Again, he’s not a guy with weird kinks or a strangely shaped dick or something. He’s an aggressive, ethically deficient boundary pusher who does not put enough significance into a partner’s continual desistence and negative signaling. Other women deserve to know this going in, especially given his reputation as a feminist etc. It’s not that I don’t care about people being sexually humiliated, I don’t care about him being sexually humiliated. It’s not that I think it’s not realy terrible for the person involved its that I don’t care how terrible it is for him. It’s a particular judgment about this person in this situation. Do you understand that?
There is nothing there that makes you sound like you get it, and I don’t think there’s anything I can say to change that.
I do. Like, if she had secretively videoed the encounter, and it hadn’t gone so bad, but he kept calling her “mama” in that adorable whiney voice of his, and she released the video, that would be horrific. That would be sexual humiliation. If that happened to me I’d weep. I can imagine feeling suicidal over it even.
That’s not what happened here. Not even sort of. He is a bad dude who got caught doing a bad thing that it is fair to warn other people about.
I’m not being insensitive to sexual humiliation. I’m failing to see how the “sex” part of this humiliation is really central to what kind of humiliation it is. It’s not sexual humiliation. It’s sex-adjacent humiliation.
If it were me–if I were the “mama” guy–and I got secretly videotaped and the tape was released and the entire internet was making fun of me, I’d feel suicidal. And it would have been wrong for her to release it.
If I were the “mama” guy and she said “please don’t call me mama” and I did it again and she said “look I don’t want to stop but you need to stop calling me that” and I did it again and she said “we need to stop right now” and I stpoped and we got dressed and watched tv for a bit and I then leaned in and whispered “mama” in her ear while carassing her arm, and she had taped it and released it, I’d feel suicidal–and it would have been within her rights to release it. I’m a bad dude doing a bad thing and it is okay for people to warn each other about me. If that means me feeling suicidal, well, so much for me. Whatever gets me to stop.
That’s kind of an extreme example because the harm involved is relatively minor. I hesitate to absolutely affirm that it’s okay to release that tape. But it’s, like I said, borderline. If that situation isn’t quite bad enough (I’m not sure), it’s close. I’m just exploring the limits and also trying to prove to you I’m not a robot, said no human being ever
You sure think you do. But three posts in a row convince me even more you don’t.
Let’s spin this around, Frylock - pretend you’ve got something of a public profile and you meet up with a young woman for a date which just doesn’t go all that well due to misinterpreted non-verbal communication on both sides - Several months later your social media feed melts down because she’s gone to some blog looking to make a name for themselves and turned her story of a crap date into an accusation of something borderline criminal and now a not insignficant chunk of your audience now thinks that instead of being erudite and charming Frylock, you’re slightly skeevy and slightly weird Frylock - and suddenly your demand for public speaking engagements, TV spot appearances, whatever you’re best known for drops off and you find yourself “on the beach” for a worryingly extended period of time based purely on someone else’s anonymous say-so, in an account which makes it abundantly clear they’re as much to blame for the crappiness of the date as you might be.
Do you not see how anyone could be worried by that scenario, or think it’s unfair, harmful to wider society, or be worried by the precedent it sets, or any one of the similar points other people (including myself) have made in this thread on those themes?
That’s odd. I explained that I would share the suicidal feeling in situations analogous to what you’re talking about. I get it. It’s just that I think too bad for me in that case. I did a bad thing, and it’s fair for people to warn each other about me. They’re under no obligation to care about my feelings in that case.
I get what you’re talking about. I share it. I just don’t think it’s an overriding factor in deciding what’s okay. If I’m a bad dude and I have to be made to feel suicidal to ensure I don’t harm people–make me suicidal. Why should it be some other way?
Am I to assume I did the things Ansari is described as doing and that the account is accurate?
And right there you’ve correctly identified issue number one with the situation. 
Whatever the answer to that clarifying question may be:
Talking about me myself, knowing my personally, since she opened it up I’d be open about it too. Without referencing anything that may have happened that she didn’t mention–so as to preserve her privacy and not be a jerk–I’d explain what I had thought was happening at each stage. I’d do so in a way that indicates I’m learning from this experience. I’d get into dialog with knowledgable people–I’d personally love to have the dialog done in public, and it would be fine if a lot of it consists in criticisms of myself. I’d be honest about what I don’t understand or don’t agree with, and honest about wanting to learn and do better. I’d do better.
I suspect it would be a career shaper or changer rather than a career ender.
Meanwhile the job of explaining what fault lies with the woman is for her friends and other trusted people and the internet nags.
Understood but the whole discussion here is premised for the sake of argument on the accuracy of the account.
My point is regardless of which versions of events is correct - whether her account is 100% truthful and correct, whether parts of misremembered or simply didn’t happen that way - your life is changed and messed up irrevocably. You will never be able to undo the repuational damage caused by this incident.
Do you understand now why people are concerned about this sort of thing?
People who deserve that reputational hit, that doesn’t bother me.
The bothersome kind of case is one where the guy really didn’t deserve it–he didn’t do the things described. (Ansari, if the account is accurate, deserves the reputational hit. And I disagree he can never undo it. He didn’t rape somebody. He didn’t grab somebody and hold them down. He acted like an oaf and put toxic masculinity on display. He can move on from this. He should be open and apologetic and self-questioning and dialectical about it. Some people will never forgive him. A whole lot more will embrace him because people love a turnaround story.)
The choice is between a system where, because there is more openness about this kind of thing, it becomes a little more likely that people may be lied about concerning their attitude toward consent, and on the other hand, a system where, because there is more closedness about this kind of thing, it becomes a little more likely that people get caught in situations where their consent isn’t respected.
I choose the former system over the latter.
I want Ansari and Grace to co-write a book.
That would be fantastic.
I just came across this article and it’s great: The Necessary Story of Aziz Ansari - The Atlantic
The article also acknolwedges, as do I, that there is also work to be done in helping women communicate more assertively, in case the above quotes gave a different impression.
That’s fine. But I am sorry that this is so difficult for you. I really cannot comprehend how anyone can honestly think that there had not been mutual consent for that level of sexual activity or that public humiliation with the expectation of career consequence is appropriate for the “crime” of misreading the cues of a hook up and being in an interaction that was going south without him being aware of it. But yeah no progress to be had here. Supporting mob judge jury executioner as a means to address miscommunication during a hook up truly disgusts me. Good bye.
I gotta figure out how your mind is working w.r.t. this. How is it reasonable to assume you have consent to continue any sexual activity at all with a relative stranger who has just expressed anger at you for something sexual you just did?
How can it not be okay to warn people about someone who may do very unpleasant things to them?
Why would you use a ridiculous cliche “judge jury executioner” phrasing here?
I will say this. I just read a while ago that Grace, on her own twitter account (I still don’t know her real ID), called for his show to be canceled.
That’s not cool, in my view.
You still haven’t answered my question. How would you feel if you were in Ansari’s place and a woman you had a crap date with months ago starts fucking with your career and livelihood when by her own admission you didn’t commit a crime?
I’d rather live in a world where adults understood that if they don’t like something that’s happening, they spoke up at the time and said “no, I don’t like this” - not decided months later they weren’t happy with how the evening went and the best course of action was to go to a blog and tell their story there, in an environment where the other party is automatically the villain.
Whereas I choose the latter. There’s far more harm caused in a society where it’s OK for one side to decide “They didn’t respect my consent!” months after the event - and have such an accusation carry the same gravitas as “They did horrible sexual assault things to me” - than one where that’s not the case.