I did several times. The first time I thought he raped her, and thought the reaction in this thread was too tame.
If she was not interested, she didn't communicate it. Was she coerced into oral sex and making out?
Celebrity Allegations, #MeToo etc
- Thread starter Buchan
- Start date
I did several times. The first time I thought he raped her, and thought the reaction in this thread was too tame.
If she was not interested, she didn't communicate it. Was she coerced into oral sex and making out?
The press made it like a gender issue, while I think it is more about Wahlberg being a dick about it. But if it is true he got co star approval, then again it is within his right to ask for the money.
I see it as no different than a female actor being a diva with outrageous demands
“He probably moved my hand to his dick five to seven times,” she said. “He really kept doing it after I moved it away.”
"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."
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.
" It was literally the most unexpected thing I thought would happen at that moment because I told him I was uncomfortable.”
@Eboue
I acknowledge the moving her hand to his dick is problematic. What do you think of this?
Whether Ansari didn’t notice Grace’s reticence or knowingly ignored it is impossible for her to say.
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.”
How is that anything but contradictory? All the reluctance is happening in her head, and if she can't say for sure whether he noticed her reluctance or ignored it, how can anyone else?
I acknowledge the moving her hand to his dick is problematic. What do you think of this?
Whether Ansari didn’t notice Grace’s reticence or knowingly ignored it is impossible for her to say.
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.”
How is that anything but contradictory? All the reluctance is happening in her head, and if she can't say for sure whether he noticed her reluctance or ignored it, how can anyone else?
Not all the reluctance is in her head. She was clearly reluctant before this point several times. He should have taken the hint.
This Ansari accusation must seem all a bit familiar to a lot of guys.
“Non verbal clues”; been out of the dating circuit for a long while now but in the past I could recognize a “no”, even if it’s not expressly said.
Mind you, a “no” for me usually didn’t turn into oral sex either.
Not sure what to make of it all really.
“Non verbal clues”; been out of the dating circuit for a long while now but in the past I could recognize a “no”, even if it’s not expressly said.
Mind you, a “no” for me usually didn’t turn into oral sex either.
Not sure what to make of it all really.
Yeah it seemed like a fairly normal date scenario. Basically a bad date, except in this case between a really unattractive but famous dude and a girl who knew who he was and thought it would be cool to hang out.
@adexkola seems to take the contrary position on every issue in this thread 
I'm kind of uncomfortable with the softening of the line between taking advantage of someone and clumsily misreading signals. Might be a controversial thing to say but I honestly don't think we're that far off from: 'we had sex but in hindsight I wish I hadn't', being considered assault. I've had sex with people I wish I hadn't and no doubt some of the people who I've had sex with wished they hadn't. That's not abuse, that's life.
It really does cheapen the experience of those who are actually taken advantage of. Sexual encounters often take place without a significant amount of verbal communication. When that happens signals will be misread, actions not considered appropriate by one of the parties will take place. There's also the issue for me of treating women as some kind of child-like moron who can find themselves naked in someone's hotel room over the course of several hours and somehow believe that they had absolutely nothing to do with that situation. I really cannot imagine anyone not laughing out the door the idea that a man who voluntarily dated a woman, voluntarily went back to her hotel room, got naked, had sex with her and by his own admission at no point explicitly told her he didn't wish to and wanted to leave, who then came out some time later and said because of this experience he felt sexually assaulted.
Watering the issue down to the point where by the end of the year we're probably going to get someone come forward and say that they kissed David Beckham when they were both at school, but looking back on it they don't recall ever signing a contract of terms agreeing to the smooch so therefore #metoo - I don't think helps anyone.
It really does cheapen the experience of those who are actually taken advantage of. Sexual encounters often take place without a significant amount of verbal communication. When that happens signals will be misread, actions not considered appropriate by one of the parties will take place. There's also the issue for me of treating women as some kind of child-like moron who can find themselves naked in someone's hotel room over the course of several hours and somehow believe that they had absolutely nothing to do with that situation. I really cannot imagine anyone not laughing out the door the idea that a man who voluntarily dated a woman, voluntarily went back to her hotel room, got naked, had sex with her and by his own admission at no point explicitly told her he didn't wish to and wanted to leave, who then came out some time later and said because of this experience he felt sexually assaulted.
Watering the issue down to the point where by the end of the year we're probably going to get someone come forward and say that they kissed David Beckham when they were both at school, but looking back on it they don't recall ever signing a contract of terms agreeing to the smooch so therefore #metoo - I don't think helps anyone.
Would be hard if not impossible to prove sexual assault in a court of law in the Ansari case but he clearly acted like a complete dick. Once she said she didn't want to feel forced, that should have been the end of it. Not sure how you go from that to "Let's sit on the couch and please suck my dick".
While I agree that that may happen, I struggle to believe that most women who have a consensual sexual encounter that they later regret would classify it as sexual assault. I don't know if you are referring to the Ansari case specifically but it's clear that the woman verbally indicated that she felt uncomfortable and didn't want to continue.
Look, if a woman pulls away from touching your dick seven times, don’t go in for an eighth.
Good general rule.
I have actually had a re-think on this whole episode. Mostly driven by a debate with my wife over it who had a different read than my initial one on it.
I think this situation is a result of Ansari hoping for a one and done feck date while the girl in question clinging on to the fantasy of dating a celeb even when he had revealed himself to be a creepy and vulgar individual. I do believe her when she says that she gave verbal and non-verbal cues that she was not ready for a sexual encounter but then she also didn't leave the place immediately after the first incident that made her comfortable and did participate in other sexual acts. Sorry to bring in pop psychology to it, but I think she would have called for cab men much sooner in other cases but just clinged on more in this one due to the desire of dating a celeb. For example - at one point she mentions that she sat on a sofa naked or in partly naked state hoping that he would just give her a back rub or play with her hair. Instead he instead turned the situation towards sex again. Now to be blunt, most folks would think that someone being naked in your place is also a cue towards getting more intimate. Compounded by the fact they indulged in oral sex even after she said she was uncomfortable. I can see why she got pressured into it given his status but from his perspective the fact she participated again even after pulling back at first, probably justified the aggressive behavior. When she did say a firm no and asked for a cab, she did get out. In a perfect world, women would not have to say an emphatic no to avoid any sexual maneuvering by the opposite sex but in this case I am having a hard time to understand as to why she did not just point blank say that she was not going indulge in any sexual activity, get dressed and worst case, leave the apartment.
Do I think, his overall behavior as described in the piece was out of line? Yes. Does it cross over into sexual assault territory? I don't think so. Overall, it still does look awfully bad for him given his otherwise public stance on dating. For example, his role in Master of none is some what auto-biographical and he is portrayed there as a man who is almost too slow to make a move on a woman rather than some aggressively pushing a date towards sex.
I think this situation is a result of Ansari hoping for a one and done feck date while the girl in question clinging on to the fantasy of dating a celeb even when he had revealed himself to be a creepy and vulgar individual. I do believe her when she says that she gave verbal and non-verbal cues that she was not ready for a sexual encounter but then she also didn't leave the place immediately after the first incident that made her comfortable and did participate in other sexual acts. Sorry to bring in pop psychology to it, but I think she would have called for cab men much sooner in other cases but just clinged on more in this one due to the desire of dating a celeb. For example - at one point she mentions that she sat on a sofa naked or in partly naked state hoping that he would just give her a back rub or play with her hair. Instead he instead turned the situation towards sex again. Now to be blunt, most folks would think that someone being naked in your place is also a cue towards getting more intimate. Compounded by the fact they indulged in oral sex even after she said she was uncomfortable. I can see why she got pressured into it given his status but from his perspective the fact she participated again even after pulling back at first, probably justified the aggressive behavior. When she did say a firm no and asked for a cab, she did get out. In a perfect world, women would not have to say an emphatic no to avoid any sexual maneuvering by the opposite sex but in this case I am having a hard time to understand as to why she did not just point blank say that she was not going indulge in any sexual activity, get dressed and worst case, leave the apartment.
Do I think, his overall behavior as described in the piece was out of line? Yes. Does it cross over into sexual assault territory? I don't think so. Overall, it still does look awfully bad for him given his otherwise public stance on dating. For example, his role in Master of none is some what auto-biographical and he is portrayed there as a man who is almost too slow to make a move on a woman rather than some aggressively pushing a date towards sex.
What about the old “just the tip?”
How many guys in here have said that to a woman? I know I have
I am going to be blunt here just for the effect, apologies upfront if people think this is kind of victim-blaming. I am more interested in another perspective to these to make up my own mind over it.
If she felt uncomfortable and did not want to continue then why did she continue? Let's say he did force her hand or even her mouth towards his genital area. Are we saying that he forced then to perform any acts she did? They were not in a professional relationship, it was their first date - why did she spend so much time in his apartment at all, that too a lot of in a state of undress? At what point, do adult women lose agency to stop this kind of incident from happening? I can understand harassment in a workplace being difficult to counter but adults have to take responsibility for their actions or getting involved in such incidents on first dates itself. Nothing in this case, suggests that she lost the power to completely stop the sexual acts from happening since a couple of times she temporarily did and eventually she completely stopped it by leaving the apartment.
Some people are comparing this to date rapes which is highly irresponsible IMO. Date rapes largely involve people drugging someone or physically forcing themselves on another. In this case while it is vile that Ansari felt entitled enough to force through a sexual intercourse, it is never suggested that he actually used physical force at any point. Some might say that is a low bar and perhaps it is but it is also important not to trivialise actual rapes and sexual assaults.
His statement -
Diff perspective - https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/01/the-humiliation-of-aziz-ansari/550541/
I don't agree with this article actually but just putting it out there
I don't agree with this article actually but just putting it out there
Trial by media in this climate. People take the testimony of a anonymous person as gospel and the comedian's reputation is forever stained.
The future will judge Mike Pence as a visionary.
What about after the 3rd time a man tries to make you touch his dick,you conclude he's dick only after one thing and get your coat and leave.
Ansari treated her like groupie,she behaved like groupie and in hindsight she decided she not the kind women of behaved that way.
Discussed that one with the wife to see what her thoughts were and her reaction was pretty much the same as mine, a typical douchy guy that was over eager to get some but nothing more. She thinks most women have been in that situation and its their decision to have sex or not judging on the guys behaviour.
It does seem like behaviour that used to be described in many other terms is now being thrown under sexual assualt.
I dunno, i think its a bit offensive to suggest women are so incapable of making a decision because of repetitious requests. If they feel unsafe thats a different matter
It does seem like behaviour that used to be described in many other terms is now being thrown under sexual assualt.
I dunno, i think its a bit offensive to suggest women are so incapable of making a decision because of repetitious requests. If they feel unsafe thats a different matter
Let me put it like this;
Men and women are able to change their mind about engaging in sexual activity even when;
1 - they are in your apartment/house
2 - they are kissing you
3 - they are naked in your bed
4 - have already given you oral/other sexual activity
5 - are currently having sex with you
etc.
You are not entitled to a person's body just because you have cleared certain checkpoints, and for some people they can go from wanting sex in one moment, to not wanting it, in the next moment.
This idea of a verbal 'no' is troublesome because it assumes that the person who wants to say no, will always speak up and communicate this.
If someone is not wanting to engage with you sexually, yet you insist on doing so they will often 'check out' so they are not wholly there or present, this is particularly prominent with rape and sexual assault victims when they freeze, or are silent and not as responsive.
Just because they didn't communicate a verbal no, doesn't mean that they wanted it - but their body language should give you indication of this, and if you aren't sure just ask, look them in the eyes - if you're having sex and both of you are enjoying it there should be sounds, grabbing, kissing, eye contact etc.
Equally, sexual assault isn't black and white - so I understand why some of you may feel frustrated.
What Aziz did wasn't okay - does that make him evil, bad? No. Should he be in prison? Not in my opinion. Should his career be over? Nope.
But I hope that he, and many others - because this is a common experience for people to go through, especially women, and it's only so common because of the lack of conversation surrounding it.
Men and women are able to change their mind about engaging in sexual activity even when;
1 - they are in your apartment/house
2 - they are kissing you
3 - they are naked in your bed
4 - have already given you oral/other sexual activity
5 - are currently having sex with you
etc.
You are not entitled to a person's body just because you have cleared certain checkpoints, and for some people they can go from wanting sex in one moment, to not wanting it, in the next moment.
This idea of a verbal 'no' is troublesome because it assumes that the person who wants to say no, will always speak up and communicate this.
If someone is not wanting to engage with you sexually, yet you insist on doing so they will often 'check out' so they are not wholly there or present, this is particularly prominent with rape and sexual assault victims when they freeze, or are silent and not as responsive.
Just because they didn't communicate a verbal no, doesn't mean that they wanted it - but their body language should give you indication of this, and if you aren't sure just ask, look them in the eyes - if you're having sex and both of you are enjoying it there should be sounds, grabbing, kissing, eye contact etc.
Equally, sexual assault isn't black and white - so I understand why some of you may feel frustrated.
What Aziz did wasn't okay - does that make him evil, bad? No. Should he be in prison? Not in my opinion. Should his career be over? Nope.
But I hope that he, and many others - because this is a common experience for people to go through, especially women, and it's only so common because of the lack of conversation surrounding it.
Well, if it's true that is. Is an anonymous person testifying in a newspaper a good enough standard of evidence?
He hasn't denied it happened.
Also did you read the story? There's evidence of her and him texting, plus she goes into specific detail about where and how they met, plus there's a picture of them (albeit her face is blurred out)
Why is your immediate reaction to think that it couldn't be true?
I don't deny that they met or that things happened between them, it is that the specific version of how events played out will be completely different if you ask either of the people involved.
As I said earlier, in this climate, her version of events will be taken as gospel and his reputation permanently stained.
If other women come out with similar stories then more weight will be added but as it stands, he is condemned through trial by media.
So what would your solution be?
Nobody should talk about their experiences? That's all she did.
I can't remember if in the article she was rude or inflammatory towards him, or insulted him or anything - she's allowed to talk about what she went through from her perspective.
So i'm not sure what it is that you're sanctioning for.
Go to the police and seek charges for sexual assault?
I agree with all this, sex by coercion is a problem that often gets muddled by a simple yes or no consent based question. But in this case, I think coercion was not caused solely by Ansari's actions, it was almost equally if not more, driven by the desire of the woman to cling on to the idea or even fantasy of having a different kind of date/relationship with a celeb. Let us not kid ourselves, the cultural zeitgeist of last century has elevated celebs of any kind to a different status all together. So much so that they feel entitled to get away with certain behavior that others can't and normal people are willing to give them more leeway as well. Like someone put it crudely above, some celebs just to see it as a musician-groupie situation.
That does not mean that you excuse clearly criminal or even just vulgar behavior. But it can explain why Ansari thought that the woman just staying in her apartment and seemingly going along with his aggressive behaviour was as good as consent. Similarly it can explain why the woman chose to stay on for so long in a clearly uncomfortable situation when she felt that the date felt off since the beginning.
Do you know the conviction rates for sexual assault?
Also there's degrees of assault - if someone punches you in the face in the street, that is technically assault - but you're not likely to go to the police are you?
Him being a celebrity definitely attracted her to him and she admitted as much also in the statement.
For me, it wasn't until she approached him and made it known to him that she wasn't comfortable, he acknowledged this, yet still persisted even after the fact - that isn't okay, and regardless of his status as a celebrity that shouldn't be seen as being okay.
It depends on the context.
I reserve the right to be sceptical of anonymous testimony through media, however. I think all people should when the case is in isolation, as this one is currently.
Of course, I take each allegation on a case-by-case basis, of course not everyone who speaks up will tell the truth, and others will bend the truth to suit agendas also.
I just remain hesitant to sit on the side of being sceptical due to the accuser being anonymous, if anything that to me says that the person isn't seeking fame or validation by keeping their name out of the debate.
Also I think people should be encouraged to tell their truth, if we begin to discourage these conversations then the behaviour of the accused won't change - as history has shown, but more and more people will continue to suffer in silence.
@adexkola seems to take the contrary position on every issue in this thread
Most of the times I pop into the thread, I agree with the majority position, so no need to comment. What else is there to say about Weinstein and Spacey that hasn't been said?
It's stories like this though that just veer into the absurd category.
It’s good to see you post with the same reckless abandon you employed to choose you username.
To be fair, it's more efficient than the full spelling.
Unforgivablebee is a cumbersome word.