Tipping Point - Sexual Harassment In America

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

Wait, are we equating not walking out of an apartment on a first date to be the same thing as not walking out on a long-term abusive relationship?

No one is saying he wasn’t gross. In fact we all are. Literally no one is putting this all on her. But we are also saying that maybe it doesn’t need to be all over the Internet in graphic, clickbaiting detail, and that maybe this entire story has little to do with #metoo and is little more than tabloid fodder?

thank you Irvine!

[cobl04]

Fuck, it’s so simple. I’ve seen the light now.

[LuckyNumber7]

In equality, everyone plays a role. Not just the leaders. Not just the foot soldiers. Not just those who are guilty of the crime.

And if you're not doing a part to help facilitate change, you're just as good as someone who opposes change.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by cobl04

Fuck, it’s so simple. I’ve seen the light now.

it would be simple if everyone said no when they meant no, and yes when they meant yes and everyone listened to and respected each other

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by mama cass

it would be simple if everyone said no when they meant no, and yes when they meant yes and everyone listened to and respected each other

Wouldn't that be a boring world?

I much prefer getting a mixed signal, struggling to decipher, and stressing out over it.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

Wouldn't that be a boring world?

I much prefer getting a mixed signal, struggling to decipher, and stressing out over it.

yeah and then getting it plastered over the internet when you get it wrong

[cobl04]

Originally Posted by mama cass

i'm sorry but NO

if you don't want to do something DON'T DO IT simples!!

and if a guy is trying to coerce you into doing something you don't want to do, and disregarding your feelings on the matter, then get out of it because he is an asshole!

where the fuck has common sense gone?

you want to blame one adult because another adult consented to do something they secretly didn't want to do?

i am so confused

A-class victim blaming

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

I much prefer getting a mixed signal, struggling to decipher, and stressing out over it.

Except Aziz didn't do any of these things.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by cobl04

A-class victim blaming

no, i'm talking about the "little things" you mentioned, giving consent but not really wanting to, i.e. saying "yes" when you really mean "no" yet blaming the other - a victim of what exactly?? and that situation is NOTHING like harassment or sexual assault and, by mixing it all up, you're trivialising them, which is dangerous

[Nick66]

So now someone who consents to sex that she didn’t want is a victim?

Yeah. This is what people are talking about when they talk about robbing women of their agency and treating them as children.

Because that’s pretty much how we treat children under the law in these situations. If someone under age consents to sex with an adult we still regard her as a victim because she lacks the maturity to give meaningful consent.

Is that what we’re saying now? Adult women can’t be trusted to make their own decisions on sex? Even if they consent, if they really didn’t want it they’re a victim? So much for teaching men the importance of consent. Now we want them to psychoanalyse to make sure she really wants it.

Men have the responsibility to not be boorish jerks and not try to pressure women into sex. A guy who pressures a woman into sex is a pathetic creep and loser. There’s no excuse, and he’s responsible for his creepy behaviour. That’s part of being an adult male.

A woman’s agency is to say no and leave if she feels pressured and doesn’t want sex. If she yields, whether it’s because she feels sorry for the guy or really likes him or just can’t be bothered to get up and leave or has been socialised to, she’s responsible for her own decisions. That’s also part of being an adult. If we tell women they’re not responsible for their own bad choices, we’re not treating them as adults. Thats another way to disrespect women. It took centuries for society to decide women were adults who could make their own choices. Let’s not go backwards.

So by all means, let’s teach men better to respect women. And let’s teach women that if they don’t want to have sex, they shouldn’t have sex.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by Nick66

So now someone who consents to sex that she didn’t want is a victim?

Yeah. This is what people are talking about when they talk about robbing women of their agency and treating them as children.

Because that’s pretty much how we treat children under the law in these situations. If someone under age consents to sex with an adult we still regard her as a victim because she lacks the maturity to give meaningful consent.

Is that what we’re saying now? Adult women can’t be trusted to make their own decisions on sex? Even if they consent, if they really didn’t want it they’re a victim? So much for teaching men the importance of consent. Now we want them to psychoanalyse to make sure she really wants it.

Men have the responsibility to not be boorish jerks and not try to pressure women into sex. A woman’s agency is to say no and leave if she doesn’t want that.

So by all means, let’s teach men better to respect women. And let’s teach women that if they don’t want to have sex, they shouldn’t have sex.

i was thinking about this earlier this morning, about how we have special protection for children, and that's why we have the age of consent, but apparently now consent doesn't really mean consent... it's all getting a little bit Black Mirror

(ps - sorry everyone for agreeing with Nick66 again )

[mama cass]

good article

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...nguage-matters

[MrsSpringsteen]

Originally Posted by mama cass

good article

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...nguage-matters

She's a very good writer. I think she's right, it is a cultural problem. Socialization, like I mentioned, and so many other factors come into play.

I do want to go back and read the Babe piece to see what she said about her movement being restricted. That's really crossing a line for me, if he did that. Again I have to reread it to see if he did. That is an aggressive action that takes it to another level for me.

Yes you can try to kick and scream and get away and whatever else, but the issue starts with the person who restricts you or attempts to. When someone is a victim of assault or attempted assault and is told they should have gotten away, should have done xyz...that is victim blaming.

To emphasize, I am NOT saying that Ansari assaulted her in that situation.

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

When someone is a victim of assault or attempted assault and is told they should have gotten away, should have done xyz...that is victim blaming.

absolutely - assault is completely different to consensual sex

[Nick66]

Originally Posted by mama cass

good article

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...nguage-matters

Excellent article. What she says about assault not being a subjective feeling or perception (in legal terms) is particularly astute.

On this issue of assault, if Ansari used physical force to restrain her (against her will), that can be battery, it's a crime, and completely changes the equation and in that case she'd be a victim.

If he physically prevented her from leaving his flat, that's false imprisonment.

If either occurred, she should go to the police.

But as I recall, she's not completely clear, outside of using a football analogy, how he "limited her movements." Since she's not specific as to what occurred (and she should have been, given how important this is to how to view this incident) it's impossible to say. She did say he tried several times to put his fingers in her mouth, but whether this would constitute battery would entirely depend on the context (and the way she describes it is doesn't appear to be).

Here's another good article from the NTY:

Aziz Ansari Is Guilty. Of Not Being a Mind Reader.
Bari Weiss

I am a proud feminist, and this is what I thought while reading the article:

If you are hanging out naked with a man, it’s safe to assume he is going to try to have sex with you.

If the failure to choose a pinot noir over a pinot grigio offends you, you can leave right then and there.

If you don’t like the way your date hustles through paying the check, you can say, “I’ve had a lovely evening and I’m going home now.”

If you go home with him and discover he’s a terrible kisser, say, “I’m out.”

If you start to hook up and don’t like the way he smells or the way he talks (or doesn’t talk), end it.

If he pressures you to do something you don’t want to do, use a four-letter word, stand up on your two legs and walk out his door.

And this bit goes directly so something Irvine was talking about...

The single most distressing thing to me about this story is that the only person with any agency in the story seems to be Aziz Ansari. The woman is merely acted upon.

[Hewson]

Originally Posted by Nick66

Here's another good article from the NTY:

Aziz Ansari Is Guilty. Of Not Being a Mind Reader.
Bari Weiss



And this bit goes directly so something Irvine was talking about...

Irvine posted that article 25 hours prior to you, a few pages back:

http://www.u2interference.com/forums...ml#post8242200

Do try and keep up.

[Nick66]

Originally Posted by Hewson

Irvine posted that article 25 hours prior to you, a few pages back:

http://www.u2interference.com/forums...ml#post8242200

Do try and keep up.

Ah, my bad.

Well I did say Irvine was making a lot of sense in this thread!

[corianderstem]

There's so much social "training" to unpack from decades of pop culture and society. For ages, men are seen as the initiators, that if she says no, she's being coy and you have to keep trying (see half of the romantic comedies, or even friggin' Han Solo). Women have been "taught" to not want sex, to always be polite, let the dude down gently, whatever. (Hell, some women say no and get killed.)

Of course that's all bullshit, but they're real societal expectations that have been pounded into people for years. It's going to take a long time to unpack and unravel.

So no, it's not always as simple as common sense might dictate. There's a lot of nuance involved. I don't think this article did a good job in kicking that off. Sounds like they pursued Grace for the story, and have seen a lot of things saying how the article was problematic, in addition to its intro. (i.e., they wanted the story and the clicks, not necessarily a thoughtful evaluation of all of this stuff)

As far as "Grace was hanging around naked, what did she expect" goes - she made it clear she did not want to have intercourse. Granted, she still felt coerced into the oral sex, but went along with it. But that piece aside, it is perfectly acceptable to be okay with Sex Act A and not Sex Act B, and it was definitely not okay for him to keep going for it after she told him that repeatedly.

Other than that, I feel some of the same general discomfort over this situation that Irvine expressed.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by corianderstem

There's so much social "training" to unpack from decades of pop culture and society. For ages, men are seen as the initiators, that if she says no, she's being coy and you have to keep trying (see half of the romantic comedies, or even friggin' Han Solo). Women have been "taught" to not want sex, to always be polite, let the dude down gently, whatever. (Hell, some women say no and get killed.)

Of course that's all bullshit, but they're real societal expectations that have been pounded into people for years. It's going to take a long time to unpack and unravel.

So no, it's not always as simple as common sense might dictate. There's a lot of nuance involved. I don't think this article did a good job in kicking that off. Sounds like they pursued Grace for the story, and have seen a lot of things saying how the article was problematic, in addition to its intro. (i.e., they wanted the story and the clicks, not necessarily a thoughtful evaluation of all of this stuff)

As far as "Grace was hanging around naked, what did she expect" goes - she made it clear she did not want to have intercourse. Granted, she still felt coerced into the oral sex, but went along with it. But that piece aside, it is perfectly acceptable to be okay with Sex Act A and not Sex Act B, and it was definitely not okay for him to keep going for it after she told him that repeatedly.

Other than that, I feel some of the same general discomfort over this situation that Irvine expressed.

excellent post

[mama cass]

Originally Posted by corianderstem

There's so much social "training" to unpack from decades of pop culture and society. For ages, men are seen as the initiators, that if she says no, she's being coy and you have to keep trying (see half of the romantic comedies, or even friggin' Han Solo). Women have been "taught" to not want sex, to always be polite, let the dude down gently, whatever. (Hell, some women say no and get killed.)

Of course that's all bullshit, but they're real societal expectations that have been pounded into people for years. It's going to take a long time to unpack and unravel.

So no, it's not always as simple as common sense might dictate. There's a lot of nuance involved. I don't think this article did a good job in kicking that off. Sounds like they pursued Grace for the story, and have seen a lot of things saying how the article was problematic, in addition to its intro. (i.e., they wanted the story and the clicks, not necessarily a thoughtful evaluation of all of this stuff)

As far as "Grace was hanging around naked, what did she expect" goes - she made it clear she did not want to have intercourse. Granted, she still felt coerced into the oral sex, but went along with it. But that piece aside, it is perfectly acceptable to be okay with Sex Act A and not Sex Act B, and it was definitely not okay for him to keep going for it after she told him that repeatedly.

Other than that, I feel some of the same general discomfort over this situation that Irvine expressed.

i do agree with most of this... and i definitely think the perception/portrayal of women in films and the media has a lot to answer for...

on the romantic comedy thing, i saw a French film last week, the female character was being relentlessly hit on by a younger man, and she was brutal with him, yelled at him and slapped him round the face when he didn't give up and tried to kiss her (they were old friends but he was really pushing his luck and exasperating her), and he eventually backed off and gave up, and then later on, on her terms, when he had calmed down and was behaving himself, she went to find him and they became lovers - maybe a different perspective, a cultural difference maybe, but clearly she was portrayed as a strong woman in control of her sexuality and who was not to be pushed around... (she initiated everything, and he was happy to oblige )

Women have been "taught" to not want sex, to always be polite, let the dude down gently, whatever.

whoa didn't register that bit, nope, definitely a cultural thing... "taught not to want sex"?
those damn puritans...

[anitram]

Originally Posted by corianderstem

Of course that's all bullshit, but they're real societal expectations that have been pounded into people for years. It's going to take a long time to unpack and unravel.

So no, it's not always as simple as common sense might dictate. There's a lot of nuance involved. I don't think this article did a good job in kicking that off.