Saying 'do what you want' isn't the same as saying 'you can have sex with me'

He had no way of affirmatively communicating consent.

Look, if someone had picked up a gun and shot him, would it not have been murder?

Sensors on the bike (speed, shift position), sensors on the helmet (6-axis accel/compass combo), and a color OLED to render it all.

BTW: just as a non sequitur aside, I have absolutely no religious faith.

By being prepared to accept observations that would indicate that the natural world doesn't behave in a manner consistent with known or unknown rules.

I know it sounds like a bit of a paradox, but it is possible to place one's faith in skepticism.

We would abandon them in favor of what?

And again, the original purpose of the movement DOES matter.

Censorship - including self-censorship - is most definitely a dirty word. What you're saying is that a book-burning is no big deal, as long as you can muscle the authors themselves into throwing their works onto the pyre.

I'm sorry, but again, out in the adult world we expect professionals to act professional, and you'll find that yes, that does include exercising discretion about who you can date. Professors are expected not to date students. Doctors are expected not to date patients. And journalists are expected not to date the…

Well, you're right, of course. Rape is something that happens to men, too; and indeed a man can be just as easily be raped by a woman under the right circumstances as the reverse. All my sympathies are with victims of such assaults, particularly due to the double standard you refer to.

Right, I remember all you people who thought it was "cartoony". Also, I remember the launch of EQ2, which looked like a junior high art project from a kid whose dad had late-90's copies of Bryce 3D and Poser.

He didn't say he would sexually assault her, but that he would destroy her in game.

Yes, it's traditionally understood that you can't have something and lose it at the same time. A != ~A, and all that. But presumably you're prepared to redefine logic, as well as words.

How do you come up with a set of principles without employing faith in something, I wonder?

In deductive reasoning.

That's literally wrong. (See, I can do that, too.)

I'm saying that that original intent still matters.

"I kinda' like this girl and we may date someday. Maybe I should tell everyone about it in case a massive troll army decides I appear to be engaged in impropriety months from now" isn't a reasonable thing to ask of any journalist.