I don't particularly like Aziz Ansari. I don't agree with his politics, he seems smug and self-righteous, and he isn't very funny. And to some extent, I do like the #METOO movement, because a lot of sexual predators have been exposed through it. But one story on a website I've never heard of until this week, babe.net (apparently a site for sex stories too sad to make it into a porno magazine?), has both unfairly classified Ansari as a sexual predator and severely set back--or possibly accelerated the slow death of--the #METOO movement (for reference, the story is here: https://babe.net/2018/01/13/aziz-ansari-28355).
For those of you who haven't read it, the writer of the article tells a detailed story of a woman who went on a date with Ansari and claims that Ansari sexually assaulted her on that date. Only, the story does not describe sexual assault, and now people are debating whether or not what occurred was actually sexual assault, when it clearly wasn't, which is unfair and detrimental to victims of actual sexual assault. Ansari, a raging Leftist, has been vocal about supporting sexual assault victims and the Time's Up movement. While the story does paint a picture of someone who is self-absorbed and does not treat women well, it's also unfair for his dirty laundry to be aired to the world, and unjust that the story calls him a sexual predator.
Apparently, when Ansari and his date ("Grace") got back to his apartment after dinner, things escalated quickly. They got undressed within minutes, Ansari performed oral sex on her, and then she performed oral sex on him. There is no mention that he forced her to perform oral sex on him in any way. Even if she was hesitant, the article mentions nothing that makes this sound like anything other than voluntary and consensual. The article goes on to describe a weird and creepy sexual thing that Ansari kept doing, and then includes this gem of a quote, "I know I was physically giving off cues
that I wasn’t interested. I don’t think that was noticed at all, or if
it was, it was ignored."
Grace... You're naked in his apartment and you just sucked his dick. You were giving off cues that you weren't interested? Look, guys are pretty bad at picking up on social cues in general. Not all of them. I am. And I would imagine it's particularly hard to pick up on a cue that a girl isn't interested in having sex with you when she's NAKED IN YOUR APARTMENT AND JUST BLEW YOU. Oh, and especially when you're a famous person. I imagine that what was going through Aziz Ansari's head was something along the lines of that he had a girl naked in his apartment who just blew him and that he's Aziz Ansari and what girl wouldn't want to have sex with him? While there are plenty of moral issues that can be pointed to in that sentence, it isn't at all surprising in the context of our culture. If this girl wanted the date to end, saying no and then getting dressed and leaving would have been the best cue that she wasn't interested in having sex.
Instead of leaving, she blew him again. Nudity itself, of course, does not
always mean that someone is interested in sex, but nudity coupled with
oral sex is a pretty solid non-verbal cue of sexual interest. She went into the bathroom for a few minutes, came back out, still naked, and performed oral sex on Ansari again at his behest. Then, finally, when he once again said that he wanted to have sexual intercourse, she said no and put her clothes back on. He made out with her again and tried to take it further, and she said she was going to call herself a car and leave. Ansari called a car for her instead, and she left, crying in the car on the way home. The article continues, "Grace compares Ansari’s sexual mannerisms to those of a horny, rough,
entitled 18-year-old. She said so to her friends via text after the date
and said the same thing to me when we spoke."
Yeah, that sounds about right actually. And her actions sounded like they were on par with that same age range, as she continued to be naked and perform oral sex on him rather than stopping the whole encounter cold, getting dressed, and leaving like a grown woman who didn't want to have sex. Maybe it was because she felt she had no choice but to stay because Ansari is famous, or maybe she simply regretted what was happening while or just after it was happening, but what doesn't sound about right is Grace's ultimate conclusion. "It took a really long time for me to validate this
as sexual assault. I was debating if this was an awkward
sexual experience or sexual assault. And that’s why I confronted so many
of my friends and listened to what they had to say, because I wanted
validation that it was actually bad." Yeah, it was bad, and it was an awkward sexual experience, and I feel bad for the girl and how she feels, and I think that Aziz Ansari acted immaturely and treated her like shit, but unless a lot of key information is missing from that story, it was not sexual assault.
We can't pretend that something is sexual assault just because the alleged victim says it is. There is no such thing as this "Your Truth" thing that Oprah Weinstein-Kisser Winfrey speaks of. There's just truth and lies. This "Your Truth" thing has ushered in an era of, at best, biased and, at worst, fake news. Our culture is not in a good place. And it's also not in a good place because of the rampant casual sex and sex outside of marriage either, but that's my opinion, and it's not something I can or would want to control. Everyone should be in control of their own sex lives, as long as the sex involves consenting adults. I don't care what you do in the privacy of your own home as long as it's legal, and I don't want to hear about Aziz Ansari's private sex life either. But now that it's public, Grace should have simply said no, got dressed, and left the apartment as soon as she felt uncomfortable. Ansari wasn't forcing her to stay there, and though he was acting immaturely and aggressively, he wasn't forcing her to perform sex acts on him either.
"It was fun meeting you last night," Ansari texted Grace the next day. Grace responded, "Last night might’ve been fun for you,
but it wasn’t for me. You ignored clear non-verbal
cues; [who uses a semicolon in a text?] you kept going with advances. I want to make sure you’re aware so maybe the next girl
doesn’t have to cry on the ride home." Grace, perhaps the next time you're in a situation where you're on a date and naked and don't want to have sex, maybe throw in a lot more verbal cues, and maybe don't send mixed non-verbal cues, such as giving head. Like
most men, I've missed plenty of non-verbal cues that girls were not
interested in me, as well as non-verbal cues that they were interested in me. I'm not very good with cues. I'm much better when someone tells me something directly. In fact, maybe nix the cues altogether and just be very direct and say no, get dressed, and leave.
I don't like the actions of either of the two people in this story. I wonder if we can get President Trump to exile them both to a shithole country. Maybe one that the Clintons made worse, like Haiti. Nah, never mind. Outside of the corrupt people in power positions, the people there are probably too good for them. They deserve to stay in New York City.