4 ms·
The story you link to describes interactions with two women. One ends with > "Just as we’re coming out of the bar, here comes Ann, running across Route 66 towa
by spodek 8y ago
The story you link to describes interactions with two women. One ends with
> "Just as we’re coming out of the bar, here comes Ann, running across Route 66 toward me. She puts her arm in mine, and says, “Come on, let’s go over to my place.”"
the other with
> "We went into the bar, and before I sat down, I said, “Listen, before I buy you a drink, I want to know one thing: Will you sleep with me tonight?”
> “Yes.”"
These interactions seem like voluntary, enthusiastic consent by rational adults. Maybe I'm seeing a contradiction where there is none, but if a woman who left and never had any need to see him again ran back to initiate physical interaction and invite him to her place, is it possible she knew more about the situation than you and didn't consider his behavior quite bad?
- xevb3k 8y agoWe don’t even know if any of it was true at all, it could all be a work of fiction. But we know at least he considered it not much of a problem to call a woman a whore for not having sex with him because he bought her a sandwich. There are other allegations [1]. But that isn’t the central point really, the point is, why idolize someone who did some good work in one area and expect everything they do to be a work of genius? He was imperfect (or are you arguing otherwise?) his work in Biology is not very interesting... [1] https://galileospendulum.org/2014/07/13/the-problem-of-richard-feynman/ https://galileospendulum.org/2014/07/13/the-problem-of-richa...