OK so I've come across some actual sites, even a law firm stating that receiving sexual texts online is a form of online sexual "assault"

Like come on that's harrasment, why don't we keep such serious labels for actual serious things. Like why add text messages into it? That's harrasment we got terms for stuff, sexual assault is for physical acts of violation.

Even if we add online sexual assault bro keep it to serious acts like forcing people to do cybersex online etc not receiving texts like come on.

https://www.manlystewart.com/articles/your-guide-to-understanding-online-sexual-assault

Or a site saying Cyber sexual assault is in every way, as traumatic as offline sexual assault, or perhaps even worse, if that were possible.

Like come on...

And this actually is kinda insulting to actual victims of sexual assault too like saying smh somehow someone who experienced a sexual text they ignored is same crime as someone who experienced a bodily violation.

Seriously that is disgusting to actual victims

🍪 NOTE!

Noway implying online experiences aren't traumatic but calling them sexual assault in cases, can be thought of as diluting the label. Hoping people don't confuse the actual question because reddit often lacks reading capability

OK so I've come across some actual sites, even a law firm stating that receiving sexual texts online is a form of online sexual "assault"

Like come on that's harrasment, why don't we keep such serious labels for actual serious things. Like why add text messages into it? That's harrasment we got terms for stuff, sexual assault is for physical acts of violation.

Even if we add online sexual assault bro keep it to serious acts like forcing people to do cybersex online etc not receiving texts like come on.

https://www.manlystewart.com/articles/your-guide-to-understanding-online-sexual-assault

Or a site saying Cyber sexual assault is in every way, as traumatic as offline sexual assault, or perhaps even worse, if that were possible.

Like come on...

And this actually is kinda insulting to actual victims of sexual assault too like saying smh somehow someone who experienced a sexual text they ignored is same crime as someone who experienced a bodily violation.

Seriously that is disgusting to actual victims

Noway implying online experiences aren't traumatic but calling them sexual assault in cases can be thought of as diluting the label. Hoping people don't confuse the actual question because reddit often lacks reading capability

(hi, I didn't assume you'd read this part too most people here won't, and would just see the title, but if you did, thanks. Here's a cookie 🍪 lol.)

With technology changing the landscape of how we experience intimacy would non physical sexual acts be considered like "having sex"? Or the physical criteria is necessary?

Like watching porn, sexting, phone sex, websex etc. Not in terms of infidelity that's a separate topic.

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/sex-pleasure-and-sexual-dysfunction/sex-and-pleasure

https://www.verywellhealth.com/cybersex-pros-cons-4800752

https://www.britannica.com/topic/sexting

do answer with your "personal opinions"

Please note that definitions of acts may vary, in case of disagreement let's clarify mutual definitions first. Healthy discussion is encouraged, avoid insults.

i read that this has no cure but is there nth that can help with the hyperpigmentation at all?

If I was one uniform color as a child like I was 12 smth and now my stomach and back are a bit tan while my limbs and face are white, all without any sun exposure, I'm 20 now

how is that possible, and how do I fix it so my body is one color again?

Is there a difference in meaning or 'moderateness' between placing the adverb 'kinda' before the verb ('kinda made me sad') versus before the adjective ('made me kinda sad'), and do both versions work grammatically?

Is there a difference in meaning or 'moderateness' between placing the adverb 'kinda' before the verb ('kinda made me sad') versus before the adjective ('made me kinda sad'), and do both versions work grammatically? edit 1: thank you so much for responses but i just got more confused as some people are saying smth else and some smth else lol.

I learnt that to is not a preposition of cause like "because of", "due to" etc

Yet the sentence structure

"lost her son to illness"

"lost her city to war"

Don't they like mean lost city because of war, how's to there if it's not a preposition of cause

And a dictionary said "used to indicate the thing that causes something to happen"