Sexual Harassment.... eh, YEAH of course!

Hail 2 Da Chimp · 15-09-2010 10:42AM

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

This in mind - is it right they should leer? No.

Is it inevitable that they will? Yes.

Solution - accept that some groups of men are neanderthal in some respects and move on; or

I would agree with you up until that point, the woman had permission, as part of a television broadcast, to enter the locker room and conduct an interview.
As such those men were still in their workplace, I'm sure were given ample time to get showered and changed, or provided an alternative if they didn't want to get changed there.
To say it's inevitable it will happen is a cop out, they're grown men and should have known better.
Particularly the coach, who I would have expected to have lead by example.

Banned Account · 15-09-2010 10:46AM

Hail 2 Da Chimp wrote: »

I would agree with you up until that point, the woman had permission, as part of a television broadcast, to enter the locker room and conduct an interview.
As such those men were still in their workplace, I'm sure were given ample time to get showered and changed, or provided an alternative if they didn't want to get changed there.
To say it's inevitable it will happen is a cop out, they're grown men and should have known better.
Particularly the coach, who I would have expected to have lead by example.

My point, which people seem to be missing, is that a bunch of steroid addled footballers are not a fair cross sectional representation of society and should not be used as a yardstick in these matters.

Ashley Cole, Wayne Rooney, Frank Lampard et al - under educated rich spoiled sports men will do this kind of thing. They will not be changed - it is to be expected that children will act as children.

liah · 15-09-2010 10:46AM

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

Re-read my post - note the "SOME MEN" part.

POT - KETTLE.

Just because it's "some men" doesn't make it any more acceptable or any reason at all to just put up with it.

And pot-kettle my ass, do you truly believe women are remotely as bad as men in this respect? If you do you're completely deluding yourself. The only time I really see women do this is if they're still a teen or if they're skangers. And you don't really see it online as much, either. So trying to say "pot-kettle" doesn't stretch very far; you're going to have to come up with something better than that.

Banned Account · 15-09-2010 10:53AM

liah wrote: »

Just because it's "some men" doesn't make it any more acceptable or any reason at all to just put up with it.

And pot-kettle my ass, do you truly believe women are remotely as bad as men in this respect? If you do you're completely deluding yourself. The only time I really see women do this is if they're still a teen or if they're skangers. And you don't really see it online as much, either. So trying to say "pot-kettle" doesn't stretch very far; you're going to have to come up with something better than that.

Ah, I see, so we are now discussing percentages. If a lower percentage of women than men, leer at the opposite sex it exhonerates them completely?

What is the acceptable percentage of leering members which can safely be accomodated within each sex and still make the cut-off point?

Look, whether you like it or not the fact is that society sells sexuality on both side becuase people on both sides wish to buy it. The only problem that arises is that certain people keep trying to box it into acceptable and unacceptable according to the sex involved.

So, Sex and the City is empowering for women as is the Diet Coke ad above but men cheering a scantily clad women in their dressing room is degradxing despite the fact that the woman herself took no offence.

Dress it any way you like, the only truth is that decent people will not make others uncomfortable regardless of what sex they are. The percentages of decent people within the male and female parts of society cannot be determined accurately to support your argument.

Hail 2 Da Chimp · 15-09-2010 10:53AM

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

My point, which people seem to be missing, is that a bunch of steroid addled footballers are not a fair cross sectional representation of society and should not be used as a yardstick in these matters.

Ashley Cole, Wayne Rooney, Frank Lampard et al - under educated rich spoiled sports men will do this kind of thing. They will not be changed - it is to be expected that children will act as children.

No - I'd agree with you there, they're spoilt, rich pricks, who know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
BUT - they knew an interview was being held in the locker room, they knew it was being held by a woman, they are still in their workplace, they're still representing their sport (and as such, could have had endorsements on the line).
At the very least I would have expected their coach to tell them to cop on, not join in with them!

Nozebleed · 15-09-2010 10:56AM

who's harassing who?? im a bit confused? some slut walks into a locker room with her tits hangin out. she's a skank.

Banned Account · 15-09-2010 10:56AM

Hail 2 Da Chimp wrote: »

No - I'd agree with you there, they're spoilt, rich pricks, who know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
BUT - they knew an interview was being held in the locker room, they knew it was being held by a woman, they are still in their workplace, they're still representing their sport (and as such, could have had endorsements on the line).
At the very least I would have expected their coach to tell them to cop on, not join in with them!

And, being honest, we are arguing at crossed purposes here - I'm not defending the retarded acts of childish men, I'm just saying that, given the demographic it's to be expected and won't change. If you go in there like that expect to be leered at - don't accept if if you don't want to, but don't be shocked when it happens.

liah · 15-09-2010 10:59AM

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

Ah, I see, so we are now discussing percentages. If a lower percentage of women than men, leer at the opposite sex it exhonerates them completely?

What is the acceptable percentage of leering members which can safely be accomodated within each sex and still make the cut-off point?

Look, whether you like it or not the fact is that society sells sexuality on both side becuase people on both sides wish to buy it. The only problem that arises is that certain people keep trying to box it into acceptable and unacceptable according to the sex involved.

So, Sex and the City is empowering for women as is the Diet Coke ad above but men cheering a scantily clad women in their dressing room is degradxing despite the fact that the woman herself took no offence.

Dress it any way you like, the only truth is that decent people will not make others uncomfortable regardless of what sex they are. The percentages of decent people within the male and female parts of society cannot be determined accurately to support your argument.

You're missing my point.

I didn't bring up that females do it less because of percentages, I did it because you were trying to equate the two groups when it's not in equal measure and completely irrelevant to the current discussion. We're talking about stuff that happens face to face, not in the media.

I don't think it should be acceptable "just because that's what they do." We're not talking about media or whatever else. The rest of us have the exact same media as they do, and yet we're capable of keeping it to ourselves and they're not. Why is that?

Just because she's putting up with it (she's working for god's sake, of course she has to put up with it) doesn't make it any more justified, either.

Why do men enjoy being seen as cavemen who have no control over themselves? Can someone explain it to me?

Banned Account · 15-09-2010 11:05AM

liah wrote: »

Why do men enjoy being seen as cavemen who have no control over themselves? Can someone explain it to me?

Can someone explain to you why every man in the world enjoys being seen as a caveman? I think you'll only find that out if you speak to every man in the world. Failing that, you'll just be making a gereral assumption based on sex.

This may be sexist.

liah · 15-09-2010 11:07AM

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

Can someone explain to you why every man in the world enjoys being seen as a caveman? I think you'll only find that out if you speak to every man in the world. Failing that, you'll just be making a gereral assumption based on sex.

This may be sexist.

When did I say "every man" or "all men?"

I thought you'd be intelligent enough to understand how generalizations work.

Banned Account · 15-09-2010 11:11AM

liah wrote: »

When did I say "every man" or "all men?"

I thought you'd be intelligent enough to understand how generalizations work.

But this is the whole point - generalizations are a poor basis for an argument. What we have here is a cross section of society who, for any number of reasons are not representative of men as a whole yet they are being used as an example of how all men behave.

It's a nonsense to be honest. The only thing one can say for sure is that the group of men in question acted like a bunch of morons. Decent men act decently, indecent men do likewise. To use a generalistic argument here is akin to saying there are more indecent men then decent ones.

I take offence to this, as you would if I were to reverse the argument.

15-09-2010 11:14AM

liah wrote: »

When did I say "every man" or "all men?"

I thought you'd be intelligent enough to understand how generalizations work.

you started your question as "Why do men"
not why did these men or why do some men, so you have generalised all men.

--Kaiser-- · 15-09-2010 11:14AM

liah wrote: »

When did I say "every man" or "all men?"

Ummm....here, pretty much

liah wrote: »

This is not helping in my quest to force myself to truly believe men are not completely pathetic.

liah · 15-09-2010 11:17AM

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

But this is the whole point - generalizations are a poor basis for an argument. What we have here is a cross section of society who, for any number of reasons are not representative of men as a whole yet they are being used as an example of how all men behave.

It's a nonsense to be honest. The only thing one can say for sure is that the group of men in question acted like a bunch of morons. Decent men act decently, indecent men do likewise. To use a generalistic argument here is akin to saying there are more indecent men then decent ones.

I take offence to this, as you would if I were to reverse the argument.

No, I wouldn't, as I would assume whoever made the generalization understood it was just a generalization, as anyone over the age of about 14 does. Unless I say ALL MEN I don't mean ALL MEN. I mean what I say. If I wanted to mean all men, I would've said it. Geddit?

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

you started your question as "Why do men" im sorry but if that isn't the begining of a blanket anti male statement i dont know what is.

See above.

I really need to dig out my "people who freak out about generalizations" rant, this is ridiculous. Are we children? I don't think I've ever met anyone who says "men" or "women" and ever means "all."

nice1franko · 15-09-2010 11:17AM

OP's vid is made much better by listening to this in the background:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3Fa4lOQfbA

liah · 15-09-2010 11:18AM

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Ummm....here, pretty much

Again, please tell me where I say "ALL MEN."

Thanks.

MrDarcy · 15-09-2010 11:19AM

about blank wrote: »

OMG what a babe

What a child. She is an airhead.

Dr. Zeus · 15-09-2010 11:20AM

about blank wrote: »

She is HOT

You are NOT

Great just what AH needs, another little jumped- up, peurile, a** hole who thinks he's playing with the big boys now!

Banned Account · 15-09-2010 11:20AM

liah wrote: »

No, I wouldn't, as I would assume whoever made the generalization understood it was just a generalization, as anyone over the age of about 14 does. Unless I say ALL MEN I don't mean ALL MEN. I mean what I say. If I wanted to mean all men, I would've said it. Geddit?

See above.

I really need to dig out my "people who freak out about generalizations" rant, this is ridiculous. Are we children? I don't think I've ever met anyone who says "men" or "women" and ever means "all."

So, to re-cap, what you are asking is:

"Why are retarded men retarded?"

Awesome.

--Kaiser-- · 15-09-2010 11:22AM

liah wrote: »

Again, please tell me where I say "ALL MEN."

Thanks.

It's quite obvious from the context that you are referring to all men, unless you had some kind of 'quest' to prove to yourself that the NY Jets team weren't pathetic.

Back to digging yourself into a hole.

MrDarcy · 15-09-2010 11:23AM

She's giving an interview on US state TV about being sexually harrassed and she's standing there with her fake t*ts hanging out all over the place, my first impression of her was that she was a porn star, and then she's blatently flirting with the guy who is interviewing her. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

liah · 15-09-2010 11:24AM

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

It's quite obvious from the context that you are referring to all men, unless you had some kind of 'quest' to prove to yourself that the NY Jets team weren't pathetic.

Back to digging yourself into a hole.

No, actually, it's quite obvious from the context of the thread the specific type of men I'm referring to.

Which I assumed people would be intelligent enough to pick up on.

--Kaiser-- · 15-09-2010 11:32AM

liah wrote: »

No, actually, it's quite obvious from the context of the thread the specific type of men I'm referring to.

Which I assumed people would be intelligent enough to pick up on.

I picked up on what your sentence actually says, any misunderstanding is due to your incorrect phrasing. So you're saying you meant the following;

liah wrote: »

This is not helping in my quest to force myself to truly believe that some men are not completely pathetic.

Which is a fairly pointless.

Dr. Zeus · 15-09-2010 11:33AM

As a male I find the occurence of these type of threads in AH embarrassing and entirely predictable in how they will run.

Sad thing is the OP is probably about 13 judging from his post but the rest of the posters are probably way older which is kind of sad in my book.

I feel for the girls trying to stand up for themselves in this thread but AH has a very misognistic element it would appear.

Procasinator · 15-09-2010 11:34AM

liah wrote: »

No, I wouldn't, as I would assume whoever made the generalization understood it was just a generalization, as anyone over the age of about 14 does. Unless I say ALL MEN I don't mean ALL MEN. I mean what I say. If I wanted to mean all men, I would've said it. Geddit?

I don't want to sound mean, but do you know what you are talking about?

Some definitions of generalization/generalisation:

generalization: an idea or conclusion having general application; "he spoke in broad generalities"
abstraction: the process of formulating general concepts by abstracting common properties of instances
generalization: reasoning from detailed facts to general principles
generalization: (psychology) transfer of a response learned to one stimulus to a similar stimulus
generalise - generalize: draw from specific cases for more general cases

Which is exactly is what you are doing: you are taking a specific case (football players comments and behaviour directed to a particular women) and applying them to be general behaviour of men.

In no way does generalising boost you argument, and by your language it does appear you are talking about ALL men or at least the majority. If you do not mean this, re-phrase instead of trying to belittle people by hammering on about the fact you didn't explicitly say ALL as if everyone else is simple.

liah · 15-09-2010 11:43AM

I write what I mean. If I'd meant all men I would've said it. I assumed it would be obvious from the context of the thread of the kind of men I'm referring to.

My point about the generalities is that it's completely ridiculous to nitpick about them considering ninety nine times out of a hundred they're never meant to apply to every single thing in the category and are generally used as a kind of shorthand in discussions with related context. E.g., my comments in this thread. The thread is about men who think it's acceptable to act this way and is filled with replies of men continuing to act in the way those in the OP's video do. I reply using the statement "men" assuming that, due to the thread's context, people would understand and attack my arguments rather than be pedantic. I was mistaken. I take responsibility for that. What I will not take responsibility for is the men who are eager to get into a battle about a female being sexist towards them while completely ignoring the entire rest of the thread.

MrDarcy · 15-09-2010 11:46AM

liah wrote: »

I write what I mean. If I'd meant all men I would've said it. I assumed it would be obvious from the context of the thread of the kind of men I'm referring to.

My point about the generalities is that it's completely ridiculous to nitpick about them considering ninety nine times out of a hundred they're never meant to apply to every single thing in the category and are generally used as a kind of shorthand in discussions with related context. E.g., my comments in this thread. The thread is about men who think it's acceptable to act this way and is filled with replies of men continuing to act in the way those in the OP's video do. I reply using the statement "men" assuming that, due to the thread's context, people would understand and attack my arguments rather than be pedantic. I was mistaken. I take responsibility for that. What I will not take responsibility for is the men who are eager to get into a battle about a female being sexist towards them while completely ignoring the entire rest of the thread.

Maybe if the girl doing the interview dressed appropriately and didn't inappropriately flirt with people she spoke to in the extremely childlike way that she is doing in the OP's video clip, then maybe she would be treated in a more adult like manner?

liah · 15-09-2010 11:53AM

MrDarcy wrote: »

Maybe if the girl doing the interview dressed appropriately and didn't inappropriately flirt with people she spoke to in the extremely childlike way that she is doing in the OP's video clip, then maybe she would be treated in a more adult like manner?

How she dresses is irrelevant, the men are still adults and fully capable of keeping their thoughts to themselves in a work situation (or any situation, ideally, but we'll keep to the video). Why do they feel it necessary to be demonstrative about it?

I would be more inclined to say the flirting is probably more a "keeping the peace" thing because she's working, but who knows.

Zulu · 15-09-2010 11:55AM

liah wrote: »

I write what I mean. If I'd meant all men I would've said it. I assumed it would be obvious from the context of the thread of the kind of men I'm referring to.

My point about the generalities is that it's completely ridiculous to nitpick about them...

...so if I was to state that "feminists are ugly man-hating lesbians", you'd automatically know I was only referring to the sub set of feminists that are in fact lesbians with a dislike to men & aren't very aesthetically pleasing to the general public? Seriously?? :rolleyes:

Sometimes it can be easier to admit fault.

liah · 15-09-2010 11:59AM

Zulu wrote: »

...so if I was to state that "feminists are ugly man-hating lesbians", you'd automatically know I was only referring to the sub set of feminists that are in fact lesbians with a dislike to men & aren't very aesthetically pleasing to the general public? Seriously?? :rolleyes:

Sometimes it can be easier to admit fault.

If the thread was about a group of feminists who had a viewpoint that was decidedly offensive towards men, then yeah, I'd assume the post would be against that specific type of people... considering it's in the thread.. about that topic.. so it only makes sense.

Oh, and I'm no feminist.

Sexual Harassment.... eh, YEAH of course!

Comments