5 ms·

This article suffers from a fundamental flaw; the case of ‘Grace’ is a poor one to make any of these points off the back of. There are undoubtedly many cases wh

This article suffers from a fundamental flaw; the case of ‘Grace’ is a poor one to make any of these points off the back of. There are undoubtedly many cases which would highlight the issues raised, but of course they won’t involve Aziz Ansari. Still, this is a case which ended with a woman finally saying “No” and immediately being met with the offer to just watch some tv, clothes on. It seems unfortunate to use an example of behavior which may not be the ideal, but falls far short of both coercion and force. As a group, we’re sorting through everything from rape and sexual abuse, through coercion and harrassment, to the merely awkward or ill mannered. I can’t emphasize how much I feel bright lines need to be drawn between the first two categories and the last.

Obi_Juan_Kenobi 9y ago
Did you read the article? > Her repeated objections and pleas that they "slow down" were all well and good, but they did not square with the fact that she eventually gave Ansari oral sex. Finally, crucially, she was free to leave. That's really all that's said about Ansari, and suggests that his actions don't constitute assault. The article isn't at all about Ansari, it's about the various reactions that have come up in response. Namely those that normalize 'bad sex', which for women it is argued, often involves significant physical discomfort and pain. Even if these bad experiences aren't a result of anything we consider illegal, it doesn't mean they are irrelevant, 'natural', or don't exist.
- IntronExon 9y ago
  I didn’t say anything about irrelevancies, I said I hope like hell that the current conversation about the right not to be abused, raped, coerced, and harassed doesn’t become confused with conversations about bad sex, awkwardness, and all manner of the non-pathological. Also, isn’t it frowned upon to use that trite “did you read...” line?

Obi_Juan_Kenobi 9y ago

Did you read the article? > Her repeated objections and pleas that they "slow down" were all well and good, but they did not square with the fact that she eventually gave Ansari oral sex. Finally, crucially, she was free to leave. That's really all that's said about Ansari, and suggests that his actions don't constitute assault. The article isn't at all about Ansari, it's about the various reactions that have come up in response. Namely those that normalize 'bad sex', which for women it is argued, often involves significant physical discomfort and pain. Even if these bad experiences aren't a result of anything we consider illegal, it doesn't mean they are irrelevant, 'natural', or don't exist.

IntronExon 9y ago
I didn’t say anything about irrelevancies, I said I hope like hell that the current conversation about the right not to be abused, raped, coerced, and harassed doesn’t become confused with conversations about bad sex, awkwardness, and all manner of the non-pathological. Also, isn’t it frowned upon to use that trite “did you read...” line?