5 ms·

Have you ever been in an abusive relationship? Or seen one firsthand? People can be made to believe all sorts of things that aren't true by charismatic or power

Have you ever been in an abusive relationship? Or seen one firsthand? People can be made to believe all sorts of things that aren't true by charismatic or powerful people. It may take them some time to realize they are being tricked or abused. You absolutely can be told you consented, and trust that person's word, and realize later that no, actually you had not. It's just convenient for the abuser for you to believe you had.

aphextron 5y ago
>You absolutely can be told you consented, and trust that person's word, and realize later that no, actually you had not. It's just convenient for the abuser for you to believe you had. There has to be a line drawn somewhere when you start talking about hardcore felony level criminal accusations though. Should anyone who's ever had an (at the time) consensual intimate encounter then have cart blanche to hold accusations of rape over you for the rest of your life? I mean just picture this guy's POV for a moment. You think you had a consensual relationship with someone, who then continued having friendly relations with you for months afterwards. Then out of nowhere you're being called a rapist on the internet. I get that the guy is a total creep. But it's absolutely terrifying to think that being in a crappy relationship can land you in prison now.
- Pfhreak 5y ago
  To be clear, that guy held several positions of power over her. Even in the most absolutely charitable reading, which is that this is a bad relationship (a reading I strongly disagree with) -- if you hold significant power over someone, you shouldn't be entering into casual sexual relationships. If you want to pursue that relationship, it can be done, but not carelessly. This isn't a situation where a one night stand went awkwardly, there are several additional factors here.
  - stickfigure 5y ago
    > if you hold significant power over someone, you shouldn't be entering into casual sexual relationships I think this situation is stretching the word "power". There's a social power imbalance, sure - but nobody acts shocked when sports figures and rock stars sleep with groupies. Hell, they write autobiographies. We don't live in a caste system where people with X popularity can only sleep with other Xers. She didn't work for the guy nor did her career or finances depend on him. He wasn't a VC lording (someone else's) money over her. She was a naive young adult new in town and the guy was an (extremely) minor celebrity. People have hooked up for far worse reasons. If the guy was simply a better date we wouldn't be talking about this.
    - esarbe 5y ago
      > If the guy was simply a better date we wouldn't be talking about this. This is what makes me really dislike this story. The use of power to extort sexual favors is topic that needs serious discussion. But occurrences like these where there is so much gray just waters down the conversation to "She said, he said". So much in her post just insinuates that is wasn't his behavior at the time she was having problems with but his later actions towards her. Nothing in this accounting is about power dynamics. It is about shitty behavior by a stupid guy. > I did not blame him for what happened, and didn’t think those behaviors were problematic at the time, because it didn’t even cross my mind that he would do anything that I wasn’t comfortable with. Stuff like that doesn't really help. So - she was okay with it until she wasn't anymore? This just sucks.
- tmotwu 5y ago
  Perhaps why she did not explicitly call out rape in her message. However, it's a very realistic abuse and harassment claim, that in itself is already extremely problematic.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ALittleLight 5y ago
Maybe that's true and some Rasputin-like figure could manipulate you into believing you thought things that you didn't, but that doesn't seem to be what is alleged here. She wasn't living in this guy's cult, he helped her professionally and with conferences, and she agreed to share a room with him on a trip. That strikes me as less mind-control and more just a situation that people get into sometimes. She is and was an adult woman. Can I not expect her to know, in the typical case, whether she does or does not consent to sex? And I'm not talking about "He got me drunk and then forced sex when I couldn't consent" - obviously that would be rape, but it seems like you should realize that when you sober up, not months or years later.
- Pfhreak 5y ago
  She was left panicked and crying. That's not generally a sign that there was unambiguous consent. And it doesn't take a Rasputin-like figure to be an abuser. Plenty of people are taken advantage of and taught to believe things they later realize were abusive, even in relatively short situations. Pretty held all the power here -- he controlled where she was staying, he helped her get to the conference, she was intoxicated, she believe he was her mentor, she believe he had the ability to get her industry connections, etc. Coercing someone into sex that they later realize wasn't consensual (once they are free from that person's influence) doesn't mean she was lying in the moment or is somehow "discovering" something now. > Can I not expect her to know, in the typical case, whether she does or does not consent to sex? Adult humans (because I think this can happen to men too), can absolutely be caught off guard and be "unsure" about whether they are consenting to sex. Not everyone is wired the same, and not everyone is able to make a quick snap judgement. Not everyone is fully able to say no when pressured. Furthermore, grappling with the question, "Was I just raped/sexually abused?" is really, really challenging. What does that do to your identity? Are you forever a victim? Are you going to have to out yourself and someone else? Will you forever be the target of the public's pity? Are you going to have that stigma attached to you when you want to enter relationships in the future? That's a LOT to put on someone, and many, many victims choose to try and believe that things were consensual, because it seems easier that facing the realization they were abused.
  - 5y ago
jnwatson 5y ago
The same argument can be made the other direction. It is quite common for someone to be convinced after the fact it was nonconsensual when it was indeed consensual.
- Pfhreak 5y ago
  I'm sure it happens, I strongly doubt it's "quite common". Especially relative to the incidence of it happening the other way (where an victim escapes and abuser and realizes they were being abused.)
  - fighterpilot 5y ago
    People believe all sorts of things on the basis of false memories. You know there's a fairly large community of people that are convinced that they were abducted by aliens? There's also a community of people that are convinced they have had a past life and know the intimate details of it. They don't suffer from schizophrenia, they literally just have false memories. In the end it shouldn't be about what party X subjectively felt or what they felt afterwards. It should be about what party X actually portrayed and communicated at the time of the encounter. If they legitimately consented and weren't intoxicated but deep down were thinking "I don't want this", then that sucks for them but no crime was committed and the counterparty isn't culpable. I'm talking generally, not about the specific allegation in question.
Humdeee 5y ago
This article reads like she did not say no as much as she did not say yes, which leaves the reader in a muddled, grey area and unsure of how to interpret anything. Is she consenting, or more specifically, is she explicitly claiming to not consent? It's a very awkward article, leaving readers with more questions than answers at the end, which is never what you want your readers to feel when garnering support.
- Pfhreak 5y ago
  Consent is unambiguous and enthusiastic yes. The default assumption is that no consent is given. Not saying yes is the same as saying no.
  - Humdeee 5y ago
    I agree that this is morally correct but the law and the majority of real life intimate interactions don't reflect this. "Yes, I agree to have sex with you, and I am stating this without being under duress" or variations of that sentence is very rarely verbalized as such beforehand. Hence innocent until proven guilty and not vice versa, reasonable doubt, etc. and all the other law jargon applied.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > Consent is unambiguous and enthusiastic yes. No, “consent” is, like “intent” on the other side, a mental state rather than an action: it is the active desire for the act. An ambiguous and enthusiastic yes is outward evidence of consent, though, and it tends to be the kind of evidence without which (or at least, some similarly very clear sign) we would tend not to infer consent to other acts where consent negates criminality, like battery.
  - esarbe 5y ago
    This just leads to sill propositions and exclamations like "Now we all have to sign a contract before we kiss another!". Human communication is complicated and complex and error prone. Combine it with sexuality and you have a mess. There must be room for error and for dialogue. Humans are not binary machines. We're probabilistic ones.

aphextron 5y ago

>You absolutely can be told you consented, and trust that person's word, and realize later that no, actually you had not. It's just convenient for the abuser for you to believe you had. There has to be a line drawn somewhere when you start talking about hardcore felony level criminal accusations though. Should anyone who's ever had an (at the time) consensual intimate encounter then have cart blanche to hold accusations of rape over you for the rest of your life? I mean just picture this guy's POV for a moment. You think you had a consensual relationship with someone, who then continued having friendly relations with you for months afterwards. Then out of nowhere you're being called a rapist on the internet. I get that the guy is a total creep. But it's absolutely terrifying to think that being in a crappy relationship can land you in prison now.

Pfhreak 5y ago
To be clear, that guy held several positions of power over her. Even in the most absolutely charitable reading, which is that this is a bad relationship (a reading I strongly disagree with) -- if you hold significant power over someone, you shouldn't be entering into casual sexual relationships. If you want to pursue that relationship, it can be done, but not carelessly. This isn't a situation where a one night stand went awkwardly, there are several additional factors here.
- stickfigure 5y ago
  > if you hold significant power over someone, you shouldn't be entering into casual sexual relationships I think this situation is stretching the word "power". There's a social power imbalance, sure - but nobody acts shocked when sports figures and rock stars sleep with groupies. Hell, they write autobiographies. We don't live in a caste system where people with X popularity can only sleep with other Xers. She didn't work for the guy nor did her career or finances depend on him. He wasn't a VC lording (someone else's) money over her. She was a naive young adult new in town and the guy was an (extremely) minor celebrity. People have hooked up for far worse reasons. If the guy was simply a better date we wouldn't be talking about this.
  - esarbe 5y ago
    > If the guy was simply a better date we wouldn't be talking about this. This is what makes me really dislike this story. The use of power to extort sexual favors is topic that needs serious discussion. But occurrences like these where there is so much gray just waters down the conversation to "She said, he said". So much in her post just insinuates that is wasn't his behavior at the time she was having problems with but his later actions towards her. Nothing in this accounting is about power dynamics. It is about shitty behavior by a stupid guy. > I did not blame him for what happened, and didn’t think those behaviors were problematic at the time, because it didn’t even cross my mind that he would do anything that I wasn’t comfortable with. Stuff like that doesn't really help. So - she was okay with it until she wasn't anymore? This just sucks.
tmotwu 5y ago
Perhaps why she did not explicitly call out rape in her message. However, it's a very realistic abuse and harassment claim, that in itself is already extremely problematic.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

ALittleLight 5y ago

Maybe that's true and some Rasputin-like figure could manipulate you into believing you thought things that you didn't, but that doesn't seem to be what is alleged here. She wasn't living in this guy's cult, he helped her professionally and with conferences, and she agreed to share a room with him on a trip. That strikes me as less mind-control and more just a situation that people get into sometimes. She is and was an adult woman. Can I not expect her to know, in the typical case, whether she does or does not consent to sex? And I'm not talking about "He got me drunk and then forced sex when I couldn't consent" - obviously that would be rape, but it seems like you should realize that when you sober up, not months or years later.

Pfhreak 5y ago
She was left panicked and crying. That's not generally a sign that there was unambiguous consent. And it doesn't take a Rasputin-like figure to be an abuser. Plenty of people are taken advantage of and taught to believe things they later realize were abusive, even in relatively short situations. Pretty held all the power here -- he controlled where she was staying, he helped her get to the conference, she was intoxicated, she believe he was her mentor, she believe he had the ability to get her industry connections, etc. Coercing someone into sex that they later realize wasn't consensual (once they are free from that person's influence) doesn't mean she was lying in the moment or is somehow "discovering" something now. > Can I not expect her to know, in the typical case, whether she does or does not consent to sex? Adult humans (because I think this can happen to men too), can absolutely be caught off guard and be "unsure" about whether they are consenting to sex. Not everyone is wired the same, and not everyone is able to make a quick snap judgement. Not everyone is fully able to say no when pressured. Furthermore, grappling with the question, "Was I just raped/sexually abused?" is really, really challenging. What does that do to your identity? Are you forever a victim? Are you going to have to out yourself and someone else? Will you forever be the target of the public's pity? Are you going to have that stigma attached to you when you want to enter relationships in the future? That's a LOT to put on someone, and many, many victims choose to try and believe that things were consensual, because it seems easier that facing the realization they were abused.
- 5y ago

jnwatson 5y ago

The same argument can be made the other direction. It is quite common for someone to be convinced after the fact it was nonconsensual when it was indeed consensual.

Pfhreak 5y ago
I'm sure it happens, I strongly doubt it's "quite common". Especially relative to the incidence of it happening the other way (where an victim escapes and abuser and realizes they were being abused.)
- fighterpilot 5y ago
  People believe all sorts of things on the basis of false memories. You know there's a fairly large community of people that are convinced that they were abducted by aliens? There's also a community of people that are convinced they have had a past life and know the intimate details of it. They don't suffer from schizophrenia, they literally just have false memories. In the end it shouldn't be about what party X subjectively felt or what they felt afterwards. It should be about what party X actually portrayed and communicated at the time of the encounter. If they legitimately consented and weren't intoxicated but deep down were thinking "I don't want this", then that sucks for them but no crime was committed and the counterparty isn't culpable. I'm talking generally, not about the specific allegation in question.

Humdeee 5y ago

This article reads like she did not say no as much as she did not say yes, which leaves the reader in a muddled, grey area and unsure of how to interpret anything. Is she consenting, or more specifically, is she explicitly claiming to not consent? It's a very awkward article, leaving readers with more questions than answers at the end, which is never what you want your readers to feel when garnering support.

Pfhreak 5y ago
Consent is unambiguous and enthusiastic yes. The default assumption is that no consent is given. Not saying yes is the same as saying no.
- Humdeee 5y ago
  I agree that this is morally correct but the law and the majority of real life intimate interactions don't reflect this. "Yes, I agree to have sex with you, and I am stating this without being under duress" or variations of that sentence is very rarely verbalized as such beforehand. Hence innocent until proven guilty and not vice versa, reasonable doubt, etc. and all the other law jargon applied.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Consent is unambiguous and enthusiastic yes. No, “consent” is, like “intent” on the other side, a mental state rather than an action: it is the active desire for the act. An ambiguous and enthusiastic yes is outward evidence of consent, though, and it tends to be the kind of evidence without which (or at least, some similarly very clear sign) we would tend not to infer consent to other acts where consent negates criminality, like battery.
- esarbe 5y ago
  This just leads to sill propositions and exclamations like "Now we all have to sign a contract before we kiss another!". Human communication is complicated and complex and error prone. Combine it with sexuality and you have a mess. There must be room for error and for dialogue. Humans are not binary machines. We're probabilistic ones.