|
We understand that this topic evokes strong feelings. In the interest of maintaining a necessary and productive discussion, we will be taking a strong stance against posters that clearly do not contribute to this aim. Dishonest and bad faith arguments, victim blaming, and attacks on other users, will be strictly moderated. A post which only serves to muddy the waters and dishonestly portray the nature of assault and harassment (and corresponding accusations) is also unwelcome. |
This thread is creating more problems then good it seems.
Tons of people arguing their opinions and just trolling. Standard internet forum fashion.
Almost no discussion about what the accused are saying. Please update with Information regarding the people involved instead of everyone's opinions.
I would really like to hear the side of the story from the accused.
|
Northern Ireland23252 Posts
On June 27 2020 10:51 mcgormack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 10:41 Wombat_NI wrote:On June 27 2020 10:23 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 09:57 Wombat_NI wrote:On June 27 2020 09:53 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 09:43 JimmiC wrote:On June 27 2020 09:34 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 09:22 AttackZerg wrote:
The bar is don't be a bad person.
And it is obvious.
You failed to argue the bar should be "where the justice system draws it"
You have succeeded wasting a lot of time and hopefully you have failed to convert anyone into whatever shifting sand position you take next.
You fail to account for the fact that a real person has had their experience called nothing of importance by you, and you argued, literally and specifically against her of testimony being public because is it nothing. You have said that spread out over your pages of bullshit.
That experience is not important relative to the sexual harassment discussion and relative to judging a member of the community. This story and this experience is certainly important to that person. Do you seriously believe that the bar for public discussion is ''don't be a bad person''? Have you thought about everything that implies? Do you think that we should hold everyone accountable for every time they've done something ''bad'' and reveal it online? On June 27 2020 09:22 AttackZerg wrote:
I am done playing nice. You are a malicious and bad person.
You are pro the freedom of speech in the same thread you are against freedom of speech.
Fuck your bullshit.
I have not insulted anyone and I won't start insulting you, but I would appreciate the same. Again, you're deforming everything, I never said that she should be censored, that this story should be censored, or any such thing, as I firmly believe that anyone should be allowed to say whatever they want. From the beginning, I said that we should simply ignore that story in a public forum, it's irrelevant to the whole situation, and then I got five people debating me for ages about it. You are more then welcome too, but your strategy is awful. It is getting way more discussion because of you. It's not about trying to brush this under the rug or anything, and maybe it's getting the Barbara-Streisand effect, it doesn't matter. Maybe we're collectively hitting MeToo rock bottom with this story. Maybe when we're hearing about an (allegedly toxic) relationship between two consenting adults lasting for years, we should leave our basic curiosity behind by saying yeah ok, we're good, we got enough info on the guy already. Not just me but others have also countered your points on this, over and over. You keep skipping around those points to reiterate your initial statements on this matter with different wording. This isn’t a conversation that is developing, address criticisms of your points or don’t. Stop posting the exact same point. It seems like I'm also replying to the same points. On June 27 2020 09:32 Oukka wrote:On June 27 2020 09:10 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 08:35 Oukka wrote:A lot of the good of MeToo has been that people have been slightly more willing to speak up, and I think putting a bar too high would do more harm to that.
We still have to put a bar somewhere, don't you think? I agree that anyone should be free to speak up. I'm almost an extremist pro free speak. But then, if we're to collectively judge someone that belongs in the community, we also need to determine what we should judge him on. Surely we can all think of some information and allegations that wouldn't matter here. Yes I absolutely agree again with you the bar has to be somewhere. But it don't think it we as outsiders have a right to set that bar. The bar is set by the person who is hurt. If they want to come forth with their story they can. We are not exactly flooded by stories of people claiming to victims of abuse when they are not, but to my understanding there is a lot of people who do not feel comfortable of speaking what has happened to them. Also, as others including you have said before, this is not the only incident involving Rapid. It may be that an account of shitty, and in my mind coercive, behaviour in a relationship isn't enough on it's own to be worthy of public attention to this point. This however isn't isolated. She is the fifth woman to come forth about an abusive relationship with him by my count. I understand you disagree about this, but folk in here, me included, think it adds to the discussion and is valuable information. I can say that it his behaviour in this case too, at the very least, is another account of how us men are failing everyone around us by engaging in abusive behaviour that I don't see acceptable. I wouldn't want to associate with people who behave like that in person, and I don't want to associate with them by being part of the same StarCraft community either. That is why I see this account as relevant. The other problem with this story is that we know so little of what is being alleged. That person doesn't need to be specific if she doesn't want to, that's perfectly fine, we should respect that. But how can we, as observers, deal with this story objectively and critically? Someone is accused of being ''emotionally abusive'' and ''grooming her'' without naming specific actions. It seems unfair to me to judge him on that statement, just like it would be unfair to judge someone vaguely accused of sexual harassment without specifically knowing what that person did. It's impossible to defend against such wide statements, and it's impossible for someone else to pass a judgement on that. On June 27 2020 10:10 AttackZerg wrote:
I messaged all the old timey mods I could remember and I reported his post claiming to be a smurf, which I don't think we are allowed to do.
Because you keep insisting about this, I will reply. I had an account with 50 posts that I used until about 2012 that I lost, I don't even remember which e-mail it was associated to, so I created a new one this year when I started playing Brood War again. Please let's stop derailling this thread with this, can we? Why is it difficult to be objective on this? You have what 4 instances of alleged harassment from 4 disparate people with similar accounts. A 5th alleging similar behaviour within the confines of a relationship. Might have the numbers wrong. The objective position is to see a pattern here. While not necessarily thinking it is 100% damning proof. I’d contend that to dismiss one account that showcases similar patterns of behaviour because it’s beyond some arbitrary line is absolutely not being objective here. Emotional abuse can be a VERY WIDE range of bevahiors, just like sexual harassment, and can also imply a very wide range of gravity. A broad statement such as ''I was emotionally abused'' is not enough to pass a judgement on someone, at all, and therefore cannot be considered. Even with other allegations standing, it wouldn't be fair. Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 10:41 Wombat_NI wrote:
Most of my female friends have been burned by some person in their history. If I knew someone they were romancing had multiple accusations of being abusive and I didn’t tell them out of a fear of not being ‘objective’ they’d be pissed with me, and rightly so.
Had a former friend, kept friends with him despite his ex who I was also friends with accusing him of stuff. Over the years two other people who’d dated him, didn’t know each other or the ex but that I knew made similar accusations.
At that point no, one can be ‘objective’ or confront that a good friend has behaved abominably with 3 separate women and do with that what you want. If we're talking about the private sphere, I agree 100%, those are legitimate concerns and worth talking about. Should this be broad knowledge on the public sphere about a guy who sometimes casted Brood War games to 500 viewers at a time max? Not so much.
Absolutely it should be. If you’re a woman dealing with someone do you want to know if they’re a sexual predator or not?
As to the public/private distinction, if you have a consensual weird kink, or things in that vein that don’t harm people then yes. Keep that private. By all means.
|
On June 27 2020 10:59 cenflamatty wrote:
This thread is creating more problems then good it seems.
Not sure I agree; regardless of your position, the discussion has generated some valuable points about the topic and has, for the most part, been respectful or at least not inflammatory. These kinds of things are good, because the more we think about these issues and discuss them with people, the more we pay attention to them. While convincing people to change their minds on the internet is reputedly impossible, I've seen enough evidence to the contrary to think that discussions like this do have inherent value, even if it is at base level a way for people to vent or make their support known.
On June 27 2020 10:59 cenflamatty wrote:
Almost no discussion about what the accused are saying. Please update with Information regarding the people involved instead of everyone's opinions.
I think most of the discussion is about what the accused are saying or one step removed at most. The OP is being updated (PS: Thanks OP!)
On June 27 2020 10:59 cenflamatty wrote:
I would really like to hear the side of the story from the accused.
I think most people here agree with you on that.
|
On June 27 2020 11:03 Wombat_NI wrote:
Absolutely it should be. If you’re a woman dealing with someone do you want to know if they’re a sexual predator or not?
A friend tells you, about another friend that you know, ''I was emotionally abused by that person''.
Before passing a judgement on the accused, the first thing that a reasonable person will ask, rightfully so, will be ''oh ok, what happened?''
If ''I was emotionally abused'' is enough information for you to pass a judgement on someone accused of it, I feel like this is unreasonable and unfair. Keeping a critical sense and expecting more information from such a broad statement is not the same as not believing the victim or discrediting at all. These types of accusations have serious consequences to everyone involved, and unfortunately, strictly in terms of judging the guy, this one story doesn't bring much on the table.
|
|
|
United States4883 Posts
On June 27 2020 12:17 mcgormack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 11:03 Wombat_NI wrote:
Absolutely it should be. If you’re a woman dealing with someone do you want to know if they’re a sexual predator or not?
A friend tells you, about another friend that you know, ''I was emotionally abused by that person''. Before passing a judgement on the accused, the first thing that a reasonable person will ask, rightfully so, will be ''oh ok, what happened?''If ''I was emotionally abused'' is enough information for you to pass a judgement on someone accused of it, I feel like this is unreasonable and unfair. Keeping a critical sense and expecting more information from such a broad statement is not the same as not believing the victim or discrediting at all. These types of accusations have serious consequences to everyone involved, and unfortunately, strictly in terms of judging the guy, this one story doesn't bring much on the table.
That's why I've read every account of sexual harassment and assault in this thread.
Literally every single one of them details in what way they were abused. You're an idiot, please stop arguing.
User was warned for this post
|
On June 27 2020 10:51 mcgormack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 10:41 Wombat_NI wrote:On June 27 2020 10:23 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 09:57 Wombat_NI wrote:On June 27 2020 09:53 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 09:43 JimmiC wrote:On June 27 2020 09:34 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 09:22 AttackZerg wrote:
The bar is don't be a bad person.
And it is obvious.
You failed to argue the bar should be "where the justice system draws it"
You have succeeded wasting a lot of time and hopefully you have failed to convert anyone into whatever shifting sand position you take next.
You fail to account for the fact that a real person has had their experience called nothing of importance by you, and you argued, literally and specifically against her of testimony being public because is it nothing. You have said that spread out over your pages of bullshit.
That experience is not important relative to the sexual harassment discussion and relative to judging a member of the community. This story and this experience is certainly important to that person. Do you seriously believe that the bar for public discussion is ''don't be a bad person''? Have you thought about everything that implies? Do you think that we should hold everyone accountable for every time they've done something ''bad'' and reveal it online? On June 27 2020 09:22 AttackZerg wrote:
I am done playing nice. You are a malicious and bad person.
You are pro the freedom of speech in the same thread you are against freedom of speech.
Fuck your bullshit.
I have not insulted anyone and I won't start insulting you, but I would appreciate the same. Again, you're deforming everything, I never said that she should be censored, that this story should be censored, or any such thing, as I firmly believe that anyone should be allowed to say whatever they want. From the beginning, I said that we should simply ignore that story in a public forum, it's irrelevant to the whole situation, and then I got five people debating me for ages about it. You are more then welcome too, but your strategy is awful. It is getting way more discussion because of you. It's not about trying to brush this under the rug or anything, and maybe it's getting the Barbara-Streisand effect, it doesn't matter. Maybe we're collectively hitting MeToo rock bottom with this story. Maybe when we're hearing about an (allegedly toxic) relationship between two consenting adults lasting for years, we should leave our basic curiosity behind by saying yeah ok, we're good, we got enough info on the guy already. Not just me but others have also countered your points on this, over and over. You keep skipping around those points to reiterate your initial statements on this matter with different wording. This isn’t a conversation that is developing, address criticisms of your points or don’t. Stop posting the exact same point. It seems like I'm also replying to the same points. On June 27 2020 09:32 Oukka wrote:On June 27 2020 09:10 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 08:35 Oukka wrote:A lot of the good of MeToo has been that people have been slightly more willing to speak up, and I think putting a bar too high would do more harm to that.
We still have to put a bar somewhere, don't you think? I agree that anyone should be free to speak up. I'm almost an extremist pro free speak. But then, if we're to collectively judge someone that belongs in the community, we also need to determine what we should judge him on. Surely we can all think of some information and allegations that wouldn't matter here. Yes I absolutely agree again with you the bar has to be somewhere. But it don't think it we as outsiders have a right to set that bar. The bar is set by the person who is hurt. If they want to come forth with their story they can. We are not exactly flooded by stories of people claiming to victims of abuse when they are not, but to my understanding there is a lot of people who do not feel comfortable of speaking what has happened to them. Also, as others including you have said before, this is not the only incident involving Rapid. It may be that an account of shitty, and in my mind coercive, behaviour in a relationship isn't enough on it's own to be worthy of public attention to this point. This however isn't isolated. She is the fifth woman to come forth about an abusive relationship with him by my count. I understand you disagree about this, but folk in here, me included, think it adds to the discussion and is valuable information. I can say that it his behaviour in this case too, at the very least, is another account of how us men are failing everyone around us by engaging in abusive behaviour that I don't see acceptable. I wouldn't want to associate with people who behave like that in person, and I don't want to associate with them by being part of the same StarCraft community either. That is why I see this account as relevant. The other problem with this story is that we know so little of what is being alleged. That person doesn't need to be specific if she doesn't want to, that's perfectly fine, we should respect that. But how can we, as observers, deal with this story objectively and critically? Someone is accused of being ''emotionally abusive'' and ''grooming her'' without naming specific actions. It seems unfair to me to judge him on that statement, just like it would be unfair to judge someone vaguely accused of sexual harassment without specifically knowing what that person did. It's impossible to defend against such wide statements, and it's impossible for someone else to pass a judgement on that. On June 27 2020 10:10 AttackZerg wrote:
I messaged all the old timey mods I could remember and I reported his post claiming to be a smurf, which I don't think we are allowed to do.
Because you keep insisting about this, I will reply. I had an account with 50 posts that I used until about 2012 that I lost, I don't even remember which e-mail it was associated to, so I created a new one this year when I started playing Brood War again. Please let's stop derailling this thread with this, can we? Why is it difficult to be objective on this? You have what 4 instances of alleged harassment from 4 disparate people with similar accounts. A 5th alleging similar behaviour within the confines of a relationship. Might have the numbers wrong. The objective position is to see a pattern here. While not necessarily thinking it is 100% damning proof. I’d contend that to dismiss one account that showcases similar patterns of behaviour because it’s beyond some arbitrary line is absolutely not being objective here. Emotional abuse can be a VERY WIDE range of bevahiors, just like sexual harassment, and can also imply a very wide range of gravity. A broad statement such as ''I was emotionally abused'' is not enough to pass a judgement on someone, at all, and therefore cannot be considered. Even with other allegations standing, it wouldn't be fair. Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 10:41 Wombat_NI wrote:
Most of my female friends have been burned by some person in their history. If I knew someone they were romancing had multiple accusations of being abusive and I didn’t tell them out of a fear of not being ‘objective’ they’d be pissed with me, and rightly so.
Had a former friend, kept friends with him despite his ex who I was also friends with accusing him of stuff. Over the years two other people who’d dated him, didn’t know each other or the ex but that I knew made similar accusations.
At that point no, one can be ‘objective’ or confront that a good friend has behaved abominably with 3 separate women and do with that what you want. If we're talking about the private sphere, I agree 100%, those are legitimate concerns and worth talking about. Should this be broad knowledge on the public sphere about a guy who sometimes casted Brood War games to 500 viewers at a time max? Not so much.
So here’s my issue with your stance. You’ve claimed to be pro free speech and people can say what they want, you don’t advocate for censorship, and maybe WE as a community shouldn’t be considering things that, in your opinion, fall outside of what is being discussed.
Now, you say that this shouldn’t have been brought out into public knowledge, essentially saying that what she said should be censored (aka not released), thereby not advocating for her freedom of speech...? I’m honestly confused by this line of logic as it were...
|
On June 27 2020 13:42 wchigo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 10:51 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 10:41 Wombat_NI wrote:On June 27 2020 10:23 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 09:57 Wombat_NI wrote:On June 27 2020 09:53 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 09:43 JimmiC wrote:On June 27 2020 09:34 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 09:22 AttackZerg wrote:
The bar is don't be a bad person.
And it is obvious.
You failed to argue the bar should be "where the justice system draws it"
You have succeeded wasting a lot of time and hopefully you have failed to convert anyone into whatever shifting sand position you take next.
You fail to account for the fact that a real person has had their experience called nothing of importance by you, and you argued, literally and specifically against her of testimony being public because is it nothing. You have said that spread out over your pages of bullshit.
That experience is not important relative to the sexual harassment discussion and relative to judging a member of the community. This story and this experience is certainly important to that person. Do you seriously believe that the bar for public discussion is ''don't be a bad person''? Have you thought about everything that implies? Do you think that we should hold everyone accountable for every time they've done something ''bad'' and reveal it online? On June 27 2020 09:22 AttackZerg wrote:
I am done playing nice. You are a malicious and bad person.
You are pro the freedom of speech in the same thread you are against freedom of speech.
Fuck your bullshit.
I have not insulted anyone and I won't start insulting you, but I would appreciate the same. Again, you're deforming everything, I never said that she should be censored, that this story should be censored, or any such thing, as I firmly believe that anyone should be allowed to say whatever they want. From the beginning, I said that we should simply ignore that story in a public forum, it's irrelevant to the whole situation, and then I got five people debating me for ages about it. You are more then welcome too, but your strategy is awful. It is getting way more discussion because of you. It's not about trying to brush this under the rug or anything, and maybe it's getting the Barbara-Streisand effect, it doesn't matter. Maybe we're collectively hitting MeToo rock bottom with this story. Maybe when we're hearing about an (allegedly toxic) relationship between two consenting adults lasting for years, we should leave our basic curiosity behind by saying yeah ok, we're good, we got enough info on the guy already. Not just me but others have also countered your points on this, over and over. You keep skipping around those points to reiterate your initial statements on this matter with different wording. This isn’t a conversation that is developing, address criticisms of your points or don’t. Stop posting the exact same point. It seems like I'm also replying to the same points. On June 27 2020 09:32 Oukka wrote:On June 27 2020 09:10 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 08:35 Oukka wrote:A lot of the good of MeToo has been that people have been slightly more willing to speak up, and I think putting a bar too high would do more harm to that.
We still have to put a bar somewhere, don't you think? I agree that anyone should be free to speak up. I'm almost an extremist pro free speak. But then, if we're to collectively judge someone that belongs in the community, we also need to determine what we should judge him on. Surely we can all think of some information and allegations that wouldn't matter here. Yes I absolutely agree again with you the bar has to be somewhere. But it don't think it we as outsiders have a right to set that bar. The bar is set by the person who is hurt. If they want to come forth with their story they can. We are not exactly flooded by stories of people claiming to victims of abuse when they are not, but to my understanding there is a lot of people who do not feel comfortable of speaking what has happened to them. Also, as others including you have said before, this is not the only incident involving Rapid. It may be that an account of shitty, and in my mind coercive, behaviour in a relationship isn't enough on it's own to be worthy of public attention to this point. This however isn't isolated. She is the fifth woman to come forth about an abusive relationship with him by my count. I understand you disagree about this, but folk in here, me included, think it adds to the discussion and is valuable information. I can say that it his behaviour in this case too, at the very least, is another account of how us men are failing everyone around us by engaging in abusive behaviour that I don't see acceptable. I wouldn't want to associate with people who behave like that in person, and I don't want to associate with them by being part of the same StarCraft community either. That is why I see this account as relevant. The other problem with this story is that we know so little of what is being alleged. That person doesn't need to be specific if she doesn't want to, that's perfectly fine, we should respect that. But how can we, as observers, deal with this story objectively and critically? Someone is accused of being ''emotionally abusive'' and ''grooming her'' without naming specific actions. It seems unfair to me to judge him on that statement, just like it would be unfair to judge someone vaguely accused of sexual harassment without specifically knowing what that person did. It's impossible to defend against such wide statements, and it's impossible for someone else to pass a judgement on that. On June 27 2020 10:10 AttackZerg wrote:
I messaged all the old timey mods I could remember and I reported his post claiming to be a smurf, which I don't think we are allowed to do.
Because you keep insisting about this, I will reply. I had an account with 50 posts that I used until about 2012 that I lost, I don't even remember which e-mail it was associated to, so I created a new one this year when I started playing Brood War again. Please let's stop derailling this thread with this, can we? Why is it difficult to be objective on this? You have what 4 instances of alleged harassment from 4 disparate people with similar accounts. A 5th alleging similar behaviour within the confines of a relationship. Might have the numbers wrong. The objective position is to see a pattern here. While not necessarily thinking it is 100% damning proof. I’d contend that to dismiss one account that showcases similar patterns of behaviour because it’s beyond some arbitrary line is absolutely not being objective here. Emotional abuse can be a VERY WIDE range of bevahiors, just like sexual harassment, and can also imply a very wide range of gravity. A broad statement such as ''I was emotionally abused'' is not enough to pass a judgement on someone, at all, and therefore cannot be considered. Even with other allegations standing, it wouldn't be fair. On June 27 2020 10:41 Wombat_NI wrote:
Most of my female friends have been burned by some person in their history. If I knew someone they were romancing had multiple accusations of being abusive and I didn’t tell them out of a fear of not being ‘objective’ they’d be pissed with me, and rightly so.
Had a former friend, kept friends with him despite his ex who I was also friends with accusing him of stuff. Over the years two other people who’d dated him, didn’t know each other or the ex but that I knew made similar accusations.
At that point no, one can be ‘objective’ or confront that a good friend has behaved abominably with 3 separate women and do with that what you want. If we're talking about the private sphere, I agree 100%, those are legitimate concerns and worth talking about. Should this be broad knowledge on the public sphere about a guy who sometimes casted Brood War games to 500 viewers at a time max? Not so much. So here’s my issue with your stance. You’ve claimed to be pro free speech and people can say what they want, you don’t advocate for censorship, and maybe WE as a community shouldn’t be considering things that, in your opinion, fall outside of what is being discussed. Now, you say that this shouldn’t have been brought out into public knowledge, essentially saying that what she said should be censored (aka not released), thereby not advocating for her freedom of speech...? I’m honestly confused by this line of logic as it were...
The community gives power and elevates various statements and stories that we feel are relevant by sharing, upvoting and whatnot.
Instead, this type of story should be essentially ignored by the community for the reasons amply discussed (a vague story about two consensual adults where no crime happened)
---
And to stay with the previous exchange, Wombat_NI expressed the importance of informing women of the potential danger of certain men about their past toxic relationships. In a small social circle, I can perfectly understand.
But should those past toxic relationships (again, where no crime happened) be talked about at large as soon as someone has accomplished any amount of fame, on the pretense of protecting future partners? I don't agree with that at all. We gotta keep things in perspective.
User was banned for this post.
|
On June 27 2020 12:57 EsportsJohn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 12:17 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 11:03 Wombat_NI wrote:
Absolutely it should be. If you’re a woman dealing with someone do you want to know if they’re a sexual predator or not?
A friend tells you, about another friend that you know, ''I was emotionally abused by that person''. Before passing a judgement on the accused, the first thing that a reasonable person will ask, rightfully so, will be ''oh ok, what happened?''If ''I was emotionally abused'' is enough information for you to pass a judgement on someone accused of it, I feel like this is unreasonable and unfair. Keeping a critical sense and expecting more information from such a broad statement is not the same as not believing the victim or discrediting at all. These types of accusations have serious consequences to everyone involved, and unfortunately, strictly in terms of judging the guy, this one story doesn't bring much on the table. That's why I've read every account of sexual harassment and assault in this thread. Literally every single one of them details in what way they were abused. You're an idiot, please stop arguing.
Every sexual harassment account mentionned against Rapid was detailled enough so we all know what we're talking about (talking about his dick to random women and dick pics), and that's absolutely fair. Same for Avilo.
If we're gonna condemn someone in this community, we better know for what reason. Our discussions would have been very different if the stories were about vague ''sexual harassment'', let's not pretend otherwise.
Also, I'm being respectful and I'd please appreciate the same treatment.
|
On June 27 2020 06:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:For those lurking at home who would like a quick summary of the last few pages, this new post-Melanie conversation that mcgormack is engaging in is a great example of the term "gaslighting": "Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment, often evoking in them cognitive dissonance and other changes including low self-esteem. Using denial, misdirection, contradiction, and misinformation, gaslighting involves attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim's beliefs. Instances can range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents occurred, to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim." ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting After multiple people have already stepped forward and given similar, corroborating stories about receiving dick pics, feeling abused, and being harassed by Rapid (Reid), an additional person named Melanie came forward and publicly wrote this: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sr9qgu It includes the following statements: -"Reid and i have had an emotionally abusive relationship for years." -"Reid groomed me. For those needing a definition ‘Sexual grooming’ is the process of deliberately establishing a connection in order to prepare a person for sexual exploitation and/or abuse." -"He sent me an unsolicited dick pic soon after (this was within a week of talking and dming)." -"I felt ashamed but I hid it well." -"Telling him i’m hurt meant being apologized to in the moment, and objectified the next morning." -"He exploited my feelings for him." -"I questioned my morals, sacrificed my own self worth, my sanity, and my pride to do whatever would make him happy. But please try to understand that this entire situation with him has always just been confusing, which stems from having been groomed." [this is Melanie also realizing that she's been gaslit by Rapid] -"I know he’s caused hurt to others, and to me." And mcgormack has been responding with dismissals and excuses like these: "In this one, the events are fairly vague, and bottomline, we're talking about a long-lasting relationship between two consenting adults that was perceived as toxic and psychologically abusive by one person, but nothing illegal and no harassment. I honestly don't think that this deserves to be public." (Note the facts that Melanie did not actually consent to everything she recounted and she did explicitly state she felt abused, exploited, and groomed.) "This one isn't too clear. They had been talking for a week, and there was consent and sex in their relationship." (Having conversations with someone for seven days does not automatically grant you the right to send them dick pics, and having sex in a relationship does not mean that you cannot be abused or exploited by that sex partner before, during, or after sex.) "If someone sends a dick pic and you go along with it and reply ''hot'', it's not sexual harassment." (There is no evidence that Melanie replied with this; it's a strawman. And even if she did, that doesn't make the rest of her abusive relationship acceptable. We don't know if Melanie said anything in response to the dick pic, but what Melanie did explain - repeatedly - is that she was abused and groomed and exploited.) "In this case, she went along with it, and engaged in a relationship with the guy. There is no harassment, period." (This is classic victim blaming, and also falsely asserts that you can't be harassed by someone who you ultimately enter into a relationship with.) "What's next? A girl he insulted when he was in high school will come out? Maybe he maphacked too in Starcraft once?" (Obvious strawmen, which are not remotely comparable to Melanie's relationship with Rapid.) "Yes, you can do a million things that are illegal to your wife. Here, nothing illegal. only things that are claimed to be immoral, and no specifics. Are we gonna publicly judge everyone who did ''wrong'' things to their spouse now?" (Putting aside the obviously insane legal issues that should also be addressed, notice the explicit gaslighting of ethics here: mcgormack's rewriting of reality has become more extreme, to the point where he's making it sound crazy to publicly judge people who have done "wrong things" to their spouses. Under any other circumstances, of course we would take seriously any abuse or harassment allegations towards significant others, and yet mcgormack is trying to set a stage in which entering into a relationship means - by definition - that any claim of being a victim of "wrongdoing" is off the table. He argues that believing Melanie will cause us to wind up committing a slippery slope fallacy, as if to say something like " what's next, judging abusive spouses!?") "With the (few) facts that we know of, there is no tribunal in the US that would condemn Rapid for harassment against this girl." (A tribunal is a court of law, and mcgormack is essentially replacing "believing Melanie's story" with "it wouldn't hold up in the legal system as a criminal charge". He's insisting for an unreasonably high burden of proof, when in reality the discussion in this thread has been about whether or not we are willing to listen to victims and whether or not we should excommunicate Rapid and other abusers, rather than attempt to formally press charges.) "This is where I draw the line, it doesn't deserve to be public." And with people like you, mcgormack, it's unsurprising why so many victims don't feel comfortable telling their stories. Thankfully, a number of other posters have been responding to your nonsense with common sense. While you clearly don't believe Melanie, it would be great if you listened to at least one thing she wrote, in the very first paragraph of her story: "Believe victims, assholes."
Re-posting because he has muddied the waters to the point of invisibility.
|
More from Melanie's post,
".... The things i've said and done to please him go against many of my personal beliefs. But persuading me to engage in some humiliating acts, i allowed that to happen even though i didn’t want it to, was just gross and made my skin crawl. Allowing the relationship we had to persist offered him the ability to exercise his devious superiority. He objectified me. He made me play these sick twisted games to get him off and brushed them off as exploring our kinks and sexuality. I’m working on healing from this. .... "
www.twitlonger.com
I don't want casters who treat people like this.
|
On June 27 2020 15:11 AttackZerg wrote:More from Melanie's post, ".... The things i've said and done to please him go against many of my personal beliefs. But persuading me to engage in some humiliating acts, i allowed that to happen even though i didn’t want it to, was just gross and made my skin crawl. Allowing the relationship we had to persist offered him the ability to exercise his devious superiority. He objectified me. He made me play these sick twisted games to get him off and brushed them off as exploring our kinks and sexuality. I’m working on healing from this. .... " www.twitlonger.comI don't want casters who treat people like this.
I still have no idea what he did. Do you?
We're not just supporting someone who's sharing her story. We're also condemning someone, because names were given. And if we're condemning someone, that type of information matters.
This is a subjective story, and it's important for the victims that subjective stories are expressed. When it comes to discussing about the accused though, a more objective version is needed. If I say ''this person treated me like shit'', it can mean a very wide range of behaviors, from ignoring me to punching me in the face.
|
From Noami,
"... He told me that he was masturbating to the conversation we were having without me knowing. His tone immediately changed from one of someone who was insecure, to that of somebody who felt self satisfied. He then sent me a picture of it without consent. I immediately felt taken advantage of and manipulated, and blocked him. ...."
www.twitlonger.com
I don't want casters who act like this.
|
On June 27 2020 15:40 AttackZerg wrote:From Noami, "... He told me that he was masturbating to the conversation we were having without me knowing. His tone immediately changed from one of someone who was insecure, to that of somebody who felt self satisfied. He then sent me a picture of it without consent. I immediately felt taken advantage of and manipulated, and blocked him. ...." www.twitlonger.comI don't want casters who act like this.
Why bring up the first case again? It's creepy and awful, it's been discussed for ages already, and very clearly described as sexual harassment. No one is defending that.
|
More from Melanie's post
".... On Tuesday 06/23/2020 Reid and i had a conversation i never thought we would have and it was a little sus that he even brought it up. Since i’m not apart of the scene, he had rightfully assumed i hadn’t heard anything or knew that he had been accused of such things. In our conversation, he didn’t directly apologize for it, but he mentioned having done it to me. God knows how many other girls he’s done it to now as well. ..."
www.twitlonger.com
You have spent 14 hours in this thread writing, Reid has spent his time reaching out to victims and doing damage control and not apologizing. He hasn't denied anything.
I believe women of color and I think they are regularly dehumanized and de-legitimatized in public spaces like this.
Her testimony should matter and it does.
|
On June 27 2020 05:17 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 05:10 Artisreal wrote:On June 27 2020 05:03 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 04:58 Artisreal wrote:On June 27 2020 04:47 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 04:44 Artisreal wrote:On June 27 2020 03:53 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 03:44 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 27 2020 03:39 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 03:33 Qikz wrote:
[quote]
It was consent based on emotional abuse, wtf how can you be so dense. This relationship lasted for years. You can't claim to be sexually harassed by someone who sent you a dick pic if you've engaged in an intimate relationship afterwards.The nature of the emotional abuse itself is very vague. And the thing is, while emotional abuse may be immoral, it hurts, but it is not a crime, and it won't get anyone fired out of any job. This is where I draw the line, it doesn't deserve to be public. Are we now gonna judge everyone with any amount of internet fame who has had a toxic relationship in the past? You absolutely can. You can be sexually harassed by anyone, regardless of your previous or present or future relationship. You can be harassed by your spouse, even. If someone sends a dick pic and you go along with it and reply ''hot'', it's not sexual harassment. ''Unsollicited'' isn't the key word to determine if it's harassment or not. It's ''unwanted''. In this case, she went along with it, and engaged in a relationship with the guy. There is no harassment, period. If that is your honest opinion I feel sorry for any of your future partners. It is maybe 30 years ago that in the German parliament a woman spoke about rape during marriage and this was a foreign concept for virtually all men present who burst into laughter. You are 30 years behind. If someone is in a partnership with you, you are entitled to exactly that, and really no more, apart from what your partner wants to give you. Than means, in some cases zilch of the booty call, intercourse, sex, Bunga bunga. Not even a boobie squeeze or even a hug. If your partner wants you to stop sending dick pics all of a sudden you accept that. What the fuxk man? Is it not my opinion. It is the law. https://www.un.org/womenwatch/osagi/pdf/whatissh.pdf Either I grossly misunderstood your post or dick pic is mentioned on page 1: Unwanted letters, telephone calls, or materials of a sexual nature. That is sexual harassment. Whether it's a relationship or not doesn't make any difference whatsoever. If you think quoting a guideline for identifying workplace sexual harassment will tell anyone that there cannot be sexual harassment in a relationship you are so far off, the closest you could be is Mercury. Here's what I said earlier for the full context : If someone sends a dick pic and you go along with it and reply ''hot'', it's not sexual harassment. ''Unsollicited'' isn't the key word to determine if it's harassment or not. It's ''unwanted''. In this case, she went along with it, and engaged in a relationship with the guy. There is no harassment, period. Is it not my opinion. It is the law. ---- Again, unwanted is very different from unsollicitated. Fair enough. I understand your viewpoint. I don't understand how it's unwanted but maybe that's legalese. As the sender you cannot know how the receiver will react though. Kind of a serious gamble to do imo. I'm not sure where the confusion is TBH. If you are alone on a bus and pull out your dick to show someone is that OK? If you are alone on a bus and Text someone a picture of your Dick, that is some how Ok? The answer is no to both. Now if you are alone on the bus and she/he says can I see you Dick? And you show her is that OK? Now you are alone on the bus and she/he says can you send me a picture of your Dick? And you do is that OK? The answer to both is yes. Don't over complicate it, if it is wrong to do IRL it is wrong to do via text, same for most things. Edit: I should be clear, I don't think Artisreal is confused.
A little late to the party but I do not condone randomly sending dick pics.
|
United States4883 Posts
On June 27 2020 14:40 mcgormack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 12:57 EsportsJohn wrote:On June 27 2020 12:17 mcgormack wrote:On June 27 2020 11:03 Wombat_NI wrote:
Absolutely it should be. If you’re a woman dealing with someone do you want to know if they’re a sexual predator or not?
A friend tells you, about another friend that you know, ''I was emotionally abused by that person''. Before passing a judgement on the accused, the first thing that a reasonable person will ask, rightfully so, will be ''oh ok, what happened?''If ''I was emotionally abused'' is enough information for you to pass a judgement on someone accused of it, I feel like this is unreasonable and unfair. Keeping a critical sense and expecting more information from such a broad statement is not the same as not believing the victim or discrediting at all. These types of accusations have serious consequences to everyone involved, and unfortunately, strictly in terms of judging the guy, this one story doesn't bring much on the table. That's why I've read every account of sexual harassment and assault in this thread. Literally every single one of them details in what way they were abused. You're an idiot, please stop arguing. Every sexual harassment account mentionned against Rapid was detailled enough so we all know what we're talking about (talking about his dick to random women and dick pics), and that's absolutely fair. Same for Avilo. If we're gonna condemn someone in this community, we better know for what reason. Our discussions would have been very different if the stories were about vague ''sexual harassment'', let's not pretend otherwise. Also, I'm being respectful and I'd please appreciate the same treatment.
There's literally no point to your posts then. You are using a hypothetical that doesn't even exist.
EDIT: If you had seen my other posts, you would have realized that calling you an idiot was pretty respectful for me.
|
It doesn't seem appropriate when someone without a report button starts calling people names regardless of how much I and or others agree with the overall opinion expressed.
|
United States4883 Posts
On June 27 2020 17:25 Penev wrote:
It doesn't seem appropriate when someone without a report button starts calling people names regardless of how much I and or others agree with the overall opinion expressed.
The moderation team has already had a discussion with me. This thread is not really a debate between two equally valid stances but rather an attempt by a handful to help educate and untangle the ignorant gaslighting posts by others. The overall opinion is in favor of supporting the people speaking out, and a small handful of people are trying to distract or dilute the message with nonsensical theoretical arguments that are designed to just make the other side give up rather than prove anything meaningful.
The moderation team is unfortunately bound by strictures to try and keep an open, civil discourse so that TL.net doesn't go the way of censorship. While I (again) greatly appreciate the people who are engaging the troll posts in a level-headed manner, I also think it's important to single out those who do not contribute to the discussion in any meaningful or valid way with the most blunt and straightforward language.
|
On June 27 2020 17:43 EsportsJohn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 17:25 Penev wrote:
It doesn't seem appropriate when someone without a report button starts calling people names regardless of how much I and or others agree with the overall opinion expressed. The moderation team has already had a discussion with me. This thread is not really a debate between two equally valid stances but rather an attempt by a handful to help educate and untangle the ignorant gaslighting posts by others. The overall opinion is in favor of supporting the people speaking out, and a small handful of people are trying to distract or dilute the message with nonsensical theoretical arguments that are designed to just make the other side give up rather than prove anything meaningful. The moderation team is unfortunately bound by strictures to try and keep an open, civil discourse so that TL.net doesn't go the way of censorship. While I (again) greatly appreciate the people who are engaging the troll posts in a level-headed manner, I also think it's important to single out those who do not contribute to the discussion in any meaningful or valid way with the most blunt and straightforward language.
I don't want to diverge the discussion and attention outside of main topic here, but I must say that nothing of what you said here above entitles you to call someone idiot. I think every conversation should be based on respect and understanding.
Personal, inter-thread argues that break into insults should be moderated according to the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
