There are...
Keeping in mind that he is trying to sound sympathetic, a careful reading is...frightening.
Diving right in, one of Shitmuffin's first comments is:
all the stories attached to every old photo and book and game and bandage and prescription bottle I had to carefully pack up and put away when she left
Just before the end, he includes a text without other context or response. It says "I don't think there's any need to fight about anything. I'm not mad at you. I'm not angry Zak. Maybe you won't understand that. The only thing I'm concerned about is will you let me come by and pack up my stuff over the next few days."
To me, it sounds like he didn't have to pack that stuff up - he didn't allow her to do so. Using that quote
as a defense of his character is bizarre. Clearly he has power over her (her stuff) and one couldn't expect that she could be 100% honest. If he included further texts that allowed her to get her stuff, MAYBE we could be more charitable, but that's really strange.
Of course, when I refer to “everyone”, I’m not talking about ...
Shitmuffin goes on to specifically call out three specific people who he claims
couldn't know anything while then pointing out other people who
would have to know. Like, if 10 people COULD have seen it, and 3 people DID see it, I would assume that it happened when the 3 people happened to see it and not everyone was paying attention/it didn't happen all the time, etc. Like, most people who are abused have a person or people in their life that the abuse doesn't happen around. If a parent is abusing a child, they usually don't do it when grandma can see; grandma can say she never saw abuse, but it doesn't mean the abuse
didn't happen. Like obviously it means it
didn't happen when she could see it. He's trying to prove a negative (it never happened because I never saw it) while other people are asserting that it did happen (it happened because I saw it). Like, even in his own posts here he is very clear that if something happens
even once, it counts. Almost 1/5 of his response is someone else responding on his behalf - and one of the allegations is that he used Mandy's name to defend himself earlier.
If Mandy was abused, then Zak is an abuser. If someone that is close to Zak is defending him, there is always the chance that it is as much because they are being abused/used as it is that they are independently bringing this forward. Spending a lot of time saying he didn't PHYSICALLY abuse her but saying nothing about verbal abuse is also an interesting choice.
Since Zak says 'Connie knew us best', I wonder how he would respond if her story ever changed. I'm guessing he would accuse her of having an ulterior motive at that point. Immediately following Michelle's own defense, he adds more words that are supposed to be from her - just ask her! I hear Zak saying 'Mandy has personality issues', not Connie saying 'Michelle has personality issues'. Even if that is true, I'm not sure what it is supposed to mean.
He also adds Charlotte's words to his defense. When you take out direct quotes and what he says other people would say or did say according to him (hearsay, which he actually calls out as something that shouldn't be considered), you're not left with much.
He does also admit that he choked and slapped Hannah in broad daylight 'out of the blue', but that he thought it was appropriate at the time. He thinks it is okay because they had a sexual relationship later. In the #MeToo era, I've read a number of accounts where a woman had sex AFTER she was raped -
here's a New York Times response from a number of women sharing exactly that.
Mandy published her attack with the obvious intent to hurt me and turn people away from me.
I think that Shitmuffin's narcissism is showing.
Mandy wrote:
What I want to convey is my grief. And my shame. There is so much of it. I think when women come forward to talk about their abusers people strip them of their grief. And I am not okay. And I should be angry but I can’t be because the shame is too great. Because the abuse had me taking responsibility for everything and it’s very difficult to stop that after all these years. Everything was always my fault, the problem was me--but it wasn’t.
There are certainly going to be a lot of people that take Zak's side. We're going to hear about how he could have gotten sex from any number of willing people, so why would he use power to force sex? We're going to hear about how the victim should have said something before, during, or immediately after. We're going to hear the same things we always hear but I at least am hopeful that our culture is changing - someone like Mandy would have kept silent a decade ago. I hope that despite the attacks that she'll receive, other women are inspired/empowered to continue to share their own experiences.