Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

A reasonable person in that circumstance would not do what she did. A less than fully matured adult, manipulated by a reckless media person, would take the actions she did.

If only a man had been around to tell her.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

If only a man had been around to tell her.

Not sure what you think this adds to the conversation. When you have a thought on this subject, presumably your reaction is to disregard it because you're a man. But then you should disregard that reaction too. How do you get beyond that vicious cycle?

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

How? What does he do to enforce this privacy right? If he can't enforce it, in what sense does it exist?

How? What is the sanction for this wrongdoing? If there is none, in what sense should she not have done it?

Honestly, this is probably the dumbest stand I've ever seen you take. Because there is no ability to enforce an expectation and no ability to punish a violation, it doesn't exist?

How do you argue this and then, in the same breath, argue that what he did was wrong? She couldn't enforce her expectation that he act like a gentlemen and she has no sanction for his wrongdoing.

This is ridiculous.

TM

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not sure what you think this adds to the conversation.

This conversation is over.

When you have a thought on this subject, presumably your reaction is to disregard it because you're a man. But then you should disregard that reaction too. How do you get beyond that vicious cycle?

His thought is not disregarded. His substitution of his judgment of what happened for her's is.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not sure what you think this adds to the conversation. When you have a thought on this subject, presumably your reaction is to disregard it because you're a man. But then you should disregard that reaction too. How do you get beyond that vicious cycle?

g.o.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

How do you argue this and then, in the same breath, argue that what he did was wrong? She couldn't enforce her expectation that he act like a gentlemen and she has no sanction for his wrongdoing.

She's not enforcing it? Ty and Sebby told me his career is in grave danger.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by Adder

grave danger.

Is there any other kind?

I hate when he says this - of course there are other kinds of danger besides "grave".

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

I'm not sure why a "real conversation" is about me but not Ansari...

You're really starting to sound like a dick. We have exhausted the conversation about Ansari. I am trying to ask you to articulate whether you recognize an expectation of privacy rights between two individuals. You seem to only be able to think about the topic in the most one-dimensional "can someone expect privacy if the other person doesn't like how they behaved way." You're acting like a tool.

Originally Posted by Adder

...but if I leave someone feeling victimized I hope out of self interest they will accept an apology and keep it to themselves, but I do not expect that nor would I feel victimized if they told others. Whether that's friends or authorities or the press, if I was someone who interested them, it's my fault if I read the signals wrong.

Again, you have limited the conversation to when one of the parties feels victimized. We all understand where you stand on this.

Originally Posted by Adder

You guys both seem to have an "ask the same question repeatedly because you don't like the answer" thing going on...

Wrong. You keep reading into every question we ask you the same hypo because that's the only one you want to discuss.

Originally Posted by Adder

...but I go into those experiences with the expectation that she will tell someone else about them. Most likely, it's just her friends and assuming things go reasonably okay, she will share only discretely, but should she feel violated I'd expect a wider audience. Were I a celebrity, that wider audience would potentially include the press.

I think you're full of shit. I think you would be pissed and would feel betrayed if your wife went around telling everyone she knew that your dick is small. You sound like Atticus when he says he wouldn't mind if his wife confided all of her personal feelings in another man and not him.

Originally Posted by Adder

Me? It's reasonable to assume I won't talk about mere proclivities except perhaps to semi-anonymous imaginary internet lawyer friends. Partners? It's not reasonable, nor realistic to assume they won't talk about proclivities with friends, and violations with authorities and, if I were a celebrity, the media.

I think this is ridiculous. But maybe you're just insane. We're not talking about one night stands. We're not talking about what is possible. We're talking about the expectations one has when entering into a relationship. I think everyone on this board believes that part of being in a relationship is an understanding that there are certain personal things you do not discuss with other people. And celebrities can and should have those expectations. And their feelings of betrayal if that is violated are legitimate.

Originally Posted by Adder

Celebrities who leave partners feeling victimized should expect that said partners may talk to the media.

JFC. We heard you. Since you can't possibly agree that there are actions which one person may believe shouldn't leave the other victimized, this point is no longer worth discussing with you.

Originally Posted by Adder

They have zero enforceable privacy rights regardless, as long as the revelations are truthful. This is the case regardless of the depth of relationship.

There you go again, trying to bring it back to a very specific set of circumstances. Whatever.

Originally Posted by Adder

The person who reveals consensual kinky behavior is a bad person, but the person who is exposed nonetheless has no enforceable privacy right against truthful exposure.

This sentence is almost completely useless. I feel like I'm talking to Sebby. No one here is arguing about enforceability rights. But the fact that you just said a person who reveals personal relationship information is a bad person means I was right about where you really stand.

Originally Posted by Adder

Ansari is accused of wrongdoing. That you or I think the wrongdoing isn't actionable doesn't make the revelation of alleged wrongdoing itself a wrong.

What if she felt victimized because he didn't drive her home and revealed all of his personal, sexual attributes and tendencies? What if she misheard something he said and did an interview about everything? And if you say one more time that he can't enforce his expectation of privacy, let's just be done.

Originally Posted by Adder

I can't really believe that's even a point of discussion among lawyers. Surely y'all have seen meritorious claims that have nonetheless not resulted in successful awards. Or sincere complaints that while bad did not rise to the level of recovery. This isn't even remotely controversial in our non-fee shifting system. People are allowed to make allegations that don't bear fruit.

I like how you shift to a purely legal analysis when everyone knows we're talking about how one should act and people's relationship expectations.

Originally Posted by Adder

If you think her claims are entirely without merit, it was an entirely shitty thing to do. I don't.

Wait. Are you still talking legally or are you now talking about her expectations?

Originally Posted by Adder

He asked and respected her no? She would be shitty for revealing it but he would still have no privacy right to stop her from truthfully doing so.

No one is asking about his ability to stop her. You are a very strange man.

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

His thought is not disregarded. His substitution of his judgment of what happened for her's is.

Sebby wasn't substituting his judgment of what happened. He has a view about whether she should have cooperated with the Babe reporter.

Unless I misunderstood you, you were suggesting that Sebby's views on this can be disregarded because he's a man. Pot, kettle, no?

Originally Posted by Adder

She's not enforcing it? Ty and Sebby told me his career is in grave danger.

I didn't say that and I don't think that's true. The greater conversation that you think we need to have is so important that you'll put words in my mouth to have it with me?

[SEC_Chick]

So I think we can all mainly agree that I am mostly correct that we should disregard Adder on this now. And not because he's a man.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

She's not enforcing it? Ty and Sebby told me his career is in grave danger.

I'm on ignore?

I've a FB "friend" whom I don't really know. She is studying for a Master's in human sexuality, so she is forever posting about sexuality as a positive thing. She also sees herself as a feminist, and constantly quotes and posts things from men she finds where ever. She points out all the wrong things the men have said and done. She explains what right-thinking men should think and do. Except I don't have the first clue as to how to behave in the next situation, because her take on the specific situations seem tortured beyond belief. I'm fairly certain a high percentage of women would disagree with the faults she points to. But these are her legitimate feelings. If I went on a date with her and violated some line that only she saw I'm subject to criticism?

Just to see the various female takes on the Aziz stuff shows there is not some objective thing he did wrong. Given that how women might see a situation varies, what is a man to do? Follow the extreme of my FB friend? Well, I can't figure that out, so that would probably lead to me sitting waiting for women to approach me (High School all over again!). Of course, I'd be waiting a long time. So if men took her views to heart her degree wouldn't be of much use, because there would be a lot less sex going on.

My parents raised me to care for people in general and to respect women in particular. If I were a celebrity I'd feel wronged if I was the subject of a hit piece because of a woman's subjective view, which departs from where a reasonable person would see the situation.

All men bad. All women good?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

All women good?

The next time you encounter someone who tells you that you need to just listen to women on these subjects, hand them Caitlin Flanagan's article in the Atlantic and stand back.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I'm on ignore?

I've a FB "friend" whom I don't really know. She is studying for a Master's in human sexuality, so she is forever posting about sexuality as a positive thing. She also sees herself as a feminist, and constantly quotes and posts things from men she finds where ever. She points out all the wrong things the men have said and did. She explains what right-thinking men should think and do. Except I don't have the first clue as to how to behave in the next situation, because her take on the specific situations seem tortured beyond belief. I'm fairly certain a high percentage of women would disagree with the faults she points to. But these are her legitimate feelings. If I went on a date with her and violated some line that only she saw I'm subject to criticism?

Just to see the various female takes on the Aziz stuff shows there is not some objective thing he did wrong. Given that how women might see a situation varies, what is a man to do?

Long porn, Lubriderm, and vibrators. Short condoms, brunch joints, and Valentines' Day.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

If only a man had been around to tell her.

Ashley Banfield has my proxy penis here.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

All I know is that if Aziz Ansari didn't want his sexual misconduct to become a national news story, he could have left his apartment as soon as things got creepy. It's not like she was blocking the door.

That's awesome.

TM