I think this whole scenario falls in an area that generationally is being worked through and improved as time passes. I'm 30 years old and Andrew is 25 so not too far off. We grew up being fed that you have to chase girls and try to get them to sleep with you (James Bond, Johnny Bravo, hell there are moments in Friends / Seinfeld where protagonists are told "no" initially and keep trying/begging until they are given consent).

He was drunk, Dana and the other girl admitted they gave consent after he continued trying. It's skeevy but I don't think it's something he should be cancelled over. A very close female friend (also 30) told me my senior year of college "the first no doesn't mean no. It means kiss the neck, work the n*pples, and ask again." Her words, not mine. Just an example of the kind of consent culture being perpetuated in the 90's/early 000's.

I think the topic of consent is thankfully being discussed much more broadly than it was when Andrew/myself were growing up. The core message of, "Anything less than an enthusiastic yes is not consent," was never taught to us, and certainly not engrained in us by US society/pop culture. Andrew's apology and the actions he's taking seem heartfelt. I don't think he thinks he's lying... and he is not being accused of rape. They were all drunk and eventually gave consent. The girls regretted it, Andrew blew up, and here we are.

I think it was pretty clear that statement did not mean "I always take the first no for an answer". He obviously pressured and coerced these girls into some kind of perceived consent, which is the main issue and debatable if it should be considered consent at all, but he was clearly trying to save face with a technicality by saying "I never actually raped someone when they said no, I just made them say yes against their will".