# Aziz Ansari, Sexual assault allegations **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 14, 2018, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606 "2018-01-14T16:22:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/381 "2018-01-19T17:52:39Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Necessary? I feel like we generally strive for a higher tone. Strive to not trip over in your own flailing attempts at confused analogies and slippery redefinitions. Just spit it out without trying to get clever. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/382 "2018-01-19T17:53:31Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > … You (and **TriPolar** and **k9bfriender** and **DSeid** and perhaps others) seem to be immediately jumping to the conclusion that this woman was committing an actual crime, when maybe she’s just kind of bad at interpreting subtle cues… Really? > [@me](#): > > … If the man did not say “give me my money back” then he was an idiot and a baby (sorry to insult babies). If she refused then yes indeed call the police. Because that actually is a crime. … If you think that a person taking money out of someone’s wallet and refusing to give it back is not an actual crime, that calling that a crime is “jumping to a conclusion”, well you are simply wrong. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/383 "2018-01-19T17:55:02Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > I don’t think so. Because I didn’t say anything about whether the woman actually had any dishonest intention, versus genuinely believing that the guy was voluntarily giving her his money and just pretending to be reluctant about it. > > IANAL but AFAIK the crime of theft requires an intention of deliberate dishonesty, i.e., purposely depriving somebody else of property against their will. If you honestly don’t think it’s against their will, you’re not committing theft. > Your objections just illustrate how we as a culture invoke this entrenched double standard. We automatically find it ridiculously incredible that any woman could honestly believe that just because a guy voluntarily spent some of his money on her, he intends to give her the rest of it. > > While at the same time we readily accept that a man can honestly believe that because a woman voluntarily consented to some sex acts with him, she intends to consent to others. > > And remember, the question I asked was not whether or not the woman in the story was actually committing theft. Even if she’s not, i.e., if she genuinely but mistakenly believes that you really want her to have your money, do you consider her behavior merely characteristic of a “below average date”? Or is it a different level of unacceptable? I don’t have to cover the fact that you are changing your story. Or that a gift given, even if ill advised has no equivalence to taking someone’s money without permission. What is wrong with your post is that I never believed or said that just because a woman voluntarily consented to some sex acts that she intends to consent to others. Now which sex act did ‘Grace’ not consent to? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/384 "2018-01-19T17:55:11Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > From the legal definition given above, there is not enough information here to determine whether it was a sexual assault. Do you think otherwise? Do you know it’s _not_ a sexual assault? Note: I’m going to ignore the idea that “sexual assault” has a meaningful non-criminal definition, since I think that idea is pernicious. Given the tone of the piece–intending to show how awful Ansari’s behavior is, and based almost entirely on the account of the person who hated the encounter–I read it assuming that they’re not leaving out incriminating information, that every bad thing he did is in the article. Is that a fair assumption? If so, if she said, “I don’t want to get on the counter,” and he threatened her, or if he picked her up and put her on the counter, I think that would’ve appeared in the article. The fact that it didn’t–that it simply fast-forwarded to her being on the counter–leads me strongly to believe that she wasn’t forced onto that counter. Same with all those other details. I wouldn’t call putting his hand on her breast “assault” unless she said, “No,” and he kept doing it. I would call it bad behavior on his part. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/385 "2018-01-19T17:56:00Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > If I honestly think that you wanted to give me that microwave oven, then I can just take it, and not break any laws? Yup. In fact, that sort of misunderstanding happens all the time. One person thinks an item is a gift while the supposed “giver” thinks it’s not. Mostly that sort of situation is easily resolved because both parties quickly agree to abide by the preferred interpretation of one of them. And if they don’t agree, then the “recipient” usually (but not always) will have a much harder time convincing the authorities that it’s still reasonable for them to believe that they’re not depriving the other party of property against their will. But while you honestly and reasonably believe that the other party wanted you to have what you took, you’re not legally a thief. (Insert repeated IANAL disclaimer here, but I haven’t seen anything yet that contradicts it.) ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/386 "2018-01-19T18:01:33Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > I don’t have to cover the fact that you are changing your story. I’m not, though. I never said anything about what the woman in the story actually believed about the man’s intentions concerning giving her his money. I do think it’s interesting that so many people found it so easy to jump to the conclusion that they could be sure her intention was deliberately dishonest. Contrast that, as I said, with the widespread readiness to believe that men who are trying to coax sex from reluctant or resistant partners are just “misreading cues” or “being awkward” while honestly believing that she likes what they’re doing. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/387 "2018-01-19T18:02:09Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > From the legal definition given above, there is not enough information here to determine whether it was a sexual assault. Do you think otherwise? Do you know it’s _not_ a sexual assault? You’re evading. Yes, I know it’s not by a reasonable standard of “know.” She is an adult woman capable of expressing her desires. They were kissing, then he began fondling her breast, and then he began undressing her and then undressing himself. It’s clear from her story that at no time did she feel like if she didn’t comply her safety would be a concern. That’s typically the way sexual encounters go as far as how consent is applied. You didn’t give a legal definition of sexual assault. Legal definitions are defined by statute. In my state: > [@](#): > > Having sexual contact with someone who is under 13 years of age and you are over 17, or > Committing an act of sexual penetration when: > Using physical force not resulting in injury of the victim, > The victim is under your control, as in the case of prison inmate or probationer, > The victim is between 16 and 18 and is related to you or you have control over them, or > The victim is between 13 and 16 and you are four years older. [http://statelaws.findlaw.com/new-jersey-law/new-jersey-sexual-assault-laws.html](http://statelaws.findlaw.com/new-jersey-law/new-jersey-sexual-assault-laws.html) ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/388 "2018-01-19T18:12:27Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Note: I’m going to ignore the idea that “sexual assault” has a meaningful non-criminal definition, since I think that idea is pernicious. > > Given the tone of the piece–intending to show how awful Ansari’s behavior is, and based almost entirely on the account of the person who hated the encounter–I read it assuming that they’re not leaving out incriminating information, that every bad thing he did is in the article. Is that a fair assumption? > > If so, if she said, “I don’t want to get on the counter,” and he threatened her, or if he picked her up and put her on the counter, I think that would’ve appeared in the article. The fact that it didn’t–that it simply fast-forwarded to her being on the counter–leads me strongly to believe that she wasn’t forced onto that counter. > > Same with all those other details. I wouldn’t call putting his hand on her breast “assault” unless she said, “No,” and he kept doing it. I would call it bad behavior on his part. She doesn’t have to say no, I don’t want to, by the statue. She just has to fail to say yes she does. I need to get to a keyboard to flesh out all of this. The legal definition is way broader than I realized. I don’t think it’s a clearly fair assumption that all incriminating info would be included because I don’t know that Grace wants him jailed, don’t know that she knows what constitutes incriminating evidence, and don’t know that the journalist in question has that interest or knowledge either. Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/389 "2018-01-19T18:16:12Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > She doesn’t have to say no, I don’t want to, by the statue. She just has to fail to say yes she does. Which statute? You don’t honestly believe that implied consent is insufficient and that verbal consent must be given, do you? ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/390 "2018-01-19T18:17:28Z")
I’m not evading anything. I don’t think he sexually assaulted her. Not do I think he didn’t. My argument at the moment is that certainty that he didn’t is not well founded. Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/391 "2018-01-19T18:18:36Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > I’m not, though. I never said anything about what the woman in the story actually believed about the man’s intentions concerning giving her his money. > > I do think it’s interesting that so many people found it so easy to jump to the conclusion that they could be sure her intention was deliberately dishonest. Contrast that, as I said, with the widespread readiness to believe that men who are trying to coax sex from reluctant or resistant partners are just “misreading cues” or “being awkward” while honestly believing that she likes what they’re doing. I don’t care, it doesn’t matter. You have concluded that I and others have made an assumption that we did not and you’re attempting to point to an analogous situation to the assumption that we didn’t make. So it doesn’t really matter if your analogy is apt or not. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/392 "2018-01-19T18:22:36Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > She doesn’t have to say no, I don’t want to, by the statue. She just has to fail to say yes she does. That’s inaccurate. There are ways to use your body to give consent. For example, consenting to climb up on the counter might consist of climbing up on the counter. If she hadn’t climbed up, I’m pretty sure she would’ve mentioned it–she mentioned the damn color of the wine, ferchrissakes. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/393 "2018-01-19T18:30:57Z")
I think it’s reasonable to assume that if anything was left out of her account that it would be exculpatory information. But I take her account at face value. There’s no need not to. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/394 "2018-01-19T18:31:08Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Well now, that’s what we call “stranger theft”, or “theft theft” (actually robbery rather than theft, but let that go for now). > > Clearly different from the murky issue of so-called “date theft”, where a guy claims that even though he willingly spent some money on a woman—in fact, asked her as a favor to allow him to spend money on her—he didn’t actually intend to give her any **more** of his money. In you scenario, he never gave her any money in the first place, so the idea that somehow it is over whether he intended to give her “more” is irrelevant. > [@](#): > > Which, you know, might be true or it might not. Perhaps he **was** willing to give her his money and enjoy the playful pretense of reluctance, and then regretted his decision the next morning and decided to call it theft. He-said, she-said, really. If that were the case, he would not have expressed clear indications that he did not consent to her stealing. > [@](#): > > (Remember, for those having a little difficulty following along, I’m not in the least seriously advocating for the commission or condoning of any criminal acts. I’m just noting differences in the cultural “normalization” levels of different **non** -criminal acts.) No, you are trying to elevate a non-criminal act to be analogous to a criminal act. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/395 "2018-01-19T18:38:55Z")
Before “consent” goes down the same rabbit hole as “assault”, may I draw your attention to Frylock’s extensive thread advocating explicit enthusiastic verbal consent at each sequential stage of a sexual encounter; and his tendency to superimpose the curious notions that are part of his fantasy vision for social justice on his descriptions of current reality. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/396 "2018-01-19T18:42:37Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Yup. In fact, that sort of misunderstanding happens all the time. One person thinks an item is a gift while the supposed “giver” thinks it’s not. In the 23 years of my adult life, I have never had that kind of misunderstanding. I have never heard any stories of anyone having that sort of misunderstanding. I did watcha college humor video once where one of the guys thought that someone else bought him an iPad for his birthday, but that was a stupid video, and the entire point of it was to make fun of the guy that so lacked self awareness that he thought that just because his friend had an iPad on his birthday, it was intended for him. > [@](#): > > Mostly that sort of situation is easily resolved because both parties quickly agree to abide by the preferred interpretation of one of them. And if they don’t agree, then the “recipient” usually (but not always) will have a much harder time convincing the authorities that it’s still reasonable for them to believe that they’re not depriving the other party of property against their will. > > But while you honestly and reasonably believe that the other party wanted you to have what you took, you’re not legally a thief. (Insert repeated IANAL disclaimer here, but I haven’t seen anything yet that contradicts it.) There’s your problem there, “reasonably”. As in, would this be a reasonable action. Do you really consider it to be reasonable to take money out of someone’s wallet, specifically after they have asked you not to and to return the money already taken. If they still honestly thought that consent was given there, well, the legal system does actually have different standards for those with too little mental capacity to understand the consequences of their actions. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/397 "2018-01-19T19:05:05Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > That’s inaccurate. There are ways to use your body to give consent. For example, consenting to climb up on the counter might consist of climbing up on the counter. If she hadn’t climbed up, I’m pretty sure she would’ve mentioned it–she mentioned the damn color of the wine, ferchrissakes. By “say no” I didn’t mean necessarily literally uttering the word. In other words, I was saying she doesn’t have to indicate non-consent, she simply has to fail to indicate consent explicitly, in order for it to be sexual assault. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/398 "2018-01-19T19:06:19Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > Before “consent” goes down the same rabbit hole as “assault”, may I draw your attention to Frylock’s extensive thread advocating explicit enthusiastic verbal consent at each sequential stage of a sexual encounter; and his tendency to superimpose the curious notions that are part of his fantasy vision for social justice on his descriptions of current reality. The extensive thread in which I have participated maybe three to five times, just to clarify some things? I intentionally set out a fairly extreme example and simple argument to get a discussion going. It worked. You need to stop attacking the person here, **Riemann**. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/399 "2018-01-19T19:10:29Z")
Her name has been leaked on the 'Net for several days now. As have what seems like every social media post she ever made. I have no intention or desire to share her identity since well, I still have _some_ standards, but just FTR, what the Board rules in cases like this? ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2018, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606/400 "2018-01-19T19:12:12Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > Which statute? You don’t honestly believe that implied consent is insufficient and that verbal consent must be given, do you? Sorry, “statute” was not correct. I was referring to the definition of sexual assault given by the Department of Justice here : > [@The Feds](#): > > Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. > **[Sexual Assault](https://www.justice.gov/ovw/sexual-assault)** That’s a lot broader than I assumed any legal definition would be. By that definition, I find it much more plausible that strictly speaking he committed a crime. Much more plausible, I said. I do not say that he committed a crime. Nor do I say he did not. I am saying I find it much more plausible now, than I did before, that whatever happened, it constituted a crime. Like if he said “why don’t you get up on that counter” and pulled her up there and then started kissing her, during the course of which she basically kept a neutral face or just like, surprised faces, that would, by the definition above, be a sexual assault. She does not have to actively say no or push away or make “no faces” or whatever for it to count, by the given definition. And from the description of that part of the date given in the story we have from Grace at _Babe_, I have no idea what her face or body movements looked like. And it’s absolutely plausible to me that a person would maintain a fairly neutral or carefully not-displeased-but-not-saying-yes surprised face, during an action like that, thereby failing to signal (not to mention feel) explicit consent. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aziz-ansari-sexual-assault-allegations/806606.md?page=21)