I feel like the this issue really is divided into two main camps: the first are sticklers for a hysterical notion of consent, these people are almost always socially awkward/inept rejects/undesirables and in the overwhelming majority of cases have probably never even had sex themselves, and the second group is pretty much everyone else (also known as normal people).
To be perfectly clear it isn't my position that rape isn't rape. It is merely that romantic actions that normal people use to initiate and use during healthy relationships can get caught up in increasingly broadening litigation that could make spontaneous expression a trap. Letter vs spirit, and all that.
No means no unless you're in a relationship with safewords. In that case teddybear means no.
I am amazed people are still discussing this
How to tell if somebody learned World Geography in school or from SNL:
"GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."
SNL: Can't be Diomede Islands, say her backyard instead.
I joke, of course
How to tell if somebody learned World Geography in school or from SNL:
"GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."
SNL: Can't be Diomede Islands, say her backyard instead.
Well, I imagine people have enough brainpower to communicate with more words than no what exactly the no is for, otherwise you should stop everything you are doing because you are fucking someone that expects you to read their mind and that in itself is a big turn off imo