The article critiques the 'rock star defense' employed by R. Kelly's lawyer, which suggests that a rock star does not need to force anyone into sex. The argument claims that being a rock star inherently grants immunity from coercion. However, the author demonstrates that just because someone does not have to force sex doesn’t mean they won't; the reasoning is deductively flawed and only superficially resembles valid arguments in logic. The piece underlines the danger of conflating celebrity status with accountability for actions.
Even if it were true that 'rock stars' do not have to force anyone to have sex, it does not follow that a 'rock star' did not force someone to have sex.
The 'rock star' defense relies on a flawed structure, suggesting that not needing to force sex equates to never having done so.
Collection
[
|
...
]