Sheogorath
Visionary
★★★★★
- Joined
- May 20, 2018
- Posts
- 20,143
I thought this MeToo/cancel excess had overstayed it's welcome and vanished from a lot of popular circles, but it seems to be making it's rounds into other subcultures now, fleeing to prey on whichever men it can find, to disrupt useful pursuits and fracture communities with pointless drama about fucking-nothings.
Two foids Celine Halioua ( https://www.celinehh.com/aubrey ) and Laura Deming ( https://ldeming.posthaven.com/aubrey ) on 10 August 2021 coordinated a two-pronged assault meant to ruin this guy's career, and they ended up doing that: SENS fired him even though he denies allegations and there's zero fucking proof. Yet the law wouldn't allow him to countersue since it's impossible to disprove claims of what he allegedly said in confidence.
This is basically nothing at all. Wow, so he didn't say anything sexual to you for 3 years (14-17) and then makes a comment NOT about the details about his love life, but that he AVOIDS talking about it with her due to her youth.
No context is given as to how the conversation got on that topic: she might have even ASKED about it. Would be interesting to see the whole e-mail.
Notice the lack of quotation marks here. The closest Celine comes is using single-quote marks ('entertained' and 'glorious woman') which we know are used to represent PARAPHRASING not actual quotes.
You can also see she doesn't even dare use them around "responsibility to have sex with" because she's clearly bullshitting and portraying things out of context.
More specifics:
Two foids Celine Halioua ( https://www.celinehh.com/aubrey ) and Laura Deming ( https://ldeming.posthaven.com/aubrey ) on 10 August 2021 coordinated a two-pronged assault meant to ruin this guy's career, and they ended up doing that: SENS fired him even though he denies allegations and there's zero fucking proof. Yet the law wouldn't allow him to countersue since it's impossible to disprove claims of what he allegedly said in confidence.
Laura Deming said:I had one bad experience with him when I was 17 - he told me in writing that he had an ‘adventurous love life’ and that it had ‘always felt quite jarring’ not to let conversations with me stray in that direction given that ‘[he] could treat [me] as an equal on every other level’.
He sent this from his work email, and I’d known him since I was 14.
This is basically nothing at all. Wow, so he didn't say anything sexual to you for 3 years (14-17) and then makes a comment NOT about the details about his love life, but that he AVOIDS talking about it with her due to her youth.
No context is given as to how the conversation got on that topic: she might have even ASKED about it. Would be interesting to see the whole e-mail.
Celina Halioua said:SENS funded much of my undergraduate and graduate work, and as such I was often paraded in front of their donors. The role of my attractiveness in discussions with donors (almost always older men) was made explicit by SENS executives.
At one such dinner, I was sat next to Aubrey by a SENS executive. I was told to keep him ‘entertained’; Aubrey funneled me alcohol and hit on me the entire night. He told me that I was a ‘glorious woman’ and that as a glorious woman I had a responsibility to have sex with the SENS donors in attendance so they would give money to him.
Notice the lack of quotation marks here. The closest Celine comes is using single-quote marks ('entertained' and 'glorious woman') which we know are used to represent PARAPHRASING not actual quotes.
You can also see she doesn't even dare use them around "responsibility to have sex with" because she's clearly bullshitting and portraying things out of context.
More specifics:
Van Dermyden Makus said:Documentary Evidence. We reviewed the emails in question. Leading to Dr. de Grey’s comments, Complainant #1, age 17 at the time, reached out to Dr. de Grey on April 16, 2012, requesting an introduction to someone. Dr. de Grey responded that same day from his SRF email, writing (typed verbatim in relevant part):
[…] Heh... an admission for you - you probably know (it's public) that I have a fairly adventurous love life, and I'm not coy in talking about it, but I've always taken care to avoid letting conversations stray in that direction with someone so young as you, and I confess that that has always felt quite jarring given that I could treat you as an equal on every other level. Maybe those days are over... Ahem - back to business Yes, I'll e-introduce you [….]15
Seems conspicuous with the ... and ... that they left out of the rest (the not "relevant" parts) of his e-mails, plus also did not quote what e-mails she sent to him for us to judge. Also seems unclear if between April 16 and May 11 they had further interactions or not.Van Dermyden Makus said:Complainant #1 did not respond to Dr. de Grey’s email. A week later and just days after she turned 18 years old, Complainant #1 emailed Dr. de Grey on May 11, 2012 email to inquire if he would support her application to attend a forum. That same day, Dr. de Grey responded to Complainant #1 on SRF email, stating (typed verbatim):
Sure, no problem - just did it. Expanded your text below somewhat. Resisted the temptation to include "hotter than hell" among my five words Didn't tick the "resume" box because you didn't attach one, but presumably you will send one. Not sure you're actually eligible - there's something that says "Between 20 and 30 years of age at the time of nomination" - but maybe they'll ignore that. Good luck!16
Last edited: