The post does point out that there’s a table full of penis models (so essentially dildos) and that the task is to put a condom on one of them.
A bodyless fake penis is clearly not a sentient being so the only way a violation of consent happened if consent applied to inanimate objects. That is, of course, a ridiculous and easily attacked proposition.
In the end this would be an example of trying to make a valid point but making it in a clumsy way.
You really have to get into that mercenary mindset. You’re obviously not responsible for your actions, if you’re just executing tasks someone else wants you to do. Smh
If the person who put the dildos there and handed you the condom is asking you to put that condom on one of the dildos, then the person that owns the dildo already gave you consent to use their dildo, thereby you can’t be a raping their dildo. It ain’t difficult.
In the context they’re obviously saying that the other person initiating sexual activity is consent in of itself, ergo you can’t be a rapist for reciprocating that consent.
Being asked to do a task by the person responsible for administering the task automatically obviates you from being classified as a rapist.
“We were only following orders.”
What? If another person asks me to to rape a person then does that absolve me from being a rapist? Am i misunderstanding you?
Yes.
They are penis models, not human beings.
It is context specific.
If a human being asked you to do sex things to them and you decide to do it then you have been granted enthusiastic consent to do those sex things.
So if they are model penises but you are not asked to put the condom on them, but you do anyway, is that sexual assault?
Context: they arent human. So, no. Of course it isn’t. Stop baiting.
The original comment doesnt include anything about objects… It only talks about tasks and people asking you to complete tasks.
Ofcourse you cant rape an object, but the comment wasnt talking about that, it was talking about something much more generalized.
The post does point out that there’s a table full of penis models (so essentially dildos) and that the task is to put a condom on one of them.
A bodyless fake penis is clearly not a sentient being so the only way a violation of consent happened if consent applied to inanimate objects. That is, of course, a ridiculous and easily attacked proposition.
In the end this would be an example of trying to make a valid point but making it in a clumsy way.
You really have to get into that mercenary mindset. You’re obviously not responsible for your actions, if you’re just executing tasks someone else wants you to do. Smh
tfw you ask your toaster for consent before making toast
Nah, that’s why I wait for my wife to tell me to make toast so I can do that without. Mercenary mindset!
If the person who put the dildos there and handed you the condom is asking you to put that condom on one of the dildos, then the person that owns the dildo already gave you consent to use their dildo, thereby you can’t be a raping their dildo. It ain’t difficult.
In the context they’re obviously saying that the other person initiating sexual activity is consent in of itself, ergo you can’t be a rapist for reciprocating that consent.
We are talking about dildos dude.