• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Women are Angry, Temporarily Powerful—and Very, Very Dangerous

holbritter said:
Yeah, sounds like a war on men with comments like you just made.

She NEVER said No, nor did she ****ing leave the apartment. Was that so hard? To just walk out the door? FFS this victim culture is disgusting.
Click to expand...

I think you're more representative of most women's opinions on this subject, thank God.
 
truthatallcost said:
You don't think that trying to ruin the man's reputation with his fans is on par with all those things you mentioned?
Click to expand...
Absolutely not.

Do you really not understand how blackmail works? You threaten someone with exposure, in exchange for money or some other tangible gain.

Grace never threatened Ansari. She never demanded money. She did not tell him "if you do not do X for me, I will tell everyone." There is no indication that she is lying or defaming him. Ansari admitted he misinterpreted her reactions. And yes, she has a right to tell her side of the story, even if we disagree with how she characterized the night's events.

And again, you changed your tune. Don't pretend otherwise.


1. Grace says Aziz rushed through dinner, and wanted to get her back to his place ASAP. Hello?! Has Grace never heard of a booty call? He was being polite to offer dinner, but Grace should have known what going back to his apartment meant. No diamond ring waiting back there. No horse and carriage either.
Click to expand...
What the what?

They texted back and forth for a week in advance. It was a typical date (not a booty call). Taking a woman to dinner is not a down payment for sex. A woman entering your apartment does not obligate her to have sex. Oral sex does not obligate her to reciprocate. She wasn't expecting a marriage proposal, and she also wasn't expecting him to keep shoving her fingers in his mouth and then into her crotch.


2. You call 30 minutes of blowjobs & oral sex 'getting a bit physical'? Grace says she was mumbling her objections to having actual intercourse. How is it Aziz' fault that he didn't know what she was saying? It's not.
Click to expand...
Again, I'm characterizing him as being aggressive, not necessarily assault. None of us know how she actually responded to him, none of us know whether he ignored her, there are a lot of details we simply do not know. It is not clear whether her actions were screamingly obvious (and he was too horny to notice), or if she wasn't obvious enough about what she wanted, or a combination thereof.


None of that is reason enough to blab to the world about what happened. Aziz did the right thing by calling Grace an Uber, and apologizing afterwards. Grace DIDN'T do the right thing, which would be to realize her own naivety for thinking a movie star was going to make her his gf at the drop of a hat, & accept Aziz' apology with the new knowledge of a life lesson learned.
Click to expand...
Erm... Yeah, he's not a "movie star." He's not earning $10 million a movie. He's a minor TV star.

Nor is it clear why that matters. Should celebrities get a pass on alleged assault? Is there some sort of Celebrity Code which says that all male celebs are required to bang fans, and never get into a relationship with the hoi polloi? What nonsense.

There was nothing wrong with her expecting something a tiny bit more meaningful than a quick hump. And yes, that includes after he invited her back to his place. Just because a woman agrees to come to your apartment doesn't mean she only wants sex.

Oh, and he didn't apologize right off the bat. He texted her the next night saying (literally) "Hey - it was fun meeting you last night. I just dropped my roll of film today. Fingers crossed for some solid shots!" She then texted back out how the night was awful for her, then he texted back saying he was sorry and he misread things.
 
truthatallcost said:
You're the only poster here whose first response was to turn this into a Men vs Women thing.
Click to expand...

I call bull****. Here's your OP:

truthatallcost said:
I've been worried that our current national climate of punishing men for sexual harassment would eventual spiral out of control, resulting in women abusing our willingness to listen... and it's happened.

Ansari is a married man, so infidelity is his only wrongdoing here, which I'm sure most of us would agree isn't something the world needs to know about.

We need to stand up and give women like this the collective boot when they try to compare this to sexual assault, which Grace is doing. Otherwise, we risk damaging men's lives who don't deserve it.

To be blunt, if you're a woman who throws herself at a man, then let's him eat you out at his apartment, then denies him any reciprocal exchange... that makes you a lousy date, not a sexual assault victim!
Click to expand...
 
truthatallcost said:
The civil rights movement was also relevant, since real injustice was being committed.
Click to expand...

Perfect! Thank you. You just dismissed the *MeToo* movement as not being about the injustices of sexual harassment and abuses to women.

Very plain where you stand. It's just woman complaining to you. Well, men will be feeling the reactions of women who will feel that you need to recognize the true nature and effects that men's actions have had on us for centuries.
 
holbritter said:
What did todays men have to do with what happened for centuries? How are they responsible for what someone else did. That's really not a good or fair excuse. It's exactly crap like this that put women in the position of not being believed and brushed off in the first place. Gee, thanks "Grace"
Click to expand...

It's not like they (men) have stopped.

Lursa said:
Maybe you dont know what a pendulum is? Social ills, social reaction, social change are cumulative. They dont appear in an instant and they dont disappear in an instant and they have consequences, "reactions."

Yes, it's uncomfortable. The Civil Rights movement was 'uncomfortable' for alot of white people. Didnt make it wrong. Didnt make it go away overnight. That pendulum is still in motion as a matter of fact.

No one implied hating men. That is the go-to excuse for men. Kind of like just calling women that dont back down or that call them out "bitches." Or if a woman reacts in a way they dont like, asking if they've got their period. Just simplistic offensive acts instead of dealing with something.
Click to expand...
 
truthatallcost said:
I've been worried that our current national climate of punishing men for sexual harassment would eventual spiral out of control, resulting in women abusing our willingness to listen... and it's happened.

Ansari is a married man, so infidelity is his only wrongdoing here, which I'm sure most of us would agree isn't something the world needs to know about.

We need to stand up and give women like this the collective boot when they try to compare this to sexual assault, which Grace is doing. Otherwise, we risk damaging men's lives who don't deserve it.

To be blunt, if you're a woman who throws herself at a man, then let's him eat you out at his apartment, then denies him any reciprocal exchange... that makes you a lousy date, not a sexual assault victim!
Click to expand...

I dont go to anyone's house whom I dont know well but pleasee truth ,does it mean you have to force me to do somethng if I am at your house ?:confused:
 
Visbek said:
Absolutely not.

Do you really not understand how blackmail works? You threaten someone with exposure, in exchange for money or some other tangible gain.

Grace never threatened Ansari. She never demanded money. She did not tell him "if you do not do X for me, I will tell everyone." There is no indication that she is lying or defaming him. Ansari admitted he misinterpreted her reactions. And yes, she has a right to tell her side of the story, even if we disagree with how she characterized the night's events.
Click to expand...

And we have the right to comment on her story, since she decided the world needs to hear about this. Most of us seem to think that her story makes her sound worse than Aziz Ansari.

Other celebrities are commenting now, and their support seems to side with Aziz.


What the what?

They texted back and forth for a week in advance. It was a typical date (not a booty call). Taking a woman to dinner is not a down payment for sex. A woman entering your apartment does not obligate her to have sex. Oral sex does not obligate her to reciprocate. She wasn't expecting a marriage proposal, and she also wasn't expecting him to keep shoving her fingers in his mouth and then into her crotch.
Click to expand...

Yes, a lot of things sound great in theory, but don't seem to work out in real life. When a man invites you back to his apartment on the first date, after rushing through dinner, it's safe to assume that he isn't rushing you there to watch Netflix.

For all the talk we've heard from women about Aziz being a clueless ass for not picking up on verbal and non verbal cues, we're completely ignoring the fact that Grace ignored the most glaring cue of the entire encounter.

Again, I'm characterizing him as being aggressive, not necessarily assault. None of us know how she actually responded to him, none of us know whether he ignored her, there are a lot of details we simply do not know. It is not clear whether her actions were screamingly obvious (and he was too horny to notice), or if she wasn't obvious enough about what she wanted, or a combination thereof.
Click to expand...

Ah, here's the double standard; most women want men to be aggressive when it comes to sex. They want the man to make the first move, & they also want the man to kind of take charge. Well, Aziz did that, and Grace hopped up on his kitchen counter and spread her legs.

She had a change of heart when it came to intercourse, and Aziz eventually realized it wasn't going to happen.

He sounds like a perfectly normal man to me, not someone who should be thrown under the bus.

Erm... Yeah, he's not a "movie star." He's not earning $10 million a movie. He's a minor TV star.

Nor is it clear why that matters. Should celebrities get a pass on alleged assault? Is there some sort of Celebrity Code which says that all male celebs are required to bang fans, and never get into a relationship with the hoi polloi? What nonsense.
Click to expand...

Ever heard of groupies? Grace gave the impression of being a groupie, pursuing Aziz initially at the party, when he didn't appear interested in her. She said so herself. She also said that she told all her friends and coworkers that this 'minor TV star' was texting her, and had asked her out.

Male celebrities do bang fans, it's no big secret. Most fans just ask for an autograph however. Grace said she wanted more than that from Aziz however.

There was nothing wrong with her expecting something a tiny bit more meaningful than a quick hump. And yes, that includes after he invited her back to his place. Just because a woman agrees to come to your apartment doesn't mean she only wants sex.
Click to expand...

Yes, her expectations were not met, and she felt upset, which means its time to ruin a man's reputation. Typical narcissistic behavior.

Oh, and he didn't apologize right off the bat. He texted her the next night saying (literally) "Hey - it was fun meeting you last night. I just dropped my roll of film today. Fingers crossed for some solid shots!" She then texted back out how the night was awful for her, then he texted back saying he was sorry and he misread things.
Click to expand...

Of course, because nothing had occurred on the date that would have signaled the need to apologize. Men are not mind readers.
 
Medusa said:
I dont go to anyone's house whom I dont know well but pleasee truth ,does it mean you have to force me to do somethng if I am at your house ?:confused:
Click to expand...

No, but if you were at my house I'd probably try :) Trying and forcing aren't the same things.
 
Lursa said:
Perfect! Thank you. You just dismissed the *MeToo* movement as not being about the injustices of sexual harassment and abuses to women.

Very plain where you stand. It's just woman complaining to you. Well, men will be feeling the reactions of women who will feel that you need to recognize the true nature and effects that men's actions have had on us for centuries.
Click to expand...

That's not what I meant. Real victims of assault and harassment have had injustices done to them.
 
Lursa said:
I call bull****. Here's your OP:
Click to expand...

I stand by what I wrote there. Giving someone the boot means to kick them out of something, and #metoo needs to kick women out who are not actual victims of harassment or assault.
 
Visbek said:
Absolutely not.

Do you really not understand how blackmail works? You threaten someone with exposure, in exchange for money or some other tangible gain.

Grace never threatened Ansari. She never demanded money. She did not tell him "if you do not do X for me, I will tell everyone." There is no indication that she is lying or defaming him. Ansari admitted he misinterpreted her reactions. And yes, she has a right to tell her side of the story, even if we disagree with how she characterized the night's events.

And again, you changed your tune. Don't pretend otherwise.



What the what?

They texted back and forth for a week in advance. It was a typical date (not a booty call). Taking a woman to dinner is not a down payment for sex. A woman entering your apartment does not obligate her to have sex. Oral sex does not obligate her to reciprocate. She wasn't expecting a marriage proposal, and she also wasn't expecting him to keep shoving her fingers in his mouth and then into her crotch.



Again, I'm characterizing him as being aggressive, not necessarily assault. None of us know how she actually responded to him, none of us know whether he ignored her, there are a lot of details we simply do not know. It is not clear whether her actions were screamingly obvious (and he was too horny to notice), or if she wasn't obvious enough about what she wanted, or a combination thereof.



Erm... Yeah, he's not a "movie star." He's not earning $10 million a movie. He's a minor TV star.

Nor is it clear why that matters. Should celebrities get a pass on alleged assault? Is there some sort of Celebrity Code which says that all male celebs are required to bang fans, and never get into a relationship with the hoi polloi? What nonsense.

There was nothing wrong with her expecting something a tiny bit more meaningful than a quick hump. And yes, that includes after he invited her back to his place. Just because a woman agrees to come to your apartment doesn't mean she only wants sex.

Oh, and he didn't apologize right off the bat. He texted her the next night saying (literally) "Hey - it was fun meeting you last night. I just dropped my roll of film today. Fingers crossed for some solid shots!" She then texted back out how the night was awful for her, then he texted back saying he was sorry and he misread things.
Click to expand...

He was clearly a cad. And, she decided to post a response about that. I still do not see what the problem is or why someone started a thread about it.
 
truthatallcost said:
To be blunt, if you're a woman who throws herself at a man, then let's him eat you out at his apartment, then denies him any reciprocal exchange... that makes you a lousy date, not a sexual assault victim!
Click to expand...

Women and men have the right to refuse a sexual act.

Consenting to oral doesn't mean you've automatically given the green light to vaginal, anal, nasal or whatever else.

If you want to stick it somewhere ask. If (s)he says yes go for it. If (s)he says no, that means NO.
 
truthatallcost said:
That's not what I meant. Real victims of assault and harassment have had injustices done to them.
Click to expand...

And who do you think is behind the 'me too' movement :doh
 
truthatallcost said:
I stand by what I wrote there. Giving someone the boot means to kick them out of something, and #metoo needs to kick women out who are not actual victims of harassment or assault.
Click to expand...

So then you did make it men vs. women.

Thanks.
 
Lursa said:
Then I guess you should re-read what you wrote. You *explicitly* did so. I bolded where you did.
Click to expand...

You think I explicitly did so. No one else here has told me I'm making this into a Man vs Women debate, and we've had both men & women comment here.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
Women and men have the right to refuse a sexual act.

Consenting to oral doesn't mean you've automatically given the green light to vaginal, anal, nasal or whatever else.

If you want to stick it somewhere ask. If (s)he says yes go for it. If (s)he says no, that means NO.
Click to expand...

Nasal? What's going on in France these days? :lamo Or in your neck of the woods.
 
truthatallcost said:
You think I explicitly did so. No one else here has told me I'm making this into a Man vs Women debate, and we've had both men & women comment here.
Click to expand...

Words mean what they mean. Your denial is lame.

And if you feel you need the popular vote...lack of response doesnt mean you have it :mrgreen:
 
Lursa said:
So then you did make it men vs. women.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Yep. Truth is pushing the men's rights agenda here, for sure. Men victims of evil women using keyboards. "Oh noes, teh mens"
 
truthatallcost said:
No, but if you were at my house I'd probably try :) Trying and forcing aren't the same things.
Click to expand...

:lol: I am sure .But maybe many jerks force many women and some women are really right about their claims,not every woman is honest but many men think women come home to let them do whatever they want
 
Medusa said:
:lol: I am sure .But maybe many jerks force many women and some women are really right about their claims,not every woman is honest but many men think women come home to let them do whatever they want
Click to expand...

It all depends on the situation. The girl from the story didn't really know the guy she was going home with. The whole story reinforces stereotypes; the man wanted sex, the girl wanted a rich TV star boyfriend.
 
Women are Angry, Temporarily Powerful—and Very, Very Dangerous

Part I:

The topic of "Sexual Harassment/Sexual Assault/Rape" has been spiraling out of control for quite some time now. There is/has been a huge effort afoot to put rape/sexual assault/sexual harassment (as well as dramatically expanding the definition of sexual harassment) on a continuum in which they all become conflated and held with similar moral disgust. This is extremely dangerous and counterproductive as there is a huge danger in "Crying Wolf" far too often as to diminish the value of a Real Cry when real abuses occur.

I'm a University Senior now in my mid-twenties (male) at a standard, big state/public School in the USA. When I first transferred to this school from my previous college, we were given the "ground-rules" about University policy during Orientation. When it came time for the Sexual Assault/Sexual Harassment part of the presentation from the department head it was very telling about the state of our modern society (and very perturbing indeed).

The lady presenting, roughly in her 60's, firstly looked highly pissed off for no apparent reason. Then, she put up her power point presentation on the topic where she cited a "statistic" of 1/4 College girls will experience Sexual Assault, 1/5 will be raped, and many more will experience Sexual Harassment (Note: no "statistics" about guys was given). At this point, she looked out at the crowed, looked pissed as Hell, pointed her finger at the guys directly and demanded that we "get it through our heads that it is not okay to Rape, and Sexually Assault women/girls".

Then, she proceed to elaborate on what that means. She stated that Sexual activity requires consent and that consent cannot be given when a girl is under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. Therefore, if a guy and a girl have sex and she was drunk--that is rape (or if it was some other kind of sexual act short of "penetration" then it is considered Sexual Assault). You may think at the moment, "Okay, well yeah if she is clearly nearly passed out drunk, stumbling & fumbling all over herself, slurring words, ect. ect. and the guy is relatively sober/aware, then that is rape" (I agree). Now, she went on, if both the girl and the guy are drunk--then only the girl was raped. Furthermore, if the guy was drunk and the girl sober--then nothing happened (i.e. it was consensual sex).

Now, if that doesn't alarm you (the reader) enough to the double standard, she went on to state what officially constitutes (i.e. University Policy) a girl being "under the influence of Alcohol to such extent that they can no longer provide Sexual consent". She reasoned, since the average girl is so much smaller than a male, if she has so much as 1 beer/drink then you cannot be sure she is in a sound state of mind (i.e. alcohol intoxication/drunk) and thus would be held responsible to the aforementioned standards. At this point, all of the guys looked appalled and looked around at each other like wtf(?) while, in contrast, many/most of the girls had quite a smug look of satisfaction about it (and many were nodding their heads to varying degrees).

Does this extremely tense, hostile, ect. dynamic between the sexes worry you (the reader) at all? Also, do "you" find it highly problematic giving girls the top end of a seesaw (i.e. all of the power) in this arena (which is a very serious matter indeed)? Now, do you think this may become highly damaging to the male psyche as time progresses as well as Male-Female relationships more broadly? This has been Progressives "solution" to the matter of Rape on College Campuses--blow it out of proportion and make it a way larger/more substantial issue than it already was(?)

Note: For that statistic (1/4, 1/5, ect.), they are expanding the definition of "sexual assault" and "rape" to include "not having proper consent" to include "being drunk" with "drunk" itself being very ill-defined (and there is no way to test for it the next day or a few days later). That is, if you extend "rape" to include "sex while drunk", then; Yes, virtually all College girls that engage in sex will be "raped" or "sexual assaulted" at some point. Now, it becomes highly problematic when you are giving one gender all of the power however based on a misreading of this extremely expansive (and alarmist) definition of rape/sex. assault. (Note: based on that similar criteria of "being drunk", that would include essentially all college guys who engage in sexual activity as well as being "raped" and/or "sexually assaulted" at some point as well--there is a corresponding overly-inflated static of 1 in 16 men that was not cited)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom