Home > Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Dystopia, Musings, Philosophy sans Sophistry, Reason, Secular Religions, Skepticism > More Thoughts on Aziz Ansari “Sexual Assault” Scandal: Jan 20, 2018

More Thoughts on Aziz Ansari “Sexual Assault” Scandal: Jan 20, 2018

In my previous post on this topic, I wrote that latent racism and a miscalculation about the social standing of white womanhood in 2017 were major factors contributing to the accusations leveled by that woman against Aziz Ansari. The woman in question would not have dared to make those accusations unless she felt it was possible to get away with making them, given the significant amount of contrary evidence in her own testimony. In some respects, this case is eerily similar to another recent backfire for the ‘MeToo’ and Time’s Up’ movement.

How many of you have followed the aftermath of similar accusations against a journalist known as Jordan Chariton? To make a long story short, one of his female colleagues cheated on her husband with him and later accused him of sexual assault. The result of this malicious rumor and its dissemination by an other journalist, or two, resulted in him being fired by TYT- who was his main employer at that time. He has since sued HuffPost, which was one of main redistributors of that libelous report. As of time of writing this post, Jordan has reached a settlement with ‘The Intercept’ (for republishing that libelous claim) and TYT.

Now, some of you might say that this supports the idea that such claims against more well-known men are not inspired by racism- since Jordan Chariton is white. Well.. I never said that such claims were always due to racism. However, for reasons which I shall go into soon, race played a major role in the claims made by the accuser of Aziz Ansari. To start with, she accused Aziz of sexual assault even though her own account of that event did not support her contention. The woman who accused Jordan Chariton of sexual assault kept on altering her story to the point where later versions of her story clearly contradicted her initial version.

The point I am trying to make is that the woman who accused Jordan Chariton at least tried to change her story to make it sound like a sexual assault. In contrast, the woman who accused Aziz Ansari tried to extend the definition of sexual assault to new and highly problematic levels- specifically withdrawing consent after the encounter was consummated. In case you have not read her original account, it is clear that she never verbally communicated her desire to end the encounter to Aziz. Nor did he force her to participate in an act (such as penetrative sex) when she overtly refused to do so.

In other words, she accused him of sexual assault largely because the encounter failed to live up to her expectations. If that seems too harsh, consider that she by her own accounts went to his apartment on the first date, got naked with him and then engaged in repeated oral sex with him. Perhaps more importantly, she continued the encounter even after her allegedly felt that he was not “listening to her non-verbal communications of distress”. She was therefore a willing and enthusiastic participant in that encounter- when it occurred. So what happened afterwards? Why did she later start representing it as sexual assault, after the fact, rather than a date marred by poor sexual chemistry?

Part of the answer to that question can be found sprinkled throughout her account. To be specific, it is clear that she felt that Aziz did not live up to her sexual expectations after the encounter had started. Now, we can make all kinds of guesses as to why she felt like that- but it is clear that she knew who Aziz was and his general physical attributes before initiating said encounter. I mean.. if she did not want to have sex with short brown-skinned men, she did not have to approach him in the first place and then go on a date with him. And yet, she did all that and more. So why made her change the way she felt about it- after the encounter?

Let me put forth another idea about her motivations- specifically, that she is a ‘starfucker’ or ‘groupie’. I am sure most readers are aware that even pretty ugly men who are famous, or infamous, seem to get inordinate amounts of female sexual attention- which they would not receive if they were not famous. I can bet you that this woman would have given Aziz the time of the day if he had approached her before his entertainment career took off. Yet, after getting his own series on NetFlix and an award or two, it was she who approached and flirted with him.

But what went wrong? Why don’t other groupies (especially of musicians) complain about sexual assault regardless of the quality of sex? What made her answer the solicitation for such a story about Aziz Ansari by that webzine?

Here is what I think happened.. She correctly guessed that having sex with Aziz Ansari was a sure thing given his known preference for white women and his relatively newfound fame. Maybe she wanted it to be another notch on her proverbial ‘celebrity’ bedpost. However the combination of a lack of sexual chemistry between them and the less than enthusiastic reception from her friends after confessing to casual sex with a non-white guy made it necessary for her to reframe that incident as a sexual assault. She got her chance when the webzine that published her account began soliciting for such stories about Aziz Ansari.

She could now try to rewrite her less than stellar sexual encounter with a semi-famous non-white guy as sexual assault- thereby freeing her (in her mind) from any personal agency or role in that encounter. But perhaps, the single most important factor behind her willingness to share her story with that webzine was the following calculation- who would the public support.. an anonymous young white girl or a swarthy non-white man? As it turns out, she miscalculated pretty badly since 2018 is a very different from 1998 or even 2008- when that calculation was last viable.

Change in american society, racial demographics and communication technology over the last two decades have made the tired “wholesome young white girl sexually abused by swarthy non-white guy” shtick fundamentally nonviable. Furthermore, most men and more than a few women seem to have realized that and attempts to legitimize withdrawal of sexual consent after the fact would be highly problematic and quickly thin out most male support for other feminist causes- which is something they cannot afford, at least for now. Might write another part in this series depending on future developments and reader comments.

What do you think? Comments?

  1. January 20, 2018 at 7:12 pm

    Recently, a basketball player publicly rejected Rihanna’s advances. Years ago when he tried to get at her, she tells him to contact her when he’s playing pro-sports. Now, she tried to throw herself at him and he rejected her. Good for him. Typical groupie shit, nonetheless. Some of these groupies are creeps or looking for something to “kiss and tell” about. Great point about most musicians dodging the bullet. Most groupies who fuck rappers & R&B singers just wanna fulfill their dream. Some of them write tell-all books like Karrine Steffans (which didn’t really make the men look bad, IMO. It just made HER look like a fucking airhead). Then she throws black men under the bus and throws the pussy at Bill Maher!

    • Le` Coupe
      January 22, 2018 at 5:22 pm

      nah dude .. she didn’t throw herself at him …. you lying dude bro

      • January 22, 2018 at 7:49 pm

        …prove me wrong.

  2. Saor
    January 20, 2018 at 7:13 pm

    Perhaps I´m repeating something u might have said: but it´s easy to see that the social system created to restrict and guide women´s behaviour also protected clueless men and gave them some hand in their dealings with women.

    A few decades ago, this would have been a total non story.

    This whole hysteria, together with the other wedge issues and political divisions is going to yield one hell of a scandal these days.

    • Conscience constituent
      January 22, 2018 at 5:50 am

      No friend,marriage has been a shit deal for men.
      They had to work themselves into an early grave for shitty aging wives to whom sometimes they left big inheritances with which they could live very confortable lives after their husband’s early death(50yo/60yo) along with their pention that they were and still are able to inherit despite not having worked for it.
      Studies tell us that between 10% and 30% of the offspring born in a marriage are not fathered by the “husband”.
      Do i need to continue?

      • Saor
        January 22, 2018 at 8:19 am

        Thing is marriage was never a “good deal” for most people, one married to expand family, community, culture, property, kids, etc…, hence the restrictive laws against divorce – what the women call opression was the obligation to be tied to their husbands –
        when marriage and sex became for personal satisfaction: divorces all over.

        Im not trying to square your point, mine is that either one chooses personal satisfaction with all of its struggles or expands/maintains community with all of the restrictions.

      • Conscience constituent
        January 22, 2018 at 10:03 am

        Normally i’d patient with you but i’ve seen the lives of many many men from the past generation go down the fucking toilet because they were told all their lives that their purpose is to be a provider for some random woman that they happened to fuck.

        Your talking points are the usual silly drivel you get from christian conservativesm,but it’s all bullshit,my country is very christian and i know plenty of old couples without any offspring where the marriage basically only served to give a lazy stay at hone parasite a lavish lifestyle all paid for by the sweat and labor of their husbands.
        No divorce there and yet it was still all shit for the man,yeah,the problem is divorce right.

    • January 22, 2018 at 11:04 am

      I’m age 62 this year, so I’m one from those past US generations of men.

      The social and financial dynamics of past societal systems making marriage essentially mandatory may have restricted women’s damaging behaviors, and, also enabled the many men whom women did not find sexually attractive to have, at least in theory, a long-term sex partner.

      However, the reality never equaled the theory — because, very many if not most of those married men eventually or even immediately discovered themselves legally obligated to a woman unwilling and/or unable to satisfy his sexual or companionship needs.

      By the way, I’m anomalous. I’ve been married nearly 38 years, first marriage, and I’ve never experienced the financial, sexual, nor “parasitic” behaviors most married men experience. My wife and I actually have, and have had for decades, an open marriage, so I have had (and presently have) several other women as extramarital sexual partners. But, my wife is “not like most women” because she’s Asperger’s — and that wiring makes her logically thinking, reasoning, and behaving more nearly like a man does than a normal emotion-driven, irrational woman does. Nonetheless, I’ve observed as true that, for most men, marriage is an inevitable trainwreck. When I married her when I was a naive age 24, I chanced to, unknowingly, avoid that trainwreck. But knowing what I know now, and the near-zero probability of chancing on a woman like her, if I had to do life over, I’d never board the marriage train.

      • Conscience constituent
        January 23, 2018 at 8:05 am

        I see,if possible can you write an article about the stories of men being ruined by marriage that you’ve seen with your eyes?

      • neoconned
        February 3, 2018 at 6:52 pm

        …very many if not most of those married men eventually or even immediately discovered themselves legally obligated to a woman unwilling and/or unable to satisfy his sexual or companionship needs.

        This was me. I knew three days after I met this woman that I was making a mistake by forming a relationship with her, yet I was too emotionally broken to stand up for myself (long story). The first day back from our honeymoon, this gaslighter told me that sex once a month was enough for her and thus for me as well. I’m still with her because she’s too stupid to know that I have found my solace elsewhere, and I’m not risking her destroying me economically with a divorce. I’m too old to live under a bridge now.

  3. P Ray
    January 20, 2018 at 9:14 pm

    For a long time the CONservatives have been riding the train of “We must protect white womenhood, which excuses racist behaviour against men of colour”.

    However the funny thing they’ve forgotten is women probably put that idea of protecting womanhood into their head … while simultaneously saying they don’t need no man. Almost sounds like they got a protection racket for free … while telling the guys that protected them (that they didn’t like) “let’s just be friends”.

    The other thing about sexuality is … men’s sexuality and desire is demonised (witness the closing of subreddit r/incels) … while women’s sexuality and desire is adulated ( r/rapekink, where women fantasise about being raped … of course by a tall, handsome guy)

    What women mean when they are campaigning against rape:
    (thanks to redpillcomics.blogspot.com)

    This study evaluated the rape fantasies of female undergraduates (N = 355) using a fantasy checklist that reflected the legal definition of rape and a sexual fantasy log that included systematic prompts and self-ratings.

    Results indicated that 62% of women have had a rape fantasy, which is somewhat higher than previous estimates

    05-02-2014, 11:43 AM

    Join Date: Apr 2014
    Posts: 339

    If u have not yet realised women are extremely primitive, there is no hope for you.

    How about this one, eh?

    Over 90% of female rape victims experience orgasm during the attack

    BOSTON – A new study to be published in next month’s Journal of Clinical Psychiatry is causing controversy in the psychiatric community for some of its unexpected findings. The study, titled “Shame and Guilt in the Aftermath of Sexual Attack”, verifies much of what we know about the mental health of rape victims. However, one observation in particular is raising eyebrows. After analyzing the anonymous transcripts of over 5,000 post-rape counseling sessions, the authors point out that almost all female rape victims experience orgasm during the attack.

    Asked for comment, Dr. Herschel Liebowitz, one of the authors of the study, said, “Millions of years of evolution has hard-wired women to be attracted to strong, dominant, and aggressive men. Unfortunately, rapists exhibit an extreme form of these characteristics, even if only temporarily, and this causes an unexpected and involuntary physiological response in the victim.”

    Researchers focused on the psychiatric impact of this involuntary response. “Rape victims in general tend to experience an overwhelming sense of shame and guilt”, noted Dr. Liebowitz. “This study finds that the guilt is not a result of the attack necessarily, but rather her own response to the attack. Intellectually, she is disgusted at being violated by an anonymous attacker. But physically, her body seems to have welcomed the attack in the form of sexual climax or orgasm. We believe this contradiction in feelings is the primary source of their shame and guilt.”
    So here you have thousands of “sexual experts” who try to help women in couples achieve orgasm with their beta husband, years after years with different tricks and techniques without suceeding.

    .. Then when bitches gets raped, 90% (!!!!!!!) gets an orgasm?!

    LOL @ WOMEN,


    Remember, Chad Thundercock does nothing wrong!
    Women seem to agree too! 🙂

    • P Ray
      January 20, 2018 at 11:29 pm

      As a related follow up to #metoo and #timesup
      Natalie Portman tells LA Women’s March she experienced ‘sexual terrorism’ at 13 after starring in her first film when a fan sent her a ‘rape fantasy’ and critics ‘talked about my budding breasts’
      Natalie Portman said that after her first movie ‘The Professional’ at 13 she was victim of ‘sexual terrorism’
      Portman said her very first fan letter detailed a ‘rape fantasy,’ and movie reviewers spoke about her breasts
      She said a local radio station started a countdown to her 18th birthday, when she would be legal to sleep with
      Portman said to feel safe she rejected roles with kissing scenes and became known as ‘bookish’ and ‘prudish’
      Speaking at the LA Women’s March, she called for a world where women can express their sexuality safely
      She joined dozens of celebrities around the country to partake in women’s marches Saturday afternoon

      As people have variously observed:
      “Incels find girl attractive: “I’m not a sex object!”
      Nobody finds girl attractive: “Waaah! Fat shaming/unrealistic standards!”
      What do they want? It’s obvious. Their objective is just to get Chad and Chad only whether they’re fat/skinny or hot/ugly.
      Plus nobody gives a fuck about incels whining about how no girls find them attractive.”
      “Couldn’t have said it better, their entire world-view changes based on the type of guy desiring them. The same women who rant about being “objectified” let Chad cum all over their face while he calls them his “little cumslut”
      “An ugly man showing sexual interest in a female is worse than ten September 11ths”

      – Remember “a woman’s personality is determined by your level of physical attractiveness” – Minjaze

    • January 21, 2018 at 4:05 am

      “Over 90% of female rape victims experience orgasm during the attack”

      PRay, I agree with most of your thoughts and conclusions.

      However, for the sake of avoiding discredibility, regarding, ‘…next month’s Journal of Clinical Psychiatry is causing controversy in the psychiatric community for some of its unexpected findings. The study, titled “Shame and Guilt in the Aftermath of Sexual Attack”, it appears no such study ever existed and may have been a hoax. You may want to start fact-checking it here: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Shame_and_Guilt_in_the_Aftermath_of_Sexual_Attack

      • P Ray
        January 25, 2018 at 1:43 am

        Whew, good thing I quoted someone else and not myself 🙂

        Anyhow, for a good dose of men understanding women with some humour thrown in, try


      • P Ray
        January 25, 2018 at 1:47 am

        And another good example of “women excuse behaviour of the guy they’re attracted to, that they never would tolerate from a guy they’re NOT attracted to”:
        Millionaire’s playboy son who dragged his girlfriend by the hair and kicked her in the stomach at his £2m apartment AVOIDS jail (and the court hears they are staying together)
        Marco Nardone dragged Toni Allcock by the hair and kicked her in the stomach
        The 29-year-old carried out the brutal attack at his £2million Hammersmith flat
        Judge described assault as ‘vicious, spiteful and sustained and very shocking’
        By Richard Spillett and Amie Gordon For Mailonline
        PUBLISHED: 11:47 GMT, 18 January 2018 | UPDATED: 19:16 GMT, 18 January 2018

        Looks like Ms. Allcock … just wants that One cock! 🙂

      • P Ray
        July 27, 2019 at 4:27 pm

        Updated for joesantus

        (Maybe rape fantasy is now common because women know they only respect power, therefore, want the guy that can force them to their will?)

  4. OhioStater
    January 21, 2018 at 8:21 am

    Fascinating insight. If anything polite white society should ALWAYS believe the brown and black men.

    Given the inherently racist nature of most white people in USA, that would be a good idea. Sarcasm begets sarcasm.

    • OhioStater
      January 22, 2018 at 7:43 am

      Well my rationale (no sarcasm) is protecting women only makes sense if they’re worthy of protecting. I haven’t gotten the impression the alpha white males of America have a shortage of women, therefore they have plenty to choose from even if they kick women like Grace to the curb. Believing a brown man over a white woman is effectively expelling her from whichever white society she belonged to. I also think my “believing the brown man” rationale sends the message these women are on their own, making an example out of “Grace”, one that others dare not follow.

  5. MikeCA
    January 21, 2018 at 2:26 pm

    I don’t think this woman was a groupie. She was star struck with Aziz and imagined some kind of relationship with Aziz. When they got back to the apartment, Aziz quickly started foreplay. This made her uncomfortable, but she did not object. Maybe she was afraid to object. Afraid that if she objected, the date would be over and she would never see Aziz again. When she did finally say no to penetrative sex, she did not leave, because she did not want to break off with Aziz.

    I think Aziz was confused when she said things were going too fast, but didn’t leave. He had no idea what she wanted. It seems to me she wished she had stopped the foreplay more quickly. She didn’t want to leave, but she didn’t want sex either and she didn’t know what to say or do.

    She blames Aziz for continuing to try to initiate sex, after they had engaged in naked foreplay, but she was not clearly communicating her feelings and she blames Aziz for not being able to read her mind.

    To me this is a total failure to communicate.

    But that is not the reason we are talking about that incident.. right? The fact that her version of the story gained media publicity and was used by some white people attempting to destroy Aziz Ansari’s career is why I wrote those two posts.

  6. Your thoughts
    January 21, 2018 at 7:34 pm

    What are your thoughts on the parallels of this case to Jian Ghomeshi’s with respect to the public reception? In Ghomeshi’s case, I think the magnitude of aggression in the sexual practices formed the bulk of the media narrative and overshadowed the fact that Ghomeshi was a man of color (Indian background, I suppose) whose accusers were white. I always suspected there was a similar motivation of ‘revenge’ that is displayed in Ansari’s case. That is, something along the thought of ‘how could someone perceived as lower in the racial hierarchy end up treating me as something lesser – it should have been the other way around.’

    Ghomeshi’s actions were very close to what is defined as sexual assault by law. While race might have been an issue in that case too, it is much harder to defend a guy who is unilaterally going ’50 shades of grey’ on his dates.

  7. Not Born This Morning
    January 22, 2018 at 2:33 pm

    I agree with you. Everything you consider in this is the only really plausible.

    This is a bit philosophical and metaphorical, but…I add the following. This “fight” involves more than a battle of the sexes….

    As you stated – “She could now try to rewrite her less than stellar sexual encounter with a semi-famous non-white guy as sexual assault – thereby freeing her (in her mind) from any personal agency or role in that encounter.”

    What is “in her mind” is exclusively what she wants all perception of herself to be on a stage she created (with help). She convinces herself that her act is seen as real by others, then she accepts it to be real for herself regardless of whether it is actually real or not. She is a character in her own play so to speak. She is a prisoner of her own solipsism. She cannot see herself for what and who she truly is from outside her theater because she cannot see anything else than her theater and the roles that she scripts for herself and others. Her dilemma is quite literally that her theater is not reality. This is why she must continue to rewrite her script in a futile effort to maintain control of the story, her story. She remains unaware of what and who she really is as she cocoons herself in her own web of lies. She does not realize, and never will, that her theater is incapable of ruling the universe. That the universe itself is not just a character in her play. This is the demise of “feminism” and all the other acts of the neoliberal sociocultural drama. It is not real.

    She is a petty con artist. Many women are saying the #metoo movement “has gone too far”. This further exposes #metoo for what it really is. #metoo very quickly became a tool used by not just the more powerful, cunning cunts and whores. ALL cunts were provided the opportunity to indulge themselves in it. This allowed the less cunning, the less powerful and less crafty, but more easily recognized, to employ it in ways that exposes it for what it really is to a significant number of people who would otherwise remain clueless. “Gone too far” simply exposes the fact that is was a sham from its inception. It went “too far” and exposed itself for the lie that it really is from its inception. The girl who accused Aziz (among others) has disappointed ALL women because her use of #metoo exposes what ALL women are doing with it or at least have the propensity to do with it. They are not disappointed because things have gone “too far”. That is yet another lie, a script change to deceive and re-obscure what it really is.

    • January 22, 2018 at 3:48 pm

      “This allowed the less cunning, the less powerful and less crafty, but more easily recognized, to employ it in ways that exposes it for what it really is to a significant number of people who would otherwise remain clueless.”


      I routinely employ extreme examples to demonstrate what might otherwise be too subtle for some to recognize (e.g. to counter the wonderful yet wishful thought of “we can do anything we set our will to doing as long as we passionately want it and give ourselves to whatever it requires to do it”, I’ll ask, “So, if I sincerely want to fly on Earth like Superman, unassisted by any technology at all, I can as long as I want it badly enough?…and, if not, might that mean there are likewise limitations to other things I sincerely want, and perhaps, to many if not all things I sincerely want?”)

  8. Not Born This Morning
    January 23, 2018 at 11:39 am


    Is Ruth Bader Ginsberg now admitting that she cheated in college and is scholastically dishonest? Did she in fact obtain answers to test questions prior to taking the tests as she is now telling the entire world sixty or so years later? What did she do with the answers?
    What really happened (or not) between her and this professor over sixty years ago? Was she engaged by, or did she engage other professors in this manner? Should we all believe only her account without any questions? Why? Is she beyond reproach simply because she is female?

    Are we supposed to automatically assume that professors were giving her answers to test questions and then requesting sexual favors just because she says so? What did she mean when she said, “And I knew exactly what he wanted in return”? How did she “know”? Was “what she knew” his idea or her idea? Are we supposed to automatically assume that she in no way insinuated her sexuality in some manner to gain access to the answers? She is certainly insinuating it now, isn’t she? Why are we supposed to automatically make assumptions that support her claims? Is it just because Ginsberg is a woman and we are supposed to automatically assume that by “virtue” of being a woman she is morally superior and that any other consideration is implausible? Did he ask for sexual favors in return? If he did, why does that matter, other than the fact that someone could be receiving grades they didn’t earn? Or, did Ginsberg prejudge (frame) the prof and is she by extension prejudging (framing) all males now and has she been doing this her entire life? If so, is she appropriate for the supreme court? And is her inflammatory sociopolitical rhetoric fit for the supreme court? Should we trust her judgement?

    Why specifically is the sexual context of Ginsberg’s alleged incident the primary focus? I am all for prosecuting those who commit scholastic dishonesty and preventing it. Professors who give answers for favors and the students who use them to cheat should both be expelled. But, why specifically is the sexual context of this issue the focus of it? What is wrong with sex? Why would Ginsberg have a problem with the sexual part? Haven’t women been using their sexuality to barter with men for provisioning and favors for eons? Don’t most women openly brag about it, even claiming that prostitution is “the oldest profession”? Don’t most women compulsively compete in advertising their sexuality to men?

    If a woman advertises herself sexually to a man in exchange for favors, she is universally accepted as just “being a woman”. But if a man offers favors in exchange for sex, then he has committed harassment?

    • P Ray
      January 23, 2018 at 5:19 pm

      Sometimes old women want to “get in on the action” that younger women are participating in.
      Just to remind the world they are “relevant”.
      But good catch on the double standards between men and women advertising sexually.

    • Yusef
      January 23, 2018 at 5:59 pm

      “Is she beyond reproach simply because she is female?”

      If she is judged beyond reproach it has as much to do with her being a former Supreme Court justice as it does with her being female. I would say in either case– her being a former Supreme Court justice or her being a female– it is sad anyone would use it as a basis for regarding her highly.

      When Ginsberg was on the Supreme Court, she was one of the justices who rushed to finalize the 2000 presidential election results in favor of George W. Bush. Such a person is far from “beyond reproach.” She’s just a lackey and a hireling in her “professional” life, and now we learn she’s a fraud in her private life, too.

      • January 24, 2018 at 2:54 pm

        She still sits on the court and will until she is dead or unable to serve due to age / illness.


      • January 24, 2018 at 2:58 pm

        GBG still on the court as I write this.

        What filth will emit from the mouth or flow from the pen of this evil worm next?

      • Yusef
        February 1, 2018 at 6:51 pm

        Damned if you ain’t right…She’s a sitting Supreme Court Justice and she’s speaking this way. Wow!

        I also didn’t realize out of the nine Supreme Court Justices, currently four are now women.


      • Yusef
        February 1, 2018 at 6:56 pm

        Oops. Three currently serving women, not four.

      • TerryThePirate
        June 10, 2019 at 3:48 am

        “When Ginsberg was on the Supreme Court, she was one of the justices who rushed to finalize the 2000 presidential election results in favor of George W. Bush.“

        Um—actually, she DISSENTED from that decision.

    • January 24, 2018 at 5:29 pm

      what interests me about the RBG story about earning less than a male colleague back in the day is that when companies had to pay men and women the same, the pay for women did not usually rise–the pay for the men went down. We forget that factories in the 19th c. preferred women and children workers because they could be paid less, thus men would often be turned away and had to take even worse jobs like in steel mills.

      When minimum wage laws were being bandied about, women’s groups were against them because they believed it meant that companies would therefore not pay MORE than that wage to women. *I got this info from Back Story, a great history podcast I’ve listened to for years.*

      • January 25, 2018 at 5:09 pm

        Very interesting. I did not know that and will research it also. Makes sense.

        Things never happen because people “care”. History is shaped by physical events and the struggle to compete, not by fairytale ideologies. Technological advancements shape history. The physiological reality of human birth control pills has certainly changed human behavior, as one example.

        Not sure yet, but I suspect that the passage of the 19th amendment in 1920 had more to do with exploiting women for votes than empathy for women from politicians. The massive number of male deaths, especially young males, during WW1 decreased the voting population and politicians would certainly be interested in conning women for votes. I wonder what the contest of political scams to seduce women was like between the parties at that time.

  9. January 24, 2018 at 4:54 pm

    What do you think of the current Larry Nassar incident?

    • January 25, 2018 at 5:29 pm

      Some targets of the witch hunt are actually perverse perpetrators. No doubt some of his accusers fabricated and exaggerated their claims. Were vaginal inspections part of the routine medical evaluations? However, he is most likely guilty given the large number of claims against him, some damning testimony and his own admissions. However, it is oddly strange that he got away with it for so long, very odd. Why is he just now being called out? Why would his prosecution be procrastinated apparently indefinitely until #Metoo? It makes no sense that someone would not have gone after him before now, a victim, a parent, a relative, friend, a boyfriend, someone. I haven’t kept up with all details, maybe someone tried. How did he remain immune for so long?

      • ant
        January 26, 2018 at 1:16 am

        gold medals>>>>>>>>>>>>>>justice

  10. P Ray
    September 16, 2018 at 1:02 am

    After the #metoo baloney, Aziz Ansari is BACK!
    EXCLUSIVE: Aziz Ansari’s mystery new love is revealed to be Danish physics PhD student, 29, who expressed doubts about the #MeToo movement
    Serena Campbell, 29, from Denmark, has been revealed to be the mystery woman spotted with Aziz Ansari, 35, at the US Open
    The former teaching student is studying for her PhD at London’s King’s College, specializing in plasmonics, the study of electromagnetic fields
    She is also involved in helping an effort to find the weather on planters outside the solar system
    Her mom Kirsten, confirmed to DailyMailTV that her daughter was pictured with the comic, but declined to comment on the nature of their relationship

    Campbell shared an article last year titled ‘Literally, Why Can’t I Say #MeToo?’ in which the author says she struggles to identify as a victim despite her experiences

    Suddenly the “sisterhood” doesn’t dare to stand up and say Aziz Ansari is a wily victimiser. Must be all the regret they feel about being racist /s

  1. August 22, 2018 at 3:48 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: