Hollywood: Sexual assault whack-a-mole

[dasva]

Did he really stop if there was an "every time" though lol

Do you stop sleeping when you wake up if you just go and do it again everyday? Boy just thought he had infinite lives and every time they asked do you want to continue slammed that yes button

[Salodin]

You said yourself there's nothing wrong with bringing this to light. Yet you are saying it's an attempt to destroy his career. I'm saying so long as the account is truthful (and Aziz did not refute any of the claims regarding the sequence of events), the only way it can destroy his career is if we are at the point where we should recognize new norms.

I say there's nothing wrong with bringing this up. There are others using it to end his career. There are some of us who genuinely would like a conversation on what is or is not acceptable expectations in this situation. I think there's a great conversation to have using this story as an example, and it looks like that conversation is happening.

Having this conversation doesn't necessarily mean the norms are changing, it just means were not leaving ambiguous the expectations in this situation. I think he did nothing wrong to expect sex at the end of the night considering the context; she did however. I think he should have stopped and she should have left after the kitchen scene, but she stayed and he continued going after what he wanted. Maybe if we had this public conversation both parties would better handle the situation; maybe she'll leave when she figures out she's nothing but a booty call, maybe he'll learn that he should just call the uber and kick her out at the first sign of hesitation.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Gredival]

There's a lot of people saying it's assault though. Not necessarily on here, but in the media and online.

That depends slightly on people's conception of sexual assault.

Common thinking is that sexual assault is just "assault" in a sexual situation. And because there was a lack of force, physical or power dynamics (i.e. she wasn't in the entertainment industry and wasn't pressured to be beholden to him), it wasn't sexual assault.

On strict legal definitions, it arguably was. Assault does not require actual unwanted touching -- that's battery. Assault is an act that causes immediate apprehension of unwanted touching. And I'd say that he meets that standard given that he repeatedly followed her throughout his apartment and gave her the claw, asked her where she wanted it, and turned her around to put his dong in her face after agreeing to "chill."

(It's worth noting that it's very easy to prove assault and battery in court -- the limiting factor is damages. You can prove battery, like tapping someone on the shoulder to get their attention without their permission, but be unable to prove you deserve damages)

Most people won't want to say sexual assault because it makes it sound like he is a "held her down and ravished her" rapist. Sort of like how it's okay to call a statutory rapist just a rapist when they are much older than the victim (because that means they are a pedo and it's okay to judge them), but if it's just a few years no one will say that (regardless of applicability of Romeo/Juliet laws)

However many will push for calling this sexual assault because their ideology is about getting people to recognize "rape culture" includes the normalization and excusing behavior that even Ansari's defenders will admit is "scummy." It's a parallel for the whole "Racism isn't just about you wanting to go out and lynch people, it's when you support power structures that actively privilege certain persons over others."

[Gredival]

I say there's nothing wrong with bringing this up. There are others using it to end his career. There are some of us who genuinely would like a conversation on what is or is not acceptable expectations in this situation. I think there's a great conversation to have using this story as an example, and it looks like that conversation is happening.

Having this conversation doesn't necessarily mean the norms are changing, it just means were not leaving ambiguous the expectations in this situation. I think he did nothing wrong to expect sex at the end of the night considering the context; she did however. I think he should have stopped and she should have left after the kitchen scene, but she stayed and he continued going after what he wanted. Maybe if we had this public conversation both parties would better handle the situation; maybe she'll leave when she figures out she's nothing but a booty call, maybe he'll learn that he should just call the uber and kick her out at the first sign of hesitation.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

This is arguably why "cat person" was a big deal because it allowed discussion on this without an actual "perpetrator" whose life would/could be ruined.

[Salodin]

Not familiar with cat person, but this scandal presented itself so we're going with it. /shrug

I'm hesitant to call it assault because she willingly continued relations after she changed her mind. She had the power to just leave at any point but she continued to persue lord knows what of her own volition. I disagree with the notion that Aziz had power over her; he didnt work with her and she wasn't looking to work with him. This, by all accounts, is just two people who had a shitty date.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Gredival]

Not familiar with cat person, but this scandal presented itself so we're going with it. /shrug
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

It was a fictional short story in the Atlantic. That Atlantic article that defended Ansari alluded to it. The theme is basically an unsatisfying sexual encounter (for both parties) where there is no force/coercion but becomes a point of intense regret.

I'm hesitant to call it assault because she willingly continued relations after she changed her mind. She had the power to just at any point but she continued to persue lord knows what of her own volition.

This goes back to my first posts on this though: there's no post-facto justifications. The fact that she subsequently relented (for whatever reason) does not mean it wasn't assault when she kept separating herself from him and he would follow her and give her "the claw." Just like how the fact she gave in didn't make it okay for him to invite her to "chill" on the couch then he turned around and pointed her face at his crotch.

And since this keeps coming up, I think you are attributing way too much to the fact she eventually resumed sexual contact on the couch. Maybe she felt scared? Maybe she thought it would put an end to it for a little while? And even if you think both explanations are unsatisfactory it has nothing to do with the appropriateness of Ansari's actions.

I disagree with the notion that Aziz had power over her; he didnt work with her and she wasn't looking to work with him. This, by all accounts, is just two people who had a shitty date.

...which is why I specifically said people have a hard time labeling this as assault because this situation lacked coercion either physically or through power dynamics...

[Salodin]

And on the other side, the context, imo, supports why he would assume she was on the same page as him. They met at a party where she showed up with another date but still flirted with Aziz and gave him her number (that's scummy on her part). Then after talking for some amount of time they go out on a nice date. At the end of the evening he invites her in and she goes along. At this point, any reasonable person would assume she's DTF. They stopped after the kitchen cause she changed her mind after they already started, but after he tried again she went along; that's not assault imo. Then after they stop a second time they go watch Seinfeld and he makes a move but stops after some crude gestures and then she leaves. He's scummy for the Seinfeld move but again, not assault.

There's something to be said about not continuing to try after the first time she declined but as a society I don't think we're on a consensus on whether it's okay to at the very least try after that. And considering their entire history up until that point it is ludicrous to assume Aziz thought any differently than "this chick wants my dick".

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Salodin]

And again, she could have left. She was given the chance but decided to stay when she already knew he only wanted sex. She kept coming back for more D, didn't take the chance to leave when she's at his house, but then is shocked he continued to try to bed her? Idk man, she is capable of making adult decisions and peacing out. Even if she was scared, which I don't give her the benefit of the doubt that she was because she had no reason to be, that doesn't excuse her choice to stay when she knew all he wanted was sex.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[NynJa]

If she was giving "non verbal clues" that she wasnt interested, why is it so far fetched to believe that his logic was "I've given her enough clues to what I want tonight, and she's still here, maybe she's just playing hard to get"?

[Salodin]

I believe that's exactly what he thought. Which makes me wish we were more willing as a society to draw the line in the sand and say no more token resistence. No is a hard no regardless of the context. No, followed by a blowjob, is not no. It's "I'm playing hard to get". Assuming there isn't coercion of course.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[6souls]

It wasn't Aziz, it was RAAAAAAAANDYYYYY.

LTTP, but

[Gredival]

And again, she could have left. She was given the chance but decided to stay when she already knew he only wanted sex. She kept coming back for more D, didn't take the chance to leave when she's at his house, but then is shocked he continued to try to bed her? Idk man, she is capable of making adult decisions and peacing out. Even if she was scared, which I don't give her the benefit of the doubt that she was because she had no reason to be, that doesn't excuse her choice to stay when she knew all he wanted was sex.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

And again, why do her actions absolve him?

You can talk all you want about how someone shouldn't go down a dark alley if they don't want to get mugged. At the end of the day it doesn't make it okay for the mugger to mug them.

[Gredival]

If she was giving "non verbal clues" that she wasnt interested, why is it so far fetched to believe that his logic was "I've given her enough clues to what I want tonight, and she's still here, maybe she's just playing hard to get"?

"We should stop now because otherwise I will hate you and I don't want to hate you" isn't a verbal cue?

[Salodin]

I'll clarify for ya and say it absolves him of assault. He is not absolved from being scummy with no game. But I think society will be more lenient with him because, by all accounts especially her own, she was sending mad mixed signals yo.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[NynJa]

And again, why do her actions absolve him?

You can talk all you want about how someone shouldn't go down a dark alley if they don't want to get mugged. At the end of the day it doesn't make it okay for the mugger to mug them.

Except this isnt the same scenario. Mugging someone usually involves brandishing a weapon and issuing a threat of physical harm by non-compliance. At no point in this womans story did she present any indication that Aziz was a threat to her. A creep, yes, but zero chance that he would escalate things to get his way.

[NynJa]

"We should stop now because otherwise I will hate you and I don't want to hate you" isn't a verbal cue?

So she gave him an ultimatum to accept the friend zone or be labeled a shithead rapist even though he wasnt forcing himself on her? She had the option to leave if she wasnt happy with how the night played out. It happens.

[Gredival]

Are we really going to do this shit again where we talk about how the examples have to be 1:1 because we never learned what "moral of the story" means?

[Salodin]

"We should stop now because otherwise I will hate you and I don't want to hate you" isn't a verbal cue?

Was this before Seinfeld? Cause up until Seinfeld shed say something, then turn around and start sucking some dick. If that's not a mixed signal to someone who's verbal and non verbal clues say "you're my booty call tonight" then idk what is. Do we not give Aziz any leniency because of her actions? I think it's unfair to do so.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Salodin]

Are we really going to do this shit again where we talk about how the examples have to be 1:1 because we never learned what "moral of the story" means?

Your analogy was dumb and of all people Nynja called you out. You should feel bad lol.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Gredival]

Please read any peer reviewed journal of philosophy or ethics to see the use of principle distillation through example