First off, I am not a lawyer by any means, this is just my interpretation of local law.
I will give a trigger warning since we will be talking about sexual assault and specific details in a given situation. My friend Chris over at A Geek With Guns was showing me a post by Chris Cantwell, that referenced A Geek With Guns. While looking at Cantwell’s site, I came across a trove of his posts that have similarities to posts on r/seduction.
One stood out, however. A post about being a victim of a false rape accusations.
Cantwell talks about how his roommate brought a woman home. The roommate then left to go hang out with his girlfriend. Cantwell starts to talk about sex with the woman, and she reciprocates. Shortly thereafter, she amends her condition of consent to the act:
After a few minutes she said “don’t cum in my mouth”
To give some perspective, the legal definition of consent in Minnesota is as follows:
“Consent” means words or overt actions by a person indicating a freely given present agreement to perform a particular sexual act with the actor. Consent does not mean the existence of a prior or current social relationship between the actor and the complainant or that the complainant failed to resist a particular sexual act.
So her agreement to perform the particular sexual act of fellatio was agreed upon under the terms that he would not ejaculate in her mouth. How the sexual act followed through is dictated below:
After a few minutes she said “don’t cum in my mouth”. This time I did not obey. As I climaxed, she backed away, quite upset that I had not done as she commanded. I was also quite upset, because there was now cum all over my shirt.
By his OWN admission, he violated her consent by violating the terms she set beforehand as terms of her performing oral sex on him. While I couldn’t find any crime under Minnesota law (not that there isn’t one, but just from my armchair assessment) that he technically violated in regards to criminal sexual conduct, any reasonable person would find what he did unethical and despicable. Douchebag. Then to add insult to injury, he literally equated her anger at him violating her consent to his minor inconvenience that he got semen on his shirt.
I regularly work with local alternative communities and have had to deal with third party issues of consent. Had he been in Minnesota, even though it might not TECHNICALLY be a crime, it would be enough to be ostracized from those communities as someone who doesn’t respect consent.
He at least has some self-reflection that leads to him to believe what he did was unethical:
Let me acknowledge that some of what I’ve done here wasn’t nice. Particularly the act of cumming in her mouth after she specifically asked me not to, was completely unacceptable.
However, the point becomes moot after this:
I’m not proud of what I’m admitting here, but I hardly think that having an orgasm during the course of a voluntary sex act amounts to rape.
He misses the critical point in thinking it’s because he had an orgasm, that lead to the rape claim. When in reality, it was because he knowingly and directly violated her consent.
Not only that, he goes on to say that false-rape allegations are a glaring and humongous problem:
Unfortunately, my story is far from unique. This kind of thing happens to better men than I every single day. Better men than I are in prison on flimsier evidence as we speak. Better men than I have been raped in prison over less. Better men than I have died over it, and it needs to stop.
This statistic is almost meaningless, as many of the jurisdictions from which the FBI collects data on crime use different definitions of, or criteria for, “unfounded.” That is, a report of rape might be classified as unfounded (rather than as forcible rape) if the alleged victim did not try to fight off the suspect, if the alleged perpetrator did not use physical force or a weapon of some sort, if the alleged victim did not sustain any physical injuries, or if the alleged victim and the accused had a prior sexual relationship.
Cantwell is just trying to distract the reader from his abhorrent and unethical behavior with a straw man argument:
My suggestion, don’t date Cantwell, don’t take his dating advice. His world views are obviously skewed outside of reality. Or you might end up with “false-rape” claims as well.