As to this bit... Mostly true, but I wonder if you take yourself literally. "the guy who, for instance, seems at best to simply fail to understand that women's bodies are in fact human beings" - is it possible that some of the behavior coming to light nowadays is perpetrated "unknowingly"? (Note the scare quotes.) I think most people would call Roy Moore's actions despicable (if true of course - his defenders seem to hang their hats on his innocence - which I don't buy for one second) but is it possible that some of the offenders actually fail to recognize that their actions were wrong? Did they have a little niggling voice inside telling them - hey, don't make that crude joke, stop propositioning her already, etcetera. Or was that "just the way things were?" - as in, "Baby, it's cold outside"... If so, is ignorance any excuse? A mitigating factor in any way? Call me crazy, but I think this is where you hear about "the men" looking back at their pasts and wondering "am I next?" Honestly, I haven't decided exactly how I feel about this "retroactive" stuff - I do know society and mores have changed in the last fifty years. OTH, some of the behavior is so egregious as to be beyond the pale. For example, when was dropping your robe and masturbating ever even slightly acceptable? However, that darn continuum again - and 'round we go...
why are you feigning that sexual harassment and assault is a recent discovery or issue? sexual harassment or assault is not acceptable in the workplace or anywhere. there is written policy that is in place. it is not new. if it's mishandled, that has to do with the humans/politics involved, not policy. minor incident result in verbal reprimand, continued harassment results in firing. period. the degree of sexual violation is what escalates it to criminal level and if you have no idea where the line starts with extreme sexual violation is (which has already been mentioned but you ignore), then you are a straight-up psychopath. otherwise, why do you have this pretense of getting to a 'consensus'? there is a consensus, just not all people want to follow it. that's why you have sexual harassers, rapists and pedophiles in the shadows. this sexual harassment coming to the fore by some women is not being redefined (pretense) , it was always known to be wrong. a violation. it is clear. it is not up for debate on that point. only by other psychos on this forum who pretend this is all new info. what happened to franken is not outlandish, uncommon or severely harsh. but because he is a politician, there is more public glare/exposure but that is part of the deal when you are in such position. he would have been fired at any reputable company for this type of behavior and way before it would climb to eight.
Bold mine: Are you implying the OP was just Troll Bait? https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Troll bait
I'm not. No it's not - I defy you to find anyone who will go on record stating that sexual harassment and assault is just fine and dandy. The trick lies in defining what "sexual harassment or assault" is, in the first place. Do you happen to have a copy? If you introduce it we could discuss the merits... Just for brevity - "no duh". What's "minor"? But I do have an idea - I want to know where your line is, not mine. Why not? Why are you here? Other than to complain about how deplorable humans are - which is fine, each to their own. I'm sorry birch but that is just factually, objectively incorrect. Since your initial premise is flawed so is your conclusion. Says who? Oh yeah - Do you know how to use the ignore function birch? You could build a nice little bubble for yourself, excluding all dissent. Somehow, I don't think it would help much - you'd still be a miserable human being. Your opinion, not based on facts in evidence - else there would be no contention. Others give you a pass cause you're a little slow birch - I won't. If you keep puking up regurgitated word salad and attempting to pass it off as word from on high I will continue to label it as such.
And? Do you think that because she is a feminist, her opinions should be discounted on the sexual and domestic violence on Aboriginal women? You know, seeing that she is an Indigenous Australian herself, who has experience in the areas that she teaches and advises on...? That Indigenous Australians should listen to Germaine Greer on sexual violence and domestic violence in the Indigenous communities around Australia, instead of Marcia Langton and other prominent Indigenous Australians who also rebuked Greer for her support of sexual and domestic violence against Indigenous women? Cite the numbers of "most". Do you have studies to back your claim that "most women appreciate" it? And I really want you to pause and consider when you answer that question. Here, I'll make it easy for you. One survey of 2,000 across the US found that 65% of all women had experienced street sexual harassment, which includes men wolf whistling. Informal surveys show a 99% rate, of all women who have faced some for of street harassment, including wolf whistling. In another informal survey, 94% of women identified being subject to wolf whistling as a form of street sexual harassment. That is what the women who experience this are saying. That they identify it as harassment. Now, how many of those women appreciated it? And I want you to consider this fact: A shocking 90 per cent of British women have reported experiencing street harassment for the first time during puberty. It’s slightly worse that the international average. A new report, taking in 22 countries, shows that on average 84 per cent of women are harassed on the street before they turn 17. Over 16,000 women were surveyed by anti-street harassment group Hollaback! It found that most women experienced catcalling – where people shout sexual comments at you on the street – for the first time between the ages 11 and 17. “People don’t want to recognise that this starts really young,” Debjani Roy, deputy director of Hollaback! told the Daily News. “The emotional impact it has as girls develop is quite significant. “This is a global problem. This really points to the fact that it is a global epidemic.” You going to tell an 11 year old girl that when some dude on a building site is wolf whistling her, he's just letting her know she's pretty and she should appreciate it? How about the adult woman who will have started to experienced this when she was still in her school uniform? Now, the reality of street harassment: In the US, street harassment led 72 per cent of women to take different transportation, while 80 per cent of South African women reported changing their clothes for the same reason. Nearly half of Indian women had been confronted with another person exposing themselves, and 80 per cent said they were unwilling to go out at night because of harassment. That sound like appreciation to you? Just that it would be nice if those people who think street harassment is "just a compliment" recognised the very real and enormous impact it has on victim's lives – not just in the moment, but day-in, day-out. A compliment doesn't make you rethink your route the next time you walk down the street. Many women, including Doris Chen, who grabbed hold of a man on the underground after he ejaculated on her, have bravely confronted their harassers. But the point is that they shouldn't have to. Nobody knows how they will react in that situation until it happens. Often, victims report feeling frozen with shock. Sometimes it isn't safe to respond. Instead of telling victims how to react, we should focus on preventing it from happening in the first place. And we can start by debunking the myth that street harassment is just a bit of harmless fun. So stop telling women to "just take it as a compliment". Or are these women and girls just not sensible in your opinion? And I mean, you should read that article. Women describing how the street harassment started when they were even 8 years of age, by grown men. Are they not sensible for not appreciating it? Your "most women" comments is not backed up by reality: Three of the most common responses were angry (85%), annoyed (78%), and disgusted (72%). Respondents also indicated that the harassment made them feel nervous (80%) and scared (64%). Only 14%respondents indicated that they were ‘flattered’ by experiences of street harassment and only 4%indicated that street harassment ‘didn’t bother’ them. So we would really appreciate it if you were able to back up your claim that "most women appreciate" it. Thanks! I actually don't. But your comparison is interesting, if one were to try to delve into the psychology behind it. Put simply, do you equate a woman walking down the street, minding her own business, with risky behaviour like breaking pedestrian and road laws that can see people killed? Okay. Do you believe that your feelings about it mean that "most women" also feel the same about being sexually harassed on the street?
She's an advocate for womens rights and as I said, I don't like her anyway. Equality for sure, women's rights?? Nup, just equality without the silly extremism nonsense. iI don't have any studies but I have supplied four links by women agreeing with what I'm actually trying to get you to see. I don't need to pause, nor do I need to consider your obnoxious patronisation of people. Let me put it simply so even you may understand. Women's equality in all respects is an honourable and desirable outcome of the Feminist movement. The Feminist movement has to some extent been comprimised by feminazis who would gladly see the demonising of all men as desirable. Wolf whistling, admiring a woman and similar passive human emotions and reactions is not sexual harrassment.
Mod Note *Raise eyebrows* I am now more interested as to why you are here, berating a victim and survivor and asking her what her line is when it comes to sexual violence. What do you think you are doing? No, think about it, do you think that is appropriate, Randwolf? Why are you demanding a woman and a victim of sexual violence tells you where her line is when it comes to sexual violence, Randwolf?
Look Bells - if you feel it necessary to bring the Mod ink out, so be it. I'm not denigrating birch for her actions or views or words or whatever vis a vis "rape culture". It's an opinion based on the sum of her posting, at least that that I have been exposed to. She starts entire threads on how deplorable humans are. Should we be especially nice to here when this particular subject comes up? Note that I haven't made any snide remarks regarding her assault and harassment experiences - just her, in general. I know it won't do any good to raise "what aboutism", not that I would. But take a look at some of her words and descriptions of other posters - does that get a pass? And where, precisely is the rule that says "Though shalt not berate a victim and survivor." anyway? Which I categorically deny doing, at least in any way relevant to her victimhood. I think she is miserable and can dig up plenty of quotes to support that POV. It has nothing whatsoever to do with her being a survivor.
unbelievable. sexual harassment or any method of harassment is contextual and subjective until it becomes explicit such as actual physical sexually suggestive or explicit physical sexual contact. grabbing and groping is physical assault, factually and objectively but there are degrees which you seem to be too dense to figure out. i suppose i should spell it out for you: grabbing and groping over clothing is less of an offense than under clothing or removing clothing for explicit molestation. penetration and explicit fondling are a form of rape. but all of these are a violation. it's a wonder how you maneuver in society since you feign total ignorance or is that you are truly stupid? 'minor' harassment (grouped with contextual and subjective), sexually suggestive or otherwise, is any behavior directed at a person who has made it known this was unwanted or inappropriate behavior or speech. this results in 'minor' repercussions such as verbal reprimand for first time offense. repeats are not due to ignorance, so therefore is factually and objectively harassment at this point. i hope you could keep up. there is no contention on what sexual harassment (note: harassment) or assault is, except for psychos like you. there is only contention on how it's handled. even if some disagree on minor incidents as to be defined as sexual harassment or not, is unimportant. for instance, wolf whistling, even if that is unwanted or considered sexual harassment, is not up for debate in the real world because you cannot stop people from whistling at you in public as you pass by. it is also not overt and one is not a captive for repeated offense. i know this will be difficult for you to suss out and understand the lines between context and subjective to literal but the above explains why. precious. the one who is slow or obtuse in this current exchange, is you. you don't even understand what 'word salad' means. is that your way of excusing your lack of reading comprehension?
Perhaps. I took my own advice and am trying out the ignore function - first time ever in ten years. Carry on...
because he's too dense to figure out that my line of sexual harassment or violence has nothing to do with the problem of sexual harassment or violence issue. and your lack of unbiased thinking or perception of the poster delude you into not recognizing a point for it's own merit or logic. even i don't make that mistake, unless i want to (lol). what was that about males and their better logic? lmao. no, you shouldn't be necessarily nice but your line of questioning does not address the problem of sexual harassment/assault. neither do i determine laws or policy. lmao.
randolph is the type of poser who assumes that if you are not of a certain status or have a phd, then you are not intelligent or beneath him to take seriously in a discussion. or if you make any valid points, it will be ignored. people who are really intelligent know better. his stupidity. oh, and he's so offended by my threads of how deplorable humans can be. too bad he can't handle the objective facts. isn't that what he was going on about? lol
Apologies, my last post was rushed as I was cleaning up some mess before I picked the Mrs up from work.... Perhaps the wrong word.....Perhaps I should have said most women that are wolf whistled don't really see too much harm in it at all, and take it as it is generally meant...a jocular appreciative reaction to feminine attractiveness. Interesting to say the least. Perhaps from boys also during puberty. I really do not though see young men on a building site wolf whistling an 11 year old girl, nor one in a school uniform. You know Bells, some of your examples, particularly the one about the low life that ejeculated on a female are totally disgusting. But they are the extreme end of the scale and I along with I dare suggest most on this forum would abhore such behaviour. But please your not going to achieve anything, nor is any women's movement going to achieve anything by trying to turn all men into do gooding Angels and/or priests [well perhaps not priests!] being afraid to even look at any female at all. Also I do agree that other countries, India and probably surprisingly Japan are countries where young girls do experience far more then just wolf whistling and yes, sexual harrassment certainly comes into play in anyone's language. Religion obviously also plays a part. You should remember the Sydney arsehole muslim cleric after five muslim youths were sentenced to very lengthy sentences for raping and degrading a number of young girls. He blamed the girls comparing them to uncovered meat attracting flies. That's where your enthusiasm should be directed!!!And most fair dinkum Aussie blokes would support you to the end. Perhaps you may see a benefit in chemically castrating all men when they turn 12? I mean how else are you going to stop any young red blooded young man from wolf whistling an attractive female? How many men that have wolf whistled a girl, have taken it to full blown sexual harrasssment? Again, speaking for myself as an old bloke, I have confronted many women with various "pick up lines" when I was single of course. And on many of those occasions I was told to f%$# off in no uncertain terms. Guess what? I f%$#$# off just as they directed me to, picked up my pride and moved on, and I believe most men would have also. Every incident I have related Bells are factual. I have many friends, many! and most all feel exactly the way I do, both male and female. I'm not sure where you got your surveys from, let me say, as a baby boomer generation bloke, I respect all men and women of any race equally. In fact I lean towards the fairer sex, in my still old fashion way of standing up for them in a crowded bus, letting them in front of me in a queue, and even at different times remarking how pretty they maybe. But that's where it ends and always has, other then of course in gaining true total equality with their male counterparts in every respect. Let me ask you are hypothetical question [and I have a reason for this] Do you believe that the crime of proven gang rape [as per the Skaf gang] should get the death penalty and/or lengthy jail sentences? Do you believe that the female accuser of rape or extreme sexual abuse against a bloke or blokes, that has been proven to have lied about it, should also be given a lengthy jail sentence or death penalty?
I don't think you fully understand why I brought out the Mod ink. I'll put it this way. Would you ever see yourself asking a woman you know in passing (or any woman for that matter), where her line is when it comes to sexual violence? Understand what I'm getting at here? In a thread about women's rights, the women's march and the general atmosphere of said march when it comes to sexual harassment and sexual violence, you asked a woman and survivor where her line happened to be when it comes to sexual violence. You started here: For lack of a better term.. What.. The.. Fuck? You ask a woman, whom you know is a survivor of sexual violence, what constitutes an extreme sexual violence for her, because you want to establish boundaries and then thank her for playing? Even if she wasn't a survivor of sexual violence, molestation, sexual harassment and rape, do you really think this is an appropriate question to ask a woman, or a man for that matter? I mean, I get it, it's online, faceless, just words on the screen. But you are cognizant of the fact that on the other end is a person, in this case a woman. And in a thread about the women's march and all that entailed, in a discussion about sexual harassment and sexual violence, you saw fit to ask a woman what constituted "extreme" for her when it comes to sexual violence, because you want to establish boundaries and then thank her for playing? Not content, even after I pointed out the inappropriateness of what you were doing, not to mention the manner in which you were asking, you carried on. You then decided to have a bit of a go at her for not answering your question (try asking a female work colleague what her boundaries are for sexual violence because you want to establish boundaries and you might be lucky to walk away without security having to be called for sounding like a creep and a pervert), because I guess she wasn't playing? I mean gee, I cannot imagine why a survivor of assault or any woman, for that matter, might be unwilling to answer that question Randwolf, because you seem really keen to know because you want to establish boundaries?! Can you? You again pressed her about not answering those questions again, and again, and again, only this time, you make sure to drive the point home by asking her what her line is when it comes to sexual violence. Which is where that Mod Note entered the fray. I shouldn't have to point out why, should I?
No, that was not what he was getting at. look at his prior posts in this thread. by focusing on attention of the line of just an individual, it is insinuating that there are no definite lines of sexual harassment. he was trying to use that premise to minimize or to deem sexual harassment void of judgement due to subjectivity (assuming a sexist joke, hug or passing comment on physique etc would be deemed more or less unwelcome by different individuals). this is quite disingenuous considering people do know generally what is appropriate behavior with strangers or mere acquaintances. this needling is a pretense this cannot be understood. it was just a ploy. so i had to spell it out for him (i'm sure he knows better, just pretense that he doesn't) what the context of sexual harassment (harassment being the key point) and assault is and how it is factual and objective. this is furthered again with the pretense there is a hammer going down on the most minor of offenses or even minor mistakes. no one is going to bring the hammer down on a sexist joke, an unwanted hug, advances/propositions or even sexually suggestive comment the first time, even if it was clearly inaproppriate or poor judgement for the situation and the parties involved. but it does constitute factual harassment that does warrant taking action after it is made known it is unwelcome. sexual groping/grabbing is a no-brainer. the question posed itself is missing the mark and on purpose.
No, you just need to stop grasping. Like this. Okay, so: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Whatever. Look, dude, all you're trying to do is what every dude-advocate is trying to do, which is, functionally speaking, demand the terms by which men (in this case, you) will discuss sexual harassment, assault, and misogyny. And perhaps that sounds harsh, but you're in good company; Jackson Katz even tried ... well, okay, that's the thing; I can't even describe that disaster. At the very least, you're not doing that badly. Part of it is that you can't even tell me what kind of spectrum or continuum or comparative you want. You make demands and when people answer they get cheap not-even platitudes in response. So let us be clear: Your "must"↑ is only about your own satisfaction, and like your standard of "consensus"↑, utterly meaningless. No, really: Consensus at this↑ point↑ appears bound to your own mysterious, internal standard requiring satisfaction. So why don't we try this: Why don't you try putting something affirmative down? Here— —we can start with that. You, like so many who address these aspects, can't seem to come out of vapid generalization: • "If they are not, then some forms deserve harsher penalties - others not so much." I honestly don't know whether to start with ... ... Really? or ... ... And? To what are you applying this? What phantom are you chasing, here? You want people to take a stab at quantifying this, but what does that even mean? How about the not so much part? Again: And? It's just really strange to have someone start demanding, for no apparent reason, that everyone stop and pay attention to a two-bit two plus two. If I say you can't actually tell people what you're on about, it's because the entire principle of your inquiry seems to be very, very sosobra. But, you know, what do you mean by not so much compared to, say: ... it seems that all transgressions deserve public humiliation, degradation along with loss of career and social standing. At the minimum. It's almost like you're asking people to read your mind. There is something you're thinking of, and won't tell us what it is, yet we are supposed to respond to and accommodate it. What? What do you actually want out of this? (Or, maybe: Whose ruined life are you pissed off about?) Because here's the thing: Yeah ... er ... ah ... Caroline Orr↱ already covered that one for you: I keep hearing people say the recent flood of sexual assault allegations has men "looking over their shoulder" and wondering if they're next. There's a really easy way to answer that question: Have you ever sexually harassed or assaulted a woman? No? Good. Yes? You're next. No, you wouldn't know she said that unless you happen to attend her Twitter feed, which in turn, well, okay, she got the Roger Stone to go off on her and J. K. Rowling last year, so why wouldn't I keep an eye out. Still, though, it's not like she said anything particularly unique. Nor are you saying anything unique. To the one, I don't feel like asking the women to proscribe the age boundary for being a dumb kid, or anything, but for our practical purposes, then, we can simply go with, yeah, we're all feeling the heat right now. There are no secret methods or paths for getting through it. There are, however, certainly ways, if you need to deal with prior behavior or discussion thereof, to simply not go about it. Meanwhile, remember also our own projections will describe the exposure we think she can perceive or accuse. On this occasion, what that means is to consider the idea of being accused: Q: Did you do it? • Yes — As you deal with it, remember there are more bad ways to address the circumstance than there are known ways for getting through it intact; constructive sincerity will be your asset. • No — For whatever reason, many in this position still manage to find a way to make things worse; that is to say, there are certainly responses and methods to avoid. • Yes, but c'mon .... — Yeah, uh ... something goes here about lots and lots of ways to fuck up your response, and remembering to avoid them. Good luck. How you respond will show where you think you have exposure. In another discussion, a bit over a month ago, I considered Russel Simmons' response↗ to accusations: Simmons issued a terrible statement; and when they lead like that, watch for the hook: In the first paragraph he denies the allegations and asserts all his relations are consensual. The second paragraph asserts his innocence and attacks others. The third paragraph acknowledges his exposure while shining himself up as some sort of sacrificial hero. It's an awful statement, and, damn it, his attorneys, at least, can be reasonably expected to know how terrible it is. His exposure would appear have something to do with how he treats the word consent. (It really was a terrible statement↱. Don't ever issue a statement like that, for any reason.) And, for instance, the shit that I can't apologize for is just something I can either deal with or not. The girl I groped at the mall when I was fourteen? I have no idea who she is; I can't tell her I'm sorry. I can't tell her what I learned from and about my behavior. And so, you know, there really isn't any point to pleading youthful stupidity, but I can tell you a little about what I learned: In my time, that was like counting coup; there is a reason I recognize rape culture. I don't get to make excuses about how society raised me that way, but, you know, if I can be constructively sincere about how that all worked, there will be a time and place for telling the story. Nobody gets to feel sorry for me; the point is to figure out what we got wrong so we can disrupt the perpetuation of such cultural atrocities. And if every now and then a shiver runs through me sufficient to disrupt mundane function, an echo of knowing I treated another human being that way, nobody gets to feel sorry for me; it's the least I owe. I can't apologize, so I will remember and neither is that anything to applaud because, honestly, I do not seem to be allowed to forget. Do you see how this works? A lot of us got by on just and merely and only. The last time I felt compelled to apologize for such behavior, I was only playing with her hair and thinking I was charming while we were all loaded. Quite frankly, if that is my last dance with harassment, blessed be. But I'm not about to delve into the complexities of the fact that she was nicer than she needed to be about it, because that can actually be problematic on a whole other vector, and well beyond my faculty to properly address. Just and merely and only are not our decision to make. And that's why we feel the heat. Once upon a time, sure, I did some stupid things, and some of it was disrespectful, but that's how it was, and ... er ... ah ... I mean, right? That comfort is gone. We don't get to absolve ourselves like that, so now we feel the heat. Just telling ourselves we learned and know better is not presently a viable option. Which, I suppose, brings us around to grasping after straws. I'm aware I missed a couple; I'll come back to them. ____________________ Notes: Orr, Caroline. "I keep hearing people say the recent flood of sexual assault allegations has men 'looking over their shoulder' and wondering if they're next". Twitter. 29 November 2017. Twitter.com. 24 January 2018. http://bit.ly/2i38jdM Simmons, Russell. "Russell Simmons's Statement on Rape Allegations". The New York Times. 13 December 2017. NYTimes.com. 24 January 2018. http://nyti.ms/2zke8Nl
And that "most women" narrative is not backed up by the facts. Do you have anything to back up your claim that "most women" appreciate or "don't really see too much harm in it at all"? I have provided you with studies that show clearly, that "most women" are bothered by it. I shall post it again: Three of the most common responses were angry (85%), annoyed (78%), and disgusted (72%). Respondents also indicated that the harassment made them feel nervous (80%) and scared (64%). Only 14%respondents indicated that they were ‘flattered’ by experiences of street harassment and only 4%indicated that street harassment ‘didn’t bother’ them. I also provided you with studies that detail how a large portion of women respond, by feeling forced to walk or travel a different way to avoid it, by some even changing their clothes to avoid the unwanted attention. You didn't read the links? You think it's just wolf whistling? One woman described how she was 11 and a bunch of firemen sexually harassed her and her mother, by telling her and her mother that they did not know which one of them they "wanted more" as she and her mother walked by. Here are some examples: I was 10, walking with my cousin in a sleepy beach town, and he was a middle-aged white guy who'd had a few too many. #firstharassed [...] @Karnythia slapped on butt by passing male bicyclist (30ish?) while walking home from the library, arms full of books. #firstharassed Age: 6 [...] I was #firstharassed at age 11, in a movie theatre, with my mother present. Harasser was her age or older. [...] I was #firstharassed at age 9. Walking to the store for candy w/my cousin. Men honked and offered us rides b/c we were "too pretty to walk" [...] 16 years old, an evening out with friends, a guy on the streets decides to "lift me up" by putting his hand between my legs #firstharassed [...] I was #firstharassed at 12 at a park. Guy told me I had a baby face but an adult body, grabbed my hand and tried to get me to leave with him [...] I was #firstharassed at 11 by man talking about my ass (a cuss word!) and my hair. He followed me home from the convenience store. This is what happens when you put it down to just a wolf whistle. Because those wolf whistles often turn out to horror stories like this. Because men who wolf whistle want a reaction. If she ignores him, he'll often yell out "bitch", "slut", "whore", "cunt" (this was a daily thing for me, every single day I went to work). If I responded, it got worse, because one time, I thought I'd smile back, avoid eye contact and just keep walking. The next day, the dude was waiting for me by the door as I walked past and tried to get my phone number and started following me. I changed my route to work and walked a longer way, past a building site, where I then ignored the wolf whistles, stared straight ahead and tried to pretend it wasn't happening, to calls of "cunt" and "suck my cock" and "do you think you're better than me, bitch?!" ringing in my ears, every single day. One day, he was waiting near the gate to the work site as I walked past (I had few other options of getting to work at that point, since the other route had the creep waiting for me by the door to his shop), walked a few steps behind me, hissing about why I didn't like him. I don't know a single woman who has not had this experience and I do not know a single woman who appreciates it. Even my own mother had a similar experience when she once came to meet me for lunch in the city when I was on my lunch break. She was so upset by it (being in her 70's), she has since refused to walk through the city by herself again. Now, as to your contention that they were probably young boys or teenage boys. This makes it okay? Do you understand the word "cycle", in context of this discussion? If teenage boys feel it is okay to sexually harass little girls walking down the street, what view of women are these teenage boys going to have when they grow up?
Extreme? Dude, it's a daily part of our life. Do you know how many times I have had grown men wolf whistle me while walking home from school in my uniform, and then expose themselves to me, sometimes at busy intersections with dozens of people around? It's a daily thing. Every day. It got so bad and I was so stressed about it, my parents had to take time off work to pick me up at the train station and drive me home every day when I was in high school. You think a guy jacking off on a woman in a subway is an extreme example? Hah! That's funny. You want an extreme example? Earlier this week a man in a car pulled up next to a 14-year old girl on a street in Florida and offered to pay her $200 to have sex with him. Some people would say that’s a compliment. It’s part of being out in society, learning to deal with people, navigating relationships between men and women. Or, at least that what many commenters on articles I write about street harassment think. That or maybe they’re thinking, “She must have looked like a prostitute,” and well, you know. The girl said no. So what does this guy do? He reaches out, drags her, by her hair, into his car, chokes her until she blacks out, tosses her out of the car and then, not done yet, he runs her over several times. Bystanders watched the entire episode in shock. He almost killed her, but she lived and ID’d him in a line up and he’s been arrested and charged with Attempted Murder, Aggravated Battery with a Deadly Weapon and False Imprisonment. What was the Deadly Weapon referred to in the charge I wonder? Given our normatively male understanding interpretation of what is threatening, does a man pulling up to a girl like this and talking to her in this way constitute imminent harm? Or how about these (with links embedded): In San Francisco last year, a man stabbed a woman in the face and arm after she didn’t respond positively to his sexually harassing her on the street. In Bradenton, Fla., a man shot a high school senior to death after she and her friends refused to perform oral sex at his request. I In Chicago, a scared 15-year-old was hit by a car and died after she tried escaping from harassers on a bus. Again, in Chicago, a man grabbed a 19-year-old walking on a public thoroughfare, pulled her onto a gangway and assaulted her. In Savannah, Georgia, a woman was walking alone at night and three men approached her. She ignored them, but they pushed her to the ground and sexually assaulted her In Manhattan, a 29-year-old pregnant woman was killed when men catcalling from a van drove onto the sidewalk and hit her and her friend. Last week, a runner in California — a woman — was stopped and asked, by a strange man in a car, if she wanted a ride. When she declined he ran her over twice. Yes, how dare women have the expectation of being able to walk down the street without being harassed! I mean, we already know where you sit on this issue, paddoboy. You don't think sexually harassing women on the street is a big deal, despite "most women" actually it was not appreciated or wanted. I am going to ask here.. But is there something functionally wrong with you? That wolf whistle, is sexual harassment. How many women have to say this before you are willing to listen that the attention is unwanted and that they don't feel safe when it happens? I have posted countless of studies where "most" women have detailed how it negatively affects them and you are asking how can we stop "any young red blooded young man" from sexually harassing women in the street? And I have provided you with studies of thousands of women, the greater majority of whom describe it as unwanted and feel threatened by it. The irony of the manner in which you are posting here is that you rail at MR, for example, for failing to provide any actual evidence and for ignoring scientific studies, and here you are doing the exact same thing because you think men should have the right to sexually harass women in the street because hey, it's just a wolf whistle, right? I think anyone who falsely accuses someone of a crime has committed a crime themselves (which by law they have..). I also think there is a vast difference between a false accusation and a sexual assault and rape. There is also the fact that false accusations are exceptionally rare and I find your use of it interesting, given the context and how it is often used to condone rape culture. I also think that the Skaf gang should have been imprisoned for the rest of their natural lives. Or are you talking about the Ashfield gang rapists, who are essentially out of prison for their gang rape sprees in the area several years ago?
the problem is there is no legal recourse in this context. as long as they are not physically touching you or unless you can prove they are stalking you, there is nothing you can do legally. this is why they do it. they know the lines. and because you are not giving in, they are denigrating you. but this illustrates the point of sexual harassment or any harassment for that matter, is that there is so much harassment that can be leveled against an individual where there is no recourse (some of it because it's minor even if damaging) yet many males pretend that they have to walk on eggshells due to fear of reprisal for so-called innocent mistakes or subjective perception. this is not categorically true as you know as most sexual harassment and harassment in general is often given a pass because there is no recourse for the victim and most of it is considered minor, even if repeated. it is a form of bullying. the only times that one usually does have some recourse is in a business establishment (possibly) or at the workplace, where there are consequences for unprofessional, inappropriate or harassing behavior and speech. and this does not result in automatic firing either since verbal reprimands will be the first course of action. this pretense that men are painted into a corner where they can't function without fear of women's backlash is a general fallacy. what backlash? when you assault or continually harass someone? of course. otherwise, don't do it. you don't trip into physical assault/inappropriate touching (even the first time) and you don't trip into harassment repeatedly either. all other contexts, unless it is blatant sexual assault that is escalated to police investigation, often is not controllable or just through your own means such as avoidance.
