zoogs

Oh, there are quite a few -- IMO, awful -- op-eds about both this and #MeToo in general. There's the Atlantic piece, that French outlet, the recent WaPo one ('ladies, let's slooow down on this', or something like that) that was eviscerated by a response piece... Sometimes they're written by women and it's unfortunate how quickly that gets seized upon. When a lot of prevailing feminist commentary has been invisible to us (for example, if you find yourself reacting with surprise and "wow? people feel that way?" or "who says that" to big themes feminist twitter has been screaming about), it's...selective, at best, to keep sharing this stuff, invoking the authority of "female feminists" and going Hmm, interesting. These pieces do get responded to, after all. Here's an op-ed I do agree with: And another very good thread: Mixed signals is not yes, btw. I read the account and cringed, repeatedly, at the choices Aziz made. Especially at the tone of his text. It's hard to buy that as wholly genuine confusion. He could have, or should have known enough to stop, but he was preoccupied the entire time with getting the deed done.

What flag is this?

Could've solved this before. Why didn't we? Gee, I wonder. Same bill that man-in-search-of-spine Marco Rubio ran hard away from and spent a while apologizing for, IIRC.

Yeah, I think I saw that as a mixture of Kylo, fractured both mentally and physically, toying with Finn up until Finn lands a blow on him. After that he dispatches Finn quickly (and non-lethally, for our convenience). He's got it in his head that this lightsaber is his birthright and he needs to act out his role in this grand, glorious fight to win it. There are aspects of other lightsaber battles that also don't make enough sense when presented on screen, at least to me, and I kind of have to think around them. For the most part we don't see this "canceling" out effect; one guy decides it's time for a force throw or choke and just does it. It's not like lightning, where sometimes the target deflects it but you see how they do that. The out of universe reason of course is this is how they drew up the fight, and when they need Obi-Wan to go flying, he does. But given they have all these tools, I don't see why every lightsaber fight isn't spar until you force choke someone and then force toss your lightsaber through them.

V good thread: https://twitter.com/ElizabethGChang/status/953019126825484289

Wow, we're really doing this. Here's the thing. There was a deal. Trump rejected it. And it's because he's racist. The Republicans who like what's going on here are also racist. The ones who say, "oh, his language was a mistake" but who fundamentally agree with him and have been arguing as such are racist. The ones who, when Trump accidentally agrees with Democrats that he supports a clean DACA bill, remind him that it's their position that he doesn't, are racist. When this is all over and Trump is but a memory, these people will still be around trying to keep black and brown people out of this country, and they'll do it politely, and they'll sound and look smart, and I can't wait (not) to see how much of the no-party NeverTrumpers come flocking home to whatever the name of the party is at that point. We all know Trump is a crude, ignorant crank. His behavior can't be the only reason we oppose his policy. We're far past the moment where it's OK to remain on the sidelines, throw your hands up in the air and say, gee whiz, all these sides organizing and none of them suits me perfectly. It's not a dang fashion accessory and it's not a game. You won't find perfect, down-the-line alignment but you can choose to stop basic terrible things that do matter. /rant

+1, to you both! To respond to "Nothing I have said implies this"...first, I think the larger conversation is more important. I'm far more interested in seeing that furthered than nailing individuals to bad opinions. There are these common refrains and we should discuss why they're bad, what place they come from and if they don't reflect your opinions, great. Second, I think priorities matter. There are plenty of folks whose primary or only response to this is, well, is that really a crime. Should he be 'killed' over it. This is missing the boat in a large way. The number of women who can come out now and talk about how they struggled to navigate these situations they thought were safe, etc. It's eye-opening and valuable. There's a lot of perspective that really was never obvious to me, and now there's a lot more visibility to the issue. That's wonderful.

Wow, OK, man. I think what we really have to take from this story -- and others like it! -- is just how difficult it can be to find an out, even if you want to. Speaking of common themes, "why didn't she leave?" is another one. She did leave, eventually. She also trusted him, and it takes a while I think for someone to really process just how thoroughly wrong that was. Numerous times he reassured her and made her feel safe again, before returning to the sex stuff. I think there's a strong desire not to come off as cold, rude, or standoffish -- cultural programming, and very unfortunate. I think at some point you just try to think of a way to safely get yourself out of there. A few people online have said it better than I could. I think what I find most convincing about it all is how so many women see this as heartbreakingly relatable. It makes me wonder why we'd continue to ask questions as if they had no answer. So, yeah. Understand that she can still be distraught in this scenario. To shift the focus again to what I feel is a more appropriate place, the question really ought to be why didn't he stop? A phrase that's coming up a lot here is "enthusiastic consent". Really like that term.

This is exactly what I'm saying people should do. And the answer should not be "hey, there's nothing wrong with this picture. It's not a crime, now is it?" -- just because to say otherwise would mean some real soul-searching about those personal experiences. That's my focus in this conversation. What's really on trial here is whether that stuff, as presented, was that wrong. It is. I think I'd say I'm really glad for people, both women and men, who are coming into the dating age in this environment as compared to before.

As long as you understand that brushing aside whether there is or isn't consent isn't "ruining" anything about sex worth preserving, I'm good with that. There are actually people who do feel this way, it's really incredible. Some even take it up a notch and wonder how the human race will continue. Look, I think the problem is when every time a woman voices her concerns or we want to have a conversation about bad behavior it gets reflexively reframed into a conversation about protecting men. This is fundamentally a conversation about how women are routinely, casually victimized -- even by well-meaning men who seem like they above all should get it. So I have an extreme level of exasperation for the response that goes, well actually, the man is the victim here. I think the intentions are actually extremely clear, which is to further this ongoing conversation we've been having as a nation about our sex culture -- from abuse and assault and harassment to just plain bad behavior.

It's actually what a lot of people are saying. It comes from the exact same place as what you're saying, which is this idea you've repeated several times in conversations such as these -- "I don't know what I'd even do if I had to go on the dating scene again, etc, it's all so complicated now". Frankly, I think that's being unfair to yourself, as I really think you'd be nothing but a gentleman -- really. It's a common response, and that shouldn't be surprising if you came up with a variant of it. The rules are changing, isn't that unfair? The response is it was always unfair, skewed heavily in one direction, so yes, relative to that the rules are less "kind" but there was a problem in viewing the priors as "good" to begin with. I think a lot of guys concerned about this aren't giving themselves enough credit. A lot of the people whose opinions I agree with on these issues talk about this, and you can see such views in the responses they get. But I also think you'll see it in some of the prominent critiques of #MeToo. It's one of the common themes, along with "witch hunt/McCarthyism" and "but what if she's a fame-seeking harlot" -- really didn't think it would go under the radar, but hope it's clear now. I mean, is that really the important thing here? The man has nobody but himself to blame. He'll find his way out of it or he won't. Our society is a long, ugly history of placing protecting men's careers above women's degradation. No need for that to continue.

There's a strong element of "sex/relationships/etc are going to be ruined now" in the response to a lot of this stuff and that needs to be called out for the garbage it is. If that's sex being ruined, then what these people refer to as "sex" was never very good. I don't give a damn about Aziz's career, honestly, and I say this as a fan. He's a quality comedian and actor who built his brand on being this super woke feminist. If this brings his image irreparably crashing down, he should maybe drag himself in front of a mirror. I wouldn't be so confident to call this "not sexual assault", although I don't think the woman indicated any interest in pressing charges. It was still wrong. Very, very wrong. And that's what matters.

We have to stop interpreting speaking out about awful experiences and how we should start seeing them as wrong as an attempt to just ruin a man's career.

First, I think the message here is "this behavior is wrong, please be able to see it as wrong and don't do it", not whether or not Aziz committed a crime. Second, I think you get into pretty hazy territory re: consent if the other party's interest doesn't matter to you. Let's for sake of argument put aside whether or not Aziz did everything as described and consider it as a hypothetical. It's a story of a guy who did not care whether or not she was up for it. Consent can be tricky. If you're going to be the party who keeps the encounter going, then be damn sure that you have it, continuously. You can ask! Some of the comments that struck me most about this (and similar) stories is how often a woman just goes along with it -- even sex -- because they're taking stock of the situation and wondering if it isn't going to cause more blowback or even physical danger to attempt otherwise. So yeah, go to lengths to avoid creating that perception. And please, stop it with the "I'm glad I'm not single" junk (sorry, but it is). Be glad if the single men out there learn to be more mindful than the dips#!t in this story. I like how Nebfanatic puts it -- it's about culture. It's not a satisfactory one, to say the least, and it should change.

I will go out on a limb and venture that it's on Aziz that she went home crying in an Uber and not on her. But what was he supposed to do? Stop. It ain't rocket science.

@NM11046, thanks!

How is a guy like Dinesh not pushed to the absolute margins of our society and made a pariah? How do you do things like call women horse-faced (I recognize this is not a conservative quality only) and still have an audience? Get the eff outta here, Dinesh.

@NebfanaticThank you! It's not OK. As much as this is about profound disappointment in Aziz, whose career was built on being exactly not this type of guy, I think the below captures it perfectly: I think a lot of us recognize the broad contours of this situation as normal and everyday: guy keeps trying to get woman to 'yes', woman doesn't seem interested, guy keeps doing sex things. I don't know, though. The extent of his disregard for her interest in the activity over his own...if that's common, it absolutely should not be. What should be coming out of all this is a lot of looking at what either we have done or think is OK and go, gosh, maybe it wasn't. Not to double down, which is of course easier. I don't know what articles the rest of you have been reading. The original is from babe.net, and it's about the woman repeatedly searching for ways to shut down the encounter while Aziz plowed ahead with shoving his fingers down her throat and gesturing at his penis.

Zero mistake on Trump's part. He intended the term, he intends its meaning, and it's his thoroughly racist mind and racist policy that is the problem, not his crude choice of language. I don't know if everyone who backs Trump is racist. I wonder what it would take to be outside of that framework, truly, and still support the man. For the rest, they'd have to be pretty OK with the racist policy and intentions of the GOP. What could make them that way, if not racism? There's vanishing distinctions, if any. Relatedly, how on earth do you ignore a user? I can't find a link to do that either in the thread or on their profile page. I don't remember it being this hard!

I hadn't thought about the ship thing. It's interesting. The Force is actually a bit more problematic for me. If these guys can just fling their enemies through the air at will, why do they bother with lightsaber battle? I say 'problematic' -- it's not that much of a problem.

I think my suggestion would just be to present this story as Trump had an affair and paid off the woman to try to keep it quiet. It’s not a detail that needs to be stricken from the story, and you’re right that this is really another conversation altogether. People are referred to by their occupation a lot, but I just feel like there’s something especially dehumanizing when it’s a woman in adult film, or a sex worker, etc.

Yup, agree. I just have a small issue with all the headlines being of the same mature here. There must be another way to frame the story!

Grateful to Mieke Eoyang for following up her tweet, which introduced me to the one BRB posted, with a full column on Politico: "It means to some, their mental picture of an American doesn’t include you": https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/12/trump-diversity-us-government-216310 Here are two tweets spotlighting and supporting her article from a white man and a white woman (both media people in the natsec/foreign policy areas), which frankly I think will help make her case to a broader audience: