Lewd remarks - banter or not?

Hitchens

Spotted this article and wondered have we become totally desensitised to peoples feelings.

http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/making-lewd-remarks-to-women-on-the-street-is-not-banter-1116509-Oct2013/

Ted_YNWA

Get them out for the boys

The Backwards Man

Depends if she's a 5 or a 9.

/sarcasm

My name is URL

This'll not end well!

kasper

who goes cycling wearing high heals ?

o1s1n

The world has many arseholes. It always has. We haven't 'become' anything, it's always been that way unfortunately.

dxhound2005

Hitchens wrote: »

Spotted this article and wondered have we become totally desensitised to peoples feelings.

http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/making-lewd-remarks-to-women-on-the-street-is-not-banter-1116509-Oct2013/

I haven't, you haven't, therefore we haven't.

This part offended my senses too.

being gawked at by a group of neanderthal men.

The neanderthals were a fine species. Have we become totally desensitised to the feelings of their descendants?

Doc Ruby

Patriarchy! Feminazis! Privelege! What about the menz! Rape culture! Cultural Marxism! Third Wave! Dworkin! Brainwashing! Domestic violence!

There that should get things going nicely.

Hande hoche!

I just don't like the word banter or worse still bants.

josip

If I was more cynical, I'd see this as a "I got some attention today. Let's write an article about it and get some more attention."
But I'm not more cynical.
So it's terrible altogether.
Joe.

P_1

Other people don't give a continental shíte about what you think about them, why should you give one about what they think of you.

BBDBB

anyone fancy a diet coke?

While she definitely seems highly strung, she's 100% right.

Hande hoche!

BBDBB wrote: »

anyone fancy a diet coke?

Is there shirtless men involved?

Peregrine

BBDBB wrote: »

anyone fancy a diet coke?

Only if it's sugar tax exempt.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

so we're not even allowed look at or talk about women now?

BBDBB

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Is there shirtless men involved?

only if its essential to the plot and not a cheap gimmick to sell more diet coke to groups of ladies in high vis

April O Neill

Hitchens wrote: »

Spotted this article and wondered have we become totally desensitised to peoples feelings.

http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/making-lewd-remarks-to-women-on-the-street-is-not-banter-1116509-Oct2013/

Started out as a good enough article, but girlfriend needs to learn how to edit.

As to the thread subject, definitely not banter in the situation she describes. It might, might qualify as banter if it was addressed to her rather than about her. But it wasn't, so it's not.

Bipolar Joe

What brand of arsehole goes cycling in high heels?

o1s1n

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

so we're not even allowed look at or talk about women now?

Not making lewd comments about people when they're in ear shot would be nice.

Falls within the whole 'don't be a dick' life rule everyone should live by.

BBDBB

BBDBB wrote: »

anyone fancy a diet coke?

Honest to god, it's starting to become kind of funny that the same argument has to be trotted out when these kind of discussions come up. I think that say a lot tbh.

I agree with a poster above, she does seem highly strung. If it was me I'd shrug it off and think no more about it, but she's right, why should anyone have to hear comments like that when they're just trying to get to or from work.

Now granted, this shouldn't be a gender issue - some people are just **** - male or female.

valknut

Commentator is an arse but he makes some good points, http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D4JA4EPRbWhQ

BBDBB

Deleted User wrote: »

Honest to god, it's starting to become kind of funny that the same argument has to be trotted out when these kind of discussions come up. I think that say a lot tbh.

I agree with a poster above, she does seem highly strung. If it was me I'd shrug it off and think no more about it, but she's right, why should anyone have to hear comments like that when they're just trying to get to or from work.

Now granted, this shouldn't be a gender issue - some people are just **** - male or female.

I agree with your last point

Im not sure why you have quoted/addressed me with your first couple of paragraphs tbh

NuckingFacker

I've never liked banter, I prefer straight cash. "Swap me for my lawnmower."..pfft, feck off.

BBDBB

BBDBB wrote: »

I agree with your last point

Im not sure why you have quoted/addressed me with your first couple of paragraphs tbh

The diet coke ad is always brought into discussions where a woman claims to having been "objectified".

BBDBB

Deleted User wrote: »

The diet coke ad is always brought into discussions where a woman claims to having been "objectified".

is it? right ok, why do you think that is?

WoollyRedHat

BBDBB wrote: »

anyone fancy a diet coke?

Aspartane, like... ew.

BBDBB

BBDBB wrote: »

is it? right ok, why do you think that is?

I don't know tbh, because it's the only argument there is?

Like I said, it shouldn't be a gender issue. It's a classless asshole issue!

The Big Smoke

Deleted User wrote: »

The diet coke ad is always brought into discussions where a woman claims to having been "objectified".

Until it becomes equal to objectify both genders in ads, it should be repeated again and again. I'm sure you would be rabbiting on in whatever ladies forum about the poor wimminz being objectified in lynx or hunky dory ads. Problem is that most ads objectifying women are pulled after a while, whereas beauties like "he drives she dies" is perfectly acceptable.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

I was too busy spluttering with anger that someone, a professional, would inform me that he would like to be next to my genitals.

best sentence ever?

The Big Smoke

The Big Smoke wrote: »

Until it becomes equal to objectify both genders in ads, it should be repeated again and again. I'm sure you would be rabbiting on in whatever ladies forum about the poor wimminz being objectified in lynx or hunky dory ads. Problem is that most ads objectifying women are pulled after a while, whereas beauties like "he drives she dies" is perfectly acceptable.

Did you even read my post about it not being a gender issue? no? didn't think so.

Find me a post of mine where I ever have "rabbited" on about the objectification of women - I bet you can't because it has never ever happened.

sdanseo

We make some horrific jokes in work all the time, but only among ourselves. We wouldn't go saying them to people on the street. There's a kind of line between being normal and being a moron.

The Big Smoke

Deleted User wrote: »

Did you even read my post about it not being a gender issue? no? didn't think so.

Find me a post of mine where I ever have "rabbited" on about the objectification of women - I bet you can't because it has never ever happened.

No, you said you were tired of people bringing up the diet coke ad. The classic "shut up and take it" line trotted out whenever a man questions objectification. Whereas there's uproar when its women being objectified.

The Big Smoke

The Big Smoke wrote: »

Until it becomes equal to objectify both genders in ads, it should be repeated again and again. I'm sure you would be rabbiting on in whatever ladies forum about the poor wimminz being objectified in lynx or hunky dory ads. Problem is that most ads objectifying women are pulled after a while, whereas beauties like "he drives she dies" is perfectly acceptable.

I fail to see how a man being objectified in an ad somehow removes people's right to argue that the woman in the article shouldn't have had the comment in question shouted at her in public. They're two completely separate issues.

Wait, I'll try again. Man takes shirt off in ad. Woman gets harassed in public in a completely unrelated incident. Nope, I don't see the connection.

The Big Smoke

The Big Smoke wrote: »

No, you said you were tired of people bringing up the diet coke ad. The classic "shut up and take it" line trotted out whenever a man questions objectification. Whereas there's uproar when its women being objectified.

The moment that diet coke ad anecdote was posted, it turned it into a gender issue. It didn't need to be a gender issue.

Apart from the fact that one is about an advert on TV and the link the OP is about a woman on her way to work. Bringing the diet coke ad into this thread was ludicrous.

April O Neill

The Big Smoke wrote: »

No, you said you were tired of people bringing up the diet coke ad. The classic "shut up and take it" line trotted out whenever a man questions objectification.

That diet coke ad is pretty much all you've got. There are other ads objectifying men, but ads objectifying women are much, much, MUCH more prevalent. It's not even anywhere remotely comparable.

The equivalent for men, is menfolk being represented as blithering idiots who can barely tie their own shoelaces in ads. Objectification of men rarely happens, at least relative to women. The fact that you had to cite an ad from over 20 YEARS AGO shows this.

The Big Smoke

Deleted User wrote: »

The moment that diet coke ad anecdote was posted, it turned it into a gender issue. It didn't need to be a gender issue.

Agreed. Just making a point.

On topic, I have a fairly dark sense of humour so lewdness is a must.

diomed

It was probably a Pashley Princess bicycle. When I see someone with a bicycle I look at the bicycle and judge them on that.

The Big Smoke

The Big Smoke wrote: »

On topic, I have a fairly dark sense of humour so lewdness is a must.

Nothing wrong with a bit of lewdness :P

It's the brain to mouth filter that's the problem with gobshytes like those in the OP!

The Big Smoke

April O Neill wrote: »

That diet coke ad is pretty much all you've got.

Muller ads, he drives she dies, galaxy ads, malteaser bars... I could go on but it's off topic.

Bipolar Joe

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know tbh, because it's the only argument there is?

Like I said, it shouldn't be a gender issue. It's a classless asshole issue!

The thing is, things like these are almost always a gender issue, brought up by one or the other "Side." Hunky Dorys, Club Orange, Yorkie, Ryanair, so on. They all had to apologise, pull ads and stuff because they were deemed sexist. Then you have Diet Coke, Malteasers, DoneDeal, that Bingo app ad, Boys Are Stupid, the "Oven rack in a bag" cleaning ad, so on. All are OK for some reason. It quite often seems that women are allowed to kick up a fuss, which is fine, but men aren't.

I took a class in semiotics and media studies, where we examined The Male Gaze, infantilisation, the mix of sex and violence, among other things. When it was pointed out that men come out bad in these same ads, it was ignored.

Am I saying this lady should shut up? No, I think what you said, she needs to stop being so highly strung. This shouldn't be a case of gender politics, but the way this is written makes it at least seem that way, obviously, to a lot of people.

Any way, I am bored and ill so I'm gonna go off and probably be sick now.

April O Neill

The Big Smoke wrote: »

Muller ads, he drives she dies, galaxy ads, malteaser bars... I could go on but it's off topic.

You might want to be more specific there, as I don't know those ads. I can't think of which ones for those brands sexually objectify men. I think I remember a Aero one from a few years back. Can you enlighten me of the sexually-objectifying-to-men ads for each brand you named? Not being combative, I am just genuinely interested. I think men have another more pervasive and damaging portrayal in modern ads than being sexually objectified, and that's making men look like they are mouth-breathing ludres.

The Big Smoke

April O Neill wrote: »

You might want to be more specific there, as I don't know those ads. I can't think of which ones for those brands sexually objectify men. I think I remember a Aero one from a few years back. Can you enlighten me of the sexually-objectifying-to-men ads for each brand you named? Not being combative, I am just genuinely interested. I think men have another more pervasive and damaging portrayal in modern ads than being sexually objectified, and that's making men look like they are mouth-breathing ludres.

Youtube is your friend.

Bipolar Joe

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

The thing is, things like these are almost always a gender issue,

Oh believe me, it bothers me greatly that there are "sides" I can't stand that sh*t tbh, but I believe the OP is male and therefore not pushing the gender issue at all. He mentions "people" in his OP, and he talks about it being banter or not, not if it's not fair on the poor women.

Bipolar Joe

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh believe me, it bothers me greatly that there are "sides" I can't stand that sh*t tbh, but I believe the OP is male and therefore not pushing the gender issue at all. He mentions "people" in his OP, and he talks about it being banter or not, not if it's not fair on the poor women.

If the OP was having a conversation with himself, it might have ended better. But, sooner or later, someone will push.

Bipolar Joe

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

If the OP was having a conversation with himself, it might have ended better. But, sooner or later, someone will push.

Unfortunately in this case, it was sooner!

BBDBB

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know tbh, because it's the only argument there is?

Like I said, it shouldn't be a gender issue. It's a classless asshole issue!

an "argument" for what?

Im not arguing and I don't know why you think I am

Once again I agree, being a classless asshole isn't exclusive to one gender.

Legs.Eleven

Banter is usually two-way with both parties engaging in said banter willingly. A stranger on the street telling you what he'd like to do with you is not banter and it's inappropriate, sleazy, disrespectful carry on. I get it on a daily basis here in Madrid as do most women and my reaction is usually to raise my eyes to heaven and class the man in question under "sad case" in my mind.

I'm about to walk to the supermarket dressed in normal, casual clothes and it's almost guaranteed that I will be on the receiving end of a lewd comment/wolf whistle between here and there. Why should I or any woman be cool with that?

Legs.Eleven

BBDBB wrote: »

an "argument" for what?

Im not arguing and I don't know why you think I am

Once again I agree, being a classless asshole isn't exclusive to one gender.

What was your Diet Coke comment in reference to?

It's no consolation I know, but I honestly believe the majority of guys would never dream of saying something so arsey

BBDBB

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

What was your Diet Coke comment in reference to?

that there are "classless assholes" of both genders, neither should be excused