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.

So first of all, I think we need to be careful to assert that how one person identifies does not make them a spokesperson for an entire gender!!! I don't know if you identify as male, female, trans, non-binary, gender fluid etc. but you speak as an individual. Experts in gender studies have shown it can be problematic to fit all experiences into one of two binaries, and I tend to agree with that.

I suspect the male rapist is getting less attention because he was only subject to one episode, but also because he is harder to identify that the woman who seems quite open on social media and has a public record of abusing men. I don't think he is provoking her as it seems (from limited information) that she's a bit toxic and thus id say he's more spotlighting her.

I think we need to be careful with discourses about victims provoking their abuser.

Lol, the stalker is a bit toxic so that's why RG's spotlighting her? As opposed to his rapist? Who he's not spotlighting because he's not toxic?

No, the guy who groomed and raped RG is a great person, not toxic at all, certainly doesn't deserve to be identified to the public.

Wtaf are you talking about?

Don't answer that. Rhetorical question. I already know what you're talking about. People who depend entirely on ideology for their thinking are completely predictable.

Yet people frequently say men are only guilty of manslaughter because a woman "provoked them" into murdering them. Or if they get killed within the home the killer gets 10 years less than if they did it in the street. Domestics, see?

We are all too aware of the provocation argument.

So first of all, I absolutely LOVE your music Taylor!!!!!

Secondly, the rapist is just less active in social media. Both should be called out.

Thirdly, it's not pure ideology to consider the experiences of trans people, another wonderful part of the show.

@taylorswift1989 I don't think they can see why they'd rather blame the woman for stalking than a man for rape and drugging. She's hardly keeping under the radar and much less of a threat than a man who is in a position to audition hundreds of young men.

Unless it's self defence you should not be killing anyone.

But id also add, and this is just my own view which I don't expect anyone to agree with, I think the woman was worse.

Her abuse was prolonged and sustained, the male abuser confined to a few occasions. The male abuser did not terrorise his family or spread false rumors.

Both awful, but in my view she was worse and I think Netflix were right to spotlight her more.

She's a very vulnerable, mentally ill woman who has not been convicted of stalking Gadd, or indeed of any crime.

Making her easily identifiable was wrong and also tells us that there is an imbalance of power between her and Gadd - Gadd is confident that he has all the power.

By contrast, he's not naming the alleged male rapist because, presumably, the individual in question has more power and cultural capital and therefore Gadd does not wish to 'throw him to the wolves'.

This whole situation is extremely revealing of power imbalances and the treatment of the mentally ill. Just not in the way Gadd thinks it is.

I am also extremely concerned about the implication of 'revealing' someone as a convicted stalker when the easily identifiable person behind the story is innocent in the eyes of the law.

We're heading towards a uture where any of us could be 'exposed' for anything, some of us may be guilty, others may not. It's a dark and dangerous path.

If you think Gadd bascially telling the world the only reason people are bi or gay is because they were raped and had the choice taken away from them is a good thing, we have different versions of "wonderful". Normalising violence against trans not immediately being reported is another "wonderful" take away as well as reinforcing that men think they'll only get dates if they have a masculine job - no trite stereotypes in this at all, were there? Terri demanding he kiss her in front of angry looking men on the tube; is that showing trans empowerment or is that her making him a victim because she put him on the spot and called him out in front of them? Did she do that to provoke him? Test him?

"If you think Gadd bascially telling the world the only reason people are bi or gay is because they were raped and had the choice taken away from them is a good thing" no he doesn't.

I think your being too critical of Terri, as a trans person she represents the smallest minority in the show and arguably society at large.

This is very telling.

Her abuse was prolonged and sustained, the male abuser confined to a few occasions. The male abuser did not terrorise his family or spread false rumors.

I think this is one of the worst things I've ever read on MN, even from an MRA.

Of course you think she was worse than the man who groomed and raped him.
Of course you do.

And if it was the other way around and he'd been groomed and sexually abused by a woman but stalked by the man you'd think the groomer was worse because she's the woman. Obviously

Netflix spotlighted her more because they found the story more intriguing and thought it would be more entertaining, they didn't spotlight her more thinking she was worse. The show wouldn't have got nearly as much viewers if it was mainly about grooming.

Do you think Terri would be thrilled knowing Gadd was using a photo of his stalker to get an erection because she wasn't doing it for him? Is that what normal trans relationships need?

How is this helping the trans community?

Yes it's quite staggering isn't it. It'd be amusing if the subject matter wasn't so disturbing.

Probably not, but that doesn't reflect on her, and it's still great too see Trans representation.

I'm trying to understand why you think any of this is a good look for the trans community who seem to have been dragged into Gadd's desperate bid for fame.

Just an FYI that there are a couple of people on this thread I've told I won't be engaging with. If you read back you can see this. Yet they seem intent on responding directly to my posts and starting a direct dialogue. Sadly they have not respected this desire for a little distance, but if it seems like I am ignoring people it's not me just being rude. Mostly the people on these pages, are lovely and wonderful to chat too.

Having read the guardian opinion piece on gay sexual violence, once again I say:

what the fuck is wrong with men?

and

Men are the problem

and

Maybe NAMALT - but a sizeable minority, maybe even a majority, are.

Are you...

w-wait...

Are you saying that rape is less traumatic than stalking because it...DOESN'T LAST AS LONG?

Can you share the piece for context????

I also reiterate: So first of all, I think we need to be careful to assert that how one person identifies does not make them a spokesperson for an entire gender!!! I don't know if you identify as male, female, trans, non-binary, gender fluid etc. but you speak as an individual. Experts in gender studies have shown it can be problematic to fit all experiences into one of two binaries, and I tend to agree with that.

I'm guessing you are of the opinion that any publicity is good publicity.
Well, each to their own but if I was in a marginalised group scared of being raped by men, I'd be more worried about the male rapist in the show and angry that I was being treated as a curio by a man who seems to like showing off his manipulation and using of vulnerable people others might consider freakish.

He's not trying to normalise anything apart from that it's ok for him to tell this because it's all just so "crazy!" when it happens to a man.

I'm saying that for me personally, and nobody else, I found her actions worse. But I respect both are terrible and many disagree.

It's not a fact, an opinion.

If it starts a conversation then yeah it can be I guess.

It hasn't started anything new, it's set women and trans back a decade, if anything.

But if you can't see it because you're blinded by the excitement of seeing a member of the trans community on TV whatever the context then that's your choice. I can only advise that as a woman, straight men are not seeing what you are seeing. They are seeing another group able to be good victims when they dish out whatever the like.

Minimising the rape and prioritising the stalking for most of the show was an odd choice by Gadd if you don't bring gender bias into it. An obvious one if you do.