Aziz Ansari Doesn't Pick Up On "Non-Verbal Cues" and Gets Treated Like A Rapist

[Thumpalumpacus]

Firstly, the whole "white-knighting"-as-belittling thing is stupid. People are espousing opinions, and denigrating them on assumed motivations when you may or may not know why they're doing so is presumptuous at best and dishonest at worst. Secondly, any man worth his salt has a woman who doesn't need that. I know that's true in my own case.

It's not worth belittling if it's not actually white knighting.

I'm only referring to the guys who actually do white knight women. And what I mean by that is.... they get disingenously defensive of women in order to try to appeal to women more in hopes of getting laid more.

I'm not referring to people who aren't actually doing that.

The thing is is that that phrase is used as a pejorative to anyone supporting a woman online, whether for wanting to get laid, wanting to virtue-signal, wanting to self-image, or ... wait for it ... wanting to agree with her. Much like the term "snowflake", it's attained buzzword status, carrying its own luggage. But if you want to use it, you'll need to consider the energy it takes to haul that luggage, and whether it's worth it.

And it doesn't count when it's your significant other or crush either. Because I 100% white knight my girlfriends and crushes. Lol. I just can't help myself. I get so biased and defensive of people I have a strong affection for. I can't even help it. I can be totally aware of that bias and I still continue to do it.

I don't. A person's arguments stand or fall on their own merits ... lover, son, mother, whatever. If I don't agree with what's said, I won't support it. It helps when you've got a woman who doesn't need white-knighting.

---

Probably when he posed, hypocritically imo, as a "#metoo" kinda guy.

As for going to the police, we know that doesn't happen in many of these cases. Does that mean they never happened?

I'm not saying that "something" didn't happen. I guess the court of public opinion should decide this one since she was more intent on having it make national headlines, prior to seeking help from the law about it first. And if I was a defense attorney, this is one of the things that I would absolutely argue. Where were her priorities and what was her motive at the time she decided to forego the police in favor of a news article?

Well, here it is, the court of public opinion is deliberating.

As an aside, any defense attorney worth his salt would ask what she was wearing. That's always good mileage in these sorts of things.

The guy is creepy. He's probably really shitty in bed and if he did what she claimed he did, he's already been shamed in public for it. But I honestly see no actual crime here on his part. What I see is things went sour because she wasn't into whatever he was doing.

I think it's possible a crime was committed. If it was, I think it will never be prosecuted anyway, because her consented fellatio would be interpreted by a jury of people like you as consent for everything and no prosecutor would want to argue that case.

I have playfully batted Rob's hand away but that doesn't mean that he's sexually assaulting me. If I say I'm not in the mood or if I say stop it, he complies. 

Men can be dense and need way more than non-verbal cues with a lot of things.

I'm thinking you didn't really think this post through before you hit "send". You seem to have forgotten that you are, indeed, conversing with a man. Hopefully, that verbal cue will help you out. Lol, "dense", indeed!

I don't "comply" with my woman's wishes. I sense them and respect her feelings. It may only be a difference of emphasis, but it's important ... to us.

[Joods]

You must really be special, Thump. Again - not every man can "sense" what a woman wants. It is, after all, men who are always saying how complicated women are and that we are impossible to understand or figure out, meaning that we need to be direct and we need to state things clearly so that you all "get it".

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

The kind of men that need to be told "ffs stop it you creepo, I withdraw consent! I no longer give consent! Let me go!" shouldn't be having sex in the first place if you ask me, not that they ever could but the stars might align and they might get lucky, just like Ansari did, if it weren't for his celebrity status and his rich family he'd be lurking in some incel forums and sending hate messages to girls for not touching his pp.  

[LadyForCamus]

*popcorn*

[polymath257]

 For 30 minutes she endured kissing she did not like, and never spoke a word in protest.   

She did though, and more than once.

---

My daughters wouldn't have been in that situation to begin with.

Are you sure about that?

---

Hopefully my daughter would speak up when she doesn't like something.

Hopefully. Will you have that frank discussion with her about it?

By both her mother and me.

---

---

This doesn't feel right or good..and I don't want it - but...

-I think I'm supposed to.
-that this is me getting lucky.
-that I have to reciprocate now that she's performed a sex act on me.
-that I have to be consistent now that I've consensualy performed one sex act on her.
-that if I'm not consistent and reciprocal people will think I'm a fickle and selfish whore, or maybe just plain old gay.
-that I flat out don't know what to do, panic, and freeze.
-or maybe disgusted resignation to a perceived fate or state of affairs.  Chin up, it'll be over in a minute.

So...those are some of the ways that the illusion of control can evaporate.  Notions of expectation, consistency, reciprocity, negative consequence, and panic. Our biology and behavioral responses are incredibly subversive..in that position.

So, would it be fair to say, that in addition to educating women and young people with regard to the complexity of these various feelings and their implications during sexual encounters, it’s also important to be educating men (or any person in a position of power over others, to stay consistent with your comparison) about them as well?  Not every man in the world is going to be thoughtfully considering all of the above while he is smack dab in the middle of a blow job. Does that mean he’s a perv? 

In other words, do you think it would be fair to say that a little education in the other direction would go a long way in helping some men be more empathetic sexual partners...before we label them creeps and predators?  Or, do you think the person who is initiating the encounter should always intuitively understand all of these non-verbal feelings potentially at play?


Say, look what happens when we engage in open dialogue on a subject instead of letting the conversation get shut down by blanket accusations of victim blaming?  😏

Yes, of course. Both boys and girls need to learn both how to listen and how to speak up. Communication requires both.

[Cyberman]

Bottom line: He was wrong to have pressured her. She was wrong to have made this story public in accusation of him having sexually assaulted her.

If things went down as she says they did....and again, Mr. Ansari isn't disputing her account of what happened, including her statement about not wanting to feel forced; his only dissent has been that he thought she was "cool with it all"....then I believe she was justified in speaking the TRUTH and exposing this "fierce ally" and "dedicated advocate" for being the FRAUD that actually he is.

I can't add any more to what I've already said about how monumentally fucked up that is.

[polymath257]

Not really, but okay. How does her attempting (unsuccessfully) to avoid him while naked broaden this to the proper context?

People with no interest in sex are generally clothed when they're hanging out with a friend.

I've been in many situations with naked friends who were not interested in sex. And yes, of the appropriate gender. It is a matter of communication. But then, I have had a lot of friends that are nudists.

I have a very dear friend who I give massages (naked) to and stay at hotels with and go into a hot tub (both naked) with. We have never had sex because she has clearly stated she doesn't want to. Again, it is about communication.

[Cyberman]

Wouldn't matter anyway, whether or not it was assault. In these sorts of cases, usually the accusation is enough. Maybe not in the legal arena, but most definitely in the public one. Some years ago, a relative of mine was accused of sexual assault on minors. He denied it, the statements of the alleged victims were all over the place, forensic and other investigation came back negative, and one of the alleged victims even came out and gave details of why they were making the allegations (hint: compensation money). Yet my relative still served nine years after being coerced into pleading guilty by his own solicitor. His name is on the sex offenders register for the rest of his life.

But despite knowing all the context, there were people at the time - and still are - who said they don't care about all that and that he obviously must be guilty, because why else would the kids say such things? Why would the police have locked him up? Phrases like "no smoke without fire" were thrown about even by people who have known him for years.

Wow that's really shocking.

He was advised to plead guilty even when there was no evidence against him and the accuser admitted it was lies? Crazy. Just goes to show that "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't seem to apply once the witch hunt starts.

That's what I meant when I said that in these kinds of cases, the accusation is enough for a conviction; if only in the public mind. This whole thread is testament to that.

In my relative's case, he was basically pressured into a guilty plea in order to get a lighter sentence than if it had gone to trial and returned a guilty verdict, which happens far more than most people probably realise. That plus he didn't want the whole family to suffer a drawn-out court battle and the trial by gossip that comes with it. Put simply, there was far more going on than pleading guilty because he actually was guilty.

[polymath257]

You're already in a relationship. You bring people into your house who, presumably, understand this relationship. Way fucking different than a first date at someone else's house where you just get naked. Furthermore, I assume you also have sex with these other people you bring into your relationship. Nudity is accepted because you have an established sexual relationship.

Willfully obtuse, I tell you. Being unwilling to accept the subtleties of situations other than your own makes this conversation impossible.

Why would you assume that they have sex with these other people? Just because they get naked and watch TV?

---

I find the newly discovered fact that Tiz routinely has multiple girls round, gets naked with them, and watches movies, to be an infinitely more interesting discussion that the current one.

Truthfully, I wish I had more friends like that.

[Amarok]

No one would have sex ever if sex had to always be preceded with the question "Can we have sex now?".

It's worked for me