> "I felt being taken advantage of that he had unprotected sex with me when I was intoxicated. Nothing felt right. I remember panicking and crying."
After reading above and then seeing the part about "insisting" I feel there was more behind this statement. The author's circumstances was also very easy to be taken advantage of. I'm not woman but my guess is there probably is shock involved in situations like this. People are not acting in reasonable ways when in shock..
Slightly later she writes "I maintained friendship with him for a few months after May, because I was convinced that it was all consensual". I think it is something of a philosophical issue to debate about whether you can think you consented and later determine you didn't. It's also strange to me that it takes months and consultation with a therapist to determine if you did or did not consent.
Have you ever been in an abusive relationship? Or seen one firsthand? People can be made to believe all sorts of things that aren't true by charismatic or powerful people. It may take them some time to realize they are being tricked or abused.
You absolutely can be told you consented, and trust that person's word, and realize later that no, actually you had not. It's just convenient for the abuser for you to believe you had.
> it's also strange to me that it takes months and consultation with a therapist to determine if you did or did not consent.
No, this is not strange at all. Psychology is a non-falsifiable "science" with foundational literature that is littered with reproducibility scandals.
Psychological therapists are roughly as scientific as tarot card readers, and this woman's therapist had a full three years of time to gaslight her memories.
It's certainly possible that Pretty did what he's accused of. But any time you hear "years" and "therapist" in the context of an abuse allegation, be skeptical. The entire field is pure charlatanry.
Being taken advantage of while intoxicated and while there was a significant power imbalance between the two. She was not in a position to give consent there -- being intoxicated, being in a place that was being rented Pretty (and she could risk being out on the street if she refused), having no money and luggage on hand, being the mentee of Pretty (or believing she could be), etc.
She ended up crying and panicking. That generally isn't the outcome of a consensual relationship.
She was unable to resist his advances, for various reasons listed. While it doesn't sound like she beat him off with a stick, it does sounds like she shut down, dissociated, and didn't say "no." Consent isn't presumed; consent is not the lack of a "no", consent is the presence of free, ongoing, and enthusiastic yes. Even if she reluctantly agreed, it consent wasn't freely given in light of the power imbalance and intoxication. Even if she reluctantly agreed, that isn't enthusiastic consent. Even if she wanted sex, but he refused to use the protection she wanted him to use, that's not ongoing consent. But she clearly didn't want sex with this dude; not like that
She is definitely the kind of woman where a man shouldn't be making such advances. Let her be the acting party. She would have been telling another story if she were on top and had taken the initiative.
One of the simplest ways for a man to avoid the problems of consent where he suspects there may be is to be the one from whom consent is needed.
That is the absolute safest other than leaving. If you as a man attempt to get consent that may not be something you're able to obtain. She might be intoxicated and unable to consent. You might not know that. However what's safe is to let anyone initiate sex with you while you remain passive and let them have sex with you.
If you leave then I would strongly advise to say it is because you are feeling sick and think it's something you ate. Go to the toilet first and say you have the runs. That will cushion her pride and make her just glad you left. No chance of something mean-spirited.
> "I felt being taken advantage of that he had unprotected sex with me when I was intoxicated. Nothing felt right. I remember panicking and crying."
After reading above and then seeing the part about "insisting" I feel there was more behind this statement. The author's circumstances was also very easy to be taken advantage of. I'm not woman but my guess is there probably is shock involved in situations like this. People are not acting in reasonable ways when in shock..
Sex was had while she did not consent, she mentions in the fifth paragraph.
Slightly later she writes "I maintained friendship with him for a few months after May, because I was convinced that it was all consensual". I think it is something of a philosophical issue to debate about whether you can think you consented and later determine you didn't. It's also strange to me that it takes months and consultation with a therapist to determine if you did or did not consent.
Have you ever been in an abusive relationship? Or seen one firsthand? People can be made to believe all sorts of things that aren't true by charismatic or powerful people. It may take them some time to realize they are being tricked or abused.
You absolutely can be told you consented, and trust that person's word, and realize later that no, actually you had not. It's just convenient for the abuser for you to believe you had.
32 replies →
> It's also strange to me that it takes months and consultation with a therapist to determine if you did or did not consent.
It would have been strange to me.
But I was recently victim of emotional abuse by someone I admired and trusted. And it is not strange to me anymore.
Abusers are sophisticated. Trust is a complex thing.
> it's also strange to me that it takes months and consultation with a therapist to determine if you did or did not consent.
No, this is not strange at all. Psychology is a non-falsifiable "science" with foundational literature that is littered with reproducibility scandals.
Psychological therapists are roughly as scientific as tarot card readers, and this woman's therapist had a full three years of time to gaslight her memories.
It's certainly possible that Pretty did what he's accused of. But any time you hear "years" and "therapist" in the context of an abuse allegation, be skeptical. The entire field is pure charlatanry.
That is not what she says there. She says she felt uncomfortable and taken advantage of.
Being taken advantage of while intoxicated and while there was a significant power imbalance between the two. She was not in a position to give consent there -- being intoxicated, being in a place that was being rented Pretty (and she could risk being out on the street if she refused), having no money and luggage on hand, being the mentee of Pretty (or believing she could be), etc.
She ended up crying and panicking. That generally isn't the outcome of a consensual relationship.
5 replies →
She was unable to resist his advances, for various reasons listed. While it doesn't sound like she beat him off with a stick, it does sounds like she shut down, dissociated, and didn't say "no." Consent isn't presumed; consent is not the lack of a "no", consent is the presence of free, ongoing, and enthusiastic yes. Even if she reluctantly agreed, it consent wasn't freely given in light of the power imbalance and intoxication. Even if she reluctantly agreed, that isn't enthusiastic consent. Even if she wanted sex, but he refused to use the protection she wanted him to use, that's not ongoing consent. But she clearly didn't want sex with this dude; not like that
She is definitely the kind of woman where a man shouldn't be making such advances. Let her be the acting party. She would have been telling another story if she were on top and had taken the initiative.
One of the simplest ways for a man to avoid the problems of consent where he suspects there may be is to be the one from whom consent is needed.
That is the absolute safest other than leaving. If you as a man attempt to get consent that may not be something you're able to obtain. She might be intoxicated and unable to consent. You might not know that. However what's safe is to let anyone initiate sex with you while you remain passive and let them have sex with you.
If you leave then I would strongly advise to say it is because you are feeling sick and think it's something you ate. Go to the toilet first and say you have the runs. That will cushion her pride and make her just glad you left. No chance of something mean-spirited.
Insisting could mean doing it in this context. English is weird.