Oops. That information is NOT presented anywhere.

What I was thinking, and didn't say, is that legally there is no case.

Consent at the beginning is not consent at the end. A man can rape his wife. That wasn't possible for most of human history -- it is now.

So although there is plenty of evidence that she gave consent at the beginning -- video proof of consent -- that doesn't mean that he didn't do something later that the university looked at and said -- apparently, since they expelled him -- constituted sexual intercourse without consent.

How they arrived at that conclusion, we don't know. It is missing from what is reported here.

It is absolutely not clear to me that he is "clearly innocent".

Because a man can rape his wife. Right? Do you agree, @Mordhaus?

That lovely video showing that consent is like offering tea lays out the logic pretty clearly. Saying yes to tea at one point is not the same as saying yes to tea when you are passed out.

i am NOT saying that the university did the correct thing. I don't have any knowledge of what they based their decision to expel upon.

And nor does anyone here, as far as I can tell.

Just because it's not my cup of tea doesn't mean they do not have the right to express themselves within the law. I saw smiling faces, heard laughter and saw no tears. The reporter shed light on a segment of society that few have seen and for that I upvote.

During the harvest season the narrow roads up there are packed with people going to get the tea for themselves, because no one trust stores elsewhere that often repackage other teas as Royal Dragon Tea. Just about anytime of year the place is loaded with hundreds of weddings in and around West Lake. They should really consider freeing White Snake.

Your video, Making an International Standard Cup of Tea, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 11 Badge!

One of Jordan Peterson's claims, that the left has settled into higher ed and wants to shutdown debate in favor of indoctrination, is openly on display in the video. All 3 staff from Wilfrid Laurier state it as contrary to the university environment to present a debate on use of pronouns, or to allow the subject to be debated, save that student's are FIRST taught and thoroughly prepared to know which side of the debate is right before hand.

One of them even dismisses Peterson's claim that you can be convicted for failing to use the pronouns requested by others as baseless and contrary to all evidence. Mean while the Ontario human rights tribunal clearly states that is exactly the case. link below.

If you are find with higher education abandoning reasoned debate in favor of indoctrination then you don't need to care. Of course, here in Canada we aren't facing the same risk you American's are of finding the tables turning and the indoctrination landing in the hands of tea party or trump types.

Still, keeping free speech and reasoned debate a cornerstone of education is extremely important to maintaining a free society in my opinion and the video is a window into dark corners hell bent on shutting that down.

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/questions-and-answers-about-gender-identity-and-pronouns

For a while in history, there have been some doctors who would suggest treating a fever with an icy bath. You know, to bring the fever down. What we know now is that raising the body's temperature actually helps the immune system fight off infections. So, if someone has a fever treating the symptom (hot) with the opposite (cold) is usually terrible idea.

What do we do at home when we have a fever? Warm soup or tea. This makes it easier for the body to keep its temperature up. Treating like with like.

There are a few times in this thread where I would describe a lack of appreciation for degrees of the term "forced"

Part of why I don't consider what happened to me to be rape is because I had a mouthful of tea at the time.

Getting burned by hot tea because the other person doesn't react exactly the way I want when I want them to is a risk I was willing to take when we started pouring tea into each other's mouths. A touch too much or too little is to be expected given the situation.

I'd argue that only after that touch-and-go phase is where the place that "the line" gets crossed, and I'm annoyed at the lack of thorough acknowledgement that errors get made in those moments.

Fuck, girls go fucking crazy when they are climaxing. They dun like break a dude's dick in half and shit. Sheeeeeeeet.

You're overcomplicating it.

Wordless assent is fine, especially in an already committed relationship.

The issue here is less about consent and more about refusal.

If you're feeding each other and someone wants you to stop, just stop. Ok, if you're literally pouring tea into them at the time, it's not going to be instantaneous, but it's still pretty clear that they're no longer into it. Especially if they say "no" or try to push you away.

This isn't rocket science.

Meh, I don't like that analogy.

If it were an accurate analogy, both people would be holding the cup of tea at the same time.

As I said, the two people are working in tandem. So she and I would be holding the tea with both hands, and we would bring the cup to her mouth to drink and then mine, and so on. Or even if only one person is holding the tea and only receiving instruction;

Think about a time when you've fed someone else food or poured a drink into someone else's mouth. Ever give them more than they wanted? Not enough? Ever spill some of it on their shirt even though you never intended for that to happen?

Remember!!! It's like a game of Operation! Don't give them a drop more or less than they want when you're pouring tea into their mouth or your entire life will be ruined.

Try pouring hot tea into someone else's mouth for them, do it deliberately and without error, and then we'll talk. Finally, consider that pouring hot tea into someone else's mouth is arguably less complicated than interpreting physical cues indicating a desire to have sex.

Those kinds of over simplifications of the nuances of human behavior are just that, over simplifications.

It's the "consent as a cup of tea" model.

If you ask someone if they want tea, and they do, give them tea.

If they change their mind after you've made the tea, they don't have to drink it.

If they start drinking the tea and decide they don't like this tea, don't force them to finish the cup.

Hell, if they are actually on their last sip and they don't want to swallow... they can spit it out. I mean, it's not very polite, and I'm not really sure why you'd suddenly decide you don't want tea at that point, but fundamentally it's still up to the tea drinker.

Your video, Have a Cup of Tea (A 2017 Song), has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Reminds me of this old nursery rhyme we used to sing as kids...

Mary had a little lamb, she also had a duck
She took 'em round the corner and taught them how to...
Fried eggs for breakfast, fried eggs for tea
The more you eat, the more you drink, the more you want to...
Peter had a boat, the boat began to rock
Up jumped Jaws and bit off his...
Cocktails and ginger ale, forty cents a glass
If you don't like 'it, you can shove it up your...
Ask no questions, tell no lies
I saw two men doing up their...
Flies are bad, mosquitoes are worse
And this is the end of my dirty, rotten verse

2 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

Blow is the perfect name for the drug. Blow your time away and consequently a good sleep or healthy appetite, blow your brain cells away, blow your pocket change away - enough that you might be blowing on a little sumptin sumptin to get some more, yuck! Plus, you're supporting cartels blowing peoples heads off. I hate cocaine, coca tea is great though!

It's easy to agree with you, because your not wrong.

I would add the caution though that oversimplifying things risks underestimating this threat to us all. This level of hatred, division, anger and violence doesn't cease to exist if we could go back and make Clinton president. It might move it down a notch, but just as good of odds it would have set it off sooner and stronger.

The threat from identity politics, nationalism and hatred is much worse than just Trumps failures as a president. The divide between people has been growing for long before even Obama was in office. It used to be that a push from the extreme left or extreme right was met by a push to more centrist ideas. Lately though the political parties and media have started taking the opposite approach and it's destroying our society.

The Republicans pushed in the direction of the extreme right with the tea party. The left push back though wasn't to woo moderate right-leaning folks, but instead pushed out to the extreme left with SJW movements like BLM. The right then pushed back again not wooing the moderate left, but doubling down the tea partiers. Then the pinnacle of this insanity was Hillary Clinton's campaign arrogantly believing she could win without wooing the moderates because who in their right minds would follow the extreme right leanings that Trump represented?

The end result has become not only less choice for all us moderates on election dates. The sinister part is it has bled off the number of moderates and made them more extreme.

The Nazi's used the brutal reparations against Germany to rise to power. The Neo-Nazi's and nationalists in america are able to similarly use the SJW policies of the left, even affirmative action, to similarly expand their base. A former coal mining town filled with young, unemployed white people that start feeling like affirmative action is making them second pick for what few jobs remain is BAD.

The situation is MUCH worse than anybody is giving credit to. The problem isn't this crowd of neo-nazis that we can outnumber, push into a corner and beat up or throw behind bars. The real threat is the tipping point were a dangerously meaningful number of folks decide joining the likes of them is in their own self interest. It ALREADY went as far as that number voting Trump. The fact the democratic party and members still don't see this threat and still don't realise they need to stop chasing this base of people away and start trying to reach out and appeal to them is baffling, and terrifying.