This is all weird.
You seem to be saying that someone in a non sexual opposite sex friendship isn’t actually non sexual and is fibbing or else is some strange sci if post-sexual weirdo.
Are you asking in addition to the part where she said she was sexually assaulted and you want… more?
No, sorry, @Guap, I guess I was unclear. No. I’m not in an open relationship- that’s my best friend and his wife. I just hang out with her, alone and in public often. Have done for years. My ex and her boyfriend are not open, but hey, he trusts her- even with her old boyfriend. Because we’re all mature adults.
My main point was that if you’re a dude that thinks that ‘men and women just can’t be friends’, that’s utter, sexist bullshit. If you can’t handle yourself to treat female friends and acquaintances like anything other than sex objects… you have issues. And if that extends to your professional life, doubly so.
I have plenty of female friends and co-workers- too many, I fear sometimes, honestly, what with all the recent talk about men relying on women for their emotional labor. But that’s a whole other topic.
We must have read different articles, she never mentioned sexual assault in her article.
…Including let him sexually assault me. Regularly. I was expected to be ready for him when he came home from work.
She bolded it. Separate from the surrounding paragraphs and everything.
I just re-read that part. She did bold it, for reader effect, then went on to give the terrible story of how she was tired one night but he wanted to have sex so she consented. I’m not sure what she is defining that as, but a committed partner consenting when they are tired is pretty lame on both party’s parts, but no where near sexual assault.
So in otherwords…
She did mention it, but you don’t believe her. That’s different.
I would if you moved in with them. Not quite analogous.
I know women can be pathologically attached to abusers or convince themselves they cannot act in their own self-defense. But whether that is the case here is a question that cannot be answered. Some inquiry into the validity of the claim is justified if the stakes are high enough. Although I suspect at this point, the question may not even be able to be answered by Ms. Dykstra herself, people have a way of filling in explanations for their behavior after the fact, to the point where some people can pass polygraph tests while describing events that did not happen.
So, I suppose my approach for this court-of-public-opinion case is basically “is there proof that would justify the consequences.” (I suspect, but would not claim on your behalf, that your position is something close to “victims are credible until proven otherwise.” If so, fair enough.) But that’s not an evidentiary standard used in my profession, which is all about supporting claims with evidence or losing.
As the controversy stands right now, I’m not quite convinced, but hey, nobody cares what I think (maybe not even me, except to the extent this is a dismaying situation). And the deed is most definitely done. But, tif I’m going to engage in any kind of analysis, there’s the question of why this disclosure, including allegations of sexual assault, took the form of an article that did not identify the individual in question (despite his clear identifiability from the context) rather than a police report. If I wanted to nuke some guy from orbit, this would be a pretty easy way to do it. No personal accountability for “proof” of the alleged crime, major damage to the target.
Do I know it played out that way? Of course not, but false accusations happen and the possibility should be taken into account. If I had to guess? Somewhere in between, that he’s a shitheel but not quite a criminal one (the type seems common in showbiz). The unwillingness to actually place a name or take legal action is concerning.
I don’t think you get this.
This isn’t comparable. She was afraid to leave because of the conseqences. He obviously mentally and physically controlled her to the point of thinking if she left, her life would be ruined. So she stayed. And when she did leave, he tried to do just what she feared he would. This proves her point entirely. This is why she stayed.
I would like you to go to a domestic abuse survivor’s group and ask them “why didn’t you just leave?” “You were two consenting adults”
And I’d ask you to put yourself in the shoes of someone trying to prosecute or defend a claim of sexual assault. Should that question be disallowed?
This is he said/she said right now and without more from either side I’m afraid it’s pure speculation on our part. I think I’m done speculating for now. I probably shouldn’t have been speculating in the first place.
This is a ridiculous argument and holds no water.
There are relationships that are abusive that are not physical. Period. And it takes nothing away from women to admit that happens. This is not an unknown. We know this happens. There are studies, tons of them, that prove this happens and in some cases why.
So as someone who doesn’t do blogs or social media is it now a thing for women (and men) to go online and diss their exes. I mean in the past it would be some verbal remark passed on among friends, now it is all out on the internet.
Someone says something and everyone takes sides based on who you like and your own experiences. And of course people on the internet judge you based on that little bit of info you put out there.
It’s a new world people, and right and wrong have nothing to do with it. It’s internet justice that counts.
It’s common for everyone to go online and talk about everything. I don’t understand it, but it’s not like this is limited to women. Remember this one?
Gjoni repeatedly insisted that the segments of GamerGate making news for harassment are from members of a trollish fringe who are “ruining everything.” Part of this belief seems to stem from his assertion that “thezoepost” was not a misogynistic character assassination, as it has been painted online, but a “callout post” detailing Quinn’s purported misdeeds and hypocrisies as an emblem of social justice. Indeed, Gjoni told BuzzFeed News, as he has written elsewhere, that he considers himself a social justice advocate.
So who would have thought a “callout post” may not be a good idea? :)
I totally agree, but if you know anyone younger than…maybe 25ish, you know that they live their lives nearly totally online. It’s a very different world, and they express themselves in very different ways. They are totally cool with sharing very private things with lots and lots of people who we would probably consider strangers, or even the whole world, and they have zero expectation of or desire for privacy.
These sorts of tit-for-tat online callout posts aren’t going to go away any time soon. In fact, I presume some enterprising person will try to monitize it by creating a service solely for this sort of thing.
We attended a wedding my daughter was part of in Disneyland years ago. Nice affair for a nice couple who had met in high school.
Their eventual divorce was apparently the hot topic on social media for their friends afterwards and ended up dividing them into two camps that now, some 7 years later, still don’t talk to each other.
I know happened verbally back in the day, but it was strange watching my daughter react to stuff she would see online from her “friends” with such venom.
Assuming what she wrote is true, I appreciate knowing what’s behind the facade on entertainers and other public figures. I don’t want my money or support going to anyone I feel is a terrible human being, if I can help it.
On the other hand, you have a person who lived through (from her perspective) a very traumatic experience that had a negative impact on her life, and even then she was afraid to leave. She decided to share that experience, in the hopes that someone else would read her account and possibly get out of an unhealthy relationship before the personal cost was too great. And even then, it took her four years before she was able to share this deeply personal and difficult experience.
This is not “living her life totally online”, or being “totally cool with sharing very private things with lots and lots of people”. This is a person opening herself up emotionally, because she believed that sharing was the right thing to do if it helps someone else.
I fail to see how that’s a bad thing.
Ugh, sorry to hear about all of this.
As the resident bowling guy, Chris Hardwick is the son of one of the all time great bowlers, Billy Hardwick, PBA Hall of Famer and still considered one of the best of all time. Chris was even on Chris Paul’s Celebrity bowling special that ESPN telecasts most years, I believe, and won one year back in like 2013.
Doesn’t really add anything to this, but sucks to find out people you thought were people you respected are capable of acting like this. I always thought he did a good job on the after show events that I saw, but don’t care if I ever see him again now, unless he uses his own mistakes to promote awareness or something else constructive in the future.