Celebrity Allegations, #MeToo etc

Silva said:
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.
Click to expand...

He wouldn't be doing anything she hasn't already done to him would he. From the perspective of the public, it would be good to know his side of the story via a blog post or something similar that is written with the same amount of alleged frankness as her account was.

She could've teamed up with the writer to make a story about how her date "with a celebrity" went. But instead she opted to name Aziz. So him naming her wouldn't in any way be inappropriate.
 
Listar said:
She doxxes him, that's ok. He doxxes her, criminal. :annoyed:
Click to expand...

The irony being that she's a novice photographer just starting out with nothing to lose, whereas he has already built a successful brand and career (even though I don't care for his work) with everything to lose.
 
Raoul said:
He wouldn't be doing anything she hasn't already done to him would he. From the perspective of the public, it would be good to know his side of the story via a blog post or something similar that is written with the same amount of alleged frankness as her account was.

She could've teamed up with the writer to make a story about how her date "with a celebrity" went. But instead she opted to name Aziz. So him naming her wouldn't in any way be inappropriate.
Click to expand...
Listar said:
She doxxes him, that's ok. He doxxes her, criminal. :annoyed:
Click to expand...
Because she's alleging he sexually assaulted her. If she hadn't, people would call her a coward for not naming him (as many women who didn't name their abusers were). Even real courts don't name the victim.
 
Silva said:
Because she's alleging he sexually assaulted her. If she hadn't, people would call her a coward for not naming him (as many women who didn't name their abusers were). Even real courts don't name the victim.
Click to expand...

She didn't even initially think the evening constituted sexual assault. Apparently her friends then talked her into it.
 
Silva said:
And he made the worst decision in sexually assaulting her after agreeing to end the sexual encounter.
Click to expand...

And now you show me where it was said that "chilling on the couch" meant the end of the sexual encounter? You do know that he used the exact same phrase before that evening, right? For him chilling was actually making out and having oral sex, something she did partake in. The suggestion to put clothes back on can be very well be seen as an attempt by him to have her calm down (which again happened before that evening).

Sexual assault actually involves one party being aware that there is no consent, either by cutlural standart, law or being told by that person. Her previous behaviour inditated to him that she would be alright with sexual acts as long as it does not involve intercourse.

The whole thing is first and foremost some pretty grand miscommunication, because they both thought they would get different things out of the evening. The way he handled it was rude, but not criminal.

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

I don´t see the relevance to the Ansari story. In her story the boundaries are set as they should be. Clear and in advance. If Grace would have told Ansari, that he could not expect anything sexually from her, especially before entering his apartment, he would be indeed guilty of sexual assault. Instead she took part in everything outside intercourse, which gave him the impression that she was alright with exactly that.
 
Sphaero said:
I don´t see the relevance to the Ansari story. In her story the boundaries are set as they should be. Clear and in advance. If Grace would have told Ansari, that he could not expect anything sexually from her, especially before entering his apartment, he would be indeed guilty of sexual assault. Instead she took part in everything outside intercourse, which gave him the impression that she was alright with exactly that
Click to expand...

People have the right to change their mind at any point in an encounter as to what they are comfortable with. There doesn't have to be a time limit.
 
Sphaero said:
I don´t see the relevance to the Ansari story. In her story the boundaries are set as they should be. Clear and in advance. If Grace would have told Ansari, that he could not expect anything sexually from her, especially before entering his apartment, he would be indeed guilty of sexual assault. Instead she took part in everything outside intercourse, which gave him the impression that she was alright with exactly that.
Click to expand...
His.

So would you feel very differently about my story if I hadn't said that to him?
 
Sphaero said:
And now you show me where it was said that "chilling on the couch" meant the end of the sexual encounter? You do know that he used the exact same phrase before that evening, right? For him chilling was actually making out and having oral sex, something she did partake in. The suggestion to put clothes back on can be very well be seen as an attempt by him to have her calm down (which again happened before that evening).

Sexual assault actually involves one party being aware that there is no consent, either by cutlural standart, law or being told by that person. Her previous behaviour inditated to him that she would be alright with sexual acts as long as it does not involve intercourse.

The whole thing is first and foremost some pretty grand miscommunication, because they both thought they would get different things out of the evening. The way he handled it was rude, but not criminal.



I don´t see the relevance to the Ansari story. In her story the boundaries are set as they should be. Clear and in advance. If Grace would have told Ansari, that he could not expect anything sexually from her, especially before entering his apartment, he would be indeed guilty of sexual assault. Instead she took part in everything outside intercourse, which gave him the impression that she was alright with exactly that.
Click to expand...

If you have to calm your date down twice, the second time by putting your clothes on, and making it clear that you're going to be in your clothes, you know that taking them off immediately is crossing the line.
 
Eboue said:
People have the right to change their mind at any point in an encounter as to what they are comfortable with. There doesn't have to be a time limit.
Click to expand...

Likewise, they can change it back and forth several times within the course of a consensual sexual encounter.
 
Raoul said:
Likewise, they can change it back and forth several times within the course of a consensual sexual encounter.
Click to expand...

Yes. But after the first revocation of consent, the other person ought to make certain the person who was previously uncomfortable had actually changed their mind. Which is not what he did.
 
Eboue said:
People have the right to change their mind at any point in an encounter as to what they are comfortable with. There doesn't have to be a time limit.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. But shouldn´t I tell the other person exactly that so there is not even a chance of a misunderstanding?

DiseaseOfTheAge said:
His.

So would you feel very differently about my story if I hadn't said that to him?
Click to expand...

I think it is a slippery slope to go to someones place after a date and not set boundaries or make clear what you will be doing there. This is probably the cultural influence here. There is that kind of expectiation that is involved here. Why did you feel the need to say that to him?
 
Sphaero said:
I absolutely agree. But shouldn´t I tell the other person exactly that so there is not even a chance of a misunderstanding?



I think it is a slippery slope to go to someones place after a date and not set boundaries or make clear what you will be doing there. This is probably the cultural influence here. There is that kind of expectiation that is involved here. Why did you feel the need to say that to him?
Click to expand...

Ideally yes. But people are cultured to avoid confrontation and not say no directly, women especially. Not to mention the nonzero chance that a woman could say no and the man could assault her anyway.
 
Eboue said:
Yes. But after the first revocation of consent, the other person ought to make certain the person who was previously uncomfortable had actually changed their mind. Which is not what he did.
Click to expand...

There's no golden rule on that. Even if a person expresses discomfort and both parties mutually agree to pause their activity for a bit, that doesn't mean it can't resume a few minutes later if both parties are consensual.
 
Sphaero said:
I think it is a slippery slope to go to someones place after a date and not set boundaries or make clear what you will be doing there. This is probably the cultural influence here. There is that kind of expectiation that is involved here. Why did you feel the need to say that to him?
Click to expand...
I knew his interest in me was sexual and I was okay with that. I shared said interest. I simply didn't desire anything sexual to occur on that occasion.

To be frank, I vividly recall the moment I said it and how weird I felt about saying it, at the time. I thought it a very strange thing to say and potentially a quite insulting one and had I not already had a few drinks I doubt I would've felt it should be said.
 
Raoul said:
There's no golden rule on that. Even if a person expresses discomfort and both parties mutually agree to pause their activity for a bit, that doesn't mean it can't resume a few minutes later if both parties are consensual.
Click to expand...

But if you know someone expressed discomfort then you should make sure they actually want to continue before continuing. That's the decent thing to do.
 
Eboue said:
Ideally yes. But people are cultured to avoid confrontation and not say no directly, women especially. Not to mention the nonzero chance that a woman could say no and the man could assault her anyway.
Click to expand...
What culture is this? Defintely not the western culture.
 
Eboue said:
But if you know someone expressed discomfort then you should make sure they actually want to continue before continuing. That's the decent thing to do.
Click to expand...

Certainly. But people who are drunk and horny don't really think in rational textbook terms. They are driven by alcohol, hormones, and often conflicting emotions.
 
Eboue said:
Yes. And that's why a step to combatting the issue is to talk about these things whilst sober.
Click to expand...

True its good to talk about it, although it won't change the dynamics of standard sexual encounters between men and women that are a normal part of human nature.
 
Raoul said:
True its good to talk about it, although it won't change the dynamics of normal sexual encounters between men and women that are a standard part of human nature.
Click to expand...
Rape was legal until very recently. This kind of behaviour will also be punishable soon, and is punishable in parts of the world.
 
Raoul said:
True its good to talk about it, although it won't change the dynamics of standard sexual encounters between men and women that are a normal part of human nature.
Click to expand...

I think that's pretty defeatist. We've come a long way, even in the past 50 years. But there are so many women who have stories like the ones Silva posted above. When this topic came up among my friends, every woman said they had a similar experience. We can't just say "boys will be boys" to that. We can't.
 
Silva said:
Rape was legal until very recently. This kind of behaviour will also be punishable soon, and is punishable in parts of the world.
Click to expand...

I don't think this sort of thing can be legislated with any degree of accuracy without adversely affecting the dynamics behind why people hook up. It would just create needless timidity and paranoia and generally erode the spontaneity of having casual sex.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
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.
Click to expand...

I think it probably is unfortunately. Female friends have a thousand stories like yours. Just think most guys cant (or won't) help themselves.
Maybe its what your doing previous to going back to their place or something? Were you on a date before going back?
Its kind of a bizarre situation that you cant visit a guys place without expecting to screw him but I think in a lot of situations thats the case,
or at least its common enough that people should probably be wary of doing it

I dunno, he seems like a dickhead tbh
You did nothing wrong obviously
 
Raoul said:
I don't think this sort of thing can be legislated with any degree of accuracy without adversely affecting the dynamics behind why people hook up. It would just create needless timidity and paranoia and generally erode the spontaneity of having casual sex.
Click to expand...
It would stop creeps like Aziz Ansari from sexually assaulting people. People will be able to have casual sex after getting consent.
 
Eboue said:
I think that's pretty defeatist. We've come a long way, even in the past 50 years. But there are so many women who have stories like the ones Silva posted above. When this topic came up among my friends, every woman said they had a similar experience. We can't just say "boys will be boys" to that. We can't.
Click to expand...

I'm sure many guys have also had similar experiences. People just need to make sure they don't get into intimate situations with people they don't genuinely like or are prepared to have sex with.
 
Silva said:
It would stop creeps like Aziz Ansari from sexually assaulting people.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't stop real sexual assault. In fact, this sort of ultra sensitive months later sulking only demeans the cases of millions of women who have actually been raped. It also pushes people of both genders who are on the fence about all of this, to the more conservative side as they don't want to be part of something so non-sensical.
 
Last edited:
caid said:
I think it probably is unfortunately. Female friends have a thousand stories like yours. Just think most guys cant (or won't) help themselves.
Maybe its what your doing previous to going back to their place or something? Were you on a date before going back?
Its kind of a bizarre situation that you cant visit a guys place without expecting to screw him but I think in a lot of situations thats the case,
or at least its common enough that people should probably be wary of doing it

I dunno, he seems like a dickhead tbh
You did nothing wrong obviously
Click to expand...
No, we met that night, through mutual friends, and chatted a bit. When the pub closed and people were going home he asked if I wanted to go somewhere else and after we couldn't think of anywhere open, he said his place was pretty close by. That's all that happened before.
 
Raoul said:
I'm sure many guys have also had similar experiences. People just need to make sure they don't get into intimate situations with people they don't genuinely like or are prepared to have sex with.
Click to expand...
That's fecking appalling.
 
Raoul said:
this sort of ultra sensitive months later sulking only demeans the cases of millions of women who have actually been raped.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't.

Raoul said:
It also pushes people of both genders who are on the fence about all of this, to the more conservative side as they don't want to be part of something so non-sensical.
Click to expand...
That's fine. We're younger and more motivated than you anyway. And we'll do way better in the upcoming revolution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.