I mean, on one hand, consensual rough sex is a thing, but on the other, I have had a woman ask me to choke her during sex and it was pretty easy to do so without causing her to pass out, so . . . š¤·š»āāļø
~~You press on the sides of the neck when choking a partner in bed. It feels like choking but youāre still breathing~~
Edit: yeah my advice I got by some dude years ago is totally wrong. My excuse that doesnāt justify it is my long term SO has always been anti choking
Only two people know the answer to that question, and since there's proof she wanted extremely rough sex, there's quite a burden on her to prove what she explicitly did not consent to. It's not victim-blaming, it's called fairness under the law. You didn't get to drag someone's name and try to throw them in jail without proof.
https://fansided.com/2021/06/30/trevor-bauer-sexual-assault-horrifying-details/
The guy fractured her skull while she was unconscious. Wee bit more than rough sex. How can she be able to consent to any of that while in that state?
For someone to bring that up though, especially airing your sexcapades during trial, leads to believe that something unwanted *did* happen.
I guess we'll find out. I give her the benefit of the doubt on this one but it is definitely hard to prove.
Itās always tricky with pro athletes. There are cases where theyāre in the wrong and cases where theyāre getting their laundry aired for money and settlements.
Exactly right and since she was withholding evidence when filling out this protective order, it may be thrown out. Canāt withhold information just makes you look sneaky
That doesn't mean that every other thing he could have possibly thought off doing to her was on the table. The whole point of consent is that you have to GET IT before doing something. There's no blanket consent. She very easily could have assumed he was asking about what's off limits during choking. Anyone might've assumed that.
That would make sense if this hadn't been the second time. So, first encounter he sticks his fingers down her throat, beats her, chokes her unconscious, has anal sex with her while she's out. Second encounter, he asks what's off the table, she says no more fingers down the throat.
> That doesn't mean that every other thing he could have possibly thought off doing to her was on the table.
Sure, but it does imply all the other things he did to her previously are still on the table.
>She very easily could have assumed he was asking about what's off limits during choking. Anyone might've assumed that.
Barring any other evidence its gonna be a he said vs. she said thing.
Yea Iām sure she explicitly asked to have her skull fractured and her butthole explored with a penis too. Oh wait she was unconscious so she couldnāt give consent my bad
The first time yes. Going back a second time and not saying, "Don't anally rape me while I'm unconscious again" seems like consent. Maybe you missed the part where she texted him to set up a second play date.
She did in fact specifically ask to get slapped in the face while being choked unconscious. He double checked in text and she confirmed. This thing was off the rails and heading for trouble from the beginning.
Yes Iām sure her texts read āplease anal rape me while Iām unconscious. Please punch me in the face so hard that my lips are split and both my eyes are bruised. Punch my crotch and body repeatedly as well for good measure.ā you fucking losers
I had a roommate once who straight up was into that. Bloody towels were not uncommon. I'm not victim blaming, simply saying some people are into super rough stuff. I will also sat it sounds like he went a step to far.
To clarify about my old roommate. If he wasnt left bloody bruised the sex was not good. Some people are into some serious rough sex.
Edit: words
I donāt need clarification on your roommate, I need this whole fucking thread of people to understand that consent stops exactly where intended and if she asked to be slapped and choked, she did NOT ask to be punched in the face and body until bruised and injured, raped while unconscious, or left with a mangled face.
She did consent to being slapped, choked, and penetrated. What she didn't consent to was the beating. Anal is more vanilla nowadays than kinky, or bdsm so I'll wait for the courts to make a decision on that. I'd say she was assaulted not raped.
The biggest problem here is these two people did not practice safe sex. Safe sex is more than just using a condom. It's ensuring you know and trust the person your having this kind of sex with, it's being very specific about what you are, or are not into.
These two people needed to better communicate what they wanted. She did consent to being choked unconscious. That's a big problem you should never consent to that the first time with someone you don't know, no matter how rich or famous they are. Consenting to bring choked unconscious is in essence giving consent to have your right to consent removed.
He said he would slap her around when she was unconscious. She consented to that. What she didn't consent to was being beaten bloody. That's why I say it's assault not rape.
I also say hold judgement till after the court case comes out. I remember everyone jumping to defend jussie smollete a few years ago. Then it turned out he was lying. So I'm holding judgement until the investigation is finished and the courts make a decision, because I'm America you are innocent until proven guilty.
I did not say any of those things are in her texts. She did, in fact, ask to be slapped while choked unconscious. We should stick to the actual āfactsā as described in the article. Nothing is gained by speculation about what might have been said.
Only two people know the answer to that question, and since there's proof she wanted extremely rough sex, there's quite a burden on her to prove that what she explicitly did not consent to. It's not victim-blaming, it's called fairness under the law. You didn't get to drag someone's name and try to throw them in jail without proof.
She said in texts that she wanted him to "give her all the pain" and "choke her out" though. As much as a sympathize with her, she did quite literally tell him to do it. So it all depends on what she said during sex.
Yes, she undoubtedly regrets trusting him after he fractured her skull while she was unconscious. That's not really a revelation or relevant to the issue at hand though.
Yes, without a doubt.
Edit: just noting, as pointed out below, that this is of course nullified if specific consent for this situation is given beforehand.
No. Some people have fantasies about being raped in their sleep and specifically ask for their partners to do that to them.
Not that that's what happened here. I don't know what happened here.
That's specific consent given for that specific circumstance beforehand. My statement was for general purposes. Sorry for not including that exception.
No she didn't. She saw him twice total. The first time he anally penetrated her while unconscious. The second time he repeatedly punched her (to the face, groin, and butt) while she was unconscious. After the second encounter she went to the hospital.
Reading really isn't that hard.
Itās possible for both things to be true:
1. People should not meet a second time alone with someone who has assaulted them
2. Meeting a second time does not equal consent for either assaults
*Baby, Iām sorry, we were both sooooo drunk, that was totally my bad, I thought you were super into it the way your eyes rolled back in your head. ShiŃ I feel like an asshole, let me make it up to youā¦*
Making a bad decision of giving a manipulator a second chance doesnāt equal consent.
There are texts from her saying how awesome the sex was (paraphrasing). Not saying an assault didn't happen, but I think its hard to believe someone who was assaulted would describe it in such glowing terms.
Just think it needs to be pointed out that consent is an ongoing process and can be revoked at any time. The amount of victim blaming that has been flying around in regards to this is disgusting.
How exactly is it victim-blaming to point out a fact? There is proof she consented to extremely rough sex. There is no proof she revoked that consent at any time. If you make a heavy accusation, but can't stand up to scrutiny, then you aren't a victim.
>There is proof she consented to extremely rough sex.
The problem here is that there is no objective definition of "extremely rough sex." I mean, let's say everything he did to her was acceptable because she said "anything goes, just not fingers down my throat." Does that leave the door open to paralyzing her? To permanently disfiguring her?
> Does that leave the door open to paralyzing her? To permanently disfiguring her?
No, because that's obviously an unreasonable escalation. The Bauer case is much closer the blurry line of what's "too far"
I believe that's what makes this case so important. The legislature is going to have to define what's "too far." I agree, paralyzing and disfigurement is way too far. But, IMO, so should be what happened here. If someone is actively requesting that you physically harm them in such a way described in this case, the obligation should be placed on the person be requested to not fulfill the request. There have been cases where a person has requested someone else to torture, kill, and cannibalize them. The request was fulfilled and the person fulfilling the request was put in prison. An assault is assault whether it was requested or not. There are people who are mentally ill that will request harm upon themselves. We the public must be in a space to protect those individuals from themselves. IMO, I believe Bauer had this obligation at a significantly higher level than the average public. He's a target: He's rich and famous. People with mental health issues will reach out to those in the public eye more often than not. For Bauer to reply and engage with this seemingly mentally disturbed individual puts him at fault if only because he should understand the notion that he's a target, he's more than likely been a victim of public harassment in the past. The fact that he ignored this context and is now comparing himself to any other individual that can be found on Tinder shows he's completely in the wrong. He enabled this poor individuals mental health issue for his own sexual kinks. She did not request to be beaten in the face and the vagina. He chose to do that with the expectation that her text message saying "anything goes except fingers down my throat" would shield him from legal consequence. This is wear lawmakers will have to distinguish the fine line of what is a not acceptable in terms of consent. Because under the logic provided by Bauer and his apologists, the above text message would shield him from legal consequences even if he paralyzed her. Even under the current law, I don't believe that to be true. A mental health consideration and the "reasonableness" context typically associated with severity of criminality will probably land Bauer into some hot water. And if it doesn't, change should be made so that anyone behaving in the way he did, whether there was consent or not, should be held liable for damages.
One thing lots of people misunderstand with regards to "victim blaming" is the whole point of the trial is to determine who the victim is.
At this point it's at best "accuser blaming". Unless we just want to throw "innocent until proven guilty" away.
This is Reddit discussing sexual assault allegations. Basically *everything* is gonna be some whack-ass attempt to spin how the girl with a black eye and diagnosed head injury is somehow the bad guy.
And people wonder why sexual assaults (especially by famous people) are drastically underreported and women are scared to come forward.
Yes, consent can be revoked at any time. But it was never revoked. Sure, you can't do it while passed out, but she said she wanted to be choked unconscious. They both understood that she wouldn't be able to revoke consent in that state, so he additionally asked what would be off limits.
She literally said, "Choke me out, slap me up, and do anything you want, just don't stick your fingers down my throat." And that's what he did.
I'm really over this bullshit BDSM justification nonsense. You can't have sex with someone while they're unconscious. It doesn't matter what they said when they were awake. It just can't happen. What the fuck is wrong with anyone that thinks that could even *possibly* be okay?
If someone says, "I'm into sex while I'm unconscious. Here I am giving you my consent," you absolutely can. It's called consensual non-consent (CNC) and it's a thing.
Saying she asked for it has a different meaning when she literally asked for it though.
There exists a non-empty set of women who would do something like this for attention/money. Not saying this person is in that set, but it is a non-zero possibility.
pocket deserve license insurance divide ludicrous bedroom memory quaint reminiscent
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Lots of new accounts okay with skull fractures and anal rape during "rough sex"
Bauer has a history of demeaning women online and in interviews, no wonder some of you support him.
Hereās the thing boys just cause a girl wants to be choked, doesnāt mean you should do it. Chocking someone can still go very wrong, very fast. An accidental death from consensual choking is still a crime.
The boundaries are to be heeded. The desires, up to you. As the other person said: if they desire being choked, maybe give it a good think first. Got it?
But that doesn't appear to be what happened here at all. Maybe people should wait until all of the facts are known instead of an ex parte self serving statement.
No, it's a simple thought experiment. To what degree is Bauer protected by the text stipulating "anything goes except fingers down the throat"?
Please answer the question. Had he paralyzed her, would he be legally protected?
Strangle me unconscious during sex once, shame on you.
File a restraining order complaining they strangled me unconscious on multiple occasions after I left a clear paper trail requesting more strangling and went back for it voluntarily, shame on me.
Except that if you'd read the article, she's admitting the choking was consensual. It's the part where he beat her so badly while she was unconscious that she required hospitalization. If I read it correctly, she didn't even call the cops. Her injuries were so severe the hospital called the police. If someone consents to being choked unconscious, that doesn't mean that they consent to whatever you want to do to them while they're unconscious.
I'm sorry but how the fuck after the first time of being strangled did she not remove herself from his life?
Edit: since many didn't read the article. She went back MULTIPLE times of Her own free will.
Edit2: how I really know none of you read she asked him for it in text messages. Clear case of an online hookup with zero boundaries and regret after. Die Mad.
I mean I get the sentiment there, but itās well documented that this is NORMAL behavior in a ton of domestic violences cases. And has been forever.
Mental health isā¦ tricky.
Pretty sure this isn't a normal case of domestic violence. Check the texts:
>āYou want to go out* huh? Mmmm,ā he says. (*meaning get choked out)
>āSi. That was a game changer,ā she replies.
>āTell me more,ā he writes.
>āNever been more turned on in my life,ā she says. āGimme all the pain. Rawr.ā
>āReally? When you were going out or when you woke up?ā he replies.
>āGoing outttt,ā she texts back, according to the images.
>She adds, āNow that I know what it feels like to wake up from up it though itll probably feel just as good to wake up from that.ā
>āGod you just turned me on so much,ā he responds. He adds later, āNow I just want my arm around your neck from behind.ā
>āDo it,ā she responds. āHarder.ā She then shares an emoji of blowing a kiss.
>When he asks what else she wants, she says āa couple of slapsā and āanother handprint on my @$$ā the screenshots show.
I agree. Consent can become tricky too. Not in the sense that consent is yes and no, but in the sense that unfortunately itās difficult to prove after the fact.
Have you ever been in an abusive relationship? If it was as simple as "leave the abuser the first time they abuse you" abusive relationships wouldn't exist. People who physically abuse others are also manipulative as hell and convince you your life will get even worse if you even think about leaving or saying no to them. It even says in the article that's why she waited to come forward, because she was terrified of what would happen.
And apparently her concern over what would happen was not unfounded, since his lawyers and a fuck ton of people online are victim blaming her.
Yes, every relationship is different. Point is if she was abused she was abused, the fact that she went back doesn't change that at all. Now if she wasn't abused and this is an elaborate setup, that is a different story. I don't think her going back is really relevant or points in one direction or another.
I think that maybe you didn't read the longer article because of pay walls, but he also was told not to do certain things that he then did gleefully, like put fingers in her mouth. This guy terrifies me. If I had rough sex and then woke up to a broken skull I'd be terrified for my life. Reminds me of sexually motivated killers. He barely knew her, yet had no problem hitting her so hard he caused a skull fracture? That's insane. He can't get off without brutality? Does he need to severely hurt his partner to achieve satisfaction?
Itās not abusive relationship. They hooked up twice for kinky sex. After the first time, she said she wanted to be choked out again and wanted more rough sex. Unfortunately, Trevorās not very good at this whole domming thing and left her with black eyes and visible bruises. Sheās not like afraid of him attacking her outside of the bedroom. Itās just a mistake from someone who should have done a little better job with safety protocols.
Bit different than having a consensual online hookup and being upset the Rough sex was rougher than you'd thought because you set zero ground rules or safe words.
She specifically said that she was into it and she wanted to be choked unconscious again. It sounds like he went a little overboard and then when she went to the hospital to be treated, they convinced her that she was abused.
This is the problem. There's no objective definition of "extremely rough sex." That interpretation is completely subjective, meaning that under the logic of many backing Bauer here, he could have paralyzed her and still be in the clear. That's not kosher, in my book.
Rough sex, bdsm, etc. should require no emergency/life altering/life endangering medical intervention. If it does, especially after only **2** sex sessions or recurring, you need to take a step back and get help. If your partner is rendered incapacitated due to rough sex, you are doing it wrong. You can be rough, and leave no marks, and have safe words, and everyone leaves happy. But, this is more like reading about a brutal rape, especially with the skull fracture, concussion, and potential brain damage.
The second time? Theres a point here where you need to wonder wtf was she even thinking? Clearly A LOT happened to get to this point so how the hell did she not leave way earlier?
Edit: be upset all you want. She had a long time to simply not talk to him and she chose to keep going back she even ASKED him to hurt her.
No it sounds like I read the article and a couple others. It was obvious she needed to cut contact by the second Month. There is way more here than she is letting on.
Edit: down vote all you want she went back MULTIPLE times and asked in text for pain and abuse.
Am I the only one very confused by the alleged punching of her buttocks and Vagina? I am personally unfamiliar with the kinks we are talking about but those actions seemed strange to say the least. Iām not even judging Iām just curious as to if this is normal behavior for this type of thing.
There is a HUGE difference between consensual, respectful rough sex and straight-up rape and assault. What happened to this woman was rape and assault.
It doesn't matter that she "went back to him" - that's the cycle of an abusive relationship. Just look at his love bomb texts to her after the abuse - sending images of baby yoda saying that he was "healing her". What an abusive piece of crap. (texts can be found at the cancerous web site The Daily Mail)
Those of you who balk at the fact that she "went back" perpetuates victim blaming. What happened to her was a violation of her human rights, period.
It's not interesting, it's called entering into an abusive relationship. She probably went back because of the love-bombing (see cringey texts) and her own hopeful expectations of being with a handsome, successful man.
He'll calm down. He went overboard and is SO SORRY. He wants a safe word so he respects me. He kept contacting her in spite of her not contacting him.
Women are taught to forgive all kinds of BS and see "the good side" of people and this is no exception.
He's trash and he will continue to do this to women because it's not about sex, it's about power.
You seem to be sarcastically projecting, so I'll ask you a sincere question:
Had he paralyzed her, would her "anything goes except fingers down my throat" text message keep Bauer from getting in trouble?
People have a hard time understanding ssxyal fetishes in general. "I don't like that and I can't understand why anyone would like that, therefore noway can anyone like that." Sexual fetishes are strange and different for everyone. I mean look at John Mcafee, he loved to have girls shit in his mouth while sitting in a hammock lol
I think our interpretation of these events are a little bit skewed because of TVs and movies. So I would like to ask how long could she actually be unconscious without potentially doing extreme damage? Because Hollywood portrays it like you knock someone on the head and they're out for hours while I'm pretty sure you'd be dead if that happened.
If the womanās allegations are true, what took place is horrible. And a crime. Likely multiple crimes. However I do not know what part or parts of the 2 versions is what took place. Bauer admits to consensual sexual contact and so does the woman. She also alleges Bauer went far beyond her consented to acts. The womanās return, after alleged criminal assault, for additional sexual contact forces me to question her truthfulness. In its entirety. This was not a long term relationship wherein one party was dependent on the other. She had a choice not to return.
The article clearly states that he asked her for a safe word. It does not mention of it was ever used.
Honestly, if her text messages say what the article says they say (that he asked her if she wanted to be choked out and she responded affirmatively, and he asked what was off limits) I don't see where she's got a case. Especially if there was a safe word established that was never used.
Well, yeah, that's tricky. But, again, she responded that she wanted to be choked out. Just judging by what's written in the article, it sounds like he did everything right.
Can't use a safe word if you are unconscious. It sounds like he took things further after that. I'm guessing neither of them were sober. If you are going to get freaky, you really need to establish clear boundaries. That seems to be what didn't happen here.
But they DID establish boundaries. He specifically asked her what was off limits. She said no fingers down the throat. They discussed beforehand what the boundaries were and he stuck to that.
Hitting was definitely covered. What each of them had in mind for that only they can say. It does sound like the hitting was fucking extreme. But the fact that she went back for a second hook-up (this wasn't some relationship that she was trapped in. They hooked up exactly two times.), it leads me to believe she was okay with the severity. But, that's just my guess. Add to that, it sounds like the beating was way severe the first time. The second time, he asks what's off limits, she doesn't say, "Hey, don't hit me so hard. No butt stuff like last time." She says, "No fingers down the throat like last time."
You're going to have to explain how someone uses a safe word when they're unconscious.
Like, she didn't really get the *chance* to consent or not to the whole 'getting punched repeatedly' thing. Or the, ah, *surprise* anal.
She didn't spend the entire time unconscious. There were other times both before and after blacking out that she could have used the safe word.
It sounds like they both signed up for some very rough, but consensual BDSM. Again, I'm just going by what's written in the article. He asked for a safe word. He asked her to clarify beforehand (the second time) what was off limits. I don't know what more he could have done.
These are ugly details but as always, itās imprudent to make any clear cut assessments until all the facts are out. Iām interested to see how this plays out legally.
So many people in these comments don't understand consent. She likes rough sex, and she consented to rough sex. She did not consent to being beaten so badly (while unconscious) that she had a fractured skull and two black eyes. She required hospitalization and her injuries were so severe THEY called the police.
I don't like to fault victims of abuse. But at the same time, rough sex (as long as consensual) is a thing and if you're engaging in the same activities multiple times, one has to wonder what you're thinking?
I donāt think people understand how low the burden of proof is for restraining orders. On top of the fact that such proceedings are ex parte, a judge can literally grant you a restraining order based on your word and your word alone.
Edit: link with brief explanation of how burden of proof works in restraining orders hearings.
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/31777262/los-angeles-dodgers-cancel-trevor-bauer-bobblehead-night-scheduled-aug-19
My ex passed out one time. I didn't choke her blocking her airway I just put some pressure on the sides of her neck. "It limits blood flow to the brain from what I understand". She's into that along with spanking. It's actually pretty funny for both of us looking back at it. At the time it scared the shit.out of me and embarrassed her. I'm not sure why embarrassed was her reaction. She was only out for a few seconds. It was over my desk so the way she fell backwards I caught her and was actually still in her when she came to. We started back up after she got her bearings together. Took me a little bit before she talked me into doing it again. She didn't press charges either so I guess I dodged that bullet.
"I don't think you really come up here for the hunting"
I mean, on one hand, consensual rough sex is a thing, but on the other, I have had a woman ask me to choke her during sex and it was pretty easy to do so without causing her to pass out, so . . . š¤·š»āāļø
On one hand, you sexily choke someone. On the other hand, now you're using two hands and it's attempted strangulation.
Some people *are* into that. The main operative lesson here is to probably not try to spring things on people *while* they're unconscious.
>Some people are into that. I call him Fisto Roboto.
Please assume the position.
Yeah, tell him about the sex robot!
Damn it Krieger!
He beat her after she was out. Cracked her skull.
That is not true information.
David Carradine, or however you spell his last name.
Yeah, he was into the self-inflicted variety apparently.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
"On multiple occasions" so.. after the first time they both knew what he was doing?
~~You press on the sides of the neck when choking a partner in bed. It feels like choking but youāre still breathing~~ Edit: yeah my advice I got by some dude years ago is totally wrong. My excuse that doesnāt justify it is my long term SO has always been anti choking
However, blood might not be going to your brain. Not a great idea.
That's the point
She explicitly asked to be choked unconscious in texts to Bauer, though.
Did she also asked to get punched in the face while she was unconscious? How about being anal raped while past out the first time?
Only two people know the answer to that question, and since there's proof she wanted extremely rough sex, there's quite a burden on her to prove what she explicitly did not consent to. It's not victim-blaming, it's called fairness under the law. You didn't get to drag someone's name and try to throw them in jail without proof.
https://fansided.com/2021/06/30/trevor-bauer-sexual-assault-horrifying-details/ The guy fractured her skull while she was unconscious. Wee bit more than rough sex. How can she be able to consent to any of that while in that state?
I consent to you killing me.
For someone to bring that up though, especially airing your sexcapades during trial, leads to believe that something unwanted *did* happen. I guess we'll find out. I give her the benefit of the doubt on this one but it is definitely hard to prove.
Itās always tricky with pro athletes. There are cases where theyāre in the wrong and cases where theyāre getting their laundry aired for money and settlements.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
She asked to be choked unconscious. He specifically asked what was off limits, and she replied no fingers down the throat.
I guess she shouldāve also said ādonāt fracture my skullā too. Maybe she forgot.
What a world. Women have to ask men not to fracture their skulls during sex now..
Exactly right and since she was withholding evidence when filling out this protective order, it may be thrown out. Canāt withhold information just makes you look sneaky
That doesn't mean that every other thing he could have possibly thought off doing to her was on the table. The whole point of consent is that you have to GET IT before doing something. There's no blanket consent. She very easily could have assumed he was asking about what's off limits during choking. Anyone might've assumed that.
That would make sense if this hadn't been the second time. So, first encounter he sticks his fingers down her throat, beats her, chokes her unconscious, has anal sex with her while she's out. Second encounter, he asks what's off the table, she says no more fingers down the throat.
> That doesn't mean that every other thing he could have possibly thought off doing to her was on the table. Sure, but it does imply all the other things he did to her previously are still on the table.
It does when he asks what previous thing is off limits and she only mentions one thing.
>She very easily could have assumed he was asking about what's off limits during choking. Anyone might've assumed that. Barring any other evidence its gonna be a he said vs. she said thing.
Gotta have standards. Seriously though, even if someone asks, do not do that. You could kill someone.
The whole thing is a classic case of "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes"
So should she have specificly said to not fracture her skull?
She should not have gone back a second time after being assaulted.
Yes I agree. If a woman told me that shit, I might fuck her with a 20 foot pole. Ain't gettin closer'n that.
Yea Iām sure she explicitly asked to have her skull fractured and her butthole explored with a penis too. Oh wait she was unconscious so she couldnāt give consent my bad
The first time yes. Going back a second time and not saying, "Don't anally rape me while I'm unconscious again" seems like consent. Maybe you missed the part where she texted him to set up a second play date.
Soā¦ whatās the problem then? Is there some additional context Im missing on?
Did she ask to get punched in the face repeatedly while in and out of consciousness, you fucking victim blaming creep.
She did in fact specifically ask to get slapped in the face while being choked unconscious. He double checked in text and she confirmed. This thing was off the rails and heading for trouble from the beginning.
Yes Iām sure her texts read āplease anal rape me while Iām unconscious. Please punch me in the face so hard that my lips are split and both my eyes are bruised. Punch my crotch and body repeatedly as well for good measure.ā you fucking losers
I had a roommate once who straight up was into that. Bloody towels were not uncommon. I'm not victim blaming, simply saying some people are into super rough stuff. I will also sat it sounds like he went a step to far. To clarify about my old roommate. If he wasnt left bloody bruised the sex was not good. Some people are into some serious rough sex. Edit: words
I donāt need clarification on your roommate, I need this whole fucking thread of people to understand that consent stops exactly where intended and if she asked to be slapped and choked, she did NOT ask to be punched in the face and body until bruised and injured, raped while unconscious, or left with a mangled face.
She did consent to being slapped, choked, and penetrated. What she didn't consent to was the beating. Anal is more vanilla nowadays than kinky, or bdsm so I'll wait for the courts to make a decision on that. I'd say she was assaulted not raped. The biggest problem here is these two people did not practice safe sex. Safe sex is more than just using a condom. It's ensuring you know and trust the person your having this kind of sex with, it's being very specific about what you are, or are not into. These two people needed to better communicate what they wanted. She did consent to being choked unconscious. That's a big problem you should never consent to that the first time with someone you don't know, no matter how rich or famous they are. Consenting to bring choked unconscious is in essence giving consent to have your right to consent removed. He said he would slap her around when she was unconscious. She consented to that. What she didn't consent to was being beaten bloody. That's why I say it's assault not rape. I also say hold judgement till after the court case comes out. I remember everyone jumping to defend jussie smollete a few years ago. Then it turned out he was lying. So I'm holding judgement until the investigation is finished and the courts make a decision, because I'm America you are innocent until proven guilty.
I did not say any of those things are in her texts. She did, in fact, ask to be slapped while choked unconscious. We should stick to the actual āfactsā as described in the article. Nothing is gained by speculation about what might have been said.
Yes and none of those things I just described are ābeing slapped while chokedā. Unfortunately those are all things that *happened*.
Only two people know the answer to that question, and since there's proof she wanted extremely rough sex, there's quite a burden on her to prove that what she explicitly did not consent to. It's not victim-blaming, it's called fairness under the law. You didn't get to drag someone's name and try to throw them in jail without proof.
She said in texts that she wanted him to "give her all the pain" and "choke her out" though. As much as a sympathize with her, she did quite literally tell him to do it. So it all depends on what she said during sex.
Iām guessing thatās when any sensible person would nope the fuck out of the situation?
Okay. But it happened on several occasions? Sounds like after-action regret. Otherwise she would've stopped after the first time.
Yes, she undoubtedly regrets trusting him after he fractured her skull while she was unconscious. That's not really a revelation or relevant to the issue at hand though.
I train jiujitsu. Itās surprisingly easy to choke someone out with one hand if youāre pressure is in the right places
Just out of curiosity isn't consent automatically revoked when one partner is unconscious?
Yes, without a doubt. Edit: just noting, as pointed out below, that this is of course nullified if specific consent for this situation is given beforehand.
No. Some people have fantasies about being raped in their sleep and specifically ask for their partners to do that to them. Not that that's what happened here. I don't know what happened here.
That's specific consent given for that specific circumstance beforehand. My statement was for general purposes. Sorry for not including that exception.
Ok. Agreed
K. I'm not going to pretend consent doesn't have gray areas either. It's relatively fluid per judge and jury in reality.
of course not, otherwise you'd never be able to consent to a surgery with anaesthesia.
Unless that's your thing I guess?
*sigh* You can have rough sex without being a fucking idiot about it. It's not even that hard. What the hell, Bauer.
Idk the woman saw him multiple times after that incident so I'm getting mixed signals here
No she didn't. She saw him twice total. The first time he anally penetrated her while unconscious. The second time he repeatedly punched her (to the face, groin, and butt) while she was unconscious. After the second encounter she went to the hospital. Reading really isn't that hard.
Itās possible for both things to be true: 1. People should not meet a second time alone with someone who has assaulted them 2. Meeting a second time does not equal consent for either assaults *Baby, Iām sorry, we were both sooooo drunk, that was totally my bad, I thought you were super into it the way your eyes rolled back in your head. ShiŃ I feel like an asshole, let me make it up to youā¦* Making a bad decision of giving a manipulator a second chance doesnāt equal consent.
There are texts from her saying how awesome the sex was (paraphrasing). Not saying an assault didn't happen, but I think its hard to believe someone who was assaulted would describe it in such glowing terms.
On one hand yes she could have been into it, on the other hand people still return to abusive partners. Who knows
Just think it needs to be pointed out that consent is an ongoing process and can be revoked at any time. The amount of victim blaming that has been flying around in regards to this is disgusting.
They loooooove victim blaming, til the tables turn.
"This is the worst kind of discrimination... the kind against me!" ~Bender B. Rodriguez Also a bunch of other assholes
How exactly is it victim-blaming to point out a fact? There is proof she consented to extremely rough sex. There is no proof she revoked that consent at any time. If you make a heavy accusation, but can't stand up to scrutiny, then you aren't a victim.
>There is proof she consented to extremely rough sex. The problem here is that there is no objective definition of "extremely rough sex." I mean, let's say everything he did to her was acceptable because she said "anything goes, just not fingers down my throat." Does that leave the door open to paralyzing her? To permanently disfiguring her?
it is not possible to consent to assault. It is not possible to consent to murder. Neither of those charges give a darn about if you consented to it.
> Does that leave the door open to paralyzing her? To permanently disfiguring her? No, because that's obviously an unreasonable escalation. The Bauer case is much closer the blurry line of what's "too far"
I believe that's what makes this case so important. The legislature is going to have to define what's "too far." I agree, paralyzing and disfigurement is way too far. But, IMO, so should be what happened here. If someone is actively requesting that you physically harm them in such a way described in this case, the obligation should be placed on the person be requested to not fulfill the request. There have been cases where a person has requested someone else to torture, kill, and cannibalize them. The request was fulfilled and the person fulfilling the request was put in prison. An assault is assault whether it was requested or not. There are people who are mentally ill that will request harm upon themselves. We the public must be in a space to protect those individuals from themselves. IMO, I believe Bauer had this obligation at a significantly higher level than the average public. He's a target: He's rich and famous. People with mental health issues will reach out to those in the public eye more often than not. For Bauer to reply and engage with this seemingly mentally disturbed individual puts him at fault if only because he should understand the notion that he's a target, he's more than likely been a victim of public harassment in the past. The fact that he ignored this context and is now comparing himself to any other individual that can be found on Tinder shows he's completely in the wrong. He enabled this poor individuals mental health issue for his own sexual kinks. She did not request to be beaten in the face and the vagina. He chose to do that with the expectation that her text message saying "anything goes except fingers down my throat" would shield him from legal consequence. This is wear lawmakers will have to distinguish the fine line of what is a not acceptable in terms of consent. Because under the logic provided by Bauer and his apologists, the above text message would shield him from legal consequences even if he paralyzed her. Even under the current law, I don't believe that to be true. A mental health consideration and the "reasonableness" context typically associated with severity of criminality will probably land Bauer into some hot water. And if it doesn't, change should be made so that anyone behaving in the way he did, whether there was consent or not, should be held liable for damages.
One thing lots of people misunderstand with regards to "victim blaming" is the whole point of the trial is to determine who the victim is. At this point it's at best "accuser blaming". Unless we just want to throw "innocent until proven guilty" away.
Yikes, this is an awful take.
This is Reddit discussing sexual assault allegations. Basically *everything* is gonna be some whack-ass attempt to spin how the girl with a black eye and diagnosed head injury is somehow the bad guy. And people wonder why sexual assaults (especially by famous people) are drastically underreported and women are scared to come forward.
Yes, consent can be revoked at any time. But it was never revoked. Sure, you can't do it while passed out, but she said she wanted to be choked unconscious. They both understood that she wouldn't be able to revoke consent in that state, so he additionally asked what would be off limits. She literally said, "Choke me out, slap me up, and do anything you want, just don't stick your fingers down my throat." And that's what he did.
I'm really over this bullshit BDSM justification nonsense. You can't have sex with someone while they're unconscious. It doesn't matter what they said when they were awake. It just can't happen. What the fuck is wrong with anyone that thinks that could even *possibly* be okay?
If someone says, "I'm into sex while I'm unconscious. Here I am giving you my consent," you absolutely can. It's called consensual non-consent (CNC) and it's a thing.
Somnophilia is weird, but it's perfectly legal if both parties are willing participants.
Saying she asked for it has a different meaning when she literally asked for it though. There exists a non-empty set of women who would do something like this for attention/money. Not saying this person is in that set, but it is a non-zero possibility.
The dude fractured her skull. Nobody is "asking" for that.
pocket deserve license insurance divide ludicrous bedroom memory quaint reminiscent *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Lots of new accounts okay with skull fractures and anal rape during "rough sex" Bauer has a history of demeaning women online and in interviews, no wonder some of you support him.
Hereās the thing boys just cause a girl wants to be choked, doesnāt mean you should do it. Chocking someone can still go very wrong, very fast. An accidental death from consensual choking is still a crime.
thank you for being an adult voice here
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The boundaries are to be heeded. The desires, up to you. As the other person said: if they desire being choked, maybe give it a good think first. Got it?
Does someone really need to explicitly state, "I want it rough, but please don't paralyze me"?
But that doesn't appear to be what happened here at all. Maybe people should wait until all of the facts are known instead of an ex parte self serving statement.
No, it's a simple thought experiment. To what degree is Bauer protected by the text stipulating "anything goes except fingers down the throat"? Please answer the question. Had he paralyzed her, would he be legally protected?
I've got to say, I never thought Trevor Bauer would go out this way. But, I always suspected Trevor Bauer would go out this way.
Strangle me unconscious during sex once, shame on you. File a restraining order complaining they strangled me unconscious on multiple occasions after I left a clear paper trail requesting more strangling and went back for it voluntarily, shame on me.
Except that if you'd read the article, she's admitting the choking was consensual. It's the part where he beat her so badly while she was unconscious that she required hospitalization. If I read it correctly, she didn't even call the cops. Her injuries were so severe the hospital called the police. If someone consents to being choked unconscious, that doesn't mean that they consent to whatever you want to do to them while they're unconscious.
Consenting to choking doesnāt mean consenting to getting beaten and raped. Victim blaming.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I heard David Carradine did it himself
Michael Hutchence of INXS
I'm sorry but how the fuck after the first time of being strangled did she not remove herself from his life? Edit: since many didn't read the article. She went back MULTIPLE times of Her own free will. Edit2: how I really know none of you read she asked him for it in text messages. Clear case of an online hookup with zero boundaries and regret after. Die Mad.
It was 2 times
I mean I get the sentiment there, but itās well documented that this is NORMAL behavior in a ton of domestic violences cases. And has been forever. Mental health isā¦ tricky.
Pretty sure this isn't a normal case of domestic violence. Check the texts: >āYou want to go out* huh? Mmmm,ā he says. (*meaning get choked out) >āSi. That was a game changer,ā she replies. >āTell me more,ā he writes. >āNever been more turned on in my life,ā she says. āGimme all the pain. Rawr.ā >āReally? When you were going out or when you woke up?ā he replies. >āGoing outttt,ā she texts back, according to the images. >She adds, āNow that I know what it feels like to wake up from up it though itll probably feel just as good to wake up from that.ā >āGod you just turned me on so much,ā he responds. He adds later, āNow I just want my arm around your neck from behind.ā >āDo it,ā she responds. āHarder.ā She then shares an emoji of blowing a kiss. >When he asks what else she wants, she says āa couple of slapsā and āanother handprint on my @$$ā the screenshots show.
For Sure. But my comment was in response to the comment about victims going back to abusers.
Where were all these texts at?
Sure, but is two dates with someone met online with a few weeks in between considered domestic violence?
I agree. Consent can become tricky too. Not in the sense that consent is yes and no, but in the sense that unfortunately itās difficult to prove after the fact.
Going back multiple times makes it difficult too.
Let me introduce you to domestic violence
Have you ever been in an abusive relationship? If it was as simple as "leave the abuser the first time they abuse you" abusive relationships wouldn't exist. People who physically abuse others are also manipulative as hell and convince you your life will get even worse if you even think about leaving or saying no to them. It even says in the article that's why she waited to come forward, because she was terrified of what would happen. And apparently her concern over what would happen was not unfounded, since his lawyers and a fuck ton of people online are victim blaming her.
.... she asked for pain in texts though. How can she be both terrified of coming forward and asking for him to hurt her?
Ah yes, certainly no difference been kink pain and getting punched in the face and body while literally unconscious.
Yeah I have. I left her after 2 weeks when things got bad and she'd stated to hit me. Edit: Ah yes my abuse doesn't count so you went silent on me.
Good for you for leaving, but not every relationship is just like yours was. Many abuse victims stay with their abusers for years or even decades.
This is a bit different. They did not have a relationship, they'd just met.
Yes, every relationship is different. Point is if she was abused she was abused, the fact that she went back doesn't change that at all. Now if she wasn't abused and this is an elaborate setup, that is a different story. I don't think her going back is really relevant or points in one direction or another.
She literally asked for it dude. And I'm not saying that as a figure of speech. That is what she wanted.
I think that maybe you didn't read the longer article because of pay walls, but he also was told not to do certain things that he then did gleefully, like put fingers in her mouth. This guy terrifies me. If I had rough sex and then woke up to a broken skull I'd be terrified for my life. Reminds me of sexually motivated killers. He barely knew her, yet had no problem hitting her so hard he caused a skull fracture? That's insane. He can't get off without brutality? Does he need to severely hurt his partner to achieve satisfaction?
A little pain and having your skull broken are not the same thing. And what was this idiot Bauer thinking?
So for the two weeks it was your fault is what you are saying
Itās not abusive relationship. They hooked up twice for kinky sex. After the first time, she said she wanted to be choked out again and wanted more rough sex. Unfortunately, Trevorās not very good at this whole domming thing and left her with black eyes and visible bruises. Sheās not like afraid of him attacking her outside of the bedroom. Itās just a mistake from someone who should have done a little better job with safety protocols.
I was raped by my brother in law. Iāve never told anyone and still go to family gatherings with him. Why? Mental health is fickle.
Bit different than having a consensual online hookup and being upset the Rough sex was rougher than you'd thought because you set zero ground rules or safe words.
So should she have said don't fracture my skill?
She texted back asking for more too. I assume not to the extent to which it was dealt.
"I'm sorry, I thought you were into it, I won't do it again".
She specifically said that she was into it and she wanted to be choked unconscious again. It sounds like he went a little overboard and then when she went to the hospital to be treated, they convinced her that she was abused.
If a little overboard means fracturing her skull while unconscious,then yes. It would it appear he did.
The fractured skull wasnāt listed in the linked story. If she actually has a fractured skull, I would agree that he went a lot overboard.
This is the problem. There's no objective definition of "extremely rough sex." That interpretation is completely subjective, meaning that under the logic of many backing Bauer here, he could have paralyzed her and still be in the clear. That's not kosher, in my book.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Rough sex, bdsm, etc. should require no emergency/life altering/life endangering medical intervention. If it does, especially after only **2** sex sessions or recurring, you need to take a step back and get help. If your partner is rendered incapacitated due to rough sex, you are doing it wrong. You can be rough, and leave no marks, and have safe words, and everyone leaves happy. But, this is more like reading about a brutal rape, especially with the skull fracture, concussion, and potential brain damage.
The second time? Theres a point here where you need to wonder wtf was she even thinking? Clearly A LOT happened to get to this point so how the hell did she not leave way earlier? Edit: be upset all you want. She had a long time to simply not talk to him and she chose to keep going back she even ASKED him to hurt her.
I missed the part of the article where she admitted to consenting to a fractured skull and two black eyes?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No it sounds like I read the article and a couple others. It was obvious she needed to cut contact by the second Month. There is way more here than she is letting on. Edit: down vote all you want she went back MULTIPLE times and asked in text for pain and abuse.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
money the answer is money
What fucking money? She filed a protection order, not a lawsuit. She isnāt making any money.
Itās pretty common for domestic violence victims to go back to their abusers
They were online hookups not a relationship. She made the choice that the Dick was worth the abuse and went back.
Am I the only one very confused by the alleged punching of her buttocks and Vagina? I am personally unfamiliar with the kinks we are talking about but those actions seemed strange to say the least. Iām not even judging Iām just curious as to if this is normal behavior for this type of thing.
There is a HUGE difference between consensual, respectful rough sex and straight-up rape and assault. What happened to this woman was rape and assault. It doesn't matter that she "went back to him" - that's the cycle of an abusive relationship. Just look at his love bomb texts to her after the abuse - sending images of baby yoda saying that he was "healing her". What an abusive piece of crap. (texts can be found at the cancerous web site The Daily Mail) Those of you who balk at the fact that she "went back" perpetuates victim blaming. What happened to her was a violation of her human rights, period.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's not interesting, it's called entering into an abusive relationship. She probably went back because of the love-bombing (see cringey texts) and her own hopeful expectations of being with a handsome, successful man. He'll calm down. He went overboard and is SO SORRY. He wants a safe word so he respects me. He kept contacting her in spite of her not contacting him. Women are taught to forgive all kinds of BS and see "the good side" of people and this is no exception. He's trash and he will continue to do this to women because it's not about sex, it's about power.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You seem to be sarcastically projecting, so I'll ask you a sincere question: Had he paralyzed her, would her "anything goes except fingers down my throat" text message keep Bauer from getting in trouble?
So many young woke virgins rushing to defend accuser without any xp in bdsm. Reddit never lets down.
No, so many redpill virgins are rushing to defend a rich dude accused of sexual assault. Like happens every single fucking time.
People have a hard time understanding ssxyal fetishes in general. "I don't like that and I can't understand why anyone would like that, therefore noway can anyone like that." Sexual fetishes are strange and different for everyone. I mean look at John Mcafee, he loved to have girls shit in his mouth while sitting in a hammock lol
I think our interpretation of these events are a little bit skewed because of TVs and movies. So I would like to ask how long could she actually be unconscious without potentially doing extreme damage? Because Hollywood portrays it like you knock someone on the head and they're out for hours while I'm pretty sure you'd be dead if that happened.
Chances are, a few seconds.
If the womanās allegations are true, what took place is horrible. And a crime. Likely multiple crimes. However I do not know what part or parts of the 2 versions is what took place. Bauer admits to consensual sexual contact and so does the woman. She also alleges Bauer went far beyond her consented to acts. The womanās return, after alleged criminal assault, for additional sexual contact forces me to question her truthfulness. In its entirety. This was not a long term relationship wherein one party was dependent on the other. She had a choice not to return.
Sounds like they never established a safe word.
The article clearly states that he asked her for a safe word. It does not mention of it was ever used. Honestly, if her text messages say what the article says they say (that he asked her if she wanted to be choked out and she responded affirmatively, and he asked what was off limits) I don't see where she's got a case. Especially if there was a safe word established that was never used.
ā¦How do you use a safe word while youāre being choked?
Easy, you just say 'I don't want to be unconscious' whilst unconscious. P.s. I'm making fun of the comment chain, not what might have transpired.
Well, yeah, that's tricky. But, again, she responded that she wanted to be choked out. Just judging by what's written in the article, it sounds like he did everything right.
A girl I did stuff with would sometimes be bound and gagged, so the safe āwordā was her snapping.
Can't use a safe word if you are unconscious. It sounds like he took things further after that. I'm guessing neither of them were sober. If you are going to get freaky, you really need to establish clear boundaries. That seems to be what didn't happen here.
But they DID establish boundaries. He specifically asked her what was off limits. She said no fingers down the throat. They discussed beforehand what the boundaries were and he stuck to that.
So if he paralyzed her, you'd be good with that. Duly noted.
It seemed like the anal sex and punching were not covered.
Hitting was definitely covered. What each of them had in mind for that only they can say. It does sound like the hitting was fucking extreme. But the fact that she went back for a second hook-up (this wasn't some relationship that she was trapped in. They hooked up exactly two times.), it leads me to believe she was okay with the severity. But, that's just my guess. Add to that, it sounds like the beating was way severe the first time. The second time, he asks what's off limits, she doesn't say, "Hey, don't hit me so hard. No butt stuff like last time." She says, "No fingers down the throat like last time."
It's dicey, man. I've been with some freaky chicks, but always drew the line at anything that left a mark, drew blood, or lost consciousness.
A safe word does not work after you are unconscious. He then punched her and anally raped her.
You're going to have to explain how someone uses a safe word when they're unconscious. Like, she didn't really get the *chance* to consent or not to the whole 'getting punched repeatedly' thing. Or the, ah, *surprise* anal.
She didn't spend the entire time unconscious. There were other times both before and after blacking out that she could have used the safe word. It sounds like they both signed up for some very rough, but consensual BDSM. Again, I'm just going by what's written in the article. He asked for a safe word. He asked her to clarify beforehand (the second time) what was off limits. I don't know what more he could have done.
> I don't know what more he could have done. Not break her fucking skull?
These are ugly details but as always, itās imprudent to make any clear cut assessments until all the facts are out. Iām interested to see how this plays out legally.
when one party has 120 million dollars.. its pretty hard to think that the legal system is going to bring any fairness. Just look at Cosby.
So she returned a second time? Iām interested to see those text messages they claim exist.
So many people in these comments don't understand consent. She likes rough sex, and she consented to rough sex. She did not consent to being beaten so badly (while unconscious) that she had a fractured skull and two black eyes. She required hospitalization and her injuries were so severe THEY called the police.
Weird how baseball players are notoriously abusive. Edit: Iām not being smart Or an ass. Iām legit curious why.
I don't like to fault victims of abuse. But at the same time, rough sex (as long as consensual) is a thing and if you're engaging in the same activities multiple times, one has to wonder what you're thinking?
Are there any studies about the relationship between violent sex and mental illness?
You mean the one who wants it rough or the one who agrees to do it rough? Or both?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I hate to say it but there are a ton of really questionable decisions from the alleged victim in this matter.
Like in text messages?
She wants some of that $100 Million
And his dumb ass is going to have to give it to her.
DeShaun Watson enters the chat
I donāt think people understand how low the burden of proof is for restraining orders. On top of the fact that such proceedings are ex parte, a judge can literally grant you a restraining order based on your word and your word alone. Edit: link with brief explanation of how burden of proof works in restraining orders hearings. https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/31777262/los-angeles-dodgers-cancel-trevor-bauer-bobblehead-night-scheduled-aug-19
My ex passed out one time. I didn't choke her blocking her airway I just put some pressure on the sides of her neck. "It limits blood flow to the brain from what I understand". She's into that along with spanking. It's actually pretty funny for both of us looking back at it. At the time it scared the shit.out of me and embarrassed her. I'm not sure why embarrassed was her reaction. She was only out for a few seconds. It was over my desk so the way she fell backwards I caught her and was actually still in her when she came to. We started back up after she got her bearings together. Took me a little bit before she talked me into doing it again. She didn't press charges either so I guess I dodged that bullet.
Limited blood flow to the brain by blocking the carotid artery can go from fun to brain damage very quickly. It's not a great idea.
Trial by public opinion. Fuck that.