I know this isn't really political, but it has political overtones so I'm posting it in here.
So I don't know much about Lauer other than him being fired for #MeToo type things, but apparently a book came out and his accuser basically spilled the beans on the accusations she made. It was pretty repugnant stuff but one thing stuck out to me that seems like BS.
So the accuser says that Lauer raped her during the 2014 Socci Olympics; she said that they were at a hotel bar and she had 6 shots, and Lauer asked her up to his room. She said he had always been a gentleman before so she had no concerns. Once up in the room, she said that he forced himself on her and forced to have anal sex even though she had told him "repeatedly" that she didn't want to have that type of sex.
So here's the part that I call BS: She said that instance in Socci was non-consentual. Then she goes on to say that AFTER that incident she went on to have consentual sex with him on many occasions even though he was married. What seems pretty ridiculous to me is that she brought these allegations and charges against him later for "raping" her, yet since that rape she'd been having sex with him regularly. It seems to be that if a woman gets raped, which is horrible, and she doesn't report it then it's one thing. But if she gets raped, doesn't report it, but continues to see the guy and have consentual sex with him then I call BS on the rape. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but if you were all that bothered with it you wouldn't have continued seeing him and having sexual relations.
Am I off base here or does it sound like BS to ruin someone's life and career over an incident that she wasn't even bothered enough to stop seeing him? She sounds more like a scorned girlfriend than someone who is upset that she was raped. I'm interested to hear everyones' thoughts on this.
So I don't know much about Lauer other than him being fired for #MeToo type things, but apparently a book came out and his accuser basically spilled the beans on the accusations she made. It was pretty repugnant stuff but one thing stuck out to me that seems like BS.
So the accuser says that Lauer raped her during the 2014 Socci Olympics; she said that they were at a hotel bar and she had 6 shots, and Lauer asked her up to his room. She said he had always been a gentleman before so she had no concerns. Once up in the room, she said that he forced himself on her and forced to have anal sex even though she had told him "repeatedly" that she didn't want to have that type of sex.
So here's the part that I call BS: She said that instance in Socci was non-consentual. Then she goes on to say that AFTER that incident she went on to have consentual sex with him on many occasions even though he was married. What seems pretty ridiculous to me is that she brought these allegations and charges against him later for "raping" her, yet since that rape she'd been having sex with him regularly. It seems to be that if a woman gets raped, which is horrible, and she doesn't report it then it's one thing. But if she gets raped, doesn't report it, but continues to see the guy and have consentual sex with him then I call BS on the rape. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but if you were all that bothered with it you wouldn't have continued seeing him and having sexual relations.
Am I off base here or does it sound like BS to ruin someone's life and career over an incident that she wasn't even bothered enough to stop seeing him? She sounds more like a scorned girlfriend than someone who is upset that she was raped. I'm interested to hear everyones' thoughts on this.
