Sexy street harassment

denhaagenite

fergus1001 wrote: »

I first judged the girl and then preceded to poit out that everyone is judged by others whether you like it or not so either get over it or go back to Venus and men go back to Mars

I don't know how much Sci- Fi you've been exposed to but to the best of my knowledge all humans, regardless of gender, are from Planet Earth.

fergus1001 wrote: »

And it's not every man that does this take me for example I wouldn't have the confidence to cat call a woman or engage a random woman in conversation and I'm not ugly or what ever so don't be using the 'broad brush' on men

The "confidence" to catcall someone??? Are you serious? It's rude at best, predatory at worst. I would advise that you never develop this "confidence"

fergus1001 wrote: »

To finnish women give out about sexual harassment and make it look like every man is to blame well I'm sorry but the silent majority of men are sick of it

And I'm not talking to you in particular either

Nobody said every man is to blame, that's totally ludicrous. What we're trying to say is that there are a subsection of men (and women) who like to objectify women (and men) and feel women (and men) should be grateful for it. There's nothing wrong with trying to engage someone in conversation, just have respect for people and their boundaries.

Grayson

tinz18 wrote: »

I would say catcalling isn't as much of a problem here- or maybe its that I tune it out. However in normal times, at night on streets and around colleges during rag weeks, I definitely experienced a lot of young and not-so-young groups of lads shouting at me as I passed them. Its quite intimidating and I took to leaving work early before they'd be on the move just to avoid it. I've seen young teenage girls do it too though...in particular not-so-nice estates.

I've seen in in Dublin at night when people are locked. More from guys than girls. But the hen parties in templebar are the most terrifying

Besides that, I don't think I've really seen it. Even at building sites.

orubiru

OldNotWIse wrote: »

This reminded me, I have lost count of the amount of times that guys have said really inappropriate things to me and my girlfriend when we refuse their advances. Snide comments about just needing to be shown a good time, any chance of a threesome, "if anything ever changes in that regard" etc. It's so irritating. We are a couple, and they still can't take no for an answer. I often think if the guy in question chatted up a girl and she pointed to a guy beside her and said "that's my boyfriend" would he be so fúcking brave? Hardly, but when I point to her and say, "that's my girlfriend" we get all kinds of pervy remarks.

So what? I don't understand the point you are trying to make?

I have lost count of the number of times I have taken abuse at LUAS Heuston and Abbey Street stations because I won't give someone some change. Or abuse at Westmoreland Steet bus stop for the same.

Maybe if I was 7 foot tall and brandishing an axe would they be so f-cking brave? Hardly, but since I am short and quiet I get all kind of intimidation and threats.

I complain about it and folks are just like "that's just life in a big European city, buddy" and that's pretty much the end of it.

I'm sorry that you have encountered such awful people when you are out. The truth is that we all encounter folks like that from time to time. Sometimes even on a daily basis. Ever worked in Customer Service?

It's not restricted to guys. It's not restricted to guys who talk to women.

The fact is that in any population there will be a percentage of individuals with a lack of social skills, a lack of respect and an excess of aggression and anger. The bigger the population the bigger the number of individuals who are complete a-holes.

The more you go out, the more you will encounter them.

I think it is generally known that if you want to start up some kind of relationship, whether it be for business or friendship or sex, with another person then there has to be some kind of initial "approach". So I don't think it's unreasonable that guys would approach you and your girlfriend. I do however, think it's unreasonable for them to be mean to you. But, guess what? Some people are d!cks. In ALL walks of life and in ALL situations, people can be d!cks to each other.

Furthermore, we just have to take your word for it. For all we know you were making snide comments at these dudes and that was causing it to kick off. For all you know I was just grunting and ignoring the folks asking for change and that was causing them to kick off.

Meh.

For me the problem not "guys are harassing women in the streets" the problem is that "some people act like complete a-holes sometimes".

How can we fix that? Can we set up a charity to raise awareness that some people are just d!cks? The government could maybe run a poster campaign... "Hey, d!ckhead! Stop being a d!ckhead to everyone!"

This whole "Street Harassment" thing is tailor made for social media and people who want to be "shocked" by something and then become crusaders for that cause until they get bored and move on to the next thing.

I have someone on Facebook who had posted within a couple of hours their "disgust" at the street harassment followed up by photos of the great time they were having at Seaworld... FFS.

If it's relevant to you then you'll get indignant. If you don't care then you don't care.

I think by posting things like "well, >> I << get harassed when I'm out with my girlfriend" is not really adding to any wider discussion of the problem. You are simply reconfirming, for the millionth time, that some people are a-holes sometimes. You're just personalizing it and so missing the point that the problem is not with guys harassing women but rather with society being full of people who just have no respect for others. The "street harassment" is simply a symptom of a much larger problem.

You don't even really offer something up to say "OK, how can we maybe stop people from being d!cks to each other"

I'd maybe go as far as saying that this whole thing is just a mental masturbation exercise for those who want to feel better or superior because they think they know how to behave "properly". Your comment certainly comes across that way... "would he be so f-cking brave"... hmm, interesting.

I don't know.

beks101

secondrowgal wrote: »

I have followed this thread with interest. The last few pages, in particular the exchange between Foxtrol and OEJ, shows a microcosm of this misunderstanding in action, just in IMVHO.

OEJ has repeatedly and politely told Foxtrol that she finds such and such a harassment, that she will deal with it as she feels appropriately, starting off politely and possibly ending with a leave me the xxxx alone when all else fails.
Foxtol appears to refuse to believe what she is saying, dismisses her experience and her opinions and continues to harangue her about being polite.

Now that's just my take on reading posts with no body-language, no tone, etc., but if I can get that from the written word, why can't some guys understand that their behaviour is harassing? (I don't mean that Foxtol is harassing OEJ per se, just an analogy)

This is very true.

This thread is actually depressing me with its merry-go-round of the same opinions and insistences that 'women want to have their cake and eat it' or 'women don't understand the difference between compliments and harassment' or 'women are inconsistent/rude/arrogant/dismissive' etc etc without any regard for what real, live women with real, live experiences of this stuff are actually telling them. And of course women's experiences and feelings on the matter will vary - but I think there are enough experiences on this thread to vouch for the fact that street attention and cold approaches and all that comes with it can commonly be uncomfortable for many of us.

If someone tells you that a certain situation felt uncomfortable or felt like harassment to them, is it really your place to 'argue the facts of the situation' and tell them that they're wrong about feeling that way? Is the man's 'right' to 'talk to anyone he chooses' more important than that woman's perceived sense of safety and comfort in a public space? To her right to feel secure? Who is anyone to tell her that she is wrong in asserting her boundaries or to judge her on the various ways she may do so, because she feels uncomfortable? ("Hey OldNotWise, how dare you tell that guy to get lost after he hounded you, maybe you deserved to be called a cnut") That's what is most disturbing to me.

I think there's quite a sinister undertone to that, and one which makes it all too easy for a woman to self-doubt and self-guilt her own instinctive reaction to persistent attention or approaches and to just shut up and get on with it.

I've done it. I've been hollered at lewdly or interrupted rudely or had my ass pinched and I've just rolled my eyes and gotten on with it, because what other option did I have, really? Tell the guy to leave me alone? Oh no, then I'm a rude b1tch and full of myself for thinking that he was trying to flirt with me. Ignore the guy? No, then I'm dismissive and insensitive to how difficult it is for a guy to approach in the first place. Be aggressive back to him? Well then I'm just a giant cnut for not recognizing a compliment when it's right under my nose.

Quite often it's damned if you do, damned if you don't with this stuff to the point where even the silly, innocuous 'hello's or 'hey gorgeous's can seem like a minefield because you simply don't know how to respond, knowing that any single response could escalate the situation.

And again, I'm not saying every woman feels threatened by any element of attention she receives. Not true at all. I've said it before and I'll say it again - I love an appreciative nod or a smile or a greeting on eye contact. I like random conversations with random men anywhere and everywhere. It's the unwarranted and immediate judgements on my sexuality or inappropriate remarks or leering stares or refusals to walk away as I'm doing something as simple as walking down the street or having a pint with friends, when there hasn't been any element of interaction between us or any kind of a signal that I may be open to it.

Ficheall

What's the difference between "checking someone out and smiling at them" and giving them a "leering stare"?

denhaagenite

Ficheall wrote: »

What's the difference between "checking someone out and smiling at them" and giving them a "leering stare"?

Obvs wearing a trenchcoat and dark glasses, licking your lips and smoking a cigarette.

Grayson

Ficheall wrote: »

What's the difference between "checking someone out and smiling at them" and giving them a "leering stare"?

10 seconds and the level of your gaze

beks101

Ficheall wrote: »

What's the difference between "checking someone out and smiling at them" and giving them a "leering stare"?

Look, I get that men are going to stare at women, particularly the ones they find attractive. That's the most normal thing on the planet and works both ways. Personally that's not unpleasant at all and can be quite complimentary as long as it doesn't veer into the territory of 'leering'.

Leering, to me, is when a guy is going to stare right at you and up and down you with reckless abandon and for as long as he wants, and he doesn't give a sh1t if it makes you feel uncomfortable. He might even relish the fact that you know he's thinking about you sexually and sure you probably enjoy it anyway, why else would you dress like that? The unspoken message is 'oh yeah? What are you gonna do about it?'

orubiru

Ficheall wrote: »

What's the difference between "checking someone out and smiling at them" and giving them a "leering stare"?

I think the person doing the look, be it smiling or leering, should have a sense of which they are doing.

Maybe it really comes down to self awareness?

Like if you sit across from someone on the train, you might glance and nod or smile or whatever but I think if you sat and stared right at them for 30 seconds then some part of you must know that you are doing something slightly inappropriate or at least not socially "normal".

You just begin to wonder if some people just don't have that kind of awareness of themselves or what they are doing.

At the same time though... I bet if you filmed some guy going around NYC and saying "Hi, how are you?" in exactly the same way to a thousand different women then you'd get a pretty wide range of different responses.

Maybe it's also a contributing factor to the "misunderstanding" here?

So, if I went out on a Saturday to just get laid then playing the "numbers game" would probably be the method most likely to get me what I want... so if 9 women tell me to feck off, 15 just ignore me and Number 25 is totally into it and we go and have a one night stand then hasn't she really just made me more determined and more inclined to be relentless for next time?

Not every person has the same threshold of what makes them feel uncomfortable, or even offended. Perhaps worryingly, there will be some women out there for whom the aggressive approach might work.

I think we cross the line between "checking someone out and smiling at them" and "giving them a leering stare" when one of the two parties involved decides that we've crossed that line. Either the woman feels uncomfortable or the guy knows that he is acting inappropriately.

Unfortunately, that makes it impossible to implement a solid rule for what is appropriate to SAY to another person or how it is appropriate to look at them.

Obviously it's easier to say that physical contact is off limits... but even then... would touching an arm or a hand be inappropriate or would some people need that to say "OK, I think I know where this is going and I am good with that".

It gets really complicated really quickly.

Grayson

beks101 wrote: »

This is very true.

This thread is actually depressing me with its merry-go-round of the same opinions and insistences that 'women want to have their cake and eat it' or 'women don't understand the difference between compliments and harassment' or 'women are inconsistent/rude/arrogant/dismissive' etc etc without any regard for what real, live women with real, live experiences of this stuff are actually telling them. And of course women's experiences and feelings on the matter will vary - but I think there are enough experiences on this thread to vouch for the fact that street attention and cold approaches and all that comes with it can commonly be uncomfortable for many of us.

If someone tells you that a certain situation felt uncomfortable or felt like harassment to them, is it really your place to 'argue the facts of the situation' and tell them that they're wrong about feeling that way? Is the man's 'right' to 'talk to anyone he chooses' more important than that woman's perceived sense of safety and comfort in a public space? To her right to feel secure? Who is anyone to tell her that she is wrong in asserting her boundaries or to judge her on the various ways she may do so, because she feels uncomfortable? ("Hey OldNotWise, how dare you tell that guy to get lost after he hounded you, maybe you deserved to be called a cnut") That's what is most disturbing to me.

I think there's quite a sinister undertone to that, and one which makes it all too easy for a woman to self-doubt and self-guilt her own instinctive reaction to persistent attention or approaches and to just shut up and get on with it.

I've done it. I've been hollered at lewdly or interrupted rudely or had my ass pinched and I've just rolled my eyes and gotten on with it, because what other option did I have, really? Tell the guy to leave me alone? Oh no, then I'm a rude b1tch and full of myself for thinking that he was trying to flirt with me. Ignore the guy? No, then I'm dismissive and insensitive to how difficult it is for a guy to approach in the first place. Be aggressive back to him? Well then I'm just a giant cnut for not recognizing a compliment when it's right under my nose.

Quite often it's damned if you do, damned if you don't with this stuff to the point where even the silly, innocuous 'hello's or 'hey gorgeous's can seem like a minefield because you simply don't know how to respond, knowing that any single response could escalate the situation.

And again, I'm not saying every woman feels threatened by any element of attention she receives. Not true at all. I've said it before and I'll say it again - I love an appreciative nod or a smile or a greeting on eye contact. I like random conversations with random men anywhere and everywhere. It's the unwarranted and immediate judgements on my sexuality or inappropriate remarks or leering stares or refusals to walk away as I'm doing something as simple as walking down the street or having a pint with friends, when there hasn't been any element of interaction between us or any kind of a signal that I may be open to it.

No-one's disagreeing that if you walk past a building site and a builder shouts "SHOW US YER TITS!" that it counts as harassment.

A lot of people would disagree that someone saying "Hi" is harassment.

Some actions in between are debatable. I honestly never compliment women on their looks. I especially make a point of never doing it in work. That's because even saying "That's a nice dress" could be considered sexual by one person but not by another. It's not meant in a sexual way, but i can't help it if someone decides to take it that way.

The only time I've ever complimented a girl in work on clothing was when a girl wore a darth vader tee. And that was ok because i was wearing one too.

The only 100% solution to this is for a guy to never look at a girl as attractive and to never, ever compliment them. Because a compliment is only a compliment if it's coming from someone the girl wants it to come from.

Ficheall

beks101 wrote: »

Look, I get that men are going to stare at women, particularly the ones they find attractive. That's the most normal thing on the planet and works both ways. Personally that's not unpleasant at all and can be quite complimentary as long as it doesn't veer into the territory of 'leering'.

Leering, to me, is when a guy is going to stare right at you and up and down you with reckless abandon and for as long as he wants, and he doesn't give a sh1t if it makes you feel uncomfortable. He might even relish the fact that you know he's thinking about you sexually and sure you probably enjoy it anyway, why else would you dress like that? The unspoken message is 'oh yeah? What are you gonna do about it?'

So, for those of us who can't read minds, the only actual physical difference is the length of the stare, or presumably continuing to stare when the woman (or man) crosses her arms to cover her chest?
What's the signal for when to stop staring at a person's arse or crotch?

denhaagenite

Ficheall wrote: »

So, for those of us who can't read minds, the only actual physical difference is the length of the stare, or presumably continuing to stare when the woman (or man) crosses her arms to cover her chest?
What's the signal for when to stop staring at a person's arse or crotch?

Staring at people isn't nice. An attempt to make eye contact is OK, but if it's not possible then take it as a sign that it's not welcome.

P. Breathnach

Grayson wrote: »

No-one's disagreeing that if you walk past a building site and a builder shouts "SHOW US YER TITS!" that it counts as harassment....

Some would actually disagree on the basis that harassment involves repeated actions targeted on the same person. But I think most people would agree that it is some class of wrong or anti-social behaviour.

This leads me to a point: one person man might behave vexatiously towards a large number of individuals each day, scoring dozens of "hits" every week. But because it is a scattergun approach, no one victim can claim harassment.

[It's not obvious to me that workers on building sites are more likely to be nuisances than are other groups.]

orubiru

Ficheall wrote: »

So, for those of us who can't read minds, the only actual physical difference is the length of the stare, or presumably continuing to stare when the woman (or man) crosses her arms to cover her chest?
What's the signal for when to stop staring at a person's arse or crotch?

The individual staring would surely know the answer to that themselves?

I mean, any adult who has grown up in our society would know that a stare of more than 10 seconds without any response or acknowledgement is probably quite inappropriate.

I don't think we should need a signal to stop. I would think that anyone who does need a signal to stop staring after 10 seconds maybe even has a mental illness or least some kind of behavioral problem?

It would also be fair to assume that if a woman was OK with you looking at her for A FEW seconds AND also acknowledged you with a smile or something them the next step would be to start a conversation. Continuing to stare relentlessly would likely end up with them feeling uncomfortable with your attention.

However, I don't doubt that there are situations out there where the guy has stared awkwardly at the girl for an excessive amount of time and yet, somehow, things have worked out OK for them.

I guess it comes down to understanding what is generally OK and also understanding that there are people out there who are not OK with ANY kind of attention and others for whom WAY too much attention is still going to be OK.

Grayson

denhaagenite wrote: »

Staring at people isn't nice. An attempt to make eye contact is OK, but if it's not possible then take it as a sign that it's not welcome.

Depends on the culture too. Some cultures consider it rude to make any eye contact. Some consider it a lack of respect if you don't. (Western) Men apparently look at women between 4-8 seconds depending on how attractive they think they are. This is partly related to the body's reward system. looking at an attractive woman releases endorphins which elicit a good sensitisation in men. Women on the other hand tend to look at a guy on average for about 4 seconds.

How much eye contact is made during conversation has also been studied. Most people maintain eye contact with the other person for about 60% of the conversation.

The thing is that there are differences in how a woman looks at a man and how they look bad. Even if it's a nice guy, if he finds her attractive he'll probably look at her for twice as long as she looks at him.

Grayson

P. Breathnach wrote: »

[It's not obvious to me that workers on building sites are more likely to be nuisances than are other groups.]

It's just a stereo type and I think I mentioned earlier that I've never seen builders harass women.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Some would actually disagree on the basis that harassment involves repeated actions targeted on the same person. But I think most people would agree that it is some class of wrong or anti-social behaviour.

This leads me to a point: one person man might behave vexatiously towards a large number of individuals each day, scoring dozens of "hits" every week. But because it is a scattergun approach, no one victim can claim harassment.

Without looking up the dictornary, I think harassment depends on the level of abuse. But that can depend on the abuse, the duration and the persistence. For example looking at a woman chest for 60 seconds would be harassment. I think we would both agree with that. And so would staring at her chest for 30 seconds on two days running. however does 1/8th of a second over a year and a half count (Silly i know, but just to make a point)

Ficheall

orubiru wrote: »

I mean, any adult who has grown up in our society would know that a stare of more than 10 seconds without any response or acknowledgement is probably quite inappropriate.

I don't think we should need a signal to stop. I would think that anyone who does need a signal to stop staring after 10 seconds maybe even has a mental illness or least some kind of behavioral problem?

I guess it comes down to understanding what is generally OK and also understanding that there are people out there who are not OK with ANY kind of attention and others for whom WAY too much attention is still going to be OK.

I'd consider 10 seconds a ridiculously long length of time to stare continuously at someone. You'd walk into something, for starters.

orubiru wrote: »

It would also be fair to assume that if a woman was OK with you looking at her for A FEW seconds AND also acknowledged you with a smile or something them the next step would be to start a conversation.

Or people could just smile without wanting to initiate conversation? I smile at passing people on a regular basis - doesn't mean I want to talk to the feckers.

OldNotWIse

orubiru wrote: »

So what? I don't understand the point you are trying to make?

I have lost count of the number of times I have taken abuse at LUAS Heuston and Abbey Street stations because I won't give someone some change. Or abuse at Westmoreland Steet bus stop for the same.

Maybe if I was 7 foot tall and brandishing an axe would they be so f-cking brave? Hardly, but since I am short and quiet I get all kind of intimidation and threats.

I complain about it and folks are just like "that's just life in a big European city, buddy" and that's pretty much the end of it.

I'm sorry that you have encountered such awful people when you are out. The truth is that we all encounter folks like that from time to time. Sometimes even on a daily basis. Ever worked in Customer Service?

It's not restricted to guys. It's not restricted to guys who talk to women.

The fact is that in any population there will be a percentage of individuals with a lack of social skills, a lack of respect and an excess of aggression and anger. The bigger the population the bigger the number of individuals who are complete a-holes.

The more you go out, the more you will encounter them.

I think it is generally known that if you want to start up some kind of relationship, whether it be for business or friendship or sex, with another person then there has to be some kind of initial "approach". So I don't think it's unreasonable that guys would approach you and your girlfriend. I do however, think it's unreasonable for them to be mean to you. But, guess what? Some people are d!cks. In ALL walks of life and in ALL situations, people can be d!cks to each other.

Furthermore, we just have to take your word for it. For all we know you were making snide comments at these dudes and that was causing it to kick off. For all you know I was just grunting and ignoring the folks asking for change and that was causing them to kick off.

Meh.

For me the problem not "guys are harassing women in the streets" the problem is that "some people act like complete a-holes sometimes".

How can we fix that? Can we set up a charity to raise awareness that some people are just d!cks? The government could maybe run a poster campaign... "Hey, d!ckhead! Stop being a d!ckhead to everyone!"

This whole "Street Harassment" thing is tailor made for social media and people who want to be "shocked" by something and then become crusaders for that cause until they get bored and move on to the next thing.

I have someone on Facebook who had posted within a couple of hours their "disgust" at the street harassment followed up by photos of the great time they were having at Seaworld... FFS.

If it's relevant to you then you'll get indignant. If you don't care then you don't care.

I think by posting things like "well, >> I << get harassed when I'm out with my girlfriend" is not really adding to any wider discussion of the problem. You are simply reconfirming, for the millionth time, that some people are a-holes sometimes. You're just personalizing it and so missing the point that the problem is not with guys harassing women but rather with society being full of people who just have no respect for others. The "street harassment" is simply a symptom of a much larger problem.

You don't even really offer something up to say "OK, how can we maybe stop people from being d!cks to each other"

I'd maybe go as far as saying that this whole thing is just a mental masturbation exercise for those who want to feel better or superior because they think they know how to behave "properly". Your comment certainly comes across that way... "would he be so f-cking brave"... hmm, interesting.

I don't know.

When was the last time someone asked if they could join you and your OH in the sack? Or have I hit a nerve

One eyed Jack

secondrowgal wrote: »

I have followed this thread with interest. The last few pages, in particular the exchange between Foxtrol and OEJ, shows a microcosm of this misunderstanding in action, just in IMVHO.

OEJ has repeatedly and politely told Foxtrol that she finds such and such a harassment, that she will deal with it as she feels appropriately, starting off politely and possibly ending with a leave me the xxxx alone when all else fails.
Foxtol appears to refuse to believe what she is saying, dismisses her experience and her opinions and continues to harangue her about being polite.

Now that's just my take on reading posts with no body-language, no tone, etc., but if I can get that from the written word, why can't some guys understand that their behaviour is harassing? (I don't mean that Foxtol is harassing OEJ per se, just an analogy)

Quality post secondrowgal, but, erm, I'm not sure how to tell you this...

Awkward :pac:

Grayson wrote: »

The only 100% solution to this is for a guy to never look at a girl as attractive and to never, ever compliment them. Because a compliment is only a compliment if it's coming from someone the girl wants it to come from.

Ficheall wrote: »

So, for those of us who can't read minds, the only actual physical difference is the length of the stare, or presumably continuing to stare when the woman (or man) crosses her arms to cover her chest?
What's the signal for when to stop staring at a person's arse or crotch?

Seriously like, can you guys not actually understand that everyone has their own comfort levels and points where they experience discomfort? It's not rocket science, it's basic human interaction, and it's using your best judgment based on your reading the other person's body language.

There's no 100% foolproof answer to what is or isn't appropriate behaviour for every single individual in every single social situation, and that's why sometimes your intentions can be misinterpreted. It's not the other person's fault that you feel your intentions were misinterpreted. They're just doing the same as you - reading your body language, and that's why it's more important that you're aware of your own behaviour before you go shifting the responsibility for the misinterpretation onto the other person. Sometimes you'll get it wrong, it happens, I've often been mistaken for a gay man when I'm out on my own in a gay bar, so I can understand when a guy tries to chat me up. Usually all it takes is to tell him I'm not interested, but there are some guys who don't take the hint and try to push it.

The same thing happens with women - most of the time they take the hint the first time, but there are that minority that have questioned my sexuality because "You don't want this?", I'm not sure how to reply to that one because there's no nice way to say "No?" that you won't oftend somebody, but it's how they react after I say no that determines whether I'll feel guilty about it afterwards or not - calling me a stuck up cnut (that's a popular one! ), I'm not going to feel too guilty about having not reciprocated their intentions.

orubiru

OldNotWIse wrote: »

When was the last time someone asked if they could join you and your OH in the sack? Or have I hit a nerve

I'm not sure I understand the point of the "Or have I hit a nerve" comment...?

If you are out with your OH and someone is making comments like that then that person is a bit of an a-hole. You and your OH are not the only people who are the subject of bad, aggressive or anti-social behavior though.

Like I said, some people experience that on a daily basis. It can depend on where you live, which buses you get, the clothes you wear, your hairstyle, the color of your skin or, of course, your sexuality.

Hell, I bet there are cyclists who are out there antagonizing motorists every morning and motorists antagonizing cyclists.

I think that you assume you are being harassed because you are with your OH and you are both female. That's incorrect. You are being harassed because those people who are harassing you are total pr!cks and that's the way that these folks behave. Surely, you can see that the kind of person who is acting like a d!ck towards you in a bar is the same kind of person who'll be verbally abusing the staff in McDonalds or the taxi driver or just random strangers at the end of the night?

I'm pretty confident in assuming that you are overstating the amount of times people ask if they could "join you and your OH in the sack". I'd reckon it's a pretty rare occurrence. Much the same as the lady in the Youtube video, without the raw data (like how many times you were out, for how long and how many people you encountered etc) it's impossible to say if the annoyances that you experience are down to just folks being a-holes in general or if it is actually a problem where you are a specific target of abuse and people who would otherwise be relatively polite and reserved are going out of their way to antagonize you.

It's not a "Men vs Women" problem. Yet, many people seem determined to paint it as such.

gozunda

fergus1001 wrote: »

I first judged the girl and then preceded to poit out that everyone is judged by others whether you like it or not so either get over it or go back to Venus and men go back to Mars

Your 'judgement' is irrelevant to the issue tbh. The fact whether you perceive the woman as beautiful or ugly is immaterial - a bunch of blokes in that video already made comments about her. It's quite clear that she was already 'judged' by those individuals. The point is that no one is under any obligation or even has any remit to make random strangers the recipients of such valueless vocalised 'judgements'. In short keep it in your pants.

fergus1001 wrote: »

And it's not every man that does this take me for example I wouldn't have the confidence to cat call a woman or engage a random woman in conversation and I'm not ugly or what ever so don't be using the 'broad brush' on men

So it's lack of confidence that prevents you cat calling / harassing others on the street?? How about another more valid reason - basic good manners! The reason that I don't engage in such behaviour is that I wouldn't wish any female acquaintance or relative to be at the receiving end of such harassment.

fergus1001 wrote: »

To finnish women give out about sexual harassment and make it look like every man is to blame well I'm sorry but the silent majority of men are sick of it

Well I'm a man and I don't have a chip on my shoulder about 'women' (all women?) and I don't believe that these 'woman' believe that 'every man is to blame'. FFS get real and grow a pair - you are blaming women for being the victims of street harassment. Nice 360 Clive ...

fergus1001 wrote: »

And I'm not talking to you in particular either

That's ok cos I ain't a women either ..

One eyed Jack

orubiru wrote: »

It's not a "Men vs Women" problem. Yet, many people seem determined to paint it as such.

Whereas you seem determined to suggest that people should be more understanding and accepting of people who engage in antisocial behaviour?

I didn't need to read an explanation of what motivates anyone to engage in antisocial behaviour, I don't particularly care what their motivations or justifications are. I don't simply have to accept it and I don't believe anyone else should have to accept it either.

ps - if someone asks can they jump in the sack with your girlfriend, it's a direct insult with regard to that person's sexuality. It's like the gay guy that says I should try it some time - I'm not particularly interested in trying it any time, I'm just there to enjoy myself, and I'll decide what I enjoy.

I don't need strangers to make that determination for me, no matter how good looking or interesting they think they are. I may not see them the same way they see themselves, and that's where the problem is with them, not with me, as much as they might like to assume I'm the one with the problem. I'm not the person who put them in the position they find themselves, I'm only responsible for my own behaviour, and they're responsible for their own behaviour.

Grayson

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Seriously like, can you guys not actually understand that everyone has their own comfort levels and points where they experience discomfort?

That was my point. the only 100% way to be certain of not offending anyone is to never compliment etc (and probably wear dark sunglasses).
Otherwise at some point you are going to offend someone. In this case, you seem to have misunderstood my post and got offended.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The same thing happens with women - most of the time they take the hint the first time, but there are that minority that have questioned my sexuality because "You don't want this?", I'm not sure how to reply to that one because there's no nice way to say "No?" that you won't oftend somebody, but it's how they react after I say no that determines whether I'll feel guilty about it afterwards or not - calling me a stuck up cnut (that's a popular one! ), I'm not going to feel too guilty about having not reciprocated their intentions.

Tell them you had a **** before you left the house and maybe later...

OldNotWIse

orubiru wrote: »

I'm not sure I understand the point of the "Or have I hit a nerve" comment...?

If you are out with your OH and someone is making comments like that then that person is a bit of an a-hole. You and your OH are not the only people who are the subject of bad, aggressive or anti-social behavior though.

Like I said, some people experience that on a daily basis. It can depend on where you live, which buses you get, the clothes you wear, your hairstyle, the color of your skin or, of course, your sexuality.

Hell, I bet there are cyclists who are out there antagonizing motorists every morning and motorists antagonizing cyclists.

I think that you assume you are being harassed because you are with your OH and you are both female. That's incorrect. You are being harassed because those people who are harassing you are total pr!cks and that's the way that these folks behave. Surely, you can see that the kind of person who is acting like a d!ck towards you in a bar is the same kind of person who'll be verbally abusing the staff in McDonalds or the taxi driver or just random strangers at the end of the night?

I'm pretty confident in assuming that you are overstating the amount of times people ask if they could "join you and your OH in the sack". I'd reckon it's a pretty rare occurrence. Much the same as the lady in the Youtube video, without the raw data (like how many times you were out, for how long and how many people you encountered etc) it's impossible to say if the annoyances that you experience are down to just folks being a-holes in general or if it is actually a problem where you are a specific target of abuse and people who would otherwise be relatively polite and reserved are going out of their way to antagonize you.

It's not a "Men vs Women" problem. Yet, many people seem determined to paint it as such.

You are wrong.

One eyed Jack

Grayson wrote: »

That was my point. the only 100% way to be certain of not offending anyone is to never compliment etc (and probably wear dark sunglasses).

That's true and all, but if you find someone attractive, they're never going to know, and you're never going to know if they would reciprocate your attraction because they don't want to risk offending you either. That's fine in theory, but it makes things pretty tense between people. Your idea is the other extreme of the scale.

There's nothing inherently offensive about complimenting someone, it's the manner in which you compliment them that they may perceive as being welcome, or unwelcome, and usually you can tell that by their demeanour, their deportment, their behaviour, their attitude, and yes, even their appearance!

Otherwise at some point you are going to offend someone. In this case, you seem to have misunderstood my post and got offended.

Sure, I misunderstood your post, but I wasn't offended by it, honestly I'm not sure how you picked that up, but some communication methods are naturally more prone to misunderstood communication than others. The fact you acknowledged that I may have been offended, even given it was a misinterpretation, shows at least you acknowledged that possibility, and that's appreciated a lot more than if I thought you just didn't give a shìt at all!

Tell them you had a **** before you left the house and maybe later...

They never believe me

:pac:

P. Breathnach

Grayson wrote: »

That was my point. the only 100% way to be certain of not offending anyone is to never compliment etc (and probably wear dark sunglasses).
Otherwise at some point you are going to offend someone. ...

You don't have to initiate a conversation with a stranger by paying a compliment. In fact, by doing so, you are investing the contact with some significance: "I'm talking to you because I fancy you (and ...)". If the other party doesn't fancy you, you are implicitly inviting a rejection.

ptee1

Here is the new zealand version with a stunning model

I'd say this is more representative of what actually happens to most women on a day to day basis.




youtube.com/watch?v=kXdMAXaMicc

orubiru

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Whereas you seem determined to suggest that people should be more understanding and accepting of people who engage in antisocial behaviour?

I didn't need to read an explanation of what motivates anyone to engage in antisocial behaviour, I don't particularly care what their motivations or justifications are. I don't simply have to accept it and I don't believe anyone else should have to accept it either.

ps - if someone asks can they jump in the sack with your girlfriend, it's a direct insult with regard to that person's sexuality. It's like the gay guy that says I should try it some time - I'm not particularly interested in trying it any time, I'm just there to enjoy myself, and I'll decide what I enjoy.

I don't need strangers to make that determination for me, no matter how good looking or interesting they think they are. I may not see them the same way they see themselves, and that's where the problem is with them, not with me, as much as they might like to assume I'm the one with the problem. I'm not the person who put them in the position they find themselves, I'm only responsible for my own behaviour, and they're responsible for their own behaviour.

Not at all. Antisocial behavior, on the level that OldNowWIse is describing, is absolutely unacceptable. I don't think there is a need to be understanding or accepting of the behavior but there is a need to understand that the behavior is a symptom of something else. A larger problem.

The Youtube video would have been far more effective if it had provided us with more data and had actually taken the time to confront the guys doing the harassing and ask "why?". Not even THAT sure that some of the comments made to the lady could really be classified as harassment.

All I can gain from that video is the knowledge that some people are a-holes sometimes. If you walk around NYC for 10 hours and come up with only 2 minutes of video to prove your point or make your statement. Then I might suggest that you've wasted your time and shouldn't plow through with your campaign until you actually have something of substance to go forward with.

Except the message they obviously just wanted to get out there was "guys are a-holes, look how they harass women".

We all know that some people are a-holes sometimes. Be selective with the footage and it becomes "some GUYS are a-holes sometimes" strip away any actual statistics so the message has become "guys are a-holes, look how they harass women".

If we don't know how many people she encountered and how many of those actually harassed her then we can't create an informed opinion.

You are right, you don't have to accept it. Nobody should have to accept it.

This video wasn't created to solve the problem though. There is no effort made to educate or inform. It's simply a piece of propaganda.

orubiru

OldNotWIse wrote: »

You are wrong.

Well, I don't believe you. Since it was you making the statement the onus of proof lies with you. So, lets leave it there maybe?

ptee1

orubiru wrote: »

Not at all. Antisocial behavior, on the level that OldNowWIse is describing, is absolutely unacceptable. I don't think there is a need to be understanding or accepting of the behavior but there is a need to understand that the behavior is a symptom of something else. A larger problem.

The Youtube video would have been far more effective if it had provided us with more data and had actually taken the time to confront the guys doing the harassing and ask "why?". Not even THAT sure that some of the comments made to the lady could really be classified as harassment.

All I can gain from that video is the knowledge that some people are a-holes sometimes. If you walk around NYC for 10 hours and come up with only 2 minutes of video to prove your point or make your statement. Then I might suggest that you've wasted your time and shouldn't plow through with your campaign until you actually have something of substance to go forward with.

Except the message they obviously just wanted to get out there was "guys are a-holes, look how they harass women".

We all know that some people are a-holes sometimes. Be selective with the footage and it becomes "some GUYS are a-holes sometimes" strip away any actual statistics so the message has become "guys are a-holes, look how they harass women".

If we don't know how many people she encountered and how many of those actually harassed her then we can't create an informed opinion.

You are right, you don't have to accept it. Nobody should have to accept it.

This video wasn't created to solve the problem though. There is no effort made to educate or inform. It's simply a piece of propaganda.

Good post. I have to agree wholeheartedly.

The "charity" at the end of the video and the push for donations probably had a big part in designing the video. I think it was a business decision to target a specific audience that would donate money at the end. They certainly did a great job.