This isn't loony. Killing unborn children is loony. Declaring war on people you have never met is loony. Wanting to go one day without being hit on or harassed is perfectly sane.
Newsflash, so to speak. Most rape victims do not speak up. The problem is, there are a few that cry wolf for celebrity status or for money. But this is actually a disservice to the rest of them, meaning they can't speak up or be told "you just want to make trouble".
As for Moby, this is totally off base. Switch the genders like Crest said. Suppose you were at a bar some guy closed the shades, took off his shirt, and expected women to jump his bones. He has a ripped chest but he's not an actor or anything, just some random guy? Most people find it charming? Not really. Most people find it weird, then creepy as when you say no he wants to take off his pants and show his package. Ummmm, yeah I can't imagine this works on ANYONE and the entitled behavior after calling on it is seriously unappealing.
This isn't loony thing. This is real. There are some frivolous rape "victims" but you should at least know when the claim is valid.
I didn't claim anyone here was loony as some general rule, although I'd say everyone is pretty much guaranteed to be loony about some things, myself included. I should be able to claim that newspeak, pushing for cruel, unfair laws and "justice" while ignoring SEVERE suffering that could be fixed by the same group clearly able to get the laws to change over and over again, and other THINGS are loony. Or stupid, or wrong, or bad. If these things are so core to one's identity that this is "triggering" then all I can say is that you're free to explain to me how I'm wrong with pure facts and reasoning. I don't always care what arbitrary feelings are out there in others any more than they care about my feelings when I see our disgusting world and they complain about metaphorical paper cuts when they could care about metaphorical beheadings instead. Obviously I can't give good solutions in many cases, but some things are just "loony" to where a clear improvement is simple to conceptualize.
I consider newspeak loony in that it pollutes our world and causes enmity and disorder by abusing trust in the honesty of people when they make a claim. It's clearly not a good thing. Moby DIDN'T attempt to rape Crest by a definition of rape that ONLY includes a range of activities worthy of heavy punishment. Trying to shove more and more and MORE under the term "rape" just makes the term soften to the point of meaninglessness, because you now never know if someone was just made uncomfortable or if they were actually ASSAULTED.
The reason I brought up feminism is because this newspeak definition of rape is overwhelmingly feminist. There is other newspeak (for example the "defense" budget) that is non-feminist in origin, but this is this and that is that. I'm sorry you can't accept that feminism is as untrustworthy and abusive as pretty much any other dominant form of politics, but the truth is the truth, and feminist newspeak is feminist newspeak. I honestly don't know why you were "triggered" to defend this clear violation of the concept of rape unless you continue to view feminism as a great thing for all and/or continue to reject the TRUE definition of rape which Brion already corrected you on, but which you must have rejected. In the former case you should simply accept that nothing is pure, and in the latter case I don't know what you're doing, really, unless you actually like the endless grab for power feminists make in part through redefining words such as rape and harassment. Certainly rape victims are not better off with the definition of rape watered down, nor is society better off by misunderstanding the motivations of rapists.
There are lots of false rape accusations, too (especially the ones made publicly), and REAL rape victims tend to view the redefinition of rape to include this, that, and the other thing (such as "I totally consented at the time but my boyfriend will think I'm a slut so I'll just say I was raped, since I know women are RARELY punished (and almost never punished heavily) for false claims." or "Boohoo "Moby" made me uncomfortable but I was totally able to refuse and leave whenever I pleased and "Moby" was totally nonviolent..."MOBY" TRIED TO RAPE ME!", etc.) to CHEAPEN their ACTUAL HARD EXPERIENCE to the point of meaninglessness. This is what Brion was probably at least in part alluding to when he called your 100% wrong definition of rape "insensitive".
Never mind that mixing truth and lies, harsh reality and hyperbolic inflation or even pure fabrication of victimhood, makes it harder to effectively act to prevent rape in the future. Victims by definition can't do anything to reasonably prevent being victimized, so their feelings don't matter when it comes to prevention, since the one you have to prevent is the victimizer, who again by definition doesn't particularly care about the victim's feelings either. This may seem cold to you but it's not because the focus is on minimizing victims, not ONLY coddling them by lying to them about why they were victimized by conflating their feelings with the cause of the victimizer's actions. One doesn't call lightning striking someone to be "about" a shocking, burning feeling and project this onto the lightning; one instead recognizes that the laws of electromagnetism dictated that you were a convenient target, and that in the future one may try using things such as lightning rods (and avoiding holding things that function as such) to avoid being struck again in the future (or for others who were never struck to avoid ever being struck).
The claim that Moby attempted to rape Crest is NOT valid. Brion clearly understands this (I doubt he's self-hating enough to say he would've accepted Moby's offer while believing that she was trying to rape him) but you want to defend someone trying to stretch "attempted rape" from 100% serious to approximately 0.01% serious (and I'm being generous here) in comparison with ACTUAL attempted rape. This just makes the whole thing ridiculous to people who care about REAL RAPE and not nearly so much about mere discomfort, jerk behavior, etc. Moby acted entitled, but this is NOT attempted rape unless rape is stretched to include things that are TRULY trivial in comparison with forced or non-consenting sex or the attempts of such. Crest was made uncomfortable and his sense of fairness was trampled on, but SURELY this is nowhere near an actual ASSAULT.
In your example with male "Moby" and female "Crest" I would ALSO say there was no attempted rape, so long as it was the same, meaning that "Moby" didn't alter "Crest's" mind (to induce direct (but ultimately false) consent where there would otherwise be none or make "Crest" unconscious) without "Crest's" consent or initiate any violence against "Crest". This is key to ACTUAL equality, justice, and truth. Just because something is uncomfortable doesn't make it on the level of ATTEMPTED RAPE. For a comparison, imagine someone, let's say a hobo, said "How about you give me your money?" to you on the street, but you said "No." and were completely free to walk away alongside the hobo initiating NO violence towards you. Is this "the same" as if another hobo pulls out a knife, corners you, and ignores your wishes? It's NOT. This should be easily understandable, but our current world is just a sad place in this respect.
But those people are evil and should be shunned.
I just have to ask...what happened to your ideal of a world without shaming? Because you just unambiguously declared shaming to be good in this case, undermining what you were saying before. Well, I doubt it matters how you answer (so don't feel like you need to), since you probably don't really care that much about justifying this to me, and that's fine.
------------
I sent Brion a PM semi-related to things here, since apparently even he can't get through to some of you sometimes even though he's super-tolerant and reasonable, and it sometimes becomes "loony" to me.