No no no no no
Celebrity Allegations, #MeToo etc
- Thread starter Buchan
- Start date
No no no no no
Juding by the reaction to the Ansari story - it does. There isn't even a broad consensus among women in the US about which side to take in this story, which tells you all you need to know about how unconvincing it is.
You want to feck everyone you associate with?
I'm not discussing this further.
Thats quite sad really.
I guess it really doesn't matter what you were doing before regardless
Oh yes. If you voluntarily give someone a blowjob then you will lose the credibility to complain about it after the fact.
It tells me how conditioned to accept sexual assault people are.
Not at all. But then again I don't get into intimate settings with everyone I associate with either. You have to think ahead and use common sense about who you are alone getting drunk with, where you are, and what may happen - then proactively ask yourself whether its appropriate to proceed.
I find your story borderline on sexual assault. But since he did not force himself on you, it will be hard to charge him.
If sexual assault were legit in this case, it would be a slam dunk and everyone would be in agreement. The fact that so few are and many people, including women, are questioning the efficacy of the story, suggests it isn't sexual assault but rather a shitty run of the mill bad date.
Last edited:
There is certainly truth in that. If I´m honest, the vast majority of the women I have or had close relations with never lacked self esteem. I have two older sisters and a mother who can more than take care of themselves. I was raised with the clear idea that everyone deserves a certain level of respect and that there should always be equality between the genders. It should be what you do by what you are judged by, not as what you were born. Naturally I was also drawn to women who would be my equal and speak up for themselves if it was necessary. I´m certainly a more open communicator than both of these peoples in this story.
For me a lot of Grace´s behaviour in this story does not make sense to me or showcases her inner thoughts. Maybe I give Ansari too much credit here for not getting it. Probably does not help that my personal experiences with sexual assault and abuse are so much on the extreme side that my scope in general moved too far in that direction thus what I view as sexual assault can differ from what others perceive it as. Food for thought I guess.
I acutally think it is a very honest and healthy thing to do.
Everyone would be in agreement? The lawyer of the president of the united states has argued that a man cannot rape his wife. If not everyone can agree on that, what the feck makes you think they'll agree on this? And why should I trust the consensus of the generation that led that shitshow of a lawyer and his president to the white house?
That is precisely the problem, and young women are fecking furious about it.
Than bad dates ? Definitely. Get to know the person a bit better and stick to non-intimate surroundings like group settings in restaurants etc.
Yeah, both answers make sense to me tbh.
We should ask for better and expect the worst i guess
For the record, a bad date is when the other person bores you, or you actively hate each other for some silly irrational reason. It doesn't lead to you crying on the way home because some dipshit sexually assaulted you.
It can range from any number of things, including having sex with your date when you went into the date wanting to network with them for career purposes.
I don't think either of you did much wrong tbh. He tried to see how far he could take it, you pushed him off. End of the story really. Sexual assault wouldn't even cross my mind if i were in that situation.
I'm amazed people are still claiming that because she put his dick in her mouth for a few seconds, she can't claim sexual assault. As long as she said no to anything further, anything sexual he does to her after that is sexual assault. That's not even debatable.
Well it clearly is debatable since we are all debating it.
We could debate whether deliberately shooting some random guy in the street is murder or not. It won't actually make it debatable, though, will it?
He shouldn't have been walking there, everyone knows that people just want to shoot bullets towards that part of the street.
That Lara tweet
can't say I don't agree. But way to stick one up to those filthy men standing up for feminism.Luckily I like to think I'm neutral in this and not a feminist, so I guess I'm safe, for now.
Why, I can actually think of one in this thread right now that is applicable to description.
He should have clearly stated that he was not interested in being shot before he even got down the block.
To be fair, it is actually debatable because we have to see if that guy is mentally ill, threatened to do it, etc.
Also didn't we just recently have a case where an officer randomly shot an Aussie woman on the street? Don't think he got charged with murder?
But that is off topic.
Carry on.
Last edited:
It certainly would be debatable if the central question was what the actual circumstances of the shooting was - whether it was actually self-defense, homicide, accidental, manslaughter etc. Debate generally follows controversy.
I thought it was clear enough from "shooting a random guy" that we were talking about grabbing a gun and walking outside and just shooting some random guy for no other reason than to shoot him. He's a target picked at random.
Yeah but a random shooting is completely relative to the observer and whether they know the circumstances of what led up to it. To one person it could be random, to another it could be a mob hit, or a gang shooting based on the color of hat the assailant and the victim were wearing, or a well orchestrated planned revenge killing made to look like a random shooting. To you, the uninformed observer it could've looked completely random. To other observers who knew what it was carried out, not so much.
Feck it. I can't deal with this level of pedantry.
Not that it relates to the topic, but just to be argumentative, there is some parts of places and scenarios you should not walk at.
Example:
1) In between the street where a gang fight is occurring
2) In the hunting ground dressed up like a bear
3) In the airport shouting god is great
You can't deal with it because your example wasn't comparable to the central topic of this thread. Best to get back on topic about Ansari and his anonymous date.
Last edited:
We're arguing about murder now?
Change is hard to accept and most people are set in their ways. Thankfully, younger generations are taking the lead on this and we'll have less "bad dates" as we go on.
Change is hard to accept and most people are set in their ways. Thankfully, younger generations are taking the lead on this and we'll have less "bad dates" as we go on.
We're arguing about murder now?
Change is hard to accept and most people are set in their ways. Thankfully, younger generations are taking the lead on this and we'll have less "bad dates" as we go on.
We've sliced and diced the Ansari story to death so I guess we are moving on to hypotheticals now.
My example was there to illustrate that you (poorly) trying to debate something doesn't make it debatable. Like you trying to argue that physical sexual advances that take place after consent is withdrawn is somehow not sexual assault. It is, in pretty much every developed country (and probably in a lot of developing ones too). How severe is open for debate, but whether or not it is isn't.
Everything in this thread is fair play for debate. Its typically what happens on message boards. Just because you have made up your mind about a topic doesn't mean others can't continue debating it.
Feeling uncomfortable or uneasy in the lead up to or even during a sexual encounter and feeling regretful of that sexual encounter after it has taken place, really isn't assault - it's life. There seems a massive disconnect between real life and this ideal reality that ultra right-on commentators seem to hold up as the only acceptable standard for a sexual encounter, whereby you've a consent form that has been both signed and notarised, a bonk without spillage on a bed of rose petals and a post-script of warm hugs fading out to idyllic harp music. Oh and the next day you're married and she's now Julie Andrews.
It's all about signals and signs and clues and awkwardness and fumbling and "oh my sh*t, what happened last night?". I don't think regret or displeasure that someone didn't read the signals correctly in the several hours you spent with them before agreeing to go back to their place and end up having their penis in their mouth, really belongs in the conversation. Feels a bit like gatecrashing a group intended for the surviving partners of suicide victims, defending you inclusion by saying that you too have been above the 7th floor of a building. It's not really the same thing and I think makes it harder for actual victims of actual sexual assault.
It's all about signals and signs and clues and awkwardness and fumbling and "oh my sh*t, what happened last night?". I don't think regret or displeasure that someone didn't read the signals correctly in the several hours you spent with them before agreeing to go back to their place and end up having their penis in their mouth, really belongs in the conversation. Feels a bit like gatecrashing a group intended for the surviving partners of suicide victims, defending you inclusion by saying that you too have been above the 7th floor of a building. It's not really the same thing and I think makes it harder for actual victims of actual sexual assault.
Obviously, as you've clearly demonstrated, anything can be debated. Doesn't make it look any less dumb when you start disagreeing with stone-cold facts.
We're talking about a specific event. After she had made it clear to him that she wasn't comfortable and sex was not on the table, and he suggested they get dressed and watch some TV instead. I don't think it's debatable that at that point, consent had well and truly, explicitly even, been withdrawn. If he then starts kissing her while trying to undo her pants, then that is, by any reasonable definition, sexual assault.
Thread continues: