Has any woman in your life ever talked with you about her experience of sexual assault? If no, statistics indicate they don’t trust you to discuss it. Your comment is nauseating.
Has any woman in your life ever talked with you about her experience of sexual assault? If no, statistics indicate they don’t trust you to discuss it. Your comment is nauseating.
Working with survivors of sexual assault has been my career for over 25 years, so let me be clear. The author of this piece chose to frame the story of a highly vulnerable 16 year old girl being groomed and statutorily raped by a powerful 42 year old man, as 'romantic.'
And since I do work with this population, I can tell you that far more survivors of grooming still love and want to protect their groomers than don't. THAT IS LITERALLY PART OF GROOMING. You are psychologically conditioned starting at a vulnerable age.
Augusta's inability to completely condemn McCarthy's actions isn't a signal that this situation was ok, or as the author wants to frame it, romantic. It just means she's still expressing the behaviors of a person sexually groomed from adolescence and through their adult life. And the only person allowed to define her experience for herself is Augusta, whose voice was completely overshadowed in this article. The moments where she *did* express discomfort with what happened, are left glossed over and unexamined by the author.
It's not lost on me that the majority of highly defensive comments here are from posters who appear to have male names, and that the author is liking all of them. Much like as what happened in this article, men are speaking for and over women, transposing their voice and point of views onto our stories.
sorry. but i do feel like your "raw exuberance" comment sounds like you're getting off on the writer getting off on this story, and you're romanticizing the whole naive discovery thing in a way that just feels gross, considering the gravity of the deeper issues.
I find the archeology and unearthing that happened in this revelation, exposing a vast subterranean strata of force, meaning, pain, and inspiration hidden in the heart of American letters to be vital and exuberant and compelling. The story is also gross. Can it not be both? Our 'new' president is a convicted rapist and felon. It feels a little precious, out of touch to point to Vanity Fair as some normalizer of abuse at this point. Anyways, I'm organizing a book burning in Los Angeles. Please share https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTYjYPvu5/
so let me get this straight: because Trump has "normalized" sex abuse, you think it's now "precious" to criticize media for doing that? what's your logic there exactly?
i think the closer we really are to something like child sex abuse, it doesn't quite feel so intoxicating to discover it in our past. the nauseating "gross" part tends to overshadow the "exuberant."
Has any woman in your life ever talked with you about her experience of sexual assault? If no, statistics indicate they don’t trust you to discuss it. Your comment is nauseating.
Working with survivors of sexual assault has been my career for over 25 years, so let me be clear. The author of this piece chose to frame the story of a highly vulnerable 16 year old girl being groomed and statutorily raped by a powerful 42 year old man, as 'romantic.'
And since I do work with this population, I can tell you that far more survivors of grooming still love and want to protect their groomers than don't. THAT IS LITERALLY PART OF GROOMING. You are psychologically conditioned starting at a vulnerable age.
Augusta's inability to completely condemn McCarthy's actions isn't a signal that this situation was ok, or as the author wants to frame it, romantic. It just means she's still expressing the behaviors of a person sexually groomed from adolescence and through their adult life. And the only person allowed to define her experience for herself is Augusta, whose voice was completely overshadowed in this article. The moments where she *did* express discomfort with what happened, are left glossed over and unexamined by the author.
It's not lost on me that the majority of highly defensive comments here are from posters who appear to have male names, and that the author is liking all of them. Much like as what happened in this article, men are speaking for and over women, transposing their voice and point of views onto our stories.
sorry. but i do feel like your "raw exuberance" comment sounds like you're getting off on the writer getting off on this story, and you're romanticizing the whole naive discovery thing in a way that just feels gross, considering the gravity of the deeper issues.
I find the archeology and unearthing that happened in this revelation, exposing a vast subterranean strata of force, meaning, pain, and inspiration hidden in the heart of American letters to be vital and exuberant and compelling. The story is also gross. Can it not be both? Our 'new' president is a convicted rapist and felon. It feels a little precious, out of touch to point to Vanity Fair as some normalizer of abuse at this point. Anyways, I'm organizing a book burning in Los Angeles. Please share https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTYjYPvu5/
cute? won't be sharing.
so let me get this straight: because Trump has "normalized" sex abuse, you think it's now "precious" to criticize media for doing that? what's your logic there exactly?
i think the closer we really are to something like child sex abuse, it doesn't quite feel so intoxicating to discover it in our past. the nauseating "gross" part tends to overshadow the "exuberant."
but you be you!
Of course it's complex and gross. And there are plenty of writers who could do that duality justice. Barney isn't one of them.