@StuckOnRepeat: Seriously? No where in her comment did she say that. You have been commenting all up and down the thread that people need to wait and see before they decide these men were rapists.

@vu_xlibris: It's because it gets cross posted to Deadspin.

@BlueJeans: Well first of all it's hardly EVER a defense. But in the commenter aboves example (that I'm just taking him at his word on) I guess I could imagine how someone could be out in the street being a drunk spectacle and not realize (nor intending, if it's a specific intent crime like inciting a riot) that they…

@ReggieDunlop: Well if the accusers had any sort of pre-existing medical condition or the like then that would of course be a defense. That's why we have a discovery period.

@Antrack: Well I think that's why the law has to take a position and then go with it. In this case that would be, consent has to be freely and knowingly given. I would add that that definition applies to many areas of law, like Contracts for one.

@ReggieDunlop: Yeah for a crime that wasn't an assault. Intoxication can be a defense just not in the situation of rape (or any assault typically).

@BowieCadmium: Yep.

@sportz.star: The accused' level of inebriation isn't a defense. If I'm remembering correctly.

@faire-la-moue: I was just discussing with a co-worker how there aren't as many of them around any more. They've had to close to many just for lack of funding.

@faire-la-moue: I really don't think Planned Parenthood has the available funds to buy ad time on MTV during prime time.

@vernisee: ha. Perhaps.

@LuthienTinuviel: I hear what you're saying. I just think the tax thing is bullshit. Republicans can tax and spend with the best of them.

I'm trying to picture MTV continuing to employ a male reality star who had been shown on camera physically abusing his partner multiple times. I can't.

@LuthienTinuviel: Oh that's cute! You think Republicans are for only taxing an individual as much as needed to cover what the federal government is responsible for.

@newkidpresh: I still don't think the analogy is too apt. For one thing you're buying music files and she was selling her script. Choosing to not sell the rights to your very popular novel (for one thing the novel is already a success in its own right, she's not a screenwriter) is a little different than choosing not…

It's funny because Republicans hate women!

@newkidpresh: Eh. It's a little bit different than clicking on the "agree" for itunes. I mean she had legal representation at the time. Maybe it could be argued not the best representation but still. I don't know what negotiating power she had, it all depended on how badly they wanted to buy the rights. Of course…

Unfortunately this is a cautionary tale about selling the rights to your intellectual property and not retaining some form of control.

This is hilarious. This should be a movie.

She looks so warm and comfortable outdoors. I hate her.