So, on a scale of 1-10, how bad is this?

[agrajagthetesty]

No need to fuck him over with this girl just because he made a little mistake whilst pissed.

Do you really think that it's more important for this guy to maintain his close relationship with the victim of his sexual assault than it is for that victim to know that she has been spending time with someone who has violated her body and might possibly do it again?

Really?

And what did he do?

I told you that in my original post. He sexually assaulted her. Meaning, he sexually touched her without her consent.

No, specifically, what did he do?

And you can see my summary of the whole thing a few posts up anyway.

Are you asking me exactly where and how he put his hands on her body? Neither you or I know that. Nor do I think it matters much. The precise nature of the sexual assault is less significant than the fact that an assault took place at all.

I'm not sure which post you're referring to. Various other people have been countering your points. All that I'm trying to impress on you is that the girl's right to be informed of the risk posed to her vastly outweighs the guy's desire for his secrets to be kept or for his relationship with her to be unharmed. Maybe he should have thought of that before he molested her.

 

[Woodsey]

No need to fuck him over with this girl just because he made a little mistake whilst pissed.

Do you really think that it's more important for this guy to maintain his close relationship with the victim of his sexual assault than it is for that victim to know that she has been spending time with someone who has violated her body and might possibly do it again?

Really?

And what did he do?

I told you that in my original post. He sexually assaulted her. Meaning, he sexually touched her without her consent.

No, specifically, what did he do?

And you can see my summary of the whole thing a few posts up anyway.

Are you asking me exactly where and how he put his hands on her body? Neither you or I know that. Nor do I think it matters much. The precise nature of the sexual assault is less significant than the fact that an assault took place at all.

I'm not sure which post you're referring to. Various other people have been countering your points. All that I'm trying to impress on you is that the girl's right to be informed of the risk posed to her vastly outweighs the guy's desire for his secrets to be kept or for his relationship with her to be unharmed. Maybe he should have thought of that before he molested her.

Well poking someone in the eye and smacking them over the head with a club are both assault, but I'd think it'd be important to distinguish between the two before deciding how you respond.

And this same page, my discussion with Evidencebased.

Basically: the impression I get from the OP is that nothing particularly noteworthy happened, certainly not enough to warrant telling the girl and all the potential upset that could cause between all three parties.

If it was more specific, then I'd probably say tell her. Simply repeating words like "molestation" and "sexual assault" doesn't change the fact that what was described in the OP was highly-drunken "groping" for a few minutes.

Words are more (and less) than just their technical definitions.

 

[agrajagthetesty]

Are you asking me exactly where and how he put his hands on her body? Neither you or I know that. Nor do I think it matters much. The precise nature of the sexual assault is less significant than the fact that an assault took place at all.

I'm not sure which post you're referring to. Various other people have been countering your points. All that I'm trying to impress on you is that the girl's right to be informed of the risk posed to her vastly outweighs the guy's desire for his secrets to be kept or for his relationship with her to be unharmed. Maybe he should have thought of that before he molested her.

Well poking someone in the eye and smacking them over the head with a club are both assault, but I'd think it'd be important to distinguish between the two before deciding how you respond.

And this same page, my discussion with Evidencebased.

Basically: the impression I get from the OP is that nothing particularly noteworthy happened, certainly not enough to warrant telling the girl and all the potential upset that could cause between all three parties.

If it was more specific, then I'd probably say tell her. Simply repeating words like "molestation" and "sexual assault" doesn't change the fact that what was described in the OP was highly-drunken "groping" for a few minutes.

Words are more (and less) than just their technical definitions.

True, but when I get poked in the eye I don't thank my lucky stars that my assailant didn't hit me with a club. Violence is violence, and sexual assault is sexual assault. I think I'd want to know if my friends were committing violence on my body while I was unable to feel it thanks to a drug I'd taken.

It seemed at the end of that discussion that you saw the reasoning behind telling the girl. That's why I was uncertain that you were directing me there, since you're still asserting to me that it would be better if the girl didn't know.

Take it from me, getting sexually assaulted is noteworthy to the victim. It doesn't matter how much upset it would cause, the girl has a right to know. Why exactly do you disagree with that concept? Sexual assault is a terrible, demeaning thing. It makes you feel unsafe, powerless and violated. She deserves to have the facts so that she can make an informed choice about her company, and if she gets upset, that's her right. I know I'd rather get upset and know the truth than maintain a harmonious relationship in ignorance.

We don't have specific information, but the perpetrator does, and the OP could potentially find it out from him (if he doesn't already have more specific information that he hasn't shared). I'd want the girl to know what happened in as specific terms as possible, but failing that, her knowing what we know would suffice. And for the record, non-consensual "groping" equals molestation and sexual assault. By definition. As for the "highly-drunken" part, the fact that the guy was drunk doesn't excuse him. Alcohol lowers your inhibitions, it doesn't transform your personality. The fact that he did it while drunk means that he would at the very least consider it while sober.

 

[xcgillx2]

There was something like this a while back where I went to a party and a girl passed out early on and I went to go check on her and someone was feeling her up and I pulled him off and told her what happened, she charged rape but he didn't get arrested.

Next month she was "Riding" a mate of mine that was asleep but he had all his clothes on so he charged rape and she want ape shit about it and flipped out about it.

So with your friend you never know if she has done anything as well

 

[DaKiller]

That would be a hard 7 on my scale of assholery and my scale goes from

1 (cutting in line) to 10 (murder)