• athos77@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Notice how her entire team immediately took her side? This isn’t the first time he’s done something like this, and she’s not the first person on the team he’s done it to, either.

  • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    107
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    People are so quick with conclusions without actual information.

    If you read the article, it is about whether the person gave consent or not for the kiss.

    We as just observers on the internet, have no idea about that. So why drawing conclusions?

    EDIT you can downvote all you want, since it doesn’t mean anything on here. However let me ask:

    Were you next to both of them when it happened? I’m assuming not, so how do you know the facts? Conclusions without facts are just random opinions.

    • Liv2themax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s a significant difference between claiming some things was spontaneous and actually getting consent. This guy wasn’t in a relationship with the player where this type of behavior would have been previously cleared. He’s not even claiming that he asked permission. In this case you would have to assume mutual spontaneous consent. That is what he’s claiming. However, one party has clearly said it wasn’t mutual consent. So now you either have to assume the victim is lying or you take the logical path and realize that there’s photographic evidence of a powerful figure, who doesn’t claim to have asked for consent, assaulting a female athlete and showing no regard or remorse for that behavior.

      • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        57
        ·
        1 year ago

        First of all thanks for an actual argument without throwing insults and such.

        You are right indeed, about actual consent, spontaneousness/ spontaneous consent. One party says it was spontaneous consent and the other party said it was not, so how do we as the internet observer what it truly was?

        I mean, certainly if it was not, he should resign and such. I would like to say though, I never said that there was no photographic evidence. This matter is an she versus he said.

        • osarusan@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          One party says it was spontaneous consent and the other party said it was not, so how do we as the internet observer what it truly was?

          You are a clown.

            • osarusan@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              No man. Use your fucking brain. This is either one of the most intellectually dishonest arguments I have ever seen or you are truly an idiot.

              You’re saying the equivalent of “How do we know person A punched person B, and it wasn’t person B who slammed his face into person A’s fist? shrug We as internet observers just can’t know.”

              It’s disgustingly dishonest. Everyone is trying to tell you this and you keep retreating further. Step out of your shoes or whatever personal reason is causing you to have this cognitive dissonance and look the situation honestly. You should see that your posts defending this have been pathetic and dishonest.

      • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        52
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Well the fact that no one gave an counterargument, proves my point.

        This is pretty much “follow the hate train”. As usual.

        I don’t particular like the guy but people here pretend as if they have been there and heard everything. Which is kind of funny(?)

        • frickineh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          34
          ·
          1 year ago

          The counterargument is that she said it wasn’t consensual. Holy shit, how many people in your life should think about pressing charges against you if that’s how you think consent works?

          • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            36
            ·
            1 year ago

            Since you are making this personal, I won’t argue with you. However if you are curious, you can check my other comments to the ones that are actually giving arguments without being personal.

    • rusticus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Dude, Hermoso herself said it was non consensual. How can you justify suing HER since it happened to HER. Do you know what she was thinking?

      • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        49
        ·
        1 year ago

        My point is, people here pretend as if they know everything what has truly happened. While we are just observers, we do not know actually has been said at that right moment (or do we?). I do not justify anything, never claimed I was justifying anything.

        Certainly he can he an ‘‘POS’’ but I don’t know. I don’t know him that much, do not follow him and do not know him personally.

        • rusticus@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          1 year ago

          You can see that he kissed her on the lips and she said she didn’t want or consent to that. What more evidence do you need? Do you think she is lying?

          • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            40
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, we can see he did that. Yes, she said that afterwards. She showed no signs of it at that moment.

            I’m not saying she’s lying, I’m saying that the people on here pretend to know everything.

            Personally, I’m curious how this goes. What more evidence I want? Nothing. Don’t think there’s more unless we can actually get a video with sound where we hear what both of them say.

            • rusticus@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              22
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              So you don’t want any more evidence. So you either believe her or you think she’s a liar. Which is it?

                • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  20
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, you believe the abuser caught in video but you’re too much of a coward to admit it outright.

                • rusticus@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  16
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No. You didn’t. You said “I’m not saying she’s lying”. That’s not the same.

                  Do you believe her statements or do you think she’s lying?

          • osarusan@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not empiricism. He’s disguising nihilistic cynicism as skepticism.

            His argument boils down to he think that we should doubt someone when they tell us their own feelings. He’s claiming that if we don’t have 100% certainty about something being true, then we have 0% certainty. It’s almost a retreat into solipsism, suggesting that because we can’t know with perfect certainty, then we have perfect uncertainty.

            Doubting that someone who says “I didn’t want to be kissed” didn’t actually want to be kissed is to outright call them a liar. It’s victim blaming. He’s just trying to mask that behind a false veneer of skepticism and mental acrobatics because he knows that his position actually sounds appalling when presented straight-forward.

            • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              While we are just observers, we do not know actually has been said at that right moment

              Empiricism: the theory that all knowledge is derived from sense-experience.

              The argument seems to be that we cannot make any determination on this unless we have first hand knowledge and have experienced the event directly ourselves.

              • osarusan@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The argument seems to be that we cannot make any determination on this unless we have first hand knowledge and have experienced the event directly ourselves.

                Using this methodology makes all concept of justice moot. If we can’t make a determination without firsthand knowledge, then we can’t ever prosecute or judge anyone but our own selves. No reasonable argument can ever be made if this is the foundation one relies on. Thus, it is an absurd retreat into solipsism.

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        A person in a position of power does something unwanted to another person underneath his/her power. Then the person in a position of power claims the person underneath lied about consent. This is always the fault of the person in power. Shame on you for not having better judgment. Be better.

          • rusticus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That was the risk he chose to take when he took advantage of the power dynamic. None of us get to choose the severity of punishment for bad actions but we are responsible. And there is no question he is at fault here. You can reasonably argue the severity of punishment but no one should be questioning his accountability here.

              • rusticus@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Wrong. The power dynamic is not equal. Therefore it is impossible to “figure out a solution on their own.” Your profound ignorance around abuses of power are shocking. Get help.

                Edit: I love how what appears to be a bunch of men on the internet defending the sexual assault of a woman beneath the male in the power dynamic. And all of her colleagues and teammates are defending her, not him. A story as old as time itself.