Aziz Anseri situation

[Bluegoat]

I don't think she is going to be completely disempowered, I'm sure just about everyone who will now look at the guy  in a different way.  He was a  lousy date and the details of how far into the date and performed and received certain sex acts is being very widely discussed.   That's a violation, too. really.

 

I don't watch his show, I didn't watch P&R, I just know his face.

 

Oh, yes, I think it's really a breach of privacy to talk about that stuff publicly.  Not the end of the world, but not really the thing.

 

I don't mean I think she will be disempowered - I think she has been, and I think that's part of how she got into this situation.  There have been a good number of times over the last years where I've heard of women of that age, particularly middle class and university educated, that have this kind of really unclear sense of what sexual assault actually is, and I think an almost naive view of what a sexual encounter is supposed to look like.  

 

And it leaves them kind of helpless to act and also I think leaves them very emotionally vulnerable.  Now she feels she's been assaulted and violated, when she was actually free to go any time.  That isn't a good way to feel.  

 

I think a lot of young adults could stand to have someone tell them that there is a certain kind of resilience and attitude required to participate in the hook up culture.

[poppy]

Oh, yes, I think it's really a breach of privacy to talk about that stuff publicly.  Not the end of the world, but not really the thing.

 

I don't mean I think she will be disempowered - I think she has been, and I think that's part of how she got into this situation.  There have been a good number of times over the last years where I've heard of women of that age, particularly middle class and university educated, that have this kind of really unclear sense of what sexual assault actually is, and I think an almost naive view of what a sexual encounter is supposed to look like.  

 

And it leaves them kind of helpless to act and also I think leaves them very emotionally vulnerable.  Now she feels she's been assaulted and violated, when she was actually free to go any time.  That isn't a good way to feel.  

 

I think a lot of young adults could stand to have someone tell them that there is a certain kind of resilience and attitude required to participate in the hook up culture.

 

I can believe she felt like she was violated by Anseri. I'm saying, Babe violated her too by publishing this, because there is no way they didn't know this would be a conversation sparker / controversial-- largely at her expense.

[Farrar]

It seems obvious to me that he could have believed that it was consensual and that the details of her account are completely true from her perspective. She claimed she felt assaulted and violated. I'm not sure where she stands on the legal definition of those things. But considering what happened, it makes sense that she would feel that way.

 

I do not think this rises to the level of rape, but a man's belief that it was consensual is not what defines rape. How many men have raped women who said no and thought that no meant yes? That the woman was only objecting because she thought that's what good girls do? That she didn't fight back physically so it must have been consensual? That her fighting back was part of her being into it? That she only said no to rile him up and get him to sleep with her? Men actually believe these things. Intention not to rape is not a golden ticket out of rape.

 

She did not only give nonverbal cues. She also asked him to stop. He stopped, and then started again repeatedly.

 

Look, I agree that she needed to do things differently to protect herself and that in the end, because of the way this unfolded, I cannot imagine it rises to the level of a legal assault. But that doesn't make it her fault that despite the fact that she said stop, he restarted and repeatedly pressured her. And that's not behavior that's okay. And that's on him.

 

I think women are conditioned to be afraid that men will turn on them in this situation - and, in fact, some men do. This is exactly how some much more clear cut cases of date rapes occur. I think women are also conditioned to soften their no's in all situations. I think men are conditioned to think that persistence is not only okay, but desirable. I think men are not conditioned to question if consent is being given enthusiastically like it should be. I think all those things worked against both of them to create a sexual encounter that left her feeling assaulted and him feeling confused.

 

 

[marbel]

I feel bad for the guy, getting embarrassed.   He'll be known for this for a long time. 

 

I know of no one who is on the side of the 'victim'.   Shame on Babe for publishing it. 

 

I wonder about their motivation too.  I'd never heard of the site before this, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone.  Surely they have seen an increase in traffic since this story came out and was picked up by NYTimes, etc.   The article seems like it could be libelous - pure speculation on my part as I don't know the law on that sort of thing.  Surely even celebrities can expect some level of privacy in their lives? 

 

ETA: also from Poppy:

 

 

 

Babe violated her too by publishing this...

 

Did she not give them permission to publish it?  

Edited January 16, 2018 by marbel

[poppy]

Violated her trust.

[EmseB]

It seems obvious to me that he could have believed that it was consensual and that the details of her account are completely true from her perspective. She claimed she felt assaulted and violated. I'm not sure where she stands on the legal definition of those things. But considering what happened, it makes sense that she would feel that way.

 

I do not think this rises to the level of rape, but a man's belief that it was consensual is not what defines rape. How many men have raped women who said no and thought that no meant yes? That the woman was only objecting because she thought that's what good girls do? That she didn't fight back physically so it must have been consensual? That her fighting back was part of her being into it? That she only said no to rile him up and get him to sleep with her? Men actually believe these things. Intention not to rape is not a golden ticket out of rape.

 

She did not only give nonverbal cues. She also asked him to stop. He stopped, and then started again repeatedly.

 

Look, I agree that she needed to do things differently to protect herself and that in the end, because of the way this unfolded, I cannot imagine it rises to the level of a legal assault. But that doesn't make it her fault that despite the fact that she said stop, he restarted and repeatedly pressured her. And that's not behavior that's okay. And that's on him.

 

 

I feel like you and I have read two different accounts of the situation. She didn't ask him to stop. She asked him to chill and then hung out naked with him on the couch and was intimate with him again. You say he started again repeatedly, but from her account, so did she. She asked him to slow down but then sat in front of him expecting a back rub or expecting him to play with her hair. She expected some kind of physical contact from him, but on her terms, and she wasn't willing to state those terms. He is the one who suggested they put their clothes back on later. Then she cuddled with him on the couch close enough to him for him to start kissing her again. When she did unequivocally ask him to stop, he called her a car.

 

Honestly, from her account of things, and trying to see things from his point of view, a woman who actually wanted to hook up with him could have behaved in the exact same way as Grace did.  That is to say, willingly coming back to his apartment after rushing through dinner, being naked, engaging in sexual activity, going to freshen up in the bathroom, providing requested activities when asked, staying to cuddle on the couch, etc.

 

The more I read it, the more I just think she was/is incredibly naive about...a lot of things and that is why she felt violated.  Her comments that all men are the same are kind of telling.  Yes, a lot of men who have women get naked and make out with them probably assume that they are going to have sex with her. That doesn't give them the right to take it if she's not willing, but in this case he definitely didn't do that.

[Bluegoat]

It seems obvious to me that he could have believed that it was consensual and that the details of her account are completely true from her perspective. She claimed she felt assaulted and violated. I'm not sure where she stands on the legal definition of those things. But considering what happened, it makes sense that she would feel that way.

 

I do not think this rises to the level of rape, but a man's belief that it was consensual is not what defines rape. How many men have raped women who said no and thought that no meant yes? That the woman was only objecting because she thought that's what good girls do? That she didn't fight back physically so it must have been consensual? That her fighting back was part of her being into it? That she only said no to rile him up and get him to sleep with her? Men actually believe these things. Intention not to rape is not a golden ticket out of rape.

 

She did not only give nonverbal cues. She also asked him to stop. He stopped, and then started again repeatedly.

 

Look, I agree that she needed to do things differently to protect herself and that in the end, because of the way this unfolded, I cannot imagine it rises to the level of a legal assault. But that doesn't make it her fault that despite the fact that she said stop, he restarted and repeatedly pressured her. And that's not behavior that's okay. And that's on him.

 

I think women are conditioned to be afraid that men will turn on them in this situation - and, in fact, some men do. This is exactly how some much more clear cut cases of date rapes occur. I think women are also conditioned to soften their no's in all situations. I think men are conditioned to think that persistence is not only okay, but desirable. I think men are not conditioned to question if consent is being given enthusiastically like it should be. I think all those things worked against both of them to create a sexual encounter that left her feeling assaulted and him feeling confused.

 

I would interpret a lot of this very differently.

 

The issue of thinking consent was given - no, it's not just about what the person thinks, but that is a real factor.  The formula is "known or ought reasonably to have known".  How would someone reasonably have known that she didn't want to participate? That is totally different than someone claiming the person was fighting back as part of sex - in fact I think there is something really disturbing trying to draw a parallel between saying that kind of claim and a situation like this.

 

And I don't understand her as telling him to stop at all, but to slow down, or wait a bit - which isn't an unusual request for women in sexual encounters.  Saying "chill" is not a clear communication of "I'm not interested in sex and actually I'd rather like to leave."  

 

As for this business of women being conditioned to be afraid of being raped so continuing to say yes, or just to be nice.  I'm sorry, but if that is an issue even when there is no actual evidence they are under threat they need to grow up or go home.  If you can't consent because you are afraid a man will rape you in his home, then you can't go to his home.  If you can't go on a date because you can't say you don't want to go to his place, then you aren't capable of going on a date.  What are men supposed to do here when dealing with women who are legally and socially adults?  Maybe the hook-up culture is fundamentally a problem - actually I agree it is - but we don't seem to be willing to say adults are not allowed to make their own sexual decisions.  If young women aren't able to accept the level of agency that comes with doing so they can perhaps begin advocating to go back to a more protective culture where they need to be back in their dorm rooms by 8 o'clock.

Edited January 16, 2018 by Bluegoat

[Word Nerd]

I suspect the viral short story mentioned previously is the primary reason it was published.

[Crimson Wife]

Well, I think it is part of women telling their stories at the moment. Sparked by #metoo, but as a safe dialogue about sexuality from the woman's perspective. A perspective that is usually either idolised or pornified. I think it is an important conversation, part of discussing consent and rape culture.

 

It reminds me of the short story Cat Person published late last year.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/11/cat-person

 

I really doubt it will help Grace get 15 mins of fame, it rarely works that way for women.

 

What this incident, the "Cat Person" story, and that Black Mirror episode about the dating app leaves me wondering is why so many Millennial women are passive about going along with intimate acts they don't actually want to engage in.

 

When I was in the dating scene, I had no trouble setting boundaries and being clear about them with my dates. I walked out of plenty of dates when the guy got pushy and it was clear he wasn't going to respect my boundaries. It really isn't that hard to say "this isn't working out" and get up & leave.

[KungFuPanda]

I think she believes what she says and is entitled to her feelings, but it definitely doesn’t read like assault to me. It just seems like if he had better moves, she would have stayed and been happy. He sounds like he was persistent and had no game, but the pressure she was feeling seems to come from her own expectations for the evening. I’m not sure she can make criminal accusations when saying no and walking out was what she did and what she could have done at any earlier point.

[katilac]

 Slander is actually a crime though and it can be addressed.

 

 

Setting aside the routine difficulties of proving slander in court - this was an anonymous accusation. 

[LMD]

Setting aside the routine difficulties of proving slander in court - this was an anonymous accusation.

And if he apparently did nothing wrong, what's the slander?

[Soror]

I quite appreciated this from Jameela Jamil.

OH, I love that.

 

I read the original article from Babe and Ansari's statement. I'm having a hard time forming thoughts on it. From what she has said it doesn't seem to warrant the assault label, although I feel sick picturing the situation and some comments seem to be a bit close to victim blaming to me. I wonder if I'm the only one who was ever in a situation where they were pressured and were unable to summon the courage to walk away when their rebuffs were ignored. 

 

I don't know that I feel comfortable with Ansari being crucified(perhaps an anon accusation would have been more appropriate although I don't know that it would have generated the dialogue but no one deserves to be sacrificed for a movement however noble). But I think that this is an important part of this conversation, even if it doesn't warrant a #metoo hashtag. There is more of a continuum of right and wrong than some posts seem to acknowledge. We've got a lot of work to do and just stopping full on rape shouldn't be the final goal, we are shooting too low. 

[Crimson Wife]

There is more of a continuum of right and wrong than some posts seem to acknowledge. We've got a lot of work to do and just stopping full on rape shouldn't be the final goal, we are shooting too low. 

 

I don't think anyone was in the right here. He was wrong for being a pushy jerk and she was wrong for being a passive doormat who lacked the sense and/or backbone to leave as soon as she realized he was being a pushy jerk.

 

To label this a #metoo story demeans those of us who really WERE victims of harassment by someone who held power over us and couldn't just tell the guy to knock it off without facing retaliation for doing so.

 

[Soror]

I don't think anyone was in the right here. He was wrong for being a pushy jerk and she was wrong for being a passive doormat who lacked the sense and/or backbone to leave as soon as she realized he was being a pushy jerk.

 

To label this a #metoo story demeans those of us who really WERE victims of harassment by someone who held power over us and couldn't just tell the guy to knock it off without facing retaliation for doing so.

 

Do we have to insult the girl? She is merely the product of our culture, that she was too stupid or not brave enough to speak up is a product of our times and what we are working on changing, at all levels. I will use this as an example for my daughters and it won't be in the context of shaming and insulting her. There is always somebody who had it worse, this needn't be a pissing contest. I don't see it demeaning anything but acknowledging there are layers of to this. As I said I don't think he deserves to be lambasted OR that I would use the #metoo in this context but maybe we need a new hashtag.

[EmseB]

Do we have to insult the girl? She is merely the product of our culture, that she was too stupid or not brave enough to speak up is a product of our times and what we are working on changing, at all levels.

 

I find this line of thinking to absolutely feed into the idea of patriarchal movements that say women need to be protected and taken care of because they are inferior. If us womenfolk are simply a product of our culture and can't not go into men's apartments and can't not make out with them because we are too scared to say no, then like Bluegoat said, we all need curfews and minders.  That is not empowering. That is infantilizing.  There's no levels to change anything at that point. We as women cannot go out alone if we're simply products of our culture (which strangely has been shouting about female empowerment for at least as long as I've been alive).

 

I reject the idea that a choice a college-educated woman makes to go to a guy's apartment or not, to be intimate with him or not, to leave when uncomfortable or not are all simply a passive "product of our culture" in 2018 in New York City.  There are places historically and around the world where this argument would make sense.  It doesn't make sense here and now, and especially not in this story when the guy in question was asked to stop and he...called her a car so she could leave safely and anonymously.

 

The woman in this story felt bad about intimacy that was awful. That is understandable. It is not, however, worth blasting the crude details all over the internet in an attempt to show what a bad date the guy was. It isn't even a new hashtag. It's just a bad encounter with a man she didn't end up liking very much because he was not good at intimacy.  If one wants to hook up with men on a first date, that sort of thing is bound to happen, probably more often than not.

[goldberry]

Part of me thinks that labeling this assault and/or putting all the blame on the guy is a way to keep herself from learning or growing.  If my daughter told me this story, I would want her (among other things) to look at whatever was going through her mind when she continued to engage in things she felt uncomfortable with...how she could change that in the future....and how she has no reason whatsoever to do something or stay somewhere she feels uncomfortable.  This woman doesn't seem to want to address that.  

[happi duck]

I thought this was interesting:

 

http://www.katykatikate.com/2018/01/not-that-bad_15.html?m=1

[happi duck]

The rational brain seems to check out when one is under stress. I don't assume that I can know what she was capable of doing.

 

There are different ways that people have power over others. I think it's important to be mindful of that.

[daijobu]

 

 

I think a lot of young adults could stand to have someone tell them that there is a certain kind of resilience and attitude required to participate in the hook up culture.

 

That's what gets me.  Who are all these young people who are having casual sex and just okay with that?   Who are these people who have sex with a stranger and wake up in the morning feeling great?

 

And is everyone else in this country past the notion that sex on the first date is a bad idea?  Because I have this crazy idea that it still is.  (Also I'm sick with the flu and watching a lot of 1950s TV on youtube.)

[Frances]

That's what gets me. Who are all these young people who are having casual sex and just okay with that? Who are these people who have sex with a stranger and wake up in the morning feeling great?

 

And is everyone else in this country past the notion that sex on the first date is a bad idea? Because I have this crazy idea that it still is. (Also I'm sick with the flu and watching a lot of 1950s TV on youtube.)

I so agree. And I’m pretty sure alcohol is involved most of the time. It seems so risky on so many levels for both parties involved to go to the apartment of a stranger on a first date. How often does it actually end well, especially for the woman?

[Crimson Wife]

I thought this was interesting:

 

http://www.katykatikate.com/2018/01/not-that-bad_15.html?m=1

 

From the linked article [lightly edited for language]:

 

"Women have had so much bad sex that our scale for sex has been skewed so it shows every sh*tty sex encounter as 10 pounds less sh*tty than it was."

 

And that brings me back to the question I had earlier: what is it about Millennial women that so many of them are passively going along with intimate encounters that they really didn't want?

 

I can understand putting up with the occasional night of bad sex as part of an ongoing serious relationship where most of the time the sex is decent. But if you're heading home in a cab feeling icky and shameful after the encounter, then you're not in that kind of ongoing serious relationship. The author is trying to claim that is "normal" and that just leaves me shaking my head as to why she and so many other young women have such little self-respect to put up with that kind of cr@p from their dates.

 

[Tsuga]

Setting aside the routine difficulties of proving slander in court - this was an anonymous accusation.

Ah. In that case he could prosecute the tag that published it.

[Joker]

This one bothers me because I do not think it was assault. I was the victim of sexual abuse when I was definitely too young to speak up for myself and I didn't feel safe enough to tell anyone.

 

I have also been in positions to say no and remove myself from a situation. I don't really think someone is a victim just because someone else was an ass/jerk/moron/etc. and you couldn't decide what to do or because you were upset about it after. 

 

I think this story hurts the movement more than helps. This is a different story about being able to stand up for oneself but I don't feel it is part of the #metoo movement. 

 

 

[KungFuPanda]

The rational brain seems to check out when one is under stress. I don't assume that I can know what she was capable of doing.

 

There are different ways that people have power over others. I think it's important to be mindful of that.

"My rational brain checked out" shouldn't be an excuse for either of them. You can't reduce women to mindless zombies and claim men are in total command at the same time. He doesn't sound any brighter than her and this was a train wreck of a date.

[HeartString]

Ah. In that case he could prosecute the tag that published it.

She might be anonymous to us, but surely he knows who it is. Keeping her name out of doesn't protect her from libel, if there are factual untruths in the piece.

[LMD]

OH, I love that.

 

I read the original article from Babe and Ansari's statement. I'm having a hard time forming thoughts on it. From what she has said it doesn't seem to warrant the assault label, although I feel sick picturing the situation and some comments seem to be a bit close to victim blaming to me. I wonder if I'm the only one who was ever in a situation where they were pressured and were unable to summon the courage to walk away when their rebuffs were ignored.

 

I don't know that I feel comfortable with Ansari being crucified(perhaps an anon accusation would have been more appropriate although I don't know that it would have generated the dialogue but no one deserves to be sacrificed for a movement however noble). But I think that this is an important part of this conversation, even if it doesn't warrant a #metoo hashtag. There is more of a continuum of right and wrong than some posts seem to acknowledge. We've got a lot of work to do and just stopping full on rape shouldn't be the final goal, we are shooting too low.

You're not the only one. I don't think we're unusual either.

[Soror]

You're not the only one. I don't think we're unusual either.

:grouphug:

 

The thing is I was in worse situations (much worse) situations that I care to detail, if we have to share such things for cred I guess I'm out of luck but I don't look back on myself as some stupid girl (or those experiences as unworthy of pain). Yes, I should have been more assertive, I should have done a lot of things. I learned to pick better guys to hang out with and to find my voice but it was a skill I had to learn (it is a skill I'm sure the girl in the article is developing as well). Our society still wants women to be people pleasers and put others first. I mean look at the campaign at HRC, we don't women who are too empowered, so no even in 2018 in NY I don't think we've magically arrived at the place where women are truly equal footing. Ansari stopped at sex but was ok with pushing and coercing his way up until that point. 

 

Anyway, I probably shouldn't have waded in but I felt the need to stand up for the girl I have been. The article Sadie linked hits the nail on the head for me. I'm not going to try and blame the girl and empower her at the same time. I hope I am open enough with my own daughters that they feel they can come to me and I hope that I am able to raise all of my girls to see enough of their own value that they don't feel the need to please men (or anyone else). I'm raising my son that consent is not enough, you need a willing and enthusiastic partner.

[marbel]

"My rational brain checked out" shouldn't be an excuse for either of them. You can't reduce women to mindless zombies and claim men are in total command at the same time. He doesn't sound any brighter than her and this was a train wreck of a date.

 

Right.  That puts us back to "women can't take care of themselves; they need men to protect and watch over them."

[poppy]

She might be anonymous to us, but surely he knows who it is. Keeping her name out of doesn't protect her from libel, if there are factual untruths in the piece.

 

Anseri's response:

 

"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."

[poppy]

Well I don’t know what else he could say. That sounds about equivalent in terms of “other side of the story†and doesn’t conflict with her own account.

 

Just saying, he is unlikely to seek out slander / libel charges.

[EmseB]

:grouphug:

 

The thing is I was in worse situations (much worse) situations that I care to detail, if we have to share such things for cred I guess I'm out of luck but I don't look back on myself as some stupid girl (or those experiences as unworthy of pain). Yes, I should have been more assertive, I should have done a lot of things. I learned to pick better guys to hang out with and to find my voice but it was a skill I had to learn (it is a skill I'm sure the girl in the article is developing as well). Our society still wants women to be people pleasers and put others first. I mean look at the campaign at HRC, we don't women who are too empowered, so no even in 2018 in NY I don't think we've magically arrived at the place where women are truly equal footing. Ansari stopped at sex but was ok with pushing and coercing his way up until that point. 

 

Anyway, I probably shouldn't have waded in but I felt the need to stand up for the girl I have been. The article Sadie linked hits the nail on the head for me. I'm not going to try and blame the girl and empower her at the same time. I hope I am open enough with my own daughters that they feel they can come to me and I hope that I am able to raise all of my girls to see enough of their own value that they don't feel the need to please men (or anyone else). I'm raising my son that consent is not enough, you need a willing and enthusiastic partner.

 

Except he didn't do that either.  In her mind, he did, but from his perspective it was not that. From his perspective he had a naked girl making out with him, hanging out with him on a couch. According to her account he suggested they get dressed after she continued to hang out naked and expected him to rub her back or play with her hair. She was expecting physical contact with him while she was undressed. She did not like his "style" and it made her uncomfortable, but she was hoping he would change over the course of the evening to something that aligned with her expectations. When he did not, she said she didn't want to engage anymore and he called her a car.

 

As someone pointed out earlier, if a woman is in a safe neighborhood, with her own money/means of transportation, with a guy who will obviously listen to the word "no", and STILL cannot assert herself, then what hope is there that we could ever be independent or empowered?  Really, what can we do?  If we, as women, cannot deal with a situation like that, then doesn't that mean we are, in fact, in need of protection from guys like Ansari?

 

It's not that she is unworthy of pain. Oh my gosh, bad dates are some special kind of awful and feel awful for a long time, especially when one makes choices in the moment that make them uncomfortable. It's the fact that the pain of a bad date with a dude who is bad at reading women and bad at intimacy does not merit one plastering the salacious details of a private, intimate interaction with said dude all over the internet.

 

I have also been in situations where I was uncomfortable but didn't let on. I have done things that I probably didn't want to do in the moment, but did them to go along and get along. But that was my choice. I chose my actions. I was not forced. I felt bad later because I made the wrong choice and I knew it. My choices were a result of my agency in the situation, and there was no way for the other party involved to know what I was thinking about how I really didn't want to be doing something but did it anyway because of whatever reason.  And maybe I would go to some of my friends the next day and say, "Ugh, Joe Smith is such a bad date. Don't even bother." So this is kind of like that, except the guy is famous and she put it on the internet for everyone to see both of them making bad choices. I'm sure this is not the reaction she was expecting.

 

I think the whole account really enforces the idea that it's generally a bad idea to be intimate with someone you barely know.

[Bluegoat]

From the linked article [lightly edited for language]:

 

"Women have had so much bad sex that our scale for sex has been skewed so it shows every sh*tty sex encounter as 10 pounds less sh*tty than it was."

 

And that brings me back to the question I had earlier: what is it about Millennial women that so many of them are passively going along with intimate encounters that they really didn't want?

 

I can understand putting up with the occasional night of bad sex as part of an ongoing serious relationship where most of the time the sex is decent. But if you're heading home in a cab feeling icky and shameful after the encounter, then you're not in that kind of ongoing serious relationship. The author is trying to claim that is "normal" and that just leaves me shaking my head as to why she and so many other young women have such little self-respect to put up with that kind of cr@p from their dates.

 

 

Except - I'm not sure it's great sex for the men either.  It doesn't sound in this case like it likely was.  But I've heard that kind of sentiment from other supposedly feminist writers, and it kind of seems like they have this expectation that these guys are meant to be sex gods or something.

 

Most casual sex is just not going to be fantastic, and most people aren't sex gods.  

 

 

As far as your original question - I get the sense for a lot of these women and men, this is just the sexual marketplace they find themselves in, and they don't question it much.  No one has suggested that they should have some other standard, and they associate that with what they assume are bizarre arbitrary passe values and religious indoctrination, and little old ladies saying "he won't buy the cow if the milk's available for free."

 

They just haven't had any ind of real alternative presented or realistic discussion of the impact sex has on people psychologically - they've been taught to believe that it's meant to be easy fun.

[EmseB]

Except - I'm not sure it's great sex for the men either.  It doesn't sound in this case like it likely was.  But I've heard that kind of sentiment from other supposedly feminist writers, and it kind of seems like they have this expectation that these guys are meant to be sex gods or something.

 

Most casual sex is just not going to be fantastic, and most people aren't sex gods.  

 

 

As far as your original question - I get the sense for a lot of these women and men, this is just the sexual marketplace they find themselves in, and they don't question it much.  No one has suggested that they should have some other standard, and they associate that with what they assume are bizarre arbitrary passe values and religious indoctrination, and little old ladies saying "he won't buy the cow if the milk's available for free."

 

They just haven't had any ind of real alternative presented or realistic discussion of the impact sex has on people psychologically - they've been taught to believe that it's meant to be easy fun.

 

This is so spot on.  Just exactly.  And when it isn't easy and fun and people walk out feeling embarrassed, uncomfortable, or maybe even ashamed, it means that someone must have been a victim of something.

 

Sex is simultaneously supposed to be so serious that permission must be asked, almost puritanically, every single step of the way in an intimate encounter, but yet it's also supposed to be no big deal so that you can do it with someone you've known all of 2 hours and it will just fill some sort of biological release for both parties that is fun and care-free. No wonder people are confused!!

 

This all is what I was trying to get at with my comment about how women think a one-night stand is supposed to be a scene out of Cosmo and men think it's going to be like a porno.  But you said it all so much better.

[Bluegoat]

:grouphug:

 

The thing is I was in worse situations (much worse) situations that I care to detail, if we have to share such things for cred I guess I'm out of luck but I don't look back on myself as some stupid girl (or those experiences as unworthy of pain). Yes, I should have been more assertive, I should have done a lot of things. I learned to pick better guys to hang out with and to find my voice but it was a skill I had to learn (it is a skill I'm sure the girl in the article is developing as well). Our society still wants women to be people pleasers and put others first. I mean look at the campaign at HRC, we don't women who are too empowered, so no even in 2018 in NY I don't think we've magically arrived at the place where women are truly equal footing. Ansari stopped at sex but was ok with pushing and coercing his way up until that point. 

 

Anyway, I probably shouldn't have waded in but I felt the need to stand up for the girl I have been. The article Sadie linked hits the nail on the head for me. I'm not going to try and blame the girl and empower her at the same time. I hope I am open enough with my own daughters that they feel they can come to me and I hope that I am able to raise all of my girls to see enough of their own value that they don't feel the need to please men (or anyone else). I'm raising my son that consent is not enough, you need a willing and enthusiastic partner.

 

I think lots of people have had experiences like this.  And it is a skill to learn to navigate sexual relationships, and people aren't perfect at it.

 

But I have doubts she'll learn much from it as long as she is thinking about it in terms of being sexual assault, as something done to her, in a situation that was somehow in itself inevitable.  If her response to the incident had been a little more self-reflective, I suspect readers would be more positive in their response.

 

This idea that consent has to be "enthusiastic" to me really puts a dent in the idea of consent at all.

[EmseB]

On the topic of "he doesn't deserve to have his name dragged through the mud": that's the risk you take when you get naked with a virtual stranger on the first date. If you don't want your sexual activities to be made public then only have them with people with whom you've established some level of trust and confidentiality.

 

They both exhibited poor decision making and lack of concern for the other person. Her consequence is sexual activity that she didn't want and is uncomfortable with, his is publicity that he didn't want and is uncomfortable with. She's not a victim but neither is he.

 

I absolutely agree with this. I don't think he's a victim, but I will say that at the end of reading the article my personal, gut reaction was that I felt more sorry for him than I did for her, but I actually think an irresponsible editor at the babe holds most of the responsibility for reading that account and then publishing it as "journalism". But they are getting their clicks out of it I suppose.

[marbel]

<snip>

 

This idea that consent has to be "enthusiastic" to me really puts a dent in the idea of consent at all.

 

I keep wondering how a person is supposed to determine the level of enthusiasm their date/sex partner is showing, when they barely know them. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by marbel

[poppy]

On the topic of "he doesn't deserve to have his name dragged through the mud": that's the risk you take when you get naked with a virtual stranger on the first date. If you don't want your sexual activities to be made public then only have them with people with whom you've established some level of trust and confidentiality.

 

They both exhibited poor decision making and lack of concern for the other person. Her consequence is sexual activity that she didn't want and is uncomfortable with, his is publicity that he didn't want and is uncomfortable with. She's not a victim but neither is he.

 

So, he is a stand up comic.  If he made their sexual encounter public in his routine, in a way that humiliated her, using her name, on a  TV special --- you would be fine with that? She took the risk by getting naked with a virtual stranger, shoud have known better, not a victim?

[Bluegoat]

I keep wondering how a person is supposed to determine the level of enthusiasm their date/sex partner is showing, when they barely know them. 

 

I think I'd just find it very annoying - maybe even angering - to have someone think they had some kind of right to decide when I was enthusiastic enough to meet their requirements to make a decision.

 

I'd be like some aerobics instructor telling you you needed to look like you were enjoying yourself more.

[Bluegoat]

So, he is a stand up comic.  If he made their sexual encounter public in his routine, in a way that humiliated her, using her name, on a  TV special --- you would be fine with that? She took the risk by getting naked with a virtual stranger, shoud have known better, not a victim?

 

I think maybe there is a difference between telling your friends about something like this - which might be rude but that is the risk you take - and publishing something or saying it on tv.

 

Especially if you are actually tying it to criminal behaviour.

[katilac]

And I am saying that if people are reading the story and jumping to "that's not sexual assault" they are missing the point.

 

 

 

It's not missing the point because "Grace" states that it is sexual assault. It's a direct response. 

[catz]

I keep wondering how a person is supposed to determine the level of enthusiasm their date/sex partner is showing, when they barely know them. 

 

:iagree:  Early into my relationship with DH I was mad at him for something minor that I had thought I had told him.  But I really was skirting the subject.  He eventually said "What is the problem?  I don't read minds."  It suddenly clicked to me that I needed to put my thoughts and feelings out there very clearly.  He is super responsive when I do that.  When I hint or pout, he often has no clue. Some humans aren't good with signs and non-verbal communications.  Aziz may really have thought everything was going ok.  But when you don't know someone else, you don't know what their perceptions or communications style is.  If she would have said "Sorry, I only drink red wine" or "I'm not ready to leave the restaurant yet.  I'd like to finish my dinner.", "I really enjoyed my evening, but don't go back to a guy's home on a first date" would the night have gone differently?  People put on airs when they are dating someone new to make them not seem high maintenance. 

 

I married at 29.  I dated.  A BUNCH.  If I wasn't ok with a physical relationship, I would not go to someone's home or invite a man to my home when on a date with them.  I had male friends over to watch movies or sports or for dinner or whatever but my male friends were long time friends.

 

This young woman flirted with this man while on a date with another guy just before their hook up.  If she were my friend and we were in our 20's, I would have asked her why she went to his house if she wasn't open to s*x.  This is a hook up culture move.   From flirting while on another date to following a man home.    I would have hugged her and made her cookies and said I'm sorry, men can be real jerks.  But I think she got caught up in the fact that he was a celebrity.  I do suspect she was open to a physical interlude but wanted it to go differently.  But was for some reason unable to verbalize what she would have preferred or shut it down.  From the description of their meeting, I am not surprised he thought she was a confident self assured adult woman since she sounded fairly flirty and assertive at their first meeting.

 

I do not feel sorry for him at all.  Anyone can kiss and tell. It's good to have some level of trust and understanding of each other before you are intimate with them.   I do think this is a situation that is worth discussion and honestly, this whole thing helps me form conversations with my own kids as they age and move toward moving out.

 

Edited January 17, 2018 by WoolySocks

[poppy]

It's not illegal. And yes, it's the risk she took.

 

That doesn't mean I'm "okay" with it -- I think it would have been a jerk move. But I am also very much not okay with takes on this situation that call expecting him to be considerate of her infatalizing women and saying they are fragile beings with no agency in need of protection while at the same time expecting her to be considerate of him and protect him. Why does that not infantalize men and consider them fragile beings in need of protection? She has to take her hit as a learning experiene and so does he.

 

She had a bad experience.

She told him she had a bad experience, and he responded IMO appropriately: with apologies, not defensiveness.

(here i'm referring to their text exchange, not their public statements).

 

That would have been enough in the "take a hit" department , for me, without publishing the story.

 

I do think anyone who uses  a public pulpit to put out these kinds of private sexual details with someone's  name attached - from strangers OR from true intimate partners - is stepping over some serious boundaries.  Which is entirely appropriate in a criminal situation, of course. But here?   It's gross.

Edited January 17, 2018 by poppy

[Crimson Wife]

I absolutely agree with this. I don't think he's a victim, but I will say that at the end of reading the article my personal, gut reaction was that I felt more sorry for him than I did for her, but I actually think an irresponsible editor at the babe holds most of the responsibility for reading that account and then publishing it as "journalism". But they are getting their clicks out of it I suppose.

 

I don't feel sorry for either one of them. They both come out of it looking bad to my mind. If he's pretending to be some great feminist ally when he's actually a selfish, pushy jerk than he deserves the exposure of his hypocrisy. If he were actually a nice guy, he wouldn't be in this situation.

[happi duck]

Iirc, "Grace" only went public after seeing AA wearing the "me too"(?) support pin(?) at the Golden Globes.

[8circles]

This isn't sexual assault. It shouldn't fall under #metoo. It is an extremely important conversation to have nontheless.

 

I'm actually appalled by the idea that seems to be coming out of the conversation that if a woman doesn't know how to handle herself by immediately saying "no" and walking out, she should not be allowed to be unsupervised. 

 

It's as if internalized misogyny isn't a real thing. We are all just raised in families and in cultures where women are empowered just the same as men. Nothing to see here. Move along. 

[8circles]

 

 

This isn't sexual assault. It shouldn't fall under #metoo. It is an extremely important conversation to have nontheless.

 

I'm actually appalled by the idea that seems to be coming out of the conversation that if a woman doesn't know how to handle herself by immediately saying "no" and walking out, she should not be allowed to be unsupervised. 

 

It's as if internalized misogyny isn't a real thing. We are all just raised in families and in cultures where women are empowered just the same as men. Nothing to see here. Move along. 

 

AND.

 

I detest that this conversation centers so much around women and how they behave - even though their behavior, bad or good, has nothing to do with violating someone else. 

 

This conversation should be about men. Why/How have we conditioned men to approach this situation with entitlement?

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.

He isn't asking for consent, consent is assumed. 

[8circles]

This isn't sexual assault. It shouldn't fall under #metoo. It is an extremely important conversation to have nontheless.

 

I'm actually appalled by the idea that seems to be coming out of the conversation that if a woman doesn't know how to handle herself by immediately saying "no" and walking out, she should not be allowed to be unsupervised. 

 

It's as if internalized misogyny isn't a real thing. We are all just raised in families and in cultures where women are empowered just the same as men. Nothing to see here. Move along. 

 

And in CHURCHES. 

 

How many advocates to we have - on this site - who talk about complementarianism as if it puts men and women on equal footing, empowering them both, equally. Except that the man "has the final say".

 

How many people belong, or condone, fundamentalist ideas of what "good"/"modest" women should wear - where it is exclusively men in charge and making the rules.

 

I swear, it's like all of a sudden we're in bizarro world where men and women are actually equal. Is that how people go to their happy-place? Just pretend it's all OK and continue to heap the responsibility onto the women's back. 

 

ETA: in orange

Edited January 17, 2018 by 8circles

[Bluegoat]

This isn't sexual assault. It shouldn't fall under #metoo. It is an extremely important conversation to have nontheless.

 

I'm actually appalled by the idea that seems to be coming out of the conversation that if a woman doesn't know how to handle herself by immediately saying "no" and walking out, she should not be allowed to be unsupervised. 

 

It's as if internalized misogyny isn't a real thing. We are all just raised in families and in cultures where women are empowered just the same as men. Nothing to see here. Move along. 

 

Do you really think that in a culture with no misogyny, everyone would be able to manage these things without problems?  It's just as likely someone doesn't speak up because of natural reticence, being shy, not knowing what to say, being unsure about his or her own preferences...  there are 100 reasons.

 

Getting into a situation you aren't comfortable with and being unsure how to get out gracefully is pretty ubiquitous in the hook-up dating culture.  Not being sure what you want in an interaction is pretty ubiquitous in the under-25 dating experience.

 

I don't think anyone thinks women should always be supervised - they are responding to people saying that she couldn't get out of going home with him, ask for different wine - a really incredible level of helplessness akin to what you'd use to describe a child.  How can you talk about consent being possible at all at that point - it wouldn't be possible to obtain legal consent - and that seems to imply the necessity for extra guardianship.

[8circles]

Do you really think that in a culture with no misogyny, everyone would be able to manage these things without problems?  It's just as likely someone doesn't speak up because of natural reticence, being shy, not knowing what to say, being unsure about his or her own preferences...  there are 100 reasons.

 

Getting into a situation you aren't comfortable with and being unsure how to get out gracefully is pretty ubiquitous in the hook-up dating culture.  Not being sure what you want in an interaction is pretty ubiquitous in the under-25 dating experience.

 

I don't think anyone thinks women should always be supervised - they are responding to people saying that she couldn't get out of going home with him, ask for different wine - a really incredible level of helplessness akin to what you'd use to describe a child.  How can you talk about consent being possible at all at that point - it wouldn't be possible to obtain legal consent - and that seems to imply the necessity for extra guardianship.

 

Nope. There are always some women who will naturally be less empowered than others. But we cannot on the one hand condone (through pretense of equality) the conditioning into weakness that women have experienced throughout centuries and then on the other, expect them to be empowered. Let's ACTUALLY CHANGE our culture to empower women. EXPLICITLY. It's cruel and a form of gaslighting to train them to be one way and then expect them to be different.

 

Your repeated talk of "extra guardianship" is creepy.  Truly. There is no rational conversation possible here if you keep throwing that out there.

 

You will be taught to be helpless.

You've now proven that you're helpless.

You need extra supervision because you're helpless.

 

 

Edited January 17, 2018 by emzhengjiu
language -