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.

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/MP+WIFE%27S+STALKER%3B+Lawyer+Laura+tells+of+fired+trainee%27s+hate...-a061570268

I really don't think that's a great write up at all. 😂

The ending obviously said more about Donny, that was the point. I also didn't think any part of it was about Marthas origin story at all. It was always about Donny.

There's nothing to suggest she's a psychopath. I would say she probably has borderline personality disorder and something else (or several other things).

As for Donnys wanting to hide his sexuality from his parents, I think it was more the abuse and 'origins story' of how his sexuality had changed that he really wanted to hide from them. He had previously identified as straight.

Donny is who he is as a result of the trauma, not because of other peoples expectations.

As for the final line.....that was obvious and he explained as much in the show and in all of the interviews he did. People are acting like they've uncovered some hidden meanings even though the writer/actor/victim literally explained all of that 😂

Yes, the father's revelation was so moving. Generations silenced by abusers and no support apart from his wife all that time.

I think it's an amazing piece of art too. The fact that it generates so much discussion is proof of that.

And we already know that too many abusers have silenced their victims and gotten away with it. He shows how cleverly his abuser breaks him down, grooms him over time. When these kinds of stories come out there is always discomfort and a sense that they 'shouldn't' be told, because they are grenades that upset a lot of people. But if we don't tell them then these abusers will keep going.

@jengachampion like you I was also stalked. It happened when I was at Uni and genuinely changed the course of my life because of the severity and resulting fear/trauma.

I feel very conflicted about Baby Reindeer. At first I thought the creator said he changed enough she wouldn't be found/identified, but that very much doesn't seem like the case.

I worry about her mental health but then I ask myself if the sexes were reversed and the victim was female and the perpetrator male, would I feel so bad for him? I don't think I would...

While he has a right to tell his story and it's certainly compelling, also probably good to raise the awareness that women can be perpetrators too, as someone who has experienced it I'm not sure I'd have done the same.

Nobody said or even insinuated your last sentence...

People are discussing the show. And I agree with the post. You don't (insert sarcastic, patronising emoji)

Re your last question about how cotton mouth alludes to brass eye

Both titles are two words, with an adjective based on a natural material and a noun based on a facial feature.

Simple but clever swaps.

I also love whoever pointed out the Baby Reindeer/fawn response.

Gadd has clearly done his research around trauma responses and what I also loved about this series is how carefully he brings those elements in, both with his acting and the script.

It's brilliant.

No they havent ‘Found him’ at all

‘They’ have no right to accuse people of things they havent done because ‘they’ THINK they have got the right person

Yes they did. And people are doing it all over the internet.

It was a very real depiction of how trauma can fuck you up and he literally explained so much of in words and even in his facial expressions and then there's people all over the internet doing their 'in-depth' analyses saying "You know what, I think deep down part of him was getting something from it".

Because I work in TV and know the strict compliance processes involved. She was not convicted of the crimes and sent to prison, he used creative licence to add that bit in. She is now receiving death threats and being harassed.
I don’t think she should be excused at all, but a story has been put out there that’s untrue (the prison part) and she will be able to follow up on that, rightly or wrongly, as it’s causing her detriment. It isn’t a factual documentary which other similar true crime series have been. It’s an embellished story where the individuals are easily identified.

Remains to be seen if she sells her story to Netflix. Until then it’s not really the same thing.

There is a hell of a lot of victim blaming here. I would have I would have, people deal with things very differently.

It’s not so much being worried about the stalker as side eyeing the fact that he emphasises how vulnerable she is and that no one should look for her when he knew they would, and that this would bring lots of negative attention.

And no not saying she is not culpable but as op’s said, we don’t go through the Court of Netflix. He also seems to provoke her response through this when we know that police response is inadequate and stalkers usually don’t respect RO’s etc, so why does he do it? Then someone else bringing up in interview that he still gets messages from her through his family and friends??

Gender does play into this as men are much more dangerous on average than women, and I think it’s much less likely for a woman to put herself in danger like this (of course it would be her right to, but she takrs the risk of finding herself dead with a stalker who ignored an RO), but it’s not all about that. Look up the Dear Zachary case for an infuriating and heartbreaking female on male stalking case.

I get why people are talking about victim blaming. But there are some very contradictory things going on here and not all is above board. If we were just talking about the show itself, LOVE that it showed a flawed victim. I’m talking about the irl stuff behind it.

D'oh, I am thick as mince. I was looking at snakes .
I did mention the Fawn response though so swings, roundabouts.

That's interesting as two people on here insisted there was no legal case to answer.

Were they lawyers/solicitors?

I’m two episodes in and I think I dislike him as much as I dislike her. Will I feel sorry for him at any point?

They didn't expand on why there was no case to answer. One insisted I just wanted to take a man down

😂 I remember reading that now. Yes, that was silly. There's a lot on this thread insisting things without evidence to back it up it seems

Gadd's responses make me doubt his motives, and his honesty to some extent.

He says he didn't 'press charges' as didn't want her to go to prison. But has been happy to identify her in this series, and bait her on twitter. He has said the series is 'emotionally true' which frankly could mean anything. He has already exaggerated that she went to prison, so who knows which other bits he exaggerated. In the interview with her recently she said he had read up on her background, as he did on others who went to the pub he worked at. He uses his real life in his act, he needs material. I'm not doubting she stalked him, but think how it started might be a grey area.

He has spoken out about SF, though pointing towards him in the series. He wouldn't want people in his own industry seeing him as a loose cannonball, so has done some damage mitigation there for his career. With 'Martha', no mitigation needed.

Doesn’t he tell us throughout the show what he wants

fame and adulation he has it now

It was difficult viewing and an honest account of his complexities I thought it was very good but damaging to others as they would know who it is about (Martha and Terri) and Martha would certainly react no one is that naive to believe she wouldn’t

For the last time, you don’t ’press charges’ in England/Wales. This isn’t the USA. Here, a victim makes a complaint, and the state decides whether to prosecute based on the available evidence. If the complainant pulls out, the state can still prosecute based on public interest or the available evidence.

I think we also have to bear in mind that the when Gadd was making it, he would have been caught up in the work itself, and given he wrote it and acted in it that would have been pretty all encompassing. He would have been living and breathing the story and its execution.

Signing the contract with Netflix would have been part of that, but really who can predict what is going to happen when a TV series comes out? It could have sunk like a stone.

the fact that it's gone viral and created such a media storm, could never have been predicted. It's like Staircase or Tiger Kings, some things just catch the public mood.

In my admittedly limited experience publishers/media producers don't do a lot to protect their creators making risky work, which this is, they cover their own backs and will happily throw the tell-all memoirist or whoever under a bus. They would have covered themselves legally and currently be enjoying its success. I feel like Gadd is a fairly canny operator and yes, he's exposed people who would have preferred he didn't but writers sell people out all the time - look at Truman Capote as one example of the top of my head. It's not necessarily a nice thing to do but if you give a writer material they will use it.

Okay so listened to this so noone else has to.
Podcast October 2016:
Artist Richard Gadd - Eye contact, anger black-outs and parents from Who Hurt You? | Podcast Episode on Podbay

1. Gadd struggles with eye contact so likes wearing sunglasses.
2. Gadd likes analysing people's energies, is always interested when people matched on paper are awkward irl, thinks anxieties/energies come from somewhere primal.
3. His show Money see, monkey do (2016) alludes to that: monkeys trying to be like human beings.
4. Gadd says he works obsessively but the pressure on his show Waiting for Gaddot (2015 ) was a lot so he sent the actors notes every night.
5. Gadd says his parents pushed him but not as much as he pushed himself, failed his mocks at 15 (and felt he'd let them down) at university didn't feel very academic (especially compared with his father, who was clever) but never missed a lecture, worked hard and got a first eventually.
6. His work ethic comes from being in a shallow industry, went to a state school so felt had to use that to overcompensate at university against privately-schooled peers. Knows clever people but with no work ethic. Spends abnormal amounts of time by himself working.
7. His shows were always niche, callous themes, reductive/cruel, aggressive in tone, tapping into repressed anger. Only relevant one month of the year (Fringe). Gaddot was less intense/visceral so offered more release. Says later his shows used to lack emotional heart/were colder.
8. Once he heard a whole toilet of people discussing how bad his show was and so knows he may still alienate people. But as people are multi-faceted and he doesn't believe "normality" is a thing - many can understand the fucked-upness of his shows now.
9. He thinks anyone could do stand-up with the right ethic, doesn't believe anyone is boring.
10. Feels he is judged by others but nowhere near as much as he judges himself and projects his own paranoia onto others/can be neurotic/internally spirals. So brooded ages on his own football-red mist when he once got angry in a match.
11. Self-hatred/neuroses. Guilty voice in his head is lessening.
12. If art is there for anyone it should be to hold a mirror up to the audience/world to make people feel challenged or accepted. Pet peeve is comedy without a point/nothing to say. Should be testing, break norms/conventions, has to challenge our thinking or bring us together.
13. Hagen feels people don't always want or feel comfortable with the dark stuff and just want to laugh/not be challenged and would rather people repress their feeling in her experience. Gadd's own personal opinion is that art without point or purpose is not how it should be.
14. Therapy mentioned briefly - that certain details ring true. That performing has also helped. (SH). Both feel they are more introverted as people. Gadd says club gigs (rather than theatre comedy) make his anxiety/neuroses/monkey brain worse but gets inner solace afterwards.
15. Gadd would like to go to Melbourne Festival (it's not warm as it's in Autumn). Isn't sure he believes in the supernatural.
16. What advice to younger self? Surround yourself with good people. Don't trust/give yourself away so easily. Try and be positive. Don't care as much. Energy vampires/dragging you down - self-control and self-respect = cut those taking your energy from your life. Inner strength. Keep your wits about you. Wonderful friends/parents meant he was naïve, always seeing the good in everyone, caused difficulty in his life.
17. Mental health (SH) - depression, addiction, heartbreak etc doesn't ever leave you (residue memories). Gadd would like to feel he could be fixed completely. His coping mechanisms = putting everything into work, running, knowing he's survived some bad shit.
18. Sophie auditioned for his show Waiting for Gaddot but they'd met at a previous Chortle awards ceremony. Messy night. She was a bit intoxicated, another comedian was robbed at gunpoint, cab driver put her out in middle of London, briefly mentions her unrequited love and topic of new show (whole other thread).

No, didn't think it would be somehow funnily enough

Rape victim goes public, choosing to eschew traditional justice in favour of public storytelling (interview or drama, same thing) and eschews trial in favour of assumed financial benefit.

You're so right, not the same at all.

Is the only thing that identified the real life Martha the fact that people went through ten year old tweets (or other social media) and found messages that linked them? His play has been out for years and he had National coverage about it for years. At what point did people identify the real Martha.
Is it possible that her being identified was really a genuine mistake. Lots of people are clueless about social media (and the fact RG allowed over 40,000 emails to be sent to him by Martha suggests he's not great at managing in his online activities)
People say she is identifiable from the show but 'overweight Scottish Solicetor' who studied at Aberdeen isn't that identifiable. Wiki suggests there are 1200 students at the Aberdeen school of Law.
It also looks like she changed her name since being in the press for the two previous stalking incidents.

Are people assuming he intentionally wanted people to know who she was or do they think it was a genuine slip up by him and the producers at Netflix?