Sexy street harassment
Comments
-
Joeytheparrot wrote: »Simple question why did the poster suggest using an "average" woman?
Because using an extremely ugly or extremely good looking person for the experiment wouldn't be as relevant to as many people as using a normal, average looking woman that you see more frequently than either of the extremes. Average would obviously be the middle ground.0 -
DoYouEvenLift wrote: »Because using an extremely ugly or extremely good looking person for the experiment wouldn't be as relevant to as many people as using a normal, average looking woman that you see more frequently than either of the extremes. Average would obviously be the middle ground.
So if it was a good looking woman then harassment could be excused?It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Terry Pratchet
0 -
Joeytheparrot wrote: »So if it was a good looking woman then harassment could be excused?
Lmao where are you getting that from? I didn't even hint at anything like that but your assumptions actually bring the lols.
Can't believe I even have to explain such a simple concept. I'm talking about holding a simple experiment, similar to the op, that would be relevant to the higher amount of people since obviously our streets aren't filled with extremely ugly people or extremely good looking people and using an 'average' would be the middle ground. We could assume that if the average woman received a high number of cases of harassment that the extremely ugly woman would receive considerably less and the extremely good looking woman would receive considerably more.
Nowhere in any of my posts did I condone harassment for any situation, or at least I didn't intend to if you interpreted them that way.0 -
DoYouEvenLift wrote: »Lmao where are you getting that from? I didn't even hint at anything like that but your assumptions actually bring the lols.
Can't believe I even have to explain such a simple concept. I'm talking about holding a simple experiment, similar to the op, that would be relevant to the higher amount of people since obviously our streets aren't filled with extremely ugly people or extremely good looking people and using an 'average' would be the middle ground. We could assume that if the average woman received a high number of cases of harassment that the extremely ugly woman would receive considerably less and the extremely good looking woman would receive considerably more.
Nowhere in any of my posts did I condone harassment for any situation, or at least I didn't intend to if you interpreted them that way.
Why does it matter what the person looks like though?It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Terry Pratchet
0 -
Joeytheparrot wrote: »Why does it matter what the person looks like though?
Because we are humans, visual creatures. Do you think an extremely ugly person would receive the same amount of harassment as an extremely good looking person?0 -
Advertisement
-
Joeytheparrot wrote: »Why does it matter what the person looks like though?
If what the person looks like doesn't matter then why should the gender of the person matter?
I wonder if anyone could comment on same gender harassment? I'm sure that it must as common in "gay" clubs and bars as it is in regular clubs and bars?
On the streets, would it happen as much? I mean, I think we can assume that there are more heterosexual people than homosexual or bisexual (or any other categorisations we wish to make) so the instances of "man vs woman" harassment would be higher but as a percentage do we think it might be almost the same?0 -
I wonder if anyone could comment on same gender harassment?
Seriously? After you insinuated oldnotwise was a liar. Why would anyone discuss their experiences with you at all when you completely dismiss them out of hand?It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Terry Pratchet
0 -
DoYouEvenLift wrote: »Because we are humans, visual creatures. Do you think an extremely ugly person would receive the same amount of harassment as an extremely good looking person?
But you see in a roundabout way that is saying you excuse harassment against perceived good looking women and perceived ugly looking women because you are saying "oh lets have a trial but dont choose a person who might actually prove there is an issue. Lets choose someone who we think might prove theres no issue". Its a biased outlook before you even begin.It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Terry Pratchet
0 -
DoYouEvenLift wrote: »Because we are humans, visual creatures. Do you think an extremely ugly person would receive the same amount of harassment as an extremely good looking person?
It doesn't matter if some people are harassed less than others. What matters is that it happens.0 -
Joeytheparrot wrote: »But you see in a roundabout way that is saying you excuse harassment against perceived good looking women and perceived ugly looking women because you are saying "oh lets have a trial but dont choose a person who might actually prove there is an issue. Lets choose someone who we think might prove theres no issue". Its a biased outlook before you even begin.
Holy sh!t. No it's not. It is me saying it'd prove that harassment actually happens in Ireland. If harassment occurs for either the ugly, average or good looking person then it would obviously prove it does exist, I'm just saying using an average person would get a general idea of the scale of it for the general population.0 -
Advertisement
-
Joeytheparrot wrote: »Because you continually rudely suggested Oldnotwise was a liar with an agenda.
Not continually and not rudely. Exaggeration is exactly what I "accused". Now, I find you are doing the same thing.
People can only say so many times that the Youtube video gives no real insight into the complexity of this issue. It is an agenda driven piece of propaganda. I tend to think that folks like yourself just ignore rational discussion and grind it down until the rational voices give up and you can have your viewpoint uncontested.
Surely if I take everything everyone says at face value then I am left vulnerable to manipulation? My emotions and my opinions can be hijacked. So, it makes sense to question OldNotWIse if I think the claims have no substance or are exaggerated.
I think we ALL know that harassment happens. I think that we all agree that nobody should tolerate it.
Some people are a-holes. Everybody knows this.
Endless posts about personal instances of harassment are simply reiterating points that everyone already knows. Over and over until it drowns out reasonable discussion. It's the "angry mob" mentality in action.
So, I told OldNotWIse that I thought the claims were exaggerated. The immediate response was "don't give a f*ck if you believe me or not". In other words "we're not going to discuss this. Nod in agreement or shut up."
We are left with claims being made with no proof, or analysis or insight behind them. Any questioning or discussion is shouted down so all we have is the point that we all knew anyway "some people are a-holes sometimes" being repeated endlessly and gradually refined into "men harass women".
Is this really what people want here? We watch the Youtube video, nod our heads and think "wow, that was all men giving that poor woman hassle, men are such a-holes" end of conversation?0 -
It does.
I think what makes it so annoying and at times outright creepy is not the one guy saying "Hi sweetie, have a nice day". It's the fact that there are so many of them doing it.
And, truth be told, as a woman you tend not to think "Great, he noticed how lovely my hair looks today", you tend to think "He's talking at me, what's he going to do next? Is he watching? Will he start following me? Should I step into that shop to throw him off my trail?"
It's not nice, it's scary.
Yes, some of them probably really don't have any ulterior motives and are just trying to be nice, but how do you know which one of them is the one who will turn out to be the nutcase you need to be aware of?
The serial killer/rapist probably won't draw attention to himself by loudly verbally complimenting you in public before attacking you ..........0 -
Joeytheparrot wrote: »Seriously? After you insinuated oldnotwise was a liar. Why would anyone discuss their experiences with you at all when you completely dismiss them out of hand?
Do you think you might respond to a question with an answer sometime?
I didn't dismiss OldNotWIse out of hand. Based on the percieved tone of the posts, the flippant way harassment was discussed and the "lolz, I totally get harassed with my OH cos we are so hot" vibe I got from OldNotWIse, I reckoned that they were exaggerating to make a point about men in bars... so I said so.
My goal had been to get OldNotWIse to comment on the frequency of such harassment as I know for a fact that same gender harassment is as big a problem in "gay" bars as harassment of women by men in "straight" bars. I had thought that through discussion we could agree that maybe harassment by others is a issue we all have to deal with and its not restricted to hot lesbians being sexually harassed by men while they are just trying to have a nice night out. Instead I was shut down with a "I dont give a f*ck what you think" and no further discussion took place. So I couldnt make my point.0 -
... My goal had been to get OldNotWIse to comment on the frequency of such harassment as I know for a fact that same gender harassment is as big a problem in "gay" bars as harassment of women by men in "straight" bars. I had thought that through discussion we could agree that maybe harassment by others is a issue we all have to deal with and its not restricted to hot lesbians being sexually harassed by men while they are just trying to have a nice night out. Instead I was shut down with a "I dont give a f*ck what you think" and no further discussion took place. So I couldnt make my point.
Nor should people be harassed in gay bars - again, frequency is not significant.0 -
I had thought that through discussion we could agree that maybe harassment by others is a issue we all have to deal with and its not restricted to hot lesbians being sexually harassed by men while they are just trying to have a nice night out.
Let's not pretend for a second that anybody ever suggested anything remotely like this in the thread.0 -
The serial killer/rapist probably won't draw attention to himself by loudly verbally complimenting you in public before attacking you ..........
How do you know what any of these guys' intentions are or how things might escalate? I've had such innocuous comments escalate into being followed down the street, crossing over and he crosses over while yelling crude insults at me, having to jump onto a bus to get away...I've also been cornered in a cul-de-sac by a lad who 'just wanted to talk to me'.
Not murder, not rape, but not fcuking pleasant and not something I'm willing to accept is perfectly reasonable behaviour from one stranger to another.0 -
How do you know what any of these guys' intentions are or how things might escalate? I've had such innocuous comments escalate into being followed down the street, crossing over and he crosses over while yelling crude insults at me, having to jump onto a bus to get away...I've also been cornered in a cul-de-sac by a lad who 'just wanted to talk to me'.
Not murder, not rape, but not fcuking pleasant and not something I'm willing to accept is perfectly reasonable behaviour from one stranger to another.
I said that most serial killers/rapists probably won't draw attention to themselves by initiating contact ......... although Ted Bundy would probably disagree with me!
My point being while wolf-whistles, leering and flirty comments may be unpleasant or embarrassing etc. for some women they don't generally lead to any actual physical harm ......... ie these incidences are quite harmless yet some women react in a way over-the-top dramatic fashion as to suggest that they are/were in actual danger of being murdered and raped ......... in that order!0 -
Let's not pretend for a second that anybody ever suggested anything remotely like this in the thread.
The irony being that Orubiru is exaggerating this.It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Terry Pratchet
0 -
I said that most serial killers/rapists probably won't draw attention to themselves by initiating contact ......... although Ted Bundy would probably disagree with me!
My point being while wolf-whistles, leering and flirty comments may be unpleasant or embarrassing etc. for some women they don't generally lead to any actual physical harm ......... ie these incidences are quite harmless yet some women react in a way over-the-top dramatic fashion as to suggest that they are/were in actual danger of being murdered and raped ......... in that order!
You're right, a majority of them probably don't lead to any physical danger for the woman. Does that then mean that it's ok for us to be shouted at, leered at, accosted, intimidated, commented upon?0 -
You're right, a majority of them probably don't lead to any physical danger for the woman. Does that then mean that it's ok for us to be shouted at, leered at, accosted, intimidated, commented upon?
If you read my post properly you'll see I've already answered that question ............. :rolleyes:0 -
Advertisement
-
My point being while wolf-whistles, leering and flirty comments may be unpleasant or embarrassing etc. for some women they don't generally lead to any actual physical harm ......... ie these incidences are quite harmless yet some women react in a way over-the-top dramatic fashion as to suggest that they are/were in actual danger of being murdered and raped ......... in that order!
But we shouldn't be made to feel unpleasant or embarrassed. My dog walking route takes me on a path that's just below the motorway and sometimes cars or trucks beep at me. It's like they're trying to tell me that even by leaving the house I'm drawing unnecessary attention to myself. They get absolutely nothing out of it except making me feel like the jeans and jacket I'm wearing or the way I'm holding the dogs lead are particularly enticing and something I should change- obviously that last bit is a total over exaggeration in my case but is in fact the way someone else might feel. What is the point in doing it??0 -
denhaagenite wrote: »But we shouldn't be made to feel unpleasant or embarrassed. My dog walking route takes me on a path that's just below the motorway and sometimes cars or trucks beep at me. It's like they're trying to tell me that even by leaving the house I'm drawing unnecessary attention to myself. They get absolutely nothing out of it except making me feel like the jeans and jacket I'm wearing or the way I'm holding the dogs lead are particularly enticing and something I should change- obviously that last bit is a total over exaggeration in my case but is in fact the way someone else might feel. What is the point in doing it??
I agree ........... but my original post was in response to a lady who implied that this kind of behaviour usually leads to rape/murder ........ when in fact it usually doesn't.
I myself am a father, son, brother, husband, uncle etc. so I personally would never engage in this type of behaviour and (if in the company of one my female loved ones) respond to such disrespectful behaviour equally as disrespectfully towards any "man" who offends a lady in my company.0 -
denhaagenite wrote: »But we shouldn't be made to feel unpleasant or embarrassed. My dog walking route takes me on a path that's just below the motorway and sometimes cars or trucks beep at me. It's like they're trying to tell me that even by leaving the house I'm drawing unnecessary attention to myself. They get absolutely nothing out of it except making me feel like the jeans and jacket I'm wearing or the way I'm holding the dogs lead are particularly enticing and something I should change- obviously that last bit is a total over exaggeration in my case but is in fact the way someone else might feel. What is the point in doing it??
They get a laugh out of it for themselves, they feel better. They're not particularly concerned with how their behaviour makes you feel, unfortunately.
It's the same mentality as the "I have a right to approach someone to say hello", only thinking about what their rights are and what they're entitled to do. To be asked to consider how the other person might feel is an inconvenience to them, and like a spoilt child - they react like "I won't have anyone tell me what to do!"...
And then they complain if people are rude to them! They never think they might have been at fault at all for not considering the other person's rights, like the right to go about their business unhindered by unwelcome approaches from strangers.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »They get a laugh out of it for themselves, they feel better. They're not particularly concerned with how their behaviour makes you feel, unfortunately.
It's the same mentality as the "I have a right to approach someone to say hello", only thinking about what their rights are and what they're entitled to do. To be asked to consider how the other person might feel is an inconvenience to them, and like a spoilt child - they react like "I won't have anyone tell me what to do!"...
And then they complain if people are rude to them! They never think they might have been at fault at all for not considering the other person's rights, like the right to go about their business unhindered by unwelcome approaches from strangers.
You don't have the right not to be approached by other people. You have the right to tell them to go away though or ignore them.0 -
You don't have the right not to be approached by other people. You have the right to tell them to go away though or ignore them.
I never said I had the right not to be approached by other people? I said everyone has the right to go about their business unhindered by other people.
Other posters here though have tried to argue that I don't have the right to tell them to go away or that I don't have the right to ignore them as apparently to them that's ME being rude.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »They get a laugh out of it for themselves, they feel better. They're not particularly concerned with how their behaviour makes you feel, unfortunately.
It's the same mentality as the "I have a right to approach someone to say hello", only thinking about what their rights are and what they're entitled to do. To be asked to consider how the other person might feel is an inconvenience to them, and like a spoilt child - they react like "I won't have anyone tell me what to do!"...
And then they complain if people are rude to them! They never think they might have been at fault at all for not considering the other person's rights, like the right to go about their business unhindered by unwelcome approaches from strangers.
But people do have a right to approach someone to say hello especially when in a social setting like a bar. As outlined you have a right to respond any way you want to but their is a courteous manner of doing this, and one that is not courteous.One eyed Jack wrote: »
Other posters here though have tried to argue that I don't have the right to tell them to go away or that I don't have the right to ignore them as apparently to them that's ME being rude.
Just because you have the right to do it doesn't make it the right thing to do- if you respond in a negative tone or ignore someone who says hello to you, that is rude by todays standards.0 -
I wonder if anyone could comment on same gender harassment? I'm sure that it must as common in "gay" clubs and bars as it is in regular clubs and bars?P. Breathnach wrote: »It doesn't matter whether it happens twice a year or twice a week: it's something that should never happen.
Nor should people be harassed in gay bars - again, frequency is not significant.
The frequency of sexual assault, sexual harassment domestic violence etc is significant for one important reason. It is important because feminist campaigners elsewhere successfully widened the definition of sexual harassment, domestic violence, sexual assault etc to exclude and target innocent men [interfering with due process on college campuses and going on about ''stare rape'' etc which is just psychotic paranoia] but ignoring lesbian victims and lesbian perpetrators. And just like here they have elected morons into office who do not understand statistics and who just want the easy way out without checking the facts.
The ultimate Irony for feminists who concentrate on female issues only so long as the perpetrator is male: Lesbians reporting that they'd been sexually assaulted/raped by other women - occur at a higher level than women in general reporting that they'd been raped by a man. 1-3 Lesbians will be raped or sexually assaulted by a woman. Meanwhile the greater macrocosm of women: even the most bull**** of twisted unfactchecked studies conducted says that 1-4 women will be raped or sexually assaulted by a man. If you degrade the definition of sexual assault to even wishing someone a 'good morning' but being male this is the kind of nonsense you arrive at
Domestic Violence
Women are perpetrators often as men.
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V75-Straus-09.pdf
286 sources on assaults on partners by women
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
Women are more violent
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/women-are-more-violent-says-study-622388.html
Domestic violence being equally committed by women, only males get arrested
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
Men are over 40% of domestic abuse victims
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence
Male DV victims are discriminated against
http://www.saveservices.org/pdf/SAVE-VAWA-Discriminates-Against-Males.pdf
Gay and bisexual men experience abuse in intimate partner relationships at a
rate of 2 in 5, which is comparable to the amount of domestic violence experienced by heterosexual women.
https://www.uncfsp.org/projects/userfiles/File/DCE-STOP_NOW/NCADV_LGBT_Fact_Sheet.pdf
About 17-45% of lesbians report having been the victim of a least one act of physical violence perpetrated by a lesbian partner (1,5,6,13).
https://mainweb-v.musc.edu/vawprevention/lesbianrx/factsheet.shtml
Men or DV is Not the leading cause of death among women under 50 but facts are not important for legislators
https://mainweb-v.musc.edu/vawprevention/lesbianrx/factsheet.shtml
More DV facts
http://www.domesticviolenceresearch.org/pages/12_page_findings.htm
I can back all this up. And much much more. As you can see I provided links to research and facts. So you cannot just dismiss this with ignorance.0 -
I said that most serial killers/rapists probably won't draw attention to themselves by initiating contact ......... although Ted Bundy would probably disagree with me!
My point being while wolf-whistles, leering and flirty comments may be unpleasant or embarrassing etc. for some women they don't generally lead to any actual physical harm ......... ie these incidences are quite harmless yet some women react in a way over-the-top dramatic fashion as to suggest that they are/were in actual danger of being murdered and raped ......... in that order!
They don't generally lead to any actual physical harm?
Well that's hardly reassuring, is it?I agree ........... but my original post was in response to a lady who implied that this kind of behaviour usually leads to rape/murder ........ when in fact it usually doesn't.
I myself am a father, son, brother, husband, uncle etc. so I personally would never engage in this type of behaviour and (if in the company of one my female loved ones) respond to such disrespectful behaviour equally as disrespectfully towards any "man" who offends a lady in my company.
Again, hardly reassuring, and you can't say that for a fact unless you can read people's minds, and since nobody can read other people's minds, they don't know exactly the motivations behind another person's behaviour, and so they can only judge based on their experiences, and if their experiences with strangers cat-calling them, following them, etc have been negative, then it's understandable why they might form certain conclusions.
That's not being over-dramatic, that's just being wary of their personal safety based on their experiences. I've been mugged and assaulted on the street in the past while I was waiting for the bus one morning. The last question I asked the cab driver dropping me off was "Is it safe around here?", "You'll be grand" he said. Turned out he was wrong and I should have trusted my own judgement.
Just because something is unlikely to happen, doesn't mean anyone should ever be complacent about their personal safety. After the incident I was holed up in my apartment for a week, afraid to go out in public. I still get unnerved when strangers approach me on the street. It's instinct, I have to think to try to overcome that instinct, it's not something I can easily laugh off as "but sure I know generally speaking a stranger isn't going to attack me". Those sort of statements offer no reassurance at all to a person who has been in that situation, and that IS a fact.0 -
masculinist wrote: »The frequency of sexual assault, sexual harassment domestic violence etc is significant for one important reason. It is important because feminist campaigners elsewhere successfully widened the definition of sexual harassment, domestic violence, sexual assault etc to exclude* and target innocent men [interfering with due process on college campuses and going on about ''stare rape'' etc which is just psychotic paranoia] but ignoring lesbian victims and lesbian perpetrators. And just like here they have elected morons into office who do not understand statistics and who just want the easy way out without checking the facts.
I note you have mentioned this scenario of some (?) US college campuses adopting perceived anti men campus wide regulations previously. However I believe it is ambiguous to place these regulations as the same standard as statutory law. College campuses in the US and students unions here are enabled by governance to have their relevant student bodies vote on their own regulations. Such regulations do not negate state or national law.
As a polar opposite to the fairly extreme example given above we could take the example of Sharia law given by another posterThe request for some sort of proof before your experience will be believed has an uncomfortable parallel with the way sexual assault cases are dealt with under sharia law, where the act has to have been witnessed (with the caveat that the statement of a female witness bears half the weight of that of a male witness) in order to be credible! Obviously it's not remotely the same level of severity and I'm not for a second equivocating the experience of a privileged western woman with that of a middle eastern woman under strict Islamic law, however it strikes me as being (scarily) on the same spectrum of thinking...
Such wrongs does not make dismissing street harassment or sexual violence right. The fact that such extremes exist do not negate that sexual violence against women is a relatively common phenomenon. Should we dismiss the voiced concerns of all woman concerning harassment because such extremes of reaction exist in other jurisdictions and other areas? I don't think so.
No one is saying that street harassment is only happening to woman but many woman do experience very real fear and intimidation when confronted by random street harassment. I will go with both with what women posters have posted here and from research in this area. [I am excluding harassment that occur in less likely threatening environments such as pubs and clubs where a concerned individual is more able to seek help in similar circumstances.]masculinist wrote: »The ultimate Irony for feminists who concentrate on female issues only so long as the perpetrator is male:
Tbh I think it is not useful to repeatedly go on about 'feminists' as if they are the perpetrators of such behaviour. Yes they are deeply worrying but so for example is Sharia law in my opinion. These extremes reactions should help enlighten more positive thinking about this issue and not cloud it further by polarising the issue at hand.0 -
Advertisement
-
One eyed Jack wrote: »They don't generally lead to any actual physical harm?
Well that's hardly reassuring, is it?
Again, hardly reassuring, and you can't say that for a fact unless you can read people's minds, and since nobody can read other people's minds, they don't know exactly the motivations behind another person's behaviour, and so they can only judge based on their experiences, and if their experiences with strangers cat-calling them, following them, etc have been negative, then it's understandable why they might form certain conclusions.
That's not being over-dramatic, that's just being wary of their personal safety based on their experiences. I've been mugged and assaulted on the street in the past while I was waiting for the bus one morning. The last question I asked the cab driver dropping me off was "Is it safe around here?", "You'll be grand" he said. Turned out he was wrong and I should have trusted my own judgement.
Just because something is unlikely to happen, doesn't mean anyone should ever be complacent about their personal safety. After the incident I was holed up in my apartment for a week, afraid to go out in public. I still get unnerved when strangers approach me on the street. It's instinct, I have to think to try to overcome that instinct, it's not something I can easily laugh off as "but sure I know generally speaking a stranger isn't going to attack me". Those sort of statements offer no reassurance at all to a person who has been in that situation, and that IS a fact.
I think we can all agree that being approached by someone in a bar and being mugged on the street are two totally different situations. If you're traumatised enough by being mugged for that to have an impact on how you respond to someone in an innocent social interaction then you might benefit from having some therapy.0