I was thinking the same thing in regard to the SA, especially considering the heightened stigma for males as victims. I hope it was a cathartic experience for him.
I think he did a good job taking accountability for his role the story. I wish people would take the lessons and grow/appreciate rather than hunt down the real Martha, but people are shite like that.
You are 100% correct. And the amount of down votes tells it, too. I feel bad for people who deny reality because they think that women are always the ultimate victims. No they are not.
Didn't this guy rape a woman though as well? Doesn't exactly sound like a saint if that's true we have it coming. I don't know I didn't watch the show. But this is what I just saw on piers Morgan.
There is a better way of saying this. Women and marginalized people are major victims for different types of SA, but that doesn't leave out males from the statistics. Many SA survivors are not believed when reaching out to authority. Our systems needs to change to become more trauma informed and provide modes of safety, belief and accurate documentation when SA+A happens. That is what lessens incidence on a larger scale.
As an actor with the ability to own the performance AND the trauma, I think he felt ‘who better’ than himself. I think the difference is SA victims who aren’t actors naturally would not be trained in the compartmentalization of acting.
What do people even mean when they keep parroting this "heightened stigma for male victims" and "it's even harder for male victims to talk about it". Have any women been like "oh it was easy for me to get raped since I'm a woman" or "oh it was easy to tell my family and the authorities for me cause you know us women getting raped is something we're totally cool with"? All I hear about is men who don't shut up about how they've been raped and how it's harder for them to speak up, but I never see women being this outspoken about it. And very few people have been both a man and a woman who experienced getting raped so it's not like we can say which one is harder. It seems like something that men made up like they just woke up one day and decided that getting raped must be harder for them. Seems like they just don't want to put themselves on an equal foot with women like it must be "oh but when I experienced it, it's harder for me" like you have this need to be more important and a bigger victim than women. Could we just agree that it's equally as hard for everyone regardless of gender? Or do you see women as below you therefore their suffering can't be like yours? Do you think women are not equally as embarrassed and unable to tell anyone about it? I don't understand where this idea comes from that women are supposedly less embarrassed.
Well first of all I am a woman who has been raped, so jot that down...
What I mean by stigma for male rape victims is that toxic masculinity/patriarchy has made it difficult for men to come forward in a way that is unique for them. It does not diminish my experience to have empathy for others.
Women have literally been stoned to death for getting raped. When a man gets raped everyone feels horrible for him. Sure, other men sometimes ridicule them, I guess? But I would be surprised if that happened with the same frequency at which women are ridiculed, disbelieved and victim-blamed in society.
I suspect that most people who perpetuate the idea that "it is harder for men to be taken seriously" are women who have their heart in the right place, but it's very much an MRA talking point and it's not based in reality. Feminists these days are being gaslit into believing this type of thing, because they don't want victims to feel bad (of any gender) and I suspect also because we feel this need to prove how "inclusive" feminism is so we don't get yelled at.
We should let this myth die already. Edit: so I agree with you, but was piggybacking off your comment to add something.
The difference is that people are sympathetic to women who are raped and unsympathetic towards men who are raped. Rape is horrible for everyone. But, when you're a man, you get the added bonus of being mocked for being a victim in addition to being told by others that "women can't rape men."
When high school boys get groomed and SA’d by their teachers, literally every comment on those stories is “damn I wish I had teachers like that when I was in school”, “he should’ve shut up cause he’s so lucky”, “bet he enjoyed it” etc etc etc. Society has drilled it into the minds of so many that men want sex every second of the day and that we’ll always want to have sex no matter the situation. And when a man does say no, women get insulted and take it personally because society acts like men aren’t allowed to say no to sex.
Lol, you think men take being told "no" kindly? Men have such a hard time dealing with rejection they often kill the women who reject them. That's the extreme version, but before getting to murder you have a whole range of piss poor reactions, including way more men getting insulted and taking it personally than women.
Well...
I wouldn't say people are always sympathetic towards women. "What was she wearing?", etc. Yes, it's terrible for everyone. Human suffering is not dependent upon gender.
Women get mocked too. There's actually so much more stigma to women getting raped, but you're not even willing to try to empathise with women. Everything has to be only one way, with everyone giving empathy to men, and yet you never try to empathise with women. Sexual purity is valued in women so if a woman gets raped that decreases her value in the eyes of society. She becomes "used up". Men don't want to date a woman who was raped. It is seen as messy, she is seen as a woman of questionable character and judgment for putting herself in a situation where she could be raped, or she gets stigmatized for hanging around that kind of man. Women who get raped don't get respect and don't get sympathy. Many women stay with their rapist because they know they'll be seen as tainted and no other man will want them after that ordeal. And then there's the whole elephant in the room of women getting accused of making false rape accusations. There's so much talk about false rape accusations and how "dangerous" it is for men to be around women. That means society is incredibly biased against women, inclined to think that women are likely to lie and manipulate. Nobody doubts the word of a man when he says he was raped.
I loved one of the last scenes, where she imagines first killing her rapist and then comforting him for his own misery, and how in the end both versions of him ask to leave and she lets them go. It was so simple and yet so profound, felt a lump in my chest when I watched it.
I got most of the way through the show and then someone close to me got SA’d and I haven’t been able to finish it, but I think I will try and get through it now. It sounds like it might help.
I hear this comparison all the time but I can't see it. I watched I May Destroy You because people said this but it was just... eh not for me, 2/5. Baby Reindeer was 5/5 (or more).
You can't see the comparison of someone going through trauma and being brave enough to share their story?
It's all subjective, but they were both 5/5 for me and to be able to share these traumatic experiences can't be easy.
Right? It kind of makes me question the full story a little, not that she’s not bat shit crazy but he wrote and stared in this and it’s not like it made him look great… I just wonder what we didn’t see or maybe even what parts were really a far stretch because it was all thru his perspective.
I have so many questions and thoughts about this now but of course I feel like we’re not supposed to even go there. Oh well, it was a decent series definitely kept me watching.
I think the show was realistic about what happened. She gave positive feedback and because Donny was like in the lowest point of his life, he really needed that. That's why he didn't stop Martha. They trauma bonded. And it let to a shit show.
Baby Reindeer is 5/5 show one of the best I've seen for a while. Someone said that "I May Destroy You" is similar and as good - pfft no, that was 2/5
I agree. I had to stop watching it. It was a little triggering at first.
But I'm also wondering why people are choosing to focus on Martha and not Darrien. Darrien was the most triggering part for me, and an actual complete fucking monster.
No but there was a sense of victimization that suddenly makes sense. Like overly victimized with everything and there was a sense of an inflated ego. His comedy wasn’t funny, I find it hard to believe he made that bar he performed at shut the TVs off and suddenly everyone was laughing at him in his weird outfits telling jokes that weren’t funny. I’m just saying, knowing this it seems more like we just watched one side of an argument between two delusional people. I’m still thinking she’s worse I’m just seeing both sides.
I wonder if they actually dated and the assault with her didn't happen, but I do think she at some point ended up stalking him and that she was emotionally abusive and manipulative. I think that it's possible that both of them are very sick people. The guy also made it so easy for her to get doxxed which happened within days. I would like to see her version of events in a show in an alternate reality lol.
It's interesting you mention this and bring this up, if you notice, at the start of each episode it says, "written & created by Richard Gadd" what exactly are you "creating" if this all based on a true story and true events? Or maybe I'm just reading into that too much. Usually, they just say written by, and whoevers name, created by to me means there's fiction at work here, not just nonfiction. Does that make sense? You don't have to create nonfiction cause it actually happened in real life, and you're just retelling the events/story. Creating something means we'll just that, it didn't necessarily happen in real life cause you created it. I dunno. Lol
Created by is merely a type of writing credit. It is not used to describe whether the material is fictionalized or not. It is a credit given to a writer for completing a certain portion of the writing process. It’s just an industry tool for explaining who worked on what part of the script and is therefore given credit: with credit referring not just to acknowledgment but also to a percentage of earnings from the project.
He’s said he changed Martha’s character a lot to be honest ”unrecognisable” even to the real person. Apparently not enough since people found her online, but he’s made changes
that’s the danger of the internet. the shit we post is out there for just about forever.
i think the average person probably couldn’t identify her, but someone who dedicated enough time and research could do it.
Yes, exactly. I don’t know for me as I was watching in really kept thinking parts of this do not seem true but this is a true story? So, what you’re saying makes complete sense to me.
I think it's created as there are a lot of identifying parts that are fiction. The real Martha may be skinny or claimed to be a doctor or whatever but he created parts of the story so people are unable to identify who the real people are. I think the general concept and story are true but some peices are created
Creating means the creating of the show. Whether it’s a tv show or a film it still has to be created. That’s what it’s referring to, not the storyline itself. Eg if you paint a life drawing exactly from what is in front of you, you still have to create the painting.
Dude that's a really dense comment. Created by in cinema means to create a piece of work ( cinematography, screenplay, background, sequence of events) plain and simple.
Same. I’m surprised someone would want to perform such trauma all the time and relive it constantly. I wouldn’t be surprised if this was a bit embellished
yeah. frankly, I think that was an ego/catharsis decision that came at the expense of the quality of the show.
I think the story could have been more compelling if it had been played by a skilled early-20s actor, closer to the age Gadd had been when the events unfolded.
I think the story he presents is a lot more complex as he isn't a "perfect" victim. There are times with how he handles things that feels very wrong and I wonder how real this is to what happened in real life. This felt very raw and his discussion about spiralling and sex used to erase the abuse and also harm himself is very relatable. I do feel icky about his portrayal of his dealing with Martha.
Not being the perfect victim is spot on. I really like how he didn’t shy away from his own part in it, how he kept it going for two years when he had so many chances to shut it down.
We learn the why he does it and it’s very real but what sticks with me also is how at the time when Martha is going after his parents he very explicitly says to leave them alone but never ever says she should leave him alone.
And yes agree with most of this; abuse isn’t always black and white or how you’d perceive. You don’t know how you’d react or if you’d go back for more until you’re in it. It’s blurry and awful and this is the closest I’ve seen to how it really is.
it was so wonderfully and beautifully written and done i also can’t believe he was able to put himself back in those vulnerable moments again and relive them it’s crazy to me
In a paradoxical way, being willing to go full carte sur table about something extremely private feels very private in a way. It removes a lot of the power that makes the thing worth hiding in the first place.
That’s not why. It’s because Martha isn’t a psychopath. She might be horrible, awful, and abusive etc, but she’s not a psychopath. She’s very emotional and clearly mentally unwell.
That’s the whole point of the end part of the show. You learn that Martha clung to Donny because he represented something comforting and special to her and that her pain and trauma had fuelled her behaviour, even if it was wrong.
Nah psychopaths don’t feel empathy and attachment to others, they mimic others’ emotions, whereas Martha had a plethora of emotions. She was delusional and had created a world where she was still a lawyer, and her and Donny were in a relationship.
And psychopaths AREN'T mentally and emotionally unwell?
She's at minimum a sociopath, likely due to her own unresolved trauma...hurt peoole hurt people
She wasn't a psychopath and isn't portrayed as one. She's very clearly portrayed as having a serious mental illness - likely schizophrenia or something on that spectrum, given features of delusions, catatonia, inappropriate social behaviour, poor impulse control, poor self care, and lack of insight into her issues.
I disagree….she definitely suffered from at least one mental illness as well, but certainly fits at least the [characteristics of a psychopath](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/psychopathy?amp) to me.
This might be a good time to point out that I'm a psychologist, so thanks, I do know what psychopathy is - a lot better than you do, actually. And no, this women was not portrayed as anything like a psychopath. She lacks the affective AND behavioural traits of a psychopath. Her behaviour is absolutely consistent with a person with poorly-managed/untreated psychotic illness.
I just finished episode 4 and I have NO idea how he did it.
The first assault was bad enough - I thought that was "it", but no it went on and on and was so horrific. It was triggering enough to watch as an SA victim, but holy shit.
Idk how it's possible to do that, to act in those scenes, and not be retraumatized to hell.
I agree with you, but also we are in the age of zero privacy where everybody seems willing to bear everything online for either likes, money, or sympathy. People have no shame anymore. In someways it’s a positive thing, like what this guy did with baby reindeer. I think it was a very important story to be told for victims of SA, especially men. unfortunately, the downside is we get the Kardashians and reality stars for presidents, etc.
I agree that this show brings up some really interesting questions around the ethics and consequences of making this kind of “bare all” content (we’re literally seeing some of the consequences play out in real time with all the speculation and digging that’s been going on around ‘Martha’).
I think there’s also a lot to be said about what the impact of making, reliving, and watching stuff like this must be psychologically (not only for the people that are making it but for us as consumers). I still haven’t quite figured my feelings on that yet, but I agree that this show achieves something important for how complex experiences of trauma are told.
And the real Martha has supposedly retaliated verbally. He may end up regretting that he made this film if she comes back into everyone’s lives, including the actress now.
How so? People have never been able to communicate and share information so quickly so freely to everyone. Cameras everywhere are a pretty recent thing, including Camera phones, porch cameras, cameras everywhere. It’s actually completely different than the world has ever been. Other than writing an opinion piece for your local newspaper, which had to be approved, regular, every day people have never been able to express themselves or be heard at all until social media. This is truly an unprecedented experiment.
This show blew my mind. Raw, honest, and difficult to watch in places. The actors were incredible. I loved it. I don’t know if I’d recommend it, but I really liked it. Very good show
They explained in the show that you can't block an unknown number. At least a civilian can't, not sure if the police could subpoena the phone company to request that they block it, but it didn't seem he would go that far.
I think a lot of one-person theater shows are similar to this. It's a style of modern (post-modern?) theatre where the person tells a personal story with both jokes and some disturbing content. I saw one where a woman was talking about her sister growing distant from her and how she got the impression that maybe her sister's husband was hitting their kids but not bad enough to report it. The twist was that she didn't have a sister, she had a brother, and she challenged the audience with the fact that society wouldn't care as much if she told a story about her brother dealing with a seemingly abusive wife.
But the man in this story had an unusual story to make a one-person show out of, and he can actually back himself with the proof that he went to court and that there was a conviction, no wonder it went to Netflix.
The show I saw was good, but I assume it can all be considered slander if she doesn't have any proof.
I watched the whole show in one sitting last night.
Episode 4 was too much for me, because I went through his rape experience. I said this in another thread on another sub, but the fallout of the rape was far worse for me than the actual rape scene itself.
Because I saw a lot of myself in it. The not caring what happened to myself afterwards because the worst had already happened, the craving sexual and emotional attachment but noping out at the thought of actually doing it, etc. THe worst part too, is that I knew what happened to me at the time was rape but I purposefully internalized it and pushed it down deep inside me because it was the last thing I wanted to admit happened to me.
I really applaud Richard Gadd for having what it took to share this story, and also helping people like myself be seen.
I’m so sorry that happened to you. I am also a SA survivor and I felt all of the same things. I was prepared for rape scenes so that bit was awful but I was prepared. The set on stage where he talks about hating himself, the way it disturbs his relationship with himself and sex itself, and his dads confession were the bits that truly made me weep.
Yes that’s exactly how I felt about this show. One of my friends asked me if they should watch it and it was like “hmm. I don’t know. It’s very well done, but I can’t in good conscience recommend it. It made me feel like shit.”
I agree with this sentiment! I would never recommend it to someone else, it felt very dark and I didn’t enjoy it. yet I needed to know what happened, I was engaged and invested.
It’s hard to read between the lines because of the sarcastic tone generally on Reddit. So I’m genuinely asking, was this his kind of autobiography or his genuine life story? If
I was referring to some more of the graphic SA scenes in the show that Gadd had to recreate and how potentially re-traumatising that must’ve been.
I know from watching BTS of other Netflix shows that scenes like these are heavily choreographed, discussed and guided by intimacy experts for example, but I still don’t think something like that could have been an easy thing to perform.
Oh okay! Yea I totally see where you’re coming from, but he did write the show so I don’t think he’d genuinely include something he wasn’t comfortable with. He wouldn’t have written it in at all. Just something to think about. In his interview with Netflix (check it out on TikTok) He actually seems very pro-empowerment re: coping/ recovering from abuse. I’m not trying to sound like I’m like.. against believing in trauma or anything at all. I just think didn’t understand the verbiage/ wording that was all.
I hear you, my initial point was pretty vague! I definitely see your point that this show would’ve been a lot of prep and planning and writing in the making (and he has been doing this as a one man show for a while). Still though, I think I find the fact he was able to reach a point of writing and re-enacting these very horrific moments in such a raw, public way a massive psychological endeavour in itself, even if someone may be in a better place.
I think we’re all bound to bring our own understanding of trauma to this show though, so the idea of doing something like this might be more daunting/unconventional to me than to others!
Like a few others have said, I’d definitely recommend finishing the series and seeing how you feel afterwards. I certainly wouldn’t say that there is a set way that you’re ‘supposed to feel’ about certain characters, nor would I try to assert one, but there’s a lot more info to be processed beyond the second ep.
No I think they're talking about the emotional difficulty that would have been experienced for an SA victim to relive their traumatic experiences through acting.
I was SA by someone I knew for 10 years. He groomed me and waited till I was 18 to make it seem “consensual”. (I think he was too afraid of being a pedo but SA someone is fine?) but I cried so uncontrollably when he was talking to his parents about it. This show was so much but in the best way. I am so happy a show like this is out.
This film series means a lot to me, I was molested when I was younger so I’ve always had a freeze response if a thought comes into my head and I know I’m sleeping with a bad partner.
It happened in my last relationship so this was a sobering watch; anything that makes me feel unsafe just made me freeze up/cry. I really felt that scene when he froze up when he got groped by M.
Dad’s support was also amazing, made me feel safe.
He's been telling this story for 8 years on stage from Monkey See, Monkey Do to his show Baby Reindeer. It's been his entire career aside a few bit parts on TV.
He's literally made a career from it.
I find it absolutely pathetic keeping it secret who raped him. The same people who all knew what Cosby was doing. Everyone in this industry supposedly knows, then why arnt people saying anything? They are just as guilty, letting it continue to happen.
Apparently he’s been joking to many fellow comedians about Martha - a big Scottish girl that was infatuated with him - and how he was going to fictionalise it as a stalker drama to make money. He’s been laughing about it for years. They know the true story. People are incredibly naive to watch a show and take it as factual - when it is only one persons side. He is not a saint and he is not a particularly kind person - he is certainly not a victim of Martha. He is a victim of the man who raped him and he is a victim of his own relentless ambition to be famous - at the cost of the truth and at the expense of a vulnerable woman that has been the butt of his crude jokes for more than a decade - and now she is the butt of the world’s jokes - and public enemy number one. She is disabled and lives in a council flat and she minds her own business. She didn’t ask for any of this. Anyone who judges or attacks her is a monster.
I just wish that people realize the guy who made this also has a lot of mental illness and still does, IMO. Making him the poor heroic victim and "Martha" the mentally ill fat woman kind of disgusts me in a way because folks are hunting her down and hurling abuse at a vulnerable woman.
And I'm sorry but his excuse that he never thought people would look for Martha is pretty lame. Honestly, the whole thing just doesn't sit right with me and I think we also have to realize that his sickness feeded into letting Martha become the stalker.
I've been downvoted before but.I don't see him as the saint and her the sinner. His sickness lead to this and I don't think that is portrayed enough. I wish he would have gone into more detail about the real evil of the man who sexually assaulted him. He's the real villain in this IMHO. But I guess when you are famous, you can remain anon.
He literally says that it isn’t about painting people a hero or villain and that it’s about exploring the grey. So if anyone has the take away that it’s black and white/good and bad then that’s a them problem and the point shot right over their head.
Except he really did paint some clear villains - leading people to be harassed IRL - and he really did present his own version of events in an extremely self-serving way that has gotten him a huge amount of adulation as being so brave, so talented, etc.
I mean, anyone could also write a heavily embellished, one-sided, semi-deidentified version of their own past trauma this way.
You don't think he presented Darrien as a villain? Especially when he went on that long and self-indulgent soliloquy about how he presumes that Darrien had some psychopathic intention to toy with him and make him feel powerless - rather than the far more obvious proposition that Darrien was just driven by sexual gratification?
I didn’t have that take away at all lol… you’re taking the dialogue as surface level literal instead of picking up subtext and watching within shifting character context. And sexual gratification on its own as a motive can still be rape, which is then driven by the *unconscious* motive of power. This doesn’t make people “evil,” though… which, again, *is the point.* People do “evil” acts, but they are also a product of their shitty, traumatic, and complicated background experiences as well. Because this was a running theme through the whole show, the intent is to apply that theme to his rapist as well, so I watched those scenes with that context..
Though I strongly disagree that he clearly made villains based on what I watched in the universe I’m living in, even if he *had* I highly doubt you’d be criticizing him for it if he were a woman and be calling him “self-serving.” Which, funny enough, another point of the show was how there’s stigma around men sharing their SA stories.
I dunno dude the whole point of the show is that he isn’t the perfect victim. At numerous points in the story he actively encourages Martha. He still sees his abuser. It’s far closer to the truth of abuse and it’s an important message: not being the “perfect” victim does not cancel out his abuse nor does it mean he isn’t capable of hurting other people.
I think it made quite a strong point that he is anything but a saint. The whole thing was a commentary on how these situations are rarely black and white. I understand some of your sentiments but I think a lot of it must have gone over your head.
I think you really missed with this one. He wasn't poor heroic victim, he wasn't perfect victim. He was human and made human decisions. He symphatized with Martha. He didn't report him or her but only when she threatened his parents.
About him not realizing people would go after Martha: I think not living in America might have something to do with that. He does seem very naive, though, even his character is very naive.
Not sure if it changes much, but I did read that the viral spinning out on stage moment didn’t actually happen and was a reference to a different one man show he produced called Monkey See Monkey Do, as well as some other less intense stand up moments. Here’s the source if you’re interested:
https://thetab.com/uk/2024/04/23/whether-richard-gadd-actually-had-an-onstage-breakdown-like-in-baby-reindeer-362752#:~:text=Knowing%20that%20the%20show%20is,it%20play%20out%20on%20screen.
When I thought this show was fictional, I placed this in my top 10 shows of all time however learning this is biographical makes me slightly uneasy not solely due to the nature of the Protagonist’s story but to claim to be a victim and then to re enact those scenes… yourself… is… gut wrenching (to be nice) to me. Someone in the comments called it embellished and that far more believable than what’s being reported.
I was really moved by it moreso with his relationship with his stalker than with him battling with his sexuality and the attack. I don’t know why
I think that was the most honest thinking we've heard for a while. Especially "Am I with this beautiful woman because of him?" and "Did my sexuality change because of the abuse I went through?" because those are real issues. Even though they are rarely talked about.
I was thinking the same. Honestly the episode where the bulk of the SA happened was both super difficult and way too close to home for me.
Just the way he describe the way it made him feel though, and then he stayed and went back, it was really validating at the same time because I went through a very similar situation unfortunately. I felt like I was watching myself and having someone else tell my story.
My heart goes out to him, and I hope it wasent too detrimental for him to relive any of that during filming.
What a brilliant show though, and amazing storytelling overall.
Easy: Most of it was fiction. Netflix and the series it self state that "this is a true story" not based on a true story or even inspired by a true story. Except how exactly is it a "true story" when so much of it was changed? It's been stated by Gadd himself that alot of details about the identity of his abusers had been changed in order to obscure. He's even gone so far as tk ask people to not speculate on their identities. I don't know about you but if I had been abused in the manner that Gadd claims I would very much out the identities of my abusers.
So this is how everyone is interpreting it. Im just starting episode four now and it’s pretty obvious this guy is a pretty shit dude. At least, to me it is. And this isn’t some kind of “humbled now in retrospect at the ass hole I once was” thing. He’s still an asshole! Yeah, he’s a victim. But the entire point of this show is that it’s a freak show. We’re milking lolcows on Netflix now. Pretty fucked up.
In the hopes I don’t sound too dismissive (because I think the point your making is an important one) I would be interested in knowing your thoughts after finishing the series as (and I hope this isn’t considered a spoiler) the last leg really does put the series through its moral paces, or at least it did for me.
I’d also argue that your opinion and the thoughts I’ve shared above aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive (in fact I think they go hand in hand in some ways). A big part of what I found pretty astounding about this series’ existence is the display of his own problematic behaviours, and the very real scrutiny he’s opened himself up to in consequence.
I finished it. It really doesn’t sit well with me at all.
I know a person like Martha. He doesn’t stalk me, but a mutual friend of ours. I wouldn’t make his issues public in front of an audience of millions for all the money in the world. I wouldn’t do it if you put a gun to my head.
It all feels so calculated to me. He’s entirely in control of how the story is told. Just as you’re questioning if parading someone like Martha around can be justifiable, just as soon as we see him utterly fail to protect the people in his life (Terri, his parents) because his own comfort is more of a priority to him, he comes in with the whole “ah, but look how hard I have had it! Aren’t I brave to show all this? Can you really blame me?” narrative/horse shit.
I can’t call it accountability. Not if he’s getting rich and famous over it. Not if he’s someone who chronically puts himself before others like this. How is the show not just a continuation of his past shitty behaviour?
It’s like the whole “kid getting in trouble for bullying someone, but then getting out of trouble by giving a whole sob story about some unrelated nonsense” phenomenon. Except it’s a grown ass man who’s turned all that into a career somehow, and we’re consuming it for entertainment. The whole thing feels patently deranged to me. I wish I didn’t watch it.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts again on the show after finishing it, and I’m sorry to hear that it was such a bad viewing experience for you. I can definitely respect your perspective on this, and the more I’ve sat with this show I’ve asked myself similar question on the ethics and consequences of it being made.
I think where our views deviate is that I didn’t personally feel the story was presented as a “woe is me” exercise or even as an attempt at Gadd morally self aggrandising that you’ve described it as. I didn’t walk away feeling that Donny was redeemed, or that it pushed me to come to any clear cut conclusions on who the good or bad guys of the show were (aside from one character), and I think that’s something I appreciated about it. I think it invites you to walk away and come to your own conclusion of these people, and that conclusion can be that Donny, Gadd and this show are a complete and utter mess.
I agree that the real world implications of this show are worrying, and I do wish that more responsible steps had been taken to hide the identity of Martha somehow (for everyone involved’s welfare). But I think that also raises interesting questions about the ethics of autobiographical storytelling, and particularly who has the right to telling stories about experiences of trauma. If we’re saying that the stories of certain survivors aren’t fit, ethical or palatable enough to be shared, I think we also have to ask ourselves what kinds of lines we’re drawing in the sand. Some really important discussions about the often unspoken, ugly sides of abusive relationships that are happening might not have been had, and I think that would be a real loss to how we think and talk about experiences of trauma overall.
I also think there’s something to be said about the gender dynamics in this show, and I do have to wonder if some of the more negative takes I’ve seen in this thread (and on the internet generally) about how Gadd should’ve handled his trauma/story better as a “grown man” are problematic. Part of me does question if the outrage would be as prominent if the roles were reversed (which is a take I don’t often like to make). But with all that said, I can appreciate that a show like this isn’t going to land for everyone.
I agree with you completely and thanks for articulating it.
It feels ‘dirty’ as in by making and getting rich and famous from telling his story we, as the audience who applaud him, are just complicit in validating and perpetuating his own toxic and narcissistic behaviours.
Like you say I too think it’s unfair on Martha and Terri at least.
Also based on the ending, Richard is still stuck in a harmful loop where he’s not attempting to address his own shortcomings. Because of this I just don’t want to fall for the whole ‘powerless and imperfect victim’ narrative that he’s trying to portray.
There are three abusers in this show. And by some strange coincidence, the only one whose behaviour is given an explanation, the only one allowed to have redemption, is Richard. A wonder how that works, don’t you think!
Martha gets the last line of the show, where she briefly mentions her abuse at the hands of her father, and explains where the title of the show/nickname “Baby Reindeer” comes from. That’s it. Richard gets *60 percent of the series* to explain why he did what he did.
Additionally, he confesses outright that he took advantage of her for validation, AND that he’s willing to operate in destructive ways for the smallest chance at getting famous.
He portrays himself as being stuck in a cycle of abuse, where he receives abuse and then, through not addressing his own problems, passes that abuse on to others. Which, fair enough. Except not fair enough if he’s the only one to get the privilege of accounting for his actions in this way. Given this lopsided self-favouritism, and Richard’s own admission that he will stoop to some serious lows for validation, I cannot view this series as anything other than a continuation of that cycle of abuse. The entire exercise comes off to me as deeply deranged.
Focusing on whether or not he's a "pretty shit dude" doesn't seem all that relevant to the themes and lessons of the show, and certainly not the quality
Totally agreed with you until I just kept watching and now I feel horrible for him. People process trauma in different ways and after what I watched, I don’t judge him at all anymore
It doesn’t occur to you that, because he is the one telling the story, that he deliberately engineered your emotions to behave that way? Of course you feel bad for him. You are under his spell, and he wouldn’t have it any other way.
Dude what? I would feel bad for anyone who’s stalked by a violent, convicted stalker and raped. I don’t wish that on anyone. If he didn’t want people to know he was an asshole, he would’ve curated the show to be that way but he’s very clearly an asshole and even then it’s due to trauma. It’s called having a heart? it’s no spell. Idk why you’re shaming a literal rape and stalking victim because of.. *checks notes* he’s an asshole. That’s fucking weird
If you’re just starting episode four, you really shouldn’t comment on it yet. It’s a game changer.
Edit: I don’t mean that in a dismissive way at all. I felt the same.
Honestly, stick with it. He doesn't shy away from calling himself out for his failures. He could have, but the brutal honesty and vulnerability, and the story arc makes watching the whole series an absolute must imho.
I can’t get past the fact that he is the one writing this. If you’re sympathetic towards him, it’s because he made himself out to be so. I finished the show, and I can’t shake the feeling that this is just entirely self-serving.
I’m a bit late to the party but there’s a pattern. The whole show he’s trying to get famous for his comedy. It’s shit, no one’s denying that. But he clearly shows he needs to be in the spotlight. He showed himself getting off to the shame of it all. Do we really think he’s done a 180 or has he found a way to both be in the spotlight and scratch his little shame fetish. I’m not making light of what he’s been through but I don’t think he should be praised like this.
Yes, exactly! I feel gross and used just being pulled into it. I bet he’s reading our words right now.
Leave us alone, Richard! We don’t want to participate. Go do therapy.
It’s partially why I think the story is heavily embellished or made up. If real, his stalkers and abusers should be in prison, not the subjects of a hit Netflix series.
While I can appreciate that stories like this aren’t for everyone, I do find takes like these a little bit disconnected from reality. It’s pretty well known that many survivors don’t report for a variety of reasons (one of the main ones being that it rarely ends in an actual conviction).
Only around 2% of reported rapes in the UK even end in a charge, let alone a conviction. People are so completely clueless about how bad the justice system is and how unlikely it is for a SA victim to get justice. This is especially true in ‘complex’ (I say complex as shorthand) cases like Gadd's where the average person (and potential jury member) might not understand why Donny went back to his abuser's flat and will see that as evidence the SA didn't happen.
Sadly that rarely happens in real life. Abusers have to be reported. As for stalkers.. check how many of them are actually convicted. It's a shockingly low number
I was thinking the same thing in regard to the SA, especially considering the heightened stigma for males as victims. I hope it was a cathartic experience for him. I think he did a good job taking accountability for his role the story. I wish people would take the lessons and grow/appreciate rather than hunt down the real Martha, but people are shite like that.
100%
You are 100% correct. And the amount of down votes tells it, too. I feel bad for people who deny reality because they think that women are always the ultimate victims. No they are not.
Suffering is not a competition. There is no ultimate victim.
Thank you.
It is to some people
How do you tell if someone is treating it as a competition?
Didn't this guy rape a woman though as well? Doesn't exactly sound like a saint if that's true we have it coming. I don't know I didn't watch the show. But this is what I just saw on piers Morgan.
I don't know, the "real-life Martha" said something Piers Morgan show but I haven't hearn anything about that.
There is a better way of saying this. Women and marginalized people are major victims for different types of SA, but that doesn't leave out males from the statistics. Many SA survivors are not believed when reaching out to authority. Our systems needs to change to become more trauma informed and provide modes of safety, belief and accurate documentation when SA+A happens. That is what lessens incidence on a larger scale.
As an actor with the ability to own the performance AND the trauma, I think he felt ‘who better’ than himself. I think the difference is SA victims who aren’t actors naturally would not be trained in the compartmentalization of acting.
What is"SA"?
Sexual assault
What do people even mean when they keep parroting this "heightened stigma for male victims" and "it's even harder for male victims to talk about it". Have any women been like "oh it was easy for me to get raped since I'm a woman" or "oh it was easy to tell my family and the authorities for me cause you know us women getting raped is something we're totally cool with"? All I hear about is men who don't shut up about how they've been raped and how it's harder for them to speak up, but I never see women being this outspoken about it. And very few people have been both a man and a woman who experienced getting raped so it's not like we can say which one is harder. It seems like something that men made up like they just woke up one day and decided that getting raped must be harder for them. Seems like they just don't want to put themselves on an equal foot with women like it must be "oh but when I experienced it, it's harder for me" like you have this need to be more important and a bigger victim than women. Could we just agree that it's equally as hard for everyone regardless of gender? Or do you see women as below you therefore their suffering can't be like yours? Do you think women are not equally as embarrassed and unable to tell anyone about it? I don't understand where this idea comes from that women are supposedly less embarrassed.
Well first of all I am a woman who has been raped, so jot that down... What I mean by stigma for male rape victims is that toxic masculinity/patriarchy has made it difficult for men to come forward in a way that is unique for them. It does not diminish my experience to have empathy for others.
Women have literally been stoned to death for getting raped. When a man gets raped everyone feels horrible for him. Sure, other men sometimes ridicule them, I guess? But I would be surprised if that happened with the same frequency at which women are ridiculed, disbelieved and victim-blamed in society. I suspect that most people who perpetuate the idea that "it is harder for men to be taken seriously" are women who have their heart in the right place, but it's very much an MRA talking point and it's not based in reality. Feminists these days are being gaslit into believing this type of thing, because they don't want victims to feel bad (of any gender) and I suspect also because we feel this need to prove how "inclusive" feminism is so we don't get yelled at. We should let this myth die already. Edit: so I agree with you, but was piggybacking off your comment to add something.
The difference is that people are sympathetic to women who are raped and unsympathetic towards men who are raped. Rape is horrible for everyone. But, when you're a man, you get the added bonus of being mocked for being a victim in addition to being told by others that "women can't rape men."
When high school boys get groomed and SA’d by their teachers, literally every comment on those stories is “damn I wish I had teachers like that when I was in school”, “he should’ve shut up cause he’s so lucky”, “bet he enjoyed it” etc etc etc. Society has drilled it into the minds of so many that men want sex every second of the day and that we’ll always want to have sex no matter the situation. And when a man does say no, women get insulted and take it personally because society acts like men aren’t allowed to say no to sex.
Lol, you think men take being told "no" kindly? Men have such a hard time dealing with rejection they often kill the women who reject them. That's the extreme version, but before getting to murder you have a whole range of piss poor reactions, including way more men getting insulted and taking it personally than women.
Well... I wouldn't say people are always sympathetic towards women. "What was she wearing?", etc. Yes, it's terrible for everyone. Human suffering is not dependent upon gender.
There's definitely victim blaming towards both genders. But, you'd be hard pressed to find someone who believes women can't be raped.
Except republicans because apparently "the human body has ways to shut that thing down"
I think I see where you're coming from. You are saying some people believe men cannot be raped by women. Yes, that sucks, and those people are wrong.
Women get mocked too. There's actually so much more stigma to women getting raped, but you're not even willing to try to empathise with women. Everything has to be only one way, with everyone giving empathy to men, and yet you never try to empathise with women. Sexual purity is valued in women so if a woman gets raped that decreases her value in the eyes of society. She becomes "used up". Men don't want to date a woman who was raped. It is seen as messy, she is seen as a woman of questionable character and judgment for putting herself in a situation where she could be raped, or she gets stigmatized for hanging around that kind of man. Women who get raped don't get respect and don't get sympathy. Many women stay with their rapist because they know they'll be seen as tainted and no other man will want them after that ordeal. And then there's the whole elephant in the room of women getting accused of making false rape accusations. There's so much talk about false rape accusations and how "dangerous" it is for men to be around women. That means society is incredibly biased against women, inclined to think that women are likely to lie and manipulate. Nobody doubts the word of a man when he says he was raped.
This is so hilariously untrue I don’t even know what to say
dude this show was literally the most vulnerable thing ive ever seen
'I may destroy you' is the only other show I've seen that felt this way until this show
yes re i may destroy you!
That one scene with her therapist when she asks who is the male in her dreams looking at. That scene broke me. It was so raw.
I loved one of the last scenes, where she imagines first killing her rapist and then comforting him for his own misery, and how in the end both versions of him ask to leave and she lets them go. It was so simple and yet so profound, felt a lump in my chest when I watched it.
I got most of the way through the show and then someone close to me got SA’d and I haven’t been able to finish it, but I think I will try and get through it now. It sounds like it might help.
I hear this comparison all the time but I can't see it. I watched I May Destroy You because people said this but it was just... eh not for me, 2/5. Baby Reindeer was 5/5 (or more).
You can't see the comparison of someone going through trauma and being brave enough to share their story? It's all subjective, but they were both 5/5 for me and to be able to share these traumatic experiences can't be easy.
Agreed. I think both were very brave to tell their story on screen. Both were 5/5.
What show is this and how have I missed it ? Or can you just tell me where to watch? Thanks
It's hbo [info here](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11204260/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk)
Thanks!
It was on HBO I think.
Netflix
Wait was the actor playing the main character actually the man in real life?
I'm only learning this now, but yes, it's based on his one man shoe and real life experience
It’s based on one of his shoes? Wow, this story gets crazier and crazier.
He did put his best foot forward
Of course, before the story became a one man shoe it started as a stump speech.
The whole thing was so weird but now it’s somehow even weirder.
What is a two man shoe? If one man shoe exists then two man shoe must too right
No you idiot, it's based on his man shoe, as oppose to his lady shoe. He has one of each, you see?
Ladies don’t wear shoes
And left.
I was SHOCKED when I found out about this
Right? It kind of makes me question the full story a little, not that she’s not bat shit crazy but he wrote and stared in this and it’s not like it made him look great… I just wonder what we didn’t see or maybe even what parts were really a far stretch because it was all thru his perspective. I have so many questions and thoughts about this now but of course I feel like we’re not supposed to even go there. Oh well, it was a decent series definitely kept me watching.
I think the show was realistic about what happened. She gave positive feedback and because Donny was like in the lowest point of his life, he really needed that. That's why he didn't stop Martha. They trauma bonded. And it let to a shit show. Baby Reindeer is 5/5 show one of the best I've seen for a while. Someone said that "I May Destroy You" is similar and as good - pfft no, that was 2/5
yeah, the whole thing left me feeling a little icky. kinda like I was some unwilling voyeur to his own personal self-flagellation trauma porn.
This is it! Exactly!
I agree. I had to stop watching it. It was a little triggering at first. But I'm also wondering why people are choosing to focus on Martha and not Darrien. Darrien was the most triggering part for me, and an actual complete fucking monster.
Tbf I don’t think it made him look entirely great either
No but there was a sense of victimization that suddenly makes sense. Like overly victimized with everything and there was a sense of an inflated ego. His comedy wasn’t funny, I find it hard to believe he made that bar he performed at shut the TVs off and suddenly everyone was laughing at him in his weird outfits telling jokes that weren’t funny. I’m just saying, knowing this it seems more like we just watched one side of an argument between two delusional people. I’m still thinking she’s worse I’m just seeing both sides.
I wonder if they actually dated and the assault with her didn't happen, but I do think she at some point ended up stalking him and that she was emotionally abusive and manipulative. I think that it's possible that both of them are very sick people. The guy also made it so easy for her to get doxxed which happened within days. I would like to see her version of events in a show in an alternate reality lol.
I have to agree about his comedy. It stunk and the show spent too much time showing it.
It was unbelievably cringe and so uncomfortable to watch
It's interesting you mention this and bring this up, if you notice, at the start of each episode it says, "written & created by Richard Gadd" what exactly are you "creating" if this all based on a true story and true events? Or maybe I'm just reading into that too much. Usually, they just say written by, and whoevers name, created by to me means there's fiction at work here, not just nonfiction. Does that make sense? You don't have to create nonfiction cause it actually happened in real life, and you're just retelling the events/story. Creating something means we'll just that, it didn't necessarily happen in real life cause you created it. I dunno. Lol
Created by is merely a type of writing credit. It is not used to describe whether the material is fictionalized or not. It is a credit given to a writer for completing a certain portion of the writing process. It’s just an industry tool for explaining who worked on what part of the script and is therefore given credit: with credit referring not just to acknowledgment but also to a percentage of earnings from the project.
Exactly To illustrate the point, the Chernobyl miniseries has a created by credit too
He’s said he changed Martha’s character a lot to be honest ”unrecognisable” even to the real person. Apparently not enough since people found her online, but he’s made changes
that’s the danger of the internet. the shit we post is out there for just about forever. i think the average person probably couldn’t identify her, but someone who dedicated enough time and research could do it.
Yeah I think it was her tweets that really pinpointed her
Yes, exactly. I don’t know for me as I was watching in really kept thinking parts of this do not seem true but this is a true story? So, what you’re saying makes complete sense to me.
I think it's created as there are a lot of identifying parts that are fiction. The real Martha may be skinny or claimed to be a doctor or whatever but he created parts of the story so people are unable to identify who the real people are. I think the general concept and story are true but some peices are created
Creating means the creating of the show. Whether it’s a tv show or a film it still has to be created. That’s what it’s referring to, not the storyline itself. Eg if you paint a life drawing exactly from what is in front of you, you still have to create the painting.
Dude that's a really dense comment. Created by in cinema means to create a piece of work ( cinematography, screenplay, background, sequence of events) plain and simple.
Same. I’m surprised someone would want to perform such trauma all the time and relive it constantly. I wouldn’t be surprised if this was a bit embellished
yes!
yeah. frankly, I think that was an ego/catharsis decision that came at the expense of the quality of the show. I think the story could have been more compelling if it had been played by a skilled early-20s actor, closer to the age Gadd had been when the events unfolded.
Yeah, the actor Richard Gadd is Donny. He played himself. I wonder how he felt having to reenactment the rape scene? I'm like dear God no
I think the story he presents is a lot more complex as he isn't a "perfect" victim. There are times with how he handles things that feels very wrong and I wonder how real this is to what happened in real life. This felt very raw and his discussion about spiralling and sex used to erase the abuse and also harm himself is very relatable. I do feel icky about his portrayal of his dealing with Martha.
Not being the perfect victim is spot on. I really like how he didn’t shy away from his own part in it, how he kept it going for two years when he had so many chances to shut it down. We learn the why he does it and it’s very real but what sticks with me also is how at the time when Martha is going after his parents he very explicitly says to leave them alone but never ever says she should leave him alone.
Very true I hadn’t realized that.
This is true.. there were numerous times where I felt like shouting at him but also felt compassion for him. Hurt people *hurt* people.
He comes off really bad here. Like really really bad. He treats Teri horribly. I don't think he wanted to shy away from how terrible he was there
And yes agree with most of this; abuse isn’t always black and white or how you’d perceive. You don’t know how you’d react or if you’d go back for more until you’re in it. It’s blurry and awful and this is the closest I’ve seen to how it really is.
it was so wonderfully and beautifully written and done i also can’t believe he was able to put himself back in those vulnerable moments again and relive them it’s crazy to me
In a paradoxical way, being willing to go full carte sur table about something extremely private feels very private in a way. It removes a lot of the power that makes the thing worth hiding in the first place.
This is probably my favourite take I’ve read so far
All of these other (important) comments aside; a huge shoutout to the actress playing Martha. She did a phenomenal job of portraying a psychopath.
I feel like calling Martha a psychopath is missing a big part of what Gadd was trying to communicate.
I think the intent was more to the effect of "psychopaths are people too, and victims can be not that great, but that doesn't make it okay"
Not really. She is a psychopath. People struggle referring to her as such because it is a female.
That’s not why. It’s because Martha isn’t a psychopath. She might be horrible, awful, and abusive etc, but she’s not a psychopath. She’s very emotional and clearly mentally unwell. That’s the whole point of the end part of the show. You learn that Martha clung to Donny because he represented something comforting and special to her and that her pain and trauma had fuelled her behaviour, even if it was wrong.
Well, psychopath isn’t technically a standard diagnosis. She is clearly as destructive and vile as any other person deemed a psychopath.
Nah psychopaths don’t feel empathy and attachment to others, they mimic others’ emotions, whereas Martha had a plethora of emotions. She was delusional and had created a world where she was still a lawyer, and her and Donny were in a relationship.
And psychopaths AREN'T mentally and emotionally unwell? She's at minimum a sociopath, likely due to her own unresolved trauma...hurt peoole hurt people
She reminded me a more modern Kathy Bates in Misery. Well done
She wasn't a psychopath and isn't portrayed as one. She's very clearly portrayed as having a serious mental illness - likely schizophrenia or something on that spectrum, given features of delusions, catatonia, inappropriate social behaviour, poor impulse control, poor self care, and lack of insight into her issues.
I disagree….she definitely suffered from at least one mental illness as well, but certainly fits at least the [characteristics of a psychopath](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/psychopathy?amp) to me.
This might be a good time to point out that I'm a psychologist, so thanks, I do know what psychopathy is - a lot better than you do, actually. And no, this women was not portrayed as anything like a psychopath. She lacks the affective AND behavioural traits of a psychopath. Her behaviour is absolutely consistent with a person with poorly-managed/untreated psychotic illness.
I’m also randomly a psychologist on Reddit and I agree.
I just finished episode 4 and I have NO idea how he did it. The first assault was bad enough - I thought that was "it", but no it went on and on and was so horrific. It was triggering enough to watch as an SA victim, but holy shit. Idk how it's possible to do that, to act in those scenes, and not be retraumatized to hell.
I agree with you, but also we are in the age of zero privacy where everybody seems willing to bear everything online for either likes, money, or sympathy. People have no shame anymore. In someways it’s a positive thing, like what this guy did with baby reindeer. I think it was a very important story to be told for victims of SA, especially men. unfortunately, the downside is we get the Kardashians and reality stars for presidents, etc.
I agree that this show brings up some really interesting questions around the ethics and consequences of making this kind of “bare all” content (we’re literally seeing some of the consequences play out in real time with all the speculation and digging that’s been going on around ‘Martha’). I think there’s also a lot to be said about what the impact of making, reliving, and watching stuff like this must be psychologically (not only for the people that are making it but for us as consumers). I still haven’t quite figured my feelings on that yet, but I agree that this show achieves something important for how complex experiences of trauma are told.
I appreciate your thoughts on this and the way youexpressed them.
And the real Martha has supposedly retaliated verbally. He may end up regretting that he made this film if she comes back into everyone’s lives, including the actress now.
I mean you can call them "reality" shows but they are fake as fuck, this is more real, at least it deals with real issues.
I agree. I don’t watch reality shows. I’m proud to say I’ve never watched the Kardashians.
Been like this for many many years but just different outlets
How so? People have never been able to communicate and share information so quickly so freely to everyone. Cameras everywhere are a pretty recent thing, including Camera phones, porch cameras, cameras everywhere. It’s actually completely different than the world has ever been. Other than writing an opinion piece for your local newspaper, which had to be approved, regular, every day people have never been able to express themselves or be heard at all until social media. This is truly an unprecedented experiment.
Thought this was a great show
This show blew my mind. Raw, honest, and difficult to watch in places. The actors were incredible. I loved it. I don’t know if I’d recommend it, but I really liked it. Very good show
The story is sad tho for both of them. Martha, needs help also, watching it, I would always say, WHY NOT BLOCK THE NUMBER tho.
They explained in the show that you can't block an unknown number. At least a civilian can't, not sure if the police could subpoena the phone company to request that they block it, but it didn't seem he would go that far.
You can deny all calls from unknown numbers, you can also set a whitelist.
That is now maybe it wasn't possible when the stalking happened was it 2007 or something?
At the end Martha pleads guilty to harassing Donny from 2015-2017.
Have you ever tried to do ANYTHING while youre getting SPAMMED calls from private numbers? The hell
I think a lot of one-person theater shows are similar to this. It's a style of modern (post-modern?) theatre where the person tells a personal story with both jokes and some disturbing content. I saw one where a woman was talking about her sister growing distant from her and how she got the impression that maybe her sister's husband was hitting their kids but not bad enough to report it. The twist was that she didn't have a sister, she had a brother, and she challenged the audience with the fact that society wouldn't care as much if she told a story about her brother dealing with a seemingly abusive wife. But the man in this story had an unusual story to make a one-person show out of, and he can actually back himself with the proof that he went to court and that there was a conviction, no wonder it went to Netflix. The show I saw was good, but I assume it can all be considered slander if she doesn't have any proof.
I watched the whole show in one sitting last night. Episode 4 was too much for me, because I went through his rape experience. I said this in another thread on another sub, but the fallout of the rape was far worse for me than the actual rape scene itself. Because I saw a lot of myself in it. The not caring what happened to myself afterwards because the worst had already happened, the craving sexual and emotional attachment but noping out at the thought of actually doing it, etc. THe worst part too, is that I knew what happened to me at the time was rape but I purposefully internalized it and pushed it down deep inside me because it was the last thing I wanted to admit happened to me. I really applaud Richard Gadd for having what it took to share this story, and also helping people like myself be seen.
I’m so sorry that happened to you. I am also a SA survivor and I felt all of the same things. I was prepared for rape scenes so that bit was awful but I was prepared. The set on stage where he talks about hating himself, the way it disturbs his relationship with himself and sex itself, and his dads confession were the bits that truly made me weep.
I watched it, can't say I liked any of it, but was engaging and heartbreaking.
Yes that’s exactly how I felt about this show. One of my friends asked me if they should watch it and it was like “hmm. I don’t know. It’s very well done, but I can’t in good conscience recommend it. It made me feel like shit.”
I agree with this sentiment! I would never recommend it to someone else, it felt very dark and I didn’t enjoy it. yet I needed to know what happened, I was engaged and invested.
Me too.
It’s definitely not something I would rewatch.
Hectic series I didn't expect that
I just finished watching it. Had no idea that it was based on Gadd's past. I think the ending was simple yet brilliant.
It’s hard to read between the lines because of the sarcastic tone generally on Reddit. So I’m genuinely asking, was this his kind of autobiography or his genuine life story? If
He has issues clearly but it’s sad what has happened to him
He has “issues” BECAUSE of what happened to him. This is his way of dealing with his trauma and owning it and taking control of the narrative to heal.
What do you mean by “I have no doubt that Richard’s and Netflix’s ‘safeguarding’ procedures and staff were STACKED during filming” ??
I was referring to some more of the graphic SA scenes in the show that Gadd had to recreate and how potentially re-traumatising that must’ve been. I know from watching BTS of other Netflix shows that scenes like these are heavily choreographed, discussed and guided by intimacy experts for example, but I still don’t think something like that could have been an easy thing to perform.
Oh okay! Yea I totally see where you’re coming from, but he did write the show so I don’t think he’d genuinely include something he wasn’t comfortable with. He wouldn’t have written it in at all. Just something to think about. In his interview with Netflix (check it out on TikTok) He actually seems very pro-empowerment re: coping/ recovering from abuse. I’m not trying to sound like I’m like.. against believing in trauma or anything at all. I just think didn’t understand the verbiage/ wording that was all.
I hear you, my initial point was pretty vague! I definitely see your point that this show would’ve been a lot of prep and planning and writing in the making (and he has been doing this as a one man show for a while). Still though, I think I find the fact he was able to reach a point of writing and re-enacting these very horrific moments in such a raw, public way a massive psychological endeavour in itself, even if someone may be in a better place. I think we’re all bound to bring our own understanding of trauma to this show though, so the idea of doing something like this might be more daunting/unconventional to me than to others!
It was really hard to watch!
This show showed us such a viceral look into trauma and cycle therefore. A look only experience can give.
Hold on, am I supposed to feel sorry for Richard? Two episodes in and he’s not exactly a sympathetic character
Like a few others have said, I’d definitely recommend finishing the series and seeing how you feel afterwards. I certainly wouldn’t say that there is a set way that you’re ‘supposed to feel’ about certain characters, nor would I try to assert one, but there’s a lot more info to be processed beyond the second ep.
Keep watching. Very complex story.
Yall acting like this a documentary and not a heavily produced show with a script and several rewrites.
No I think they're talking about the emotional difficulty that would have been experienced for an SA victim to relive their traumatic experiences through acting.
I loved it! wow
I was SA by someone I knew for 10 years. He groomed me and waited till I was 18 to make it seem “consensual”. (I think he was too afraid of being a pedo but SA someone is fine?) but I cried so uncontrollably when he was talking to his parents about it. This show was so much but in the best way. I am so happy a show like this is out.
This film series means a lot to me, I was molested when I was younger so I’ve always had a freeze response if a thought comes into my head and I know I’m sleeping with a bad partner. It happened in my last relationship so this was a sobering watch; anything that makes me feel unsafe just made me freeze up/cry. I really felt that scene when he froze up when he got groped by M. Dad’s support was also amazing, made me feel safe.
He's been telling this story for 8 years on stage from Monkey See, Monkey Do to his show Baby Reindeer. It's been his entire career aside a few bit parts on TV. He's literally made a career from it.
I find it absolutely pathetic keeping it secret who raped him. The same people who all knew what Cosby was doing. Everyone in this industry supposedly knows, then why arnt people saying anything? They are just as guilty, letting it continue to happen.
Apparently he’s been joking to many fellow comedians about Martha - a big Scottish girl that was infatuated with him - and how he was going to fictionalise it as a stalker drama to make money. He’s been laughing about it for years. They know the true story. People are incredibly naive to watch a show and take it as factual - when it is only one persons side. He is not a saint and he is not a particularly kind person - he is certainly not a victim of Martha. He is a victim of the man who raped him and he is a victim of his own relentless ambition to be famous - at the cost of the truth and at the expense of a vulnerable woman that has been the butt of his crude jokes for more than a decade - and now she is the butt of the world’s jokes - and public enemy number one. She is disabled and lives in a council flat and she minds her own business. She didn’t ask for any of this. Anyone who judges or attacks her is a monster.
I just wish that people realize the guy who made this also has a lot of mental illness and still does, IMO. Making him the poor heroic victim and "Martha" the mentally ill fat woman kind of disgusts me in a way because folks are hunting her down and hurling abuse at a vulnerable woman. And I'm sorry but his excuse that he never thought people would look for Martha is pretty lame. Honestly, the whole thing just doesn't sit right with me and I think we also have to realize that his sickness feeded into letting Martha become the stalker. I've been downvoted before but.I don't see him as the saint and her the sinner. His sickness lead to this and I don't think that is portrayed enough. I wish he would have gone into more detail about the real evil of the man who sexually assaulted him. He's the real villain in this IMHO. But I guess when you are famous, you can remain anon.
He literally says that it isn’t about painting people a hero or villain and that it’s about exploring the grey. So if anyone has the take away that it’s black and white/good and bad then that’s a them problem and the point shot right over their head.
Except he really did paint some clear villains - leading people to be harassed IRL - and he really did present his own version of events in an extremely self-serving way that has gotten him a huge amount of adulation as being so brave, so talented, etc. I mean, anyone could also write a heavily embellished, one-sided, semi-deidentified version of their own past trauma this way.
Again, if you saw clear villains then you missed the nuances and the point.
You don't think he presented Darrien as a villain? Especially when he went on that long and self-indulgent soliloquy about how he presumes that Darrien had some psychopathic intention to toy with him and make him feel powerless - rather than the far more obvious proposition that Darrien was just driven by sexual gratification?
I didn’t have that take away at all lol… you’re taking the dialogue as surface level literal instead of picking up subtext and watching within shifting character context. And sexual gratification on its own as a motive can still be rape, which is then driven by the *unconscious* motive of power. This doesn’t make people “evil,” though… which, again, *is the point.* People do “evil” acts, but they are also a product of their shitty, traumatic, and complicated background experiences as well. Because this was a running theme through the whole show, the intent is to apply that theme to his rapist as well, so I watched those scenes with that context.. Though I strongly disagree that he clearly made villains based on what I watched in the universe I’m living in, even if he *had* I highly doubt you’d be criticizing him for it if he were a woman and be calling him “self-serving.” Which, funny enough, another point of the show was how there’s stigma around men sharing their SA stories.
I dunno dude the whole point of the show is that he isn’t the perfect victim. At numerous points in the story he actively encourages Martha. He still sees his abuser. It’s far closer to the truth of abuse and it’s an important message: not being the “perfect” victim does not cancel out his abuse nor does it mean he isn’t capable of hurting other people.
I think Gadd perfectly describes repeat victims of offenders like bill Cosby.
I think it made quite a strong point that he is anything but a saint. The whole thing was a commentary on how these situations are rarely black and white. I understand some of your sentiments but I think a lot of it must have gone over your head.
I think you really missed with this one. He wasn't poor heroic victim, he wasn't perfect victim. He was human and made human decisions. He symphatized with Martha. He didn't report him or her but only when she threatened his parents.
About him not realizing people would go after Martha: I think not living in America might have something to do with that. He does seem very naive, though, even his character is very naive.
He spun out one night on stage…and now he’s capitalizing on it.
Not sure if it changes much, but I did read that the viral spinning out on stage moment didn’t actually happen and was a reference to a different one man show he produced called Monkey See Monkey Do, as well as some other less intense stand up moments. Here’s the source if you’re interested: https://thetab.com/uk/2024/04/23/whether-richard-gadd-actually-had-an-onstage-breakdown-like-in-baby-reindeer-362752#:~:text=Knowing%20that%20the%20show%20is,it%20play%20out%20on%20screen.
When I thought this show was fictional, I placed this in my top 10 shows of all time however learning this is biographical makes me slightly uneasy not solely due to the nature of the Protagonist’s story but to claim to be a victim and then to re enact those scenes… yourself… is… gut wrenching (to be nice) to me. Someone in the comments called it embellished and that far more believable than what’s being reported. I was really moved by it moreso with his relationship with his stalker than with him battling with his sexuality and the attack. I don’t know why
I think that was the most honest thinking we've heard for a while. Especially "Am I with this beautiful woman because of him?" and "Did my sexuality change because of the abuse I went through?" because those are real issues. Even though they are rarely talked about.
Show Made my whole family cry
I was thinking the same. Honestly the episode where the bulk of the SA happened was both super difficult and way too close to home for me. Just the way he describe the way it made him feel though, and then he stayed and went back, it was really validating at the same time because I went through a very similar situation unfortunately. I felt like I was watching myself and having someone else tell my story. My heart goes out to him, and I hope it wasent too detrimental for him to relive any of that during filming. What a brilliant show though, and amazing storytelling overall.
Easy: Most of it was fiction. Netflix and the series it self state that "this is a true story" not based on a true story or even inspired by a true story. Except how exactly is it a "true story" when so much of it was changed? It's been stated by Gadd himself that alot of details about the identity of his abusers had been changed in order to obscure. He's even gone so far as tk ask people to not speculate on their identities. I don't know about you but if I had been abused in the manner that Gadd claims I would very much out the identities of my abusers.
He strikes me as fame hungry sure it wasn't a problem
So this is how everyone is interpreting it. Im just starting episode four now and it’s pretty obvious this guy is a pretty shit dude. At least, to me it is. And this isn’t some kind of “humbled now in retrospect at the ass hole I once was” thing. He’s still an asshole! Yeah, he’s a victim. But the entire point of this show is that it’s a freak show. We’re milking lolcows on Netflix now. Pretty fucked up.
In the hopes I don’t sound too dismissive (because I think the point your making is an important one) I would be interested in knowing your thoughts after finishing the series as (and I hope this isn’t considered a spoiler) the last leg really does put the series through its moral paces, or at least it did for me. I’d also argue that your opinion and the thoughts I’ve shared above aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive (in fact I think they go hand in hand in some ways). A big part of what I found pretty astounding about this series’ existence is the display of his own problematic behaviours, and the very real scrutiny he’s opened himself up to in consequence.
I finished it. It really doesn’t sit well with me at all. I know a person like Martha. He doesn’t stalk me, but a mutual friend of ours. I wouldn’t make his issues public in front of an audience of millions for all the money in the world. I wouldn’t do it if you put a gun to my head. It all feels so calculated to me. He’s entirely in control of how the story is told. Just as you’re questioning if parading someone like Martha around can be justifiable, just as soon as we see him utterly fail to protect the people in his life (Terri, his parents) because his own comfort is more of a priority to him, he comes in with the whole “ah, but look how hard I have had it! Aren’t I brave to show all this? Can you really blame me?” narrative/horse shit. I can’t call it accountability. Not if he’s getting rich and famous over it. Not if he’s someone who chronically puts himself before others like this. How is the show not just a continuation of his past shitty behaviour? It’s like the whole “kid getting in trouble for bullying someone, but then getting out of trouble by giving a whole sob story about some unrelated nonsense” phenomenon. Except it’s a grown ass man who’s turned all that into a career somehow, and we’re consuming it for entertainment. The whole thing feels patently deranged to me. I wish I didn’t watch it.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts again on the show after finishing it, and I’m sorry to hear that it was such a bad viewing experience for you. I can definitely respect your perspective on this, and the more I’ve sat with this show I’ve asked myself similar question on the ethics and consequences of it being made. I think where our views deviate is that I didn’t personally feel the story was presented as a “woe is me” exercise or even as an attempt at Gadd morally self aggrandising that you’ve described it as. I didn’t walk away feeling that Donny was redeemed, or that it pushed me to come to any clear cut conclusions on who the good or bad guys of the show were (aside from one character), and I think that’s something I appreciated about it. I think it invites you to walk away and come to your own conclusion of these people, and that conclusion can be that Donny, Gadd and this show are a complete and utter mess. I agree that the real world implications of this show are worrying, and I do wish that more responsible steps had been taken to hide the identity of Martha somehow (for everyone involved’s welfare). But I think that also raises interesting questions about the ethics of autobiographical storytelling, and particularly who has the right to telling stories about experiences of trauma. If we’re saying that the stories of certain survivors aren’t fit, ethical or palatable enough to be shared, I think we also have to ask ourselves what kinds of lines we’re drawing in the sand. Some really important discussions about the often unspoken, ugly sides of abusive relationships that are happening might not have been had, and I think that would be a real loss to how we think and talk about experiences of trauma overall. I also think there’s something to be said about the gender dynamics in this show, and I do have to wonder if some of the more negative takes I’ve seen in this thread (and on the internet generally) about how Gadd should’ve handled his trauma/story better as a “grown man” are problematic. Part of me does question if the outrage would be as prominent if the roles were reversed (which is a take I don’t often like to make). But with all that said, I can appreciate that a show like this isn’t going to land for everyone.
I agree with you completely and thanks for articulating it. It feels ‘dirty’ as in by making and getting rich and famous from telling his story we, as the audience who applaud him, are just complicit in validating and perpetuating his own toxic and narcissistic behaviours. Like you say I too think it’s unfair on Martha and Terri at least. Also based on the ending, Richard is still stuck in a harmful loop where he’s not attempting to address his own shortcomings. Because of this I just don’t want to fall for the whole ‘powerless and imperfect victim’ narrative that he’s trying to portray.
There are three abusers in this show. And by some strange coincidence, the only one whose behaviour is given an explanation, the only one allowed to have redemption, is Richard. A wonder how that works, don’t you think! Martha gets the last line of the show, where she briefly mentions her abuse at the hands of her father, and explains where the title of the show/nickname “Baby Reindeer” comes from. That’s it. Richard gets *60 percent of the series* to explain why he did what he did. Additionally, he confesses outright that he took advantage of her for validation, AND that he’s willing to operate in destructive ways for the smallest chance at getting famous. He portrays himself as being stuck in a cycle of abuse, where he receives abuse and then, through not addressing his own problems, passes that abuse on to others. Which, fair enough. Except not fair enough if he’s the only one to get the privilege of accounting for his actions in this way. Given this lopsided self-favouritism, and Richard’s own admission that he will stoop to some serious lows for validation, I cannot view this series as anything other than a continuation of that cycle of abuse. The entire exercise comes off to me as deeply deranged.
Focusing on whether or not he's a "pretty shit dude" doesn't seem all that relevant to the themes and lessons of the show, and certainly not the quality
Totally agreed with you until I just kept watching and now I feel horrible for him. People process trauma in different ways and after what I watched, I don’t judge him at all anymore
It doesn’t occur to you that, because he is the one telling the story, that he deliberately engineered your emotions to behave that way? Of course you feel bad for him. You are under his spell, and he wouldn’t have it any other way.
Dude what? I would feel bad for anyone who’s stalked by a violent, convicted stalker and raped. I don’t wish that on anyone. If he didn’t want people to know he was an asshole, he would’ve curated the show to be that way but he’s very clearly an asshole and even then it’s due to trauma. It’s called having a heart? it’s no spell. Idk why you’re shaming a literal rape and stalking victim because of.. *checks notes* he’s an asshole. That’s fucking weird
If you’re just starting episode four, you really shouldn’t comment on it yet. It’s a game changer. Edit: I don’t mean that in a dismissive way at all. I felt the same.
Honestly, stick with it. He doesn't shy away from calling himself out for his failures. He could have, but the brutal honesty and vulnerability, and the story arc makes watching the whole series an absolute must imho.
I can’t get past the fact that he is the one writing this. If you’re sympathetic towards him, it’s because he made himself out to be so. I finished the show, and I can’t shake the feeling that this is just entirely self-serving.
I’m a bit late to the party but there’s a pattern. The whole show he’s trying to get famous for his comedy. It’s shit, no one’s denying that. But he clearly shows he needs to be in the spotlight. He showed himself getting off to the shame of it all. Do we really think he’s done a 180 or has he found a way to both be in the spotlight and scratch his little shame fetish. I’m not making light of what he’s been through but I don’t think he should be praised like this.
Yes, exactly! I feel gross and used just being pulled into it. I bet he’s reading our words right now. Leave us alone, Richard! We don’t want to participate. Go do therapy.
And exploitative.
Totally!
It’s partially why I think the story is heavily embellished or made up. If real, his stalkers and abusers should be in prison, not the subjects of a hit Netflix series.
While I can appreciate that stories like this aren’t for everyone, I do find takes like these a little bit disconnected from reality. It’s pretty well known that many survivors don’t report for a variety of reasons (one of the main ones being that it rarely ends in an actual conviction).
Only around 2% of reported rapes in the UK even end in a charge, let alone a conviction. People are so completely clueless about how bad the justice system is and how unlikely it is for a SA victim to get justice. This is especially true in ‘complex’ (I say complex as shorthand) cases like Gadd's where the average person (and potential jury member) might not understand why Donny went back to his abuser's flat and will see that as evidence the SA didn't happen.
IRL "Martha" was not charged or imprisoned, the situation was settled without the authorities. But that doesn't villainise her enough for TV.
Sadly that rarely happens in real life. Abusers have to be reported. As for stalkers.. check how many of them are actually convicted. It's a shockingly low number