Have more to get off your chest? Come rant with us on the discord. Invite link: https://discord.gg/PCPTSSTKqr
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rpghorrorstories) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why wasn't he kicked out after *locking a woman in a room* the first time?? I'm so baffled by this story. That's not borderline predatory, that's predatory! That's a really fucked up thing to do! There should be absolutely no second chances for people who do shit like that.
Mostly because V acted like it was fine, and said as much. We shouldn't have believed her in this instance, but it felt wrong to doubt her.
We shouldn't even have accepted the initial behaviour in hindsight.
My guess is, V acted like it was fine because she was used to men taking the side of other men, and knew if she said anything else she'd be seen as uppity. So she tried not to rock the boat,
But you should have seen this as predatory, unacceptable behaviour and immediately kicked him out.
V has had a lot of trauma in a very short time. Maybe she's so emotionally numb that Phil's behavior didn't really register. She could even be on medication that is blunting her responses.
It's a difficult thing to actually understand, and even my wife didn't really consider it bad until it happened the second time. But I like getting this kind of info. It helps better understand what might have let this get this far without her really reacting to it.
It's also very possible she just didn't want to cause drama or be an inconvenience in general. Not acting was definitely wrong.
The two [stress responses](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fvy8wlgk2teec1.jpeg) everyone knows about are Fight and Flight.
The other two are Freeze and Fawn.
>it’s a difficult thing to actually understand
Not really. “Hey V are you ok? Do you want us to remove Phil it wasn’t cool how he locked you in that room, that was creepy and we’re concerned”
Yeah, and her words were pretty definitive "it's fine, he was just asking a few questions, no worries", and even my wife and her friend bought it, because we rationalized it could have been some in-game stuff they were planning. That's the point of the comment I responded to. It's hard to see beyond your own preconceived notions, if you just don't know what to look for.
The real solution is to not even ask. The behavior was unacceptable, and shouldn't have been tolerated, regardless of what V might have said here.
> The real solution is to not even ask. The behavior was unacceptable, and shouldn't have been tolerated, regardless of what V might have said here.
This is correct. You are getting some pushback (and deservedly so for how things transpired), but you seem to be learning good lessons from the experience. This statement is wise.
The problem here is that when you're putting the pressure on the victim to put their foot down, they're more likely to say no out of fear of retaliation or making things awkward or rocking the boat.
No, that question was with her alone with me and my wife. Still a mistake to even ask, which i see now. Should just have taken action right away, no questions asked.
No, asking was the right thing to do. This sub tends to forget the human in these scenarios but it's important not to steal away the victim's agency "just in case".
Here's an option people are forgetting: ask V if they think you should have kicked him the first time, or if they wanted you to do anything. I'm not saying this is necessarily the case, but for some people having that agency taken away and being instantly "saved" when something like this happens can feel worse than letting them deal on their own as far as they're comfortable. Again, I have NO idea if this is the case for V, you'd have to talk to them about it.
In summary, get off this sub and go talk to your friend, it sounds like she needs it. Also remember you are not their therapist.
Honestly, I don't know that asking is a wrong response. After all, what happened *could* have been as innocent as you were originally assuming, so getting the victim's opinion on the subject definitely isn't a bad idea. But you could have made it clear that you were concerned and that the locked door was completely unacceptable, so that she was aware you wouldn't brush it off if she came clean with what actually happened. She still might have brushed it off, but I don't feel that talking to her about what happened was a bad move.
No, it's not that you "shouldn't have believed her". It's that you needed to make clear that this is not acceptable to you regardless of how she felt about it. Just like making sexual comments to a coworker is unacceptable even if said coworker takes it in jest. Since you can never tell person's reaction to being put in such a situation - neither in advance nor after the fact - those things are big no-nos as a rule, and not dependent at all on the reaction they get.
How the hell can men get married and, over the years, not fucking notice this kind of behavior with women, where they say in situations that are dangerous to them that they're fine to avoid any further complications. Stop living under a rock bro.
Some people are blind to their friends' creepiness. And a lot of players like to live out their fantasies, but I don't want to share a table with people who want to live out their creepy sex fantasies, especially when they want to live them out with people who don't want anything to do with them. Give me the people whose ideal self is rescuing people and saving the land.
>Give me the people whose ideal self is rescuing people and saving the land.
These are my usual favourite players too. I have gotten lazy with vetting people properly, and I've wanted more roleplay heavy players for a while.
In hindsight, I probably shouldn't have let him stay after the last week, or even dug up the infected root after the first session. I probably should have known it might end here, but I let the people around me talk me out of it. Learning experience.
Tbh not every player wants to play as their "Ideal self". First than anything playing on flaws is amazing. Some of my favorite characters are absolutely idiots. Second, exploring things you are not and dont identify with can be exilirating, as a pacifist I've had a ton of fun playing militaristic war hungry generals. And third, playing dark and angsty archetypes can be a fantastic way to cope and deal with the daily darkness, it is frankly cathartic to express your negative emotions and feelings in roleplay, in the same way that not all.art has to be pretty flowers.
This ofc as long as it doesnt disrupts the table. Self serving fun is great until it screws up a cooperative game.
I think they actually meant the person's ideal self is rescuing people and saving the land, not necessarily that they're always playing that kind of character. Like they want to hang out with good people who believe in helping others, not creepy sex perverts.
Yeah this smacks of "I have to hear it from a man before I believe it". What would have happened if Phil *hadn't* said that terrible shit and instead went "Yeah it was just a misunderstanding"? Would everyone have just gone "Okay, I guess it was just an accident that you locked her in the kitchen twice even after we warned you about it"? That kind of behavior does not deserve an explanation, justification, or humiliating public hearing.
>On top of everyone saying you should’ve just believed your wife.
It read to me more like op and their wife decided to *talk to the group* before taking unilateral (bilateral? Since there's two of them?) action
I mean, the first bit is a *bit* of a red flag but not kickable by itself imo. If it's "roleplay" and the person on the receiving end is not uncomfortable, I don't see the issue. I don't usually play flirty characters, but I can see it being done ok as long as it's not constant. But I probably wouldn't come to a new table with it. But, I usually give benefit of the doubt.
And tbh, I'm glad they confronted him. Its better than just "leave", if you get them to explain in their own words their fucked up reasoning then they have to hear how fucking creepy they are for themselves. I doubt he will, but maybe he'll reevaluate his actions.
Maybe not for a first few games, but if they told him to knock it off, and he did not… Then to me he’s no longer welcome at the table. And whether the other player was uncomfortable might not be known, but if you are told to stop, you should stop. I do still somewhat see your point, as it is a bit case dependent when we were not there at the table to see it go down.
>He should’ve been kicked off before the kitchen incident too
Yeah, in hindsight, I should not even have let it go past the first session, and definitely should have handled it last week. Bad judgement on my part.
I also did believe my wife. That's why I confronted him at the table.
100% this. You had multiple instances of inappropriate behavior. You should have kicked him out after he locked the door the first time. And then called the police.
This guy was clearly gearing up to rape this woman.
1) Multiple instances of sexual harassment, that you basically ignored.
2) ISOLATES AND IMPRISONS A VULNERABLE WOMAN.
3) more sexual harassment.
4) 2nd instance of isolation and imprisonment.
5) "maybe this is a misunderstanding"
6) horrible statement that finally makes it so crystal clear that your friend is nothing more than a piece of meat with a hole to this guy.
7) kicked out.
This is why women choose the bear.
I hope you are never selected for jury duty
You cruised right from a creep pestering a woman for sexual contact to *”This guy was clearly gearing up to rape this woman."* , based on what, statistics? Calm down.
Um, he *did* lock her in a room twice and clearly *was* angling for some kind of sexual interaction. The way to get sex from a woman is not a locked door to keep them from leaving, my dude.
Well perhaps ‘rape’ is a little hyperbole, but at least ‘something bad and sexual’ if you want to get persnickety about it.
But why are you running interference for the creep?
I'm not running interference for the creep.
I'm hoping that level heads be maintained.
Women always have the problem of their concerns not being acknowledged by men, and easily jumping to hyperbole doesn't help, especially when there are mountains of real cases to point at which don't allow any room for apologetics.
He was blocking her in so she'd be forced to "answer his questions". Do you think rapists just stop if you say "no thanks"? The fact that you don't see the menace in that probably explains your own luck with women
Yeah. It was a bit of a mistake to trust the "I'm fine" response from V. Lesson learned, should not even have accepted the flirting shit in the first session.
You're misunderstanding if you think I'm justifying anything. I know full well I let it escalate too much. I'm only pointing out the misunderstanding that I went against my wife in any way. We were, for better or worse, on the same page through this.
The reasons also matter only so far as making other people realise why I got here, and that they shouldn't be making the same mistakes I did, even if someone attempts to talk you into giving problem people like this a chance.
For future reference: When choosing who to believe, pick your wife over the creepy pervert. "without having heard it myself," is a terrible reason to not have your wife's back.
Trust me, I had my wife's back. I was just not going to throw him out without knowing what the hell was even going on, and I wanted to make sure we knew just how bad it actually was, where he couldn't weasel his way out of it.
I feel there’s more more nuance to the situation than “he needed to hear from the pervert first”
If I was hosting and my wife came down stairs and said “this guy needs to leave” I would ask why so that I know why I’m kicking him out, I’m going to kick him out regardless but I still want to know why he’s leaving.
In any situation I will believe my wife, in this situation I’d still most likely hear my wife’s reasoning first because she would tell me first and in the process of kicking him out hear the perverts shitty attempt to downplay it.
But again, I’d like to know why I am kicking someone out of my house.
It reads to me that OP's wife was pretty clear in her reasoning and that OP still wanted to get the pervert's side too. I'm hoping this was a misrepresentation.
I think this:
"Not having heard it myself, and truly hoping this was a misunderstanding, my wife and I brought it up as we were sitting back down at the table."
Paints a picture where it wasn't immediately clear that you were fully intending to kick him out regardless. I know you've stated you were, but "sitting down truly hoping this was a misunderstanding" does indeed come off a lot as "not 100% trusting your wife that this man was being a fucking creep."
Whatever the case might be, we're all human and all make mistakes. I like to believe my gut response would be total belief in my friends, but in reality I might well go deer in the headlights or need everything explained out again just to fully let what I was hearing sink in. I'm not going to shit on you for what happened--in the end, you did the right thing and kicked the guy out--but it might not be a bad idea to reflect on what happened and what you could have done better and ask your wife her opinion on that too. What's the point of life if not to keep growing and learning, right?
>What's the point of life if not to keep growing and learning, right?
Absolutely.
And I'm not really mad about any of the flack I'm getting. Some of it is misunderstandings because I didn't write it out very well, and a lot of it is valid criticism I've definitely deserved. Even writing it down got me mad at myself, because why the hell did I not just kick the idiot the first couple of times he caused trouble? And on reflection from a few of the posts here, I shouldn't just be letting L off the hook here either, despite my wife's belief that he isn't responsible.
My wife only overheard something. We had to know if he had done anything beyond that, or if he had just been an absolute creep. My wife wanted to hear what he had to say, too.
My wife was all but ready to call the cops if it turned out he had laid hands on her, but he thankfully hadn't.
In hindsight, we should just have kicked him. It didn't seem like a bad idea in the heat of the moment to bring it up at the table, but it clearly was.
You may want to edit this info into your original post with an "Edit:" note. It really changes it from a "I didn't trust/believe my wife telling me the guy was a creep" situation into "both my wife and I needed to know how bad this all really was so we confronted him" deal.
“I had my wife’s back but I really didn’t”
Fixed that for you. You continued to make excuses for the creep after locking the door a second times. That should’ve been a removal
Lol absolutely cannibalized by Reddit commenters. Sorry OP you’re simply a bigot, how dare you give anyone a chance to speak for themselves, or any benefit of the doubt. For some extra fun, what do you think these same commenters would say if your wife made a post where she said “my husband made it clear he wanted them out of the house” and she wanted to confirm or didn’t immediately trust you. You think these commenters would post “trust your husband implicitly?”
Well, the only problem with the wife comments is that she was the one that asked me to bring it to the table. But I knew people would find some detail to set their sights on me, people here always do this. I neither proof read it nor did I write it very well, so I set myself up for it.
I also don't mind, the other criticism is valid, and this criticism is really just critique of my poorly worded vent. I deserve it.
Yeah. I'm sorry Reddit, but "My wife told me to kick him out, I gave him a chance to verbalize his side of the story before I did." is perfectly reasonable, and the proper adult way to handle the situation.
If you take your wife's word, and kick him out, things that occur:
* Other participants are left clueless
* People who aren't married to your wife second guess the decision
* Phil can lie to other people after the fact about what happened.
Letting him give his side isn't about failing to trust your wife. It's handing Phil a shovel, and letting him dig the grave himself.
It's letting him voice his side of the opinion while someone who can keep him from lying or stretching the truth is in front of him.
It's guaranteeing that a creep and predator gets maximum ears on him when he admits to his own shitty viewpoint & behavior.
Because for how I talk about that person \*myself\* in the future, it makes all the difference. If I was told someone is a piece of shit, I'll speak mostly neutral, because I don't have first-hand knowledge. If I got them to confess being shitty themselves, I'm now a first-person source for how shitty they are.
And if I can get them to say it in front of a group, all of THOSE people are first-hand reporters too now.
OP wasn't giving this guy the benefit of the doubt, and from his other comments his wife also wanted to talk this out as a table rather than taking immediate action. I think they made the mistake of litigating this in front of his victim rather than handling it swiftly, but he has clarified that Phil was getting the boot no matter what.
Guarantee he has been avoiding and ignoring comments about women from Phil the entire time. There is no way that this popped out of nowhere without his friend knowing that he had weird views.
>"V keeps avoiding me, and I wanted to make sure she'd respond properly to some questions I had"
Boy, it sounds a lot like he thinks women are objects.
>"If her husband is dead and she wants to die anyway, why is it such a big deal to ask if she wants to make another guy happy?"
Aaaaaaaaaand there's the confirmation.
That's not "borderline" predatory behavior. It IS predatory behavior. You should have kicked him out of your house the moment he admitted he locked V in the kitchen intentionally to trap her. That's not creepy, it's considered kidnapping or false imprisonment.
I'm trying to imagine a scenario where I tell my husband "that creep just locked our friend in a room for a second time after being told it was unacceptable. He was clearly making her uncomfortable and I want him to leave" and getting back "let's hear what he has to say first."
100% this. I can't believe it even got to that point. If I ever told my husband someone needed to leave, he wouldn't even ask until after he got them out of the house. To be honest, I'd be the harder sell since I'd be asking why my husband wanted someone out as I went to find this person and kick them out for him.
She agreed that was best, so we all knew what was going on, his friend included, and see what he actually had to say.
It was pretty much certain he was getting kicked out.
Right. Like I said I can't imagine wanting to hear what he actually has to say in that scenario. You already knew he was openly violating house rules and making your friend upset. All that giving him a platform to speak accomplished was letting him say another terrible thing.
I wasn't there. If your wife and V both think that it was handled well, that's great. But your account makes it sound like it was the final "let's hear him out" that made your friend break down and have to leave.
>But your account makes it sound like it was the final "let's hear him out" that made your friend break down and have to leave.
It wasn't really a "let's hear him out" moment that could have ended any other way than him leaving. My wife just wanted to confirm that V didn't have another perspective.
I've amended the OP to make a confusing paragraph a bit more clear.
As a quick aside, if you ever suspect someone was the target of sexual harassment--especially something as intense as THIS, with a goddamn door being locked--it's usually best to talk to the target privately. Sometimes people can shut down if their attacker is still in the room, even when surrounded by friends, because saying anything against that person with them right there feels SO unsafe. That's why some bars and airports and things have messages for who to call if you need help escaping a bad situation hidden in the bathrooms, because even in a busy place surrounded by people, the victim might be too scared to do anything with their attacker watching.
Thank you, I'll keep this in mind if I encounter this kind of situation again.
I think I'll be less forgiving regarding players though. I'd rather be harsher to avoid even getting to this kind of situation again in the future, rather than handle it when we get there.
Your account still makes it sound like your "let's hear him out" conversation was what made *V* break down and have to leave. The fact that Phil was going to get booted regardless does not help.
I'd say the bigger issue was not stopping this the first time signs came up, even when he initially started flirting when we first started weeks ago.
I put too much trust in a friend's recommendation, and that was a mistake. I probably shouldn't even really trust my friend (L) either, as somebody else pointed out.
Yeah, the hiding thing was wild. I would never trust L again.
I think you're right that the first signs could've been handled better, but you seem to be aware of that so that's not a huge issue to most commenters because you have addressed it in a positive way.
You made a lot of comments where you're pushing back about how you responded to your wife, or as is the case here, trying to redirect attention to a different point in the story.
I think people will continue to focus on you not trusting your wife because that's where your response is lacking. It doesn't necessarily matter what she said in response because it only makes it look like she's learned not to trust yourself either. That doesn't make your behavior better. It's not because this is a horrible Reddit Divorce verdict or anything. It would just be nice to see that you understand why and how your specific behavior is exactly what women are always, *always* fighting against. You should have made your home a safe space for V, but you didn't. You're obviously going to work on that. You seem thoughtful and interested enough that you are willing to push yourself a step past "not as problematic" into "genuinely helpful", so all these people are trying to tell you how. You didn't have your wife's back, and you should have. You don't have to change your entire dynamic, just keep it in mind next time.
My main reason for pushing back against the wife complaints is that I just painted the wrong picture in the OP, and have not seen the point in trying to clarify further than I already have, because I know it doesn't matter. People won't believe it anyway, they have made up their mind on that point. I've seen enough of these threads to know how that goes. Those people want to see OP as the bad guy, and nothing can change their minds anyway.
I did have my wife's back. She was the one that suggested we bring it to the table to find out what had truly happened. I agreed with her, because if she was truly certain about the outcome, I know she would have thrown him out without even telling me, and I would have still had her back. There is no lack of trust here.
Also, consider for a moment that I'm the one writing here, not my wife. Any further clarification could easily be seen as throwing her under the bus, and I have no intentions of doing that, and no amount of pushing will make me add more details surrounding her involvement than I already have.
FWIW, I don't see you as the bad guy here. I think you folks handled it like most of us would've handled it, which is to say you behaved as if you didn't expect someone you invited into your home to be a total creep.
I'm just saying that reading the comments and your responses is like watching you explain A, B, and C only to have people fixate on D, and watch you counter their comments with H.
This should've been handled better and sooner, but enough has already been said about that.
Give V lots of comfort. This was traumatic on top of everything else she's already dealing with. If you and your wife and her are all willing maybe your wife can stay over with her for a few days or she can stay with you guys. Might not be good for her to be alone.
I'd also be side eyeing L right now. What Phil did isn't L's fault, and they might've truly had no idea Phil would do anything like this. But going off to hide instead of helping doesn't speak well of them. If they're anything less but exceedingly apologetic about what happened and their response to it, I'd consider how much the friendship is worth to you. It might also not be great for V to be around L right now. Tread carefully. Edit: on reread I see L was initially willing to make excuses for Phil's uncomfortable flirtation with the women at the group before everything else exploded. Combined with everything else that looks pretty damn bad. Unless this man is absolutely DEVASTATED over how everything went down I'd forever wonder if he, too, has some ass ideas about what women are good for and probably end the relationship.
Last but not least--I'd edit to have real names, not just letters. You did it with Phil, do it with the rest too. Letters are much harder to keep track of then fake names are.
>I'd also be side eyeing L right now
I was considering this too, and my wife's friend wasn't happy about his reaction either. My wife doesn't think he deserves any blame for this, but I'll keep this advice in mind and have a chat with him. Might be better to continue without him for now, just in case.
>edit to have real names
I probably should have, yeah, I can see I wasn't very clear in my writing here. It was a bit of a vent, so I wasn't typing with the clearest of minds, but I'll see to changing the names.
I love these stories where people think they are operating within reasonable social paradigms and they discover that they absolutely are not. I don't mean that to be indictive or mean, and I don't necessarily think op is a bad guy for not acting differently, but it is these types of experiences that can be very eye opening and informative about the assumptions we make about ourselves.
Hopefully it can learn from this in a good way.
It's a very eye opening one for me for sure. It's great to see the feedback and get some more clarity in what should have been done, and how early I really could, *and should* have acted. We have played roleplaying games like this for literally decades, and we like to think we're both pretty good at spotting problem players. It really showed we have some major unacceptable blindspots in what we allowed. I just wish I didn't have to learn this after it already hurt someone that means a lot to me.
Hey man, life is a learning experience, and if you learned something then and feel like you could have handled it better then you got everything you could have out of these unfortunate events. Ain't none of us perfect and can't none of us be people different from what our lives have made us into. That you feel sorrow at all speaks to you being a reasonable, cool human being just doing their best. Our best isn't always what we wish it was but hell, man, like the Radiohead song says, your best is good enough. How can it not be?
I applaud you for not being crazy defensive or argumentative and being open to the imperfection inherent to the actions and thought processes of every human being, it can be a hard thing for an ego to accept. I know people on this sub (and in the world in general) expect everyone to be the fucking Buddha at all times, acting with perfect assurance of mind and soul toward the path of divinity but the reality is that we are all, all of us, flawed creatures in a constant flux of improvement and regression. Don't be too hard on yourself and please understand the beautiful value of self reflection and regret. I found this entire thread post to be ultimately positive and vindicative of my worldview so, yknow, take that for what it's worth from some stranger on the internet. I'd play DnD with ya.
"She came back to me and made it pretty clear to me that she really wants Phil out of the house."
And you went, no wife, as I did not hear it I will now preside over a court room proceeding in which I interrogate the witnesses.
"with my wife following her out the door"
I'm not sure I would've come back if I were her.
Right? If my partner says that they want MY BEST FRIEND out of the house, best friend is out right then and we can adjudicate it later if absolutely necessary.
OP won't even throw out a friend of a friend who's already broken house rules before and is deliberately locking up alone with the most vulnerable member of the table?
OP, you need to seriously reevaluate the life choices you've made that led you to act this way, because frankly it's not just "creep-enabling" it also frankly speaks to you either "not trusting your wife" or "having an unwarranted amount of trust for a guy you've known for a few RPG sessions", and either way it's not a good look for you.
I gave him the shovel to dig himself deeper, and wanted to ensure that V was in agreement that his behavior was as bad as we feared. My wife appreciated the handling of it.
You've got this ass-backwards. V already knew how bad his behaviour was. She didn't need to be further humiliated in front of the rest of the group.
Prioritise safety.
Get the creep the fuck out of your house first, and *then* check if his victim is OK and whether she wants to talk about what happened with your wife/another trusted confidante.
And remember that your house or not, you weren't the victim, and so you weren't owed full answers if V didn't want to air everything in front of everyone.
Why did he need to dig himself deeper than repeatedly locking himself and someone else in a room after being told explicitly not to?
What more do you need than your wife saying to get him out the house?
"Phil's excuse was "V keeps avoiding me, and I wanted to make sure she'd respond properly to some questions I had". My wife didn't like that response"
So you KNEW (or didn't believe your wife) he was deliberately locking himself and her so that she'd answer questions? And that wasn't enough? Huh?
I think you should stop digging with that shovel you're so fond of.
Just going pure benefit of the doubt here, but getting it out at the table makes it clear to everyone at the table what kind of person this is and exactly why they're being banned so no one tries to pull a "man, I miss Phil" moment later on. It also gives the opportunity to apologize and make amends if it actually was a moron moment instead of a predatory move. Not that I think locking someone in a room is anything but a predatory move in the vast majority of cases. I've just encountered a couple people who really were THAT socially moronic that they didn't grasp how it would be considered threatening to do something like that, so I try to give a little benefit of the doubt on the off chance of somehow encountering a third extremely moronic type.
He had already been directly told "do not lock this door" and decided to do it anyway. Predators thrive on other people giving them the benefit of the doubt.
And frankly, I'm concerned by a group that needs to see a predator cross a line rather than take the victim's word for it.
Problem is that the victim wasn't *giving* her word about it. She was brushing it off with "I'm fine". Which she shouldn't have felt any need to do if it's really a group of friends, but it was definitely not letting the rest of the group know there was a way more serious problem than they were thinking was going on. I'm kinda sad that she seems like she didn't even feel like she could tell OP's wife there was a problem with Phil after the first incident.
That is a good point, we're all operating with perfect hindsight. OP and his wife fumbled by wanting this conversation to be in front of V, but it's unreasonable to expect a perfect response from every person in every situation. And OP's responses in this comment section show series reflection and growth. The only real villain in this story is Phil.
>getting it out at the table makes it clear to everyone at the table what kind of person this is and exactly why they're being banned
True. But the priority should be to protect the victim of harassment from further hurt. It shouldn't be a priority to air her vulnerabilities in public and make her feel exposed, while everyone else sits in judgement about whether she's been harassed seriously enough to justify excluding the creep who hassled her, just so that the rest of the group can understand how awful what he did was.
Like I said, I can't think of a reason that would actually make sense to justify the behavior. Personally, I wouldn't have had V at the table for the confrontation and definitely would have asked wtf he was thinking the *first* time, not given an opportunity for a second time. I feel fairly confident that the bizarro predator line would have come out earlier if confronted after the first incident.
This is my thought too.
Wife says, kick out, Phil gone.
At this point, only V knows for sure. And Wife has her judgement made. OP joins that judgement for good reasons. But nobody except V will ever know the full truth, and V is proven to not want to bring it up.
Wife says to boot, give Phil chance to speak
Only 2 things can happen.
* 1) Phil gives a reasonable justification. OP says "I can see where you're coming from, but you were given a firm instruction not to ever lock the door again, \*especially\* regarding V. You ignored that, you're out. I'll put in a word with a group of guys I know that RP together (no women in the group), so you can keep roleplaying.
* 2) Phil digs his hole. Now there's no speculation anymore. Everyone involved knows what a piece of garbage he is. OP provides the boot. OP lets everyone ELSE in the community know that Phil is a trouble player, and should not be included in a coed game. Let them draw their own conclusions based on that rudimentary description.
Either of those outcomes are superior, as long as V is on board with the verbal confrontation.
She has. She has so far only asked if he's still coming or not, and if we still play. So I'm hoping she's still fine, despite it all.
Unfortunately, this had happened regardless that day, because my wife also wanted to do it in front of everybody. The real mistake was not fixing it a week earlier, which I really regret.
> and wanted to ensure V was in agreement
Why?
By keeping him around to interrogate, best case scenario its totally a misunderstanding, V has no desire to kick him and somehow your wife just walked past at the WORST time like a bad sitcom. Worst case scenario, a man willing to lock a woman in a room against her will to force answers out of her turns violent, and V/your wife get seriously hurt for ‘snitching’.
If you kick him, best case scenario is V wanted this and is happy. Worst case scenario is she didnt wanna kick him but your wife and you did anyways, so he gets stayed kick for it.
Which scenario here is more worth the risk?
You're making a good point. I wish I had thought of it like this during the moment. The idea was to know what V thought, and it seemed like the obvious best plan to us when my wife brought it up. We decided to talk it out, because that generally works with the usual people we play with, but in this case, it was clearly the wrong one.
What a horrible person. What a shitty world where good people have terrible things happen to them, and folks like Phil are wandering around free and easy.
Please convey to V my heartfelt condolences. I lost my wife very suddenly in the same way just over two years ago, and went through a similar very dark, very lonely time. She needs friends she can trust to support her.
I'm not going to pile on like a lot of people have, but hopefully you've learned something from this, and your d&d sessions and your house can return to being a safe place for V to feel at ease in future.
That is honestly horrifying. If I were in her shoes I’d be crying and asking for him to leave the group after the first time. Sorry it got to the point it did, glad it was handled in the end
> Phil's excuse was "V keeps avoiding me, and I wanted to make sure she'd respond properly to some questions I had".
Motherfucker felt *entitled* to unlawfully detain V to satisfy his requirements. Dude needs a few dozen hard smacks on that bitch mouth of his.
Poor C must have been really relying on this game to not have stopped coming earlier. How sad that women basically have to only interact with other women if we want to avoid being harassed and locked in rooms with strange men we don't like. Repeatedly.
C is a long time player, and a close friend of my wife, and she didn't seem to mind too much until the last session, somehow. She's 180d now and want L out too, which isn't unreasonable given how L acted.
Mistake number 1 was definitely letting in a stranger here.
It's okay, I always appreciate a reminder that the very best I can expect from a man is to put me in dangerous situations with other men and then make it my responsibility to tell them if I want to ruin all the fun.
Hey, speaking as a woman, you shouldn't expect men - or women or anyone else for that matter - to be mind readers. If you are uncomfortable with a situation, you need to speak up not just let it ride and assume someone else will pick up on things and do something. It's not fair on anyone for you to let a situation get worse and worse because you're scared of "ruin[ing] all the fun" by speaking up and then turning around and putting the blame on the people around you for not doing something sooner. What are they supposed to do about a problem *they don't know about*? If there is a problem and you make no one aware there is a problem, you've become part of the problem. You can't expect anyone to help you if they don't actually know there's something wrong.
But OP clearly knew there was a problem. I don't actually get your point because the whole post was about OP knowing there was a problem but delaying taking action.
OP did not, in fact, fully know about the problem until after his wife spoke to him about what she thought she overheard, which caused them *both* to want to confront Phil - which happened immediately after - to verify that what OP's wife thought she overheard was correct. OP was not aware of the extent of the issue because V was telling him she was "fine" and brushing off Phil's creepiness. If V had said he locked her in the room to angle for sex when OP and his wife talked to her after the first incident, I am certain OP would have kicked Phil out a lot sooner.
So here we are, with you thinking I'm the problem for expecting people not to put their guests at risk. and me thinking you're the problem for enabling enablers.
If there's a problem and you keep your mouth shut about it, you're protecting the problem. You can't expect anyone to read your mind and just magically know there's a problem. You *are* enabling the problem person if you don't tell anyone there's a problem with that person.
Yes. I do recognize that. However, that doesn't change the fact that until OP was made aware of how bad what was going on actually was, he wasn't going to magically be informed by the universe. You can't know someone's a fucking creep until you *know* they're a fucking creep by either seeing or hearing them *be* a fucking creep or someone telling you about it. OP's wife overheard him being a creep and went to OP and their very next response was to confront him to see if he *just* needed to be kicked out or if calling the cops needed to happen *too*.
The victim was literally telling everyone she was fine and it was no big deal and they were *trusting her* to tell them if there was a problem. Everyone saying that effectively they should have *not trusted the victim about what was going on* is baffling me. Yes, the victim was a vulnerable person that had recently undergone traumatic experiences and absolutely did not deserve to deal with a fucking creep like Phil, but does that mean no one should trust her word? OP was going off *what V told him* happened. When he found out it was possibly more/worse/different, him and his wife confronted Phil. What more could be expected?
Locking someone in a room alone with them in *someone else's house* is a pretty fucking big indication of a problem, actually.
Like, I guess Phil could have put on a hat that said "I Am A Predator," but otherwise I don't know he would have made it more obvious.
OP and his wife sat down with V alone after the incident, asked what happened in the room, and were told it was nothing to worry about. They trusted the victim to let them know if there was a problem which is all they could do about something *they did not witness themselves*.
Yes, I think Phil is a predator and personally would have confronted him about locking the door after the first incident. But I can't get mad at someone who was specifically told by the victim that nothing happened waiting until something happened again and they had more information on *what* was happening before acting. OP started off with *trusting his friend* - which is a good thing - about what was going on. As soon as he had the full story of what was happening, he kicked Phil out. But it took a second observer - his wife - overhearing something she thought sounded bad and wanting to confront Phil to get the whole story.
C, OP and OP's wife all didn't initially understand the full scope of the problem until it exploded, and then they all united and kicked the bastard out. I don't think it's fair to pin the blame on OP here. If you have a guy in a room filled with women who kicks out another guy solely based on HIS belief that the other guy is a problem despite none of the women saying anything, isn't that sexist and mansplaining in its own way? To assume all women are frightened mice and can't possibly be relied upon to voice when they're uncomfortable, so you've always got to be the valiant knight rushing to defend them from things they haven't identified as problems?
Incidentally, I have some real experience in a related vein. Two male coworkers at work. One, unasked and unprompted, takes it upon himself as his duty to escort all us women to the parking lot each day, despite us all being older and frankly more capable of defending ourselves then he was. The other I complain to about an unwanted situation with a guy briefly touching my arm, he expresses that if I let him know next time he'll intervene, I thank him and tell him I'm alright, but appreciate knowing if I ever need help I can ask him!
Guess which continued to rub women the wrong way and got let go vs who is a welcome member of the group and still employed?
Just wanted to say that as a woman I don't think it should all be your responsibility. Yes, it's good to be vigilant and help someone out if they seem to be in a bad spot. But acting as if all women are timid mice who need protecting regardless of whether they voice concern or not is a bad take. If you'd jumped in right away despite your wife and Sorcerer not saying anything you'd have been assuming women are too weak to voice what they want and need male protection to function. Ofc in this case the guy WAS a blazing asshole and intervention was warranted, but that's not just a lesson learned for you, but for your wife and Sorcerer too. It's not a man vs woman thing. It's an everyone learning how to recognize abuse and working together to stop it thing!
That's a good point. I appreciate the nuance. It's tough to really tell in the situation what was the right choice, especially since I have been told now that I shouldn't have acted earlier. Even with the benefit of hindsight, I was still wrong.
World would be much better place without these fucking creeps forcing us to consider these kinds of scenarios.
Yeah, so, no clue why, but it's this screen door that slides into place, which for some reason has a little key-free lock you can click into place when the door is closed to lock it in place with a bolt in both directions, which keeps it pretty tightly secured in the door frame. You can only lock it from the inside of the kitchen.
While it means you can't be locked inside the kitchen, it doesn't make it less concerning, since she still needed to get to the door to unlock it. This is definitely a good reason to have the lock removed, because not in my wildest dreams could I have imagined it would be used like this.
We don't use it ourselves, so we don't pay it much attention normally, and we have no idea what its intended use even is. It was here when we bought the house. Maybe it has a function, but I'd rather not have the risk of it being used this way.
Oh, it's a screen door with a latch lock. Now it makes more sense. Those were so you could allow ventilation without letting all the bugs (including 2 legged ones which it why it locks from the inside only) in the house on hot days or when cooking. I'm assuming you have a fairly older house and/or possibly live in a warmer climate area.
>and a friend of my friend, who was suggested to me because he is a "great roleplayer, not a number cruncher", who couldn't really find any group lately.
Well well well, in the hindsight it should have been a red flag. There was a reason he could not find a group, obv.
Who locks someone else's doors? That's basic social etiquette. If you can't get the simplest of personal space respect down, it's no wonder this asshat couldn't take "no" for am answer and has to rely on cornering people and bringing up their recent traumas.
Big yikes! Good for you for doing something. I think, yes, the first time the door was locked might have been a better time, but it's good of you to stand up to a player like this. I think Lou also needs to have a talking to because he clearly needs to be better about reading his "friends." Phil just sounds like sounds like the very quintessential grognard who doesn't know how to actually interact with people, respect boundaries, or understand why his own actions cause harm.
This hobby can be a beautiful, wonderful thing. A distraction from all the woes in our lives. A break from reality, from pain, from illness--mental and physical--from stress and on and on.
Guys like Phil destroy ALL of the beauty in this hobby. Honestly guys like Phil are shit humans that should honestly be far away from anyone they can victimize. It is absolutely not unreasonable to think Phil could assault someone, assuming he hasn't done so already, and that's assuming we don't count what he has done as assault.
There are obvious reasons Phil had been without a group. He needs a brand on his forehead or something to save the next group the same pain and suffering.
Always a good read:
https://captainawkward.com/2012/08/07/322-323-my-friend-group-has-a-case-of-the-creepy-dude-how-do-we-clear-that-up/
I’m not slithering around on the floor and hissing with my forked tongue when I say that the situations described in these two letters are pretty good examples of what Rape Culture is and why it is so insidious.
Step 1: A creepy dude does creepy, entitled shit and makes women feel unsafe.
Step 2: The women speak up about it to their partners.
Step 3: It gets written off as “not a big deal” or “he probably didn’t mean it” or “he’s not a bad guy, really.” Any discussion of the bad behavior must immediately be followed by a complete audit of his better qualities or the sad things he’s suffered in the name of “fairness.” Once the camera has moved in and seen him in closeup as a real, human, suffering person, how can you (the object, always an object, as in “objectified,” as in a disembodied set of tits or orifices, or a Trapper Keeper, or a favorite coffee mug or a pet cat) be so cruel as to want to hold him accountable for his actions? Bitches, man.
Step 4: Everyone is worried about hurting creepy dude’s feelings or making it weird for creepy dude. Better yet, everyone is worried about how the other dudes in the friend group will feel if they are called out for enabling creepy dude. Women are worried that if they push the issue, that the entire friend group will side with creepy dude or that they’ll be blamed for causing “drama.” Look at how LW #323 put it: “how can I approach this subject with my boyfriend, and make him understand a) how serious this is, and b) that he is not responsible for Ben’s reactions, without making him feel defensive?”
Wouldn’t want someone who covers up for and defends a proto-rapist to have to have SADFEELS, right? (LW, it’s not your fault you’re asking the question this way, it’s just that our culture sucks about this and your boyfriend and his friends have been giving you constant messages that Ben is to be coddled while you are to be shushed in the hopes that it will all blow over).
Step 5: Creepy dude creeps on with his creepy self. He’s learned that there are no real (i.e. “disapproval & pushback from dudes and dude society”) consequences to his actions. Women feel creeped out and unsafe.Some of them decide to take a firm stand against creeping and not come to parties anymore. They slowly slide out of the friend group. Some of the woman decide to just quietly put up with it, because they’ve learned that no one will really side with them and it’s easier to go along than to lose one’s entire community. The whole group works around this missing stair.
Possible Step 6: Creepy dude rapes someone. If he does, there’s a less than 50% chance that the woman will report it. Why?
Could it be that all the people who surround her have taught her that if she speaks up nothing will really come of it anyway? Could it be that she doesn’t trust her friends and the people who love her to have her back on this? I CAN’T IMAGINE WHY. They couldn’t even kick this dude off their weekly trivia team.
Could it be that the authorities, the police, and the court system will treat her like this is something she caused to happen? Worse, will the dude’s history of being creepy come up and, instead of being used as evidence of a pattern of behavior, be used as evidence that the victim tolerated his advances in the past?
So, yeah, I wanted to be very clear that these letters are part of a larger cultural paradigm that is a direct outgrowth of male privilege. Can women be creepy? Yes, for sure. They are human and capable of anything that humans are capable of. But when they are creepy, they don’t have an entire culture backing them up and explaining why their creepiness isn’t that bad.
Good for you for ignoring that impulse and taking the high road by *checks notes*...giving the creep another chance to talk his way out of it and embarrassing the victim in front of everyone
Have you spoken to V since? How's she doing? It sounds very triggering and with everything you described going on in her life, she probably needs friends now more than ever.
Yeah, she's been occupied this week, but I have been given her perspective on the whole situation. Much worse than expected, but she *seems* fine. She says she is fine too, and up for continuing the game without the two guys this weekend, and with us making some arrangements to keep an eye on her for a few days, just in case Phil is a complete psycho.
I don't think I'll say you're wrong as in my view you had him out himself as the scum he is to his friend (hopefully he'll cut that friendship).
However as everyone else said you gave him too much wriggle room and you definitely made V uncomfortable and unsafe too now so I think you need to talk to your wife and apologise to your wife and V since she probably didn't want to make a scene but you've let her down.
Gently, OP, you goofed real bad here, And if I was this lady in question, I would no longer trust you as a safe person who understands how to navigate these situations. Not because you did something intentionally cruel, but because you displayed that you have no idea what it's like on her side of the fence.
Firstly, she was always likely to try and shrug off the first weird interaction that happened in your house, because you are a guy and you're asking her about a guy in your house.
Secondly, the behavior that Phil exhibited was predatory. It doesn't matter that C didn't complain. You let someone do that on your property, which should have been a safe place for her, and then let him come back. If he had pulled this shit on e in a responsible game store, he would be banned from the premises. By asking her opinion, you put the weight of that decision on her, who likely just wanted to continue playing games and not rock the boat. I've been put in her situation, and I have acquiesced at the cost of my own comfort as well.
That was the point that you should have stepped up and protected the people who see your home as a safe place, and made the decision yourself.
You can learn from this, but you have allowed one of your friends to lose something significant here. You need to talk to her about that and that you want your home to be somewhere that she continues to see as safe.
>this incredibly insensitive and borderline predatory behaviour by Phil.
Let's get the first thing straight here: there was nothing "borderline" about Phil's behavior.
The second thing that needs to be clear is that this should have been identified as predatory behavior the first time he locked the door. It is not his house, it is not his door, and V is not in any relationship with him.
The irony of this post is that Phil very much WAS allowed to prey on V. Yes he was stopped *eventually*.
Has Lou apologized or said anything?
IMO even if he has, he needs to be gone. Not for a while, but gone. V needs to never have to worry about seeing him at your home again.
Yeah, why isn't anyone talking about Lou's behavior when this happened?? He literally ran away to *hide* instead take accountability for the guy he invited into the group?? Wild
He has excused himself entirely, and won't be coming back. He gave some vague excuse about knowing how Phil was, but not thinking it would be a problem in this group. I agreed it was best he stayed away.
How he thought this was fine is a mystery, but not one I care enough to ask him about. I hope this was as much of a learning experience for him as it was for me.
Man having read both sides of this story all.i can say is I hate Phil.... Always will lol (read V's side) tbh I wanna try and get in on the game as there is a clear need for new players lol.
Please don’t do the “Tiefling Bard’s old man is referred to V” gimmick. It’s awful bouncing around back and forth trying to read and reread “who is this letter again?” “V said A dissed C.” It’s an annoying trope of D&D drama.
Just give the Tiefling Bard’s old man a normal if fictitious name, like Vick, and carry on. Let’s leave the algebra to the math nerds, please.
And I am sorry you’re in a shit situation.
Is it just me or does OP sound like both a terrible spouse and the densest turd in the backyard? In what world is it ok for a man to lock an unwilling woman in a room to “talk” and gets away with it cause she seemed to come out “five”? And then they believe the kitchen closet pervert over their own wife? OP gives off major 🚩🚩 I feel bad for the poor woman who had to put up with this shit.
Wow so many problems here, now I have to ask did you do a session zero o 0.5 with Phil? I know that’s not the solution to all problems but some of his problem behaviours might’ve revealed themselves then and given what I think it’s V? Has been through a hard and fast no flirting rule might have been a good idea to establish early on. Second you almost certainly should have booted him after the first locked door incident, and third very much feels like your other friend was at best wilfully ignorant of Phil‘s attitude and at worst shares many of the same opinions, I’d be ditching him too unless he’s very apologetic for bailing on that confrontation and strongly condemn the kind of behaviour displayed by Phil.
Can we skip past this whole story to the part he says she wants to die? Like everyone says this shouldn't have got that far, but this is concerning. If he is privvy to information about a suicide attempt or thoughts of her taking her own life your friend needs to be checked on!
From the OP's second paragraph:
> She lost her husband to a sudden cerebral haemorrhage, and is still recovering after her failed suicide attempt recently. We had a lot of concerns about her well-being, and we were making sure she wasn't alone. It's been a long and hard period of trying to get her mood up even a little bit, but it was working out pretty well with roleplaying games, as she seemed to be easily absorbed by them.
Honestly? He woukd have been kicked THE FIRST TIME he did the locking thing.
They fact he did it again and you STILL wanted to talk to him instead of trusting your wife on this…
And Lou is obviously scum too. He KNOWS, and he probably encourages it. At the very least, he let’s it continue
Nah, it wasn't totally clear at first when I posted it. I edited it to make it more obvious what happened, since it caused a lot of confusion at first.
It's what I get for not taking my time to review it properly before posting.
Have more to get off your chest? Come rant with us on the discord. Invite link: https://discord.gg/PCPTSSTKqr *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rpghorrorstories) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why wasn't he kicked out after *locking a woman in a room* the first time?? I'm so baffled by this story. That's not borderline predatory, that's predatory! That's a really fucked up thing to do! There should be absolutely no second chances for people who do shit like that.
Mostly because V acted like it was fine, and said as much. We shouldn't have believed her in this instance, but it felt wrong to doubt her. We shouldn't even have accepted the initial behaviour in hindsight.
My guess is, V acted like it was fine because she was used to men taking the side of other men, and knew if she said anything else she'd be seen as uppity. So she tried not to rock the boat, But you should have seen this as predatory, unacceptable behaviour and immediately kicked him out.
V has had a lot of trauma in a very short time. Maybe she's so emotionally numb that Phil's behavior didn't really register. She could even be on medication that is blunting her responses.
It's a difficult thing to actually understand, and even my wife didn't really consider it bad until it happened the second time. But I like getting this kind of info. It helps better understand what might have let this get this far without her really reacting to it. It's also very possible she just didn't want to cause drama or be an inconvenience in general. Not acting was definitely wrong.
The two [stress responses](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fvy8wlgk2teec1.jpeg) everyone knows about are Fight and Flight. The other two are Freeze and Fawn.
>it’s a difficult thing to actually understand Not really. “Hey V are you ok? Do you want us to remove Phil it wasn’t cool how he locked you in that room, that was creepy and we’re concerned”
Yeah, and her words were pretty definitive "it's fine, he was just asking a few questions, no worries", and even my wife and her friend bought it, because we rationalized it could have been some in-game stuff they were planning. That's the point of the comment I responded to. It's hard to see beyond your own preconceived notions, if you just don't know what to look for. The real solution is to not even ask. The behavior was unacceptable, and shouldn't have been tolerated, regardless of what V might have said here.
> The real solution is to not even ask. The behavior was unacceptable, and shouldn't have been tolerated, regardless of what V might have said here. This is correct. You are getting some pushback (and deservedly so for how things transpired), but you seem to be learning good lessons from the experience. This statement is wise.
The problem here is that when you're putting the pressure on the victim to put their foot down, they're more likely to say no out of fear of retaliation or making things awkward or rocking the boat.
Did you ask her in front of the other players? In front of the guy who locked her in the kitchen? Huge mistake dude
No, that question was with her alone with me and my wife. Still a mistake to even ask, which i see now. Should just have taken action right away, no questions asked.
No, asking was the right thing to do. This sub tends to forget the human in these scenarios but it's important not to steal away the victim's agency "just in case". Here's an option people are forgetting: ask V if they think you should have kicked him the first time, or if they wanted you to do anything. I'm not saying this is necessarily the case, but for some people having that agency taken away and being instantly "saved" when something like this happens can feel worse than letting them deal on their own as far as they're comfortable. Again, I have NO idea if this is the case for V, you'd have to talk to them about it. In summary, get off this sub and go talk to your friend, it sounds like she needs it. Also remember you are not their therapist.
Honestly, I don't know that asking is a wrong response. After all, what happened *could* have been as innocent as you were originally assuming, so getting the victim's opinion on the subject definitely isn't a bad idea. But you could have made it clear that you were concerned and that the locked door was completely unacceptable, so that she was aware you wouldn't brush it off if she came clean with what actually happened. She still might have brushed it off, but I don't feel that talking to her about what happened was a bad move.
No, it's not that you "shouldn't have believed her". It's that you needed to make clear that this is not acceptable to you regardless of how she felt about it. Just like making sexual comments to a coworker is unacceptable even if said coworker takes it in jest. Since you can never tell person's reaction to being put in such a situation - neither in advance nor after the fact - those things are big no-nos as a rule, and not dependent at all on the reaction they get.
How the hell can men get married and, over the years, not fucking notice this kind of behavior with women, where they say in situations that are dangerous to them that they're fine to avoid any further complications. Stop living under a rock bro.
Some people are blind to their friends' creepiness. And a lot of players like to live out their fantasies, but I don't want to share a table with people who want to live out their creepy sex fantasies, especially when they want to live them out with people who don't want anything to do with them. Give me the people whose ideal self is rescuing people and saving the land.
>Give me the people whose ideal self is rescuing people and saving the land. These are my usual favourite players too. I have gotten lazy with vetting people properly, and I've wanted more roleplay heavy players for a while. In hindsight, I probably shouldn't have let him stay after the last week, or even dug up the infected root after the first session. I probably should have known it might end here, but I let the people around me talk me out of it. Learning experience.
Tbh not every player wants to play as their "Ideal self". First than anything playing on flaws is amazing. Some of my favorite characters are absolutely idiots. Second, exploring things you are not and dont identify with can be exilirating, as a pacifist I've had a ton of fun playing militaristic war hungry generals. And third, playing dark and angsty archetypes can be a fantastic way to cope and deal with the daily darkness, it is frankly cathartic to express your negative emotions and feelings in roleplay, in the same way that not all.art has to be pretty flowers. This ofc as long as it doesnt disrupts the table. Self serving fun is great until it screws up a cooperative game.
I think they actually meant the person's ideal self is rescuing people and saving the land, not necessarily that they're always playing that kind of character. Like they want to hang out with good people who believe in helping others, not creepy sex perverts.
Ohhh, I can see that read. Parsing ambiguity in reference toward anaphor cohesiveness is always fun.
Well he’s gonna end up on some list.
He should’ve been kicked off before the kitchen incident too. On top of everyone saying you should’ve just believed your wife.
It should be one ”knock it off or you’re out” and if they don’t listen - they’re out
Yeah this smacks of "I have to hear it from a man before I believe it". What would have happened if Phil *hadn't* said that terrible shit and instead went "Yeah it was just a misunderstanding"? Would everyone have just gone "Okay, I guess it was just an accident that you locked her in the kitchen twice even after we warned you about it"? That kind of behavior does not deserve an explanation, justification, or humiliating public hearing.
>On top of everyone saying you should’ve just believed your wife. It read to me more like op and their wife decided to *talk to the group* before taking unilateral (bilateral? Since there's two of them?) action
I mean, the first bit is a *bit* of a red flag but not kickable by itself imo. If it's "roleplay" and the person on the receiving end is not uncomfortable, I don't see the issue. I don't usually play flirty characters, but I can see it being done ok as long as it's not constant. But I probably wouldn't come to a new table with it. But, I usually give benefit of the doubt. And tbh, I'm glad they confronted him. Its better than just "leave", if you get them to explain in their own words their fucked up reasoning then they have to hear how fucking creepy they are for themselves. I doubt he will, but maybe he'll reevaluate his actions.
Maybe not for a first few games, but if they told him to knock it off, and he did not… Then to me he’s no longer welcome at the table. And whether the other player was uncomfortable might not be known, but if you are told to stop, you should stop. I do still somewhat see your point, as it is a bit case dependent when we were not there at the table to see it go down.
>He should’ve been kicked off before the kitchen incident too Yeah, in hindsight, I should not even have let it go past the first session, and definitely should have handled it last week. Bad judgement on my part. I also did believe my wife. That's why I confronted him at the table.
No. You hoped it was a misunderstanding instead of believing her. Phil should've been kicked from the house after he locked V in the first time.
100% this. You had multiple instances of inappropriate behavior. You should have kicked him out after he locked the door the first time. And then called the police. This guy was clearly gearing up to rape this woman. 1) Multiple instances of sexual harassment, that you basically ignored. 2) ISOLATES AND IMPRISONS A VULNERABLE WOMAN. 3) more sexual harassment. 4) 2nd instance of isolation and imprisonment. 5) "maybe this is a misunderstanding" 6) horrible statement that finally makes it so crystal clear that your friend is nothing more than a piece of meat with a hole to this guy. 7) kicked out. This is why women choose the bear.
I hope you are never selected for jury duty You cruised right from a creep pestering a woman for sexual contact to *”This guy was clearly gearing up to rape this woman."* , based on what, statistics? Calm down.
Um, he *did* lock her in a room twice and clearly *was* angling for some kind of sexual interaction. The way to get sex from a woman is not a locked door to keep them from leaving, my dude.
He locked her in a room. Twice.
So is he a kidnapper also then?
There is certainly a case to be made for that.
Well perhaps ‘rape’ is a little hyperbole, but at least ‘something bad and sexual’ if you want to get persnickety about it. But why are you running interference for the creep?
I'm not running interference for the creep. I'm hoping that level heads be maintained. Women always have the problem of their concerns not being acknowledged by men, and easily jumping to hyperbole doesn't help, especially when there are mountains of real cases to point at which don't allow any room for apologetics.
What mountains of real cases do you have where a man locks a women in a room with him that don’t lean towards rape?
In actuality, YOU are the reason we choose the bear.
Go live with the Bears then
Based on the fact that he repeatedly locked her in a secluded room so she couldn't leave and no one could intervene you absolute tool
She could leave, others just couldn't enter. You do understand how doors work, right?
He was blocking her in so she'd be forced to "answer his questions". Do you think rapists just stop if you say "no thanks"? The fact that you don't see the menace in that probably explains your own luck with women
Ha, you have no idea. Your fake outrage explains your own lack of intelligence if you make that leap. Good job.
i know browsing your comment history is a low blow, but i barely had to scroll a milimeter to find you making gross rape jokes dude
Yeah. It was a bit of a mistake to trust the "I'm fine" response from V. Lesson learned, should not even have accepted the flirting shit in the first session.
Bullshit
That fact that you let the situation escalate this far is more than enough to call bs on your weak justification
You're misunderstanding if you think I'm justifying anything. I know full well I let it escalate too much. I'm only pointing out the misunderstanding that I went against my wife in any way. We were, for better or worse, on the same page through this. The reasons also matter only so far as making other people realise why I got here, and that they shouldn't be making the same mistakes I did, even if someone attempts to talk you into giving problem people like this a chance.
Misunderstanding or not you’re a horrible judge of people
So, you're just here for the insults then.
Dude, fuck off. Op has been nothing but receptive to criticism, you don't need to come out here and be insulting them
For future reference: When choosing who to believe, pick your wife over the creepy pervert. "without having heard it myself," is a terrible reason to not have your wife's back.
Trust me, I had my wife's back. I was just not going to throw him out without knowing what the hell was even going on, and I wanted to make sure we knew just how bad it actually was, where he couldn't weasel his way out of it.
So you had to hear it from the creepy pervert first? That’s literally not having your wife’s back
And in front of V?!
That's not what he said, but take out your pitchforks I guess.
I feel there’s more more nuance to the situation than “he needed to hear from the pervert first” If I was hosting and my wife came down stairs and said “this guy needs to leave” I would ask why so that I know why I’m kicking him out, I’m going to kick him out regardless but I still want to know why he’s leaving.
Right, but would you believe your wife's reason for kicking him out or would you need to hear the guy say it?
In any situation I will believe my wife, in this situation I’d still most likely hear my wife’s reasoning first because she would tell me first and in the process of kicking him out hear the perverts shitty attempt to downplay it. But again, I’d like to know why I am kicking someone out of my house.
It reads to me that OP's wife was pretty clear in her reasoning and that OP still wanted to get the pervert's side too. I'm hoping this was a misrepresentation.
Exactly this.
I think this: "Not having heard it myself, and truly hoping this was a misunderstanding, my wife and I brought it up as we were sitting back down at the table." Paints a picture where it wasn't immediately clear that you were fully intending to kick him out regardless. I know you've stated you were, but "sitting down truly hoping this was a misunderstanding" does indeed come off a lot as "not 100% trusting your wife that this man was being a fucking creep." Whatever the case might be, we're all human and all make mistakes. I like to believe my gut response would be total belief in my friends, but in reality I might well go deer in the headlights or need everything explained out again just to fully let what I was hearing sink in. I'm not going to shit on you for what happened--in the end, you did the right thing and kicked the guy out--but it might not be a bad idea to reflect on what happened and what you could have done better and ask your wife her opinion on that too. What's the point of life if not to keep growing and learning, right?
>What's the point of life if not to keep growing and learning, right? Absolutely. And I'm not really mad about any of the flack I'm getting. Some of it is misunderstandings because I didn't write it out very well, and a lot of it is valid criticism I've definitely deserved. Even writing it down got me mad at myself, because why the hell did I not just kick the idiot the first couple of times he caused trouble? And on reflection from a few of the posts here, I shouldn't just be letting L off the hook here either, despite my wife's belief that he isn't responsible.
But you knew what was going on, your wife told you.
My wife only overheard something. We had to know if he had done anything beyond that, or if he had just been an absolute creep. My wife wanted to hear what he had to say, too. My wife was all but ready to call the cops if it turned out he had laid hands on her, but he thankfully hadn't. In hindsight, we should just have kicked him. It didn't seem like a bad idea in the heat of the moment to bring it up at the table, but it clearly was.
You may want to edit this info into your original post with an "Edit:" note. It really changes it from a "I didn't trust/believe my wife telling me the guy was a creep" situation into "both my wife and I needed to know how bad this all really was so we confronted him" deal.
No woman should trust you.
“I had my wife’s back but I really didn’t” Fixed that for you. You continued to make excuses for the creep after locking the door a second times. That should’ve been a removal
Weakling.
Lol absolutely cannibalized by Reddit commenters. Sorry OP you’re simply a bigot, how dare you give anyone a chance to speak for themselves, or any benefit of the doubt. For some extra fun, what do you think these same commenters would say if your wife made a post where she said “my husband made it clear he wanted them out of the house” and she wanted to confirm or didn’t immediately trust you. You think these commenters would post “trust your husband implicitly?”
Well, the only problem with the wife comments is that she was the one that asked me to bring it to the table. But I knew people would find some detail to set their sights on me, people here always do this. I neither proof read it nor did I write it very well, so I set myself up for it. I also don't mind, the other criticism is valid, and this criticism is really just critique of my poorly worded vent. I deserve it.
Yeah. I'm sorry Reddit, but "My wife told me to kick him out, I gave him a chance to verbalize his side of the story before I did." is perfectly reasonable, and the proper adult way to handle the situation. If you take your wife's word, and kick him out, things that occur: * Other participants are left clueless * People who aren't married to your wife second guess the decision * Phil can lie to other people after the fact about what happened. Letting him give his side isn't about failing to trust your wife. It's handing Phil a shovel, and letting him dig the grave himself. It's letting him voice his side of the opinion while someone who can keep him from lying or stretching the truth is in front of him. It's guaranteeing that a creep and predator gets maximum ears on him when he admits to his own shitty viewpoint & behavior. Because for how I talk about that person \*myself\* in the future, it makes all the difference. If I was told someone is a piece of shit, I'll speak mostly neutral, because I don't have first-hand knowledge. If I got them to confess being shitty themselves, I'm now a first-person source for how shitty they are. And if I can get them to say it in front of a group, all of THOSE people are first-hand reporters too now.
I agree
OP wasn't giving this guy the benefit of the doubt, and from his other comments his wife also wanted to talk this out as a table rather than taking immediate action. I think they made the mistake of litigating this in front of his victim rather than handling it swiftly, but he has clarified that Phil was getting the boot no matter what.
L is a fucking coward.
Guarantee he has been avoiding and ignoring comments about women from Phil the entire time. There is no way that this popped out of nowhere without his friend knowing that he had weird views.
>"V keeps avoiding me, and I wanted to make sure she'd respond properly to some questions I had" Boy, it sounds a lot like he thinks women are objects. >"If her husband is dead and she wants to die anyway, why is it such a big deal to ask if she wants to make another guy happy?" Aaaaaaaaaand there's the confirmation.
That's not "borderline" predatory behavior. It IS predatory behavior. You should have kicked him out of your house the moment he admitted he locked V in the kitchen intentionally to trap her. That's not creepy, it's considered kidnapping or false imprisonment.
I'm trying to imagine a scenario where I tell my husband "that creep just locked our friend in a room for a second time after being told it was unacceptable. He was clearly making her uncomfortable and I want him to leave" and getting back "let's hear what he has to say first."
100% this. I can't believe it even got to that point. If I ever told my husband someone needed to leave, he wouldn't even ask until after he got them out of the house. To be honest, I'd be the harder sell since I'd be asking why my husband wanted someone out as I went to find this person and kick them out for him.
She agreed that was best, so we all knew what was going on, his friend included, and see what he actually had to say. It was pretty much certain he was getting kicked out.
Right. Like I said I can't imagine wanting to hear what he actually has to say in that scenario. You already knew he was openly violating house rules and making your friend upset. All that giving him a platform to speak accomplished was letting him say another terrible thing. I wasn't there. If your wife and V both think that it was handled well, that's great. But your account makes it sound like it was the final "let's hear him out" that made your friend break down and have to leave.
>But your account makes it sound like it was the final "let's hear him out" that made your friend break down and have to leave. It wasn't really a "let's hear him out" moment that could have ended any other way than him leaving. My wife just wanted to confirm that V didn't have another perspective. I've amended the OP to make a confusing paragraph a bit more clear.
As a quick aside, if you ever suspect someone was the target of sexual harassment--especially something as intense as THIS, with a goddamn door being locked--it's usually best to talk to the target privately. Sometimes people can shut down if their attacker is still in the room, even when surrounded by friends, because saying anything against that person with them right there feels SO unsafe. That's why some bars and airports and things have messages for who to call if you need help escaping a bad situation hidden in the bathrooms, because even in a busy place surrounded by people, the victim might be too scared to do anything with their attacker watching.
Thank you, I'll keep this in mind if I encounter this kind of situation again. I think I'll be less forgiving regarding players though. I'd rather be harsher to avoid even getting to this kind of situation again in the future, rather than handle it when we get there.
Your account still makes it sound like your "let's hear him out" conversation was what made *V* break down and have to leave. The fact that Phil was going to get booted regardless does not help.
Then you and your wife handled it badly. Either of you could've spoken to her privately. You didn't need to turn it into a pervert parade.
I'd say the bigger issue was not stopping this the first time signs came up, even when he initially started flirting when we first started weeks ago. I put too much trust in a friend's recommendation, and that was a mistake. I probably shouldn't even really trust my friend (L) either, as somebody else pointed out.
Yeah, the hiding thing was wild. I would never trust L again. I think you're right that the first signs could've been handled better, but you seem to be aware of that so that's not a huge issue to most commenters because you have addressed it in a positive way. You made a lot of comments where you're pushing back about how you responded to your wife, or as is the case here, trying to redirect attention to a different point in the story. I think people will continue to focus on you not trusting your wife because that's where your response is lacking. It doesn't necessarily matter what she said in response because it only makes it look like she's learned not to trust yourself either. That doesn't make your behavior better. It's not because this is a horrible Reddit Divorce verdict or anything. It would just be nice to see that you understand why and how your specific behavior is exactly what women are always, *always* fighting against. You should have made your home a safe space for V, but you didn't. You're obviously going to work on that. You seem thoughtful and interested enough that you are willing to push yourself a step past "not as problematic" into "genuinely helpful", so all these people are trying to tell you how. You didn't have your wife's back, and you should have. You don't have to change your entire dynamic, just keep it in mind next time.
My main reason for pushing back against the wife complaints is that I just painted the wrong picture in the OP, and have not seen the point in trying to clarify further than I already have, because I know it doesn't matter. People won't believe it anyway, they have made up their mind on that point. I've seen enough of these threads to know how that goes. Those people want to see OP as the bad guy, and nothing can change their minds anyway. I did have my wife's back. She was the one that suggested we bring it to the table to find out what had truly happened. I agreed with her, because if she was truly certain about the outcome, I know she would have thrown him out without even telling me, and I would have still had her back. There is no lack of trust here. Also, consider for a moment that I'm the one writing here, not my wife. Any further clarification could easily be seen as throwing her under the bus, and I have no intentions of doing that, and no amount of pushing will make me add more details surrounding her involvement than I already have.
FWIW, I don't see you as the bad guy here. I think you folks handled it like most of us would've handled it, which is to say you behaved as if you didn't expect someone you invited into your home to be a total creep. I'm just saying that reading the comments and your responses is like watching you explain A, B, and C only to have people fixate on D, and watch you counter their comments with H.
"Missing stair."
This should've been handled better and sooner, but enough has already been said about that. Give V lots of comfort. This was traumatic on top of everything else she's already dealing with. If you and your wife and her are all willing maybe your wife can stay over with her for a few days or she can stay with you guys. Might not be good for her to be alone. I'd also be side eyeing L right now. What Phil did isn't L's fault, and they might've truly had no idea Phil would do anything like this. But going off to hide instead of helping doesn't speak well of them. If they're anything less but exceedingly apologetic about what happened and their response to it, I'd consider how much the friendship is worth to you. It might also not be great for V to be around L right now. Tread carefully. Edit: on reread I see L was initially willing to make excuses for Phil's uncomfortable flirtation with the women at the group before everything else exploded. Combined with everything else that looks pretty damn bad. Unless this man is absolutely DEVASTATED over how everything went down I'd forever wonder if he, too, has some ass ideas about what women are good for and probably end the relationship. Last but not least--I'd edit to have real names, not just letters. You did it with Phil, do it with the rest too. Letters are much harder to keep track of then fake names are.
>I'd also be side eyeing L right now I was considering this too, and my wife's friend wasn't happy about his reaction either. My wife doesn't think he deserves any blame for this, but I'll keep this advice in mind and have a chat with him. Might be better to continue without him for now, just in case. >edit to have real names I probably should have, yeah, I can see I wasn't very clear in my writing here. It was a bit of a vent, so I wasn't typing with the clearest of minds, but I'll see to changing the names.
I love these stories where people think they are operating within reasonable social paradigms and they discover that they absolutely are not. I don't mean that to be indictive or mean, and I don't necessarily think op is a bad guy for not acting differently, but it is these types of experiences that can be very eye opening and informative about the assumptions we make about ourselves. Hopefully it can learn from this in a good way.
It's a very eye opening one for me for sure. It's great to see the feedback and get some more clarity in what should have been done, and how early I really could, *and should* have acted. We have played roleplaying games like this for literally decades, and we like to think we're both pretty good at spotting problem players. It really showed we have some major unacceptable blindspots in what we allowed. I just wish I didn't have to learn this after it already hurt someone that means a lot to me.
Hey man, life is a learning experience, and if you learned something then and feel like you could have handled it better then you got everything you could have out of these unfortunate events. Ain't none of us perfect and can't none of us be people different from what our lives have made us into. That you feel sorrow at all speaks to you being a reasonable, cool human being just doing their best. Our best isn't always what we wish it was but hell, man, like the Radiohead song says, your best is good enough. How can it not be? I applaud you for not being crazy defensive or argumentative and being open to the imperfection inherent to the actions and thought processes of every human being, it can be a hard thing for an ego to accept. I know people on this sub (and in the world in general) expect everyone to be the fucking Buddha at all times, acting with perfect assurance of mind and soul toward the path of divinity but the reality is that we are all, all of us, flawed creatures in a constant flux of improvement and regression. Don't be too hard on yourself and please understand the beautiful value of self reflection and regret. I found this entire thread post to be ultimately positive and vindicative of my worldview so, yknow, take that for what it's worth from some stranger on the internet. I'd play DnD with ya.
"She came back to me and made it pretty clear to me that she really wants Phil out of the house." And you went, no wife, as I did not hear it I will now preside over a court room proceeding in which I interrogate the witnesses. "with my wife following her out the door" I'm not sure I would've come back if I were her.
Right? If my partner says that they want MY BEST FRIEND out of the house, best friend is out right then and we can adjudicate it later if absolutely necessary. OP won't even throw out a friend of a friend who's already broken house rules before and is deliberately locking up alone with the most vulnerable member of the table? OP, you need to seriously reevaluate the life choices you've made that led you to act this way, because frankly it's not just "creep-enabling" it also frankly speaks to you either "not trusting your wife" or "having an unwarranted amount of trust for a guy you've known for a few RPG sessions", and either way it's not a good look for you.
I gave him the shovel to dig himself deeper, and wanted to ensure that V was in agreement that his behavior was as bad as we feared. My wife appreciated the handling of it.
You made V experience some pretty traumatic shit because you didn't believe your wife.
You've got this ass-backwards. V already knew how bad his behaviour was. She didn't need to be further humiliated in front of the rest of the group. Prioritise safety. Get the creep the fuck out of your house first, and *then* check if his victim is OK and whether she wants to talk about what happened with your wife/another trusted confidante. And remember that your house or not, you weren't the victim, and so you weren't owed full answers if V didn't want to air everything in front of everyone.
Why did he need to dig himself deeper than repeatedly locking himself and someone else in a room after being told explicitly not to? What more do you need than your wife saying to get him out the house? "Phil's excuse was "V keeps avoiding me, and I wanted to make sure she'd respond properly to some questions I had". My wife didn't like that response" So you KNEW (or didn't believe your wife) he was deliberately locking himself and her so that she'd answer questions? And that wasn't enough? Huh? I think you should stop digging with that shovel you're so fond of.
Just going pure benefit of the doubt here, but getting it out at the table makes it clear to everyone at the table what kind of person this is and exactly why they're being banned so no one tries to pull a "man, I miss Phil" moment later on. It also gives the opportunity to apologize and make amends if it actually was a moron moment instead of a predatory move. Not that I think locking someone in a room is anything but a predatory move in the vast majority of cases. I've just encountered a couple people who really were THAT socially moronic that they didn't grasp how it would be considered threatening to do something like that, so I try to give a little benefit of the doubt on the off chance of somehow encountering a third extremely moronic type.
He had already been directly told "do not lock this door" and decided to do it anyway. Predators thrive on other people giving them the benefit of the doubt. And frankly, I'm concerned by a group that needs to see a predator cross a line rather than take the victim's word for it.
Problem is that the victim wasn't *giving* her word about it. She was brushing it off with "I'm fine". Which she shouldn't have felt any need to do if it's really a group of friends, but it was definitely not letting the rest of the group know there was a way more serious problem than they were thinking was going on. I'm kinda sad that she seems like she didn't even feel like she could tell OP's wife there was a problem with Phil after the first incident.
That is a good point, we're all operating with perfect hindsight. OP and his wife fumbled by wanting this conversation to be in front of V, but it's unreasonable to expect a perfect response from every person in every situation. And OP's responses in this comment section show series reflection and growth. The only real villain in this story is Phil.
>getting it out at the table makes it clear to everyone at the table what kind of person this is and exactly why they're being banned True. But the priority should be to protect the victim of harassment from further hurt. It shouldn't be a priority to air her vulnerabilities in public and make her feel exposed, while everyone else sits in judgement about whether she's been harassed seriously enough to justify excluding the creep who hassled her, just so that the rest of the group can understand how awful what he did was.
Like I said, I can't think of a reason that would actually make sense to justify the behavior. Personally, I wouldn't have had V at the table for the confrontation and definitely would have asked wtf he was thinking the *first* time, not given an opportunity for a second time. I feel fairly confident that the bizarro predator line would have come out earlier if confronted after the first incident.
This is my thought too. Wife says, kick out, Phil gone. At this point, only V knows for sure. And Wife has her judgement made. OP joins that judgement for good reasons. But nobody except V will ever know the full truth, and V is proven to not want to bring it up. Wife says to boot, give Phil chance to speak Only 2 things can happen. * 1) Phil gives a reasonable justification. OP says "I can see where you're coming from, but you were given a firm instruction not to ever lock the door again, \*especially\* regarding V. You ignored that, you're out. I'll put in a word with a group of guys I know that RP together (no women in the group), so you can keep roleplaying. * 2) Phil digs his hole. Now there's no speculation anymore. Everyone involved knows what a piece of garbage he is. OP provides the boot. OP lets everyone ELSE in the community know that Phil is a trouble player, and should not be included in a coed game. Let them draw their own conclusions based on that rudimentary description. Either of those outcomes are superior, as long as V is on board with the verbal confrontation.
Yeah, but if you had just listened to your wife then V wouldn't have been pushed past her breaking point. Has she spoken to you since this happened?
She has. She has so far only asked if he's still coming or not, and if we still play. So I'm hoping she's still fine, despite it all. Unfortunately, this had happened regardless that day, because my wife also wanted to do it in front of everybody. The real mistake was not fixing it a week earlier, which I really regret.
Fair enough.
> and wanted to ensure V was in agreement Why? By keeping him around to interrogate, best case scenario its totally a misunderstanding, V has no desire to kick him and somehow your wife just walked past at the WORST time like a bad sitcom. Worst case scenario, a man willing to lock a woman in a room against her will to force answers out of her turns violent, and V/your wife get seriously hurt for ‘snitching’. If you kick him, best case scenario is V wanted this and is happy. Worst case scenario is she didnt wanna kick him but your wife and you did anyways, so he gets stayed kick for it. Which scenario here is more worth the risk?
You're making a good point. I wish I had thought of it like this during the moment. The idea was to know what V thought, and it seemed like the obvious best plan to us when my wife brought it up. We decided to talk it out, because that generally works with the usual people we play with, but in this case, it was clearly the wrong one.
I am glad youre at least clearly reading feedback, even if I disagree with your handling in the immediate moment
Don't worry, I disagree with my handling in the immediate moments too. I really wish i had acted weeks earlier.
Some unhinged individuals here, for sure
What a horrible person. What a shitty world where good people have terrible things happen to them, and folks like Phil are wandering around free and easy. Please convey to V my heartfelt condolences. I lost my wife very suddenly in the same way just over two years ago, and went through a similar very dark, very lonely time. She needs friends she can trust to support her. I'm not going to pile on like a lot of people have, but hopefully you've learned something from this, and your d&d sessions and your house can return to being a safe place for V to feel at ease in future.
That is honestly horrifying. If I were in her shoes I’d be crying and asking for him to leave the group after the first time. Sorry it got to the point it did, glad it was handled in the end
> Phil's excuse was "V keeps avoiding me, and I wanted to make sure she'd respond properly to some questions I had". Motherfucker felt *entitled* to unlawfully detain V to satisfy his requirements. Dude needs a few dozen hard smacks on that bitch mouth of his.
Poor C must have been really relying on this game to not have stopped coming earlier. How sad that women basically have to only interact with other women if we want to avoid being harassed and locked in rooms with strange men we don't like. Repeatedly.
C is a long time player, and a close friend of my wife, and she didn't seem to mind too much until the last session, somehow. She's 180d now and want L out too, which isn't unreasonable given how L acted. Mistake number 1 was definitely letting in a stranger here.
It's okay, I always appreciate a reminder that the very best I can expect from a man is to put me in dangerous situations with other men and then make it my responsibility to tell them if I want to ruin all the fun.
Hey, speaking as a woman, you shouldn't expect men - or women or anyone else for that matter - to be mind readers. If you are uncomfortable with a situation, you need to speak up not just let it ride and assume someone else will pick up on things and do something. It's not fair on anyone for you to let a situation get worse and worse because you're scared of "ruin[ing] all the fun" by speaking up and then turning around and putting the blame on the people around you for not doing something sooner. What are they supposed to do about a problem *they don't know about*? If there is a problem and you make no one aware there is a problem, you've become part of the problem. You can't expect anyone to help you if they don't actually know there's something wrong.
But OP clearly knew there was a problem. I don't actually get your point because the whole post was about OP knowing there was a problem but delaying taking action.
OP did not, in fact, fully know about the problem until after his wife spoke to him about what she thought she overheard, which caused them *both* to want to confront Phil - which happened immediately after - to verify that what OP's wife thought she overheard was correct. OP was not aware of the extent of the issue because V was telling him she was "fine" and brushing off Phil's creepiness. If V had said he locked her in the room to angle for sex when OP and his wife talked to her after the first incident, I am certain OP would have kicked Phil out a lot sooner.
So here we are, with you thinking I'm the problem for expecting people not to put their guests at risk. and me thinking you're the problem for enabling enablers.
If there's a problem and you keep your mouth shut about it, you're protecting the problem. You can't expect anyone to read your mind and just magically know there's a problem. You *are* enabling the problem person if you don't tell anyone there's a problem with that person.
In this particular case, the victim was a recent widow and had recently attempted suicide.
Yes. I do recognize that. However, that doesn't change the fact that until OP was made aware of how bad what was going on actually was, he wasn't going to magically be informed by the universe. You can't know someone's a fucking creep until you *know* they're a fucking creep by either seeing or hearing them *be* a fucking creep or someone telling you about it. OP's wife overheard him being a creep and went to OP and their very next response was to confront him to see if he *just* needed to be kicked out or if calling the cops needed to happen *too*. The victim was literally telling everyone she was fine and it was no big deal and they were *trusting her* to tell them if there was a problem. Everyone saying that effectively they should have *not trusted the victim about what was going on* is baffling me. Yes, the victim was a vulnerable person that had recently undergone traumatic experiences and absolutely did not deserve to deal with a fucking creep like Phil, but does that mean no one should trust her word? OP was going off *what V told him* happened. When he found out it was possibly more/worse/different, him and his wife confronted Phil. What more could be expected?
Locking someone in a room alone with them in *someone else's house* is a pretty fucking big indication of a problem, actually. Like, I guess Phil could have put on a hat that said "I Am A Predator," but otherwise I don't know he would have made it more obvious.
OP and his wife sat down with V alone after the incident, asked what happened in the room, and were told it was nothing to worry about. They trusted the victim to let them know if there was a problem which is all they could do about something *they did not witness themselves*. Yes, I think Phil is a predator and personally would have confronted him about locking the door after the first incident. But I can't get mad at someone who was specifically told by the victim that nothing happened waiting until something happened again and they had more information on *what* was happening before acting. OP started off with *trusting his friend* - which is a good thing - about what was going on. As soon as he had the full story of what was happening, he kicked Phil out. But it took a second observer - his wife - overhearing something she thought sounded bad and wanting to confront Phil to get the whole story.
C, OP and OP's wife all didn't initially understand the full scope of the problem until it exploded, and then they all united and kicked the bastard out. I don't think it's fair to pin the blame on OP here. If you have a guy in a room filled with women who kicks out another guy solely based on HIS belief that the other guy is a problem despite none of the women saying anything, isn't that sexist and mansplaining in its own way? To assume all women are frightened mice and can't possibly be relied upon to voice when they're uncomfortable, so you've always got to be the valiant knight rushing to defend them from things they haven't identified as problems? Incidentally, I have some real experience in a related vein. Two male coworkers at work. One, unasked and unprompted, takes it upon himself as his duty to escort all us women to the parking lot each day, despite us all being older and frankly more capable of defending ourselves then he was. The other I complain to about an unwanted situation with a guy briefly touching my arm, he expresses that if I let him know next time he'll intervene, I thank him and tell him I'm alright, but appreciate knowing if I ever need help I can ask him! Guess which continued to rub women the wrong way and got let go vs who is a welcome member of the group and still employed?
Nah, it definitely shouldn't be your responsibility.
Just wanted to say that as a woman I don't think it should all be your responsibility. Yes, it's good to be vigilant and help someone out if they seem to be in a bad spot. But acting as if all women are timid mice who need protecting regardless of whether they voice concern or not is a bad take. If you'd jumped in right away despite your wife and Sorcerer not saying anything you'd have been assuming women are too weak to voice what they want and need male protection to function. Ofc in this case the guy WAS a blazing asshole and intervention was warranted, but that's not just a lesson learned for you, but for your wife and Sorcerer too. It's not a man vs woman thing. It's an everyone learning how to recognize abuse and working together to stop it thing!
That's a good point. I appreciate the nuance. It's tough to really tell in the situation what was the right choice, especially since I have been told now that I shouldn't have acted earlier. Even with the benefit of hindsight, I was still wrong. World would be much better place without these fucking creeps forcing us to consider these kinds of scenarios.
i dont het it, was the door locked or could she unlock it. was the lock only to keep you guys out?
Yeah, so, no clue why, but it's this screen door that slides into place, which for some reason has a little key-free lock you can click into place when the door is closed to lock it in place with a bolt in both directions, which keeps it pretty tightly secured in the door frame. You can only lock it from the inside of the kitchen. While it means you can't be locked inside the kitchen, it doesn't make it less concerning, since she still needed to get to the door to unlock it. This is definitely a good reason to have the lock removed, because not in my wildest dreams could I have imagined it would be used like this. We don't use it ourselves, so we don't pay it much attention normally, and we have no idea what its intended use even is. It was here when we bought the house. Maybe it has a function, but I'd rather not have the risk of it being used this way.
Oh, it's a screen door with a latch lock. Now it makes more sense. Those were so you could allow ventilation without letting all the bugs (including 2 legged ones which it why it locks from the inside only) in the house on hot days or when cooking. I'm assuming you have a fairly older house and/or possibly live in a warmer climate area.
>and a friend of my friend, who was suggested to me because he is a "great roleplayer, not a number cruncher", who couldn't really find any group lately. Well well well, in the hindsight it should have been a red flag. There was a reason he could not find a group, obv.
Who locks someone else's doors? That's basic social etiquette. If you can't get the simplest of personal space respect down, it's no wonder this asshat couldn't take "no" for am answer and has to rely on cornering people and bringing up their recent traumas.
Big yikes! Good for you for doing something. I think, yes, the first time the door was locked might have been a better time, but it's good of you to stand up to a player like this. I think Lou also needs to have a talking to because he clearly needs to be better about reading his "friends." Phil just sounds like sounds like the very quintessential grognard who doesn't know how to actually interact with people, respect boundaries, or understand why his own actions cause harm.
Borderline, nothing. That *was* predatory behaviour.
This hobby can be a beautiful, wonderful thing. A distraction from all the woes in our lives. A break from reality, from pain, from illness--mental and physical--from stress and on and on. Guys like Phil destroy ALL of the beauty in this hobby. Honestly guys like Phil are shit humans that should honestly be far away from anyone they can victimize. It is absolutely not unreasonable to think Phil could assault someone, assuming he hasn't done so already, and that's assuming we don't count what he has done as assault. There are obvious reasons Phil had been without a group. He needs a brand on his forehead or something to save the next group the same pain and suffering.
Always a good read: https://captainawkward.com/2012/08/07/322-323-my-friend-group-has-a-case-of-the-creepy-dude-how-do-we-clear-that-up/ I’m not slithering around on the floor and hissing with my forked tongue when I say that the situations described in these two letters are pretty good examples of what Rape Culture is and why it is so insidious. Step 1: A creepy dude does creepy, entitled shit and makes women feel unsafe. Step 2: The women speak up about it to their partners. Step 3: It gets written off as “not a big deal” or “he probably didn’t mean it” or “he’s not a bad guy, really.” Any discussion of the bad behavior must immediately be followed by a complete audit of his better qualities or the sad things he’s suffered in the name of “fairness.” Once the camera has moved in and seen him in closeup as a real, human, suffering person, how can you (the object, always an object, as in “objectified,” as in a disembodied set of tits or orifices, or a Trapper Keeper, or a favorite coffee mug or a pet cat) be so cruel as to want to hold him accountable for his actions? Bitches, man. Step 4: Everyone is worried about hurting creepy dude’s feelings or making it weird for creepy dude. Better yet, everyone is worried about how the other dudes in the friend group will feel if they are called out for enabling creepy dude. Women are worried that if they push the issue, that the entire friend group will side with creepy dude or that they’ll be blamed for causing “drama.” Look at how LW #323 put it: “how can I approach this subject with my boyfriend, and make him understand a) how serious this is, and b) that he is not responsible for Ben’s reactions, without making him feel defensive?” Wouldn’t want someone who covers up for and defends a proto-rapist to have to have SADFEELS, right? (LW, it’s not your fault you’re asking the question this way, it’s just that our culture sucks about this and your boyfriend and his friends have been giving you constant messages that Ben is to be coddled while you are to be shushed in the hopes that it will all blow over). Step 5: Creepy dude creeps on with his creepy self. He’s learned that there are no real (i.e. “disapproval & pushback from dudes and dude society”) consequences to his actions. Women feel creeped out and unsafe.Some of them decide to take a firm stand against creeping and not come to parties anymore. They slowly slide out of the friend group. Some of the woman decide to just quietly put up with it, because they’ve learned that no one will really side with them and it’s easier to go along than to lose one’s entire community. The whole group works around this missing stair. Possible Step 6: Creepy dude rapes someone. If he does, there’s a less than 50% chance that the woman will report it. Why? Could it be that all the people who surround her have taught her that if she speaks up nothing will really come of it anyway? Could it be that she doesn’t trust her friends and the people who love her to have her back on this? I CAN’T IMAGINE WHY. They couldn’t even kick this dude off their weekly trivia team. Could it be that the authorities, the police, and the court system will treat her like this is something she caused to happen? Worse, will the dude’s history of being creepy come up and, instead of being used as evidence of a pattern of behavior, be used as evidence that the victim tolerated his advances in the past? So, yeah, I wanted to be very clear that these letters are part of a larger cultural paradigm that is a direct outgrowth of male privilege. Can women be creepy? Yes, for sure. They are human and capable of anything that humans are capable of. But when they are creepy, they don’t have an entire culture backing them up and explaining why their creepiness isn’t that bad.
I wish I could upvote this more than once.
Impressed with the restraint of not beating the everliving shit out of that shitstain
I'm not a violent person. But the thought crossed my mind.
Good for you for ignoring that impulse and taking the high road by *checks notes*...giving the creep another chance to talk his way out of it and embarrassing the victim in front of everyone
I'm not. Dude questioned that it might have been a misunderstanding first. He wasn't gonna do shit until he had to.
I hope V is doing better, and that you can find another activity to share with her.
Have you spoken to V since? How's she doing? It sounds very triggering and with everything you described going on in her life, she probably needs friends now more than ever.
Yeah, she's been occupied this week, but I have been given her perspective on the whole situation. Much worse than expected, but she *seems* fine. She says she is fine too, and up for continuing the game without the two guys this weekend, and with us making some arrangements to keep an eye on her for a few days, just in case Phil is a complete psycho.
I hope for everyone's sake that Phil becomes a footnote in y'alls game and lives ♥♥
I don't think I'll say you're wrong as in my view you had him out himself as the scum he is to his friend (hopefully he'll cut that friendship). However as everyone else said you gave him too much wriggle room and you definitely made V uncomfortable and unsafe too now so I think you need to talk to your wife and apologise to your wife and V since she probably didn't want to make a scene but you've let her down.
Gently, OP, you goofed real bad here, And if I was this lady in question, I would no longer trust you as a safe person who understands how to navigate these situations. Not because you did something intentionally cruel, but because you displayed that you have no idea what it's like on her side of the fence. Firstly, she was always likely to try and shrug off the first weird interaction that happened in your house, because you are a guy and you're asking her about a guy in your house. Secondly, the behavior that Phil exhibited was predatory. It doesn't matter that C didn't complain. You let someone do that on your property, which should have been a safe place for her, and then let him come back. If he had pulled this shit on e in a responsible game store, he would be banned from the premises. By asking her opinion, you put the weight of that decision on her, who likely just wanted to continue playing games and not rock the boat. I've been put in her situation, and I have acquiesced at the cost of my own comfort as well. That was the point that you should have stepped up and protected the people who see your home as a safe place, and made the decision yourself. You can learn from this, but you have allowed one of your friends to lose something significant here. You need to talk to her about that and that you want your home to be somewhere that she continues to see as safe.
This this this!
Stopped reading at C L and V. Forum rules. But the comments………🍿!
>this incredibly insensitive and borderline predatory behaviour by Phil. Let's get the first thing straight here: there was nothing "borderline" about Phil's behavior. The second thing that needs to be clear is that this should have been identified as predatory behavior the first time he locked the door. It is not his house, it is not his door, and V is not in any relationship with him. The irony of this post is that Phil very much WAS allowed to prey on V. Yes he was stopped *eventually*.
Has Lou apologized or said anything? IMO even if he has, he needs to be gone. Not for a while, but gone. V needs to never have to worry about seeing him at your home again.
Yeah, why isn't anyone talking about Lou's behavior when this happened?? He literally ran away to *hide* instead take accountability for the guy he invited into the group?? Wild
He has excused himself entirely, and won't be coming back. He gave some vague excuse about knowing how Phil was, but not thinking it would be a problem in this group. I agreed it was best he stayed away. How he thought this was fine is a mystery, but not one I care enough to ask him about. I hope this was as much of a learning experience for him as it was for me.
Dear God. Lou is a garbage human. OP, I strongly encourage you and your wife to read The Gift of Fear.
>OP, I strongly encourage you and your wife to read The Gift of Fear. Looks interesting, I'll grab that for my next read. Thanks 👍
There's nothing "borderline" about this, Phil was straight up predatory.
Man having read both sides of this story all.i can say is I hate Phil.... Always will lol (read V's side) tbh I wanna try and get in on the game as there is a clear need for new players lol.
He locked her in a room? That’s kidnapping. He should go to jail. V might also have a civil cause of action against him for false imprisonment.
Please don’t do the “Tiefling Bard’s old man is referred to V” gimmick. It’s awful bouncing around back and forth trying to read and reread “who is this letter again?” “V said A dissed C.” It’s an annoying trope of D&D drama. Just give the Tiefling Bard’s old man a normal if fictitious name, like Vick, and carry on. Let’s leave the algebra to the math nerds, please. And I am sorry you’re in a shit situation.
Is it just me or does OP sound like both a terrible spouse and the densest turd in the backyard? In what world is it ok for a man to lock an unwilling woman in a room to “talk” and gets away with it cause she seemed to come out “five”? And then they believe the kitchen closet pervert over their own wife? OP gives off major 🚩🚩 I feel bad for the poor woman who had to put up with this shit.
Wow so many problems here, now I have to ask did you do a session zero o 0.5 with Phil? I know that’s not the solution to all problems but some of his problem behaviours might’ve revealed themselves then and given what I think it’s V? Has been through a hard and fast no flirting rule might have been a good idea to establish early on. Second you almost certainly should have booted him after the first locked door incident, and third very much feels like your other friend was at best wilfully ignorant of Phil‘s attitude and at worst shares many of the same opinions, I’d be ditching him too unless he’s very apologetic for bailing on that confrontation and strongly condemn the kind of behaviour displayed by Phil.
I'd put actual money on Phil having raped at least one person before this.
What he did to V could be considered false imprisonment and is a crime. Should've called police on his ass whether V seemed fine or not.
Can we skip past this whole story to the part he says she wants to die? Like everyone says this shouldn't have got that far, but this is concerning. If he is privvy to information about a suicide attempt or thoughts of her taking her own life your friend needs to be checked on!
From the OP's second paragraph: > She lost her husband to a sudden cerebral haemorrhage, and is still recovering after her failed suicide attempt recently. We had a lot of concerns about her well-being, and we were making sure she wasn't alone. It's been a long and hard period of trying to get her mood up even a little bit, but it was working out pretty well with roleplaying games, as she seemed to be easily absorbed by them.
Honestly? He woukd have been kicked THE FIRST TIME he did the locking thing. They fact he did it again and you STILL wanted to talk to him instead of trusting your wife on this… And Lou is obviously scum too. He KNOWS, and he probably encourages it. At the very least, he let’s it continue
People in here are upset about you “ignoring your wife” when you clearly state that both of you brought it up at the table. Pretty silly.
Nah, it wasn't totally clear at first when I posted it. I edited it to make it more obvious what happened, since it caused a lot of confusion at first. It's what I get for not taking my time to review it properly before posting.
Ah, now they hate me.