I don't necessarily fully agree with everything the writer has to say, but I feel that they make some interesting and arguable points, and I'd like to have a general discussion on this matter.

An_Old_Big_Tree wrote on January 18, 2018 at 9:14 AM (edited on January 18, 2018 at 9:22 AM)

I think this is a shit article. Seems pretty clearly to be written by somebody who hasn't engaged much with feminist thought and is still pretty absorbed in patriarchal logics. Nitpicking about not having waited for Ansari to respond is the same kind of shitty attempts to knock away at the ethical authority of the piece by making it about something else that they think wasn't done right.

It's the same dogshit logic that has her saying "yes we totally have to talk about these things, but she doesn't do it well enough" like there's a standard that assaulted women have to meet before their stories are good enough.

The idea that "most of society understands that sexual assault and harassment are wrong" is actually not cut and dry at all!

Actually I don't feel like going through this whole thing to explain how shit it is bit by bit. Gonna leave it here.

not_AFX_lol OP wrote on January 18, 2018 at 11:54 AM

I feel like what drew me to the article was the writer's efforts to create nuance, but having read your points I think you're right; this 'getting to the middle of the issue' feels like a cover for the setting of bullshit standards that you pointed out.

The poorly reported Aziz Ansari exposé was a missed opportunity | Jill Filipovic

Comments

An_Old_Big_Tree wrote on January 18, 2018 at 9:14 AM (edited on January 18, 2018 at 9:22 AM)

not_AFX_lol OP wrote on January 18, 2018 at 11:54 AM