Celebrity Allegations, #MeToo etc

[Listar]

she left when he tried again, such good common sense guy

She wanted a back rub no? I'm pretty sure she wanted intimacy.

You looked to be one of those that is so far left of the movement that you can't see (therefore can't accept) any arguments from the right.

 

[Sphaero]

Soo, this is how one of the most vocal voices of this movement wants to handle this situation? Way to self sabotage and do the job of the opposing voices for them.

First she changes the narrative of the whole situation, citing fear as the main reason that Grace did not leave. Where was this cited in the article? Discomfort, unpleasentness, dissapointment? Sure, but fear? No. She was not too scared to still be around him nude, she was not too scared to still seek and hope for intimacy with him. Did I somehow miss Ansari threathening her in any way and make her do his bidding against her will? If so, he was very forthcoming for sure when she actually did decide to leave and he called her a car to get her home.

Then and this is even worse she says that the "me-too"-movement is not only about covering the cases of rape, sexual assault and abuse, but also about talking about unpleasent encounters in public. She basically gave her ok to public shaming because the public would surely know the difference of cases like this and actual sexual abuse. I guess this is why this case caused an enourmous uproar to the point that even some of the most respected newspapers of the country (Wahington Post, NYT) chose to cover it and offer their perspective and completely overshadowed any of the valid cases this movement stood for.

So far most of the major voices of this movement handled the topic pretty well by distancing themselves from this story, but this video is as contra productive as it gets.

 

[Listar]

Soo, this is how one of the most vocal voices of this movement wants to handle this situation? Way to self sabotage and do the job of the opposing voices for them.

First she changes the narrative of the whole situation, citing fear as the main reason that Grace did not leave. Where was this cited in the article? Discomfort, unpleasentness, dissapointment? Sure, but fear? No. She was not too scared to still be around him nude, she was not too scared to still seek and hope for intimacy with him. Did I somehow miss Ansari threathening her in any way and make her do his bidding against her will? If so, he was very forthcoming for sure when she actually did decide to leave and he called her a car to get her home.

Then and this is even worse she says that the "me-too"-movement is not only about covering the cases of rape, sexual assault and abuse, but also about talking about unpleasent encounters in public. She basically gave her ok to public shaming because the public would surely know the difference of cases like this and actual sexual abuse. I guess this is why this case caused an enourmous uproar to the point that even some of the most respected newspapers of the country (Wahington Post, NYT) chose to cover it and offer their perspective and completely overshadowed any of the valid cases this movement stood for.

So far most of the major voices of this movement handled the topic pretty well by distancing themselves from this story, but this video is as contra productive as it gets.

That's where I find it funny. Her premise to public shame is based on people to know the difference. And just a few post up we can see that is not the case. So maybe it is not ok to public shame because her assumption is so wrong that only an idiot would believe?

 

[Silva]

If even the feminists do not agree with you, you are too far left.

It is easier to support something when everyone is on board and boundaries can be set. A good example is workplace flirtation. This is automatically classed as unwanted sexual advance and therefore it is sexual harassment, despite the objection from men. It is when the boundaries are unclear, and expecting men to abide by YOUR standards, that's when things a bit messy.

I'd expect men, women and everyone in between to behave by my standards towards me. Much like I'd behave by their standards towards them. It's human decency to treat people like individuals rather than bulldoze them.

She wanted a back rub no? I'm pretty sure she wanted intimacy.

You looked to be one of those that is so far left of the movement that you can't see (therefore can't accept) any arguments from the right.

The intimate encounter was over when she voiced her objection, and he accepted it. Him continuing to do the same things constitutes sexual assault. It's like throwing a punch after the bell has rung.

 

[Silva]

Soo, this is how one of the most vocal voices of this movement wants to handle this situation? Way to self sabotage and do the job of the opposing voices for them.

First she changes the narrative of the whole situation, citing fear as the main reason that Grace did not leave. Where was this cited in the article? Discomfort, unpleasentness, dissapointment? Sure, but fear? No. She was not too scared to still be around him nude, she was not too scared to still seek and hope for intimacy with him. Did I somehow miss Ansari threathening her in any way and make her do his bidding against her will? If so, he was very forthcoming for sure when she actually did decide to leave and he called her a car to get her home.

Then and this is even worse she says that the "me-too"-movement is not only about covering the cases of rape, sexual assault and abuse, but also about talking about unpleasent encounters in public. She basically gave her ok to public shaming because the public would surely know the difference of cases like this and actual sexual abuse. I guess this is why this case caused an enourmous uproar to the point that even some of the most respected newspapers of the country (Wahington Post, NYT) chose to cover it and offer their perspective and completely overshadowed any of the valid cases this movement stood for.

So far most of the major voices of this movement handled the topic pretty well by distancing themselves from this story, but this video is as contra productive as it gets.

I think you may have misunderstood her point. Aziz not being as bad as Kevin Spacey does not mean his behaviour was acceptable.

 

[Listar]

I'd expect men, women and everyone in between to behave by my standards towards me. Much like I'd behave by their standards towards them. It's human decency to treat people like individuals rather than bulldoze them.

When you were being condescending towards me with your "such good common sense guy" sentence, was that ok by your standards or my standards?

Actions speaks louder than words. Don't preach what you can't do.

 

[Silva]

When you were being condescending towards me with your "so much common sense guy" sentence, was that ok by your standards or my standards?

Actions speaks louder than words. Don't preach what you can't do.

I mean, it's not like you're a ray of sunshine.

 

[Listar]

I mean, it's not like you're a ray of sunshine.

Yes, but at least I am not hypocritical in it.

 

[Silva]

Yes, but at least I am not hypocritical in it.

Nothing hypocritical about it. You were being facetious about what feminists say, as if feminists are a hive mind, and I responded in kind.

 

[Raoul]

I'd expect men, women and everyone in between to behave by my standards towards me. Much like I'd behave by their standards towards them. It's human decency to treat people like individuals rather than bulldoze them.


The intimate encounter was over when she voiced her objection, and he accepted it. Him continuing to do the same things constitutes sexual assault. It's like throwing a punch after the bell has rung.

Is this before her after she willingly gave him a blowjob ?

 

[Silva]

Is this before her after she willingly gave him a blowjob ?

If you call someone sucking your dick for a few seconds a blowjob, after. Although she wasn't wholly committed to that either.

 

[Listar]

Nothing hypocritical about it. You were being facetious about what feminists say, as if feminists are a hive mind, and I responded in kind.

Ok, lets not derail the thread. If you are not satisfied with my answer, then please give your answer in response to Billy Blaggs question. I am after all curious on what you think.

 

[Silva]

Ok, lets not derail the thread. If you are not satisfied with my answer, then please give your answer in response to Billy Blaggs question. I am after all curious on what you think.

I don't know. There's a lot of reasons people don't leave a situation earlier than they should.

 

[Ducklegs]

It's not been the same since Saville died.

I said to the Mrs he was like some some celebrity sex offender Emperor Palpatine.

Once he was gone there was nobody to stop the police or journalists getting to the truth.

You think it's bullshit? Look what happened to a certain former strike it lucky presenter , he got to the truth and tried to use it to buy his way into hosting a Saturday night prime time game show.

Next thing you know? Dead rent boy in his pool.

Wonder why the likes of Cheggers, Reid, Sharpe and Diamond suddenly disappeared from our Screens?

All crossed Saville, and all were banished.

Since be died?

Open season for the celebrity molesters.

 

[Sphaero]

I think you may have misunderstood her point. Aziz not being as bad as Kevin Spacey does not mean his behaviour was acceptable.

Do I think that he acted like a douchebag according to that article? Absolutely and I doubt that even his side of the story would change my view.

Do I think that should be put on display for everyone to see in a way that tries to paint him like a criminal, creating a very real threat for his career? No, because I believe everyone has a right to have his privacy until he loses that right by commiting an actual crime.

And here is where we fundamentally disagree. You believe he commited sexual assault, I don´t.

I certainly know that this would never fly in court, because even in this very obviously unbalanced piece of "journalism" without his side of the story there are too many inconsitencies and contraditions to make a clear case for it.

Sexual assault is in its essence crossing lines that one of the participants does not want to cross. These lines or boundaries can be very low, at the workplace for example. In situations like at the end of a date between two people, the lines are set by themselves.

Aziz Ansari did not cross the lines Grace did set for herself and him. In the few moments she actually did not rely on her nonverbal signals and verbalized her thoughts to him, she made it fairly clear: she was not ready for actual intercourse. He offered it twice (granted in a weird, clumsy, very corny kind of way), she declined twice, he let go of her twice. What she did was partake in oral sex, in kissing, in making out. She did not enjoy it very much, which we know from her inner thoughts and supposed body language, which Ansari apearantly did not pick up, but she still did it. She had no issue being naked around him and looking for closeness.

You say that him trying to undress her again was sexual assault, but in truth we don´t know what he planned to do. Maybe he wanted to go down on her again like he did before, like she allowed before, and expected the same in return, which she did twice before.

 

[Listar]

I don't know. There's a lot of reasons people don't leave a situation earlier than they should.

If there are that many, then please select one from your vault that we can all go: Ah, that's plausible.

 

[Raoul]

If you call someone sucking your dick for a few seconds a blowjob, after. Although she wasn't wholly committed to that either.

A blowjob is a blowjob whether its for a few seconds or a few hours. No getting around that one I'm afraid. I just noticed she allowed him to do the same to her as well.

She should've got up and left if any of the events were in any way unpleasant to her. Instead she gave him a blowjob and allowed him to go down on her. Sounds consensual to me.

 

[Silva]

If there are that many, then please select one from your vault that we can all go: Ah, that's plausible.

Awkwardness
Lack of interpersonal skills
Stupidity
Lack of emotional intelligence
Fear
Anxiety

Do I think that he acted like a douchebag according to that article? Absolutely and I doubt that even his side of the story would change my view.

Do I think that should be put on display for everyone to see in a way that tries to paint him like a criminal, creating a very real threat for his career? No, because I believe everyone has a right to have his privacy until he loses that right by commiting an actual crime.

And here is where we fundamentally disagree. You believe he commited sexual assault, I don´t.

I certainly know that this would never fly in court, because even in this very obviously unbalanced piece of "journalism" without his side of the story there are too many inconsitencies and contraditions to make a clear case for it.

Sexual assault is in its essence crossing lines that one of the participants does not want to cross. These lines or boundaries can be very low, at the workplace for example. In situations like at the end of a date between two people, the lines are set by themselves.

Aziz Ansari did not cross the lines Grace did set for herself and him. In the few moments she actually did not rely on her nonverbal signals and verbalized her thoughts to him, she made it fairly clear: she was not ready for actual intercourse. He offered it twice (granted in a weird, clumsy, very corny kind of way), she declined twice, he let go of her twice. What she did was partake in oral sex, in kissing, in making out. She did not enjoy it very much, which we know from her inner thoughts and supposed body language, which Ansari apearantly did not pick up, but she still did it. She had no issue being naked around him and looking for closeness.

You say that him trying to undress her again was sexual assault, but in truth we don´t know what he planned to do. Maybe he wanted to go down on her again like he did before, like she allowed before, and expected the same in return, which she did twice before.

Going from "let's watch TV with our clothes on" to undressing her certainly crossed the lines they set moments earlier.

A blowjob is a blowjob whether its for a few seconds or a few hours. No getting around that one I'm afraid. I just noticed she allowed him to do the same to her as well.

She should've got up and left if any of the events were in any way unpleasant to her. Instead she gave him a blowjob and allowed him to go down on her. Sounds consensual to me.

Some of it being consensual doesn't mean all of it was.

 

[Raoul]

Some of it being consensual doesn't mean all of it was.

That argument is undercut by her willingness to be consensual at all. If she was vehemently against sex then she should've left. Staying and continuing to be consensual is a good sign she believed the benefits of staying outweighed the benefits of leaving. You don't get to retroactively pick and choose the consensual and non consensual moments after the fact with your article writer at your side, because you later felt the evening didn't go as you'd originally wanted it to.

 

[Silva]

That argument is undercut by her willingness to be consensual at all. If she was vehemently against sex then she should've left. Staying and continuing to be consensual is a good sign she believed the benefits of staying outweighed the benefits of leaving. You don't get to retroactively pick and choose the consensual and non consensual moments are after the fact with your article writer at your side, because you later felt the evening didn't go as you'd originally wanted it to.

She voiced her objection during the encounter. This wasn't her retroactively deciding it was assault, it was assault.

 

[Raoul]

She voiced her objection during the encounter. This wasn't her retroactively deciding it was assault, it was assault.

Repeating the word assault doesn't change the reality that this was a consensual encounter. The vast response against the article, especially among female journalists is a good sign this was an attempt to anonymously wield power against Ansari because the woman didn't like the way the evening went. She had ample opportunities to leave but didn't take any of the off ramps. At that point you lose all credibility to make a believable claim of assault.

 

[Silva]

Repeating the word assault doesn't change the reality that this was a consensual encounter. The vast response against the article, especially among female journalists is a good sign this was an attempt to anonymously wield power against Ansari because the woman didn't like the way the evening went. She had ample opportunities to leave but didn't take any of the off ramps. At that point you lose all credibility to make a believable claim of assault.

I mean, you had ample opportunities to admit Trump was never going to pivot, but you kept at it for months. People make bad decisions all the time. And I suspect that in time, as Grace's generation of women gain power, the kind of behaviour Aziz displayed will be seen with all the disgust it deserves.

 

[Raoul]

I mean, you had ample opportunities to admit Trump was never going to pivot, but you kept at it for months. People make bad decisions all the time. And I suspect that in time, as Grace's generation of women gain power, the kind of behaviour Aziz displayed will be seen with all the disgust it deserves.

Ok, so at least we can agree she made a bad decision to stay and consensually have oral sex with him. That's a good start.

 

[Silva]

Ok, so at least we can agree she made a bad decision to stay and consensually have oral sex with him. That's a good start.

And he made the worst decision in sexually assaulting her after agreeing to end the sexual encounter.

 

[Listar]

She voiced her objection during the encounter. This wasn't her retroactively deciding it was assault, it was assault.

Ok to be fair, forcibly undressing her is assault. However, attempting to undress another person without force can be read as foreplay by many partners on a date.

Feels like we use the term assault lightly.

 

[Raoul]

And he made the worst decision in sexually assaulting her after agreeing to end the sexual encounter.

You've already admitted she made a bad decision so her consensual actions after wards would seem to discredit any claims to the contrary.

 

[Silva]

Ok to be fair, forcibly undressing her is assault. However, attempting to undress another person without force can be read as foreplay by many partners on a date.

Feels like we use the term assault lightly.

I know assault invoked a particularly grim image, but it really just means physical wrongdoing. I.e, groping a random in a nightclub is sexual assault. And the context in which Aziz tried to undress her, moments after asking her to watch TV fully clothed, it reads less like an attempt to flirt and more a violation.

 

[Silva]

You've already admitted she made a bad decision so her consensual actions after wards would seem to discredit any claims to the contrary.

Nothing consensual happened afterward. He asked her to watch TV fully clothed, tried to undress her again, and she promptly left.

 

[Raoul]

Ok to be fair, forcibly undressing her is assault. However, attempting to undress another person without force can be read as foreplay by many partners on a date.

Feels like we use the term assault lightly.

Agreed. Some are hellbent on redefining sexual assault so it conforms to their interpretation of power. It would literally kill the cat and mouse game of foreplay in millions of dates and relationships where one side may not initially be interested until they are. It literally defies human nature.

 

[Raoul]

Nothing consensual happened afterward. He asked her to watch TV fully clothed, tried to undress her again, and she promptly left.

The leaving bit should've happened well before that if she was uncomfortable.

 

[Silva]

It would literally kill the cat and mouse game of foreplay in millions of dates and relationships where one side may not initially be interested until they are.

Holy shit, how bad is your fecking dating life? You shouldn't be into foreplay until they're already interested.

 

[Silva]

The leaving bit should've happened well before that if she was uncomfortable.

That doesn't excuse his behaviour.

 

[Raoul]

Holy shit, how bad is your fecking foreplay?

Nothing to do with me. It would kill millions of romantic situations, especially among teenagers where guys are usually the ones who are trying to get into a girl's pants, where in the beginning its one side pursuing the other and winds up completely consensual. Not a very realistic approach.

 

[Silva]

Nothing to do with me. It would kill millions of romantic situations, especially among teenagers where guys are usually the ones who are trying to get into a girl's pants, where in the beginning its one side pursuing the other and winds up completely consensual. Not a very realistic approach.

Coincidentally, teenage girls are the group who report the highest concentration of sexual assaults. So, yeah, that needs to fecking change. You can't expect women to put up with being sexually assaulted because some dickhead wants to get his dick wet.

 

[Raoul]

That doesn't excuse his behaviour.

His behavior doesn't warrant any excuses. Its was a bad date. She'll get over it...as long as he doesn't opt to name her in public at which point she will feel significantly more uncomfortable than she claims she was on the date.

 

[DOTA]

I went home with a guy, once. He seemed nice. I told him, as I was agreeing to head to his place that "nothing is going to happen" and he was fine with that. We got back to his and he poured some wine. We drank some whilst listening to Radio 6. He gave me a quick kiss and I didn't mind. Moments later he kissed me in a more significant way and I kissed him back. He then put his hand underneath my underwear. I removed his hand and reminded him he'd said nothing would happen.

I thought that would be enough to make him realise I was serious, to be honest. Potentially naive, in hindsight, but that is what I thought. I still thought we could have a nice time drinking wine and listening to good music.

He again put his hand on my genitals, and I removed it, a couple more times, before I told him if he did it again I would leave. He said he understood and, moments later, he tried again and I very hurriedly left.

There is quite a lot in this thread that makes me think the fact I agreed to go back to his and that I enjoyed kissing him back would make some of you think that he did little wrong.

 

[Listar]

I know assault invoked a particularly grim image, but it really just means physical wrongdoing. I.e, groping a random in a nightclub is sexual assault. And the context in which Aziz tried to undress her, moments after asking her to watch TV fully clothed, it reads less like an attempt to flirt and more a violation.

Of course groping a random in a nightclub is sexual assault. And I'm sure there were plenty of guys being groped by females, but let's not go there. This case is a bit different no? They are on a date at a private location, under the circumstance, is he not ok to try to (not forcefully) initiate intimacy?

By the same token, her persistent in flirting with him in the first place after he had initially showed no interest is sexual harasssment?

 

[Silva]

His behavior doesn't warrant any excuses. Its was a bad date. She'll get over it...as long as he doesn't opt to name her in public at which point she will feel significantly more uncomfortable than she claims she was on the date.

If he doxxes her, then his career is really over. That would be petty, mean and add another crime on his wrap sheet.

 

[Raoul]

If he doxxes her, then his career is really over. That would be petty, mean and add another crime on his wrap sheet.

It would be completely acceptable for him to name her since she opted to name him, and in the process damage his career. She and the author wanted to self-aggrandizingly promote the story by linking it to a celebrity for the purpose of piggybacking on MeToo, so why should he not extend a similar courtesy. There should be either complete anonymity or none at all.

 

[Silva]

Of course groping a random in a nightclub is sexual assault. And I'm sure there were plenty of guys being groped by females, but let's not go there. This case is a bit different no? They are on a date at a private location, under the circumstance, is he not ok to try to (not forcefully) initiate intimacy?

Read the story above your post. You don't have to take it to extreme levels to have sexually assaulted someone.

By the same token, her persistent in flirting with him in the first place after he had initially showed no interest is sexual harasssment?

Harassment, sure, but unless she left some details out of the story it wasn't sexual harassment. She was asking about his camera, not his ballsack.

It would be completely acceptable for him to name her since she opted to name him, and in the process damage his career. She and the author wanted to self-aggrandize the story by linking it to a celebrity for the purpose of piggybacking on MeToo, so why should he not extend a similar courtesy. There should be either complete anonymity or none at all.

Because it would be petty, mean and convince people that, you know what, maybe he is the kind of inconsiderate arsehole who would sexually assault a woman.