Baby Reindeer creator is provoking his stalker

[jengachampion]

SPOILERS AHEAD
I’ll preface this by saying I had a male stalker for 7 years. I moved, changed jobs, and deleted all social media in that time. I’m also a survivor of SA, as well as assault after being spiked, similar to RG in the show.

It completely baffles me that he would completely replicate his stalker down to physical likeness, occupation, accent, exact correspondences and references like hanging curtains.

He is clearly not too worried about people finding the real person, as well as her potentially contacting him again.

If it were me telling my story, I would change all identifying details of both of us, because I would NEVER want to go through it again. RG telling his story this way is hugely weird to me and really speaks to the theme of mutual obsession he hints at in the show.

Do you feel that way about The Tinder Swindler?, for example

That was a documentary about a convicted fraudster.

Why do you feel that is different?

And this was a representation of a man's experience with a convicted stalker.

Is she 100% convicted? I'm genuinely asking (I'm also not saying she didn't do some/all of it by that question)

She was shown pleading guilty, which leads one to assume she was convicted

Is It your opinion that the fraudster was mentally ill? If he was, was it totally unethical of Netlfix?

What about Epstein? Poor guy.

Shown pleading guilty where?

On the show, do catch up

This completely encompasses it for me, credit to GGBarabajagal on Reddit.

*I agree that the series would have been incomplete without the ending. I think the ending says more about Donny than it does about Martha.

Martha had an unhappy childhood with neglectful parents, but she is not unique in this regard. As you say, different circumstances affect different people in different ways -- some becoming more independent, some more attached. What makes Martha different from most people is that she lacks empathy. She is psychopath.

Donny feels too much empathy. He protected his parents' feelings by keeping his sexuality from them, until the viral video, when he then had to protect their feelings by telling them before Martha could. He cared more about the feelings of his mentor/rapist than he did about his own in that relationship, regardless of the (obviously hollow) promise of the writing gig. And when he gave her that first drink on the house, he cared more about Martha's feelings of loneliness than he did about his own feelings that she seemed dodgy and unstable.

That's why I liked the ending so much. At first it seems like it is all about Martha, explaining her origin story. But by the time it's over, I felt like it was really about Donny, explaining his origin story.

Martha is who she is because she tends to treat everyone else as a means to her own ends. Donny is who he is because he is too attuned to other people's expectations of him, to the point that he cannot create a personality of his own for himself.

Even after she was finally gone, Donny spent months obsessing over Martha's voicemails. How much was that to figure out what he could see in her, and how much just to try to figure out what she saw in him?*

😂 Oh... The irony. The show isn't completely real....

Funny, because you're all jumping to use the show to defend the mentally ill stalker

Presumably you’re aware of the difference between a documentary and a drama? In this case - Roman à clef.

@worrieddaughter97 do catch up... ;)

That was supposed to be a screenshot of my earlier post. I'll find the screen grab again

Why is okay to expose people via documentary, but not drama?

What is the difference?

Both expose.

You just don't like the way the victim did it.

Netflix often does crime documentaries without the okay of victims. They steam ahead without input from them, you don't have threads upon threads on the internet about that.

It says no where she was ever convicted of anything or plead anything relating to him.

Netflix/Gadd could be sued for defamation if she didn't commit any assaults perhaps or for inciting hate crimes against her? Not sure.

For all those thinking it's a hoax/Black Mirror situation/publicity stunt...
You have her tweets to Gadd himself, including mention of a Jimmy.
You have her name in connection with hassling First Minister for Scotland (now dead but she was not his favourite constituent). His name had same initials as Gadd's character (DD).
You have her other surname in connection with hassling a previous employer who either fired her or she resigned from, depending on who tells it. That employer was a lawyer herself, her law firm, was married to an MP (Jimmy) and had to take out a restraining order eventually because social services turned up after her stalker employee allegedly reported her and her husband for physically abusing their son with dyspraxia.
These reports go back 22/24 years so must be true unless The Free Library by Farlex is deemed unreliable - Sunday Mail (Glasgow) journalist checks out.

But neither the First Minister nor the MP/Lawyer nor Gadd took her to court. The latter two took out restraining orders possibly but no prosecution therefore no court records or jail time afaik.
She denied one published allegation and stated she'd contact her lawyer.
If there was enough evidence for Gadd to get a restraining order (over three years, if reports are to be believed, 41,071 emails , 350 hours worth of voicemails, 744 tweets, 46 Facebook messages and 106 pages of letters) that ought to suffice as proof of stalking.
Where it gets stickier are the two physical assaults depicted in the pub - especially if these were invented or happened but were never reported at the time.
It depends upon whether "Based on a true story" as a disclaimer/caveat has any legal footing.

Did not go to prison does not mean she was not convicted.

Is this all statistically backed up or is this your belief? I’ve noticed quite a lot of absolutes on this thread so tape victims are like this, tape victims are vulnerable, they are disbelieving , they are convinced they have done something…:

There is literally no legal case.

You're gagging for a male victim to be torn down because you hate men.

Oh, they are, ‘complex’. Just to be clear anyone can be raped, anyone!

Are you in England/Wales? We don’t ’press charges’ here.

Thanks for that, it was an interesting read

The real life stalker was never jailed but Gadd says he got a restraining order

No... It doesn't mean she was either. That's my point. It's all conjecture because some of its true, some of it isn't and it's a really fucking dangerous subject for Netflix to fuck around with because it leaves it all open to interpretation as this thread is a shining example of