Slashdot Mirror
Tor Project Confirms Sexual Misconduct By Developer Jacob Appelbaum (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The Tor Project, a nonprofit known for its online anonymity software, says it has verified claims that former employee Jacob Appelbaum engaged in "sexually aggressive behavior" with people inside and outside of its organization. "We have confirmed that the events did take place as reported," Shari Steele, Tor's executive director, tells The Verge. In a blog post today, Steele says that Tor began an investigation into Appelbaum's behavior after several people came forward with allegations of misconduct in late May. In a statement made in June, he said the allegations were "entirely false." He resigned from the Tor Project in May. "I want to thank all the people who broke the silence around Jacob's behavior," Steele writes. "It is because of you that this issue has now been addressed. I am grateful you spoke up, and I acknowledge and appreciate your courage." Steele says that Tor is now implementing a new anti-harassment policy, as well as a process for submitting complaints and having them reviewed. The changes will be put in place this week. Tor also announced last month that it would replace its entire board of directors.
A "confirmation" from an internal corporate investigation is worth about as much as my toilet.
This is a case of hipster he said she said. SJW 'logic' likely applies.
http://jacobappelbaum.net/ This site reeks of typical SJW style faux fear of intimidation.
Tor is backdoored. You can see that from the ease with which the Feds locate sites and users. Thus its one and only use: bringing free, anonymous, speech to people in repressive regimes, its ended.
When a company first sacks someone facing no charges, then hires a PI to confirm their reason for sacking, even though he's not claiming wrongful dismissal. That pretty much tells you that the organization is stuff full of bad actors. They go beyond any allegations and into a hatchet job.
And those bad actors delivered exactly what is expected. Good people gone, bad people in, product *demonstrably* no longer works for its primary purpose. When outside universities can point out 100 fake attack nodes, that Tor Project somehow didn't notice, that tells you they are more bad than good in there.
So a new thing has to be made, and that new thing has to be made from trustable people. And that is Jacob.
These "we slept together and he licked my muff and that's rape because I didn't agree before hand he could lick my muff, only share the bed"... these are Assange style attacks, they were disclosed in the Snowden leaks, and they just make him more, demonstrably honest:
https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
"By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse “hacktivists” of using, the use of “honey traps” (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. "
Anonymous, secure, free speech trumps any of this shit, and a secure network delivered by a trusted person is necessary now. That's not Tor.
This is a case of hipster he said she said. SJW 'logic' likely applies.
http://jacobappelbaum.net/ This site reeks of typical SJW style faux fear of intimidation.
You used the "hipster" word, therefore you concede that you are completely full of shit.
This kind of accusation is usually BS to frame politically dangerous people.
Um. No. Seriously and respectfully ask some of your female friends what kind of misconduct they've experienced in the workplace. You may be amazed.
Real lawyers write in C++
Some of the accusations sound legit, some not so much. Lovecruft's claims she was fondeled after agreeing to sleep in the same bed as JA. What adult in their right mind sleeps in the same bed with another grown person of the opposite sex, then gets suprised to be frisked? Maybe I just wasn't raised the same way. I wouldn't even share a hotel room with another adult besides a explicit SO.
There were other claims which are still contested, such as the Nick Farr incident. The "victim" came out and said people blew things out of proportion and people misinterpreted what they saw.
More drama than Shakespeare.
Ever since gamergate my concepts of fair reporting, harassment, he said she said have been seriously adjusted. There was totally horrible people, saying horrible things, but it seems only one side of the story is ever reported, making people more and more jaded and cynical of the media.
Stories such as Linus specifically having to avoid spending any time with females one on one as he's been "targeted for take down". Situations of outright false claims against people, proven clear and still people write incorrect articles about them, deliberately.
This story may well be correct, however in the very very least, I will no longer blindly leap into "condemn them, silence them!!" mode as is intended. I am particularly skeptical when a "harassment policy" is put in place too, as those have been going a general indicator of people "meddling in the name of righteousness " regardless if there was even a problem in the first place.
Be wise and if you read the article at least try to find multiple sources and preferably the other side of the story. At least GG taught me take stuff on the Internet with again of salt finally.
P.s off topic , I used to see posts whining about how awful Slashdot mobile is, I thought the people were exaggerating. They aren't, it's a warcrime.
It isn't a coincidence that these alleged thingamajics surface right at the crux of entire board being offed.
While rest of you are having a social hard-on for and against the whole abuse scenario as per to their plan,
do we yet have answers to the actually meaningful questions?
I mean, The entire board of directors are being replaced. that's not a small thing.
what else?
Maybe JA was trying to laid, frankly. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. A grown adult woman of tor-developer-level intelligence could not see this coming? She then gets offended when he makes the next move, after willingly getting into a bed with a grown man. Sounds bizarrely clueless. A responsible person would have politely declined and slept somewhere else. I guess he should have broken out a PGP-signed proposal for intimacy. I'm not defending any of the other party accusations, but this is complete idiocy on her part.
There is always a reason, though not always obvious. Tor is now shit, because the good people were chased away. Notice that there are no criminal charges anywhere, just allegations and accusations repeated over and over on any media outlet that would print it. Lead developer gone, whole new board being elected, one should be rather suspicious.
Now for the tin foil hat: A whole lot of money and effort goes into taking over a project like Tor, and as we saw with the Snowden NSA leaks it is a global exploitation at least after the fact. China, the US, the UK, and just about everyone else suddenly has no problem finding people on Tor networks. All of those same groups can claim ignorance when the cat jumps out of the bag.
Sometimes it's not easy to see who benefits and a clear goal. That is when you need to look around to see why you are being distracted.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
You just said it twice. Point proven.
OP has obviously never backpacked, where mixed gender shared rooms are common.
That is one lousy article. The name of the guy is the only thing revealed, and that is a journalistic no-no IMO: you don't give the full name unless charges have been proven. By a judge. About the nature of his "misconduct", the article is very vague: it's couched in different terms, but it's never made clear what happened, when, where, in what context and who were the victims. It also focuses on the sexual transgressions, and only gives a fleeting reference to people being "humiliated, intimidated, bullied", without explaining why. I understand there is some sort of political battle that largely includes both sides in parallel, and that is not even hinted at. In short, it's bad journalism.
I've ended up having to share a room with a female coworker on a business trip (separate beds of course). Nothing untoward happened, no accusations were filed.
What is "sexual mistreatment"? I can't find any info in the article, or the link within that was purported to contain more information.
Given that this kind of accusation can permanently prevent someone from finding work in their field, I find these articles--lacking details, with no formal legal proceedings--troubling.
A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
But that's impossible. Everyone knows Slashdot posters are the most desirable of all men? How is it possible that she didn't immediately leap across the space, demand sexual gratification from you, and then inevitably go and tell your mutual supervisor that you molested her in a wanton and depraved manner?
Oh, I forget to mention SJW, so SJW this and SJW that! Women are vile evil creatures out to entrap men and then get them fired!
SJW....
SJW...
SJW .... SJW .... SJW !!!!!
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
She assumed you were gay.
They don't want a court involved for the same reason no corporate or private entity wants a court involved; because the court will find the organization was in the wrong, and will find against it. The whole point of having sexual harassment policies and making them apply to everyone from the CEO to the guy that vacuums the carpet is corporate liability for sexual harassment or assault lies solely on the perpetrator. Even where a board or management has been proven to have insufficiently protected employees from sexual or other kinds of abuse, a strong response is seen as a way of assuring the corporate culture is appropriately modified.
Where I work, and I am in a senior management position now, sexual harassment, bullying and other anti-social actions are all in the company policies, and those policies constitute part of an employee's employment contract. While serious assaults would be referred to police, actions that while perhaps not criminal in nature, but still in violation of the policies surrounding the most egregious behaviors will inevitably lead to termination (with severance where we deem it inappropriate to have the individual on premises one second longer).
It sounds to me like Tor hat a right shitty organizational culture which had far too much familiarity between employees, and while I'll wager that they did have the proper policies, non-enforcement can lead to those being little more than a booklet that collects dust in everyone's office. Well, that's bad on them, but at the end of the day, in the world we live in now, at any point one party in a sexual or erotic encounter can terminate that encounter immediately, and if the other party does not comply, then the line is crossed. But really, there should be a zero tolerance for shenanigans. Managers should not be having any kind of sexual encounters with subordinates, even if it is consensual. It's disruptive, bad for general moral, and opens up the organization to significant liabilities. Frankly, if I or one of the other managers had a sexual encounter with a subordinate, and it gets found out, I'd say we'd be out the door in a pretty big hurry.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
It may not be a crime to be bad, but in may still be an actionable offense by one's employer. Employers, particularly where employment contracts are in place, do not have to sit and wait for the police to charge someone, or wait until they're convicted, or even ignore violations of policy because they don't rise to the level of criminal actions, to sack someone.
Whether it's someone sticking his hands down a woman's pants or even just common theft are almost always actions that can lead to immediate termination.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Being stupid isn't a license for someone to sexually assault you. But there have been much more specific accusations about Appelbaum's behavior.
http://www.dailydot.com/layer8...
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
There have been at least a few people willing to go on record as witnesses to his ill behavior.
http://www.dailydot.com/layer8...
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
How about not having their asses sued off? Strong responses to sexual and other forms of misconduct are often not done out of some sense of decency, but because without a strong response, the victims' next route is to sue the organization, which can be very costly.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The blog writer explicitly said they weren't going in to details, but had confirmed to their own satisfaction the veracity of the reports. But there have been a few people willing to go on record to report on what they've seen of Appelbaum's behavior:
http://www.dailydot.com/layer8...
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
You're begging the question. If you put yourself in a position that conventionally implies interest in sexual activity, then it's NOT sexual assault for the other person to engage in sexual activity. Even if you didn't actually want it, you can't blame them for your own behaviour being misleading.
I bet your mum/sister/brother hope you don't have the occasion to sleep in the same bed as them
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
No. You ask; you don't assume there's some unspoken green light just because someone laid down next to you. If you don't get someone's consent and go ahead and grope them anyway, it's absolutely sexual assault.
You don't get a pass on nonconsensual behaviour just because you thought someone near you was sexually attractive. If you honestly think that you should, then you're a big part of the problem. And if you think it's such a fucking hardship to get consent, then I shudder to think of how you've treated any woman you've ever wanted to date.
It's all moot because false sexual misconduct claims are about as rare as bigfoot. The prospect of a claimant having to face a hostile courtroom where she's assumed to be a hooker pulling a scam before she even turns up tends to put people off.
Fuck off with this. There is a point beyond which nonconsent needs to be explicit; sharing a bed is exactly that point. "Sleeping with" somebody is used almost solely as euphemism for screwing in our language for a reason. Allowing that kind of intimacy is already saying "let's do this." If that isn't what you mean, you have to actually say so.
Did anybody wonder if there is something funny with Shari Steele? - her husband is working with the NSA. and probably works/worked for the NSA: https://bvass.wordpress.com/ta... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"No. You ask; you don't assume there's some unspoken green light just because someone laid down next to you. If you don't get someone's consent and go ahead and grope them anyway, it's absolutely sexual assault."
I shudder to think of the poor service you've been giving your women. You absolutely never ever "ask".
You touch her hand. You stroke her forearm. You touch her face. You touch your face to hers. You run your hand from her shoulder down do the small of her back while breathing hotly on her neck.
You run your hand over her hip and down the outside of her thigh, then, at the knee, you come up the middle of her hamstring and over her outer buttock to the small of her back. The next down stroke goes right down the middle and your grab her buttocks *hard* and she gasps.
Note that you are constantly measuring her physical reaction and will abort at the slightest hint of apprehension on her part, and you still haven't kissed...
Once you do kiss, it will be amazing, and you will absolutely have consent.
But Jesus Fucking Christ. You never *ask* (verbally).
Well, OK, sometimes you can say, "So, you wanna?", and that works too.
When you start dating you'll understand that you don't get a signed consent form when you have sex. It doesn't generally work that way.
I had absolutely no idea that Shari Steele and the Tor Project Administration was a court of law!
Oh wait, they're not? Fascinating!
But boy howdy, you gotta admire their moxie. After all they did their own little investigation and found him guilty all by themselves. No pesky evidence or defense lawyers needed -- just enough harpies claiming victimization (but not enough to actually go to the police) and you too can destroy someone's life forever. ... ESPECIALLY interesting since one of the "victims" later pointed out that she wasn't a victim, it was a bunch of SJWs speaking on her behalf without permission to create a lynch mob towards Jacob...
(Although I have it on good authority she's suffering from internalized misogyny and thus you should believe the 3rd party witnesses over her statements, because Third Wave Feminists represent all women, even women who don't want to be represented by them. ESPECIALLY those kinds of women.)
Remember there was an active attempt to frame Linus Torvalds with sexual assault allegations. Around the same time you saw these types trying to push codes of conduct that were backdoors to get editorial control over projects they were targeting.
So everyone needs to be a tiny bit wary when hearing stories like this, especially when you see these SJW style shame lynch mob tactics used. No evidence, mobbing tactics, public shaming, threatening people who question the narrative, and demanding reparations for perceived slights in the form of policy changes and increased decision making power to their political allies. It's a playbook that targets some known exploits in our culture -- namely that everyone's hesitant to demand evidence of an overly emotional woman, and everyone's first response is to beat up whomever she's pointing at and ask questions later.
If there are actual allegations, they need to be taken to a court of law. If they won't hold up in a court of law, recognize it for what it is -- bitchy ex girlfriends wanting to slander an ex boyfriend they're mad at. Don't let the Kangaroo Court bullshit that's infested our campuses start leaking out into the real world.
And if you want to implement an "anti-harassment" policy for your project: Don't. It's a stupid fucking idea leading to drama and abuse by lesser minds.
If you are really looking for a nice Code of Conduct, aim for the Code of Merit - because as ESR has so adamantly pointed out, "We must constantly demand merit – performance, intelligence, dedication, and technical excellence – of ourselves and each other."
SJW Codes of Conduct like the Orwellian Contributor Covenant by Coraline Ada Ehmke (who is tied to Model View Culture, which is ran by white supremacist "feminist" Shanley Kane, which is also tied to the Ada Initiative's two founders, which was the group attempting to frame Linus for rape...) are nothing more than a way to backdoor losers like Ehmke and her ilk into projects they don't deserve access to.
While he's done a few things of note in one area he's a bit of a goose in others.
See also his introduction of the word "Fisking" into the jargon file as an example of how utter full of shit he is at times when he has a political agenda to push - in that case opposition to anyone even mildly critical of Israel, in this case he's definitely been very upset with feminist politics on occasion instead of just ignoring something that's never going to impact on his life in any way at all.
In other words utter fucking bullshit passed on at least twice from who knows where before posted on 4chan or whatever.
Note Eric's fucking huge chip on his shoulder from his wording. Expect bias.
Notice how they didn't rock anything? Life went on and it's a year later. Maybe Eric's blog rant was just another of Eric's blog rants.
If you are going to bring it up again I suggest you mention Eric's name instead of defaming Linus. I thought you were bringing up something new that actually involved Linus instead of Eric's deranged rant of "deliberately planned and persistent campaign to frame Linus" which for some reason Linus was not able to notice.
The story about the woman who wake up to him fingering her clearly states that she had explained to him on many occasions that he could share her bed as a friend, but that it did not constitute an invitation to have sex. If you go to bed with someone and nothing happens when they're awake and able to consent, why would assume that they're totally down for sex now that they're asleep? Also : even if you're involved with someone, even if you're sleeping in the same bed, this does not mean they're available for sex 24/7. There's such a thing as marital rape.
No, they are not that rare. I suspect how things go work out differently depending on where you live, if you compare your average american-football-player-turned-rapist and e.g the ordeal of Assange, but I'd never share a room with a female co-worker for exactly that reason.
One simple lie, and you're in such a hassle you wouldn't believe it. And then basically you have to prove your innocence and that she's a big fat liar. And even if you manage that, you're still screwed because people will still believe, and act according to that. That's a way too big a gun for me to trust anyone with.
If by "rare as bigfoot" you mean "a plurality of studies have found them to be at least 20% of accusations" then sure
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
> Any other adult? Or just one of the sex you tend to prefer to sleep with?
Should try going camping in the mountains in spring time and forget enough blankets. I lucked out and someone else couldn't find their tent (arrived late, someone else had set it up, kind of funny really) and bunked in mine.
Was not someone I would ever want to have sex with, but let me tell you we spent about 6 hours hanging on to eachother for what seemed like dear life. Seemed like every 20 minutes the night got colder.
Not sure it was a life threatening cold, but, it was certainly a much bigger concern than whether I would want to stick my dick in the only source of heat I had. Hell, I would have brought more people in if I could (or, you know... some more blankets; I would totally have replaced the heat source with like two blankets or a well insulated sleeping bag)
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
that Tor is a US Government supported project, right? The DoS is a big supporter.
Best Slashdot Co
Eww. Tell your five bucks they have a foul mouth and that they shouldn't put images in peoples' heads.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
What adult in their right mind sleeps in the same bed with another grown person of the opposite sex, then gets suprised to be frisked? Maybe I just wasn't raised the same way.
I should guess you weren't, since the former hardly raised (or raises) an eybrow in certain times and places. Never thought I'd actually ever say that, but perhaps you may be proving the point of people calling for males to be taught to behave in a certain, better way, if you're making such mental leaps as assuming permission to do things that you weren't actually permitted to do, on the basis of your spurious perception?
Ezekiel 23:20
If he assaulted you, you should be down at the police station with wounds you received defending yourself. If you didn't defend yourself, then quit asking us to take your claims of assault seriously.
So, how many women have you psychologically abused into compliance and then raped so far?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Apparently, according to the other comment above, an acknowledgement-of-non-consent form should have been signed by him instead, so it indeed doesn't work "that way" in this case.
Ezekiel 23:20
But does that include cases where any sexual activity has actually happened, or does it include only those cases where there has been no contact at all and a close acquaintance of yours is fabulating? I'd assume the latter to be a proper subset of the former, but I'd be surprised if there were studies aimed specifically for that.
Ezekiel 23:20
Oh yes -- the peer police, judge, jury, and executioner. Social control for everybody, all nutters' favourite.
Some people can't control themselves, which is why we have these rules and laws. It's unfortunate, but it's true, and no amount of wishing it away will stop it.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Where is the "buy T-shits mugs and other merchandise" button ?
Except he has never been officially charged with anything, so innocent until proven guilty does not apply. He was simply fired from his job. If you sexually harrass someone at your office, you can get fired based on their word alone because the bar for evidence is not the same as a legal proceeding. This is normal.
Except that is compete bullshit that you just made up. Citation needed.
The only "sexual misconduct" worth discussing by millions of people, most of whom have never even heard the names of the parties, is rape. And even then — only on specialized forums.
Why is this on Slashdot's "front page"? It is nothing compared to the other sad facts of life, such as, for just one example, that 78% of Of Female Birds Sexually Harassed By Strangers.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Safe rooms for developers and trigger warnings in all code and enforcement by IRC bots.
I'm completely unwilling to accept any of this at face value. This thing wreaks of bullshit!
But the accusation website that the anonymous "victims" have created is positively terrifying. They whine of their fear of being "doxed", but look at what they gleefully do to this guy. Holy shit!
Their excuses for not going to authorities are just that, (lame) excuses. All other highly questionable accusations of intimidation and harassment aside, they accuse this man of rape. If this is real, or I am to take any of it seriously, this must be reported to police and formal charges be brought. It doesn't matter that he moved to Berlin, formal charges can and should still be filed.He can absolutely be extradited on rape charges. Saying that he left the country is is fallacious whining that causes me to doubt the veracity of these faceless accusers even more.
But, to think that faceless people could put up such a website, using his own name for the domain, is deeply disturbing.
Is there any list of specific acts by Applebaum that prompted this controversy? Or is this another nerd clumsily asking women for dates, Clarence Thomas style?
I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Stewart (1981)
Maclean (1979)
Gregory and Lees (1996)
Kanin (1994)
Jordan (2004)
Grace et al. (1992)
Chambers and Millar (1983)
Philadelphia police study (1968)
McCahill et al. (1979)
all rates from 90% down to 18% false. If you extend the floor to 10% then the plurality becomes a majority. The only people pushing the "false accusations don't exist" claim are the same people who support a reversal of the burden of proof, "listen and believe" lynch mobbing, and the mathematically absurd claims that virtually every woman in the united states has been or will be raped.
In other words ideologues who directly profit in money, prestige, and social influence by controlling women through fear.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
That definition of consent makes all males and females that anytime in their life had sex without a "clearly given yes, not the absence of a no", rapists.
In other words, that definition implies that almost 100% of the population are rapist.
May be that definition of consent is not accurate even close to what the society understand and uses as consent?
One in five? Seriously? How dumb do you think we are?
Or many dangerous people (the ones who like to snub the law) have little respect for it and other people and may be guilty of other crimes as well.
Just because you happen to agree with a political view doesn't make these people nice people.
If someone big on trying to change the system has a lot of personality to try to make the change, this personality also causes many bad behaviors as well. Because there is a fine line between I must fight for what I think is right, vs everything I think is right.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I seem to remember a lot of "false" claims about Bill Crosby and Phil Spector that no longer sound so false. There were "false" claims against Jimmy Saville to well over a dozen police stations over the years.
How about you quote a relevant portion of one of those things you've name dropped to show that it really says what you are suggesting it does. Don't try the cowardly weasel trick of suggesting that all cases dropped due to lack of evidence or similar reasons are false claims - a false claim is a claim that has been proved to be false.
It's kind of a ginormous gray area.
Sexual advances imply some risk. If you're on the couch with some girl and you want to get frisky, asking bluntly is... not attractive. At all. It's more likely to get you a sharp "no" (or a laugh at how hilariously stupid you are, and a signal to pretend you were just kidding and never talk about this again) than sliding up, slipping an arm around her, and physically presenting the suggestion that she should "get closer"... you know, *closer*. A *lot* closer.
An arm around someone might seem innocuous, but *touching* someone can be *extremely* upsetting. Run a finger down a girl's arm when she's not open to a sexual advance and she'll take the intimate suggestion in full meaning--and immediately want to be *far* away from you. You might as well grab her tits; the only real difference is we've got some social conventions where we've acknowledged this boundary is okay to break, *that* boundary is you being an asshole, and so you have a way to step across a line while clearly signalling that you're harmless and willing to back off if it ain't working. With all that in mind, slinging an arm around a girl is possessive and intimate, which is a *lot* of presumption.
Possessive and intimate will get you good responses where a blunt query will get you laughed at. They'll also get you bad responses, because if the answer is no then you've just done something *extremely* uncomfortable to someone.
This extends even when you've got a girl in bed. You can't just go pushing your boxers up to her and groping at her tits if you haven't acknowledged how far this is going. You have to push the right buttons, and she might put the brakes on anyway because she's just not looking to go that far. Pushing those buttons, of course, carries risk; and drawing up the legal framework beforehand is really awkward and uncomfortable for all parties involved. Everyone really wants to go in blind and see what comes out the other end, but they also don't want to get pulled into something that's beyond their comfort level at that exact moment; the fact that your comfort level changes moment-to-moment makes this impossible to spec out ahead of time unless you're either well into the "no physical contact" stage or blatantly getting together to hook up.
All that said, some people keep pushing--hard--when they've gotten push-back. That's harassment. Today we've taken the harassment to social minefield levels, where getting distracted by a girl's showy dress can get you pulled into HR for looking at her tits and ass for 1 second, because of course you would.
Fortunately for me, my peculiar mix of psychiatric defects automatically disables sexual attraction in professional contexts (and most other contexts). I simply don't like interacting with people. Prosopagnosia... don't even remember what my parents's faces look like WHILE I'M TALKING TO THEM. SPD ... I don't have any emotional attachment to any human being. My academic understanding of all this crap doesn't translate to any form of social skill set, so I'm not picking up girls like crazy; even if I could, I wouldn't bother, because it's too much strain trying to satisfy the complex social needs of that kind of interaction. No romance, no emotional needs, and no particular sexual attraction means I can just skip out on all that bullshit. I guess normal people would consider that some kind of giant hole in their lives, but it doesn't really occur to me.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I literally already posted over a half dozen studies backing that up.
And the answer is I find the idea 1 in 5 accusations are false a lot more believable than the idea that almost every single woman in the US has been or will be raped.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Going right from "we're in the same bed" to "I PENIS U!" is kind of a jarring shift. Have you tried snuggling up first and nudging at the comfort barriers to see if she decides you need to back off?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Don't try the cowardly weasel trick of suggesting that all cases dropped due to lack of evidence or similar reasons are false claims - a false claim is a claim that has been proved to be false.
Congratulations, this is how lynch mobs work. You have the presumption of innocence backwards, it's the accusers job to prove guilt. You're the one relying on the deplorable and frightening weasel trick of claiming that all non-convictions are simply guilty people that got away.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
So, when I lie on my back, say nothing, and the bitch climbs up on my dick, again no words spoken, I'm raping her?
Thank you for proving that the University of Oregon is way the fuck behind the times, and stupid as shit to boot.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
You have ZERO(0) idea what you are talking about. Notice that I am not posting anonymous. Read the court documents... http://www.gwinnettcourts.com/...
She claimed that I raped her. She then claimed that I wanted to murder her... Read the final document where the court dismisses the entire thing and why.
The reason why she did that is because she didn't want me to have any thing to do with my son... Read this court document... http://www.gwinnettcourts.com/...
Yet she wanted 25% of my income for the next 18 years.
Previous girl friend that lived with me called the cops and claimed that I raped her when I wasn't even home. The cops showed up before I got home from work that evening and were waiting for me. They smelled something fishy and handcuffed me and put me in the back of a patrol car. I told police that I had no idea why she did that.
They took me to a near by police station where I called her and asked her why, while recording the conversation. She said that she was ending the relationship with me and moving her stuff out and wanted to take the brand new LCD tv that I had just purchased and needed me out of the house all night so she could do that.
The police let me go and ended up arresting her. I have searched the website but have come up empty as this happened in 2002.
To make a long story short.... All women lie.
Nathan
Sex without consent is rape. Period. No exceptions.
That is an idealistic fantasy. In real life, it is complicated, "no" often means "yes", and that is especially true the first time a couple has sex. Women have been conditioned to appear chaste, and not too willing. Many women expect the man to take the initiative, and may be offended if he asks them for explicit consent. The first time I had sex with my last girlfriend, she was saying "no, no, no" while giggling and helping me unbutton her clothes. We are now happily married with two kids.
If the person you are dating has blue or purple hair you would be insane not to get a signed and witnessed consent form. Each and every time.
Yes that is going to put a damper on the relationship...
Problem with the place we had booked, and since it was Hong Kong right after Chinese New year, everything was full or close to it. So we spent a night in the "executive suite" at the Cosmopolitan, enjoyed the view, and got the admin lady to find us another place to stay (with separate rooms) the next day.
so you think sleeping in the same bed as your mum/sister/brother is also a prelude to sex with them? :o)
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
It's what happens when you let SJW's write policy though.
If you're on the couch with some girl and you want to get frisky, asking bluntly is... not attractive. At all. It's more likely to get you a sharp "no" (or a laugh at how hilariously stupid you are, and a signal to pretend you were just kidding and never talk about this again)
It probably depends on the girl. If she's one of today's 4th-wave feminists, she'll be pissed you didn't ask for explicit consent first. Of course, this same girl probably isn't someone any normal guy would have any physical attraction to anyway....
The entire thing smells like a psyop. One of the key figures herself debunked one of the bigger lies from her view as the first party.
Except he has never been officially charged with anything, so innocent until proven guilty does not apply. He was simply fired from his job.
Wrong. He was not only fired from his job, but he's been publicly defamed and accused of this. He actually has a good case for a defamation or libel suit.
Well if it is on the University of Oregons website it MUST be true! I guess they are the law now. Do you believe everything you read on the internet?
Like I said: reasonable, and carries risk.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
+1
-1000
No. He doesn't.
Sorry, that's pressuring a woman into sex. Please check yourself into the nearest university's rape culture presentation as soon as possible.
You have to do the Schrodinger's Rapist dance correctly to even say "hello" to a woman without it being sexual harassment. I assume if you find the actual article (not at that link) they outline what the exact steps are. I don't really have any reason to go find out for myself.
But yes, generally I prefer guys use your method with me over whatever the hell you're supposed to do to get consent from a woman without it being rape. Perhaps a lawyer here somewhere can draw up a Durable Consent to Intercourse contract. No, a marriage ring won't work. You need a Durable Consent to Intercourse on top of the ring.
You should also make sure to have her drug tested and give her a breathalyzer immediately before intercourse, because the presence of any drugs or alcohol automatically makes it date rape. I'm not sure what the BAC limit is, but I'd recommend zero tolerance to be safe. If she fails either test, immediately vacate the premise.
I think you also need to affirm consent every 15-20 seconds during the act, but I'm not sure on that part. It could be more frequently. If the response is any less than an enthusiastic yes or if there is any ambiguity, immediately stop, put your clothes on, and vacate the premise.
"So you wanna?" is not likely to elicit an enthusiastic yes, so I doubt it could ever work.
They cover all of this in rape culture training. This is pretty basic stuff. There are other rules such as avoiding the presence of women after dark, especially a woman who's walking alone. Do not make eye contact. Do not allow her to come within 100 feet of you. If she's attacked, do not attempt to intervene (you'll automatically, by policy, be considered complicit in the attack).
At least that was my take away from rape culture training. If that prevents women from having a good time, that's their fucking problem. Boo hoo.
Grand Valley State University if you must know. No, they don't advertise this.
No kidding. I read a couple stories and they made my head hurt.
"Jacob invited me into the bathtub and I didn't get in but it made me uncorftable even though I was in the bathroom with him, maybe it was because I was so hungover."
"Jacob shamed me in public once."
The sad thing is that these are supposedly the people at the front lines now, fighting against censorship. No wonder we're losing.
If a woman is already turned off just by asking them what they'd like me to do or not do after I tie them to the bed, then they're way too vanilla for me.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Right. I'm a 20 year old faggot. I've been posting on SD since I was 10.
Fucking idiot.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
i say that to girls all the time. It works *amazingly* well at getting them to be the aggressors. "Now look, just because I'm letting you sleep over doesn't mean we're going to have sex!" I have yet to meet one who hasn't taken that as a challenge.
Anyway, yes, it's a double standard. You can either try to change the nature of women, or just go with it. I'll let you figure out which works better.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Literally already posted about a half dozen or more studies ranging from 18% on up into the 40s.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Meanwhile every other major high profile rape case falls into shambles, if they ever happened at all (UVA comes to mind).
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
And it looks like those studies of yours are from the late 90s, same time frame as my source from the USDOJ.
So, you got anything more recent to back those claims up?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
You do not use public transport much, do you?
Do you still beat your wife?
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
It's nice that you pulled the papers from Rumney (2006) that agree with your worldview, but you ignore the actual conclusions from that meta study itself. Police judgement of "no crime" does not mean that it was a false accusation, only they they chose to stop investigating it. That could mean there wasn't enough evidence, or the police arbitrarily decided they didn't give a shit (which is why all the studies you link are quite old, when rape was taken less seriously). There is no way to judge from those studies what the rate of false accusations is. Nice try though. I especially like the part where in the Maclean study he deems one instance a false allegation because the victim didn't look "disheveled" enough to have been raped. Solid science there.
You realize that the guy you are referencing just went to wikipedia and copied a number of studies that appear support his claim, without including the overarching summary written there that basically said, "these studies are examples of bad science." Think for yourself some time maybe.
[Moderation] BINGO!
Guess what: you normal people are the problem. Perverts' motto is "safe, sane and consensual"
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Do you still beat your wife?
First, I don't have a wife, and never have, so I never could have beaten my wife, since I never have had one. So that's a stupid question.
It's also a stupid question because it completely mischaracterizes the situation. You are making claims about rape that make it clear that you don't understand what rape is. If you don't even know what rape is, how can you avoid it? But actually, it's much worse than that: in fact, you willfully believe situations which are rape not to be rape. There's no reason for you to do that except for justifying some of your behavior, which leads to the expectation that you are a rapist. By contrast, I have said nothing condoning wife-beating, or in fact any other kind of violence, which makes your question an obvious distraction from how rapey your beliefs are. People usually act on their beliefs (not stated ones, but actual ones) so it's reasonable to assume that you're a rapist. But since I have consistently spoken against violence, it's not reasonable to assume that I'm a wife-beater.
Now, if you want to retract the statements that make it clear that you don't understand what rape is, what effect is has on someone's emotional condition, and so on, then perhaps people will think less that you're a rapist. But right now, you've effectively condoned rape, so it's a reasonable assumption.
TL;DR: You're an idiot, and probably a rapist, based on what you said. If you meant to say something other than "if you didn't fight back it wasn't rape" then I'm all ears, but until you do that, I'm assuming that your sexual "partners" are just women who didn't fight back.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Neither "fired from his job" nor "publicly defamed and accused" are the same as "charged."
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
How does that logic work?
1. Steal the word Hipster from who spoke it ...
2.
3. Profit!
Maybe JA was trying to laid, frankly. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
If you wanted to get laid, and you didn't have permission from the other party, but you tried to make it happen anyways... yeah, there is a lot wrong with that.
If you don't have another person's permission... try alone, by yourself. You can hopefully make something happen for yourself.
If you're not even dating the person, and you actually know them through your work... you should not be trying at all. The first step is, is this person even willing to have private social alone-time with you? No? Then you shouldn't be "trying to get laid" with them. If they agree to hang out alone in private during off-work hours, then you have an opportunity to proposition them.
So are you saying that that isn't consistent with the legal definition, or are you just throwing up your hands and saying you don't know and don't know how to check?
I'll give you a hint though, the University of Oregon has the only public law school in the State, and the State has a very high per-capita number of lawyers...
If a woman is already turned off just by asking them what they'd like me to do or not do after I tie them to the bed, then they're way too vanilla for me.
A tiny snippet from my life...
"Should we have a safe word or something?"
"No"
"How do I know if you're OK?"
"If I pass out, let go."
If there is a gray area, that means you didn't have consent.
If you have consent, it is very unlikely you'll need to get it in writing, or recount a magic set of words. The whole premise shows that the requisite level of intimacy to begin the act hasn't been developed between you. Or in baseball terms, you don't steal home base from the batters box. You have to get to first base, then second base, then third base. If you never made it to first base, you never had a nice date, then you don't get a goodbye kiss; if you never got a goodbye kiss, you shouldn't be trying to laid. Of course a blunt query will get laughed at, just like a batter stepping up to the plate, reaching his foot out and touching home base, and asking the umpire, "that's a score, right?" will get laughed at... if you're lucky.
And getting distracted at work should always get you sent to HR. It is your responsibility to pay attention to your job while at work. You can't push that onto somebody else. "Sexy women exist in the world" is not an excuse to be distracted at work.
The part you seem to miss is: things that don't occur to you... are things you don't know anything about.
For Americans who think of "backpacking" as a type of wilderness camping, this use of the word translates to "traveling by bus or train and staying in hostels (which are a type of hotel dormitory that you share with strangers)"
I'm so tired of hearing this nonsense. I spend a lot of time in the woods, and there are lots of Bigfoot. Idiots see them all the time and think they are this imaginary creature called the Black Bear, but that's because Bigfoot are smart enough to stoop over when they see a human.
Shorter version of your story:
1 equals infinity, blame women.
Who else but nerds take the time to throw the rubber chicken, and ask the rubber ducky? Why would nerds care if these supposed "real" people understand what they're seeing?
erm. I've shared a mattress with another bloke. With another six blokes in the room.
Maybe I slept through it, but I don't recall any fondling, let alone full-on balls bouncing off cheeks type action.
I did get up at 5am and go have coffee with house owner's mother though.
Yeah. By the time she's in bed with you, either you can't avoid sexual activity or she very clearly doesn't want it.
Never yet met a woman that'll lie there next to you going, "Why isn't he asking me?"
(Lying there going, "Why did I agree to this?" or "Did he just fart?" however..)
get laid
...phrasing?
Ezekiel 23:20
So where are those relevant quotes then?
You dropped names. No "backing up" at all. Surely you can do better than that and provide some actual content instead of just dropping names or being evasive and as with your other post.
So in other words you are equating case dismissal due to potentially a wide range of reasons to a "false claim" and have become angry when your petty little trick has been seen through?
Yes or no?
What are you using to establish that a claim is actually false?
There was that one time... I was at a party and joked to my buddies "Why do people always say they're going to pick up a woman, but they never do? This is how you pick up a woman.", then turned around, grabbed the nearest cutie and thew her over my shoulder.
Then I carried her out of the apartment, down the street to my apartment building, up the stairs and through the apartment, threw her on the bed, tore her clothes off and fucked her brains out.
I never actually asked her for consent, but she was giggling the whole way there, so, I dunno... does that count?
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Getting to first base requires consent. Finding out if you have consent requires testing that consent.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
See, you admit you aren't capable of understanding on your own, but then instead of trying to learn when it is explained to you, you just argue from assertion. It isn't because of the mental state you were born with that you don't understand this; it is because you're willfully ignorant.
You are the one that's pretending that all non-convictions mean the woman was a lying bitch making it all up.
There are many reasons not just that one as you know but are pretending not to - that false stupidity to push a point must be taught in school debating or something, so much of that shit around.
For example - often when it's without doubt that a crime has been committed it's not clear who did it.
You are lumping that in with your "cry wolf" numbers.
You are getting the number for a collection of fruit and pretending they are all apples when there are mostly oranges in the mix.
Except, of course, that it did happen.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
I wish I was a woman where apparently sex just falls out the sky every 2 seconds so it doesn't matter if you miss a bunch. But in a guys reality, the worst that happens is actually that she assumes that you don't like her because you "could" have made a move and didn't, so she goes and sleeps with someone else. Now he's her boyfriend, there's never again an opening to date her and they get married and have kids, but only after your continued interest in her means you don't pursue other girls and she subtley scares other girls away - until after you're out of college and no longer surrounded by women at which time she slowly cuts off contact with you because it would be "weird" as she is married now and you're left with an empty dead end job and no romantic prospects in your 30's wondering where you went wrong. One day another guy from your college friend group adds you on facebook, you get together to talk, he tells you about how she talked all the time about how much she liked you, and was really upset you didn't make the move you were supposed to, so she got herself drunk at a party and fucked the guy from her biology class who wasn't as nieve as you - that's her husband now. Then you realize that some people just use "rape" as an excuse to be narcissistic assholes on the internet.
If you're a man, and a woman has repeatedly told you she doesn't want you to touch her, and you grab her pussy while she's asleep, you're a SCUMBAG RAPIST, and you should be in fucking jail.
And how exactly do you intend to prove her allegations? Make it a requirement that every bed have a government-operated camera monitoring it 24x7? Because that's the only way you can prove such allegations.
Until that day comes, a smart woman will avoid putting herself into these situations. And if you're too stupid to understand this, then you're a shit excuse for a human.
This must be the Brave New World I hear so much of - the one where one procedes directly from accusation to punishment without going through pesky intervening stages like "trial" and "conviction". At lest, that is my impression. So, since the accusation has been made and trial and conviction are being bypassed I can go directly to punishing the people involved for attempting to undermine the fundamental human rights of the accused.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Is there room in your brain for the possibility that you're just sheltered?
I tried asking a woman for consent once. She was in my bed, and I said "Tell me you want it."
Silence.
"Tell me you want it."
Silence.
"Tell me you don't want it."
Silence.
"Tell me something."
Silence.
I got fed up, rolled over and went to sleep.
Next day, her girlfriend is explaining how she wanted me so bad, that's why she was there, but she couldn't say the words, because she wanted to remain a good girl. She wanted me to be the bad guy so she could have what she wanted while remaining the good girl.
That's our job as men. To take the risks, be the domineering, "bad" guy. No matter how many laws are passed that could put us in jail for trying, no matter how dangerous they make it, no matter how much they criminalize healthy, natural interactions between men and women, it's still our job.
Ever heard the stereotypical "I don't want to tell you what to do, I just want you to do it." line women like to say?
That's them telling you, in plain english, that they value their submissive role more than they value having all the other things they want.
That's human nature.
The women who are making all the noise don't speak for women. They're freakish outliers, not representatives of their gender. Most of their gender simply doesn't wish to speak up at all.
Pandering to them does not mean you're "respecting women".
Might I suggest you conduct an experiment to confirm or refute? Go visit a small town where you won't feel concerned about embarressing yourself and having to see them at the grocery store, and experiment with behaving as though you were a man.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
The short version of your statement is "you're a dumbass."
The fact of the matter is PUTTING A HAND ON A GIRL'S SHOULDER is an invasive action, and can make her uncomfortable, and, if unwanted, CAN BE AN ASSAULT. Attempting to do so is a test of consent, and can--and does--get pushback. This is normal human behavior.
Your assertion is that you're supposed to ask before every little thing like moving closer, touching, or whatnot. A lot of actions are intimate and invasive, and nobody asks before doing them because the direct probe does something which people describe as "ruining the mood." It's been acknowledged that you're specifically not supposed to be a dork and ruin the mood; you're supposed to test boundaries. That's how normal human beings who aren't verbally negotiating an explicit consent contract operate--as in every human being who doesn't suffer from severe mental defects.
Support my political activism on Patreon.