ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags !MOD BOX WARNING!

Reply
Old 11th January 2018, 03:15 AM   #81
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,938
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
At the beach.
A topless one?


Quote:
Is that what you meant then? Is your daughter's body up for your version of "public consumption" when she goes to the beach?
My hypothetical daughter can do what she likes if she's a grown up.

If she wants to wear a low cut top and, horror of horrors, someone actually notices, I wouldn't indulge her getting all upset about it. Someone touching would be another matter. Of course, we're talking here aobut someone who doesn't exist who, if they did, would have been raised by me and likely share my values so it's a pointless enquiry and a dodgy appeal to emotion.

Are you going to ask someone to think of the children in a minute?







Quote:
We are talking about it now. Are the laws different on a topless beach?
No idea. Don't really care. It's not relevant to the conversation we're having. You just want to talk about it on a topless beach because, there, your argument might actually work. I'm not doing that, I'm sticking with the conversation we're actually having.
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:16 AM   #82
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
But looking at someone and raping them are not the same. In fact, your argument was a highly exaggerated version of the original... the definition of hyperbole.

I don't think you really believe that someone who thinks they can ogle pretty ladies is also automatically okay with raping them.
I not only don't believe that, I never said it either.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:18 AM   #83
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
A topless one?
Or regular.



Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
My hypothetical daughter can do what she likes if she's a grown up.
And if she's not? Is her body up for public consumption then?

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
If she wants to wear a low cut top and, horror of horrors, someone actually notices, I wouldn't indulge her getting all upset about it. Someone touching would be another matter. Of course, we're talking here aobut someone who doesn't exist who, if they did, would have been raised by me and likely share my values so it's a pointless enquiry and a dodgy appeal to emotion.

Are you going to ask someone to think of the children in a minute?
I am asking you if children's bodies are up for public consumption.



Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
No idea. Don't really care.
Hint: They are not.


Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
It's not relevant to the conversation we're having. You just want to talk about it on a topless beach because, there, your argument might actually work. I'm not doing that, I'm sticking with the conversation we're actually having.
The conversation in which you are saying women's bodies are up for public consumption?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:18 AM   #84
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,938
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
It's not hyperbole to compare your argument to the argument that women who get raped should not have worn provocative clothing. In fact, it's the same argument.
No it isn't.

I'm saying that ladies who wear low cut tops should not get upset if men look.

You're saying that I'm saying that ladies who wear low cut tops should not get upset if they get raped. That's not what I'm saying. You brought rape into the conversation and now you're trying to equate rape with what we're talking about. Rape has nothing to do with this situation at all. We're not discussing rape. We're discussing one person looking at another person.
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:19 AM   #85
mike81
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 440
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
This is true. It's unfortunate that this discussion is being held in a thread about #metoo, as it has nothing to do with it. It appears that some posters in the thread aren't up to speed with what #metoo is.
#metoo isn't just about what you seem to think it is. Yes, it may have started that way. Now (at least it seems to me and some others) that it has turned into a witch hunt. Innocent behavior is being called assault and people are having their lives ruined over it. Women (like the James Franco accuser) are, almost certainly, lying to try to ruin him and others. We have women who agree to do things and then later cry assault. Like the one who agreed to do nude scenes for a certain amount and now is crying harassment or whatever. Let me guess, since Franco had "power" over her, she couldn't open her mouth and say no. She couldn't not sign the contract.

Last edited by mike81; 11th January 2018 at 03:23 AM.
mike81 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:19 AM   #86
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
No it isn't.

I'm saying that ladies who wear low cut tops should not get upset if men look.

You're saying that I'm saying that ladies who wear low cut tops should not get upset if they get raped. That's not what I'm saying. You brought rape into the conversation and now you're trying to equate rape with what we're talking about. Rape has nothing to do with this situation at all. We're not discussing rape. We're discussing one person looking at another person.
No, I'm saying your argument is the same argument as those who say women who get raped shouldn't have worn provocative clothing. You do understand that I'm not accusing you of actually saying that women who get raped shouldn't have worn provocative clothing, right? I'm simply saying that the argument you are using is the same argument that the people who do say so are using.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:19 AM   #87
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 17,824
3point14, perhaps you missed my post. Why is it not okay to follow a woman you find physically attractive if she's out in public?
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:20 AM   #88
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by mike81 View Post
#metoo isn't just about what you seem to think it is. Yes, it may have started that way. Now (at least it seems to me and some others) that it has turned into a witch hunt. Innocent behavior is being called assault and people are having their lives ruined over it. Women (like the James Franco accuser) are, in all likely hood, lying to try to ruin him and others.
Yes, #metoo is just about what I am saying it is. What you (and some other) think about it is really not relevant.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:22 AM   #89
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,938
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Or regular.





And if she's not? Is her body up for public consumption then?



I am asking you if children's bodies are up for public consumption.
Are you trying to paint me as some sort of paedophile? Why the hell are you talking about children now.

I am talking about looking at displayed cleavage. So far you've managed to drag both rape and possible pedophilia into the conversation.





Quote:
Hint: They are not.




The conversation in which you are saying women's bodies are up for public consumption?
Yes, for being looked at. Like anything else in public.
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:22 AM   #90
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,793
I'm siding with The Don (though I'm not yet middle-aged, and my income isn't very middle class at the moment ).
I'm not a woman, and I'm not in a position to dismiss their experiences.

In fact, I've heard enough shocking stories about the behavior of men from women that I think it's not an exaggeration to say that a certain subset of men don't know how to treat women like people instead of like fleshy pleasure machines.
Most men? Hell no. But enough to warrant a discussion, and #metoo is a good place to start.

Could it turn into a witch hunt? Possibly.
Will there be a couple of false accusations? Probably.
Will this result in a puritan crusade against all displays of affection? No, I don't think so.

So what do we do? Keep an open mind, keep talking, and don't let the conversation get hijacked by extremists or trolls.

Last edited by Porpoise of Life; 11th January 2018 at 03:23 AM.
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:23 AM   #91
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,938
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Why is following not okay?

I think it constitutes stalking. I think following is not okay. If you want to argue that it is, go ahead.

(sorry, got caught up in far too many posts, got caught out by the 60 second rule)
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:24 AM   #92
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cymru
Posts: 23,898
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I am very confused about the concept that one can show flesh in public but others can't look. I'm also wondering how one would legally define the difference between 'noticing' and 'staring'.
A young woman is sunbathing topless on the beach. Are you perfectly within your rights to stand over her, staring at her breasts ?

If she is offended and says "Oi, perv, stop looking at me", are you entitled to say that if she didn't want you standing over her staring at her, then she shouldn't be sunbathing topless ?

It may not be illegal to do so - and AFAIK I've even tried to make a legal distinction - but I personally don't think that behaviour is reasonable.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I'm really struggling with the concept of displaying flesh such that the act of noticing it is a perverted act bordering on the criminal.
Again, AFAIK I've not tried to distinguish between legal/illegal but please feel free to point out where I have, if I have.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
People, in public, can look at other people in public.
Yes, and there's a point when staring becomes rude. An acquaintance has a significant facial disfigurement as a result of injury. As a consequence he tends to attract attention. Sometimes that attention goes beyond people glancing and instead people stare at him. Although he is inured to this through decades of this kind of behaviour, occasionally it gets on his nerves and he will go across and talk to people.

Generally when he does so, they are embarrassed and will apologise. I think his behaviour is reasonable but perhaps he should just tolerate it because "People, in public, can look at other people in public. ""

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
That's fairly easy. Wear what you like. Nobody has permission to touch you in any way without your consent, even if you're naked. If you're naked, however, expect the world to look.
I disagree that unless behaviour is illegal then it's up to the individual to put up with it. If someone is being rude, tell them. Of course not everyone has the confidence to do that and that's where it can become a real problem.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Different people have different sex drives. Breasts are a secondary sexual characteristic and the male -- and female - eye will be drqwn towards a prominent display. I like civilisation, but let's not try to pretend we're not mammals.
And let's not pretend that staring at someone's breasts without their express consent isn't rude, regardless of the circumstances.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:24 AM   #93
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Are you trying to paint me as some sort of paedophile? Why the hell are you talking about children now.

I am talking about looking at displayed cleavage. So far you've managed to drag both rape and possible pedophilia into the conversation.
I'm not accusing you of being a paedophile. Take it easy.

I'm asking you if your argument applies equally to children as it does to women. You said, if it's in the public space it's up for public consumption. Does that apply to children's bodies as well, and if not, why not?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:26 AM   #94
mike81
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 440
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Yes, #metoo is just about what I am saying it is. What you (and some other) think about it is really not relevant.
So some women are not exploiting the #metoo "movement" by telling lies? If the answer is yes, then it is relevant.
mike81 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:27 AM   #95
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by mike81 View Post
So some women are not exploiting the #metoo "movement" by telling lies? If the answer is yes, then it is relevant.
I don't know. Do you?

If you do, why not call those women out by name so they can stop hijacking the movement?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:27 AM   #96
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,793
Originally Posted by mike81 View Post
So some women are not exploiting the #metoo "movement" by telling lies? If the answer is yes, then it is relevant.
It's certainly possible. Do you know of any specific cases? Or is it just a hunch?
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:30 AM   #97
mike81
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 440
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
It's certainly possible. Do you know of any specific cases? Or is it just a hunch?
There is the Franco accuser. She was on Twitter saying that she finds ways to ruin people's lives and lied about being pregnant to get a man to talk to her. Again, I know that does not prove she is lying, but come on now. Do I need to provide links to the tweets? There's also the Al Franken situation that I and others believe has been blown way out of proportion.

Last edited by mike81; 11th January 2018 at 03:32 AM.
mike81 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:31 AM   #98
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 7,367
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
By 'public consuption' do you mean 'so that people can see', then yes, I do. Anything one displays in public is for public consumption. by definition. Again, not touching, not following, just looking.
Agree.

If you drive down the street in a $500,000 sports car, you can expect people look at you. They are not stealing it or touching, just looking.

If you walk down the street wearing a "Priscilla Queen of the Desert" costume, you can expect people look at you. They are not stealing or touching, just looking.

If you are a man and you walk down the street wearing only your budgie smugglers as you show off your "package", you can expect people look at you. They are not stealing or touching, just looking.

And here is a question for the prudes... what if, in the incident I mentioned in post #33, we replace the man with a woman... Is that OK? What if she is a lesbian... is that OK?
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:34 AM   #99
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Agree.

If you drive down the street in a $500,000 sports car, you can expect people look at you. They are not stealing it or touching, just looking.

If you walk down the street wearing a "Priscilla Queen of the Desert" costume, you can expect people look at you. They are not stealing or touching, just looking.

If you are a man and you walk down the street wearing only your budgie smugglers as you show off your "package", you can expect people look at you. They are not stealing or touching, just looking.
Maybe you could answer if this principle applies to children's bodies as well?

Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
And here is a question for the prudes... what if, in the incident I mentioned in post #33, we replace the man with a woman... Is that OK? What if she is a lesbian... is that OK?
If a man was wearing a low cut top and a woman oogled him, he called her a pervert and she slut-shamed him? No, it would still not be ok.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:37 AM   #100
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,938
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
A young woman is sunbathing topless on the beach. Are you perfectly within your rights to stand over her, staring at her breasts ?
We've gone from 'staring while walking by' to 'stand over her'

I don't think they're equivalent. The situation as described was a man walking past ladies. They yelled at his back. Nobody stood over everyone.

This topic seems to generate hyperbole.


Quote:
If she is offended and says "Oi, perv, stop looking at me", are you entitled to say that if she didn't want you standing over her staring at her, then she shouldn't be sunbathing topless ?
No. standing over someone is not what was being described.

Quote:
It may not be illegal to do so - and AFAIK I've even tried to make a legal distinction - but I personally don't think that behaviour is reasonable.
Neither do I. Standing over anyone staring at them is not acceptable behaviour. Staring at someone's obviously displayed cleavage as you walk past is not the same thing.



Quote:
Again, AFAIK I've not tried to distinguish between legal/illegal but please feel free to point out where I have, if I have.
No, you didn't, but if it's difficult to separate the acceptable from the unacceptable with a definition then it's really difficult to work out what's actually acceptable.



Quote:
Yes, and there's a point when staring becomes rude. An acquaintance has a significant facial disfigurement as a result of injury. As a consequence he tends to attract attention. Sometimes that attention goes beyond people glancing and instead people stare at him. Although he is inured to this through decades of this kind of behaviour, occasionally it gets on his nerves and he will go across and talk to people.

Generally when he does so, they are embarrassed and will apologise. I think his behaviour is reasonable but perhaps he should just tolerate it because "People, in public, can look at other people in public. ""

It's the human condition. People will notice and look at the unusual. The unusually tall, the unusually attractive or a prominently displayed pair of breasts. I feel sorry for your friend. I would try not to look. I certainly would not judge him for his unusual appearance but I would certainly notice his unusual appearance.



Quote:
I disagree that unless behaviour is illegal then it's up to the individual to put up with it. If someone is being rude, tell them. Of course not everyone has the confidence to do that and that's where it can become a real problem.
Again, we seem to be talking about a different interaction. Again, I'm talking about, to put it bluntly, staring at tits in the street as they go by. Not stopping, not interacting, but definitely looking as they go by.



Quote:
And let's not pretend that staring at someone's breasts without their express consent isn't rude, regardless of the circumstances.
Again, the game of gotcha in these circumstances should not be indulged.

If it's rude to look, isn't it therefore rude to display? I don't get how it can be rude to look but not to display.
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:38 AM   #101
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 7,367
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Maybe you could answer if this principle applies to children's bodies as well?
What do YOU think?

Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
If a man was wearing a low cut top and a woman oogled him, he called her a pervert and she slut-shamed him? No, it would still not be ok.
Nice switcheroo there, but not what I asked.
__________________
► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:39 AM   #102
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,938
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I'm not accusing you of being a paedophile. Take it easy.

I'm asking you if your argument applies equally to children as it does to women. You said, if it's in the public space it's up for public consumption. Does that apply to children's bodies as well, and if not, why not?

I'm fairly sure You're trying to muddy the waters.


Children can be looked at, just as everyone else can.

15 year old girls with fully developed bodies who are wearing low cut tops will be looked at. You might not like it, but it's going to happen. They might not like it, in which case, they might consider wearing a different top
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:40 AM   #103
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,793
Originally Posted by mike81 View Post
There is the Franco accuser. She was on Twitter saying that she finds ways to ruin people's lives and lied about being pregnant to get a man to talk to her. Again, I know that does not prove she is lying, but come on now. Do I need to provide links to the tweets? There's also the Al Franken situation that I and others believe has been blown way out of proportion.
I read about that too, and I think it's suspicious too.
When the well-intentioned mantra is that accusers should always be believed, there will be some nasty people who take advantage of this.
And coupled with the unsavory attitude of many on social media to destroy anyone who can be classed as 'the enemy' that can lead to terrible consequences.

I don't know how to prevent that. Callous opportunists and angry mobs will always exist.
But the fact that the #metoo movement can be abused does not mean that the issues it raises aren't legitimate.
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:41 AM   #104
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
What do YOU think?
No, I don't think it applies. That should be obvious by my posts in this thread. The question is if you - who believes the principle applies to women's bodies - believe it applies to children's bodies as well.


Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Nice switcheroo there, but not what I asked.
Then I misunderstood. Could you outline how the positions were reversed?

ETA: Re-read and understood. Sorry about that. If a woman oogled another woman I would think that's not ok.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

Last edited by uke2se; 11th January 2018 at 03:45 AM.
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:43 AM   #105
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I'm fairly sure You're trying to muddy the waters.
Instead of trying to second guess my motives, I'd appreciate if you simply answered the question.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Children can be looked at, just as everyone else can.

15 year old girls with fully developed bodies who are wearing low cut tops will be looked at. You might not like it, but it's going to happen. They might not like it, in which case, they might consider wearing a different top
Would a parent be within his/her right to call someone who oogles their child a pervert? Would the oogler be in the right to inform the parents that if they didn't want him to look, they shouldn't have dressed their child in provocative clothes?

For the record, I'm not talking about fully developed 15-year-olds.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:44 AM   #106
mike81
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 440
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
I don't know how to prevent that. Callous opportunists and angry mobs will always exist.
But the fact that the #metoo movement can be abused does not mean that the issues it raises aren't legitimate.
I agree. I just think we need to remember and talk about the fact that some will exploit it. Probably more than some will ever admit to. We need to listen to what the accusers have to say, but not automatically believe them and ruin someone's life. We don't need to equate looking, flirting, "making a move', etc. with assault or rape.

Last edited by mike81; 11th January 2018 at 03:46 AM.
mike81 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:49 AM   #107
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 13,938
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Instead of trying to second guess my motives, I'd appreciate if you simply answered the question.
I'd rather not, when you're desperately taking the conversation from grown ups to children I naturally get suspicious. It wasn't what we were talking about at all. Your logic hasn't stood up till now and you've decided to work an edge case. It has all the markings of an attempted gotcha so yes, I'm being suspicious.



Quote:
Would a parent be within his/her right to call someone who oogles their child a pervert?
Depends on the 'child'


Quote:
Would the oogler be in the right to inform the parents that if they didn't want him to look, they shouldn't have dressed their child in provocative clothes?

This mainly raises the question 'why is the child dressed provocatively?'

People are allowed to look at other people. People are allowed to look at other people's children. Parents are, rather ickily, allowed to dress their children provocatively - which I find just weird, buth hey, we'll go with that if you want' - People are going to look. Sometimes, when children are out in public, bad people are going to look at them and have bad thoughts. You can't police this, much as you try.


There's a device someone developed that sits on the forehead and accurately tracks eye movements. Maybe we should all (or possibly just us men, eh?) wear one of these all the time and if we're found to be looking at someone or something we're not allowed to perhaps the police should be called.



We're the tiniest step away from thought crime here. It's a bit mental to me.
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:50 AM   #108
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,793
Originally Posted by mike81 View Post
I agree. I just think we need to remember and talk about the fact that some will exploit it. Probably more than some will ever admit to. We need to listen to what the accusers have to say, but not automatically believe them and ruin someone's life. We don't need to equate looking, flirting, "making a move', etc. with assault or rape.
I don't really know of any examples of this happening. Do you, or are you afraid it's going to go in that direction?
Or do you perhaps feel that this could affect you because of your own flirting style?

(I don't mean to accuse you of anything, I might just be reading too much into your exchange with The Don upthread.)
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:55 AM   #109
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,271
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I'd rather not, when you're desperately taking the conversation from grown ups to children I naturally get suspicious. It wasn't what we were talking about at all. Your logic hasn't stood up till now and you've decided to work an edge case. It has all the markings of an attempted gotcha so yes, I'm being suspicious.
It's an attempt to get you to understand my point of view. I don't think that's a "gotcha".

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Depends on the 'child'
It does? Please explain.


Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
This mainly raises the question 'why is the child dressed provocatively?'
That's the question it raises to you? Seriously?

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
People are allowed to look at other people. People are allowed to look at other people's children. Parents are, rather ickily, allowed to dress their children provocatively - which I find just weird, buth hey, we'll go with that if you want' - People are going to look. Sometimes, when children are out in public, bad people are going to look at them and have bad thoughts. You can't police this, much as you try.
Do you think that, at any point at all, looking might break any social norms to the point where verbally lashing out at the oogler becomes acceptable?

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
There's a device someone developed that sits on the forehead and accurately tracks eye movements. Maybe we should all (or possibly just us men, eh?) wear one of these all the time and if we're found to be looking at someone or something we're not allowed to perhaps the police should be called.
Or you can just look and then apologize if you're caught, understanding that the person you were oogling didn't want you to.


Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
We're the tiniest step away from thought crime here. It's a bit mental to me.
Thought crimes are committed by the mind. We're talking about the eyes here.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:57 AM   #110
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cymru
Posts: 23,898
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
We've gone from 'staring while walking by' to 'stand over her'

I don't think they're equivalent. The situation as described was a man walking past ladies. They yelled at his back. Nobody stood over everyone.

This topic seems to generate hyperbole.
There seems to be some kind of continuum from completely ignoring at one end and loitering and staring at the other. It seems that different people have different opinions about what constitutes acceptable behaviour on this continuum. You think it's perfectly fine to stare at a woman's boobs as you walk past - because they are on display - and that the woman objecting is some kind of "gotcha". You also seem think that it's up to the person staring (or you, I'm not sure) to determine whether the person being stared at thinks the staring is rude and hence whether they can remonstrate with the person staring.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
No. standing over someone is not what was being described.
True, but it's the same kind of behaviour.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Neither do I. Standing over anyone staring at them is not acceptable behaviour. Staring at someone's obviously displayed cleavage as you walk past is not the same thing.
What is acceptable ?
  • If I stop to stare, is that still acceptable ?
  • If I slow down to stare is that acceptable ?
  • If I maintain speed but change course, is that acceptable ?
  • If I maintan speed and course but turn around to continue staring once I've passed, is that acceptable ?

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
No, you didn't, but if it's difficult to separate the acceptable from the unacceptable with a definition then it's really difficult to work out what's actually acceptable.
IMO it's up to the person being stared at. If they're happy at you ogling their breasts then good luck to them (and you), but don't be surprised if other people have a lower threshold and upbraid you.


Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
It's the human condition. People will notice and look at the unusual. The unusually tall, the unusually attractive or a prominently displayed pair of breasts. I feel sorry for your friend. I would try not to look. I certainly would not judge him for his unusual appearance but I would certainly notice his unusual appearance.
Acquaintance, not friend.

Would you feel comfortable staring at him though, or would you have the uneasy feeling that I have, that staring is rude ?

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Again, we seem to be talking about a different interaction. Again, I'm talking about, to put it bluntly, staring at tits in the street as they go by. Not stopping, not interacting, but definitely looking as they go by.
Where is the line ?

Is the person being stared at ever justified in complaining ?

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Again, the game of gotcha in these circumstances should not be indulged.

If it's rude to look, isn't it therefore rude to display? I don't get how it can be rude to look but not to display.
Not at all. IMO my acquaintance isn't being rude showing his facial disfigurement but I personally think that staring at him is rude. YMMV

IMO the same applies to attractive people.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 03:57 AM   #111
mike81
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 440
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
I don't really know of any examples of this happening. Do you, or are you afraid it's going to go in that direction?
Or do you perhaps feel that this could affect you because of your own flirting style?

(I don't mean to accuse you of anything, I might just be reading too much into your exchange with The Don upthread.)
I just see it heading in that direction based on everything I've read. I believe some of the guys when they say it was consensual and now they are being accused. I believe some of the guys when they say that nothing happened or that not as much happened as she claims. I know my belief does not prove anything. I have many reasons to believe that there are more liars than some seem to think. I also have pretty good evidence (like with the Franco accuser) that some are lying.

Also, you are reading too much into what I said earlier. No big deal. I can see how that could happen.

Last edited by mike81; 11th January 2018 at 04:07 AM.
mike81 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 04:14 AM   #112
erlando
Graduate Poster
 
erlando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,397
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Quote:
We're the tiniest step away from thought crime here. It's a bit mental to me.
Thought crimes are committed by the mind. We're talking about the eyes here.


Soon-to-be obligatory eyewear for human (adult?) males in public...:

__________________
"If it can grow, it can evolve" - Eugenie Scott, Ph.D Creationism disproved?
Evolution IS a blind watchmaker
erlando is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 04:19 AM   #113
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,793
Originally Posted by erlando View Post


Soon-to-be obligatory eyewear for human (adult?) males in public...:

https://s17.postimg.org/x9ko0azb3/mi...sleep-mask.jpg
The #metoo thing was started because sexual abuse (mainly of women, and often by a person in a position of power) is overlooked or dismissed too often.

Why do so many people insist that it's some kind of anti male conspiracy that will make it illegal to look at a pretty woman?
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 04:19 AM   #114
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 41,130
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
Yep they deserve to be sexually assaulted for those dresses.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 04:21 AM   #115
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 41,130
Originally Posted by mike81 View Post
When will it be enough? When all sexuality is wiped off the face of the planet? Ok that is a bit drastic I know. Seriously though it's getting to the point where men are going to be terrified to do anything because flirting is now harassment. Which may be ok with some "feminist."

I may get **** for saying this, but I think if a man goes to kiss, grope, exposes himself, or whatever, then all the woman has to do is say stop. If he does not, then it is wrong. If he does stop though, then maybe that should be the end of it. If she is going along with it and any reasonable person would say she is ok with it based on her actions, then you don't get to later cry rape/harassment/assault/or WTF ever. You don't get to agree to do a nude scene for $100 a day and then later cry harassment all because you feel like a slut or otherwise regret doing it.
And women who freeze up and panic are now consenting to sex. Makes so many supposed rape victims into the sluts they truly are.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 04:24 AM   #116
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 41,130
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
If you find yourself wondering whether you should strip in front of someone and start to masturbate (a la Weinstein) without a clear indication from the other party that this is what they want to happen then I'd suggest stopping.
No you just pull a trump and start kissing them, if they freak out then it is a problem but if threats to their career and social pressure against making a scene win out then it was all good.

Gab them by the pussy, it is only wrong if you don't stop if they object.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 04:25 AM   #117
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 17,747
This movement won't be over until the glass ceiling is shattered........ and all the broken shards are used to kill every male on the planet.
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 04:27 AM   #118
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,793
I'm sure all this hyperbole, snark, and assuming the worst of other posters' intentions if they don't agree with you completely is going to lead to a productive discussion...
Porpoise of Life is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 04:28 AM   #119
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 80,246
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
The #metoo thing was started because sexual abuse (mainly of women, and often by a person in a position of power) is overlooked or dismissed too often.

Why do so many people insist that it's some kind of anti male conspiracy that will make it illegal to look at a pretty woman?
Given the main thread of discussion in this thread I can see how some people may get that idea.

I do wish we could concentrate on the real problem that has been exposed which is clear, and unambiguous sexual assault, sexual harassment by those in a position of power over those they have assaulted and harassed that for a myriad of reasons have been allowed to continue for decades.

"edge" cases are all well and good but let's deal with the unambiguous problems first?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th January 2018, 04:29 AM   #120
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 17,747
I certainly hope so
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:46 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.