|
|
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. |
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?
I like Ansari. I've probably seen every bit of comedy he's done. Each one of his bits are about his upbringing in South Carolina, what an awkward childhood and adolescence he had. You can see it in Master of None.
Are there preachy types in Hollywood? Of course. Aren't there preachy folks in every walk of life? I have a stepdaughter that drives me nuts with her vegan bullshit.
So for a guy I don't consider particularly preachy, it's bizarre to see Limericm take such delight in this story. I dont care whos telling the truth. Probably somewhere in the middle.
Then again, there was a certain senatorial candidate who was recently accused of assult. Multiple accusors. Some underage. Didn't hear a peep about it on here. From Limerick or other champions of truth - those who live to battle such hypocrisy.
THAT'S a non-verbal cue in an of itself!
And on top of that, she has clearly had similar "bad" experiences in the past. Does she ever learn?
If you're not comfortable around a guy, don't go to his apartment after a date! Grow up already.
Quote:
It's the cognitive dissonance between saying, "good thing Ansari is suffering, he's a hypocrite lecturing us while being guilty of these acts" and also saying, "I think Ansari is just in an unlucky situation and hasn't really done anything wrong" that makes your take stupid. And I think that's what caused you to get some shit.
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?
I like Ansari. I've probably seen every bit of comedy he's done. Each one of his bits are about his upbringing in South Carolina, what an awkward childhood and adolescence he had. You can see it in Master of None.
Are there preachy types in Hollywood? Of course. Aren't there preachy folks in every walk of life? I have a stepdaughter that drives me nuts with her vegan bullshit.
So for a guy I don't consider particularly preachy, it's bizarre to see Limericm take such delight in this story. I dont care whos telling the truth. Probably somewhere in the middle.
Then again, there was a certain senatorial candidate who was recently accused of assult. Multiple accusors. Some underage. Didn't hear a peep about it on here. From Limerick or other champions of truth - those who live to battle such hypocrisy.
Quote:
In comment 13793245 adamg said:
Quote:
It's the cognitive dissonance between saying, "good thing Ansari is suffering, he's a hypocrite lecturing us while being guilty of these acts" and also saying, "I think Ansari is just in an unlucky situation and hasn't really done anything wrong" that makes your take stupid. And I think that's what caused you to get some shit.
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?
I like Ansari. I've probably seen every bit of comedy he's done. Each one of his bits are about his upbringing in South Carolina, what an awkward childhood and adolescence he had. You can see it in Master of None.
Are there preachy types in Hollywood? Of course. Aren't there preachy folks in every walk of life? I have a stepdaughter that drives me nuts with her vegan bullshit.
So for a guy I don't consider particularly preachy, it's bizarre to see Limericm take such delight in this story. I dont care whos telling the truth. Probably somewhere in the middle.
Then again, there was a certain senatorial candidate who was recently accused of assult. Multiple accusors. Some underage. Didn't hear a peep about it on here. From Limerick or other champions of truth - those who live to battle such hypocrisy.
I'm sure if Ansari put his fingers in his ears and just yelled "FAKE NEWS!!!" TLG would give him the benefit of the doubt like he has to everyone else he politically agrees with as opposed to some bullshit about hypocrisy.
I'd have gladly given you my opinion on Roy Moore and how I did not support his candidacy for Senate if such discussion was permitted here.
Quote:
It's the cognitive dissonance between saying, "good thing Ansari is suffering, he's a hypocrite lecturing us while being guilty of these acts" and also saying, "I think Ansari is just in an unlucky situation and hasn't really done anything wrong" that makes your take stupid. And I think that's what caused you to get some shit.
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?
I like Ansari. I've probably seen every bit of comedy he's done. Each one of his bits are about his upbringing in South Carolina, what an awkward childhood and adolescence he had. You can see it in Master of None.
Are there preachy types in Hollywood? Of course. Aren't there preachy folks in every walk of life? I have a stepdaughter that drives me nuts with her vegan bullshit.
So for a guy I don't consider particularly preachy, it's bizarre to see Limericm take such delight in this story. I dont care whos telling the truth. Probably somewhere in the middle.
Then again, there was a certain senatorial candidate who was recently accused of assult. Multiple accusors. Some underage. Didn't hear a peep about it on here. From Limerick or other champions of truth - those who live to battle such hypocrisy.
I like Ansari too. I loved him in Parks and Rec.
Here is an analogy. What if you walked in on your stepdaughter eating a chicken tender one day after you had to endure her preaching to you about the vegan lifestyle. I mean she isn't eating a 24oz porterhouse but wouldn't that be mildly annoying after hearing her tell you what a good vegan she was?
If he's not guilty, there's no hypocrisy. Period.
Wow, that analogy makes perfect sense.
Quote:
In comment 13793245 adamg said:
Quote:
It's the cognitive dissonance between saying, "good thing Ansari is suffering, he's a hypocrite lecturing us while being guilty of these acts" and also saying, "I think Ansari is just in an unlucky situation and hasn't really done anything wrong" that makes your take stupid. And I think that's what caused you to get some shit.
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?
I like Ansari. I've probably seen every bit of comedy he's done. Each one of his bits are about his upbringing in South Carolina, what an awkward childhood and adolescence he had. You can see it in Master of None.
Are there preachy types in Hollywood? Of course. Aren't there preachy folks in every walk of life? I have a stepdaughter that drives me nuts with her vegan bullshit.
So for a guy I don't consider particularly preachy, it's bizarre to see Limericm take such delight in this story. I dont care whos telling the truth. Probably somewhere in the middle.
Then again, there was a certain senatorial candidate who was recently accused of assult. Multiple accusors. Some underage. Didn't hear a peep about it on here. From Limerick or other champions of truth - those who live to battle such hypocrisy.
I like Ansari too. I loved him in Parks and Rec.
Here is an analogy. What if you walked in on your stepdaughter eating a chicken tender one day after you had to endure her preaching to you about the vegan lifestyle. I mean she isn't eating a 24oz porterhouse but wouldn't that be mildly annoying after hearing her tell you what a good vegan she was?
That analogy blows. The equivalent would be taking a vow of celibacy only to be caught hooking up with someone.
Aziz Ansari is allowed to stand up for women’s right and also have consexual sexual relations with women. You realize that, right? Or don’t you?
What if it's chicken fried steak?
If he's not guilty, there's no hypocrisy. Period.
Would you not agree that he stepped over a line a little bit?
I don't think he commited any crime but since when has that been the criteria for judgment? Ask Al Franken how he feels about that.
Quote:
That you can't see how you're having it both ways?
If he's not guilty, there's no hypocrisy. Period.
Would you not agree that he stepped over a line a little bit?
I don't think he commited any crime but since when has that been the criteria for judgment? Ask Al Franken how he feels about that.
Oh fer fluck's sake...
Quote:
That you can't see how you're having it both ways?
If he's not guilty, there's no hypocrisy. Period.
Would you not agree that he stepped over a line a little bit?
I don't think he commited any crime but since when has that been the criteria for judgment? Ask Al Franken how he feels about that.
I don't have much of an opinion on something I have no trustworthy information about. Based on your own interpretation, you're having it both ways. Saying he didn't really do anything wrong while also relishing in exposing some sort of hypocrisy you see in his behavior. That those should be mutually exclusive should have registered by now, no?
So you're actually saying he's guilty of some sort of crime? What crime is he guilty of? Anything more substantial than bad press?
Quote:
What line did he step over that exposes him to charges of hypocrisy beyond merely having an inflammatory article being published about him? What has he himself done that is reprehensible?
*Shudders* Don't remind me...
Quote:
In comment 13793448 Modus Operandi said:
Quote:
In comment 13793245 adamg said:
Quote:
It's the cognitive dissonance between saying, "good thing Ansari is suffering, he's a hypocrite lecturing us while being guilty of these acts" and also saying, "I think Ansari is just in an unlucky situation and hasn't really done anything wrong" that makes your take stupid. And I think that's what caused you to get some shit.
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?
I like Ansari. I've probably seen every bit of comedy he's done. Each one of his bits are about his upbringing in South Carolina, what an awkward childhood and adolescence he had. You can see it in Master of None.
Are there preachy types in Hollywood? Of course. Aren't there preachy folks in every walk of life? I have a stepdaughter that drives me nuts with her vegan bullshit.
So for a guy I don't consider particularly preachy, it's bizarre to see Limericm take such delight in this story. I dont care whos telling the truth. Probably somewhere in the middle.
Then again, there was a certain senatorial candidate who was recently accused of assult. Multiple accusors. Some underage. Didn't hear a peep about it on here. From Limerick or other champions of truth - those who live to battle such hypocrisy.
I'm sure if Ansari put his fingers in his ears and just yelled "FAKE NEWS!!!" TLG would give him the benefit of the doubt like he has to everyone else he politically agrees with as opposed to some bullshit about hypocrisy.
I'd have gladly given you my opinion on Roy Moore and how I did not support his candidacy for Senate if such discussion was permitted here.
Almost.
Regards, Yat
And conversely women are told to play "hard to get", to resist some to come over as a "good girl". Its a vicious circle. Women say no and get the guys to pursue. THe guys know this and push forward even after an initial push back. Guys should just stop and girls should just say yes or no. However that is not the way the game is currently played.
The method of addressing real and perceived imbalances of power by giving a real or perceived power imbalance to one group...especially when its turning into a set, rote, dogmatic method, is one of the most dangerous methods in human history.
BUT....I DONT, repeat DONT think that this is what the METOO movement is doing, per se!
Some few adherents maybe, but for the most part they are just talking openly ...and why not.
The 'power vs power method' IS endemic in our society ....and does immeasurable harm, in short, is evil.
All that being said...its not what the METOO movement is all about.
I think the movement is great, as a father of a teenage girl (not to mention the boy) its great to think that things are changing.
That said, the blind and dumb use of 'empowerment' willy nilly....is another subject and well worth discussing.
Sounds like when the girl verbally said no that they got dressed, sat on the couch and watched Seinfeld.
In today's environment, isn't that almost to the T what he's supposed to do?
He's being accused of ignoring non-verbal cues. I don't even know what that is. Eye rolls? Gag reflex? Closing eyes while being pleasured?
Fuck - if people aren't going to verbalize things, then do acts and the next day follow it up with remorse, lawyers will be overrun with these types of cases.
and...regarding that, how we as individuals culturally express or even -perceive- power (in this case maybe) .. when, where, how...or not...is key in all this.
For example, in one model you may be complete social equals with someone you serve with in service, so- in private time call him a 'silly fucker' and a 'run-away bastard'...but during actual service events, he, being your superior in that context, you happily do -exactly- as he says.
In another contrasting (negative) model, once power is established in -one- aspect of life (job lets say, or the other one has money, or major career contacts) it is then imbedded in ALL the social interactions between the two individuals. So, for example, you see your boss or 'social better' at a barbeque, and he hits on your wife or asks you to run to the store and pick up some more hotdog buns while he throws a baseball to your kids, expects you to call him by Votre as opposed to Tu, etc.
There are different ...and deep... cultural models for how and when individuals sort out and even perceive power between themselves, and this is at the heart of the matter.
The fix is NOT to, for example, 'empower all people under six feet tall', or 'all people with X less $ bank'...that leads to ...all sorts of evils.
The fix is to embrace a volunteer culture where people treat each other as total social equals and yet also volunteer to subject themselves in the proper temporary contexts, i.e. team, military, job, family, while climbing a mountain or sailing a vessel....but NOT at dinner...in the subway....etc etc etc
The last part is the catch 22. How can you impose a just punishments on false accusation? The power assymetry means Anzari has alot more to lose than the 23 yo photographer. She basically posed a complete threat to his livelihhod. He may still lose a significant amount of opportunity from this - due to her accusations - and his recourse is next to zero.
Sounds like when the girl verbally said no that they got dressed, sat on the couch and watched Seinfeld.
I'll ask you again - what happened after they got dressed and watched Seinfeld?
Is there something I'm missing or why you keep asking a question I can't answer?
2) This is an interesting one. Her story changed after his response. The question here is what were the non-verbal cues she referred to. If she was moving his hands, gesturing, etc. then she has a point about him proceeding. But, one version of her story makes me think it was in her head, but never communicated in any way, shape, or form. From her story, it's also possible that her discomfort may have been after the fact.
Is there something I'm missing or why you keep asking a question I can't answer?
What do you mean "apparently?" You say that like you didn't bother to read her account of what happened.
Does her account even mention watching Seinfeld? That's in HIS account. Her account doesn't discuss what happened after she told him no other than she cried the whole way home.
Don't confuse me not reading her account with made up shit.
Aziz hasn't offered his side of these events, that's why. At most, he's offered a 134-word response to her account - in which he doesn't rebut a single thing she said, or offer any new information of his own.
But you got the basic point I was trying to make to FMiC. The encounter didn't end with "Grace" saying 'No,' and them sitting on the couch to watch Seinfeld until he called her an Uber. He basically tried to fuck her again.
Although things are slowly changing, for most of our history (in this culture-some cultures are vastly different, others very similar) women are supposed to not want sex lest they appear "slutty" (for lack of a better term). Men have been taught (maybe not always implicitly) that since women have to at least appear to not want sex, you have to be persistent so that after "succumbing" to a man's advances, they can comfort themselves in the knowledge that they put up resistance.
The perfect example of this behavior is the song that this new generation of feminist idiots love to trot out as a "date rape" song: Baby It's Cold Outside. The song was written in 1944. It is a song about the game I described above in which a man and woman are negotiating a sexual encounter. She obviously wants the encounter, but has to put out a good excuse as to why she would stay at the man's house overnight so everyone doesn't think she's a slut. They are basically discussing this and coming up with all the different excuses she can use. It drives me nuts when I hear folks talk about it being about "date rape". These idiots that can't understand the obvious subtext of a verbal exchange are the same idiots expecting non-verbal cues to be understood by anybody...hilarious.
Anyway- we certainly don't intend to teach our boys and girls to behave in that matter anymore, but culture doesn't change overnight, and that way of thinking about gender roles still does persist for a large chunk of society.
There are also genetic and biological aspects to it as well- behavior is never simply a matter of "nurture"- there's always a "nature" aspect to it. And for sure, the are major biological differences between men and women that account for many of the differences in the way each pursue sex.
A line from the original piece continues to bother me: “When she sat down on the floor next to Ansari, who sat on the couch, she thought he might rub her back, or play with her hair—something to calm her down.” This was after she’d collected herself in the bathroom, after she told him she didn’t want to feel forced. Ansari sat on the couch and watched Seinfeld. Grace then, after the half hour of trying to get away from him, after saying she didn’t want to feel forced, seats herself in a vulnerable position—on the floor with her back to him—intentionally giving him nonverbal cues for physical, intimate interaction: a backrub or hair playing.
When I think of people non-sexually rubbing my back or playing with my hair, I think of friends, partners, people I trust. It’s a gesture that is trusting and intimate. And, by Grace’s own words, she gave Ansari a nonverbal cue for this kind of physical intimacy. She wanted him to touch her, but in a very narrow, specific way. If she wanted physical but nonsexual intimacy, she needed to use her words. I don’t see how it’s reasonable for a near stranger to understand that your nonverbal cue for touching is only for a backrub or hair play. That’s a kind of intimacy that is built. She did seem to want intimacy with Ansari, and maybe that’s why she stayed so long. If this one nonverbal cue isn’t very clear (I would not have been able to pick up on it), I wonder how many of her other cues weren’t as clear as she may have thought they were.
This moment is particularly significant for Grace, because she thought that would be the end of the sexual encounter — her remark about not wanting to feel “forced” had added a verbal component to the cues she was trying to give him about her discomfort. When she sat down on the floor next to Ansari, who sat on the couch, she thought he might rub her back, or play with her hair — something to calm her down.
Ansari instructed her to turn around. “He sat back and pointed to his penis and motioned for me to go down on him. And I did. I think I just felt really pressured. It was literally the most unexpected thing I thought would happen at that moment because I told him I was uncomfortable.”
Soon, he pulled her back up onto the couch. She would tell her friend via text later that night, “He [made out] with me again and says, ‘Doesn’t look like you hate me.’”
Halfway into the encounter, he led her from the couch to a different part of his apartment. He said he had to show her something. Then he brought her to a large mirror, bent her over and asked her again, “Where do you want me to fuck you? Do you want me to fuck you right here?” He rammed his penis against her ass while he said it, pantomiming intercourse.
“I just remember looking in the mirror and seeing him behind me. He was very much caught up in the moment and I obviously very much wasn’t,” Grace said. “After he bent me over is when I stood up and said no, I don’t think I’m ready to do this, I really don’t think I’m going to do this. And he said, ‘How about we just chill, but this time with our clothes on?’”
They got dressed, sat side by side on the couch they’d already “chilled” on, and he turned on an episode of Seinfeld. She’d never seen it before. She said that’s when the reality of what was going on sank in. “It really hit me that I was violated. I felt really emotional all at once when we sat down there. That that whole experience was actually horrible.”
While the TV played in the background, he kissed her again, stuck his fingers down her throat again, and moved to undo her pants. She turned away. She remembers “feeling in a different mindset at that point.”
“I remember saying, ‘You guys are all the same, you guys are all the fucking same.’” Ansari asked her what she meant. When she turned to answer, she says he met her with “gross, forceful kisses.”
After that last kiss, Grace stood up from the couch, moved back to the kitchen island where she left her phone, and said she would call herself a car. He hugged her and kissed her goodbye, another “aggressive” kiss. When she pulled away, Ansari finally relented and insisted he’d call her the car. “He said, ‘It’s coming, but just tell them your name is Essence,’” she said, a name he has joked about using as a pseudonym in his sitcom.
the article that started it all - ( New Window )
That such a simple sentiment is lost on a 23 year-old woman making adult choices is frightening.
That happens?
Quote:
according to her the non-verbal cues were repeatedly moving his hand off her and moving away from him every time he stuck his finger in her mouth, only for him to follow her and do it again. I'm on the side that she had many opportunities to leave and a simple No would have ended it, but I think those are not so subtle non-verbal cues. He, allegedly, then responded to her telling him that she doesn't want to be forced by requesting a bj. Though I think they are both still naked at that point so that could be confusing to Aziz. She did mention Seinfeld in her version of events and how even then he stuck his finger in her mouth and tried to do take off her pants. When that failed, he called an uber. I haven't had a chance to read his side.
Aziz hasn't offered his side of these events, that's why. At most, he's offered a 134-word response to her account - in which he doesn't rebut a single thing she said, or offer any new information of his own.
But you got the basic point I was trying to make to FMiC. The encounter didn't end with "Grace" saying 'No,' and them sitting on the couch to watch Seinfeld until he called her an Uber. He basically tried to fuck her again.
Someone points at their dick and your obligated to blow him??
Someone points at their dick and your obligated to blow him??
Wait, that's not true?
Frack....
So for a guy I don't consider particularly preachy, it's bizarre to see Limericm take such delight in this story.
That's funny... I've read enough of Limerick's post to not find this bizarre in the slightest.
Brought a girl home to eff it
After the suck
He ran out of luck
And she went to rake up the muck.
I can't even confidently say that Ansari's career is safe, even though it appears he did nothing wrong!
How is that acceptable?
Of course, this is a sub-set of the greater threat for false rape allegations that any average male can have their lives ruined by.
So, my apologies if I'm not "moved" by this movement.
Couldn't be anymore on point.
"I'm worth it, so he'll pursue me!"
Women have been programmed to setup this stupid defensive wall. Men have to fight through this wall just to have a chance. Now we're saying that attempting to penetrate (no pun) this wall is akin to sexual assault?