A new low for Yahoo Answers.

[Canadian Mojo]

I have a problem with him trying to be a control freak in the first place.

The way he phrased him telling her not to go there doesn't seem like a case of "I'm concerned about your safety", it's more like a case of "I want to control every aspect of your life, including where you go, and I do this under the veil of caring about you, because I am an emotionally abusive bastard."

In retrospect, she's probably better off without him.

Intent vs. interpretation can get rather muddled in a written medium, but his tone does seem well set to be a good dog whistle for calling in the misogynists so they can start howling about how she deserved to be raped etc.

[rageaholic]

I say her being raped makes his threat moot. If he cared about her, he would change his mind & comfort her. So no, he gets no sympathy from me. Hopefully, she'll have family who'll be there to help her in recovering from this horrible experience.

So in your opinion how long should he be obligated to stay in the relationship? If she had stepped out in front of a bus while coming home from the club and ended up in a wheelchair would you expect him to do the same thing? What if she never got out of the chair, marry her and stay forever?

He drew a line, she crossed it, then something bad happened to her.

We don't know enough of the story to say if he is a jerk for drawing the line, but sticking to one isn't an inherently bad thing. A lot of the guys replying to him are complete fuckwads though.

But why would he care if she went to the club in the first place?  Trying to control her in that way is a dick move in of itself.

That said, I don't think he has any obligation to stay with her for any reason, but he still

a) blamed his girlfriend for being raped when she needed support and comfort.
b) acted like a smug snake even when his friends were calling him out on his douchiness.

So even if he didn't break up with her, he still sounds like a real McDouche.  Perhaps breaking up with her might be a blessing in disguise for his GF. 

[Thejebusfire]

First off, he had no right to tell his gf he will dump her if she went somewhere he didn't like. The fact that she was raped there makes him even more of an epic dick.

[I am lizard]

Also, does this mean Canadian Mojo just sided with a copypasta?
Wow, I might have to have my network of spies trace your IP address for that.

You have to appreciate how well the scenario is designed to elicit reaction from two conflicting perspectives and bring them into conflict. He dumped her for lying to him vs. he abandoned her when she needed him. It's almost like somebody pulled it out of an ethics class debate. Do it or don't do it, why? Trolling aside, it makes for an interesting debate because we ask this same sort of question about where our duty to others lies at a national scale and with global implications.

That's actually a pretty interesting philosophical and ethical debate.

Should I start trying to decipher whether shite really was "So Cash"?

[I am lizard]

First off, he had no right to tell his gf he will dump her if she went somewhere he didn't like. The fact that she was raped there makes him even more of an epic dick.

Yeah, it's one thing to warn your GF/BF not to go somewhere because it's a great place to end up on the missing persons list, he just seemed to think "She mah hoe and dat bitch betta do as i tell her."

[dpareja]

First off, he had no right to tell his gf he will dump her if she went somewhere he didn't like. The fact that she was raped there makes him even more of an epic dick.

He had every right to tell her that, doing so just made it clear that he's a gigantic douche.

[Søren]

I just give him props for actually going through with it, if she didnt get raped, then not going through with dumping her would equate with emotional blackmail

[Sylvana]

It is an interesting situation.

On one hand the requirement that the girlfriend not go to the club reeks of emotionally abusive control freak. Although we dont have information on the reasoning, the ultimatum implies that it was more a measure of control, preventing her from being exposed to guys who are better than him and who she would leave him for.

That said, he is entitled to make that kind of unreasonable demand and he is entitled to break off the relationship if she ignores it, and she is entitled to ignore it and go anyway. However, both have to face the consequences there of. As everyone knows relationships are all about compromise. However, in this case it would seem that ignoring the instruction because he is a control freak would in general be the best for her to accept him leaving her.

The above though all works on the assumption that nothing bad happens. However now in the case posited by the troll, she encounters a tragic event. It makes him seem more of a douche for leaving her, but as Hofstadter's Tortoise pointed out, it is kind of emotional blackmail. In emotionally abusive relationships in particular one common tactic for the abuser is self harm, which causes the other party to feel guilty and responsible for the abusers harm and hence they submit to the demands. Now I doubt the rape in this case falls into this category. However, it would not be outside the bounds of a manipulative emotional abuser to have a one night stand, and then label it as rape towards their partner in an attempt to manipulate sympathy out of them.

This story is a really interesting ethical case study. I wonder if we as readers have subjective biases to one or the other party.

In general it seems we feel sympathy for the female victim. What if the roles were reversed. What if a girl had forbid her boyfriend from going to a club on threat of leaving him. He goes anyway but gets into a fight and ends with all his limbs broken. She ends up leaving him afterwards. do we automatically feel the same sympathy towards the victim or do we feel the situation is different because of our own cultural perceptions and biases.

[Murdin]

*snip*

Woah. Your masterful arguments, "she asked for it" and "what about the menz?", have totally convinced me that the situation is way more nuanced than I originally thought. And by more nuanced, I mean that the bitch deserved it and the dudebro, while a bit of a control freak, deserve to be hailed as a fucking hero for sticking to his guns. After all, can't we all agree that being in the right about something absolves you from basic human decency towards those that have been proven "in the wrong"?


Okay, I'm tired of fucking around. I find it horrifying that most people here, on both sides of the "debate", think that putting excessively restrictive conditions on their relationship was the worst thing this guy did. When someone you know has been assaulted and calls you in a state of shock, unless they are some kind of mortal enemy, the exact status of your relationship with them should not be the first thing that come to your mind. It takes a uncaring and supremely self-centered bastard to immediately shift the conversation away from the victim's immediate distress and towards their own petty grievances.

There is a distinction between hurting people by being inflexible and brutally honest, and kicking them while they're down. The scumbag didn't have to hide the fact that he considers their relationship to be over. Does it make it okay for him to go out of his way and force the subject on her, in place of offering her any kind of practical or even emotional support? Some people here seem to think so. Well, let's just say... that I disagree. That people who obsess about "being in the right", for the feeling of moral infallibility it procures towards people who aren't, disgust and frighten me. That this vindicative, judgemental, self-gratifying mentality is at the root of the very kind of evil this forum was once supposed to mock... and I guess we'll leave it at that.

[WatermelonRat]

Best Answer
? answered 2 years ago

As far as i'm concerned, she cheated on you. I would have done the same thing.

Also, you should rape her for getting raped. Thus completing the circle of life.

Source: my brian, and Mufasa from 'The Lion King.'

[Ironchew]

First off, he had no right to tell his gf he will dump her if she went somewhere he didn't like. The fact that she was raped there makes him even more of an epic dick.

He had every right to tell her that, doing so just made it clear that he's a gigantic douche.

Pretty much my stance on the matter. People can dump other people for any reason they want, and he had a stated reason for doing so and was at least consistent. I don't see why the SJ crowd is all up in arms about this.