, he understood. That makes me doubt your abilities.
Look at his first sentence: “see your pov (rape/SA) or lack common sense”. We have NEVER said anything about it is not SA. It is SA.

You need to read carefully.
On your other comments I can’t respond too. Your points don’t make them wrong. Your points show you need to read the read the dialogue and scenes better. Did he forget or is it you. Your points don’t make you right. Your pov don’t make you right.
Saying we lack common sense for not seeing rape don’t make you right. Saying see rape or lack common sense doesn’t make you right.

This whole war is just people who lack common sense trying to terribly convince people that it's rape when it really is not:

"beg?"- yes he did beg because Dan was. clear that he didn't want it but Joo insisted in exchange of money.

"doesn’t read carefully"- if u read carefully and didn't lack comprehension skills, u would know that Joo is very aggressive and Dan shows clearly that he despises it.

"opinion"- Literally the law classifies that as rape

"Is it to Joo? "- No it's to the reader to demonstrate how inconsiderate Joo was to Dan. He didn't care nor even realise that he was hurting Dan more so because he took advantage of him- which is rape

"Completely misses chapter 4 when Dan is crying. "- Yh Dan cries and is in peak distress and all Joo does is ask him, "are u crying?" with distaste look on his face and even though Dan just brushes it of, we as readers are meant to understand that Dan is lying to himself for the sake of his safety in that moment, contributing to Joo hurting Dan as he somehow doesn't realise but it's clear and instead continuing and even threatening him.

"This is biased"- no ur just a dumbass end of

"Key word WE."- Exactly, WE know that Dan is in pain and wants it to and it's extremely clear however Joo doesn't realise because he doesn't care how Dan feels but instead just want to take advantage of him.

"I am a rape crisis counselor."- Ok that don't tell me
shit because a social worker and the LAW would disagree with ur view.

"This only fit one scene."- No it's multiple but even if it was one scene, that confirms that rape is in the manhwa and Joo is a terrible human being.

"Jaekyung never “took advantage of one's financial situation or using materialistic goods.”"- he did because he's rich or of a higher social class who uses money to get sex out of average people/everyday person simply due to that money is essential, it's need to afford basic essentials for everyone but because of this the value of money can heighten due to one's situation, for example, Dan.

If u actually did ur research as an apparent Rape crisis councillor, u would know rape comes in many forms, for example, Dan's first experience with Joe.

Which is why I say u people lack common sense and are complete dumbasses with ur shitty argument but i'll give u credit for trying.

Have a goodnight

If people like that can become rape crisis councillors then I can become a mathematician.

Guys that person is not real, ain't no way it isn't a troll or a social study in the making lmao
I refuse to believe someone as deluded as that exist and knows how to use the internet

Cool story, bro. Opinions. Misusing words. Shows lacking comprehension skills. Law wouldn’t be: they would throw it out before it got to court. You should you don’t care about the story or gave a carefully honest read. It is biased. With false assumptions to back your opinion.
You are talking about yourself. You are forcing your pov with the financial situation. Pathetic. You are just trying to degrade me because I don’t share your fee-fees.

If you have to lie about the story or force a pov. You lost. If you have to attack me and insult me. You lost.

If you want to have a constructive debate with someone, the last thing you want to do is to insult them or resort to name calling because that usually makes your opponent go into attack or defensive mode and from that point on, anything you say is considered invalid in their mind. If you want to convince someone you’re right, calling them an rape apologist or saying their opinion is something the should seek professional help on isn’t the way to do it.

These people resort to name-calling and attacks because they lost, and they know it. They have no more logical arguments and are now just hoping that name calling and attacks will get them favourable opinions from their party. Because they are full of ego, childish, impulsive, and self centered. People have become outrageously defensive and aggressive in our culture.

On some level they know they have lost and are upset about it. They know they can’t win the debate with logic. When people have no rational arguments, they resort to ad hominem attacks.
people who resort to emotional attacks throw the other person or persons off balance. If the other person fights back emotionally, the original person quickly uses that to say they can't discuss it anymore because ther other person has gotten emotional. Using emotions is a coward's manipulative move.

Then they lost at being able to control themselves or take criticism. They got upset and returned those insults thinking it would have the same results but failed. Monkey see, monkey do. They failed to see the results were not the same. They lost as soon as they misused rape apologist.
Thanks for sharing your lost. Have a good day
.

It MUST be a troll. I also refuse to believe people with this type of mindset actually exist.

They talk about wanting to be civil, but when people DO converse, they still call you delusional, say you're a troll, a coward amongst other things, say you're attacking them, make themself out to be the victim, and always say we're 'forcing our opinion on them' when really, they are.
And I STILL haven't seen good reasons to prove that there isn't multiple accounts of SA and rape in this story.

They keep saying "we lost" when the only thing we lost was our time arguing and braincells dealing with them.
Besides, this ain't a ball game bro? There is no win or lose, it's a fking petty online argument. Imagine being so insecure you have to say you 'won' an online argument to feel good. Besides, if they thought we were always trolls...why'd they go out of their way to respond? lmao

OH im sure that mingwa had so much planned for the story. But it IS rape. How much more does it need to be spelled out for you? What would YOU consider to be rape, if not half the story we have so far.

You are very right. To explain it in more simple terms: It's called coercive rape. The people in your replies are ridiculous.

I’m puzzled why Sazz revived a discussion from last year unless it was to provoke trouble.

I read the topic.
It seems at first, Side Eye was misled by gaslighting and strawman arguments, as nobody was claiming there’s no sexual assault or rape in "Jinx." I am not so sure by the end of the conversation.

Tmsmyz (TM) was trying to address misunderstandings and have a real conversation about the topic. Despite his efforts over several months (during that time), TM faced harassment from some individuals and was not given a fair chance to discuss the matter. Unfortunately, many dismissed TM’s contributions without fully understanding or engaging with their comments. It really showed here.

let's drive in:

*TM’s First Comment: TM aimed to clarify the difference between rape and sexual assault, noting that while "Jinx" portrays sexual assault, it may not fit the definition of rape. TM stressed the importance of understanding these distinctions and not imposing a single viewpoint. They provided factual information to support their perspective, showing acceptance of various opinions while arguing that "Jinx" does not depict rape. Noted: he allows for the pov of rape even though it is not.

Mikaela’s Initial Comment: Mikaela’s response was hostile and inflammatory, using personal attacks rather than addressing the discussion's substance. Insults like “shrek looking mf” and accusations of having a preference for rape stories undermine productive dialogue and can be seen as bullying. This approach misrepresents TM’s position through strawman arguments and focuses on personal attacks rather than addressing the points about the story.

TM’s Second Comment: TM clarified that "Jinx" resembles a Disney-type narrative rather than toxic stories that are worse. They listed other stories where rape is depicted and later in other topics mentioned their personal aversion to such narratives to where he will drop stories or will only read them once.

ManhwaSpicy (MS) First Comment: MS promoted respectful discourse and encouraged Side Eye to present their arguments constructively rather than resorting to insults. They emphasized the need for diverse opinions to be expressed without derogatory comments.

Side Eye’s Comments: Side Eye aggressively defended their interpretation of "Jinx" with intensity, focusing on their view of sexual assault and rape. Their comments involved personal attacks and did not accurately reflect the story’s events.

TM’s Third Comment: TM continued to advocate for respectful communication and warned against imposing personal perspectives on others. They stressed the need for civility and suggested seeking professional help if someone finds pleasure in causing harm.

Mikaela’s Second Comment: Mikaela’s response was dismissive and condescending, belittling the efforts to communicate and resolve differences. They used strawman arguments to misrepresent the targets' positions, distorting and exaggerating their viewpoints.

Tora’s Initial Comments: Tora provided a detailed analysis, emphasizing the importance of understanding the full context of "Jinx." They argued that Side Eye’s interpretation did not align with a comprehensive understanding of the characters and narrative, aiming to clarify the story’s complexity.

MS’s Subsequent Comments: MS dismissed unnecessary remarks and focused on substantive points. They discussed the importance of consent. MS offered a detailed breakdown of specific interactions and emphasized a nuanced understanding of the story’s events and characters.

Tora’s Third and Fourth Comments: Tora highlighted the distinction between rape and consensual sex, emphasizing that rape involves power and control. Tora criticized those who deny Rose’s status as a rape survivor and challenged those defending Jaekyung.

MS’s Sixth and Seventh Comments: MS noted that Dan’s thoughts are not explicitly voiced, which could lead to misinterpretations of Jaekyung’s actions and Jaekyung misunderstanding the situation. Both Tora and MS engaged in discussion together without attacking others, aiming to clarify misunderstandings.

Aphroditis’s Comment: Aphroditis interacted with TM but did not fully grasp TM’s points. MS effectively managed this situation. By this point TM already left the conversation.

BeloveRose’s Comment: BeloveRose highlighted the deep divide in interpretations regarding sexual assault and rape in "Jinx," stressing the importance of careful reading and respectful discussion.

Side Eye’s Third Comment: This response was aggressive and relied on ad hominem attacks, dismissing and falsely accusing Tora.

Mikaela’s Third Comment: Mikaela’s response was sarcastic and aimed at discrediting Tora.

Anonyzz’s Comment: Anonyzz should reflect on their own beliefs, as their dismissive stance towards others with similar views questions the sincerity of their opinions which should lead to questing their own.

Tora’s Final Comment: Tora rejected Side Eye’s interpretation of the story as rape, critiqued their debate tactics, and defended their perspective.

Sir Donewithyoshit: Admitted to being a troll around this time in another topic, did not contribute constructively, using gaslighting and strawman arguments against the genuine contributors. The only real conversation that happen here is with Tora, TM, And MS.
They misunderstand "you lose" bit. They have never said they won or claimed a victory.
To clarify that when they mentioned "you lose," it wasn't about claiming victory in the debate but rather indicating a breakdown in constructive conversation. The use of insults and attacks, in their view, signifies a loss in the ability to engage in meaningful dialogue.

In conclusion, those who believe the story depicts rape are attacking those who argue otherwise or seek a reasoned conversation. They employ insults, strawman arguments, gaslighting, and deflections instead of engaging in a factual discussion. On the other hand, the genuine contributors (TM, Tora, MS, Rose) have tried to present evidence and reasoned arguments. This debate highlights a broader issue in online discussions about sensitive topics, where aggressive tactics can undermine meaningful dialogue.

It shows the targets have allowed people to believe it is rape and they are not fighting. They left this conversation when it was all personal attacks.

I love that sazz bumped this but it shows how much effort the targets made to have a conversations but was attacked. So being factual, objective reporting, being an adult is not ridiculous. They are not ridiculous for being grounded in reasonable interpretation or analysis. What is ridiculous is how much people do to force people into their own interpretations even when they know they are wrong. TM and the other tagets have genuinely attempted to engage in a conversation. The others here are imposing and forcing their opinions with ad hominems.

Key Points:

**Sazz’s Role:

Position: Sazz believes the story depicts coercive rape and criticizes those who disagree.
Behavior: Attacks and insults those with differing opinions, deflects from the discussion by labeling others as ridiculous.


**TM’s Contributions:
Comments: TM tries to clarify distinctions between rape and sexual assault, emphasizing the importance of understanding these differences. He provides factual information and strives for a constructive discussion. He is fighting "see rape/sa or lack common sense".

Subsequent Comments: Continues to advocate for respectful dialogue and correct understanding, despite facing hostility and misunderstanding.


**MS’s Approach:

Comments: MS encourages respectful discourse and detailed analysis, aiming to address the nuances of consent and coercion in the story. They provide a thoughtful examination of the characters' interactions and the overall narrative.


**Side Eye’s Behavior:

Comments: Side Eye passionately and aggressively defends their interpretation of the story as involving sexual assault and rape. They use personal attacks and aggressive language, which detracts from the discussion.


**Mikaela’s Comments:

Behavior: Mikaela uses hostile and inflammatory language, resorting to personal attacks and dismissive remarks rather than engaging with the substance of the debate.


**Tora’s Contributions:

Comments: Provides a detailed analysis of the story, emphasizing the importance of understanding context and character motivations. Tora challenges biases and misinterpretations, advocating for a factual discussion.


Additional Interactions:

**Eddie and Sazz: Both resort to dismissive and attacking behavior, further polarizing the discussion.


**Sir Donewithyoshit: Admits to trolling and does not contribute constructively to the debate.


Summary of the Debate Dynamics
Targets’ Approach (TM, Tora, MS): These individuals strive to engage in a meaningful and respectful dialogue. They present reasoned arguments and seek to clarify misunderstandings about the narrative and its depiction of sexual assault and rape.

Noted they even tried when they were being ganged up on and treated people like they were humans when they were treated like garbage. They are not ridiculous. How they have been treated has been ridiculous.

Aggressors’ Approach (Sazz, Side Eye, Mikaela, Eddie): The aggressors primarily use insults, personal attacks, and deflections. Their approach undermines constructive dialogue and shifts the focus away from factual discussion to emotional and personal confrontations.

The amount of time wasted writing this biased paragraph lmao

I wasted no time with writing objective comments. My aim has been to provide a clear and objective analysis of the situation. It's not productive to label objective reporting as 'biased' without specific evidence. The real issue seems to be a refusal to engage with the analysis provided. An insult to degrade others with lies is wasted time.

It is biased you labeled "agressors" those who are clearly seeing the story for what it is, a rapist and his victim, and you were pratically kissing the boots of those trying to act as if rape had a deeper meaning here. You said no one was saying there wasn't any rape ? Please who are you trying to fool ? The same people you were praising are literally acting as if the desperate penniless guy who got coerced into giving his body to save his grandma, his only family left, isn't being raped because he signed a contract when he was at rock bottom and had no other choices.

The ones that clearly see the story for what it is are the targets. The aggressors are labeled as such based on their actions.

This means Safety didn’t label you; you labeled yourself as an aggressor. One thing Safety did was put comment after comment into ChatGPT, which is a neutral and objective tool. ChatGPT can identify ad hominems, derogatory remarks, and aggression. There is no bias in the labeling; it is based on behavior. There is no praising either.

Using strawman arguments and misrepresenting others' comments only detracts from a fair and constructive discussion. It's important to address the facts and support arguments with evidence without resorting to personal attacks or exaggerations. The focus should be on understanding the nuances of the situation and engaging respectfully.

Dan was not raped. He was not coerced. Dan had a choice, just as you do. You choose to use strawman arguments and lie about people who have never downplayed Dan’s abuse. They use facts and distinguish between terms. They supported their selves. They are not giving an opinion.

You are using strawman arguments against the targets to make them look bad, treating them poorly, not listening to them, and presenting the story with inaccurate details. You have undermined the targets' points and safety points with ChatGPT. The terms “aggressors” and “targets” are used based on observed behaviors and actions. No one is being unfairly labeled without consideration of their actions and the context provided. Your behaviors and actions prove Safety right, showing you as an aggressor who can’t handle facts or other perspectives on your own.

You blocked Woomb, right? As you said you were?
You were right—they came back with more of their agenda, harming the targets. I couldn't help but laugh when they claimed you praised their targets. I rolled my eyes at their attempt to provoke an emotional response with that strawman argument. They're trying to make the targets look bad for not seeing the abuse as rape, even though they acknowledge it as sexual abuse, sexual coercion, and non-consensual acts. The targets aren't downplaying the abuse, but Woomb is changing the details to make it seem worse and to make the targets look worse. It's just the same petty nonsense.
On a side note.
I called you safety in my last comment. I thought you kept that with a your new name change. lol. I was wrong.

Omg OP could you pretty please come here and block this weird ass cult of rape apoligists (⊙…⊙ ) Or better, just edit your comment and then block them, so that none of us will have to suffer seeing their ridiculous attempt at patting themselves on the shoulder for bullshit like this lol.
PS to all of you weirdos : I know you're all either friends either only one incredible lowlife playing on all these accounts, thanks for giving more of your alts, hope it's the last one.

They came back with another attack.
They're misusing "rape apologist" to attack their targets, cheapening the value of that term.

The real "cult" is the group they're part of, and they're deflecting blame. Facts and objective reporting are being misrepresented, and their name-calling shows immaturity and a lack of valid arguments. This is more proof they're aggressors using strawman arguments to attack others who are standing with facts and evidence not just opinions. Facts > opinions.
Woomb is showing how abusive they are.

From a friend showing the ones that using rape apologist on the targets are just a part of a cult that is misusing the term and cheapening the value of that word.
The targets are not rape apologist more manipulative tactics from that cult woomb is a part of and more proof they are the aggressors who can’t handle the facts or different perspectives.

https://www.shatteringthesilence.org/blog/identifying-a-rape-apologist#:~:text=%E2%80%9CRape%20Apologist%E2%80%9D%20is%20an%20umbrella,race%2C%20ethnicity%2C%20or%20age.
```
None of this fits to the targets. It does fit to some of the hate group aka the real cult.


Identifying A Rape Apologist
“Rape Apologist” is an umbrella term for someone who for someone who blames survivors, has a general disbelief in allegations of assault, and participates in the normalization of sexual violence. They can be any person of any gender identity, sexuality, race, ethnicity, or age. While the term make evoke an image of a particular group or type of person, in reality, anyone can be a rape apologist. A rape apologist is not just someone who is outwardly aggressive towards survivors who speak out or someone who makes sexually harassing comments, they are also someone who is apathetic or tolerant towards sexual violence. One either participates in upholding or dismantling rape culture.



Reluctant to Believe Survivors
When they hear about allegations of sexual assault, they immediately ask for proof and claim that the perpetrator is "innocent until proven guilty.”

Why is this a problem? Immediately demanding proof demonstrates that one has an inherent disbelief of survivors and needs to be proven otherwise. While innocent until proven guilty is a good method for our legal system, it is not supposed to be a tool that we rely on in order to demonstrate our support for survivors. Most survivors do not report, and most of those that do report do not get their day in court to prove that the perpetrator is guilty.



Making Excuses
When they or a friend get accused of inappropriate behavior, they shrug it off, downplay it, and insist that the person who committed the act is a good person.

Why is this a problem? No form of sexual violence should be downplayed or ignored and all survivor experiences are valid. Additionally, part of breaking down rape culture is understanding that anyone can be capable of sexual violence; there is no quality that someone can have that absolves them of any guilt. Someone can be a good person to you and be abusive towards someone else.



Definition of Consent
They have a distorted view on how to give and receive consent and deny that certain behaviors are sexually abusive.

Why is this a problem? Someone cannot participate in dismantling rape culture if they do not know what behaviors are wrong. Not only will not understanding consent result in sexual violence, but it will cause them to be dismissive towards acts of sexual violence they hear disclosed.



False Allegation Panic
They wrongly believe that false allegations are a serious threat to them or others and overestimate the prevalence of false allegations, resulting in an inability to provide support to survivors.

Why is this a problem? It is false. False reports are extremely rare. Widely reported statistics put the estimated number of falsely reported assaults at 2-10%. But even this is an overestimation, because a rape has to be reported first in order to be considered falsely reported, and 90-95% of survivors do not report their assault. Therefore, that statistic only applies to 5-10% of assaults, putting the real statistic closer to .5% of disclosures of assault (Heaney 2018).



Reactivity
They get more upset about allegations that they believe are false than allegations that are proven to be true.

Why is this a problem? As mentioned above, false allegations are extremely rare and it is statistically unlikely that a survivor who is disclosing to you is not telling the truth. When someone gets more angry about allegations that they suspect are false than they do over true and proven acts of sexual violence, it demonstrates that they find false allegations of sexual assault worse than sexual assault itself. In reality, sexual violence is a pervasive and undeniable fact that plagues all societies around the world and the extremely low rate of false accusations does not compare in its social impact.



Victim-blaming
They engage in typical victim-blaming behaviors such as asking whether the survivor was drinking or what they were wearing.

Why is this a problem? Victim-blaming is essentially telling survivors that they took actions to deserve or expect their assault. No survivor EVER deserves or invites sexual assault. Engaging in this behavior demonstrates that one finds victims more responsible for their assault than the assailant.



Distorted Views of Sexual Violence
Their understanding of sexual assault does not go much farther than the dark alley stranger stereotype. they have a hard time believing sexual assault that occurs between partners.

Why is this a problem? Sexual violence rarely happens in the ways it is potrayed in the media and almost always involves someone that the survivor knows.



Objectifying Others
They overly sexualize people around them and make inappropriate comments to the person's face or behind their back.

Why is this a problem? This is sexual harassment, which is a form of sexual violence.



Do Not Employ a Zero Tolerance Policy
They continue to associate themselves with friends and acquaintances who have allegations of sexual violence. Additionally, they continue to support celebrities who have allegations against them. They continue to surround themselves with these abusers even after the allegations have been proven. While they may state that they are trying to remain neutral, neutrality only benefits those who are causing harm, not receiving it.

Why is this a problem? Survivors often cannot rely on the traditional justice system to hold the assailant accountable. As a result, they rely on social justice from their friends, family, and peers to hold them accountable by denouncing the behavior on a zero tolerance policy. Sexual violence is never okay and it can never be swept under the rug.

Misusing “rape apologist” to attack their targets cheapens the value of that term.


A rape apologist excuses, downplays, justifies rape, or blames the victim. None of the targets are doing that. However, some from the real cult harassing the targets are rape apologists, as they denied a rape survivor. Using “rape apologist” to attack others is a manipulative tactic that’s overused and misused. Some targets used reverse psychology to help the aggressors understand what they were doing. Aggressors like Woomb think the targets are ignoring the rape they see and dismissing the points and facts made.

Woomb misuses terms and lacks valid arguments, choosing to attack their targets instead of addressing the facts. This is why Woomb and their cult are the aggressors. They force everyone to see rape or be labeled with negative terms. The targets stand against this treatment and present evidence showing the validity of perspectives such as sexual assault or coercion but not rape. It’s for aggressors to understand that other perspectives are valid and that differing opinions shouldn’t be attacked.

The targets stand with facts, terms, and the actual story, while people like Woomb add details to make the story more toxic and spread more hate. This behavior raises questions about their motives. If Woomb is misrepresenting the story to elicit more hate, what does that say about them?

If the targets think Woomb is adding rape to make it more toxic, does that make Woomb a rapist? Using the same logic Woomb is using, the targets are not calling anyone a rapist but trying to wake up the abusive cult members who misuse and overuse manipulative tactics. But they are going up against facts and the actual story.

Also, if Woomb’s perspective is similar to their targets’ and they label the targets as rape apologists, what does that make Woomb? Their use of strawman arguments and abusive behavior suggests something worse.

This clarifies the manipulative tactics and logical inconsistencies in Woomb’s arguments that this hate group uses repeatedly. The targets are not rape apologists or weirdos for standing up to harassment or standing with facts and the actual story. This reveals Woomb’s insecurities from their immature and toxic behavior. Woomb is character assassinating themselves. It has never been about opinion versus opinion for the targets. They are standing up to allow all perspectives and fighting Woomb’s logic of “see rape or be a rape apologist.” That is wrong. Woomb is labeling people and their character based on their own opinion on a story and that is wrong. Woomb’s comments are showing more about Woomb and their character than their targets. Woomb has clearly shown they are the aggressor here and one that wants to hide the fact as this topic shows no one took time to understand the targets and only attack them to still attacking them a year later.
Tora and Rose deleted their accounts in November. TK has not responded since March.
They are still being attacked with gaslighting and strawman arguments. That is ridiculous.

Lmao keep yapping mate

I feel the same!