I just re-read the passage you would agree about, if its particulars are as alleged. It's the bolded one below.
Since every item in it is completely documented, and the only one you have to take someone's word for is that the unwelcome attentions have been "deeply distressing," I am now wondering whether you simply don't believe that Poet has suffered from this, and that her husband has as well.
She has been put on anti-anxiety meds because of it.
I would have had to seek such help, too. Evidently you wouldn't have.
If you choose to believe CH's treatment of Poet to be not-so-bad, just kind of "jerky," and to disbelieve that Poet has been harmed, well, you have a right to make such a choice.
If it is deeply distressing to its recipient, the subject of the innuendo and insinuation and unwelcome attention, and she makes clear that it is, and her friends do, too; if she begs him to stop; if her husband does the same; if he claims his attentions are somehow justified, but because we see only "the tip of the iceberg" he can't prove it; if he is given leave to show the whole iceberg and refuses...
....When you cause suffering, do it protractedly, repeatedly, and knowingly, that is not called "jerkiness," it's called sadism and obsession. |
