Aziz Ansari is innocent

[_Jersey Girl]

I have eyeballs. I can see from this thread alone the reluctance to even dare question her behavior, motivations, character, or decision making. It's been primarily focused on AA.

I question all of those things.

[_EAllusion]

Here are some must reads on babe.net:

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainme ... et/551036/

This article is humning along fine criticizing Babe.com for being a rag. Like Natalie Graham points out, the way Flanagan goes after youth to demean is off-putting, but I can look past it. And while the author of the Aziz call-out piece made herself into an easy target, there's nothing wrong with taking a few easy shots for the writer being a clueless jerk.

However, once you're deep into the piece it draws a dubious connection. Babe apparently has Cosmo element to it and has published a variety of articles on women's sexual fantasies regarding rape. Rape fantasies are common and there's nothing wrong with that. We can give Flanagan the benefit of the doubt that she's not suggesting that because women can have forced-sex fantasies, that does not mean they cannot complain about actual forced sex. What she instead tries to argue is that the lurid, writerly details of accounts of sexual assault are meant to titillate as well as scandalize.

Now that's ugly. It's the high-brow version of complaining that if a woman didn't like it rough, then why is she dressed like a whore? It's baseless to argue that one type of article's motives impregnate the others'. Then as you read further, subtext just becomes text:

But the piece is the almost inevitable consequence of a lifestyle promoted on the website, which enjoins young women to fulfill men’s sexual desires and to— literally—behave whorishly.

I know Caitlin Flanagan has a reputation for carving out a niche as an anti-feminist writer, but I've never seen it as explicit as this.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Here are some must reads on babe.net:

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainme ... et/551036/

This article is humning along fine criticizing Babe.com for being a rag. Like Natalie Graham points out, the way Flanagan goes after youth to demean is off-putting, but I can look past it. And while the author of the Aziz call-out piece made herself into an easy target, there's nothing wrong with taking a few easy shots for the writer being a clueless jerk.

However, once you're deep into the piece it draws a dubious connection. Babe apparently has Cosmo element to it and has published a variety of articles on women's sexual fantasies regarding rape. Rape fantasies are common and there's nothing wrong with that. We can give Flanagan the benefit of the doubt that she's not suggesting that because women can have forced-sex fantasies, that does not mean they cannot complain about actual forced sex. What she instead tries to argue is that the lurid, writerly details of accounts of sexual assault are meant to titillate as well as scandalize.

Now that's ugly. It's the high-brow version of complaining that if a woman didn't like it rough, then why is she dressed like a whore? It's baseless to argue that one type of article's motives impregnate the others'. Then as you read further, subtext just becomes text:

But the piece is the almost inevitable consequence of a lifestyle promoted on the website, which enjoins young women to fulfill men’s sexual desires and to— literally—behave whorishly.

I know Caitlin Flanagan has a reputation for carving out a niche as an anti-feminist writer, but I've never seen it as explicit as this.

It's the oddest thing to watch your brain work sometimes. You transition from calling a rape fantasy a "forced-sex" fantasy. Weird.

Wait.

If I told you that I fantasize about raping women, like, I masturbate to that, you'd be cool with that? Or are you only cool with women fantasizing about being raped?

WTF weird ass world are we living in right now?

- Doc

[_Jersey Girl]

WTF weird ass world are we living in right now?

- Doc

It's been interesting following all the posts on this thread. I'll answer your question straight up even though it wasn't intended for me.

We're living in a world where a man acts like an overbearing jerk and treats a woman like what she portrayed. Then the woman gives her account anonymously in order to embarrass him when what she actually does is embarrass herself in the process.

[_Jersey Girl]

I figured this thread could use at least one woman's perspective. When I wrote this:

We're living in a world where a man acts like an overbearing jerk and treats a woman like what she portrayed. Then the woman gives her account anonymously in order to embarrass him when what she actually does is embarrass herself in the process.

That's exactly what happened. That's all that happened. There's no reason to over-analyze it. There's no reason to lay blame solely at the man's feet. They both played their part in this temporary relationship.

I could tick off a list of where she naïvely went wrong. Then, I'd be accused of victim blaming and shaming because that's how some folks roll around here.

She went wrong from the start. She sent out the signals and he caught them. She set the tone.

It's a damn shame that folks can't tell the straight up truth.

[_EAllusion]

It's the oddest thing to watch your brain work sometimes. You transition from calling a rape fantasy a "forced-sex" fantasy. Weird.

You're taking issue with me describing rape as "forced sex?" This is the bridge you stand astride proclaiming "Thou shall not pass!"

Yeah, weird. Using definitions of words. Who would've thunk it.

If I told you that I fantasize about raping women, like, I masturbate to that, you'd be cool with that? Or are you only cool with women fantasizing about being raped?

Sounds fine to me. I mean, I'm sure you're not actually groping at the difference between fantasies of overpowering an unwilling person and fantasies of being overpowered, but fantasy is fantasy.

WTF weird ass world are we living in right now?

Which part truly confuses you here? That it is not uncommon for women to have rape fantasies? That this is an OK thing to do? That doing so doesn't mean you have undermined your right to complain about actual rape? That writing about the problem of sexual assault (well, trying to) doesn't mean you are indulging in sexually exciting readers who are into rape fantasy?

[_Themis]

I have eyeballs. I can see from this thread alone the reluctance to even dare question her behavior, motivations, character, or decision making. It's been primarily focused on AA.

I question all of those things.

From Doc's postings he appears to have a lot of bias clouding his thinking as well as a major dislike for some posters like EA.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Oh my god. I'm biased.

Welcome to Bizarro world where sucking some dude's dick is male sexual harassment and fantasizing about raping people is a-ok.



- Doc

[_DoubtingThomas]

You didn't answer the question. What consequences should she suffer?

but anyways EAllusion. We men have to be very careful and respect women, and not push them to have sex with us if they are unsure or reluctant. As for the woman accusing Azizi she shouldn't suffer any consequence, I changed my mind. Let's all be happy and freedom for all.

[_DoubtingThomas]

I figured this thread could use at least one woman's perspective. When I wrote this:

That's exactly what happened. That's all that happened. There's no reason to over-analyze it. There's no reason to lay blame solely at the man's feet. They both played their part in this temporary relationship.

I could tick off a list of where she naïvely went wrong. Then, I'd be accused of victim blaming and shaming because that's how some folks roll around here.

She went wrong from the start. She sent out the signals and he caught them. She set the tone.

It's a damn shame that folks can't tell the straight up truth.

Thanks Jersey Girl