Hollywood: Sexual assault whack-a-mole

[Gredival]

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

After the kitchen counter she started walking away from him and he would follow her and give her "the claw" in her mouth. Eventually she went to the bathroom. She came out, he asked if she was okay, and she said "We should stop now because otherwise I will hate you and I don't want to hate you."

He said "It's not fun if we aren't both having fun. Let's just chill then." Then he invited her to the couch. That should have been the end of it, but then he turned her around and pointed her towards his junk.

[NynJa]

Did you really write a peer reviewed article on why strawman is acceptable? lol
I could have really used that a couple years back when everyone kept complaining about my strawman arguments.

[Salodin]

Why do the context of her actions make no difference to the contribution of his scummy actions? Is it impossible that they both could have handled this poorly? Why is she absolved of any culpability even when this all started cause she lead him on while on a date with someone else. I have no reason to believe up until Seinfeld that he thought he was getting laid, even if she might have been a little nervous or thought they were going too fast.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Salodin]

After the kitchen counter she started walking away from him and he would follow her and give her "the claw" in her mouth. Eventually she went to the bathroom. She came out, he asked if she was okay, and she said "We should stop now because otherwise I will hate you and I don't want to hate you."

He said "It's not fun if we aren't both having fun. Let's just chill then." Then he invited her to the couch. That should have been the end of it, but then he turned her around and pointed her towards his junk.

And? Where's the assault? Pointing to his junk after his verbal and non verbal cues say he wanted to get laid?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Byrthnoth]

I do not think the woman had any obligation to keep her bad dating experience with Aziz private.

I don't think he should be arrested.

The publication of her bad dating experience (along with the appetite people have for such stories) is already the justice.

[Salodin]

I think the story is great if only cause it forces us to address nuance in #metoo.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Thunder]

His career is fine lol, his PR team is fucking doing work

I think his life is fine, many millions and what not

You know his comedic shtick for a while has been all about dating/sex/feminism, yeah? He's even written a book last year (co-authored, but no credit given on cover, with some sociologist prof at NYU) to deconstruct modern romance and guide the reader through it. It's a new york times best seller!

Spoiler: show

he does jokes about how all men suck (lol), how many (white) women he's fucked, all the dating he's done, etc. Last few years his comedy has been majorly about love/sex and he's never outright said it(?) but he's been getting known as some kind of love savant among fans (can check amazon book reviews yourself for a glimpse at that)

meanwhile his game is the horny man's version of "are we there yet?" lmao


so, not sure about his career. He could get mentally shook by comics making fun of him (he was already not very well liked among comedians supposedly), he might not get ahead of the PR and that could get to him, his shtick might have to change, and probably a bunch of other things that could fuck a comedian up mentally and they never write good material again

[Gredival]

Did you really write a peer reviewed article on why strawman is acceptable? lol
I could have really used that a couple years back when everyone kept complaining about my strawman arguments.

Use of examples that are specifically contoured to examine one specific principle have been the norm in philosophy for a little more than a century.

Again: trolley problem vs. hospital problem vs. junta problem. These are all famous examples meant to examine utilitarian ethics. The point of having different examples is to see how different contexts change our answers so we can determine what sorts of contexts are relevant.

Why do the context of her actions make no difference to the contribution of his scummy actions?

This is a separate question than this

Is it impossible that they both could have handled this poorly?

You can say she handled it poorly. You can say that she played a role in the "but-for" causation of the events of the night and she could have left before anything happened.

None of that absolves Ansari. Because he is responsible for his own actions and he had a clear verbal cue to stop which he did not respect (combined with non-verbal cues which someone can miss but Ansari shouldn't considering he wrote a book on the subject)

Because just like in the mugger example, the victim's poor judgment doesn't legitimize the mugger's malfeasance.

For the record I think that anything up to the bathroom we could GENEROUSLY chalk up to him being on a different page. I think everything after the bathroom? He had clear notice.

And? Where's the assault? Pointing to his junk after his verbal and non verbal cues say he wanted to get laid?

Does that make it "rape" in colloquial understanding? No.

Does it make it assault? In the strict sense that his actions would have created apprehension of imminent sexual touching? Yes.

Will most people consider it assault? No.

Should most people consider it assault? That's the discussion. You yourself admit he was being scummy.

The point of talking about how this is "rape culture" is to identify, and de-legitimize" excuses for poor behavior. Rape culture doesn't mean that as a society we are fine with men forcibly ravishing girls who are screaming "NO!" or that we are fine with drugging girls. It's about the normalization of objectification.

Just like how racism isn't just about the Klan stringing people up, it's about complicity in things like voter ID laws that create a structure meant to suppress the autonomy of non-whites.

Why is she absolved of any culpability even when this all started cause she lead him on while on a date with someone else.

Because it's completely unreasonable to say it's okay for a guy to ignore boundaries as long as she shows interest first?

[Zealot]

At least this gives me an excuse to never have to watch Master of None.

[Salodin]

I think those boundaries are blurred if she says nah then starts sucking some schlong. And this whole time I'm talking legal definition of assault, not "you tapped my shoulder" assault. I'm not absolving him of his actions; I'm saying I understand why he thought, up until Seinfeld, that she might have been nervous but still willing to engage in sexual relations. Both sides were talking past each other, well one was clawing and the other was sucking. I won't crucify the man for mixed signals, and I won't victim blame because she's free to not have sex if she doesn't want to. I will say Aziz should have used his words more and said "I'm honestly not looking for a relationship" and took it from there, cause that would have solved everything for her it seems.

[Eurell]

.

Usin extreme examples is fine. The reason yours doesn't quite work this time is because its more like if she was walking down a dark alley, someone tried to mug her, she said no and the mugger stopped. Then she stayed next to the mugger, sucked on his gun a few times and put her wallet in his hand. Then complained to the media that the mugger bought the wrong kind of wine.


Maybe not exactly like that, but close enough.

[Gredival]

And this whole time I'm talking legal definition of assault, not "you tapped my shoulder" assault.

That is the legal definition though.

I'm not absolving him of his actions; I'm saying I understand why he thought, up until Seinfeld, that she might have been nervous but still willing to engage in sexual relations. Both sides were talking past each other, well one was clawing and the other was sucking.

Ok and as I said, if we're being super generous to him (again he wrote a book about this) then maybe that gets him to the bathroom. But after that she literally says "Stop here or I'll hate you." That's the clear dividing line in the encounter. Anything past that can't be excused by mere ignorance.

Yet 30 secs later he whips it out on the couch.

You say mixed signals but the mixed signal would be AFTER he was given clear verbal notice to stop. So unless you are arguing post-facto justification, that was a clear encroachment.

[Salodin]

Usin extreme examples is fine. The reason yours doesn't quite work this time is because its more like if she was walking down a dark alley, someone tried to mug her, she said no and the mugger stopped. Then she stayed next to the mugger, sucked on his gun a few times and put her wallet in his hand. Then complained to the media that the mugger bought the wrong kind of wine.


Maybe not exactly like that, but close enough.

I thought Nynja's comments were comedic gold, but this wins by far. JFC i love it haha

[Salodin]

That is the legal definition though.



Ok and as I said, if we're being super generous to him (again he wrote a book about this) then maybe that gets him to the bathroom. But after that she literally says "Stop here or I'll hate you." That's the clear dividing line in the encounter. Anything past that can't be excused by mere ignorance.

Yet 30 secs later he whips it out on the couch.

You say mixed signals but the mixed signal would be AFTER he was given clear verbal notice to stop. So unless you are arguing post-facto justification, that was a clear encroachment.

Idk if I already said it, but after the bathroom I'd probably call his actions harassment. Still not into assault territory imo.

Tap on the shoulder is "assault" if someone complains loud enough, but no one sincerely believes it's assault. Just like it seems a lot of people sincerely believe Aziz didn't assault this woman. But I'm glad we're having this conversation cause I think it's something that needs to be addressed.

[Andalusian girls]

Feeling is probably mutual but I truly like you less every time you post.

[Thunder]

if she really was cold and unresponsive like she says she was... and aziz did the "fingers down the throat" move throughout the night then uh.. I definitely wouldn't personally call for the guy to get legal action thrown at him (which is what I think when I think assault)

but that's gross

like, can anyone put themselves in aziz's shoes here and explain to me what he was thinking with the fingers in the mouth -> pussy move multiple times when the girl was cold/unresponsive (her word of course). Getting a girl into sex from 0 by just.. doing something sexual to her?

[NynJa]

Who knows how much of her story was exaggerated though?

I tried to google it, but I havent found any articles of Aziz saying his side of the story, other than "I misread her non-verbal clues, and I apologize for it". For all we know, "his fingers in a V shape down my throat" could be nothing more than his fingertips barely passing her lips. I mean, I find it hard to believe that, even for a 5'nothing dude, that two fingers in a V shape would fit in someones throat.

[Thunder]

It's her word, yep

but the exaggeration would have to be on the cold/unresponsive bit for it to make sense to me. Even if it was just the fingertips that's still really fuckin' weird, lol

(and btw the smaller his fingers are the more difficult it is to get em in her throat, not easier - the rest of his hand would be pressing her cheeks back to do that)

[NynJa]

But he would have smaller fingers thus the diameter would be smaller

[dasva]

And again, why do her actions absolve him?

Because that's exactly how consent based issues work?