Aziz Ansari MYTHS vs FACTS

MYTH: "She never said no!"
FACT: Yes she did. She said "No, I am not ready!" Also "Next Time" should count as "No" for everyone is not a retard. Plain and simple. Yes she also used non-verbal cues at first.

MYTH: Aziz stopped as soon as she said no!
FACT: No he did not, not in any meaningful way. He turned on Seinfeld and got right back to shoving his fingers down her throat and undoing her pants. He only stopped once she was out of his apartment altogether.

MYTH: Aziz did nothing wrong!
FACT: Pressuring someone into sex is wrong, especially after they already told you no and they aren't ready. Shoving your fingers down someones throat and trying to undo their pants after they say "no" is sexual assault. A "feminist" like Aziz should know this.

MYTH: She said it was rape! She used #metoo!
FACT: She never called it rape or used #metoo in the article.

MYTH: She complained about wine choice!
FACT: She only said she preferred red. Yes the article is badly written and the interviewer included every single tiny detail when they should have scaled it back.

MYTH: Going to a man's apartment is consenting to sex! Oral sex is consent to intercourse!
FACT: No. It is not. Yes, often one leads to another but that's not 100% especially if its a first date. Aziz should have LISTENED when she told him "Next Time". He should have CARED. He should have shown her respect especially as a "feminist" who claims to support women.

MYTH: Saying she was wronged is like saying women have no agency!
FACT: Wtf. No. Everyone has agency, including everyone who is wronged.

Am I missing anything?

This has nothing to do with Aziz's work in film and television. Take your lazy bait thread elsewhere.

>This has nothing to do with Aziz's work in film and television. Take your lazy bait thread elsewhere.

Not a bait thread. Just felt that the same bs myths come up time and time again on Sup Forums and need to be addressed. If you know a more appropriate board for a tv star like Aziz I'm open to hearing it.

go back to r*ddit you stupid nigger we hate women here

Already old news. No one cares.

Fuck off

Read the rules you fucking moron.

Take this bullshit to /x/ where it belongs.

Yes, that is what she should've done, instead of taking off her clothes and sucking his benis

There have been many many Aziz threads on here and the same exact hateful myths keep getting repeated. I didn't see you complaining about them.

I don't spend all day and night on here like you because I have a life. You know why you posted this thread. Take this shit to Sup Forums or Sup Forums. inb4 you bring up the marvel and star wars threads.

Rate this butt.

There was JUST ONE on here with those hateful myths that hit the bump limit and fell off the page. You don't need to be on here "all day and night" so much as 5 mins ago. You have a double standard or selective vision at least.

These myths weren't on Sup Forums they weren't on Sup Forums (or if they were, I don't care because I am addressing you here, I don't go on those boards).

Um, shit lord RAPISTS, just because it's not ILLEGAL, doesn't mean it's not a SEX CRIME.

Get this roastie out of here

Exactly the excuse MEN have been using for decades to keep their privileged position as rapists.

Pic related - THIS is film and television. Your Time's Up, scum.

Remind me again exactly how this relates to his work in film & television.

If every guy stopped when a girl says the first no humanity would have been extinct a long time ago

This is kinda true, insofar as the legal standard is a minimum and we need to be better to each other to achieve a good world for men and women alike.

>Tale film and television discussion to Sup Forums

No thanks. Keep it on the fucking board it's related to, retard.

How the fuck is this paranormal?

Sup Forums is objectively the biggest non-white board. They'd love a thread like this.

Because
1) if he's a fucking sex creeper in his personal life that's going to make a effect on how he treats women in his professional life.
2) Part of his personal "brand" too is being a feminist and a "woke bae". This
is how he markets himself. Instead he's a piece of shit. So will he be marketed quite the same way anymore?

And a lot of people on Sup Forums seem hellbent on defending him and you seem to have a major double standard between those people on Sup Forums defending him and people on Sup Forums pointing out that its actually super fucked up what he did.

FACT he shits in the streets

Because you're just making shit up.

Im not that user but everything in OP is sourced from original Babe net article or basic human morals.

This has no direct link to his work. You know you are in the wrong here. That's why you keep bringing up the fact that some people on here defend him. Guess what sweetie? That doesn't automatically make your thread relevant to television & film. I'm sorry it made you so mad when you read anonymous stranger's opinions that disagree with your own, but you can't run away from the fact that you are actively trying to make this board worse by posting a thread like this.

>basic human morals

Now you're really talking about spooks.

>This has no direct link to his work. You know you are in the wrong here.
No I am not. Certainly if I am wrong then so are all his defenders, but like I said I didn't see you there even 5 minutes ago when his defenders were in full swing.
"Direct link" =/= "No Link" Either. I established a link and you moved the goalposts. He is a TV personality. He is part of TV.

> you are actively trying to make this board worse by posting a thread like this.
Aziz defenders make this board 1000% worse. FAR worse than someone saying "nope this is not okay". You are wrong and you know it.

That's a lot of words just to say "It doesn't user, you're right, I'm stupid."
This won't affect his work, it has barely affected his image, in fact I've only seen it said he handled it all well.
Nobody here gives a single shit about Aziz Ansari except when he releases another season of his lame show or a horrible stand up special.

thicc/10

...

>He is a TV personality. He is part of TV.
That doesn't make this television and film related. A thread about how hot an actresses is will get taken down because it isn't related to her work. Again, read the fucking rules, you moron. If you wanted to discuss how his personal life seems to be at odds with the views he professes in his work, THAT would be a relevant thread. I think your tiny brain automatically assumed I'm defending Aziz. I'm not. I'm saying your gossip thread about he said she said nonsense has no place on this board. There are plenty of ways you could make a thread that is relevant to this board discussing this topic, but you chose to make a blatant gossip thread.

>This won't affect his work, it has barely affected his image, in fact I've only seen it said he handled it all well.
Then you are an absolute idiot who has been reading absolutely the wrong blogs I guess. Go literally just google Aziz Ansari and you'll see a ton of articles about how he is wrong. And he is. DOes he have defenders? Yes. Are they shitbags? Yes.

>Nobody here gives a single shit about Aziz Ansari
Fuck you there has been multiple threads about him all of which autosaged. So sit the fuck down.

>liberals currently tearing each other apart because one faction believes women over everyone else and one faction believes brown people over everyone else
This is glorious.

Aziz being the posterchild of male feminism who constantly shat on supposed sexist male trump supporters and pretended to be "woke" not practicing what he preaches.

If HE doesnt even bother following their own shitty liberal doublethink rules no drunk frat boy can be expected to either.
Liberals are calling the accuser a slut and a whore who should have expected sex by going into an appartment with aziz.
So never again can they complain about "victim blaming".

This is really entertaining.

kk I already explained to you how its related and you are being a fucking piece of garbage with double standard so idec

Not all "liberals" are doing this. But yes this is a real litmus test for those who actually care about consent and feminism and who just use it to bash the "other side"

>some nobodies complaining online about it
Huh sounds pretty familiar.
>an SJW-type ends up being a hypocritical creep
Wow color me shocked!

No one needs your sweet lesson on consent, my dude. Nobody needed this thread, either. You seem mentally stunted and definitely on spectrum though, if having a containment thread to lock you up in is what you want, you've got it. But there's nothing to say here and you know it.

Best part is it's liberal infighting and everyone else can sit back and enjoy the show.
Because literally no active party in this debate can win it without being damaged by the fallout.

You explain how it COULD be related, but that has nothing to do with your original post. Your purpose in this thread is to talk specifically about the allegations against Aziz. You have not ONCE tried to aim the conversation toward a discussion of his work in film and television. You know what you're doing. Everyone knows what you are doing. You aren't clever.

One side is right and one side is wrong.
I feel like the side arguing for consent will win, and I don't see that as damaging.

K

Nooo tamblyn used to be my waifu. Holy shit look at those retweets.

open bob

Shes right the response to Aziz Ansari on Sup Forums and elsewhere is so full of garbage victim blaming straight out of the 19th century.

Maybe Sup Forums doesn't care and isn't obligated to care.

Is it worth pointing out that 'the claw' (ramming splayed fingers down throats and into vaginas) is a classic move from the misogynistic end of the porn spectrum?
I'm in my 40's and have been with a lot of women (including within the BDSM scene) and have never tried 'the claw' as a standard move.
The majority of people would not find this move erotic or enticing when performed without consent. And even in (safe/sane/consensual) BDSM you'd want to clear it before a scene. It's uncomfortable at best and painful/damaging at worst.
TL:DR- If this lady's story is true, I think it's evidence that Mr. 'male feminist' Ansari likes to watch violent, misogynistic porn like facial abuse or Max Hardcore.

Bullshit. He was promoted in the media due to an underlying agenda of needing a feminist-friendly brown muslim that SJWs could point to and say "see, not all muslims".

It's fun to see all the SJW's call what he did 'sexual misconduct' and not 'sexual assault' or 'rape'. It's like they've invented a new category of sexual misdemeanor to minimise what he did.
If he was a confederate flag wavin', gun ownin', pickup-drivin', republican votin' white dude with a mullet and a moonshine still they'd be calling it rape, hoo boy.
It's great because it shows the hypocrisy of the 'color blind' left, who judge the seriousness of crimes differently depending on the color of the criminal's skin.

Hey! It's the same roastie that always posts on Ansari's threads!

>girl blows guy on first date
>it was wrong of him to assume she was a whore
Women logic make me kek every single time

...

>The guidelines first go about describing what is sexual harassment in Hollywood production terms (examples include quid pro quo offers of jobs in exchange for sex and creating hostile work environments with unwanted advances, jokes, or derogatory comments)
>no more quid pro quo offers
does this ultimately hurt a lot of women's chances of ever becoming a movie star?

delicious.

has anyone read this? in what chapter does he explain the claw?

>does this ultimately hurt a lot of women's chances of ever becoming a movie star?
No because women should be able to be hired based on their merits same as men, without jumping through creepy sex hoops.

Yeah I am hoping this will be a good final post because you are right I spend too much time arguing with Aziz defenders. I say the same things over and over and over. I hope everyone who sees this post does the job for me next time. She did say "no". Aziz did ignore her.

Are you a Sup Forumstard or a Twitter feminist? they are the only two groups of people who believe it was sexual assault and not bad sex. A couple of blowjobs are not the way to de-escalate a sexual situation.

No because they still do it anyways.

It's especially hard to stamp out in Hollywood where fuckability is a valid concern when hiring for certain roles.

You really should include the part where she wanted to eventually fuck Aziz before the whole night was ruined. If he can't be trusted to be cool during a make out session, how can she know he'll be cool when they fuck?

I did. What's interesting about it is that in canvasing online dating and finding out that for men it's a goddamn wasteland of terror, he still found lots of time to describe how things are bad for women too.

>Are you a Sup Forumstard or a Twitter feminist?
Neither.

> they are the only two groups of people who believe it was sexual assault and not bad sex
Disagree. I think anyone with empathy can understand Aziz crossed some major lines. He didn't just merely be bad at sex. He pressured her to have sex physically even after she said "no".

> A couple of blowjobs are not the way to de-escalate a sexual situation.
You are probably right, live and learn. I always thought if a guy got a blowjob he would be satisfied and back off. Doesn't excuse what Aziz Ansari did.

is claw bad for sexi lady?

I actually admire your effort. But you know you're not going to convince anyone right. Why would guys go along with an atmosphere where girls can just accuse them of sexual assault when they gave vague mixed signals and finally say stop and call it assault. It would be like turkeys voting for Christmas.

And why would women go along with any date when they have personal experience of men not accepting no for an answer when in private?

Really they should reject a man completely after a single warning sign, and tell other women to do the same.

This guy's a tool and an unfunny hack, but is this seriously a hill to die on? A woman who chose to stick around and get finger fucked instead of being a big girl and, oh, I don't know, leaving? There was no threat of violence, there was no leveraging of power. There was a horny street shitter, an overgrown child incapable of accepting accountability for her decisions, and a crappy date.

>, oh, I don't know, leaving?
She did leave

>There was a horny street shitter, an overgrown child incapable of accepting accountability for her decisions,
What about his decisions? Why isn't he taking accountability?

Wow, she's pressing charges?

Why should you take accountability if you don't feel like it?

>coercing a woman into sex is abuse of power

so she admits men have the power, ha

Her error was in thinking he will stop doing the stuff she's saying no to.

His error was in thinking he can keep doing things she has said no to.

One of these is a failing of having too much empathy, and one is a failure of having too little. Are they morally equivalent decisions?

Accountability for what, exactly? Persistence? Not picking up on some "nonverbal cues" because she's slobbing on his knob? She wasn't passive in all this, she chose to up the ante. If she'd left at the first sign that he was going to keep trying, or even laid down the fucking law instead of giving in, this whole nonissue would have been avoided. Instead she chose to hope that he was just kidding about wanting to fuck or whatever the hell was going on in her head until finally remembering she has legs bilateral to her cunt and walk out.

Out of men and women, which on average are stronger?

>Accountability for what, exactly? Persistence?
Yes. "Persistence" in trying to push a girl into having sex after she already said "no".

>Not picking up on some "nonverbal cues" because she's slobbing on his knob?
Sure. And ignoring "verbal cues".

You want the girl to take 100% responbsibility but you give 0% to the guy pressuring an unwilling girl into sex.

>or even laid down the fucking law
READ THE OP. She said no.

Like when a man and woman agree to bondage and anal sex, the man could not then complain if she surprised him by tying him up and fucking his ass with a strap-on. He chose to up the ante.

It is literally impossible to agree to one thing without agreeing to everything, and literally insane to back out of anything you've agreed to.

Sounds like you are a Muslim hating bigot.

>"Persistence" in trying to push a girl into having sex after she already said "no".
So nothing happened really, he tried to push her into agreeing, but at no point forced her to do anything

>but you give 0% to the guy pressuring an unwilling girl into sex.
I really wonder how people like you function on a daily, not even trying to "roast", i really do
Last time I was in college and dating girls the man had to make the move and the girl that didnt want to hang out with me simply told me to fuck off, which is fine really
What you're proposing is to forbid any kind of social interaction between males and females, no romance or flirting at the first sign of the first "cue" or else you're some kind of pre-rapist

It's quite unexpected to see puritanism come back in full force on the back of hollywood liberals

You aren't understanding what user is saying.

He's saying women should publicly reject men who show any warning signs or make any faux-pas, because the alternative is that you must be consenting to whatever they do to you.

>Yes she did. She said "No, I am not ready!" Also "Next Time" should count as "No" for everyone is not a retard. Plain and simple. Yes she also used non-verbal cues at first.
They got naked and made out, she said no, he stopped.
>No he did not, not in any meaningful way. He turned on Seinfeld and got right back to shoving his fingers down her throat and undoing her pants. He only stopped once she was out of his apartment altogether.
No, he tried to calm down an awkward situation and watched TV with her.
>Pressuring someone into sex is wrong, especially after they already told you no and they aren't ready. Shoving your fingers down someones throat and trying to undo their pants after they say "no" is sexual assault. A "feminist" like Aziz should know this.
Literally didn't happen
>She never called it rape or used #metoo in the article.
Agreed
> She only said she preferred red. Yes the article is badly written and the interviewer included every single tiny detail when they should have scaled it back.
Agreed
>No. It is not. Yes, often one leads to another but that's not 100% especially if its a first date. Aziz should have LISTENED when she told him "Next Time". He should have CARED. He should have shown her respect especially as a "feminist" who claims to support women.
He never said it was
>Wtf. No. Everyone has agency, including everyone who is wronged.
I don't think anyone has made the argument that her being wronged meant she had no agency. She said no and it stopped. The end.

>So nothing happened really, he tried to push her into agreeing, but at no point forced her to do anything

This is what happened. He physically did the thing she didn't want, she physically stopped him. Then later he did it again, and she stopped him again. He did this so many times that she decided not to try and sleep with him, ended the date, and didn't plan a second one.

Because if he's up to that shit when you're just at third base, what might he do during sex? He obviously doesn't give a fuck, he might decide to not wear a condom without saying, or to record it on camera, or something like that.

Jesus, is the same assmad roastie that shit up the other thread?

#POOED

>He obviously doesn't give a fuck

Not so obvious if it took this idiot that long to choose to leave. That's where I keep getting fucking hung up. You're not shackled, you don't have a career riding on this casting couch. The moment you realize he's going to keep trying to do shit you don't want, why is your reaction to say "I'll go halfway and gauge the reaction when I reach that point"? Who fucking thinks like that?

I've never had first-time-sex with someone without both of us being drunk
I don't think is is uncommon for a lot of men and women, gay or straight.
If they want to change the "culture", maybe they should talk about teaching people confidence.
I always see women only classes and courses about building up confidence and leadership, and yet all my female friends have said they would never approach a guy first.
What exactly do they want men to do? The more they shoot guys down for trying to initiate something, the harder it is to do it at all.

The women not only jump through sex hoop, they are the ones that provide the hoops.

She chose to leave when he proved that.

She gave him a lot of chances to prove otherwise.

She was wrong to give him a chance. Women in general are wrong to give men a chance if they make them uncomfortable even once. Or no?

>"I'll go halfway and gauge the reaction when I reach that point"? Who fucking thinks like that?

You do.

If you're making out with a girl, how many times does she have to try to stick a finger up your ass before you ask her not to do it again? How many times would you have to ask her before you called the whole thing off? What if she didn't do it for like an hour and then started again?

Do you call the whole thing off as soon as you sense anything you might not be into, like you say women should do, or do you go halfway to see what might happen?

AM I PRETTY? AM I??????????

>there is nothing any woman could do that would make any man not hit on her and not sleep with her

same one in every thread

The answer doesn't matter because neither of these people matter.

>He physically did the thing she didn't want, she physically stopped him. Then later he did it again, and she stopped him again. He did this so many times that she decided not to try and sleep with him

Yeah well that's a bit too forward, but she did physically stop everytime, which mean he always backed off, she also left, which mean he didnt stop her

So at the end of the day all you have here is two idiots in a bad date, but consent was respected at every turn, yet somehow the dude must "take responsability" for something that "could have happened" but really didnt

OH BOYS

After seeing that gymnast girl go to the trial of the doctor, I just can't give a fuck about this non story anymore. I've been watching that shit all week. It's fucking harrowing and the fuckups from everyone involved especially USAG are nigh on unforgivable.

I dunno. You can see with those girls talking what the shit really is. They had a few girls' parents their in years because their kids killed herself over this.

I cannot equate that shit with this bad date. And I cannot care about what happened to this woman at all.

>Who fucking thinks like that?

Well, what a feminist will say here is
>Men fear embarrassment, women fear death
even though he's a tiny dude who'd made no threats and done nothing to indicate violence.

Other than being in possession of claws.

Going to his house and sucking his dick and getting finger ed while saying no between each action is kind of sending mixed singles but in this case actions spoke louder than her words.

The casual dating scene, as I understand it, requires men to be a tad pushy and clingy and the women tend to act hesitant at first even if desire is there.

Its all fucking related. When you excuse the smaller stuff you allow for the bigger stuff. You decide where to draw the line. Fuck you for enabling this kind of entitlement to sex.

If it's particularly bizarre, one strike is enough. If it's fairly benign but still unwelcome, they get one more chance not to pull shit like that and then I'm out.

For the record, this policy has actually been tested when a misunderstanding led me to a gay dungeon on the state line under the pretense of fixing a computer.

> requires men to be a tad pushy and clingy and the women tend to act hesitant at first even if desire is there.

No. It does not require any such thing. And drop the "heh you know you want it" nonsense.

He ruined the date. You have a woman explaining how and Aziz agreeing and apologizing. Everyone did the right thing after that night, Aziz did the wrong thing on the night, unless you think women are wrong for giving men a chance.

Consent wasn't respected at every turn. It would be respected if he didn't try something she physically stopped him doing for the sixth time in the night, or if he had quit it the first time and asked before the second time. This is what convinced her that it would not be fun to sleep with him, that it might even be disgusting, and so she left.

this is literally a slippery slope argument

>Muh slippery slope argument
Ok we officially entered tumblr shitposting territory, time to go home

So women should stop men the very first time the man does something that makes them even slightly uncomfortable. Okay. I think that's an odd rule but okay.

>traditional roles are worse than objectification
Interesting

LOVE ME OR I START CUTTING