nope, rape is when either one of both parties cannot or do not consent to intercourse
''call it what you will'' is a very dangerous mindset to have, you should be educated in this aspect as it's a very sensitive subject.
Abuse is repeated, and there no evidence of that. The only thing you could attribute it to maybe is Sexual Battery, but even then there is enough ambiguity to leave it no merit.
I'm sorry but you're trying to educate people when you're absolutely clueless yourself, a quick google search will tell you "Abuse is repeated" that it's just not true. Rape is sexual abuse
And call it what you will means idc what name you give it the action is the same one and means the exact same thing you give it the name you give it
"but even then there is enough ambiguity to leave it no merit". No, according to her she stated she was against that before the sex
And this has nothing to do with evidence, I'm arguing what he is being accused of, not if he is guilty, completely different things
Let's be clear, I'm not trying to educate you, I am telling you to educate your self. I have been educated on this topic professionally but that does not mean I can educate others, I am merely suggesting that you should seek a professional to educate you as a matter of opinion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_abuse
sexual abuse is a term used for a persistent pattern of sexual assaults.
You should at least do the due diligence of doing 'a quick google search' before you tell others to do so.
From what she has said, the sex was consensual, not the ejaculation, but in several legal cases where this has happened the ruling has been that's far too ambiguous to be treated as Sexual Battery.
And there is nothing to argue about the accusations, they are obviously bad. I'm surprised that needs to be said.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/sexual-abuse
It definitely does not have to be repeated, plenty of types of abuse that don't have to be repeated
she claims to have specifically stated that, which is not ambiguous, what it is, is impossible to proof. That being said, here in Spain for example is indeed a recognized form of rape and sexual abuse
from the very link you sent
sexual abuse overlaps with sexual assault, as both involve sexual contact without the victim’s consent. The former, however, usually involves a series of acts of criminal sexual contact committed by a single perpetrator (or group of perpetrators) over a prolonged period, whereas the latter usually consists of a particular act committed by a perpetrator (or group of perpetrators) against a single person.
Again, it cannot be sexual abuse or rape by definition. This extends to Spain:
From a Spanish law firm: https://www.pineradelolmo.com/sexual-offences-in-spain/#:~:text=the%20victim%20complies.-,Rape,from%20six%20to%20twelve%20years.
A person shall be guilty under Article 179 of the Penal Code when the sexual assault consists of vaginal, anal or oral penetration, or inserting body parts or objects into either of the former two orifices. A person convicted of rape shall be given a sentence of imprisonment from six to twelve years.
No mention of non-consensual ejaculation
Ik, it's a quite recent law that includes it, which btw is an absolutely ridiculous law you might wanna check it out if you're interested it's commonly known as the "Solo Si es Si" law.
I also explicitly know it's a crime because an influencer in Spain bragged about doing exactly what flashback is accused of and I believe wasn't prosecuted because the law wasn't passed yet. But here you have the textual words of one of the spanish ministers addressing the situation (You might need to translate)
Quitarse el preservativo o eyacular dentro sin consentimiento es hoy abuso sexual y la Ley #SoloSíesSí lo reconocerá como agresión.
Presumir ante 26 millones de seguidores de algo así refleja la urgencia de poner el consentimiento en el centro. Lo pondremos en conocimiento de Fiscalía.