Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Mar 28 18:56:30 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / That was undoubtedly rape
Victim
Member
Tue Jan 16 14:16:39
I hope he gets 20+ years!!

http://babe.net/2018/01/13/aziz-ansari-28355


I went on a date with Aziz Ansari. It turned into the worst night of my life

by Katie Way

She approached him because she recognized his camera flash — Aziz Ansari was taking pictures at the 2017 Emmy Awards after-party with a film camera, not a digital one. “I stood up, and I’m like tipsy at this point and feeling really confident. I’m in a gown, and I walked up to Aziz and said, ‘What’d you just shoot with?’”

Grace is a 23-year-old Brooklyn-based photographer, then aged 22. We are not using her real name to protect her identity because she is not a public figure. She says Ansari brushed her off at first, but after he realized they both brought the same kind of camera to the event, an old model from the 80s, he was impressed.

They flirted a little — he took two pictures of her, she snapped some of him — and then she and her date went back to the dance floor. “It was like, one of those things where you’re aware of the other person all night,” she said. “We would catch eyes every now and then.”



They ran into each other one last time, right as Grace was leaving. At Ansari’s suggestion, she put her number in his phone.

When her plane landed back in New York the next day, she already had a message from him. They exchanged flirtatious banter over text for a week or so before he asked her to go out with him on Monday, September 25.

The date didn’t go as planned. The night would end with Grace in an Uber home, in tears, messaging her friends about how Ansari behaved. Babe spoke to the first friends she told about it, and reviewed the messages on her phone.

The day after the incident, she wrote a long text to Ansari, saying: “I just want to take this moment to make you aware of [your] behavior and how uneasy it made me.” To that message, Ansari responds: “Clearly, I misread things in the moment and I’m truly sorry.”

The mobile phone number from which his texts to her were sent matches up with his details on a searchable public register.

We spoke to Grace last week. When we met, Ansari had just won Best Actor for his Netflix show “Master Of None” at the Golden Globes, where he declared his support for the fight against sexual assault and harassment by wearing a “Time’s Up” pin on the red carpet.

Grace said it was surreal to be meeting up with Ansari, a successful comedian and major celebrity, and she was “excited” for their date.



Before meeting Ansari, Grace told friends and coworkers about the date and consulted her go-to group chat about what she should wear to fit the “cocktail chic” dress-code he gave her. She settled on “a tank-top dress and jeans.” She showed me a picture, it was a good outfit.

After arriving at his apartment in Manhattan on Monday evening, they exchanged small talk and drank wine. “It was white,” she said. “I didn’t get to choose and I prefer red, but it was white wine.” Then Ansari walked her to Grand Banks, an Oyster bar onboard a historic wooden schooner on the Hudson River just a few blocks away.

She said it was a beautiful, warm September night. They discussed NYU, comedy and a new, secret project he was working on, but she says she did most of the talking.

Grace says she sensed Ansari was eager for them to leave. “When the waiter came over he quickly asked for the check and he said like, ‘Let’s get off this boat.’” She recalls there was still wine in her glass and more left in the bottle he ordered. The abruptness surprised her. “Like, he got the check and then it was bada-boom, bada-bing, we’re out of there.”



They walked the two blocks back to his apartment building, an exclusive address on TriBeCa’s Franklin Street, where Taylor Swift has a place too. When they walked back in, she complimented his marble countertops. According to Grace, Ansari turned the compliment into an invitation.

“He said something along the lines of, ‘How about you hop up and take a seat?’” Within moments, he was kissing her. “In a second, his hand was on my breast.” Then he was undressing her, then he undressed himself. She remembers feeling uncomfortable at how quickly things escalated.

When Ansari told her he was going to grab a condom within minutes of their first kiss, Grace voiced her hesitation explicitly. “I said something like, ‘Whoa, let’s relax for a sec, let’s chill.’” She says he then resumed kissing her, briefly performed oral sex on her, and asked her to do the same thing to him. She did, but not for long. “It was really quick. Everything was pretty much touched and done within ten minutes of hooking up, except for actual sex.”

She says Ansari began making a move on her that he repeated during their encounter. “The move he kept doing was taking his two fingers in a V-shape and putting them in my mouth, in my throat to wet his fingers, because the moment he’d stick his fingers in my throat he’d go straight for my vagina and try to finger me.” Grace called the move “the claw.”

Ansari also physically pulled her hand towards his penis multiple times throughout the night, from the time he first kissed her on the countertop onward. “He probably moved my hand to his dick five to seven times,” she said. “He really kept doing it after I moved it away.”

But the main thing was that he wouldn’t let her move away from him. She compared the path they cut across his apartment to a football play. “It was 30 minutes of me getting up and moving and him following and sticking his fingers down my throat again. It was really repetitive. It felt like a fucking game.”

Throughout the course of her short time in the apartment, she says she used verbal and non-verbal cues to indicate how uncomfortable and distressed she was. “Most of my discomfort was expressed in me pulling away and mumbling. I know that my hand stopped moving at some points,” she said. “I stopped moving my lips and turned cold.”

Whether Ansari didn’t notice Grace’s reticence or knowingly ignored it is impossible for her to say. “I know I was physically giving off cues that I wasn’t interested. I don’t think that was noticed at all, or if it was, it was ignored.”

Ansari wanted to have sex. She said she remembers him asking again and again, “Where do you want me to fuck you?” while she was still seated on the countertop. She says she found the question tough to answer because she says she didn’t want to fuck him at all.

“I wasn’t really even thinking of that, I didn’t want to be engaged in that with him. But he kept asking, so I said, ‘Next time.’ And he goes, ‘Oh, you mean second date?’ and I go, ‘Oh, yeah, sure,’ and he goes, ‘Well, if I poured you another glass of wine now, would it count as our second date?’” He then poured her a glass and handed it to her. She excused herself to the bathroom soon after.

Grace says she spent around five minutes in the bathroom, collecting herself in the mirror and splashing herself with water. Then she went back to Ansari. He asked her if she was okay. “I said I don’t want to feel forced because then I’ll hate you, and I’d rather not hate you,” she said.



She told babe that at first, she was happy with how he reacted. “He said, ‘Oh, of course, it’s only fun if we’re both having fun.’ The response was technically very sweet and acknowledging the fact that I was very uncomfortable. Verbally, in that moment, he acknowledged that I needed to take it slow. Then he said, ‘Let’s just chill over here on the couch.’”

This moment is particularly significant for Grace, because she thought that would be the end of the sexual encounter — her remark about not wanting to feel “forced” had added a verbal component to the cues she was trying to give him about her discomfort. When she sat down on the floor next to Ansari, who sat on the couch, she thought he might rub her back, or play with her hair — something to calm her down.

Ansari instructed her to turn around. “He sat back and pointed to his penis and motioned for me to go down on him. And I did. I think I just felt really pressured. It was literally the most unexpected thing I thought would happen at that moment because I told him I was uncomfortable.”

Soon, he pulled her back up onto the couch. She would tell her friend via text later that night, “He [made out] with me again and says, ‘Doesn’t look like you hate me.’”

Halfway into the encounter, he led her from the couch to a different part of his apartment. He said he had to show her something. Then he brought her to a large mirror, bent her over and asked her again, “Where do you want me to fuck you? Do you want me to fuck you right here?” He rammed his penis against her ass while he said it, pantomiming intercourse.

“I just remember looking in the mirror and seeing him behind me. He was very much caught up in the moment and I obviously very much wasn’t,” Grace said. “After he bent me over is when I stood up and said no, I don’t think I’m ready to do this, I really don’t think I’m going to do this. And he said, ‘How about we just chill, but this time with our clothes on?’”

They got dressed, sat side by side on the couch they’d already “chilled” on, and he turned on an episode of Seinfeld. She’d never seen it before. She said that’s when the reality of what was going on sank in. “It really hit me that I was violated. I felt really emotional all at once when we sat down there. That that whole experience was actually horrible.”

While the TV played in the background, he kissed her again, stuck his fingers down her throat again, and moved to undo her pants. She turned away. She remembers “feeling in a different mindset at that point.”

“I remember saying, ‘You guys are all the same, you guys are all the fucking same.’” Ansari asked her what she meant. When she turned to answer, she says he met her with “gross, forceful kisses.”

After that last kiss, Grace stood up from the couch, moved back to the kitchen island where she left her phone, and said she would call herself a car. He hugged her and kissed her goodbye, another “aggressive” kiss. When she pulled away, Ansari finally relented and insisted he’d call her the car. “He said, ‘It’s coming, but just tell them your name is Essence,’” she said, a name he has joked about using as a pseudonym in his sitcom.

She teared up in the hallway, outside his place, pressing the down button on the elevator. The Uber was waiting when she left the building. He asked if she was Essence, she said yes, and then she rode back to her Brooklyn apartment. “I cried the whole ride home. At that point I felt violated. That last hour was so out of my hand.”

Babe asked Ansari’s representatives if they wanted to respond to Grace’s account but they have yet to do so. [Update – 10:02pm, January 14: Ansari has released a statement, which you can read in full here. In it, he acknowledges that they “engaged in sexual activity” but says “by all indications [it] was completely consensual.”]

Grace compares Ansari’s sexual mannerisms to those of a horny, rough, entitled 18-year-old. She said so to her friends via text after the date and said the same thing to me when we spoke.

But Aziz Ansari isn’t an 18-year-old. He’s a 34-year-old actor and comedian of global renown who’s probably done more thinking about the nuances of dating and sex in the digital age than practically anyone else. He wrote a book about it, “Modern Romance”, and it was a New York Times bestseller. Ansari built his career on being cute and nice and parsing the signals women send to men and the male emotions that result and turning them into award-winning, Madison Square Garden-filling comedy.

Most people first saw Aziz when he was Tom Haverford, a Parks and Rec fan favorite whose absurd, hilarious phrases were made to be memed. Who hasn’t said “treat yo’ self” once or twice? At that time, he branded himself as the witty, woke alternative to the stereotypical douchebag bro. His early 2010s routines paint him as the kind of guy who strikes out because he actually respects women.



And then, as he rose to prominence, he focused less on his own sexual disenfranchisement and more on pressing societal issues like racism and sexual assault, a move that’s earned him tons of praise. Refinery29 called him “a certified woke bae.”

In the second season of “Master of None”, one episode introduces a macho TV food guy called Chef Jeff, who gives Ansari’s character Dev a huge career opportunity before being accused of sexually inappropriate conduct by a bunch of women.

Discussing the storyline, Ansari said he wanted to examine what happens when much-loved characters are revealed to be creeps, making all those around them who don’t speak out complicit. “So it was like, ‘Okay, what if this is one of those types of guys and we just get the audience to love him? And then pull the rug out from under them at the end and reveal that he’s actually not a good dude?’”

Speaking to babe, Grace mentioned the glaring gap between Ansari’s comedy persona and the behavior she experienced in his apartment as a reason why she didn’t get out earlier. “I didn’t leave because I think I was stunned and shocked,” she said. “This was not what I expected. I’d seen some of his shows and read excerpts from his book and I was not expecting a bad night at all, much less a violating night and a painful one.”

In the Uber home from Ansari’s apartment, Grace texted a friend: “I hate men.” She continued: “I had to say no a lot. He wanted sex. He wanted to get me drunk and then fuck me.” She texted another friend after she got back to her apartment, “I’m taking a bath I’m really upset I feel weird.”

Grace’s roommate, who babe has spoken to, didn’t see or talk to Grace until the morning after. The roommate asked how it went right away. “She said, ‘it was awful. It didn’t feel good at all.’” Grace filled her roommate in on the details later. “I guess it ended up getting really fucking weird, really fucking quick,” the roommate said. “She was really shaken up about it.”

Another friend, who Grace texted on the way home from Ansari’s apartment and spoke to the day after on the phone, told babe she was “so upset.”

Grace says she spent the next day groggy and miserable. When they asked, she told her coworkers that the date had gone poorly. She also reached out to her friends, who helped her craft a message to tell Ansari how she felt about the date. But he reached out first.

“It was fun meeting you last night,” Ansari sent on Tuesday evening. “Last night might’ve been fun for you, but it wasn’t for me,” Grace responded. “You ignored clear non-verbal cues; you kept going with advances.” She explains why she is telling him how she felt: “I want to make sure you’re aware so maybe the next girl doesn’t have to cry on the ride home.”

“I’m so sad to hear this,” he responded. “Clearly, I misread things in the moment and I’m truly sorry.”




Those texts were the last Grace had contact with Ansari. And that night in his apartment was the last time she saw him, until she watched him win big at the Golden Globes.

Grace says her friends helped her grapple with the aftermath of her night with Ansari. “It took a really long time for me to validate this as sexual assault,” she told us. “I was debating if this was an awkward sexual experience or sexual assault. And that’s why I confronted so many of my friends and listened to what they had to say, because I wanted validation that it was actually bad.”

For Grace, the Golden Globes brought the events back to the forefront of her mind. “It was actually painful to watch him win and accept an award,” she said. “And absolutely cringeworthy that he was wearing the Time’s Up pin. I think that started a new fire, and it kind of made it more real.”

She told babe: “I believe that I was taken advantage of by Aziz. I was not listened to and ignored. It was by far the worst experience with a man I’ve ever had.”

Babe first reached out to Ansari’s team over 31 hours ago, and he has now released a statement denying sexual misconduct.

He said: “It was true that everything did seem okay to me, so when I heard that it was not the case for her, I was surprised and concerned.”

Update: Ansari’s full statement:

“In September of last year, I met a woman at a party. We exchanged numbers. We texted back and forth and eventually went on a date. We went out to dinner, and afterwards we ended up engaging in sexual activity, which by all indications was completely consensual.

“The next day, I got a text from her saying that although ‘it may have seemed okay,’ upon further reflection, she felt uncomfortable. It was true that everything did seem okay to me, so when I heard that it was not the case for her, I was surprised and concerned. I took her words to heart and responded privately after taking the time to process what she had said.

“I continue to support the movement that is happening in our culture. It is necessary and long overdue.” – Aziz Ansari
yankeessuck123
Member
Tue Jan 16 15:04:12
A female friend of mine messaged me today to ask if I had read this.

I told her I have zero interest in celebrity stuff and wasn't about to read 3000 words on a topic that really doesn't interest me.
Dukhat
Member
Tue Jan 16 15:22:00
http://pag...ris-sexual-misconduct-accuser/

"HLN host Ashleigh Banfield has come to Aziz Ansari‘s defense after the comedian was accused of sexual misconduct.

"“You had a bad date. Your date got overly amorous. After protesting his moves, you did not get up and leave right away, you continued to engage in the sexual encounter. By your own clear description, this was not a rape, nor was it a sexual assault — by your description,” Banfield, 50, snapped on Monday.

“Your sexual encounter was unpleasant,” she added. “It did not send you to the police. It did not affect your workplace or your ability to get a job, so I have to ask you: What exactly was your beef? That you had a bad date with Aziz Ansari? Is that what victimized you to the point of seeking a public conviction and a career-ending sentence against him?”

************************

Me Too movement has played itself out. I don't give a fuck about people's personal interactions especially people who don't have the brains or strength to just say no and leave. People should not have their personal careers ruined because you are wishy-washy during sex and pretend afterwards that you were a victim.

Aeros
Member
Tue Jan 16 15:22:15
basically aziz took a girl out to dinner, invited her home, she accepted, got to drink some of his wine (which was criminally white rather then red apparently), had Aziz eat out her pussy and was then super uncomfortable when the man assumed this meant he could get to put his dick in her. He then had the audacity to call her an uber after she said no and left the apartment.
Rugian
Member
Tue Jan 16 15:53:36
Grace fucked up, she forgot that women rank below brown people when it comes to who guilty liberals will side with.

In all seriousness though, as douchey as Aziz is it'd be completely fucked up if this hurts him professionally. This is basically revenge porn in text format, Grace is a cunt.
Pillz
Member
Tue Jan 16 17:02:15
I doubt half of this happened as she said it did.

And I bet she agreed to go out with him for this explicit purpose - to cry about rape
obaminated
Member
Tue Jan 16 17:13:05
She had an uncomfortable date and walked away feeling used and discarded. That isnt rape or criminal. Aziz is just a dooshy guy disguised as a modern day male feminist.
hood
Member
Tue Jan 16 17:35:24
"“He said something along the lines of, ‘How about you hop up and take a seat?’” Within moments, he was kissing her. “In a second, his hand was on my breast.” Then he was undressing her, then he undressed himself. She remembers feeling uncomfortable at how quickly things escalated."

This is missing key details. When he kissed you, did you say you were uninterested? Did you pull away? When he started touching you, did you say no?

"When Ansari told her he was going to grab a condom within minutes of their first kiss, Grace voiced her hesitation explicitly. “I said something like, ‘Whoa, let’s relax for a sec, let’s chill.’” She says he then resumed kissing her, briefly performed oral sex on her, and asked her to do the same thing to him. She did, but not for long. “It was really quick. Everything was pretty much touched and done within ten minutes of hooking up, except for actual sex.”"

So he showed interest in sex and you said no. Ok, he got his first confirmation that you didn't want something. And as you said, sex never happened. He started kissing you again, did you play along with it again? And then when he asked you to give him oral, you did? You could have not, or said slow down, or whatever, like you did with sex. Yet your mouth ended up around him.


Aziz sound really aggressive, but there was very little detail about what this chick actually did or said. The only time she admits to saying no, nothing happened. She conveniently seems to leave out any other indication of confirmation.
Turtle Crawler
Admin
Tue Jan 16 20:20:30
That realization that your only good for getting drunk and fucked, that's gotta play head games on girls.

What kind of girl goes back to your place, gets nakid then won't go all the way?
obaminated
Member
Tue Jan 16 20:50:47
Its pretty interesting. We went through this abrupt phase inwhich you cant slut shame, women can be slutty, you cant judge a woman based on how she presents herself to the world. And now, almost in direct reaction to that we are seeing women demand men treat them in the more classical sense of relations between men and women.
obaminated
Member
Tue Jan 16 20:51:27
Maybe we should go back to the tested and true method of men and women having sexual relations after a period of courtship?
hood
Member
Tue Jan 16 20:54:21
Hence the saying "at least buy me dinner first."

Which, as it were, Aziz did!
Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 03:07:43
Hood:

"This is missing key details. When he kissed you, did you say you were uninterested? Did you pull away? When he started touching you, did you say no?"

Is it? The very next paragraph says:

"When Ansari told her he was going to grab a condom within minutes of their first kiss, Grace voiced her hesitation explicitly. “I said something like, ‘Whoa, let’s relax for a sec, let’s chill.’” She says he then resumed kissing her, briefly performed oral sex on her, and asked her to do the same thing to him."

Seems to me that's a red line there.

Would you perform oral sex on a woman who just told you politely she's not comfortable?

"Ansari also physically pulled her hand towards his penis multiple times throughout the night, from the time he first kissed her on the countertop onward. “He probably moved my hand to his dick five to seven times,” she said. “He really kept doing it after I moved it away.”

But the main thing was that he wouldn’t let her move away from him. She compared the path they cut across his apartment to a football play. “It was 30 minutes of me getting up and moving and him following and sticking his fingers down my throat again. It was really repetitive. It felt like a fucking game.”

Throughout the course of her short time in the apartment, she says she used verbal and non-verbal cues to indicate how uncomfortable and distressed she was. “Most of my discomfort was expressed in me pulling away and mumbling. I know that my hand stopped moving at some points,” she said. “I stopped moving my lips and turned cold.”"

This is pretty damning too.

Does anyone here honestly say they'd conduct themselves like that?


Allahuakbar
Member
Wed Jan 17 04:45:12
Let us identify the problems that led to this criminal sexual behaviour:
1) She wore no veil
2) They both drunk alcohol

I don't think that lashes would be enough punishment in this case.
delude
Member
Wed Jan 17 06:18:23
"Seems to me that's a red line there.

Would you perform oral sex on a woman who just told you politely she's not comfortable? "

The non-consent/consent ordeal. She indicated to "chill" after he suggested to grab a condom but then allowed him to perform orally on her. It would give the impression she gave consent for to that degree.

"But the main thing was that he wouldn’t let her move away from him. She compared the path they cut across his apartment to a football play. “It was 30 minutes of me getting up and moving and him following and sticking his fingers down my throat again. It was really repetitive. It felt like a fucking game.”"

I'm sorry but the responsibility is now onto her. Yes, she was giving signals, if true, as he was readjusting herself, but if it was too apparent and he wasn't getting a clue. It would be prudent to bluntly say something. Instead of "I was trying to give him clues." the chemical in the brain that induces the desires of sexual relations and all will undoubtedly impair judgement to a degree. I'm sorry, unless he got violent with her, I can see where he was going and she could have just say "no, I am leaving, I try to give you subtle hints because I like you and respect you, but you're taking it too far."

That would have been a reasonable response.

I should also add that I do understand a 'victim's' thought process too because of the 'fight or flight' if it was getting to a point of aggression. Victims will feel helpless and feel that in order to survive such of an encounter is to comply with the actions and commands. However in this particular instance, I do not have the opinion that she was in fear nor really thought she was taken advantage of. The end result was that she went home safely and that it was a "bad date."


"Throughout the course of her short time in the apartment, she says she used verbal and non-verbal cues to indicate how uncomfortable and distressed she was. “Most of my discomfort was expressed in me pulling away and mumbling. I know that my hand stopped moving at some points,” she said. “I stopped moving my lips and turned cold.”"

This is pretty damning too.

Does anyone here honestly say they'd conduct themselves like that? "

Yes, and that is the part where he realized that he isn't going to get anywhere and the date ended.

I will have to chalk this one up as a 'bad date' and that Aziz needs to up his game because he did do it wrong.

jergul
large member
Wed Jan 17 06:46:27
This false ambiguity is why Sweden is changing its laws.

The tale strikes me as mostly not sexual assault, intermixed with 5-6 sexual assaults.
hood
Member
Wed Jan 17 07:53:50
@seb:

When I fucking quote the next paragraph, I fucking know what it says. Stop being a tard.

And no, this isn't an indication that I want to debate the topic with you; I already know you aren't going to actually bother reading my replies and digesting them. But I'll gladly insult you all thread long if you want to play those games.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Wed Jan 17 10:05:05
if only he'd have offered her white wine.
Rugian
Member
Wed Jan 17 10:34:24
Weren't they going to an oyster bar? What kind of cultureless zilch has red wine with seafood? I'm starting to understand what Aziz did wrong here, he was trying to have sex with a retard.
Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 11:38:24
Delude:

It wouldn't cross your mind at this point that she's alone, he's stronger, their in his house, he's demonstrated he intends to carry through?

This is not as million miles from the bad days of aquiting people because their victim didn't resist.

Put it this way, a maffia protection racket wouldn't be dismissed simply because no threat was overt or explicit.

Once she's made her desire not to carry through clear, it's on him to back off and re establish enthusiastic participation.

I'm baffled that so many of you apparently would apparently need a physical slap from a woman to understand when your attention isn't wanted.


Hood:

I meant *your* next paragraph. What I was pointing out was that you are being a tard. She clearly signalled her desire to stop. He didn't. Apparently you seem to think that she needed to physically repulse him with vigour. Repeatedly moving away, moving his hands away, being cold and unresponsive, verbally asking him to stop.

There's no ambiguity there. Are you seriously telling me you'd have trouble reading this situation? Are you seriously telling me it's reasonable at even that first state not to step back and say "hey, sure, let's chill a bit" and instead think "hey, let's keep going until she slaps me" ignoring the fact she might feel implicit threat of violence?

Because I don't think you're that dumb, and i think that level of emotional intelligence really is the lower bond threshold here unless you want to base a plea around diminished capability.

The law here should be strong enough to protect people from assault by implicit threat, not erring on the side of letting people pressure others into sex. And if some people are too emotionaly and socially incapacitated that they pose accidental threat to others and may accidentally find themselves performing sexual acts on people who don't want it, that's secondary.

The underlying assumption in this line of thinking is that it's socially acceptable for one person to have sex with another person who is less than enthusiastic about it.

"Oh, she's nervous, but she'll like it if I just keep going" may not fit a preconceived notion of rape as perpetrated by violent strangers. It's certainly fits the bullshit ideas of women not liking sex and needing to be convinced into it like a fledgling from a nest.
Bottom line, it's not actually socially acceptable and we shouldn't be trying to flex sexual assault laws to accommodate it.

And the simple test for this is: would you honestly behave that way, or would alarm bells be ringing in your mind that you were making someone very uncomfortable?

If the answer is "yeah, we've all been there, women need a bit of physical prodding to get into sex", bad news. It's not sex she wasn't into. It was you.




Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 11:47:43
How fucked up is a country where someone continuing to advance after being told "don't come closer" can be considered reasonable grounds for being threatened; but feels that "hey, let's slow down and chill" can be followed up with someone immediately performing a sex act on you as not being threatening?

The idea that repeatedly moving his hands away, repeatedly physically moving away from him etc is mixed signals is frankly autistic.
pillz
Member
Wed Jan 17 11:52:22
As has been stated, and is plainly visible (if only you could read), she did not object to him preforming oral sex on her. Nor did she object to returning the favor.

He was persistent, but she doesn't seem to have given negative consent except when faced with the prospect of sex.
Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 12:15:07
Pillz:
You are clearly being a bit of a hard.

He said let's get a condom.
She said no, let's slow down.
He ignores her, and performs a sex act on her.

At thatvpoint he's ignored her, and physically imposed himself on her.

You say she should have at this point reiterated her previous objection.

But you are giving no weight at all that the deliberate ignoring of her previous objection and physical transgression is an implicit threat. The obligation was on him to stop when she said stop, not a carte Blanche for him to keep doing things to heruntil he got explicit rejections for each one. If she had said "woah, slow down even more" and he'd then started fingers g her ass, presumably that'd be fine until she said "still all a bit fast" etc.

Consider a "non mugging" buying a car - "I'll just ring that up for you" - "well, I'd like to hear more about mileage" - *caching* "of course sir"
Pillz
Member
Wed Jan 17 12:17:30
Let's slow down doesn't mean let's stop have have an in depth discussion regarding consent and boundaries.

He mentioned (imminent) sexual intercourse, she said no, he went back to his previous activities, she did not object.
Dukhat
Member
Wed Jan 17 12:48:20
This discussion is retarded because

1) Rape did not occur and this woman did not press charges even though it's still within the statue of limitations.

2) Aziz didn't do anything to hurt her professionally either.

So it's all a bunch of the grey area that happens in hookup culture and it's none of our business and none of us should give a fuck. If we are going to demonize guys that take advantage of women with low self-esteem; we'd have to ban all men everywhere from working.

The #meetoo movement is destroying itself by not differentiating between actual rape (Cosby) and abuse of power (Weinstein ending actresses' careers); instead focusing on weird sex stuff between consenting adults.

hood
Member
Wed Jan 17 12:54:30
Seb, did you not understand "no, this isn't an indication that I want to debate the topic with you"? It should have been an indication that your incredibly long reply was a complete waste.

Since I explicitly stated I was not interested in continuing, does that mean I've been raped?
jergul
large member
Wed Jan 17 13:16:48
Rape actually did occur by the definition of non-consentual insertion into orfices. As you pointed out, the statute of limitations is far off. Early days.

Seb
Posters are struggling with consent being conditional and subject to retraction.

A lot of the stuff that happened would not qualify as rape. And some of it would.
jergul
large member
Wed Jan 17 13:17:57
Hood
Are internet discussions sex to you? Then you have been subjected to involuntary sex. Poor lad.
Forwyn
Member
Wed Jan 17 13:34:30
Seb and jergul read one-sided transcripts of revenge porn and predictably come in with their Eurocuck spins on rape.

Classic.
Delude
Member
Wed Jan 17 14:03:48
"It wouldn't cross your mind at this point that she's alone, he's stronger, their in his house, he's demonstrated he intends to carry through?"

Wouldn't cross your mind that if roles reverse he went home with her there would be a big thug there waiting to rob him as well as extort?

Of course a thought of safety shpuld cross everyone's mind on any date. But there has been a degree of trust established. Her going home with him. Her allowing oral sex until the introduction of intercourse. Which she did not want to occur. Her prerogative.

She had every right to withdraw the consent that she has allowed to a point. And the point was met and the date ended.

Do you honestly think that she was so sexually violated?

"I'm baffled that so many of you apparently would apparently need a physical slap from a woman to understand when your attention isn't wanted."

I know mix signals like consenting to oral sex would or should never give the impression to venture a step further.
hood
Member
Wed Jan 17 14:18:37
"Are internet discussions sex to you? Then you have been subjected to involuntary sex. Poor lad."

Indeed. I am now a victim of mind and ocular rape. Pity me.
Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 17:31:44
Pillz:

Silly me. Of course it clearly means "perform a sex act on me that doesn't require a condom".

Seriously pillz, if your interpersonal skills are so bad, I advise to avoid sex with people. Sick to blow up dolls, flashlight and
Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 17:32:07
* fleshlights and sheep.
Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 17:37:18
Hood:

I'll be honest. I read the first two sentences of your idiot retort which had enough erroenous thinking to fill several paragraphs. At that point, you exceeded quota and the rest of your post was truncated.

If the goal was "Lalala, I don't want to hear why my opinions are dubioud", best not to reply to my post in the first place.

Yes, I've clearly raped you. But in my defence replying to my post have me mixed messages and your argument didn't put up much resistance. And it was only the top.
Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 17:39:46
Forwyn:

We are assuming the transcript is accurate. I did think of adding that qualifier but given almost all of the posts here start from the implicit view that it's accurate, and my critique is of how they then parse that, it seemed unnecessary.

Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 17:40:30
Gosh I hate autocorrect on this phone. Most persistent even after I go back, it re-corrects.
Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 17:48:31
Delude:

" Her allowing oral sex until the introduction of intercourse"

You have it back to front. Kissing and fumbling. Then he suggests intercourse. She at that point says - effectively - stop.

Instead he performs oral sex.

So let's think that through.

She's against a wall, on a counter top. In this guy's home. Partially undressed clearly. Quite vulnerable.

And she's just asked him to stop. Instead he's ignored that and started going down on her.

The implication is "I'm going to do what I want and tippy can't stop me".

So what's her next move?

Go with the flow?

Be more forceful verbally, at the risk of provoking a violence. Generally, men who don't stop when given a clear verbal signal will use force. So there's risk there.

Be forceful physically? Yeah, right.

No. The moment she said "slow down" and his response was to ignore this and perform a sex act on her, he crossed will over the lines of defensible behaviour.

And the simple test is, at that decision point, what would you do?

Do you really think "Hey, slow down, let's chill" is not an invitation to stick your tongue in a woman's vagina?
Seb
Member
Wed Jan 17 17:55:49
Jergul:

If as described, he responded to "slow down, let's chill out" with sticking his tounge in her vagina, that's pretty strong case for sexual assault.

She'd indicated she wasn't up for sex at that point. The fact he performed a different sex act doesn't really help.

I'm sure pillz and good would agree that their beefy future prison mates* probably aren't entitled to fuck then up the arse after they've explained they don't want to give then a blow job simply because they failed to enumerate all the other things they dont consent too.

*inevitable if they actually act in accordance with the behaviours they defend (which I doubt)
obaminated
Member
Wed Jan 17 18:09:46
Seb.... this is not a battle you should have, even the woman admits it wasnt rape or forced. Just awkward and clumsy.
smart dude
Member
Wed Jan 17 20:41:28
"Generally, men who don't stop when given a clear verbal signal will use force."

That's retarded. I'm sure you have an ounce of evidence to support this and you aren't just making it up.
hood
Member
Wed Jan 17 21:53:12
"If the goal was "Lalala, I don't want to hear why my opinions are dubioud", best not to reply to my post in the first place."

More like I know arguing is pointless because you DON'T bother listening to what the other person says, so I'm not going to put forth any effort. You'll just call everyone here serial rapists anyway for not immediately siding with the female. If I wanted to be called a rapist, I'd club a bitch in the back of the head and tie her up. (it should be noted that I'm not going to do that and the comment was made in jest. so fuck off, NSA)

But I will give you one, single nugget seb:
Please read for the first sign of her communicating non-consent. According to the article, the first time she did that was when he brought up sex. And comments about awkwardness were not raised until well after those first few paragraphs I quoted.

Again, please do not bother replying. I'm not going to read any serious post you make.
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 00:35:22
Hood
Get off the soapbox if you don't want to be hassled.

SD
You go to a bar, a guy accosts you, you say chill, but he punches you. You try to talk him down, move away, or otherwise extract yourself. He still punches you a few more times before you leave. He texts you the next day thanking you for a night on the town.

Were you assaulted? How many times?
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 00:37:47
That should clarify things. People should stop assuming other people want sex with them. It is generally as likely as they wanting to be punched by them.
Forwyn
Member
Thu Jan 18 01:08:15
> implying being punched is the natural escalation of dinner date involving alcohol and going home together
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 01:18:23
Forwyn
I am implying that if you go out drinking, you might get punched. So, yah, it is a natural escalation of social activity involving alcohol.

On review. More people would prefer to be punched than to have their orfices penetrated.
delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 05:15:23
"You have it back to front. Kissing and fumbling. Then he suggests intercourse. She at that point says - effectively - stop.

Instead he performs oral sex.

So let's think that through. "

Mistakenly so; however it does not make my point any less. She did not want to have sex, but he did perform oral sex and she reciprocated.

"She's against a wall, on a counter top. In this guy's home. Partially undressed clearly. Quite vulnerable.

And she's just asked him to stop. Instead he's ignored that and started going down on her.

The implication is "I'm going to do what I want and tippy can't stop me".

So what's her next move?

Go with the flow? "

Or, she would rather have foreplay before having sex? Not entirely sure. I mean, I did suggest that a victim may 'go with the flow' to avoid agitating an aggressor. But at the same time, and in her interviews and responses she did not indicate that she felt she was raped. Other than appalled by the behavior after attempting to give 'subtle' hints. Aziz maybe could have picked up on it. Maybe she could have been more forward...

"Be more forceful verbally, at the risk of provoking a violence. Generally, men who don't stop when given a clear verbal signal will use force. So there's risk there. "

Quite clear that Aziz is not necessarily a violent person. And no generally men will not use force. You have a few who would. This is rather a careless remark made using 'generally.' You may want to reconsider.

"No. The moment she said "slow down" and his response was to ignore this and perform a sex act on her, he crossed will over the lines of defensible behaviour. "

One can say no to intercourse and then prefer oral sex. This is not that rare of a thing. A woman can be a director sometimes and instead of rushing right to sex, may be also thinking,, let's fool around some more too. To Aziz's defense possibly could be thinking the same thing. Especially if she reciprocated.

"And the simple test is, at that decision point, what would you do? "

Not entirely sure, have to be in the moment and be able to read the person. But based on what her account is and what she expressed. It appears that she did not like his behavior, he was too forward, but not to the point where she has claimed rape. Not indicated that she wanted something in return other than expressing her discontent and not appreciate his behavior. His response was reasonable and mature acknowledging that he may have misread the moment.

"Do you really think "Hey, slow down, let's chill" is not an invitation to stick your tongue in a woman's vagina? "

It could be interpreted in a few ways. I demonstrated it just a few lines before...
delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 05:25:49
I think this sums it up nicely for me.

Aziz Ansari Is Guilty. Of Not Being a Mind Reader.

I’m apparently the victim of sexual assault. And if you’re a sexually active woman in the 21st century, chances are that you are, too.
That is what I learned from the “exposé” of Aziz Ansari published last weekend by the feminist website Babe — arguably the worst thing that has happened to the #MeToo movement since it began in October. It transforms what ought to be a movement for women’s empowerment into an emblem for female helplessness.

The headline primes the reader to gird for the very worst: “I went on a date with Aziz Ansari. It turned into the worst night of my life.” Like everyone else, I clicked.

The victim in this 3,000-word article is called Grace — not her real name — and her experience with Mr. Ansari began at a 2017 Emmys after-party. As recounted by the woman to the reporter Katie Way, she approached him, and they bonded over their admiration of the same vintage camera.
The woman was at the party with someone else, but she and Mr. Ansari exchanged numbers and soon arranged a date in Manhattan.

After arriving at his TriBeCa apartment on the appointed evening — she was “excited,” having carefully chosen her outfit after consulting with friends — they exchanged small talk and drank wine. “It was white,” she said. “I didn’t get to choose and I prefer red, but it was white wine.” Yes, we are apparently meant to read the nonconsensual wine choice as foreboding.

They went out to dinner nearby and then returned to Mr. Ansari’s apartment. As she tells it, Mr. Ansari was far too eager to get back to his place after he paid for dinner: “Like, he got the check and then it was bada-boom, bada-bing, we’re out of there.” Another sign of his apparent boorishness.

She complimented Mr. Ansari’s kitchen countertops. He then made a move, asking her to sit on top of them. They started kissing. He undressed her and then himself.

In the 30 or so minutes that followed — recounted beat by cringe-inducing beat — they hooked up. Mr. Ansari persistently tried to have penetrative sex with her, and the woman says she was deeply uncomfortable throughout. At various points, she told the reporter, she attempted to voice her hesitation, but Mr. Ansari ignored her signals.
At last, she uttered the word “no” for the first time during their encounter, to Mr. Ansari’s suggestion that they have sex in front of a mirror. He responded, “‘How about we just chill, but this time with our clothes on?’”
They dressed, sat on the couch and watched “Seinfeld.” She told him, “You guys are all the same.” He called her an Uber. She cried on the way home. Fin.

If you are wondering what about this evening constituted the “worst night” of this woman’s life, or why it is being framed as a #MeToo story by a feminist website, you probably feel as confused as Mr. Ansari did the next day. “It was fun meeting you last night,” he texted.
“Last night might’ve been fun for you, but it wasn’t for me,” she responded. “You ignored clear nonverbal cues; you kept going with advances. You had to have noticed I was uncomfortable.” He replied with an apology.

Read her text message again.

Put in other words: I am angry that you weren’t able to read my mind.

It is worth carefully studying this story. Encoded in it are new yet deeply retrograde ideas about what constitutes consent — and what constitutes sexual violence.

We are told by the reporter that the woman “says she used verbal and nonverbal cues to indicate how uncomfortable and distressed she was.” She adds that “whether Ansari didn’t notice Grace’s reticence or knowingly ignored it is impossible for her to say.” We are told that “he wouldn’t let her move away from him,” in the encounter.

Yet Mr. Ansari, in a statement responding to the account, said that “by all indications” the encounter was “completely consensual.”

I am a proud feminist, and this is what I thought while reading the article:

If you are hanging out naked with a man, it’s safe to assume he is going to try to have sex with you.

If the failure to choose a pinot noir over a pinot grigio offends you, you can leave right then and there.

If you don’t like the way your date hustles through paying the check, you can say, “I’ve had a lovely evening and I’m going home now.”
If you go home with him and discover he’s a terrible kisser, say, “I’m out.”

If you start to hook up and don’t like the way he smells or the way he talks (or doesn’t talk), end it.

If he pressures you to do something you don’t want to do, use a four-letter word, stand up on your two legs and walk out his door.

Aziz Ansari sounds as if he were aggressive and selfish and obnoxious that night. Isn’t it heartbreaking and depressing that men — especially ones who present themselves publicly as feminists — so often act this way in private? Shouldn’t we try to change our broken sexual culture? And isn’t it enraging that women are socialized to be docile and accommodating and to put men’s desires before their own? Yes. Yes. Yes.
But the solution to these problems does not begin with women torching men for failing to understand their “nonverbal cues.” It is for women to be more verbal. It’s to say, “This is what turns me on.” It’s to say, “I don’t want to do that.” And, yes, sometimes it means saying goodbye.

The single most distressing thing to me about this story is that the only person with any agency in the story seems to be Aziz Ansari. The woman is merely acted upon.

All of this put me in mind of another article published this weekend, this one by the novelist and feminist icon Margaret Atwood. “My fundamental position is that women are human beings,” she writes. “Nor do I believe that women are children, incapable of agency or of making moral decisions. If they were, we’re back to the 19th century, and women should not own property, have credit cards, have access to higher education, control their own reproduction or vote. There are powerful groups in North America pushing this agenda, but they are not usually considered feminists.”

Except, increasingly, they are.

The article in Babe was met with digital hosannas by young feminists who insisted that consent is consent only if it is affirmative, active, continuous and — and this is the word most used — enthusiastic. Consent isn’t the only thing they are radically redefining. A recent survey by The Economist/YouGov found that approximately 25 percent of millennial-age American men think asking someone for a drink is harassment. More than a third of millennial men and women say that if a man compliments a woman’s looks it is harassment.

To judge from social media reaction, they also see a flagrant abuse of power in this sexual encounter. Yes, Mr. Ansari is a wealthy celebrity with a Netflix show. But he had no actual power over the woman — professionally or otherwise. And lumping him in with the same movement that brought down men who ran movie studios and forced themselves on actresses, or the factory-floor supervisors who demanded sex from female workers, trivializes what #MeToo first stood for.

I’m sorry this woman had this experience. I too have had lousy romantic encounters, as has every adult woman I know. I have regretted these encounters, and not said anything at all. I have regretted them and said so, as she did. And I know I am lucky that these unpleasant moments were far from being anything approaching assault or rape, or even the worst night of my life.
But the response to her story makes me think that many of my fellow feminists might insist that my experience was just that, and for me to define it otherwise is nothing more than my internalized misogyny.

There is a useful term for what this woman experienced on her night with Mr. Ansari. It’s called “bad sex.” It sucks.

The feminist answer is to push for a culture in which boys and young men are taught that sex does not have to be pursued as if they’re in a pornographic film, and one in which girls and young women are empowered to be bolder, braver and louder about what they want. The insidious attempt by some women to criminalize awkward, gross and entitled sex takes women back to the days of smelling salts and fainting couches. That’s somewhere I, for one, don’t want to go.

http://www...ri-babe-sexual-harassment.html
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 05:45:40
Use a pre-cautionary approach to any form of penetration. Be damned sure that is what the person in question wants to do.

So, yah, you need repeated, positive affirmation.

Or you may be charged with rape, and at the very least outed in social media.
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 05:56:28
http://the...s-lack-of-viewpoint-diversity/
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 06:08:45
One thing that does follow from defacto criminalizing sexual assault is that a smaller degree of moral stigma is attached to the crime.

He was sentenced for sexual assault having say the same stigma as he was sentenced for punching a woman in her late 50s.

Or something similar.
delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 06:59:06
Thank you for pointing out that you are unfavorable of the author. It doesn't negate the point I made that supports my opinion and that I share.

So am I to believe that you and Seb think that now if a guy attempts to kiss a woman during a date that she did not want and shuts him down and the date ends. She is allowed to later go and express her complete uncomfortableness that a date she had with a guy made her feel uncomfortable and she is to text him and express on how terrible she feels as she was giving subtle hints that he shouldn't have tried to kiss her, hold hands, touch her shoulders, caress any limbs.

Where is the line drawn.

I can't buy it in this particular situation. I am sure the woman described felt uncomfortable, but not so much to ultimately reciprocate oral sex, continued to end up watching a show together and then for her to give her opinion and then Aziz calling an uber and getting her a ride home.

To further the movement of #metoo, and let us not get confused-- I support it. But I am not going to lose my rationale and objectivity and jump on the bandwagon because a person now feels that any attempt of advances by someone that makes them feel uncomfortable is now grounds for sexual assault or that they have been egregiously sexually violated.


jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:05:04
Delude
You should draw the line at some point before penetrating any orfices.

Kiss on lips. Ok for purposes of trying to affirm consent.

Fingers or tongue into mouth, vagina, anal cavity. No ok for purposes of trying to affirm consent.

This is not exactly rocket science.

jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:07:27
Just don't stick anything inside someone elses body unless you are incredibly sure they want that, mkay?
delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 07:10:19
Yes, again, reciprocating oral sex by no way means he could attempt other methods of sexual play.
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:11:35
I probably would not vouch for groping or kissing nipples despite the lack of penetration involved. Just goes to show there is no rule without exceptions.
delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 07:12:27
Or the sheer that you cannot fathom that a person many not want to have sex, but would possibly enjoy foreplay instead...
delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 07:12:38
may not*
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:12:53
Dude, dont stick stuff into other people unless your are absolutely sure they want it.

Or be willing to face criminal charges and social ostrascism if you do.

Your call.
delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 07:14:22
dude, don't pretend that this person has been so violated that it was the worst moment of her life to reciprocate oral sex and still hang out only then to take the moment to jump on the bandwagaon because he was a celebrity and make it a story.

your call
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:19:40
Incidentally, we all know what he was trying to do. He was trying to nag or wear her down into having sex. I think he was perfectly aware she was not into it and needed some serious convincing.

I too think metoo has to accept some degree of uncouth behavior, but that stops before any form of penetration.
Delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 07:21:36
So in other words. Bad date. Didnt get anywhere. Sent home. She regretted it.
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:22:46
She was objectively violated. That is what putting stuff into someone without their permission is.

Just don't do that, bro.

Its not rocket science.
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:23:18
And remind me never to have a sauna with you.
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:28:58
Again, metoo has to allow for some degree of brinkmanship (because boys will be boys no matter gender). But the brink stops somewhere before penetration/vigorous stimulation of external erogenous matter.

He crossed lines with his fingers and tongue.

I am not going to go into unequality of power perspective because it is redundant. His actions would have been wrong from any power point.

jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:29:45
She regretted it.

And now he regrets it.
Delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 07:31:06
Just don't think that if we is giving you head that it means she would be open to the idea of other sexual endeavors.

And your second comment has nothing to do with anything other than making quip remarks to appease your ego and to not rationally think things through because bad dates dont exist in your world.
Delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 07:31:46
Autocorrect. *that if we is giving you head
hood
Member
Thu Jan 18 07:32:40
"Hood
Get off the soapbox if you don't want to be hassled."

Hmm? I have no interest in talking with Seb, as he is about as disingenuous as one can get without stooping to Rod levels of ignorance. I am willing to converse with people who actually read arguments instead of assign them.
jergul
large member
Thu Jan 18 07:36:29
Delude
I think that after maneuvering a woman down to my crotch, I would not think moving forward was a good idea if she was less than enthusiastic about it.

Its not a "maybe she is just not into blowjobs" moment. You can usually tell that part if you have to get her to touch your dick in the first place.

I am actually quite at a loss on how incompetent the whole thing was. You do not actually have to sexually assault a woman to nag her down.
Delude
Member
Thu Jan 18 07:44:07
*she

Yet she consented to perform the act.
Seb
Member
Thu Jan 18 10:09:10
Hood:

"More like I know arguing is pointless because you DON'T bother listening to what the other person says,"

More like you burry anything salient amid layers of whining so I don't get to the substance. E.g. complaining I didn't read your post when I explicitly referred to it.

Stop burying the lede and you might have a point.

hood
Member
Thu Jan 18 10:25:23
Referring to it doesn't really matter when you grossly misrepresent the actual message.

Example:
"More like you burry anything salient amid layers of whining so I don't get to the substance."

What? The only whining was from this Grace girl who feels like every experience she has needs to be pleasant.
----------------

Sure, I referred to your post. I quoted it, I recognized that there was an inkling of talk about complaining. However, my response pretty clearly indicates that I have no fucking idea what you actually said, since the message of your post was about me.

It's like when Putin's fluffer starts talking about Hillary in a thread about oil pipelines. The fuck does "warmonger Hillary" have to do with shit?


"Stop burying the lede and you might have a point."

You seem to have this notion that I am interested in talking about this topic with you, like I'm trying to have a legitimate discussion about the nature of what Aziz did with you, but keep getting in the way of that discussion. I'm not. There is no point for me to get to because I do not have any relevant point on this topic as it pertains to conversing with you.
Seb
Member
Thu Jan 18 10:27:01
Delude:

"She did not want to have sex, but he did perform oral sex and she reciprocated."

I think you can stop at "she did not want to have sex, but he performed oral sex on her". She *said* to him immediately before he did this that she wanted to slow down and chill out, which is a polite way of saying "no thank you".

Sex. Without. Consent.

The fact that she then reciprocated can be explained as an attempt to appease, de-escalate and head off potential threat *given* that verbal attempts had failed and resulted in him performing a sex act on her that was clearly against her wishes.

What you can't do is then say that actions following the first incdent can some how retroactively create consent when there was none.

Consent was explicitly denied. I'm not really sure why everyone finds this concept so hard.

"But at the same time, and in her interviews and responses she did not indicate that she felt she was raped."

Legal figures rarely rely on the perception of the victim. A patient in a permanent vegitative state can be raped, even if brain scans show they have no activity.

The question is whether she concented, and she is clearly saying she didn't.

Now whether she wants charges pressed or whether charges could be pressed is a separate question.

The point here is if her account is accurate, and if she wanted prosecution (which also depends on there being enough corroborating evidence - but lets assume her account is somehow objectively provable) - that could happen. These events, as described by a hypothetical omniscient narrator, would constitute sexual assault.

And we should all be able to agree that Aziz Ansari's behaviour is unacceptable.

"One can say no to intercourse and then prefer oral sex. "
Was there any indication she preferred oral sex? She might have preferred unprotected sex. She might have preferred anal sex. The point is, again, taking her account as literal truth - if it happened as described after she said what she said, what reasonable basis does someone have to believe that any of those acts have consent?

The underlying idea seems to be "if I'm kissing you, I can assume I have consent for any sexual act unless you specifically reject it" - which cannot possibly be the basis for any viable law criminalising sexual assault.

At some point someone is going to come along and say something stupid about how this is so bureaucratic and needs a lot of complicated communication.

It really really doesn't.

This stuff is unbelievably obvious.

Nobody has, as far as I can see, actively suggested that in the situation Ansari was in, that they would have gone from "lets chill out" to immediately giving her a blow job. Alarm bells should have been ringing. Not "hey, does this meet the technical definition of sexual assault", but "hmm, this person seems uncomfortable, what can I do to make her more comfortable and get things back on track" and if the answer to that is "I know, I'll stick my tounge in her vagina" then I suggest that person fails on basic interpersonal skills so badly that they should probably not be having sex with other people - and stick to inanimate objects.

The whole diving into whether there is some technical loophole argument whizes right past the key point: if you are having sex with a woman, that's a person not an object and if they aren't horny for you, you can't make them horny by performing sex acts on them. This is what people mean by objectification.


Seb
Member
Thu Jan 18 10:30:15
hood:

First you were whining that I didn't read your whole post (I did). Then you were whining that when I read your whining response, I didn't read to the part where you asked me not to reply to you (then why reply to me?).

Now you are whining that I'm laughing at your whining.

Are you going to make a substantive point? Or if you are making them somewhere in your posts, can I advise you do so up the top and put the whining down at the bottom, then I'm likely not to give up.

And if you really don't want to debate, don't reply. Simples. I wouldn't want to trigger you, given the horrendous textual rape I've apparently inflicted on you.

Cherub Cow
Member
Thu Jan 18 20:50:12
[Hood]: "More like I know arguing is pointless because you DON'T bother listening to what the other person says, so I'm not going to put forth any effort"

In a nutshell, that's interaction with Seb! These threads have been much easier to read by just skipping that garbage. If you read Seb posts you have to stop every sentence and think, "[The person to whom Seb is speaking] did not say that or indicate that in any way, but Seb thinks that [that person] did.. so how much time will be wasted correcting the misrepresentations before getting to any substance?" Just not worth reading it, and there's little gain in "debating" with such an error-prone mind.

..
[Rugian]: "This is basically revenge porn in text format"

+1
This is basically a non-event about an unassertive person with entitlement issues taking revenge on a bad sexual encounter by detailing it for a public audience. There was no rape here. There was no sexual assault. Itemizing the events, an SVU detective would just shrug and ask the writers if the episode was over or if they should bring in more plot details so that there could be a case (in that SVU fiction: maybe in a separate, *actual* assault Ansari was told "no" but did *not* stop, watch Seinfeld, and then call a cab after a receiving a sexist comment from his date about all men being the same? — didn't happen here in the anonymous person's account, though).

For the broken record I've been playing: this is also another example of slave morality feminism (this being different from equality-minded feminism; this slave morality feminism popped up most recently in the Louis CK apology). There's a vocabulary of ressentiment and slave entitlement here (the white wine, the "nonverbal cues", how they met at a fancy after-party that was apparently held entirely to honor his many triumphs in battle) wherein she wants Ansari to be accountable for everything bad that she feels because he's successful and she.. apparently not successful?

That article ("Aziz Ansari Is Guilty. Of Not Being a Mind Reader.") gets into it somewhat. She apparently does not feel that she was responsible for her actions during this date (a person who has surrendered "agency" or accountability). Due to Ansari's social power, he (apparently) needed to have been a Dr. Lightman micro-expression reader in order for her to not post the revenge porn (and revenge itself certainly works well for ressentiment). This has become a cultural weapon used to attack the power of "successful"/"powerful" men, but it's harmful for women because it sets things back to a 1790s denial of female value (in the Wollstonecraft sense). Or in other terms: she fully had the power to say, "No," to specify her desires, to stop also the foreplay/oral, to dress and leave — all the values of agency and willfulness that facilitate equality-feminist individuals.. but by the slave morality narrative, none of that matters because in her hidden mind she was uncomfortable and Ansari with all of his empires and with the mind of Sauron that the rings granted him should have known without words to never even risk an uncomfortable moment.

At any rate, that white wine thing was a disgusting tell and will probably be a good meme that makes fun of the psychology of entitled halfwits. Honestly I'm disgusted that I've now posted one comment in this thread and have not yet been offered my favorite drink. Never mind that none of you could have known that I was going to post, and never mind that I have never stated my favorite drink to you. You should anticipate my every desire before even I myself am aware of it so that I can dissolve my identity into your service towards me. #MeToo
hood
Member
Thu Jan 18 20:56:28
"Honestly I'm disgusted that I've now posted one comment in this thread and have not yet been offered my favorite drink"

AHEM! -points to the blue powerade on the counter-

You were saying?


"that white wine thing was a disgusting tell and will probably be a good meme"

"White wine? What are you, a rapist?"
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Thu Jan 18 20:59:10
CC knows de wae
obaminated
Member
Thu Jan 18 21:08:14
How is this still going on?
Cherub Cow
Member
Thu Jan 18 22:30:46
"White wine? What are you, a rapist?"

lol :D
Pillz
Member
Thu Jan 18 22:38:43
Well never know if she would have liked it better if he had served white wine without asking.

And that is really what we all want to know
Pillz
Member
Thu Jan 18 22:39:44
Bah, red
delude
Member
Fri Jan 19 17:44:10
Without reading the diatribe contributed by seb. My views are similar to CC and would suffice to say is my point.
obaminated
Member
Fri Jan 19 19:48:05
That is a funny point. For some reason she thought it pertinent to explain that he offered her white wine, but she would prefer red.

hood
Member
Sat Jan 20 12:41:37
"That is a funny point. For some reason she thought it pertinent to explain that he offered her white wine, but she would prefer red."

Well duh. This was an important setup. It "established" that Aziz was cold and controlling. He didn't solicit her input in WINE choice. With that in mind, it only makes sense for the reader to interpret any moment within the rest of the story where details are light and it wasn't explicitly stated that Aziz wasn't acquiring confirmed consent to be similar to the wine situation. He made out with her and put his fingers in her mouth? Well he didn't ask about wine, so it was probably forced on her without her consent. He asked for penis to vagina sex and she said no, so he went down on her? Well he didn't ask about the wine, so she probably didn't want it and he clearly raped her. He was pushy about scoring a home run? Well he didn't ask about the wine, so he was probably trying to rape her.

Clearly if you ever make a decision in a date scenario and your date doesn't like it, you're a fucking rapist from there on out.



I mean, she might have said no to Aziz on some of the other things he did to her, he may actually be a rapist. But based on the information from this story, all we know is that she didn't like what he did to her, not that she didn't consent (except to sex requiring a condom, she said no to that and it never happened).

And rapists drink white wine, so be on the lookout.
Pillz
Member
Sat Jan 20 13:55:08
Clearly we need a federally regulated database of white wine purchasers.
Seb
Member
Sat Jan 20 14:08:50
Hood:

"(except to sex requiring a condom, she said no to that and it never happened".

Simple question. What is it in "Whoa, let’s relax for a sec, let’s chill.’” that leads you to believe she's drawing a line at condom but saying yes to oral sex?

The Children
Member
Sat Jan 20 14:36:45
throw him in da cell with bubba then we will see who is the raper.


Average Ameriacn
Member
Sat Jan 20 14:52:00
Abstinence only education would have prevented this.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sat Jan 20 15:37:47
>>These threads have been much easier to read by just skipping that garbage. If you read Seb posts you have to stop every sentence and think, "[The person to whom Seb is speaking] did not say that or indicate that in any way, but Seb thinks that [that person] did.. so how much time will be wasted correcting the misrepresentations before getting to any substance?"<<

I have to admit, these days I regularly skip sebs posts, they are often as long as they are awful. And as a matter of principle you have to assume that whatever seb is arguing against has never been said by the person to who the response is aimed at.

I have on numerous occasions started to respond to something he has written these past months in a note on my phone or computer, as I am finished, good judgement prevails and I refrain from posting, to what use? For every fire you put out the empirical nihilist can easily start 50 more. AHA! Here are 453289 more irrelevant question for you to answer! On top of the 548327 "so you are saying [insert thing you did not say]?".

Speaking of which! Anyone catch the interview with Jordan Peterson and this Cathy Newman?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

I suffered through the entire thing and holy fuck what a disaster. As the "interview" was going on and this so called journalist kept saying "so you are saying [insert thing that Peterson did not say]" I kept thinking, seb is that you? Because it reminded me of all the bad faith "questions" and disasters of discussions I have had with seb. Is this a UK thing? From what I understand this is good TV in the UK.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sat Jan 20 15:51:43
To go back on topic, the entire metoo movement has been plagued by this from at least that I know of in Sweden from day 7. CK was a great example, but Ansari was too much. Now what is happening is that everyone else is looking into the details of all the "stories" with new eyes.

Fairly big name feminists like Margaret Atwood, whose Hand Maids tale has been used by feminists *cough seb* (on this board) to smear sexism on people, got flack recently for saying "hey guys, what about due process?".

This is going full circle, where we will end up back where we were. Rape is a very difficult to prove, regardless of what Lulzgul says as I have explained to him the words of the chair of the Swedish lawyers union, >>consent laws will make no fucking difference<<, it is just another layer of getting bogged down in he said she said. Did you get consent? Him: yes. Her: no. Mission accomplished! That anyone is so stupid to not IMMEDIATELY realize this, is quite fascinating.

So back again to square one. Now with the added bonus of the entire world witnessing how vindictive women who _were not raped_ can be abusing this movement in several highly publicized cases, casting more doubt on real victims. Good job sebgulz < the only idiots saying Ansari raped her. Mission accomplished part 2!
Seb
Member
Sun Jan 21 06:00:16
Nim:

Typical moaning. You want to have your cake and eat it. The things you "haven't said" are logical consequence of the things you have said. It's up to you to reconcile the two.

Can you give me an example of a thing that I've claimed you said that you haven't?
Seb
Member
Sun Jan 21 06:02:27
Nihilist is a really odd term to use to describe me. Like postmodernism, I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Seb
Member
Sun Jan 21 06:03:24
", whose Hand Maids tale has been used by feminists *cough seb* (on this board) "
[Citation needed]
Seb
Member
Sun Jan 21 06:09:44
"Rape is a very difficult to prove"

Indeed it is. But this is not a court of law. The dispute is - if it is taken as given that the events described are accurate - whether those describe a sexual assault or not.

Ansari, presumably, would dispute key details - fine.

But if everyone here is working off the same information and treating it as true, that's not an issue.

It seems many have a strange idea of what consent is; where "woah relax, let's chill out" apparently can be unambiguously taken to mean "go down on me".
delude
Member
Sun Jan 21 06:48:37
"It seems many have a strange idea of what consent is; where "woah relax, let's chill out" apparently can be unambiguously taken to mean "go down on me"."

As it escalated to that point as it deviated from intercourse. If this was a crime as it being perceived and attached to the 'metoo' movement. You would think the lady involved would go to the police and file a report.

But no, advances were too much for her. She participated in the sexual endeavors. She regretted it. Shared her experience and exploited it.

But you want to continuously play the card that she only participated because she feared for her safety.
delude
Member
Sun Jan 21 06:49:04
If she feared so much, she wouldn't have taken the time to text her attacker...
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jan 21 08:30:11
[Citation needed]

"Seb
Member Fri May 05 14:54:31
I kinda feel like I've walked into the backstory for the Handmaids's tale.

Which reminds me, I need to download the series.

Seriously, watching Nim's gradual radicalisation is quite depressing"

http://www...hread=80083&time=1494168751410

Good judgement does not allow me to continue past this point. It was trivial to google:

seb Handmaids tale site:www.utopiaforums.com

I expect nothing from you, but a wordy denial. The floor is yours Mr Publishing record.
Seb
Member
Sun Jan 21 08:57:44
delude:

"As it escalated to that point as it deviated from intercourse."

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here, I am parsing this as:

"As it escalated to that point, and as it deviated from intercourse then yes, it does mean consent".

Neither of this holds legal water. Consent for sex can be withdrawn at any time; and everything beyond this point is tainted *because* having attempted to refuse and been ignored, she's now in a position of coercion. If you don't allow that, then how on earth can you criminalize rape (or extortion) with non-explicit but implied threats?

"If this was a crime as it being perceived and attached to the 'metoo' movement."

Again, not clear what you are saying, but if it is that because many aren't saying it is a crime, it isn't a crime, that again doesn't hold legal water.

"You would think the lady involved would go to the police and file a report."
Lol. Yeah, like all those women assaulted by Harvey Weinstein. Perhaps because it wouldn't be taken seriously.

"Shared her experience and exploited it."
So, you talk about it, that's exploitation and means rape can't have happened? Again, what's the legal basis here?

"But you want to continuously play the card that she only participated because she feared for her safety."

I'm saying that's a possibility - legally you can't use it to argue around the fact he had consent when he proceeded to perform a sexual act on someone who very clearly said no. There's nothing in what she said that suggests an invitation to any kind of sexual activity, and it is behaviour like Ansari's that creates sexual assault.

Lets say things had proceeded differently. Lets say the scenario had been captured on camera and recording up to the point he goes down on her, and she goes to the police and says rape.

Do you seriously doubt Ansari wouldn't then be convicted of sexual assault?

If the only defense he has is circumstantial - that's not going to hold up.

Seb
Member
Sun Jan 21 09:09:17
Nim:

Thank you, saved me the time of hunting it out myself :)

You were arguing that you thought you had no responsibility in determining whether a woman got pregnant, and could remove your obligations to any child because she should undergo a fairly difficult and invasive medical procedure to so relieve you of any obligation to the child.

"If she can kill it, I can walk away." As you so put it. In the link above.

Pointing out that kind of assumption of control over a persons body is the thematic matter of a book and TV show isn't smearing you. I suppose more accurate would be forcing people to have babies they didn't want, rather than forcing them to have medical procedures they didn't want (would you support forced vasectomies for men that found themselves in such predicaments?)

Smearing you would imply you hadn't just outright stated your view. I stand by it.

No doubt you will try to say you didn't say what you actually said (thank you for providing the link) or alternatively suggest that any reference to Handmaid's Tail means I must be suggesting you are actually a military theocrat or something. In which case, one has to ask which of us is making something up and ascribing it to the other.
delude
Member
Sun Jan 21 09:11:21
Amazing that everything you took of mine and took it out of context.
show deleted posts
Bookmark and Share