DID I REALLY NEED LOCKE FOR THAT?

Two weeks have passed, and Mark still hasn’t replied to my request for five good memories.

I read Locke. I’m probably simplifying here, but he said memory is a necessary condition of personal identity. So, this means Mark’s personal identity—in relation to me—is my rapist.

Did I really need Locke for that?

I almost deleted the word rapist. But Mark used the word rape. I should be able to use the word rape. Do I really need Mark to use it before I can?

Maybe Mark chooses not to remember the good moments—because he wants the friendship never to have mattered.

Not mattering breeds indifference, or a freedom from existence.

That one night matters more than all the years of friendship. Why should I be hurt if that’s his position? It’s what I wanted, isn’t it?

If I wrench out five fond memories from Mark, then what?

And if Mark can’t come up with five good memories?

Mark said, It’s tough to do a deep dive on the psychology of friendship and betrayal and then change the reasons why.

Can I interpret that to mean he’ll approve of what I’m doing—of keeping details the same but simply neglecting any irrelevant identifying details?

Why not?

Because it’d be unethical.

I’ll tell him. Eventually, I’ll tell him.

. . .

ME: How do you think—would you have expected me to ever report it? Was that ever a concern of yours?

HIM: I mean, it was a concern of mine immediately afterward, and then I guess you didn’t.

ME: Right.

HIM: But yeah, certainly you could have.

ME: It didn’t occur to me.

HIM: It’s helpful for me to hear your side of a lot of these things, but it’s just like, I just want to give you a big hug and say I’m sorry in person.

ME: I appreciate it. And that’s the thing, I genuinely appreciate it. I know I keep saying this, but I feel worried I’m going to disappoint women with this project.

HIM: You feel like you should be angrier at me.

ME: Yeah. Instead, I think back to how there were so many good times. I do wonder, if it had gone further—

HIM: Would you still have that reaction?

ME: I don’t know.

HIM: I think it’s probably for the best that you don’t have to find out.

ME: I’m certainly mad at this other guy and at my newspaper advisor, but with you it was different. And that’s why I find this interesting. In some ways, this story isn’t original, and that’s the story. Sexual assault happens all the time. What makes this story sort of unusual is we’re having the conversation. I don’t think that happens very often.

HIM: Yeah, I can’t imagine.

ME: And I’m glad we’re having this conversation. I told you before, when I decided to pursue this book, I thought, Oh good, I can talk to Mark. I didn’t think I was allowed to talk to you before. Because of the narrative of how one is supposed to react to such events.

HIM: It really has been good to talk to you, even about this. I feel in a lot of ways the same way.

ME: That’s good. I’m glad it’s helpful. I’m sorry you don’t really have anyone you feel like you can open up to.

HIM: Yeah, but that’s more of a me problem than a you problem. It would be better if I did have someone, but it is what it is.