|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| Aziz Ansari responds to sexual assault allegation: 'I was surprised and concerned' (CNN)"Master of None" star Aziz Ansari has responded to an allegation of sexual assault by a woman he went out on a date with in the fall. "In September of last year, I met a woman at a party. We exchanged numbers. We texted back and forth and eventually went on a date. We went out to dinner, and afterwards we ended up engaging in sexual activity, which by all indications was completely consensual," Ansari wrote in a statement obtained by CNN on Sunday. "The next day, I got a text from her saying that although 'it may have seemed okay,' upon further reflection, she felt uncomfortable. It was true that everything did seem okay to me, so when I heard that it was not the case for her, I was surprised and concerned," Ansari's statement continued. "I took her words to heart and responded privately after taking the time to process what she had said." In a story published by the website Babe on Saturday, a 23-year-old photographer, who shared her account anonymously, described meeting Ansari at an Emmy Awards event in September where she gave him her phone number. CNN does not know the identity of the woman. About a week later, the two went out to dinner. The date continued at Ansari's apartment afterward, where, according to the woman, she was repeatedly "pressured" by Ansari to have intercourse, which they didn't, and to perform oral sex, which she did. The woman told Babe she used verbal and non-verbal cues to communicate she was "distressed." Following the encounter, Ansari arranged for an Uber to pick her up, she said. "I cried the whole ride home. At that point I felt violated," she said, telling Babe she felt her experience with Ansari amounted to sexual assault. When Ansari won a Golden Globe Award for his Netflix series "Master of None" earlier this month, the woman said she felt compelled to share her experience. "It was actually painful to watch him win and accept an award," she said. "And absolutely cringeworthy that he was wearing the Time's Up pin. I think that started a new fire, and it kind of made it more real." Time's Up is a campaign by women in entertainment to heighten awareness of gender inequality issues and curtail sexual harassment across industries. "I continue to support the movement that is happening in our culture. It is necessary and long overdue," Ansari's statement concluded. The allegations against the 34-year-old comedian, who wrote a 2015 book on dating called "Modern Romance," have sparked debate about what constitutes sexual consent. Feminist author Jessica Valenti tweeted, "A lot of men will read that post about Aziz Ansari and see an everyday, reasonable sexual interaction. But part of what women are saying right now is that what the culture considers 'normal' sexual encounters are not working for us, and oftentimes harmful." |
| Quote: |
| I’m apparently the victim of sexual assault. And if you’re a sexually active woman in the 21st century, chances are that you are, too. That is what I learned from the “exposé” of Aziz Ansari published this weekend by the feminist website Babe — arguably the worst thing that has happened to the #MeToo movement since it began in October. It transforms what ought to be a movement for women’s empowerment into an emblem for female helplessness. The headline primes the reader to gird for the very worst: “I went on a date with Aziz Ansari. It turned into the worst night of my life.” Like everyone else, I clicked. The victim in this 3,000-word story is called “Grace” — not her real name — and her saga with Mr. Ansari began at a 2017 Emmys after-party. As recounted by Grace to the reporter Katie Way, she approached him, but he brushed her off at first. Then they bonded over their devotion to the same vintage camera. Grace was at the party with someone else, but she and Mr. Ansari exchanged numbers and soon arranged a date in Manhattan. When #MeToo Goes Too Far DEC. 20, 2017 After arriving at his TriBeCa apartment on the appointed evening — she was “excited,” having carefully chosen her outfit after consulting with friends — they exchanged small talk and drank wine. “It was white,” she said. “I didn’t get to choose and I prefer red, but it was white wine.” Yes, we are apparently meant to read into the nonconsensual wine choice. They went out to dinner nearby and then returned home to Mr. Ansari’s apartment. As Grace tells it, the actor was far too eager to get back to his place after he paid for dinner: “Like, he got the check and then it was bada-boom, bada-bing, we’re out of there.” Another sign of his apparent boorishness. Grace complimented Mr. Ansari’s kitchen countertops. The actor then made a move, asking her to sit on the counter. They started kissing. He undressed her and then himself. In the 30 or so minutes that followed — recounted beat by cringe-inducing beat — they hooked up. Mr. Ansari persistently tried to have penetrative sex with her, and Grace says she was deeply uncomfortable throughout. At various points, she told the reporter, she attempted to voice her hesitation, and that Mr. Ansari ignored her signals. At last, she uttered the word “no” for the first time during their encounter, to Mr. Ansari’s suggestion that they have sex in front of a mirror. He said: “‘How about we just chill, but this time with our clothes on?’” They got dressed, sat on the couch and watched “Seinfeld.” She said to him: “You guys are all the same.” He called her an Uber. She cried on the way home. Fin. If you are wondering what about this evening constituted the “worst night” of Grace’s life, or why it is being framed as a #MeToo story by a feminist website, you probably feel as confused as Mr. Ansari did the next day. “It was fun meeting you last night,” he texted. “Last night might’ve been fun for you, but it wasn’t for me,” she responded. “You ignored clear nonverbal cues; you kept going with advances. You had to have noticed I was uncomfortable.” He replied with an apology. Read Grace’s text message again. Put in other words: I am angry that you weren’t able to read my mind. It is worth carefully studying Grace’s story. Encoded in it are new yet deeply retrograde ideas about what constitutes consent — and what constitutes sexual violence. |
It's also possible to correctly point out that, yeah, "non-verbal cues" do exist, and, if we trust this woman's account of the events (and no one, including Aziz, has bothered to dispute it), it's seems that Aziz was doing his level best to ignore them.
No, I don't think Aziz broke the law. But no, I don't think we give him a pass for how he behaved just because it doesn't meet the standard of a criminal offense.
It's also possible to correctly point out that, yeah, "non-verbal cues" do exist, and, if we trust this woman's account of the events (and no one, including Aziz, has bothered to dispute it), it's seems that Aziz was doing his level best to ignore them.
No, I don't think Aziz broke the law. But no, I don't think we give him a pass for how he behaved just because it doesn't meet the standard of a criminal offense.
There's a right and wrong here. This was a personal interaction and if you feel Aziz didn't commit a crime, then why is it ok for her to publish this and paint him as a sexual predator to the entire world? This is not a he said, she said. We can use her actual words and see that she is completely in the wrong.
The fact that Ansari put Seinfeld on suggests to me he wasn't being pushy, but social. If he wanted sex he would have put on Cinemax imo, and we know he has that channnel let's be honest.
Idk that's just my 0.02 cents.
Quote:
David Binghamton, NY 1 hour ago
I have been arguing for decades that one of the giant failings of "second-wave" and "third-wave" feminism is that while women demand equality in all things - as they should - the one giant exception is that they still expect - no, require - men to take the initiative, make all the moves, and basically take all the emotional risks that come with expressing an interest in someone. If a man doesn't pursue a woman, nothing will ever happen. It's really that simple. It's not fun pursuing women. It's usually frustrating, fatiguing, demeaning, and often deeply humiliating. But this is what women demand of men. When men are assertive and aggressive, women are much more likely to reward them with their companionship and sex. Women seldom if ever reward men for being passive.
So the choices that heterosexual men are faced with are to be assertive, domineering, and sexually successful but run the risk of being accused of sexual harassment, or to do nothing potentially offensive and spend their evenings alone with their fantasies. The solution is for women to accept the responsibilities that come with equality and personhood. That means that the roles of women and men in sex and courtship must be placed on absolutely equal footing. Only when men know for certain that if a woman doesn't express any interest it's because she actually isn't interested, rather than merely playing hard to get, will the problem
That's a really well-put comment. I think there's still the idea that this sort of action from a woman will be met with the past ideas that she's too forward or promiscuous. But I really think that there's something to that.
Ah I forgot that you were there.
Enlighten the plebes if you don't mind of exactly what occurred and how we should react to this?
Quote:
In comment 13792322 ThatLimerickGuy said:
Quote:
We will never know the true story of what exactly happened that night. The truth probably lies somewhere in between what he says and what she says.
The point is that there is a great hypocrisy from Hollywood and beyond about overreacting to social issues that present themselves (and the hot topic is sexual assault), all the while closing their doors and engaging in similar activity that they accuse everyone of doing.
Basically, you can't stand on a platform and lecture society (without credentials to do so) on how to act and then be surprised when people expect you to be hypersensitive to those issues in your own actions.
I like Aziz Ansari as a comedian and as an actor. He comes across as a good guy in interviews also. Maybe he made a mistake that one night by acting that way or maybe this is his MO. Either way- perhaps he now understands to carefully examine his own actions before trying to push his own beliefs on the population.
I don't find this to be similar activity to what Hollywood was speaking out against in the slightest bit.
Aziz wasn't her boss, didn't rape her, didn't use power to coerce her into anything.
This is not remotely similar - but then again, I know that you'll look for any excuse to bash the "Hollywood elite"
Ansari uses his Hollywood celebrity to champion his self righteousness. He has himself said dating back to 2015 "I've always been a feminist."
Feminists don't do 1/2 of the shit he pulled, assuming that some of that is true.
So what does that make him? A hypocrite who uses his celebrity to lecture the population on morality while being just the same as the rest of the world when the curtain closes. Congrats Aziz- you played yourself.
This is just another shitty take to STICK IT TO THE ELITESSSS
Apparently because they got "preachy" about stopping actual sexual assault WITHIN THEIR FUCKIN INDUSTRY! Oh but they weren't "qualified". Are you "qualified" to have a fucking opinion.
This is one reason why this story sucks so much - it gives people like you credence to tear down the very real problem of sexual assault and sexual harassment.
You're true intentions and motives are so obvious and transparent.
Feel free to specify what "half the shit he did" that a "true feminist" would not.
There's a right and wrong here. This was a personal interaction and if you feel Aziz didn't commit a crime, then why is it ok for her to publish this and paint him as a sexual predator to the entire world? This is not a he said, she said. We can use her actual words and see that she is completely in the wrong.
Because there is a moral discussion to be had about Aziz's behavior, apart from whether he broke a law.
Again, if we accept the woman's account of the events (and, so far as I can see, everyone has done that, at least implicitly), then there's something pretty creepy about Aziz's behavior. It's difficult for me to see how a non-autistic person could miss the signals she was evidently giving out.
Yes, I do think she crossed a line by saying, in the piece, that this amounted to the legal definition of sexual assault. But I don't think that invalidates the entire piece, or renders moot the discussion we might be having about Aziz's behavior on that night.
vs
taking a girl out on a date, engaging in oral sex both ways, trying to have sex, and then NOT having sex with her after she says no. Then calling her an uber when she wants to leave. Then, the next day, after being told she wasn't comfortable, apologizing and saying he misread the situation. Cause you know, he's supposed to understand every "non-verbal cue".
Calling out Weinstein and then having an experience like Aziz 100% does not make you a "hypocrite".
And standing up against actual sexual assault and sexual harassment isn't lecturing on morality, for fucks sake. it's called being a decent human being.
Quote:
There's a right and wrong here. This was a personal interaction and if you feel Aziz didn't commit a crime, then why is it ok for her to publish this and paint him as a sexual predator to the entire world? This is not a he said, she said. We can use her actual words and see that she is completely in the wrong.
Because there is a moral discussion to be had about Aziz's behavior, apart from whether he broke a law.
Again, if we accept the woman's account of the events (and, so far as I can see, everyone has done that, at least implicitly), then there's something pretty creepy about Aziz's behavior. It's difficult for me to see how a non-autistic person could miss the signals she was evidently giving out.
Yes, I do think she crossed a line by saying, in the piece, that this amounted to the legal definition of sexual assault. But I don't think that invalidates the entire piece, or renders moot the discussion we might be having about Aziz's behavior on that night.
I don't see any rationalization for why this should have become public. Being "creepy" or pushing for sex after you've gone down on a girl and gotten a blowjob, and then *not* having sex with her when she says she doesn't want to, doesn't render a public undressing and massive career impact.
Quote:
In comment 13792596 allstarjim said:
Quote:
There's a right and wrong here. This was a personal interaction and if you feel Aziz didn't commit a crime, then why is it ok for her to publish this and paint him as a sexual predator to the entire world? This is not a he said, she said. We can use her actual words and see that she is completely in the wrong.
Because there is a moral discussion to be had about Aziz's behavior, apart from whether he broke a law.
Again, if we accept the woman's account of the events (and, so far as I can see, everyone has done that, at least implicitly), then there's something pretty creepy about Aziz's behavior. It's difficult for me to see how a non-autistic person could miss the signals she was evidently giving out.
Yes, I do think she crossed a line by saying, in the piece, that this amounted to the legal definition of sexual assault. But I don't think that invalidates the entire piece, or renders moot the discussion we might be having about Aziz's behavior on that night.
I don't see any rationalization for why this should have become public. Being "creepy" or pushing for sex after you've gone down on a girl and gotten a blowjob, and then *not* having sex with her when she says she doesn't want to, doesn't render a public undressing and massive career impact.
Agreed. None of your non-verbal cues are going to register at all when the dick is in, or has just been in, your mouth. Sorry. If she felt uncomfortable, she should've and could've said so.
Couldn't agree more with the commenter on the article that said women are being infantilized as if they are incapable of expressing clear intent. You shouldn't have to read tea leaves or interpret mumblings. Your panties were off, his dick was in YOUR mouth.
Far more likely this is consent revocation after the fact. And to impact a man's public image and career in doing so, that is cause for civil litigation. She should publicly apologize immediately, and to him privately.
Not talking about creepy rapist bastards as employee, that is real, for sure, but, in this particular context,.
being told that you should render a very personal service in addition to the one as ordered.
Point being. There are those who go right along, see it as a perk or funny occurance and those who dont go along and it's not amusing.
For me, since I respect all people and yet see all people as social equals, its easy..easier.. to say no.
It seems the willingness to go along or the reluctance to say no correlate with ones belief in a social hierarchy - to begin with.
But, of course, I am male and at 195 lbs and do not in fear...that is a factor as well obviously.
But here is the thing. There are guys who feel comfortable doing it, for whatever reason see it as a perk, don't mind being 'at your service' and t
This is my exact point. I wish some others here could understand it (SY).
Work is one category. A restaurant server is working, for example, not socialising.
Dating is a very different category.
If you call on someone for advice on a non dating non sexual subject, they should not assume it's OK, or professional, to change the subject. It's not.
Professors would be another.. College level. Don't date the students. Simple.
And standing up against actual sexual assault and sexual harassment isn't lecturing on morality, for fucks sake. it's called being a decent human being.
No it's not. Lecturing on morality is telling the Guardian how you respect women so much that you are a self described "feminist". The implication of such a thing is that Aziz is some kind of authority on the subject of women's rights or something.
Then you invite a woman over and don't back off at the first sign of non-reciprocation.
HYPOCRISY
The whole movement is tainted now (not just because of Aziz Ansari), and who suffers is the women who have really been sexually abused or assaulted, whether is be via Weinstein or others, because now we have to view these claims through the "Ansari Lens". That is what sucks but you can thank the #metoo culture that was created for that. Good Work.
Quote:
And standing up against actual sexual assault and sexual harassment isn't lecturing on morality, for fucks sake. it's called being a decent human being.
No it's not. Lecturing on morality is telling the Guardian how you respect women so much that you are a self described "feminist". The implication of such a thing is that Aziz is some kind of authority on the subject of women's rights or something.
Then you invite a woman over and don't back off at the first sign of non-reciprocation.
HYPOCRISY
The whole movement is tainted now (not just because of Aziz Ansari), and who suffers is the women who have really been sexually abused or assaulted, whether is be via Weinstein or others, because now we have to view these claims through the "Ansari Lens". That is what sucks but you can thank the #metoo culture that was created for that. Good Work.
Holy shit, you are equating rape and workplace sexual assault with a bad date. This isn't hard to figure out.
This is just some excuse for you to beat your chest about "the elites" trying to "moralize" to you.
BTW, you shouldn't feel "lectured on morality" by MeToo unless you're, well a fuckin seuxal assaulter/harasser.
The girl said she didn't want to have sex, and they didn't have sex. Theres nothing "ironic" or any "hypocrisy".
But hey, what more could you expect from the person who felt "lectured on morality" by a movement calling out serial rapists and harassers in Hollywood.
I don't see any rationalization for why this should have become public. Being "creepy" or pushing for sex after you've gone down on a girl and gotten a blowjob, and then *not* having sex with her when she says she doesn't want to, doesn't render a public undressing and massive career impact.
Based on her account, Aziz's self-restraint doesn't appear to be the biggest reason they didn't have intercourse. Her account is basically the story of a guy who got some action up front, and decided it gave him the moral right to keep pushing his luck even after she gave him every indication (non-verbal and otherwise) that she wasn't interested. She should have gotten herself out of there long before she did.
The reason I don't have much problem with her telling her story publicly is that this account appears to go far beyond a standard case of two intoxicated people who got their signals crossed. It reads as though Aziz, at some point, decided it didn't really matter what this woman wanted - that if he kept the pressure on, eventually she would break.
People who want to plant their flag on "He didn't break any laws, so it's nobody's business how he treats women when he thinks no one's looking," sound like people less concerned with behaving well, and more concerned with what a guy in that situation can get away with.
Quote:
In comment 13792672 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
And standing up against actual sexual assault and sexual harassment isn't lecturing on morality, for fucks sake. it's called being a decent human being.
No it's not. Lecturing on morality is telling the Guardian how you respect women so much that you are a self described "feminist". The implication of such a thing is that Aziz is some kind of authority on the subject of women's rights or something.
Then you invite a woman over and don't back off at the first sign of non-reciprocation.
HYPOCRISY
The whole movement is tainted now (not just because of Aziz Ansari), and who suffers is the women who have really been sexually abused or assaulted, whether is be via Weinstein or others, because now we have to view these claims through the "Ansari Lens". That is what sucks but you can thank the #metoo culture that was created for that. Good Work.
Holy shit, you are equating rape and workplace sexual assault with a bad date. This isn't hard to figure out.
This is just some excuse for you to beat your chest about "the elites" trying to "moralize" to you.
BTW, you shouldn't feel "lectured on morality" by MeToo unless you're, well a fuckin seuxal assaulter/harasser.
The girl said she didn't want to have sex, and they didn't have sex. Theres nothing "ironic" or any "hypocrisy".
But hey, what more could you expect from the person who felt "lectured on morality" by a movement calling out serial rapists and harassers in Hollywood.
Ah- the old well then you must be a sexual predator if you find issue with any of this card. Well played. You've just done exactly what you are railing against this whole time- accused someone of something that didn't happen. Congrats?
Now I could come back with something personal against you and what you must do in your own life, even though our interactions are sporadic on a Giants message board, but while I abhor your take on this conversation, I respect that you have it and am not going to go to that level.
Quote:
Spouting off about which he knows nothing about. Again.
Ah I forgot that you were there.
Enlighten the plebes if you don't mind of exactly what occurred and how we should react to this?
I don't know. And neither do you. So dispense with your petulant crusade already.
Quote:
In comment 13792607 Modus Operandi said:
Quote:
Spouting off about which he knows nothing about. Again.
Ah I forgot that you were there.
Enlighten the plebes if you don't mind of exactly what occurred and how we should react to this?
I don't know. And neither do you. So dispense with your petulant crusade already.
No that's unfair I'm not going to let you off of the hook.
You specifically took the time to say that I was "spouting off" on things that I know nothing about. On a message board. Designed for discussion.
That's fine. So tell me what I should know if that is your position? Or....alternatively just browse through and contribute something positive to the conversation rather than just a snide remark. You don't need to agree with me I understand that but it's also not fair to discount an opinion because you don't like it, without becoming involved in the discussion. You also could have simply kept scrolling down and stayed out of it.
What did you accomplish? What are you doing? So weird.
Sex is going the same way. Each party is going to need a lawyer on the date, and the lawyers are going to have to decide what is allowable and what isn’t....
As for this woman with Ansari - she had bad sex and now feels guilty. Welcome to Earth...
Once again, your bullshit is transparent. You've spouted off on other subjects for everyone to know that the real driver of your statement is sticking it "Out of touch Hollywood elites".
Honestly, yes, one of the ONLY reasons you should feel "lectured on morality" by people talking about sexual assault is if you are guilty of those actions. Personally, I don't think that's the case with you - I think you chose to feel condescended to about morality due to petulant, partisan reasons.
Your posts in the thread have basically:
"ha, well Aziz deserves it for his support of #MeToo! Stupid hollywood 'elite' with their moralizing!"
Spicy take.
Once again, your bullshit is transparent. You've spouted off on other subjects for everyone to know that the real driver of your statement is sticking it "Out of touch Hollywood elites".
Honestly, yes, one of the ONLY reasons you should feel "lectured on morality" by people talking about sexual assault is if you are guilty of those actions. Personally, I don't think that's the case with you - I think you chose to feel condescended to about morality due to petulant, partisan reasons.
Your posts in the thread have basically:
"ha, well Aziz deserves it for his support of #MeToo! Stupid hollywood 'elite' with their moralizing!"
Spicy take.
Not what I said at all. Reading is Fundamental. Scroll up. I specifically said that this could have just been a bad series of events in a specific incident for Ansari. I actually believe that is LIKELY what it is.
That doesn't take away from the fact that it's hypocritical to be a champion for women's rights on one hand and then commit an alleged borderline sexual assault on the other.
In the end we are on the same side on this one Sonic. I don't think Ansari did anything wrong per se. I am in the "bad date" crowd.
The point that I keep trying to make and that is passing over your head is that these guys were trying to use their celebrity status to promote their perceived enlightened view on women's rights. I think that's a noble cause and good for them for doing it. BUT- you can't be championing feminism and then doing the things Ansari is accused of and expect to walk away scott free. The world doesn't work in a vacuum like that where they can be two indpendent things.
Spicy yes- but salty? That's your game hombre.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4bAULTwAJU&feature=youtu.be - ( New Window )
Turning a worthy cause into an attention-whoring contest is a quick way to lose the movement.
Dude does exactly what we are supposed to do "No means No", and still gets slammed?
Between this girl and the lady who had a 6-month affair with Lauer, I'm not sure who is looking to cash in more on their 15 minutes of fame.
Banfield nails it.
And what happened after that?
Hence the comments from Banfield (and others) claiming "Grace" chipped away at the #meToo movement.
Quote:
And what happened after that?
Yada yada yada, he called her an Uber
Quote:
In comment 13792992 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
And what happened after that?
Yada yada yada, he called her an Uber
You yada yada'd over the best part!
Quote:
In comment 13792646 ThatLimerickGuy said:
Quote:
In comment 13792607 Modus Operandi said:
Quote:
Spouting off about which he knows nothing about. Again.
Ah I forgot that you were there.
Enlighten the plebes if you don't mind of exactly what occurred and how we should react to this?
I don't know. And neither do you. So dispense with your petulant crusade already.
No that's unfair I'm not going to let you off of the hook.
You specifically took the time to say that I was "spouting off" on things that I know nothing about. On a message board. Designed for discussion.
That's fine. So tell me what I should know if that is your position? Or....alternatively just browse through and contribute something positive to the conversation rather than just a snide remark. You don't need to agree with me I understand that but it's also not fair to discount an opinion because you don't like it, without becoming involved in the discussion. You also could have simply kept scrolling down and stayed out of it.
What did you accomplish? What are you doing? So weird.
Let me spell it out for you.
The majority of this thread (most) has taken in the story and has made fairly nuanced points.
You dont know Ansari. I doubt you could pick him out of a lineup of Indian/Paki folks. You don't know the girl who made the accusations. Yet, you stomp in, as you're prone to do, and start making sweeping generalizations about Hollywood and who the fuck knows what else.
So go on, continue your latest little crusade. But know that you sound like a lunatic.
Quote:
In comment 13792828 Modus Operandi said:
Quote:
In comment 13792646 ThatLimerickGuy said:
Quote:
In comment 13792607 Modus Operandi said:
Quote:
Spouting off about which he knows nothing about. Again.
Ah I forgot that you were there.
Enlighten the plebes if you don't mind of exactly what occurred and how we should react to this?
I don't know. And neither do you. So dispense with your petulant crusade already.
No that's unfair I'm not going to let you off of the hook.
You specifically took the time to say that I was "spouting off" on things that I know nothing about. On a message board. Designed for discussion.
That's fine. So tell me what I should know if that is your position? Or....alternatively just browse through and contribute something positive to the conversation rather than just a snide remark. You don't need to agree with me I understand that but it's also not fair to discount an opinion because you don't like it, without becoming involved in the discussion. You also could have simply kept scrolling down and stayed out of it.
What did you accomplish? What are you doing? So weird.
Let me spell it out for you.
The majority of this thread (most) has taken in the story and has made fairly nuanced points.
You dont know Ansari. I doubt you could pick him out of a lineup of Indian/Paki folks. You don't know the girl who made the accusations. Yet, you stomp in, as you're prone to do, and start making sweeping generalizations about Hollywood and who the fuck knows what else.
So go on, continue your latest little crusade. But know that you sound like a lunatic.
Nor do I know Eli Manning or Landon Collins but we speak of them every day no? We all have opinions on the Giants yet most of us have never been in the locker room?
You're weird dude.
Is it an Indian/Pakistani thing? Is that a nerve or something? I'm not being facetious either, I'm trying to see where your angst is coming from on this one.
You can't have it both ways. Either you think Ansari is guilty and thus reaping what he's sown, or you think he's an innocent bystander. It can't be both. And, you may think Hollywood is overly preachy lately, but this isn't an example of that, is it?
What exactly are you trying to prove on this thread?
Quote:
Now that she's been publicly shamed she'll have to join the anti social-media-bullying campaign....
What exactly are you trying to prove on this thread?
That he should be banned methinks.
You dont know Ansari. I doubt you could pick him out of a lineup of Indian/Paki folks. You don't know the girl who made the accusations. Yet, you stomp in, as you're prone to do, and start making sweeping generalizations about Hollywood and who the fuck knows what else.
Why would he have to know Ansari or the girl to make generalizations about Hollywood? Generalizations are by definition non-specific
Whether or not he nagged her until she agreed to is irrelevant, but it's not sexual harassment or assault. She has agency, no means no, and yes means yes. "Yes" but "my non-verbal cues say no" is foolishness. People aren't psychics and spoken language exists for a reason.