gs11rmb
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 12:43:39 GMT -5
Posts: 3,303
|
Post by gs11rmb on Jun 10, 2019 8:17:13 GMT -5
Perhaps he meant godfather in the traditional sense rather than the Mario Puzo "Godfather"?
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jun 10, 2019 8:22:25 GMT -5
Perhaps he meant godfather in the traditional sense rather than the Mario Puzo "Godfather"? In what traditional sense can you be the godfather "of the family"? I don't know a lot about the whole godfather thing, but isn't it an individual thing rather than a family thing? He seemed to link patriarch and godfather, which doesn't sound like the traditional religious godfather role.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,030
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Jun 10, 2019 8:31:26 GMT -5
I think that's a good point, and it does point to a mentality that - if the story is true - would be indicative a controlling aspect to his personality and may be why the daughter did not see him as favorable as he thought he should be seen.
|
|
gs11rmb
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 12:43:39 GMT -5
Posts: 3,303
|
Post by gs11rmb on Jun 10, 2019 8:32:00 GMT -5
I guess I'm thinking of it in more British terms. In previous generations often middle income people would pick rich relatives to be godparents to their children because it helped to provide some financial stability. E.g. Jane Austen's brother's godfather was a very rich man and consequently, he had a more secure financial position. You'll see that reflected in some of her work. However, I suspect that the author of the article is more likely to have read "The Godfather" then "Emma" . Which means, your interpretation is a lot more likely than mine .
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 6,980
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Jun 10, 2019 8:50:17 GMT -5
All of the language is way over the top like that. The women are pure evil. The way that the nice guy discovered that they were lying is that one of his friends drives around with six months of mail in his car and just happened to produce it from his car in the middle of a golf game. They invited 250 guests and said there was no room for his 20 guests. They planned a menu he was allergic to. All the father daughter dances were the style of music that the "real dad" liked. He somehow found out all of this right around the rehearsal dinner.
As soon as the dinner was over the nice guy emptied out all their joint bank accounts, kicked her out of the house, and changed the locks. Then the next day she proved how evil she was by trying to take money out of the joint account, but fortunately the check she wrote to herself bounced since he had been smart enough to take all the money first.
Anyway, this is someone that wrote a way over the top revenge/justice story and doesn't have any other real posting history.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,690
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Jun 10, 2019 8:55:53 GMT -5
All of the language is way over the top like that. The women are pure evil. The way that the nice guy discovered that they were lying is that one of his friends drives around with six months of mail in his car and just happened to produce it from his car in the middle of a golf game. They invited 250 guests and said there was no room for his 20 guests. They planned a menu he was allergic to. All the father daughter dances were the style of music that the "real dad" liked. He somehow found out all of this right around the rehearsal dinner. As soon as the dinner was over the nice guy emptied out all their joint bank accounts, kicked her out of the house, and changed the locks. Then the next day she proved how evil she was by trying to take money out of the joint account, but fortunately the check she wrote to herself bounced since he had been smart enough to take all the money first. Anyway, this is someone that wrote a way over the top revenge/justice story and doesn't have any other real posting history. Sounds like an old Law & Order episode!!
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 6,980
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Jun 10, 2019 9:00:02 GMT -5
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Jun 10, 2019 9:13:55 GMT -5
The part that really made me stop and say "huh? is this guy all there (or is this totally fake)?" was this: "Though I once thought of myself as the patriarch or godfather of the family, commanding great respect and sought out for help in times of need," Who actually talks like that? Who says they think of themselves as "the godfather" of the family? ::This is no different than the bride who, at her wedding, instead of her vows, read the texts between her almost-groom and the woman he was cheating with (she found out the night before the wedding). I say kudos to these people. I wouldn’t do it because I’m a very private person but I totally get why people would want to out the assholes that hurt them.:: I definitely don't say "kudos" to those people. I don't particularly care about doing that kind of stuff in public, but I do care that someone is selfish enough to waste their guests' time by inviting them to one thing only to turn it into the spectacle of their own selfish revenge. You want to go off on someone in public, great. You want to waste my time by inviting me to an event, and then turn it into something else because you're all pissy about something...just do it on your own time and don't waste mine. Especially with so much internet access today, if you want to "out" someone do it online rather than waste a ton of people's time so that you can feel like you put on some show. To be fair to the second part - if I'm remembering the story correctly she was given the texts the night before the wedding. So it's not like she could have called it off and saved the guests time as they were already there for the wedding. She just wanted to let everyone know why the wedding wasn't happening and then invited everyone to the reception anyways -- I believe some from the groom's side showed up too. Putting myself in her shoes, I'm not 100% I would go for the public reading of the texts, but then again I'd want everyone that came to see me know I wasn't a runaway bride or got cold feet - that the bastard was cheating on me and now we're all going to go eat and celebrate me finding out before I was legally tied to his ass.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jun 10, 2019 9:15:35 GMT -5
Perhaps that is a clap back to spot men are in right now. Guilty based on nothing more than allegations. I am constantly reading that "white men" had their day, now let the women have theirs. Instead of saying both sexes are important, we feel the need to knock one down. And when I say that, I hear "well, that's what men did"...so this will continue, I'm afraid.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jun 10, 2019 9:23:57 GMT -5
The part that really made me stop and say "huh? is this guy all there (or is this totally fake)?" was this: "Though I once thought of myself as the patriarch or godfather of the family, commanding great respect and sought out for help in times of need," Who actually talks like that? Who says they think of themselves as "the godfather" of the family? ::This is no different than the bride who, at her wedding, instead of her vows, read the texts between her almost-groom and the woman he was cheating with (she found out the night before the wedding). I say kudos to these people. I wouldn’t do it because I’m a very private person but I totally get why people would want to out the assholes that hurt them.:: I definitely don't say "kudos" to those people. I don't particularly care about doing that kind of stuff in public, but I do care that someone is selfish enough to waste their guests' time by inviting them to one thing only to turn it into the spectacle of their own selfish revenge. You want to go off on someone in public, great. You want to waste my time by inviting me to an event, and then turn it into something else because you're all pissy about something...just do it on your own time and don't waste mine. Especially with so much internet access today, if you want to "out" someone do it online rather than waste a ton of people's time so that you can feel like you put on some show. To be fair to the second part - if I'm remembering the story correctly she was given the texts the night before the wedding. So it's not like she could have called it off and saved the guests time as they were already there for the wedding. She just wanted to let everyone know why the wedding wasn't happening and then invited everyone to the reception anyways -- I believe some from the groom's side showed up too. Putting myself in her shoes, I'm not 100% I would go for the public reading of the texts, but then again I'd want everyone that came to see me know I wasn't a runaway bride or got cold feet - that the bastard was cheating on me and now we're all going to go eat and celebrate me finding out before I was legally tied to his ass. Yeah but didn't she get all dressed up, and walk down the aisle, and go through with faking it all right up until the vows part? That just reeks of caring more about putting on a show of it than anything else. It also makes me wonder if the person REALLY got the texts the night before, with NO clue at all about anything before that. And then they made a decision to end a relationship and publicly humiliate someone they cared about enough they were planning to marry, and they made that decision in less than a day? How much work could they have possibly done to even figure out if it was true or not (it's so easy to fake things like texts). That all just lines up to me to be someone who cares about being dramatic more than anything else.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 23:00:44 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2019 9:26:05 GMT -5
Count me in the group that thinks this may have been made up or, at the least, exaggerated.
One thought that did occur to me is that, as a divorced mother, I can't imagine expecting a new man in my life to start shelling out big bucks to support a kid I brought into the world. When my second husband came into my life, I was just grateful that he was the male role model and father figure DS sorely needed. I still paid the bills.
OTOH, the guy who owned the ad agency where DH worked divorced his wife and married his secretary (she was in her late 30s, he was in his early 70s). She had a son from her first marriage. Her Ex was a musician who toured with rock groups and tried to work off the books as much as possible. New husband, a lapsed Roman Catholic, paid to join a synagogue so son could be Bar-mitzvahed, paid for Hebrew lessons, paid for the Bar Mitzvah ceremony and party, made lease payments on a truck when son got older so he could transport his drums to gigs... it went on and on. The ad agency eventually fell on hard times and closed and New Husband died a couple of years ago. I suspect she's having a hard time now.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Jun 10, 2019 10:11:53 GMT -5
To be fair to the second part - if I'm remembering the story correctly she was given the texts the night before the wedding. So it's not like she could have called it off and saved the guests time as they were already there for the wedding. She just wanted to let everyone know why the wedding wasn't happening and then invited everyone to the reception anyways -- I believe some from the groom's side showed up too. Putting myself in her shoes, I'm not 100% I would go for the public reading of the texts, but then again I'd want everyone that came to see me know I wasn't a runaway bride or got cold feet - that the bastard was cheating on me and now we're all going to go eat and celebrate me finding out before I was legally tied to his ass. Yeah but didn't she get all dressed up, and walk down the aisle, and go through with faking it all right up until the vows part? That just reeks of caring more about putting on a show of it than anything else. It also makes me wonder if the person REALLY got the texts the night before, with NO clue at all about anything before that. And then they made a decision to end a relationship and publicly humiliate someone they cared about enough they were planning to marry, and they made that decision in less than a day? How much work could they have possibly done to even figure out if it was true or not (it's so easy to fake things like texts). That all just lines up to me to be someone who cares about being dramatic more than anything else. Oh, she definitely went with the more dramatic way to handle it for sure. No argument there. As for believing the texts - there were photos of him with the other woman (googled story to double check my recollection that there were). As for the no clue part - there's tons of stories out there where it wasn't until after they found out their partner was cheating that all the little things along the way that they dismissed because they either trusted them or were denying their gut suddenly add up and make sense. So seeing the texts could just make that niggling doubt that you shoved to the back of your mind come front and center with a red flag you can't ignore or dismiss.
|
|
shanendoah
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 19:44:48 GMT -5
Posts: 10,096
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0c3563
|
Post by shanendoah on Jun 10, 2019 10:35:52 GMT -5
So, going with an assumption that this is real, or at least based on real events, (but I would not be surprised if it was totally made up) my thought has always been about the attitude toward the daughter, and this whole "real dad" thing. This man has been with his GF for 10 years. GF's daughter is now getting married. I have not read the reddit thread (nor am I likely to, but I've heard about this one a hundred times it feels like), but I am going to assume that the GF's daughter is not getting married at 16 or even 18. She's likely in her 20s. Which means this man did not come into her life until she was a teenager. Her Dad is her Dad, and has been. Even if he was in and out of her life over the last 10 years (but maybe there's been a reconciliation since the daughter became an adult), there is nothing wrong with wanting her father to walk her down the aisle. Children do not get to choose who their parents date. And if he chose to pay for things for this girl as she went through her teen years, that's on him. It's also on him if he went along with their supposed assumption that he was going to pay for everything. But if that is the relationship he had set up over the previous 10 years, then yeah, that's the assumption they are going to make. The way this relationship worked did not come out of the blue, nor did it happen "despite" him. He was an active participant in creating this power dynamic - a dynamic where he had the power of the purse strings (which is a VERY real power in relationships).
And note, this guy, in his supposed toast, doesn't look at himself as a loving father figure who helped raise this child. He doesn't describe himself as one who celebrated her victories or supported her in her rough patches. He thinks he's the patriarch whose advice and guidance should be sought, and very obviously holds his ability to pay over their heads as a mechanism of control. And control is obviously what he cares about, since he decided to make his declaration so publicly. I say they are just as lucky, or more so, to be rid of him.
And also, the venues and caterers don't give a s***. He's not getting his deposits back. I guess he could sue the couple for them, but given that he paid them freely at the time, with no conditions set on them, I doubt a court would uphold his case.
|
|
HoneyBBQ
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 10:36:09 GMT -5
Posts: 5,395
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"3b444e"}
|
Post by HoneyBBQ on Jun 10, 2019 10:57:24 GMT -5
My thoughts:
- the step dad should have been acknowledged/thanked/appreciated - the step dad should get to invite a few family friends since he is footing the bill -20 people to invite seems like a lot; almost 10% of the list invited by an non-blood related family member? Eh. Who's wedding is it? - if he wants to have a wedding and invite 20 people, he should have married his GF. - some of his language is a little over the top.
Fault: 50/50 between him and them.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,393
|
Post by thyme4change on Jun 10, 2019 11:08:55 GMT -5
So, going with an assumption that this is real, or at least based on real events, (but I would not be surprised if it was totally made up) my thought has always been about the attitude toward the daughter, and this whole "real dad" thing. This man has been with his GF for 10 years. GF's daughter is now getting married. I have not read the reddit thread (nor am I likely to, but I've heard about this one a hundred times it feels like), but I am going to assume that the GF's daughter is not getting married at 16 or even 18. She's likely in her 20s. Which means this man did not come into her life until she was a teenager. Her Dad is her Dad, and has been. Even if he was in and out of her life over the last 10 years (but maybe there's been a reconciliation since the daughter became an adult), there is nothing wrong with wanting her father to walk her down the aisle. Children do not get to choose who their parents date. And if he chose to pay for things for this girl as she went through her teen years, that's on him. It's also on him if he went along with their supposed assumption that he was going to pay for everything. But if that is the relationship he had set up over the previous 10 years, then yeah, that's the assumption they are going to make. The way this relationship worked did not come out of the blue, nor did it happen "despite" him. He was an active participant in creating this power dynamic - a dynamic where he had the power of the purse strings (which is a VERY real power in relationships).
And note, this guy, in his supposed toast, doesn't look at himself as a loving father figure who helped raise this child. He doesn't describe himself as one who celebrated her victories or supported her in her rough patches. He thinks he's the patriarch whose advice and guidance should be sought, and very obviously holds his ability to pay over their heads as a mechanism of control. And control is obviously what he cares about, since he decided to make his declaration so publicly. I say they are just as lucky, or more so, to be rid of him.
And also, the venues and caterers don't give a s***. He's not getting his deposits back. I guess he could sue the couple for them, but given that he paid them freely at the time, with no conditions set on them, I doubt a court would uphold his case. All my vendors and venues needed to be paid in full 3 days before the wedding. Is that not standard anymore?
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,882
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 10, 2019 11:22:20 GMT -5
I'm wondering if this is true - and if it is true, I'm wondering if the step dad (step boyfriend?) is loaded and in the habit of gifting large amounts of money to GF and her daughter. Maybe this is the case of a much older, wealthy guy letting his younger, hot GF move into his house with her daughter, and both GF and daughter came to expect the largesse? And I am kind of curious if he considered himself the daughter's 'dad' why he didn't bother to marry his GF in ten years. Was he even interested in forming a family unit, or was he content being the sugar daddy?
Really, though, the extravagant wedding was his fault. When your kid (or step kid) is getting married, one of the first conversations you have should be around how much money each parent (and step parent) is willing to give to the celebration. If step dad had made it clear from the start that the bank of stepdad was officially closed, and step daughter and her BF needed to plan the kind of wedding they could afford on their own, there wouldn't have been the need for all the drama at the rehearsal dinner. He shouldn't have sat back, steaming with resentment, while all the over the top wedding planning was going on and then blown up at the dinner, turning it into a public spectacle.
Not everyone believes you have to be married to be a family. I was married very young and truly believe in marriage. But I'm not so sure I want to get married again. Not because I don't believe in marriage but because of the financial implications if my marriage were to fail. Unlike the first time I married, I now have significant assets that I would have to defend. I'm just not sure I'm ready to take on that risk. My BF and I co-habitate but marriage definitely scares me. I agree with you about not needing to be married to be a family, but I'm wondering what the man and his GF thought. Sounds like the man thought they had a family, he was financially supporting it and was the patriarch of it, including the GF's daughter. However I suspect the GF and her daughter saw him more like a sugar daddy, someone happy to pay all the bills in order to keep GF hanging around, but not the patriarch of their family unit. Certainly the daughter felt that her real dad was her 'dad.'
Seems to me, if this is a true story and not made up, that the man and his GF should have had a lot of discussions both on their relationship, and also about who was paying for the wedding, long before the rehearsal dinner and public shaming. He sounds like one of those guys who never discusses anything, especially not his feelings, and then blows up dramatically.
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 21,302
|
Post by giramomma on Jun 10, 2019 11:45:15 GMT -5
It also makes me wonder if the person REALLY got the texts the night before, with NO clue at all about anything before that. And then they made a decision to end a relationship and publicly humiliate someone they cared about enough they were planning to marry, and they made that decision in less than a day? How much work could they have possibly done to even figure out if it was true or not (it's so easy to fake things like texts). That all just lines up to me to be someone who cares about being dramatic more than anything else. How long have you hung out on places like survivinginfidelity.com? There's a fair amount of folks on there, who are actually unsuspecting spouses.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jun 10, 2019 12:37:46 GMT -5
It also makes me wonder if the person REALLY got the texts the night before, with NO clue at all about anything before that. And then they made a decision to end a relationship and publicly humiliate someone they cared about enough they were planning to marry, and they made that decision in less than a day? How much work could they have possibly done to even figure out if it was true or not (it's so easy to fake things like texts). That all just lines up to me to be someone who cares about being dramatic more than anything else. How long have you hung out on places like survivinginfidelity.com? There's a fair amount of folks on there, who are actually unsuspecting spouses.
But that's my point, if you're ACTUALLY unsuspecting, I would expect that it takes a lot more of a smoking gun than some texts (which can easily be faked), and zero apparent conversations with your SO to go from "we're getting married" to "we're over and I'm going to humiliate you in front of everyone we know" in only a few hours. If you actually have no suspicions, and you are in love enough to be getting married...shouldn't it take more than a person showing you some texts to just blow the whole thing up in such a crazy dramatic way? I can't even imagine what someone could possibly show me in a text that would make me publicly embarrass and attempt to humiliate someone I actually love and trust without so much as bothering to talk to that person or spend the time necessary to confirm if what I was thinking was actually true.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,456
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jun 10, 2019 14:32:00 GMT -5
Perhaps that is a clap back to spot men are in right now. Guilty based on nothing more than allegations. I am constantly reading that "white men" had their day, now let the women have theirs. Instead of saying both sexes are important, we feel the need to knock one down. And when I say that, I hear "well, that's what men did"...so this will continue, I'm afraid. And regarding knocking men, I thought about these two pieces of information from the article: Pierson was still sitting at the front desk during the 5:30 class when she was startled by three sharp blows on the wall behind her. She thought perhaps the stereo had fallen from its shelf in the studio. But then she heard the muffled voice of the teacher — “What are you doing?” — followed by five quick gunshots.
Pierson dropped her phone and ran out the front door, turning left to avoid passing the broad window of the studio.
...
After 13 shots, the shooter paused. Joshua Quick, a second-year FSU law student and the only male in the class, heard the gun click.
“I didn’t know if it was jammed or what,” said Quick, who’d worked as a nurse in Arizona before enrolling in law school. A slender yoga and meditation enthusiast, Quick, now 34, said he thought: “I’m just going to hit him. He’ll cock that thing back and shoot me. But I’m going to hit him.”
With his terrified girlfriend looking on, Quick grabbed the best weapon in reach: an upright vacuum cleaner in the corner. And he rushed at Beierle.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,882
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 10, 2019 15:09:07 GMT -5
Perhaps that is a clap back to spot men are in right now. Guilty based on nothing more than allegations. I am constantly reading that "white men" had their day, now let the women have theirs. Instead of saying both sexes are important, we feel the need to knock one down. And when I say that, I hear "well, that's what men did"...so this will continue, I'm afraid. I don't think so. The Incel movement (unwillingly celibate) started back around 2000 and around 45 people have been killed by members of that group, who tend to be misogynists, believing all women are shallow, cruel and only marry men for money. They argue rape is justified if a woman turns you down, and believe that woman should be legally required to marry someone, since single women are 'wasted.' Shooters in the incel community who go on rampages and murder women are celebrated as heros.
I don't think this is a 'clap back.' I think it's lonely men getting sucked into a distorted Reddit site that encourages them to blame women for their lack of romantic success.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jun 10, 2019 15:25:04 GMT -5
Perhaps that is a clap back to spot men are in right now. Guilty based on nothing more than allegations. I am constantly reading that "white men" had their day, now let the women have theirs. Instead of saying both sexes are important, we feel the need to knock one down. And when I say that, I hear "well, that's what men did"...so this will continue, I'm afraid. I don't think so. The Incel movement (unwillingly celibate) started back around 2000 and around 45 people have been killed by members of that group, who tend to be misogynists, believing all women are shallow, cruel and only marry men for money. They argue rape is justified if a woman turns you down, and believe that woman should be legally required to marry someone, since single women are 'wasted.' Shooters in the incel community who go on rampages and murder women are celebrated as heros.
I don't think this is a 'clap back.' I think it's lonely men getting sucked into a distorted Reddit site that encourages them to blame women for their lack of romantic success.
I agree in that I think it has a lot more to do with the internet, social media, and the ability to meet up with like-minded individuals who tend to get themselves far more worked up as a group than they ever would by themselves (mob mentality). I think there are things which are "clap backs" to the idea that "you were unfair before, so now I get to be unfair and you shouldn't complain" type of thing...but this particular example isn't one of them (IMO).
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,393
|
Post by thyme4change on Jun 10, 2019 15:42:31 GMT -5
I don't think a majority of people feel that women should get to walk all over men for hundreds of years to make it "even". I think most people want to keep working towards a truly equal society.
Sex abuse and crimes has always been and will always be a sticky situation. There is no easy way to prove that it was not consensual. I think there are women who want to make sure that the difficult nature of the situation doesn't mean they all just get dismissed immediately with no repercussions, as that would continue the cycle. But until we get cameras, with sound, in every bedroom, it is just going to be ugly. As the mother of a son and a daughter, I don't know what the answer is.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jun 10, 2019 16:08:14 GMT -5
I don't think a majority of people feel that women should get to walk all over men for hundreds of years to make it "even". I think most people want to keep working towards a truly equal society. Sex abuse and crimes has always been and will always be a sticky situation. There is no easy way to prove that it was not consensual. I think there are women who want to make sure that the difficult nature of the situation doesn't mean they all just get dismissed immediately with no repercussions, as that would continue the cycle. But until we get cameras, with sound, in every bedroom, it is just going to be ugly. As the mother of a son and a daughter, I don't know what the answer is. I don't think people think women should get to "walk all over men for hundreds of years" but using your sex abuse/assault idea...I think there's definitely a thing happening where people recognize that for a long time women were NOT believed, and the pendulum has now swung toward this idea of "we should believe every woman who says this". It's the idea that because there was underbelief before, that now the only way to combat that is to overbelieve. With some of the bigger stories in the news over the last year in this area I can tell you I've heard women talking to other women and often hearing the same phrases "you should believe her because you're a woman", "she's a woman and you should support women", "if you don't believe her you're blaming the victim". Some of it simply puzzles me...you're a woman so you should believe women...does that mean I should believe him because he's a man and I'm a man? The responses to "I'm not sure if I believe her because of XYZ" tend to not be "You should because of ABC", but rather "she's a woman so you should believe her"...and if you're a man who doesn't believe her, well "You hate women"...ok so then if you don't believe a man do you hate men? It definitely feels very similar with genders switched to historical "the guy says he didn't, stick with the guys". It's very "old boys club" being replaced with "liberal women's club"...the idea that you should side with someone based on shared gender or sex as the sole argument. It might even be societally necessary, it's hard to swing a pendulum to even if you've had it on one side for a long time without swinging too far the other way before settling in the middle, but there's expected backlash to swinging the other way too far just like there way to swinging the initial way too far.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Jun 10, 2019 16:30:26 GMT -5
My reasoning for believing someone when they say they were sexually assaulted has nothing to do with people not believing people in the past. It has everything to do with studies that have shown the instances of false reports are ridiculously low and are no higher than reports of any other crime.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,393
|
Post by thyme4change on Jun 10, 2019 19:45:45 GMT -5
I don't think we need to believe all women, but we do need to listen to every woman that claims she was assaulted. There are a portion out there that immediately assume the woman is lying, and doesn't even give her a chance to tell her story.
|
|
adela76
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 29, 2011 19:15:12 GMT -5
Posts: 125
|
Post by adela76 on Jun 10, 2019 21:01:46 GMT -5
Perhaps that is a clap back to spot men are in right now. Guilty based on nothing more than allegations. I am constantly reading that "white men" had their day, now let the women have theirs. Instead of saying both sexes are important, we feel the need to knock one down. And when I say that, I hear "well, that's what men did"...so this will continue, I'm afraid. And regarding knocking men, I thought about these two pieces of information from the article: Pierson was still sitting at the front desk during the 5:30 class when she was startled by three sharp blows on the wall behind her. She thought perhaps the stereo had fallen from its shelf in the studio. But then she heard the muffled voice of the teacher — “What are you doing?” — followed by five quick gunshots.
Pierson dropped her phone and ran out the front door, turning left to avoid passing the broad window of the studio.
...
After 13 shots, the shooter paused. Joshua Quick, a second-year FSU law student and the only male in the class, heard the gun click.
“I didn’t know if it was jammed or what,” said Quick, who’d worked as a nurse in Arizona before enrolling in law school. A slender yoga and meditation enthusiast, Quick, now 34, said he thought: “I’m just going to hit him. He’ll cock that thing back and shoot me. But I’m going to hit him.”
With his terrified girlfriend looking on, Quick grabbed the best weapon in reach: an upright vacuum cleaner in the corner. And he rushed at Beierle.
The juxtaposition of these two quotes . . . it seems like you are implying that the man was brave and the woman was cowardly. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see why you couldn't have only quoted the latter part if you wanted to highlight something positive about men. Thanks to our recent workplace active shooter training (and I hate that such a thing is needed in today's world), I can say that both people did the right thing given the situation they were each in. They teach you to "run, hide, fight". As in, if you can run away, do it, that is the first, best choice. If you are cornered, hide. If you are cornered and have no place to hide, then fight back. But don't play the hero and run into a room where you hear gunshots armed only with a broomstick, because that's a good way to get shot.
|
|
laterbloomer
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 26, 2018 0:50:42 GMT -5
Posts: 4,350
|
Post by laterbloomer on Jun 10, 2019 21:37:41 GMT -5
Perhaps that is a clap back to spot men are in right now. Guilty based on nothing more than allegations. I am constantly reading that "white men" had their day, now let the women have theirs. Instead of saying both sexes are important, we feel the need to knock one down. And when I say that, I hear "well, that's what men did"...so this will continue, I'm afraid. So men's violence against women is because women have the nerve to complain about men's violence against women....what was the excuse before women were speaking up? I really don't get you.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jun 11, 2019 8:16:58 GMT -5
I don't think we need to believe all women, but we do need to listen to every woman that claims she was assaulted. There are a portion out there that immediately assume the woman is lying, and doesn't even give her a chance to tell her story. 1. This seems super similar to how everyone just assumes the man is lying and doesn't want to hear his side. 2. I think if you make an accusation, not only should people listen to your story, but you NEED to tell your story. No more drive-by accusations where the story is "this guy assaulted me a long time ago, that's all I'm going to say about it, but you should believe it". If you're going to accuse someone, accuse them, and let them defend themselves if they choose to. A lot of the recent stories, primarily of famous individuals, seems to be in the vein of making accusations that cannot be defended against because they contain no specifics to actually defend. In at least one case I can think of, the person being accused wasn't even named to avoid being liable for what the accuser said, it was just made very clear "who they were talking about".
|
|
cktc
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 19, 2013 22:15:31 GMT -5
Posts: 3,202
|
Post by cktc on Jun 11, 2019 9:17:32 GMT -5
So, going with an assumption that this is real, or at least based on real events, (but I would not be surprised if it was totally made up) my thought has always been about the attitude toward the daughter, and this whole "real dad" thing. This man has been with his GF for 10 years. GF's daughter is now getting married. I have not read the reddit thread (nor am I likely to, but I've heard about this one a hundred times it feels like), but I am going to assume that the GF's daughter is not getting married at 16 or even 18. She's likely in her 20s. Which means this man did not come into her life until she was a teenager. Her Dad is her Dad, and has been. Even if he was in and out of her life over the last 10 years (but maybe there's been a reconciliation since the daughter became an adult), there is nothing wrong with wanting her father to walk her down the aisle. Children do not get to choose who their parents date. And if he chose to pay for things for this girl as she went through her teen years, that's on him. It's also on him if he went along with their supposed assumption that he was going to pay for everything. But if that is the relationship he had set up over the previous 10 years, then yeah, that's the assumption they are going to make. The way this relationship worked did not come out of the blue, nor did it happen "despite" him. He was an active participant in creating this power dynamic - a dynamic where he had the power of the purse strings (which is a VERY real power in relationships).
And note, this guy, in his supposed toast, doesn't look at himself as a loving father figure who helped raise this child. He doesn't describe himself as one who celebrated her victories or supported her in her rough patches. He thinks he's the patriarch whose advice and guidance should be sought, and very obviously holds his ability to pay over their heads as a mechanism of control. And control is obviously what he cares about, since he decided to make his declaration so publicly. I say they are just as lucky, or more so, to be rid of him.
And also, the venues and caterers don't give a s***. He's not getting his deposits back. I guess he could sue the couple for them, but given that he paid them freely at the time, with no conditions set on them, I doubt a court would uphold his case. That part really bugged me as well, even step-parents who have been with their partners since the children were little recognize they won't, and aren't supposed to, replace the biological parent. This girl has already graduated college, so I would think she is at least 22. He struck me more as someone used to controlling people with money than someone with legitimate feelings for these women.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,882
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 11, 2019 11:31:29 GMT -5
I don't think we need to believe all women, but we do need to listen to every woman that claims she was assaulted. There are a portion out there that immediately assume the woman is lying, and doesn't even give her a chance to tell her story. 1. This seems super similar to how everyone just assumes the man is lying and doesn't want to hear his side. 2. I think if you make an accusation, not only should people listen to your story, but you NEED to tell your story. No more drive-by accusations where the story is "this guy assaulted me a long time ago, that's all I'm going to say about it, but you should believe it". If you're going to accuse someone, accuse them, and let them defend themselves if they choose to. A lot of the recent stories, primarily of famous individuals, seems to be in the vein of making accusations that cannot be defended against because they contain no specifics to actually defend. In at least one case I can think of, the person being accused wasn't even named to avoid being liable for what the accuser said, it was just made very clear "who they were talking about".
It's hard to come out against people who have power over you, and who could ruin you, if you're not believed. Sadly, I know several women (including Ellen DeGeneres, who recently talked about this) who were molested by a step father and either hid the fact, afraid they would get blamed, or told their mom, who didn't believe them. Some even had to leave their home and go live with their dad, because mom sided with step dad. When you look at some of these late after the fact accusations, like those against Harvey Weinstein or Kavanagh, it's always a young woman going up against a more powerful man - in this case, a major movie director and a star student from a wealthy family - who could ruin the woman, if she isn't believed.
Rape often isn't about sex, it's about a male exerting his power over a woman, and the woman takes a big risk accusing him in public, especially since, historically, women often aren't believed. Maybe in a couple decades attitudes will have changed and this will no longer be the case.
|
|