Even The Wolf likely can't clean up Harvey Weinstein's pending troubles

This piece may be more to your liking...

"I’m a sexual consent educator. Here’s what’s missing in the Aziz Ansari conversation."

I’ve lost track of the number of people in both low and high places who’ve written that the encounter was “fair game.” The response reveals the deeply ingrained ways our culture believes a woman’s resistance is a fun challenge for men to overcome, and that “consent” is a free pass one can bully out of a woman if persistent or crafty enough.

....
It’s impossible to know for sure what Ansari was thinking on the night in question, but this is a seasoned performer who knows how to read a crowd, and a “relationship expert” to boot. It strains credulity to imagine he truly thought she was excited about what was happening between them. What’s much more likely is that he didn’t care how she felt one way or the other and treated her boundaries as a challenge. Either way, his alleged behavior was dehumanizing.

 

As the interview wound down, the reporter, a young woman, asked me the surprisingly personal question off the record. She wanted me to teach her how to know what she wanted in bed.

 

I think certain of our members might be overstating the impact of "think pieces" versus the impact of the original piece, which seems to have generated an enormous amount of attention and readership. I imagine some significant percentage of the people who read the original piece couldn't give a shit what Caitlin Flanagan or anyone else has to say.

 

Eh, it's pretty ponderous.

Here's what the Washington Post wrote:

Opinion | Babe’s Aziz Ansari piece was a gift to anyone who wants to derail #MeToo

I would suggest there’s a reason this story appeared in babe, rather than the New York Times or BuzzFeed or the Los Angeles Times or, yes, The Washington Post. One of the reasons is that, however Grace now thinks of the encounter, what happened isn’t sexual assault or anything close to it by most legal or common-sense standards. And bad dates — including terrible ones that leave one person feeling humiliated — aren’t actually newsworthy, even when they happen to famous people.

The New York criminal code must be an outlier, because, again, here is what Grace said:

“He probably moved my hand to his dick five to seven times. He really kept doing it after I moved it away.”

And here is how the New York law reads:

New York Penal Law 130.55
A person is guilty of sexual abuse in the third degree when he or she subjects another person to sexual contact without the latter's consent;

Sexual abuse in the third degree is a class B misdemeanor.

New York Penal Law 130.03
3. “Sexual contact” means any touching of the sexual or other intimate parts of a person for the purpose of gratifying sexual desire of either party. It includes the touching of the actor by the victim, as well as the touching of the victim by the actor, whether directly or through clothing, as well as the emission of ejaculate by the actor upon any part of the victim, clothed or unclothed.

 

moved towards his dick, not on his dick.

 

You should go represent her. Just look for the Brooklyn-based photog with a Contax T3 film camera.

 

If the Atlantic, Washington Post, New York Times, and others who have engaged in whataboutism here had come out strongly against Aziz Ansari and his behavior instead, then "Master of None" would be done. These reaction pieces absolutely shape the perception.

 

No, "to" his dick, not "towards."

 

Did her hand touch his dick through clothing?

 

I read it that way. If not, then it's at least attempted third-degree sexual abuse.

 

We have no idea if "Master of None" is done. It's at the end of its second season. No one knows if there will be a third.

 

Is anyone here, having read the mitigating response of the think pieces, casting Aziz Ansari to be the lead in their sweet romantic comedy? Anyone?