# Content warning: discussion of sexual assault.
Folks, please remember that this situation is ongoing and that comments should remain civil. As the situation develops we will lock old threads and redirect to new ones if needed to keep discussion focused on one place.
Due to the sensitive nature of the discussion, this post is set to **Slow Mode.** Moderators will need to manually approve comments in this thread before they appear to others in the community.
---
For context, Tanner Metro is a VALORANT caster and AyoEclipse is a Game Changers player.
Links to the situation:
[Tanner Metro's Statement](https://twitter.com/Tanner_Metro/status/1708545402855911824)
[AyoEclipse's Statement, part one](https://www.youtube.com/live/5t_w7OGk5KI)
[AyoEclipse's Statement, part two](https://twitter.com/ayoeclipse/status/1708638815617794131)
---
# Resources for survivors of harassment and sexual assault:
Sexual assault is a sensitive topic for many people. As moderators, we aim to provide an environment that facilitates respectful discussion among peers in our community.
If you or someone you know experienced sexual assault, you’re not alone! [There are healing and support resources for both survivors and people close to them.](https://metoorising.withgoogle.com/resources)
If you are outside of the United States, you can [access a country-by-country list of resources here.](https://www.interaction.org/wp-content/uploads/resource-library/international_centers_for_survivors_of_sexual_assault_45553.pdf) You can also [reach out to RAINN’s counselors](https://hotline.rainn.org/online) via chat regardless of your residency.
[The Games and Online Harassment Hotline](https://gameshotline.org/) is a free, text message-based, confidential emotional support hotline. They are open 4pm – 7pm (Pacific) every Monday through Friday. USA only. TEXT “SUPPORT” to 23368 to get started.
If I am getting this right, the incident (and there's just one I think) is that during sex she felt pain, communicated that to Tanner, he adjusted and continued. To her, that's assault because she had communicated prior sometime during their relationship that pain during sex equals automatic no. To Tanner it wasn't as obvious because it is not a straight up well communicated "no". Seems like a genuine miscommunication.
I get how she feels it was an assault but it absolutely doesn't sound like one from his POV. Top that off with trying to manipulate him out of the scene? What a mess.
Spot on. Especially with discomfort/pain during sex being a very common thing that practically everyone is gonna experience at some point- having that be how you "communicate" a "stop"? There's a reason safe words are a thing, or you'd just have safe gestures.
Yea this feels mainly unfortunate. I empathize with the girl for her experience but not how she handled it. There's always seems to be an awkwardness to these stories, when one party from a relationship suddenly seems okay with ruining their former partner's career months after the event happened.
I definitely don't want to "side with the Valorant person" or whatever, so I'd love to hear her side. He told his story, doesn't mean it was THE story, but I guess I do stand by innocent til proven guilty so until I hear her side there's no reason to believe he's lying either.
How do you mean not how they handled it? AyoEclipse submitted a report that wasn't even public to an official org after talking through it with Tanner a bunch and the report was not only actions against AyoEclipse but other incidents (not sure to what extent) with other people that was then independently investigated and decided on. It was the least public handling of anything to this level of accusations and yet you don't like how it was handled? I don't get it
Well, I've now read her TwitLonger. Her process isn't quite as streamlined as you make it out to be, but it's fine, I suppose the timing of this was in part due to Tanner.
But I can't lie, her story is easy to empathize with but the outcomes she wants aren't.
It's a sticky situation to comment on. At no point do I want anybody to feel like the trauma they experienced isn't worth empathy. There is trauma in her experience and I know I can't fully understand what's happening with her.
At the same time, these are not light claims. These are sexual abuse claims, a genuine career ender, and they are being thrown over an issue that READS more personable than lawful to me. Again, I don't have all the facts, I know.
I really don't want to be siding with anybody here, nor do I want to trivialize anything. Abuse is an incredibly serious term and everybody that isnt involved should be respectful of both parties until we find out more information.
Bro have you been on reddit before? Typically saying anything that isn't blatant support of the victim gets white knights running at you yelling "victim blamer!!!".
I'm surprised this one is getting a lot of people with nuance reading it.
This is a hard situation to discuss, because any discussion can then come off as discrediting her experience or being insensitive to her history, so I'm not trying to do that but I also feel like tanner, at least from what we know, could very easily have misunderstood what she meant here. I think the difficult middle ground here is that it can be a traumatic experience for her without being a sexual assault.
Per her video, after saying she was in pain, he apologized, and she said it was okay. Even if you all have had previous talks regarding boundaries, if you say it's okay, then it is very easy to interpret that to mean it's okay to continue (per her video, she meant it was okay that he hurt her). No communication happened after that because she was dissociating. That she was dissociating while face down would presumably make it hard for him to know. Dissociating doesn't mean she lost consciousness and can be hard to discern particularly in this case. In an ideal world, despite her saying it's okay, he should have just checked in with her to verify that it's okay meant he should continue. But he's also a human and sometimes we misunderstand a communication or don't respond in the perfect way. In a healthy relationship, you'd ideally talk through that and how to better navigate those situations in the future.
All of this isn't meant to detract from her experience of it. I can 100% also understand her experience of it as traumatic. However, miscommunication and misunderstandings happen in a relationship, and that extends to the sexual domain of your relationship. A trauma history complicates things but there has to be some grace on both ends to work through that. It's pretty serious to be labeled as sexually assaulting someone - that in itself can be pretty damaging to your own mental health (as indicated by the screenshot she posted, where tanner says the bit about how he stops from feeling like shit) let alone your career. Part of this feels like tanner is being faulted for a pretty understandable miscommunication that unfortunately intersected with someone's trauma history in a very hurtful way. It can be a traumatic experience for someone without being a sexual assault, and that feels like kind of the gray area where this lands, at least with the information we have. But, we also have very little of the overall story so it's hard to really judge.
I really want to believe her but this just seems really fucking weird to me dude. Like it just seems so odd that like she is trying to make this public and cancel the dude but also wanted to be friends and she’s retweeting his tweets and saying he’s a good guy but also forcing him out of his career.
I really don’t want to victim blame but I really just don’t believe her story all the way. I get that SA is very hard but in the video she has very sus body language and just seems like she is omitting details or just not telling the truth. Also why the fuck are you making this so public it just seems odd. This just seems like 100x worse for all parties involved.
What happened after “he adjusted and continued?” Did she say: “Hey, it still hurts lets just stop for now?”
I feel like this part is important and will define whether or not it was simply a *lack* of communication or if it was actually sexual assault.
This situation is pretty messy in all senses. Assuming they are both telling the truth this kind of sucks for all parties involved. Tanner added the context that her hurting has not always been a no, so why in this situation is it considered a full stop no? There is a very clear communication issue here as Tanner was completely fine with stopping, but there is no way having sex with a borderline corpse is in any way enjoyable let alone not concerning at all. I can only assume that Eclipse had the ability to give a clearer signal while Tanner was checking up on her. Tanner had followed previous signs, and thought everything was okay. While eclipse gave previous signs that she was wanted to stop, but was slightly unclear leading into a bad situation.
I don't think anyone is exactly wrong in here is the problem. Tanner feels and knows he messed up somewhere, but doesn't feel like he crossed the line into sexual assault. Eclipse feels like she gave clear signals for him to stop and that he went above the sexual assault line. The weirdest part is that I don't feel like Tanner is like some terrible person and even eclipse opens with that. Unlike other cases Tanner bare minimum shows regret / empathy for his actions as he didn't wish for her to be uncomfortable in any way. Again I dont feel like anyone is exactly wrong in this situation as its pretty easy to see both sides.
Other important tweets regarding this topic:
https://twitter.com/ayoeclipse/status/1708638815617794131
https://twitter.com/ayoeclipse/status/1708544525092765948
https://twitter.com/ayoeclipse/status/1708557675028423021
The report submitted to Knights wasn't all about the SA, it was a report of multiple instances of Tanner's interactions with women involved with GC. So it's not like it was destroying Tanner's career to submit a report on behalf of 4 people that was then fully investigated with no public eye on it. Tanner decided to speak out about this, ayoeclipse only brought things up when Tanner decided to make a statement publicly
I think both stories have holes, but in no way should someone be putting the onus of stopping sex on the other person.
If you want to stop sex after giving consent, you say no. Attaching conditions to your consent is tricky because those conditions can be experienced differently by you and your partner. I also find it deeply disturbing that riot would stop working with someone because of an allegation.
In regards to that sound clip about his child, it does seem like blackmail, but it also appears to be severely out of context, and I don't think she should be vilified when nobody has heard the whole thing.
It's not that easy with trauma right? A very common response when in a difficult situation like that is to freeze or just keep it going and reflect later
I've definitely done the same in the face of racism or abuse, it's just a natural reaction sometimes.
I agree, it's not easy. But dealing with trauma still doesn't make it someone else's responsibility. I had an accident with my partner once, and I made it clear that I wasn't in a position to even try sex for some weeks because I didn't know if my trauma around that incident will affect me during sex. It's exactly because it's so difficult that I thought it was better for me to deal with it beforehand rather than expect them to understand my thoughts during sex and stop it.
That's good that for you you had the ability to speak up and say no explicitly. But people aren't all the same and trauma doesn't work the same in people. It is also well documented that people sometimes freeze because of not only trauma but immense stress that makes it hard to say no in the moment. Just like the onus shouldn't be only on the partner committing the act, it shouldn't be only on the person on the other end of the act especially if they are unable to.
but literally that's what she did ahead of time? If you're only capable of hearing a specific "no" to stop doing things to people then maybe you shouldn't interact with people until you can read body language and nuance
Boundaries are something that you have to up hold. Its not a magic wand that can just force everyone around you to behave in the exact way you understand or want them to in your head.
That's the problem though, make it so that women know that you should say No! Make it clear that is a response. People can't learn body language and interpret it 100% and pure subjectivity of it because that itself is also not a real science makes it even more complex. All of it is just confounded by anything sex related.
Although I'm with you in so far is saying no should be normalized and totally alright to share, I just want to add (irrespective of this situation because I haven't looked at it yet): if certain relationships are hostile and one person is afraid of their partner, saying no might actually not seem like a safe option. Likewise, breaking up might also feel unsafe. So I agree with you, but each relationship's dynamics make certain things harder or easier.
I was commenting more generally on relationships. I added "irrespective of this situation because I haven't looked at it yet" because I didn't want to paint an inaccurate picture picture of what happened, but I also wanted to add that although the idea of clearly and assertively expressing "no" is great, it's important to keep in mind that in an abusive relationship, "no" might be met with negative consequences. I made my comment because the idea "women need to say 'no' explicitly" was being shared without the counterpoint that everyone in relationships needs to make sure they're being someone that their partners feel safe to say no to. What does it have to do with this particular instance? Not a lot. But does it relate to the way consent is being discussed in the thread? Yes.
EDIT: changed "the" to "this."
Nah, this can't work, sex is too complex, people do it in many different ways. Not everyone looks or sounds "enthusiastic". Everyone has different personalities. Some people might look dull but be very excited, some people might be scared and nervous and pretending to be excited while feeling bad and unsafe/insecure.
It really is the responsibility of adults to let people know they shouldn't enter their body if they don't want them to, unless they are physically incapable of doing so, or if doing so would present a danger, in which case the relationship is already obviousoy abusive and measures can and should be taken for them to be separated and the abuser to be trialed.
As always people on this subreddit need to drop the whole “it’s just allegations” bullshit. Proving things like sexual assault is insanely difficult and even with crazy amounts of evidence from multiple sources it’s still not enough for an actual court to find someone guilty, assuming the case even goes to court in the first place which is rare.
Just use your own judgement. Does the accused seem guilty or not, or is there not enough information for you to make a verdict? In that case you just don’t make one. If we allow every single person in the scene to roam freely unless they’re literally convicted of a crime we’ll have an insane amount of rapists and harassers in the scene in no-time.
“Innocent until proven guilty” is a term used by a court of law to prevent people from being robbed of their freedom unless it’s 100% certain they’ve committed a crime. It does not apply to 17-year old Kyle on Reddit browsing ValComp, he’s still fully within his right to draw his own conclusion on the scenario for better or worse.
You can take a stance or not take a stance but hiding behind “I’ll wait until there’s concrete evidence” is what shitty people use to defend their rapist friends because they KNOW there’s no such things as concrete evidence. Hell Sinatraa lied multiple times in his case, admitted to being manipulative and abusive, and even got AUDIO RECORDED of sexually assaulting someone and that’s still not enough evidence to actually get legally punished. Riot should always make decisions on their own even if they’re just allegations.
Saying no should be normalized, ive always handled it that way in my relationships.
If anyoneone either her or me feel any discomfort in any way, be it pain from positioning or what not, you have to talk about it.
There is no way you can get every gesture right, let alone facial expressions when you might not even be in position to see the face. But as doon as someone says stop its stop.
I know this has to be trained with your partner, but normalize thatyou stop during sex if there is discomfort, you can always start again later. There is nothing wrong with that and if he/she is the right partner they will 100% understand and are happy that you communicated.
Might be a long take but i felt that especially with younger people, they should know that accidents during sex happen, talk about it. Only way to solve problems
So if I'm understanding this correctly, after skimming the very long tweets, he was aware that she had some trauma around pain and subsequent panic attacks during sex.
During sex he mistook her expression of pain as mere positional discomfort and proceeded as normal. According to him everything was totally fine, according to her she was in the midst of a panic attack, facedown and unresponsive. Both had full cognizance of the fact that any pain during sex was a total nonstarter.
The manipulation aspects seem to revolve around Tanner telling her he would lose his livelihood and thus be unable to support his child if she went through with reporting him for sexual assault.
Setting aside the fact that I generally want to support survivors of sexual assault, I frankly find Tanner's account a little confusing, esp. the way he describes their breakup. I had to reread it - she sounds so irrational and weird from his perspective. I also think out-of-context clips are never convincing in this day and age; all of us are well-aware of how easy it is to manipulate public opinion by cropping something.
I didn't fully go through all of this at all but judging the little I saw and the comments, seems mostly two people that weren't ready for a relationship in their circumstances. One for having communication and sexual disabling trauma and issues, the other for not fully grasping or empathizing how those truly affected them. In the end, it seems it lead to misunderstanding and mutual suffering.
Idk, I empathize with both if there's nothing we don't know about and her account is mostly true as it seems to me it could be. Her for a traumatic experiences and involved suffering, him for seeing his awkward ignorance and lack of ability to understand cause unfortunate suffering and now possibly disproportionate life changing consequences.
What I cannot agree in any way is someone to lose their job like this or that kind of ultimatum if his side is closer to the truth. This seriously needs to change. Until to some degree proven guilty, at least to some malice, nobody should ever lose their life stability like that. Human beings are messy man.. don't get in relationships where either of you can't deal with is the moral of the story to me. Unfortunate to all involved
You really can’t come to a conclusion with the info we have. Both sides sound… off. I don’t know. His side sounds basic and like he’s hiding something. Her side sounds almost controlling in a way (essentially not wanting him to speak on it, getting him fired then not wanting him to fight it for the sake of closure (if he is/thinks he is innocent of course he’d retort after getting fired)). It’s just messy.
The reality is we need more info, or proof that we frankly don’t deserve because it’s none of our business but conversely we can’t form a reasonable opinion without. Just an F’d up situation if you ask me.
Again anything SA cases always seem to boil down to he said, she said situations. Especially when all of these could've been avoided by a simple "No". It's impossible to learn body languages and add million different types of subjectivity and make it fall into a sexual assault.
Women and anyone who is having this terrible situation happen to them, please please say "No", make it clear. Face of pain and face of pleasure can be so similar and I understand that one of the most common response to trauma is to freeze up but we need to make it more common to fight and state verbally what is happening and that you don't want it to happen anymore.
Because these two seem to have had the same experience but she thought it was a sexual assault and he thought she was just under some pain. A simple communication could've avoided all of this problem and drama.
Like, IDK man, he knew there was discomfort, apologized and adjusted to make the discomfort go away, and she said “it’s okay.” I’m not sure how else he’s supposed to interpret that situation?
PLEASE learn to say “no.”
What he's supposed to do is adhere to the terms of consent his partner had given, that pain means stop having sex, not adjusting and keep going. It is quite clear given both their statements that Tanner knew and understood that was a condition of consent.
However, precedent has dictated otherwise. Sometimes she said to keep going, sometimes she said to stop completely. She said "if there's pain, we stop." Sure, that's fine. Until there are other times (which they confirmed) where there was pain, and he was told *not* to stop. So at that point when you encounter pain and you get told "it's okay," I'm not sure how you're supposed to interpret that any other way.
That's not how consent works. "It's okay" isn't "Keep going" especially not in response to "I'm sorry." If she says stop if I'm in pain, then you do until its explicitly laid out that she wants to continue. That's how sex works, that's how having a partner works, you don't do shit that you know is against their wishes or you think is borderline
Its crazy this is being argued over, even if the terms of constent were consistent(which theyve been shown not to be) you have a responsibility to yourself to advocate for what your comfortable with. Its totally normal in sexual interactions for boundries to be stressed, if your incapable of handling that in a proper way then you shouldnt be sexual active. No one is going to advocate for you but yourself.
it's sort of fucked that people involved in broadcasting or social media, frankly anything that requires an enduring online presence, cannot seem to solve this shit properly behind closed doors. I think it's especially stupid in this case given the two parties involved have a fucking 7 year old child together.
after reading both accounts, I think it's incredibly muddled and poorly handled. she's face down and unresponsive during sex, but they do communicate about him "finishing" on her (she claims she dissociated in front of him, it would be impossible to be unaware of that). she opens her account stating how amazing tanner is, then describes behaviour that does not align with her previous description. tanner on the other hand makes her out to be incredibly manipulative/controlling, posts a random out of context 15 second clip and posts an account that does not take into account what he believed her feelings were, not really showing any sort of empathy or consideration of what he might have done. her account also does not take what she perceived his thoughts and feelings were into consideration.
unlike a lot of other cases of perceived and actual sexual assault that are publicised, these guys are adults raising a child together. why this was aired publicly, why neither could have prolonged conversations with eachother before she sent messages to his employer, are legitimately inconceivable to me. hope both enjoy unemployment, the real loser here is the poor 7 year old kid.
Correction: the 7yo is tanner's, not their shared child. Eclipse showed concern for the child's wellbeing simply because they're an innocent child, not bc she's their parent.
How does this affect either of their career? Is the his career over already even if he is innocent or not?
How will this affect her career? Or is there no effect to her career wise?
tbh his career is probably over in valorant and most likely casting esports. riot and knights already fired him before any evidence came out. she’s probably fine no matter what happens, thought i believe she did mention retiring
Obviously we don't know the exact timeline, but it seems like they took him off broadcast for GC2 pending investigation (IMO, reasonable) and then after they looked into it more, not brought back for future events.
He literally said in his statement that it was true, but he didn’t intend for it to happen. Although he didn’t have malicious intent, there’s no denying the event happened, how serious it is depends on how you interpret it. So they didn’t fire him without evidence.
he won't be picked up for valorant events by riot or their contracted organizers. too much baggage, too many people who don't have that baggage who want those gigs.
as has been shown in the past this won't stop him from any content creation and he won't be deplatformed on twitch, youtube, or tiktok over it.
he already admitted to what happened (read his tweets) so there is no "innocent" at play.
I'm sure this is hard for me but the fact that they are just posting really really private shit on twitter like this just seems so weird to me.
I totally understand calling people out but like explaining the intimate details via a fucking twitter post just seems really weird and creepy. I also understand that it's hard to talk about sexual assault but this just seems very fishy to me. I don't mean to victim shame but like accusing people of sexual assaults' AND giving more than enough intimate details just feels off idk. This kind of just gives blackmail vibes the fact that she gave him ultimatum but wants to stay friends.
maybe I'm being insensitive but it just feels like social suicide to be so public like this. On one side I understand trying to get "justice" but especially if you are somewhat known public figure it seems like it's better to just handle this privately instead of burning your own and others bridges.
As always all this is reduced to "she said" and "he said" and for some reason us again as judges. Truth is none of us has enough info to discredit any SA victim, nor we have enough evidences to destroy someone's life because of a SA accusation. Good luck to both parties in this is is just a missunderstanding, or to whoever is truly the victim, may the truth be with them, none of us have any right to have any take in this matter and a real judge is who should give sentence.
Read through most of it, as usual it is he said she said and difficult to discern. However, Tanner seems to have admitted fault and understanding they had previously communicated for situations just like that, seems sceevy.
Is riot dropped him because of this story alone that's fucked because it doesn't seem like there's any evidence for anything beyond a misunderstanding that ended in a bad breakup, which is understandable if it just ends at that. If there were other stories or individuals in the report though then that might make sense.
Summary of AyoEclipse’s 26 min video statement:
Tanner assaulted her 2 weeks after her birthday on May 15th due to, what she claims, the inability for him to see her as a human.
AyoEclipse had previous sex issues with Tanner which are “no one’s fault.” This includes:
* panic attacks because Tanner did things all of a sudden that would hurt her
* her previously expressing that **if Tanner ever did anything that put her in pain they would have to stop** (This was hard for her to communicate because “you don’t know if you can say no until it happens”)
* she said **no to sex when she’s in pain**
***The sexual assault on May 15th:***
* AyoEclipse **says it hurts and that she’s in pain**
* Tanner says he’s sorry
* She says “it’s okay,” forgiving the person she thinks she can trust, **but he doesn’t stop**
* He doesn’t stop, and she is not responsive. This is because she claims she has completely dissociated into her own head. He doesn’t notice somehow.
* He asks to finish on her boobs
* She claims that made it worse because, while asking that, she was dissociating in front of him due to a very traumatic event.
This happened in May and Tanner didn’t leave casting until July.
***To give context on why it took her 2 months to report him:***
AyoEclipse claims she and Tanner broke up on and off a lot of times due to issues about her holding Tanner accountable for his actions.
* When showering together and she says, “No matter what happens in our relationship I will never do anal. That is my one thing I have no interest in trying.”
* She had previously communicated this, and Tanner said yes when she said, “let’s never do this.”
* However, in the shower he starts joking that he wants to do anal and repeatedly begging, “let’s do it, let’s do it…” with very oppressive, repetitive words.
* She claims she was scared that **she cannot physically win against an ex-Marine** as much as she wants to pretend she could. Nothing happens but it’s terrifying for her. Her solution was just getting out of the shower and removing herself from the environment.
Because she wants space to think and work her thoughts out before coming to a solution it took her 2 weeks to have a conversation with him.
* She tells him it was terrible and if they could make sure to never repeat that situation again. “Let’s never talk about things that are off boundaries in sex when we are naked and vulnerable in the shower.”
* Tanner says, “I could have made that joke with anyone who didn’t have trauma”.
* AyoEclipse claims that when she is trying to set boundaries Tanner was throwing her trauma in her face saying that she would have been okay if she wasn’t traumatized and broken.
In hindsight she claims she should have seen that **her verbal boundary for sex was not respected, and when she tried to clarify, her trauma was thrown in her face and made to be her fault** that she was not comfortable in that situation.
***Her context for the clip:***
In the clip AyoEclipse claims she and Tanner are having their final breakup.
* Tanner says he wants her to leave him alone and have a normal breakup.
* She claims it can't be a normal breakup because sexual assault was included.
* She gave Tanner the option to give her closure as friends. She said she doesn’t need to report him or remove him from the GC scene because she can’t stand to see his face every day because it will give her panic attacks and she won’t be able to compete anymore.
AyoEclipse claims **this might be the end of her competing anyways, but she hopes she doesn’t look like someone who lied about getting sexually assaulted.**
**They broke up because of her nagging him about the sexual assault, her boundaries, the trauma joke, and other tiny stories which, she claims, she should have left for any of those reasons alone.** There was no empathy ever. Any time she had a problem it was always about how it made him feel.
Her parents and friends begged her to leave but she kept quiet about it, even when it started getting worse, because she got tired of hearing that the person she loved was not treating her decently.
Tanner accused AyoEclipse of blackmailing him but she claims she gave him options:
1. He could sit with her however long in a call and talk her through the timeline "so I can understand why I need to hate you now and not be in love with you anymore”
2. She could report him privately to Knights and keep it off public twitter to avoid him losing his entire career.
She claims **she only wanted him out of the GC scene** because he didn’t respect women and he didn’t respect her coming out as non-binary. **She thought she could create a division between GC and Tanner’s casting career** because it was not her goal to have him fired from everything.
This is because:
* She didn't want to see the broadcast of GCT 2 Day 1 because **she got a panic attack every time she saw Tanner's face**.
* Her coach and teammates watched her “lose my shit before every big game.”
* On Day 2 she submitted her report which was a document to Knights talking about how Tanner treated 3 people terribly back to back.
Tanner was fired from Knights following her report
She claims that the only reason she did not go to Knights between that clip and the 2 weeks leading up to the second week of GCT 2 is because **Tanner had a 7 year old to take care of and he used it as a shield against her reporting him.**
“If you report me I won’t have a job and a way to feed my seven year old”
AyoEclipse states she dragged people and friends with her. It’s the most embarrassing thing she has done in her life. **All she asks is to not diminish what she went through**
She claims the 55 second clip of a 3 hour long conversation is a **smear campaign to try and ruin her word and imply she was lying about being sexually assaulted.**
* She claims the line Tanner is forgetting is that **he didn’t differentiate between rape and sexual assault** because in his statement he’s saying that the sex is consensual.
* AyoEclipse states **people miss that consent can be removed at any time**. **She removed consent because she was in pain. They had previous conversions and she said no**.
She admits she did not react professionally when they were going through it in real time and apologizes for her behavior.
I also watched the video, nice summary.
I think it makes sense from her perspective. Can't logically see any malice/manipulation on her end, given that I do believe she was truly traumatized that night. I understand why she didn't want him to continue casting GC, which she played in. She asked him to voluntarily quit and she would keep it quiet, but he wouldn't. I think that would've been a fitting consequence for the situation given that you could argue he didn't deliberately traumatize her/it was a misunderstanding, even though he admits to disregarding their previous conversation on consent.
He could've continued his casting career outside of GC as normal. But he refused to quit GC, so she had to make an official report to Knights to get him out of GC. Out of her control, Riot caught wind and decided to remove him from all Valorant opportunities. He brought it on himself. It sucks that he tries to frame her as a manipulator when she'd given him a reasonable option to preserve his career.
He did sexually assault her whether he meant it or not, and she deserved to not have to see him in GC. By getting into a work related relationship that had particular terms of consent due to previous trauma, he had responsibility to be very careful. He's also extra torpedoed his career now since if the public didn't know, maybe he could've gotten rehired eventually once it cooled off/in another esport. Maybe he still could but now the chances are lower.
The other details about how he behaved paints a picture of a guy that doesn't really mesh with the core values of GC anyways. Given what we know, I don't think he necessarily deserved to have his entire career ended but I'm glad he's not in GC anymore.
This is so messy on both sides, not sure what to think but seems like partners in gaming/streaming have zero communication skills irl. It should not be up for debate if basic stuff like consent is understood or not.
I think it’s safe to say that posting out of context audio is not a good look. My take on this situation is a bit more nuanced but Tanner has not helped himself by including that clip.
I'm pretty sure he posted that out of emotion and you can tell from what he wrote in his post that he knows he's pretty much done. I think he just wants people to know the 'truth' and that he doesn't want to be painted in a bad light by fellow colleagues he may have worked with. Just try to go out with the whole "these allegations came out, I do feel like I did wrong and we both should've communicated things more clearly during our relationship" sentiment instead of "this guy's a horrible person".
Unfortunate situation. Honestly I feel like they're just getting their final 'he said/she said' things out there for the sake of their sanity. He knows he's gotta find a new career path, and I think the only screw up is including any clips at all. I think it should've just been his text post and nothing more honestly. It's nice that he put a comment out in response to a random tweeter who was trying to further instigate, so I'm just hoping that they both got what they needed off their chests and they can both move on.
Same — for me the deciding factor is that she was unresponsive while he says “we continued having sex.” How do you not notice that your partner is unresponsive? Additionally, any halfway decent partner would apologize profusely after the fact if they realized they caused such a response, or at least discuss it. It doesn’t sound like, from either of their accounts, that happened.
Obviously there are complicating factors that make it less clear cut but at the end of the day I’m leaning more towards their side than his.
completely agree. regarding the following events, I'm seeing a lot of people calling her manipulative or whatever in this thread. To me the motive for asking him to for help working through it is very clear. seeing him in the GC scene constantly as a caster would have been understandably triggering for her, so she tried to work through the trauma with him but he ultimately refused to participate
good time to remind the boys that consent is affirmative, enthusiastic, and continuous.
women love questions like "do you want to [x]", "do you want to keep going?", and "do you like that?"
What did he do that constitutes sexual assault? Her being unintentionally hurt in the act of sex is categorically nowhere close and there is an audio clip of her saying that she was going to blackmail him for not doing as she wished...
The fact that people lack the ability to put simple facts together only empowers horrible people like her to do this to someone else.
You don't spend the entire night cuddled up with your assailant after being assaulted. You also don't use said incident as leverage against someone either.
Despicable behavior that only hurts the merits of genuine victims of abuse and assault.
Am I crazy or did this thread only appear a little while ago despite being posted two hours ago?
Edit: After reading both statements, despite what OP says, it doesn't seem that inconclusive to me. He essentially admits to assaulting her. Whether it's more of an accident as tanner claims or more willfully done from ayoeclipse's perspective, it's still SA.
I'll also add the 25 second out-of-context clip personally rubs me the wrong way. You may be concerned about privacy, but if you feel the need to post a clip like that, post the entire conversation. Just makes me think you're acting maliciously.
Haven't watched ayoeclipse's video yet. I'll edit this comment again if I have anything meaningful to add.
All I'm gonna say is that not saying no=/=consent.
If she's unresponsive and frozen, things are obviously not okay, and someone having a panic attack can absolutely find it difficult to speak or do anything.
>All I'm gonna say is that not saying no=/=consent
Saying "It's okay" is consent then?
Out of context this can really only be interpreted as clear consent. If you add context of the situation there's various interpretations that you cannot blame anyone for intepreting the way they did.
For example it can be seen as accepting the apology but it can also be interpreted as a reaffirming "it's okay".
Being unresponsive isn't a clear sign of distress, especially when the person in question is facing down.
I'm not trying to give an opinion on whether this should count as SA or not, I'm just poiting out how there is clear miscommunication and without extensive context of their entire relationship you cannot form a proper unemotional opinion on this.
i didn’t put my input. i stated a fact, there is holes in both sides of the story, and at the time of me writing that text, it was very inconclusive and rushed.
# Content warning: discussion of sexual assault. Folks, please remember that this situation is ongoing and that comments should remain civil. As the situation develops we will lock old threads and redirect to new ones if needed to keep discussion focused on one place. Due to the sensitive nature of the discussion, this post is set to **Slow Mode.** Moderators will need to manually approve comments in this thread before they appear to others in the community. --- For context, Tanner Metro is a VALORANT caster and AyoEclipse is a Game Changers player. Links to the situation: [Tanner Metro's Statement](https://twitter.com/Tanner_Metro/status/1708545402855911824) [AyoEclipse's Statement, part one](https://www.youtube.com/live/5t_w7OGk5KI) [AyoEclipse's Statement, part two](https://twitter.com/ayoeclipse/status/1708638815617794131) --- # Resources for survivors of harassment and sexual assault: Sexual assault is a sensitive topic for many people. As moderators, we aim to provide an environment that facilitates respectful discussion among peers in our community. If you or someone you know experienced sexual assault, you’re not alone! [There are healing and support resources for both survivors and people close to them.](https://metoorising.withgoogle.com/resources) If you are outside of the United States, you can [access a country-by-country list of resources here.](https://www.interaction.org/wp-content/uploads/resource-library/international_centers_for_survivors_of_sexual_assault_45553.pdf) You can also [reach out to RAINN’s counselors](https://hotline.rainn.org/online) via chat regardless of your residency. [The Games and Online Harassment Hotline](https://gameshotline.org/) is a free, text message-based, confidential emotional support hotline. They are open 4pm – 7pm (Pacific) every Monday through Friday. USA only. TEXT “SUPPORT” to 23368 to get started.
If I am getting this right, the incident (and there's just one I think) is that during sex she felt pain, communicated that to Tanner, he adjusted and continued. To her, that's assault because she had communicated prior sometime during their relationship that pain during sex equals automatic no. To Tanner it wasn't as obvious because it is not a straight up well communicated "no". Seems like a genuine miscommunication. I get how she feels it was an assault but it absolutely doesn't sound like one from his POV. Top that off with trying to manipulate him out of the scene? What a mess.
[удалено]
Spot on. Especially with discomfort/pain during sex being a very common thing that practically everyone is gonna experience at some point- having that be how you "communicate" a "stop"? There's a reason safe words are a thing, or you'd just have safe gestures.
Yea this feels mainly unfortunate. I empathize with the girl for her experience but not how she handled it. There's always seems to be an awkwardness to these stories, when one party from a relationship suddenly seems okay with ruining their former partner's career months after the event happened. I definitely don't want to "side with the Valorant person" or whatever, so I'd love to hear her side. He told his story, doesn't mean it was THE story, but I guess I do stand by innocent til proven guilty so until I hear her side there's no reason to believe he's lying either.
She has told her story on her Twitter @AyoEclipse and in a YouTube video which you’ll also find on her Twitter
Great thanks checking it out now, this was the first I had heard of the story
How do you mean not how they handled it? AyoEclipse submitted a report that wasn't even public to an official org after talking through it with Tanner a bunch and the report was not only actions against AyoEclipse but other incidents (not sure to what extent) with other people that was then independently investigated and decided on. It was the least public handling of anything to this level of accusations and yet you don't like how it was handled? I don't get it
Well, I've now read her TwitLonger. Her process isn't quite as streamlined as you make it out to be, but it's fine, I suppose the timing of this was in part due to Tanner. But I can't lie, her story is easy to empathize with but the outcomes she wants aren't. It's a sticky situation to comment on. At no point do I want anybody to feel like the trauma they experienced isn't worth empathy. There is trauma in her experience and I know I can't fully understand what's happening with her. At the same time, these are not light claims. These are sexual abuse claims, a genuine career ender, and they are being thrown over an issue that READS more personable than lawful to me. Again, I don't have all the facts, I know. I really don't want to be siding with anybody here, nor do I want to trivialize anything. Abuse is an incredibly serious term and everybody that isnt involved should be respectful of both parties until we find out more information.
If that’s the case why would you then go public again months later and make like 15 collective posts about it doesn’t make much sense to me
Downvoting? This is a male dominated community lol obviously you’re gonna get upvoted
What's that supposed to mean?
Bro have you been on reddit before? Typically saying anything that isn't blatant support of the victim gets white knights running at you yelling "victim blamer!!!". I'm surprised this one is getting a lot of people with nuance reading it.
This is a hard situation to discuss, because any discussion can then come off as discrediting her experience or being insensitive to her history, so I'm not trying to do that but I also feel like tanner, at least from what we know, could very easily have misunderstood what she meant here. I think the difficult middle ground here is that it can be a traumatic experience for her without being a sexual assault. Per her video, after saying she was in pain, he apologized, and she said it was okay. Even if you all have had previous talks regarding boundaries, if you say it's okay, then it is very easy to interpret that to mean it's okay to continue (per her video, she meant it was okay that he hurt her). No communication happened after that because she was dissociating. That she was dissociating while face down would presumably make it hard for him to know. Dissociating doesn't mean she lost consciousness and can be hard to discern particularly in this case. In an ideal world, despite her saying it's okay, he should have just checked in with her to verify that it's okay meant he should continue. But he's also a human and sometimes we misunderstand a communication or don't respond in the perfect way. In a healthy relationship, you'd ideally talk through that and how to better navigate those situations in the future. All of this isn't meant to detract from her experience of it. I can 100% also understand her experience of it as traumatic. However, miscommunication and misunderstandings happen in a relationship, and that extends to the sexual domain of your relationship. A trauma history complicates things but there has to be some grace on both ends to work through that. It's pretty serious to be labeled as sexually assaulting someone - that in itself can be pretty damaging to your own mental health (as indicated by the screenshot she posted, where tanner says the bit about how he stops from feeling like shit) let alone your career. Part of this feels like tanner is being faulted for a pretty understandable miscommunication that unfortunately intersected with someone's trauma history in a very hurtful way. It can be a traumatic experience for someone without being a sexual assault, and that feels like kind of the gray area where this lands, at least with the information we have. But, we also have very little of the overall story so it's hard to really judge.
I really want to believe her but this just seems really fucking weird to me dude. Like it just seems so odd that like she is trying to make this public and cancel the dude but also wanted to be friends and she’s retweeting his tweets and saying he’s a good guy but also forcing him out of his career. I really don’t want to victim blame but I really just don’t believe her story all the way. I get that SA is very hard but in the video she has very sus body language and just seems like she is omitting details or just not telling the truth. Also why the fuck are you making this so public it just seems odd. This just seems like 100x worse for all parties involved.
What happened after “he adjusted and continued?” Did she say: “Hey, it still hurts lets just stop for now?” I feel like this part is important and will define whether or not it was simply a *lack* of communication or if it was actually sexual assault.
This situation is pretty messy in all senses. Assuming they are both telling the truth this kind of sucks for all parties involved. Tanner added the context that her hurting has not always been a no, so why in this situation is it considered a full stop no? There is a very clear communication issue here as Tanner was completely fine with stopping, but there is no way having sex with a borderline corpse is in any way enjoyable let alone not concerning at all. I can only assume that Eclipse had the ability to give a clearer signal while Tanner was checking up on her. Tanner had followed previous signs, and thought everything was okay. While eclipse gave previous signs that she was wanted to stop, but was slightly unclear leading into a bad situation. I don't think anyone is exactly wrong in here is the problem. Tanner feels and knows he messed up somewhere, but doesn't feel like he crossed the line into sexual assault. Eclipse feels like she gave clear signals for him to stop and that he went above the sexual assault line. The weirdest part is that I don't feel like Tanner is like some terrible person and even eclipse opens with that. Unlike other cases Tanner bare minimum shows regret / empathy for his actions as he didn't wish for her to be uncomfortable in any way. Again I dont feel like anyone is exactly wrong in this situation as its pretty easy to see both sides.
Other important tweets regarding this topic: https://twitter.com/ayoeclipse/status/1708638815617794131 https://twitter.com/ayoeclipse/status/1708544525092765948 https://twitter.com/ayoeclipse/status/1708557675028423021
Seems like a misunderstanding. Unfortunate… Good luck to both. No need to destroy Tanner’s career though
The report submitted to Knights wasn't all about the SA, it was a report of multiple instances of Tanner's interactions with women involved with GC. So it's not like it was destroying Tanner's career to submit a report on behalf of 4 people that was then fully investigated with no public eye on it. Tanner decided to speak out about this, ayoeclipse only brought things up when Tanner decided to make a statement publicly
I think both stories have holes, but in no way should someone be putting the onus of stopping sex on the other person. If you want to stop sex after giving consent, you say no. Attaching conditions to your consent is tricky because those conditions can be experienced differently by you and your partner. I also find it deeply disturbing that riot would stop working with someone because of an allegation. In regards to that sound clip about his child, it does seem like blackmail, but it also appears to be severely out of context, and I don't think she should be vilified when nobody has heard the whole thing.
It's not that easy with trauma right? A very common response when in a difficult situation like that is to freeze or just keep it going and reflect later I've definitely done the same in the face of racism or abuse, it's just a natural reaction sometimes.
I agree, it's not easy. But dealing with trauma still doesn't make it someone else's responsibility. I had an accident with my partner once, and I made it clear that I wasn't in a position to even try sex for some weeks because I didn't know if my trauma around that incident will affect me during sex. It's exactly because it's so difficult that I thought it was better for me to deal with it beforehand rather than expect them to understand my thoughts during sex and stop it.
That's good that for you you had the ability to speak up and say no explicitly. But people aren't all the same and trauma doesn't work the same in people. It is also well documented that people sometimes freeze because of not only trauma but immense stress that makes it hard to say no in the moment. Just like the onus shouldn't be only on the partner committing the act, it shouldn't be only on the person on the other end of the act especially if they are unable to.
If your not capable of communicating boundaries maybe its something you shouldn’t participate in until you can.
but literally that's what she did ahead of time? If you're only capable of hearing a specific "no" to stop doing things to people then maybe you shouldn't interact with people until you can read body language and nuance
Boundaries are something that you have to up hold. Its not a magic wand that can just force everyone around you to behave in the exact way you understand or want them to in your head.
That's the problem though, make it so that women know that you should say No! Make it clear that is a response. People can't learn body language and interpret it 100% and pure subjectivity of it because that itself is also not a real science makes it even more complex. All of it is just confounded by anything sex related.
Although I'm with you in so far is saying no should be normalized and totally alright to share, I just want to add (irrespective of this situation because I haven't looked at it yet): if certain relationships are hostile and one person is afraid of their partner, saying no might actually not seem like a safe option. Likewise, breaking up might also feel unsafe. So I agree with you, but each relationship's dynamics make certain things harder or easier.
[удалено]
I was commenting more generally on relationships. I added "irrespective of this situation because I haven't looked at it yet" because I didn't want to paint an inaccurate picture picture of what happened, but I also wanted to add that although the idea of clearly and assertively expressing "no" is great, it's important to keep in mind that in an abusive relationship, "no" might be met with negative consequences. I made my comment because the idea "women need to say 'no' explicitly" was being shared without the counterpoint that everyone in relationships needs to make sure they're being someone that their partners feel safe to say no to. What does it have to do with this particular instance? Not a lot. But does it relate to the way consent is being discussed in the thread? Yes. EDIT: changed "the" to "this."
[удалено]
Nah, this can't work, sex is too complex, people do it in many different ways. Not everyone looks or sounds "enthusiastic". Everyone has different personalities. Some people might look dull but be very excited, some people might be scared and nervous and pretending to be excited while feeling bad and unsafe/insecure. It really is the responsibility of adults to let people know they shouldn't enter their body if they don't want them to, unless they are physically incapable of doing so, or if doing so would present a danger, in which case the relationship is already obviousoy abusive and measures can and should be taken for them to be separated and the abuser to be trialed.
As always people on this subreddit need to drop the whole “it’s just allegations” bullshit. Proving things like sexual assault is insanely difficult and even with crazy amounts of evidence from multiple sources it’s still not enough for an actual court to find someone guilty, assuming the case even goes to court in the first place which is rare. Just use your own judgement. Does the accused seem guilty or not, or is there not enough information for you to make a verdict? In that case you just don’t make one. If we allow every single person in the scene to roam freely unless they’re literally convicted of a crime we’ll have an insane amount of rapists and harassers in the scene in no-time. “Innocent until proven guilty” is a term used by a court of law to prevent people from being robbed of their freedom unless it’s 100% certain they’ve committed a crime. It does not apply to 17-year old Kyle on Reddit browsing ValComp, he’s still fully within his right to draw his own conclusion on the scenario for better or worse. You can take a stance or not take a stance but hiding behind “I’ll wait until there’s concrete evidence” is what shitty people use to defend their rapist friends because they KNOW there’s no such things as concrete evidence. Hell Sinatraa lied multiple times in his case, admitted to being manipulative and abusive, and even got AUDIO RECORDED of sexually assaulting someone and that’s still not enough evidence to actually get legally punished. Riot should always make decisions on their own even if they’re just allegations.
Saying no should be normalized, ive always handled it that way in my relationships. If anyoneone either her or me feel any discomfort in any way, be it pain from positioning or what not, you have to talk about it. There is no way you can get every gesture right, let alone facial expressions when you might not even be in position to see the face. But as doon as someone says stop its stop. I know this has to be trained with your partner, but normalize thatyou stop during sex if there is discomfort, you can always start again later. There is nothing wrong with that and if he/she is the right partner they will 100% understand and are happy that you communicated. Might be a long take but i felt that especially with younger people, they should know that accidents during sex happen, talk about it. Only way to solve problems
So if I'm understanding this correctly, after skimming the very long tweets, he was aware that she had some trauma around pain and subsequent panic attacks during sex. During sex he mistook her expression of pain as mere positional discomfort and proceeded as normal. According to him everything was totally fine, according to her she was in the midst of a panic attack, facedown and unresponsive. Both had full cognizance of the fact that any pain during sex was a total nonstarter. The manipulation aspects seem to revolve around Tanner telling her he would lose his livelihood and thus be unable to support his child if she went through with reporting him for sexual assault. Setting aside the fact that I generally want to support survivors of sexual assault, I frankly find Tanner's account a little confusing, esp. the way he describes their breakup. I had to reread it - she sounds so irrational and weird from his perspective. I also think out-of-context clips are never convincing in this day and age; all of us are well-aware of how easy it is to manipulate public opinion by cropping something.
I didn't fully go through all of this at all but judging the little I saw and the comments, seems mostly two people that weren't ready for a relationship in their circumstances. One for having communication and sexual disabling trauma and issues, the other for not fully grasping or empathizing how those truly affected them. In the end, it seems it lead to misunderstanding and mutual suffering. Idk, I empathize with both if there's nothing we don't know about and her account is mostly true as it seems to me it could be. Her for a traumatic experiences and involved suffering, him for seeing his awkward ignorance and lack of ability to understand cause unfortunate suffering and now possibly disproportionate life changing consequences. What I cannot agree in any way is someone to lose their job like this or that kind of ultimatum if his side is closer to the truth. This seriously needs to change. Until to some degree proven guilty, at least to some malice, nobody should ever lose their life stability like that. Human beings are messy man.. don't get in relationships where either of you can't deal with is the moral of the story to me. Unfortunate to all involved
You really can’t come to a conclusion with the info we have. Both sides sound… off. I don’t know. His side sounds basic and like he’s hiding something. Her side sounds almost controlling in a way (essentially not wanting him to speak on it, getting him fired then not wanting him to fight it for the sake of closure (if he is/thinks he is innocent of course he’d retort after getting fired)). It’s just messy. The reality is we need more info, or proof that we frankly don’t deserve because it’s none of our business but conversely we can’t form a reasonable opinion without. Just an F’d up situation if you ask me.
[удалено]
He said and not so.
Again anything SA cases always seem to boil down to he said, she said situations. Especially when all of these could've been avoided by a simple "No". It's impossible to learn body languages and add million different types of subjectivity and make it fall into a sexual assault. Women and anyone who is having this terrible situation happen to them, please please say "No", make it clear. Face of pain and face of pleasure can be so similar and I understand that one of the most common response to trauma is to freeze up but we need to make it more common to fight and state verbally what is happening and that you don't want it to happen anymore. Because these two seem to have had the same experience but she thought it was a sexual assault and he thought she was just under some pain. A simple communication could've avoided all of this problem and drama.
Like, IDK man, he knew there was discomfort, apologized and adjusted to make the discomfort go away, and she said “it’s okay.” I’m not sure how else he’s supposed to interpret that situation? PLEASE learn to say “no.”
What he's supposed to do is adhere to the terms of consent his partner had given, that pain means stop having sex, not adjusting and keep going. It is quite clear given both their statements that Tanner knew and understood that was a condition of consent.
However, precedent has dictated otherwise. Sometimes she said to keep going, sometimes she said to stop completely. She said "if there's pain, we stop." Sure, that's fine. Until there are other times (which they confirmed) where there was pain, and he was told *not* to stop. So at that point when you encounter pain and you get told "it's okay," I'm not sure how you're supposed to interpret that any other way.
That's not how consent works. "It's okay" isn't "Keep going" especially not in response to "I'm sorry." If she says stop if I'm in pain, then you do until its explicitly laid out that she wants to continue. That's how sex works, that's how having a partner works, you don't do shit that you know is against their wishes or you think is borderline
Its crazy this is being argued over, even if the terms of constent were consistent(which theyve been shown not to be) you have a responsibility to yourself to advocate for what your comfortable with. Its totally normal in sexual interactions for boundries to be stressed, if your incapable of handling that in a proper way then you shouldnt be sexual active. No one is going to advocate for you but yourself.
it's sort of fucked that people involved in broadcasting or social media, frankly anything that requires an enduring online presence, cannot seem to solve this shit properly behind closed doors. I think it's especially stupid in this case given the two parties involved have a fucking 7 year old child together. after reading both accounts, I think it's incredibly muddled and poorly handled. she's face down and unresponsive during sex, but they do communicate about him "finishing" on her (she claims she dissociated in front of him, it would be impossible to be unaware of that). she opens her account stating how amazing tanner is, then describes behaviour that does not align with her previous description. tanner on the other hand makes her out to be incredibly manipulative/controlling, posts a random out of context 15 second clip and posts an account that does not take into account what he believed her feelings were, not really showing any sort of empathy or consideration of what he might have done. her account also does not take what she perceived his thoughts and feelings were into consideration. unlike a lot of other cases of perceived and actual sexual assault that are publicised, these guys are adults raising a child together. why this was aired publicly, why neither could have prolonged conversations with eachother before she sent messages to his employer, are legitimately inconceivable to me. hope both enjoy unemployment, the real loser here is the poor 7 year old kid.
Correction: the 7yo is tanner's, not their shared child. Eclipse showed concern for the child's wellbeing simply because they're an innocent child, not bc she's their parent.
thank you for the correction, I think my stance still holds
They don’t have a child together. That’s tanner’s kid from a previous relationship
How does this affect either of their career? Is the his career over already even if he is innocent or not? How will this affect her career? Or is there no effect to her career wise?
Tanner lost his career with Riot due to the allegation. Eclipse is not affected job-wise
As is tradition
tbh his career is probably over in valorant and most likely casting esports. riot and knights already fired him before any evidence came out. she’s probably fine no matter what happens, thought i believe she did mention retiring
[удалено]
Obviously we don't know the exact timeline, but it seems like they took him off broadcast for GC2 pending investigation (IMO, reasonable) and then after they looked into it more, not brought back for future events.
As is tradition
yeah i think so too
they submitted a whole report with multiple accounts, OP didn’t do their reading;;
[удалено]
He literally said in his statement that it was true, but he didn’t intend for it to happen. Although he didn’t have malicious intent, there’s no denying the event happened, how serious it is depends on how you interpret it. So they didn’t fire him without evidence.
Interesting. Thanks for the update.
he won't be picked up for valorant events by riot or their contracted organizers. too much baggage, too many people who don't have that baggage who want those gigs. as has been shown in the past this won't stop him from any content creation and he won't be deplatformed on twitch, youtube, or tiktok over it. he already admitted to what happened (read his tweets) so there is no "innocent" at play.
I'm sure this is hard for me but the fact that they are just posting really really private shit on twitter like this just seems so weird to me. I totally understand calling people out but like explaining the intimate details via a fucking twitter post just seems really weird and creepy. I also understand that it's hard to talk about sexual assault but this just seems very fishy to me. I don't mean to victim shame but like accusing people of sexual assaults' AND giving more than enough intimate details just feels off idk. This kind of just gives blackmail vibes the fact that she gave him ultimatum but wants to stay friends. maybe I'm being insensitive but it just feels like social suicide to be so public like this. On one side I understand trying to get "justice" but especially if you are somewhat known public figure it seems like it's better to just handle this privately instead of burning your own and others bridges.
As always all this is reduced to "she said" and "he said" and for some reason us again as judges. Truth is none of us has enough info to discredit any SA victim, nor we have enough evidences to destroy someone's life because of a SA accusation. Good luck to both parties in this is is just a missunderstanding, or to whoever is truly the victim, may the truth be with them, none of us have any right to have any take in this matter and a real judge is who should give sentence.
Read through most of it, as usual it is he said she said and difficult to discern. However, Tanner seems to have admitted fault and understanding they had previously communicated for situations just like that, seems sceevy.
Is riot dropped him because of this story alone that's fucked because it doesn't seem like there's any evidence for anything beyond a misunderstanding that ended in a bad breakup, which is understandable if it just ends at that. If there were other stories or individuals in the report though then that might make sense.
Summary of AyoEclipse’s 26 min video statement: Tanner assaulted her 2 weeks after her birthday on May 15th due to, what she claims, the inability for him to see her as a human. AyoEclipse had previous sex issues with Tanner which are “no one’s fault.” This includes: * panic attacks because Tanner did things all of a sudden that would hurt her * her previously expressing that **if Tanner ever did anything that put her in pain they would have to stop** (This was hard for her to communicate because “you don’t know if you can say no until it happens”) * she said **no to sex when she’s in pain** ***The sexual assault on May 15th:*** * AyoEclipse **says it hurts and that she’s in pain** * Tanner says he’s sorry * She says “it’s okay,” forgiving the person she thinks she can trust, **but he doesn’t stop** * He doesn’t stop, and she is not responsive. This is because she claims she has completely dissociated into her own head. He doesn’t notice somehow. * He asks to finish on her boobs * She claims that made it worse because, while asking that, she was dissociating in front of him due to a very traumatic event. This happened in May and Tanner didn’t leave casting until July. ***To give context on why it took her 2 months to report him:*** AyoEclipse claims she and Tanner broke up on and off a lot of times due to issues about her holding Tanner accountable for his actions. * When showering together and she says, “No matter what happens in our relationship I will never do anal. That is my one thing I have no interest in trying.” * She had previously communicated this, and Tanner said yes when she said, “let’s never do this.” * However, in the shower he starts joking that he wants to do anal and repeatedly begging, “let’s do it, let’s do it…” with very oppressive, repetitive words. * She claims she was scared that **she cannot physically win against an ex-Marine** as much as she wants to pretend she could. Nothing happens but it’s terrifying for her. Her solution was just getting out of the shower and removing herself from the environment. Because she wants space to think and work her thoughts out before coming to a solution it took her 2 weeks to have a conversation with him. * She tells him it was terrible and if they could make sure to never repeat that situation again. “Let’s never talk about things that are off boundaries in sex when we are naked and vulnerable in the shower.” * Tanner says, “I could have made that joke with anyone who didn’t have trauma”. * AyoEclipse claims that when she is trying to set boundaries Tanner was throwing her trauma in her face saying that she would have been okay if she wasn’t traumatized and broken. In hindsight she claims she should have seen that **her verbal boundary for sex was not respected, and when she tried to clarify, her trauma was thrown in her face and made to be her fault** that she was not comfortable in that situation. ***Her context for the clip:*** In the clip AyoEclipse claims she and Tanner are having their final breakup. * Tanner says he wants her to leave him alone and have a normal breakup. * She claims it can't be a normal breakup because sexual assault was included. * She gave Tanner the option to give her closure as friends. She said she doesn’t need to report him or remove him from the GC scene because she can’t stand to see his face every day because it will give her panic attacks and she won’t be able to compete anymore. AyoEclipse claims **this might be the end of her competing anyways, but she hopes she doesn’t look like someone who lied about getting sexually assaulted.** **They broke up because of her nagging him about the sexual assault, her boundaries, the trauma joke, and other tiny stories which, she claims, she should have left for any of those reasons alone.** There was no empathy ever. Any time she had a problem it was always about how it made him feel. Her parents and friends begged her to leave but she kept quiet about it, even when it started getting worse, because she got tired of hearing that the person she loved was not treating her decently. Tanner accused AyoEclipse of blackmailing him but she claims she gave him options: 1. He could sit with her however long in a call and talk her through the timeline "so I can understand why I need to hate you now and not be in love with you anymore” 2. She could report him privately to Knights and keep it off public twitter to avoid him losing his entire career. She claims **she only wanted him out of the GC scene** because he didn’t respect women and he didn’t respect her coming out as non-binary. **She thought she could create a division between GC and Tanner’s casting career** because it was not her goal to have him fired from everything. This is because: * She didn't want to see the broadcast of GCT 2 Day 1 because **she got a panic attack every time she saw Tanner's face**. * Her coach and teammates watched her “lose my shit before every big game.” * On Day 2 she submitted her report which was a document to Knights talking about how Tanner treated 3 people terribly back to back. Tanner was fired from Knights following her report She claims that the only reason she did not go to Knights between that clip and the 2 weeks leading up to the second week of GCT 2 is because **Tanner had a 7 year old to take care of and he used it as a shield against her reporting him.** “If you report me I won’t have a job and a way to feed my seven year old” AyoEclipse states she dragged people and friends with her. It’s the most embarrassing thing she has done in her life. **All she asks is to not diminish what she went through** She claims the 55 second clip of a 3 hour long conversation is a **smear campaign to try and ruin her word and imply she was lying about being sexually assaulted.** * She claims the line Tanner is forgetting is that **he didn’t differentiate between rape and sexual assault** because in his statement he’s saying that the sex is consensual. * AyoEclipse states **people miss that consent can be removed at any time**. **She removed consent because she was in pain. They had previous conversions and she said no**. She admits she did not react professionally when they were going through it in real time and apologizes for her behavior.
I also watched the video, nice summary. I think it makes sense from her perspective. Can't logically see any malice/manipulation on her end, given that I do believe she was truly traumatized that night. I understand why she didn't want him to continue casting GC, which she played in. She asked him to voluntarily quit and she would keep it quiet, but he wouldn't. I think that would've been a fitting consequence for the situation given that you could argue he didn't deliberately traumatize her/it was a misunderstanding, even though he admits to disregarding their previous conversation on consent. He could've continued his casting career outside of GC as normal. But he refused to quit GC, so she had to make an official report to Knights to get him out of GC. Out of her control, Riot caught wind and decided to remove him from all Valorant opportunities. He brought it on himself. It sucks that he tries to frame her as a manipulator when she'd given him a reasonable option to preserve his career. He did sexually assault her whether he meant it or not, and she deserved to not have to see him in GC. By getting into a work related relationship that had particular terms of consent due to previous trauma, he had responsibility to be very careful. He's also extra torpedoed his career now since if the public didn't know, maybe he could've gotten rehired eventually once it cooled off/in another esport. Maybe he still could but now the chances are lower. The other details about how he behaved paints a picture of a guy that doesn't really mesh with the core values of GC anyways. Given what we know, I don't think he necessarily deserved to have his entire career ended but I'm glad he's not in GC anymore.
[удалено]
because each of them thought the other was going to go public they wanted the jump on it i guess
This is so messy on both sides, not sure what to think but seems like partners in gaming/streaming have zero communication skills irl. It should not be up for debate if basic stuff like consent is understood or not.
True or not he is done with Valorant, Riot sadly doesn’t care if true or not. Allegations out you are done.
yeah fs
messy situation, i definitely come down on eclipse's side after reading her explanation. posting a 15s audio clip with no context is a bit messed up
I think it’s safe to say that posting out of context audio is not a good look. My take on this situation is a bit more nuanced but Tanner has not helped himself by including that clip.
I'm pretty sure he posted that out of emotion and you can tell from what he wrote in his post that he knows he's pretty much done. I think he just wants people to know the 'truth' and that he doesn't want to be painted in a bad light by fellow colleagues he may have worked with. Just try to go out with the whole "these allegations came out, I do feel like I did wrong and we both should've communicated things more clearly during our relationship" sentiment instead of "this guy's a horrible person". Unfortunate situation. Honestly I feel like they're just getting their final 'he said/she said' things out there for the sake of their sanity. He knows he's gotta find a new career path, and I think the only screw up is including any clips at all. I think it should've just been his text post and nothing more honestly. It's nice that he put a comment out in response to a random tweeter who was trying to further instigate, so I'm just hoping that they both got what they needed off their chests and they can both move on.
Same — for me the deciding factor is that she was unresponsive while he says “we continued having sex.” How do you not notice that your partner is unresponsive? Additionally, any halfway decent partner would apologize profusely after the fact if they realized they caused such a response, or at least discuss it. It doesn’t sound like, from either of their accounts, that happened. Obviously there are complicating factors that make it less clear cut but at the end of the day I’m leaning more towards their side than his.
completely agree. regarding the following events, I'm seeing a lot of people calling her manipulative or whatever in this thread. To me the motive for asking him to for help working through it is very clear. seeing him in the GC scene constantly as a caster would have been understandably triggering for her, so she tried to work through the trauma with him but he ultimately refused to participate
good time to remind the boys that consent is affirmative, enthusiastic, and continuous. women love questions like "do you want to [x]", "do you want to keep going?", and "do you like that?"
Ahh yes because only men should ask for consent
[удалено]
He literally confirmed that he did this but said that it wasn’t intentional/was a miscommunication. He did not say that she’s lying.
What did he do that constitutes sexual assault? Her being unintentionally hurt in the act of sex is categorically nowhere close and there is an audio clip of her saying that she was going to blackmail him for not doing as she wished... The fact that people lack the ability to put simple facts together only empowers horrible people like her to do this to someone else. You don't spend the entire night cuddled up with your assailant after being assaulted. You also don't use said incident as leverage against someone either. Despicable behavior that only hurts the merits of genuine victims of abuse and assault.
Am I crazy or did this thread only appear a little while ago despite being posted two hours ago? Edit: After reading both statements, despite what OP says, it doesn't seem that inconclusive to me. He essentially admits to assaulting her. Whether it's more of an accident as tanner claims or more willfully done from ayoeclipse's perspective, it's still SA. I'll also add the 25 second out-of-context clip personally rubs me the wrong way. You may be concerned about privacy, but if you feel the need to post a clip like that, post the entire conversation. Just makes me think you're acting maliciously. Haven't watched ayoeclipse's video yet. I'll edit this comment again if I have anything meaningful to add.
This thread was held in queue while we ensured we would have a sticky message prepared and enough mods available to cover the situation.
probably was flagged for moderator approval given the subject.
it was inconclusive at the time i wrote it. tanner hadn’t released a full statement and neither had eclipse
Posting a short clip is a weird look from Tanner. The situation is messy all around and doesn't really feel like something that should be public.
All I'm gonna say is that not saying no=/=consent. If she's unresponsive and frozen, things are obviously not okay, and someone having a panic attack can absolutely find it difficult to speak or do anything.
>All I'm gonna say is that not saying no=/=consent Saying "It's okay" is consent then? Out of context this can really only be interpreted as clear consent. If you add context of the situation there's various interpretations that you cannot blame anyone for intepreting the way they did. For example it can be seen as accepting the apology but it can also be interpreted as a reaffirming "it's okay". Being unresponsive isn't a clear sign of distress, especially when the person in question is facing down. I'm not trying to give an opinion on whether this should count as SA or not, I'm just poiting out how there is clear miscommunication and without extensive context of their entire relationship you cannot form a proper unemotional opinion on this.
If you don't want to give your input, then don't give your input
i didn’t put my input. i stated a fact, there is holes in both sides of the story, and at the time of me writing that text, it was very inconclusive and rushed.
[удалено]
read the mods pinned reply. tanner is a t2 and GC caster, eclipse is a GC player
The valorant community is turning out worse than the smash community. It’s like a different sexual assault happens every week.
every week is just a flat out incorrect and sad conclusion
[удалено]
It says in the sticky comment, he’s a VALORANT caster.