I do not. I am not a clinical psychologist. I just find it strange that someone puts in the effort to publish a set of damaging allegations, and then shortly thereafter refuses to participate in investigations specifically intended to establish the veracity of the allegations.
P.S.- Is this going to be cited as another example of “casting aspersions” against Dykstra?
I’m very sorry about your experience. There may be some deep psychological point here that I’m not getting. But looked at dispassionately, surely you can appreciate that Dykstra’s refusal to participate in an investigation in which she is the central figure ought to raise reasonable suspicions about the veracity of her story? That’s certainly the basis of a lot of legal proceedings.
Yes, you’re continuing to imply dishonesty/malicious motives for a woman who has (as far as we can possibly know) done nothing other than write about her own experiences. That’s misogynistic.
That’s a pretty disgusting statement. I don’t find women’s suffering amusing at all. I do find the obsession with capitalism as the root of all evil pretty silly though.
He said, typing on his capitalist produced computer to post a message on a capitalist message board using infrastructure constructed mostly by capitalistic companies working for profit.
When your actions or words harm other people, you don’t get to cry ‘safe space’ about the consequences. The person you just harmed is also entitled to a safe space, where they aren’t attacked by your words. You think it’s opposite of the purpose because you don’t realize the space is being kept safe from you.
If you have a habit of offending people and making them feel bad about themselves, you probably should be paranoid, and quiet.
Well, the very narrow orbit of your experience with progressive thought is a consistent problem with your arguments, so I guess that’s not shocking. But yeah, a “safe space” for LGBT people - a place where they can be themselves without having to justify themselves constantly, is not going to be a “safe space” for someone who thinks all gay people are going to burn in hell. Because that’s literally the sort of person the safe space is supposed to be safe from.
I’m getting the impression, here that you’re against the concept of safe spaces? I get that you think its vitally important that people publicly debate whether I deserve rights, but am I not allowed any place I can go where I don’t have to deal with that debate? Is it “canceling” if a guy wearing an “Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” t-shirt isn’t allowed access to a gay bar?
I didn’t mean, “safe as a queer man,” I meant, “able to tell if this guy is angry with me, because all of his non-verbal cues are coming across as ‘hostile.’”
Yes, that was the entire point of the analogy. I’d be profoundly uncomfortable in a safe place for autistic people to socialize without masking, because to me it would seem like everyone is being a jerk to me. But if I know I’m in a safe place for people with autism, and I start insisting that everyone start masking around me because it makes me uncomfortable, I’m the one being a jerk.
Dykstra didn’t publish a story screaming “Hardwick is a rapist”. She published an essay talking about her experiences with (purported) abuse because she wanted to try and get some closure and share her experience about how easy she felt it is to emotionally manipulate someone. Many women and more than a few men have had difficulties getting stuck in abusive, dysfunctional relationships which they can’t seem to extricate themselves. Or fail to realize they should extricate themselves. People, particularly celebrities of one sort or another, sharing these sort of stories helps to validate the experiences of others struggling with the same issues and maybe occasionally wakes them up to their own serious problems they have been trying to ignore. I have absolutely no problem with this in general, even if you can occasionally find an example that is flawed.
She admits she is still angry, but after the investigation said said she wasn’t interested in shitting on Hardwick’s career or engaging further about it. She just wanted to get her story out. Was she being disingenuous about that? Maybe. But also maybe not. Maybe she really just did want to get it out and that was it. I don’t think we can tell, anymore than we can tell if her stronger accusations (sexual assault) are accurate or not. But given all the framing my conclusions are we cannot tell if she is lying or not or Hardwick is an asshole or not. Though he is at least certainly the sort of guy to get involved with a women 17 years his junior and in her early twenties, which always makes me quirk an eyebrow skeptically.
But whatever. Your seeming firm conclusion that Dykstra was just a bitter ex trying to torpedo him in a backhanded way doesn’t hold water for me. That might be the case, but I disagree we have enough evidence to tell either way.
Or really just what puzzlegal said more succinctly.
Or… she’s not interested in reliving these abuses and being attacked by someone’s lawyer in order to ensure her rapist’s employer can decide whether firing him is a positive NPV for the company.
I get that capitalism has pros and cons, but is anyone seriously arguing that fucking capitalism is the best way (or really anything other than a totally awful way) to get to the bottom of, and address, claims of sexual assault? That has to be a joke.
Why have you tagged me here? I haven’t even mentioned #metoo, let alone said I want to stop it. Firing someone for rape or sexual assault is different to firing then for speech, and I would have thought that obvious.
Women’s suffering isn’t entertaining, either. Obsession with the Boogeyman of capitalism is very entertaining, though. And has nothing to do with women’s suffering.
Pointing out the sophistry of screaming “Capitalism” at anything that moves, even using sarcasm to make that point, is not a “pointless game”. And making a real issue, like women being sexually assaulted, all about your typical hobby horse is pretty tasteless.