Yeah. I remember going to middle school in Utah when they had JUST lifted the ban on all after-school clubs (a ban which was just there to prevent Gay/Straight Alliances from meeting on school premises) and when there was still a separate gay prom (it was unofficial and held in a restaurant or something) because gay…

You mean sanctioned incest pantomime?

My theory is that the rule is actually there to deter LGBT students from attending or to encourage them to attend with opposite gender dates. Sure, they offered to let the two girls in together, but I'm guessing they knew that asking two friends to ditch the third meant that all three girls would leave.

I think it should be noted that Bountiful is named after a place in the Book of Mormon. They really groom them young for marriage, and couples only dances are pretty standard in Utah. As are Father-Daughter Balls...which are fucking weird.

...does anyone else find it strange they were strangely progressive for Utah, in that they were going to let the other two girls be each other's dates? But they still wouldn't just let the third girl in?

My school's prom used to have that rule, and I didn't attend because of it. Every few years there'd be an outrage because someone's sweetheart would be deployed or die in an accident and they'd be both grieving and stuck with an expensive dress. The point of the rule? Making sure there weren't any same sex couples at…

"I would just expect that someone who is a victim could show a little empathy"

You're allowed to be uncomfortable.

OK. So you don't care about helping. How about doing less harm than good. I realize that you believe you're not the only one who feels this way about the article. You're probably right. BUT commenting so goes directly to the author which is a little uncool.

But this article wasn't about you and your trauma. It was about the author's. You came on here and said because of your's you had no desire to empathize or understand. I merely pointed out that's a little messed up. I have no opinion on your trauma.

Nowhere in the article was she trying to normalize this situation. I think she conveyed pretty well how screwed up it was and how screwed up she felt.

17 stars and counting.

Absolutely. He was in a position of power and abused it.

That's great and all but why do you think anyone (especially the author) needed to know, or even cares really, about your unwillingness to empathize or understand? Not every thought or feeling you have is important enough that you have to express it, especially when it only serves to compound someone else's trauma. I…

She was 19..I was very, very confused when I was 19. He however..

It's kind of RIGHT THERE IN THE TITLE.

I am usually on board with TW requests, but the title kind of gives you a major idea of where this was going.

But you have plenty of desire to comment about your lack of desire to sympathize or understand someone whose experiences were not yours. Got it. Thanks for stopping by.

This story is horrifying, but I don't see how we can find fault with the author for telling it. Well, some people can, but those people are terrible and the kind who say DV victims are stupid because "they don't just leave."

This is some brave shit.