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.
Reply
Old 3rd April 2019, 09:37 AM   #161
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,466
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
They hypothetical is that they have a sign saying they ""I love to ****".

i too, love to ****. She might want to **** me. She probably won't, but she might.

If the hypothetical had been her wearing a Bad Obsession t-shirt, then I would probably ask her about her fabrication skills and when she thinks Binky will be finished.

People who go out of their way to attract attention (As the lady in the hypothetical is doing) should not get upset when they attract attention.

I reserve the right to address anyone in a public place, right up to the point they tell me to do one, and, at that point, I will.
You said you were going to offer help. I want to know in what respect to do they need help and what help are you going to offer?

How is a woman walking in public dressed as a Victoria Secret model asking for help?
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold 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 3rd April 2019, 09:41 AM   #162
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 18,732
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
You said you were going to offer help. I want to know in what respect to do they need help and what help are you going to offer?

Oh, you think I was giving you the script? That's not really how introducing myself to new people. I'd start with "Hello" or something similar and go frm there. I wouldn't leap straight to "Can I help" or "Wanna ****".

Then, assuming that a conversation happened, at some point I'd mention the sign and our mutual interests.

The straight away "Can I help" is reserved more for people struggling up stairs with pushchairs, that sort of thing.


Quote:
How is a woman walking in public dressed as a Victoria Secret model asking for help?
As I say, I wasn't giving you a script. My entire approach would not be "Hi, I too like to ****, can I help you with that?" I'm no Casanova, but seriously, no.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

Last edited by 3point14; 3rd April 2019 at 09:43 AM.
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 3rd April 2019, 09:43 AM   #163
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 6,323
Some meandering thoughts -

Sometimes, I think it would help if people (for example) didn't say "attractive" when they mean "beautiful." There's a difference in meaning that matters. There's reasons to want to look good and beautiful other than attracting sex. There simply are. I don't have sexual attraction to women, but I think women are beautiful and admire their beauty all the time, and their clothes, and their adornments and makeup styles. Exactly the same with men, many men, most of whom I would have no desire to sleep with in reality.

"Looks good" doesn't equal "want to bang," in like, tons of instances. I only want to bang one person in reality, but I think people are gorgeous constantly. It has nothing to do with sex in those cases. How did beauty get all exclusively wrapped up in sex? It's a big factor in sex and attraction, but we like beauty for other reasons too, man! Someone can BE wanting attention, but more the attention of being admired for their style and beauty. It doesn't have to mean he or she wants conversation or sex.
isissxn 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 3rd April 2019, 09:44 AM   #164
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,866
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Nope, she should definitely do that if she feels like it, and to hell with other peoples' comfort. MAGA hats and white power t-shirts make me decidedly uncomfortable, not to mention more than a little anxious (given what they mean and who I am), and do so for nearly anyone who is not a cis-het straight white person.
You've conflated two different questions: whether some action should be avoided and whether it should be legally prohibited. Many, many things which should be avoided are not (and should not be) legally prohibited.

Quote:
Yet I don't see anyone here advocating for legislation against them, or saying that they shouldn't be worn because they make people uncomfortable. Indeed, any suggestion of such a thing is met with cries of "censorship" and "free speech" from the same usual suspect who are here demanding women cover up to preserve men's sensibilities.
Your assumption that it's men's sensibilities which are being protected is rather unfounded. An attractive naked woman is more likely to offend other women (especially mothers with children) than men. Women have always been far more judgmental about other women than men are.

And if you want to argue that public nudity should be legal, then simply say so. No point in arguing about leggings if that's really your destination.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 3rd April 2019, 09:44 AM   #165
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 21,146
You know I'm not being facetious when I say we sort of need a universal way to advertise what level of social interaction you are open to at that moment.

Because we can get stuck in the "It's rude to interact with a person unless they are okay with, but asking they are okay with it is a form of interaction" paradox.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 3rd April 2019 at 09:46 AM.
JoeMorgue 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 3rd April 2019, 09:46 AM   #166
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,466
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Oh, you think I was giving you the script?
Oh, so why did you say it? Why did you feel a need to couch it in those terms and not just admit, "If I see someone dressed like a Victoria Secret model, I am going to hit on her"?
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold 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 3rd April 2019, 09:52 AM   #167
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 18,732
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
Oh, so why did you say it? Why did you feel a need to couch it in those terms and not just admit, "If I see someone dressed like a Victoria Secret model, I am going to hit on her"?

Because I thought I was dealing with an audience that understood less than literal language.


Just shows how wrong I can be.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
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 3rd April 2019, 09:53 AM   #168
Joe Random
Master Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,152
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
You know I'm not being facetious when I say we sort of need a universal way to advertise what level of social interaction you are open to at that moment.

Because we can get stuck in the "It's rude to interact with a person unless they are okay with, but asking they are okay with it is a form of interaction" paradox.

Time to expand and make mandatory the handkerchief code .
Joe Random 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 3rd April 2019, 09:56 AM   #169
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,201
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
The line is the point at which it may be considered insensitive to dress a certain way in a certain social context. That does not make a person responsible for ANY actions other people take.

For those purposes, dress is very much like speech. We can applaud the legal and general sentiment that people can say what they please, but saying some things in certain contexts can be considered insensitive and it is not unreasonable to ask people to refrain from certain expressions in certain contexts.

There are certain contexts were certain modes of dress or other forms of appearance can be considered inappropriate or disrespectful, but that's an opinion, and not everyone will necessarily share the same opinion. However, that's a far cry from saying "women wearing leggings are (at least partly) responsible for men becoming sexually aroused when they view them". The latter is far too close to "she was asking for it by the way she dressed" for my personal comfort.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.
luchog 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 3rd April 2019, 09:58 AM   #170
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,466
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Because I thought I was dealing with an audience that understood less than literal language.


Just shows how wrong I can be.
There is a significant difference between hitting on someone and actually asking them if they need "help."

Or are you doing like the scene in City Slickers where the two ranch hands ask Bonnie (Helen Slater's character) if she needs "help"? Let me suggest, if that's your approach, then you are a creep.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold 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 3rd April 2019, 09:59 AM   #171
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 19,517
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
You know I'm not being facetious when I say we sort of need a universal way to advertise what level of social interaction you are open to at that moment.

Because we can get stuck in the "It's rude to interact with a person unless they are okay with, but asking they are okay with it is a form of interaction" paradox.
I thought that was what headphones were for.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith 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 3rd April 2019, 09:59 AM   #172
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,866
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
There are certain contexts were certain modes of dress or other forms of appearance can be considered inappropriate or disrespectful, but that's an opinion, and not everyone will necessarily share the same opinion. However, that's a far cry from saying "women wearing leggings are (at least partly) responsible for men becoming sexually aroused when they view them". The latter is far too close to "she was asking for it by the way she dressed" for my personal comfort.
Let me see if I understand this correctly: your personal comfort is irrelevant to me when I'm picking out clothes, but I need to take it into consideration when I form an argument?
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 3rd April 2019, 10:00 AM   #173
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,466
Originally Posted by Joe Random View Post
Time to expand and make mandatory the handkerchief code .
There was that documentary by David Attenbourough (I think, is it David or Richard? Which one was the guy in The Great Escape? It wasn't him) about the nature of sex, and they showed the usual human mating ritual. It's things like eye contact and nodding, to establish that mutual aspect of it.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold 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 3rd April 2019, 10:02 AM   #174
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,201
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
People who go out of their way to attract attention (As the lady in the hypothetical is doing) should not get upset when they attract attention.

Who gets to decide when someone is "going out of their way to attract attention"? That sounds like way too subjective a judgement, and prone to way too much projection on the part of the observer. If someone is jogging down the street wearing a sports bra and leggings, are they "going out of their way to attract attention", or are they just dressed in the most comfortable and functional clothing for that activity?

I've encountered people who felt that someone dressed up in "goth" or "punk" styles is "going out of their way to attract attention", and used that as an excuse to verbally harass them (and yes, I have heard said harassers use that exact phrasing).

And even if they are "going out of their way to attract attention", have you stopped to consider that maybe it's not your attention that they're trying to attract?
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.

Last edited by luchog; 3rd April 2019 at 10:06 AM.
luchog 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 3rd April 2019, 10:03 AM   #175
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 52,601
Originally Posted by Joe Random View Post
Time to expand and make mandatory the handkerchief code .
That was more talked about than actually practiced. Remember who the audience was: hankies were more frequently chosen to go with the outfit than for communication.

Keys, though, that's legit.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 3rd April 2019, 10:03 AM   #176
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,201
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Let me see if I understand this correctly: your personal comfort is irrelevant to me when I'm picking out clothes, but I need to take it into consideration when I form an argument?

Are you capable of honestly debating a point, or just these sorts of half-assed attempts at Internet gotchas?

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
And if you want to argue that public nudity should be legal, then simply say so.

If you'd bothered actually reading my posts, instead of just skimming for gotchas, you'd find that I've already answered that point.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.

Last edited by luchog; 3rd April 2019 at 10:06 AM.
luchog 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 3rd April 2019, 10:08 AM   #177
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 18,732
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
There is a significant difference between hitting on someone and actually asking them if they need "help."

Yes, yes, there is. My apologies if my attempt to be mildly poetic has confused you. I shall attempt to be more literal when addressing you in future.


Quote:
Or are you doing like the scene in City Slickers where the two ranch hands ask Bonnie (Helen Slater's character) if she needs "help"? Let me suggest, if that's your approach, then you are a creep.
That's a scurrilous oblique accusation and I'd thank you not to make it from a position of bugger all knowledge.

Why are you angry with me?
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
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 3rd April 2019, 10:11 AM   #178
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,866
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Are you capable of honestly debating a point, or just these sorts of half-assed attempts at Internet gotchas?
Whether or not you care about someone else's reaction to your actions is a pretty damned fundamental aspect of social interactions. It's not a gotcha, it's at the heart of this entire conversation. When should we care about other people's discomfort, and when is it OK to ignore it? You've given me a scenario where you think I should care, and a scenario where you think I shouldn't, but what distinguishes them? Why care in one case, but not the other? What's the logic there?

The fact that you don't even recognize how fundamental this question is to the entire debate doesn't bode well for whether you'll be able to form a sensible answer to that question.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 3rd April 2019, 10:14 AM   #179
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 18,732
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Who gets to decide when someone is "going out of their way to attract attention"? That sounds like way too subjective a judgement,

Nope. A victoria's secret model, standing in her underwear with an I like to **** sign is definitely going out of her way to attract attention. Either that or she's being coerced or is mentally ill.

I accept that there's not a bright and shining line, but over there, where she is, waaaay over there on the far side of the bell curve, I don't really think it's too much in question.


Quote:
and prone to way too much projection on the part of the observer. If someone is jogging down the street wearing a sports bra and leggings, are they "going out of their way to attract attention", or are they just dressed in the most comfortable and functional clothing for that activity?
See, now that's somewhere in the middle of the bell curve. I certainly wouldn't make the same assumptions of your hypothetical lady as I would the hypothetical lady with the sign.


Quote:
I've encountered people who felt that someone dressed up in "goth" or "punk" styles is "going out of their way to attract attention", and used that as an excuse to verbally harass them (and yes, I have heard said harassers use that exact phrasing).

People who wear clothes specifically designed to mark them out as part of a counterculture movement don't actually want people to notice them?

I think we may be using two different meanings of "attract attention". I'm using it ilterally - i.e. people will notice and they will look. Their attention will be attracted to the unusual looking person.

I certainly don't mean the expanded, definition where 'this thing attracted my attention' means the same as 'I interacted with this thing'.


Quote:
And even if they are "going out of their way to attract attention", have you stopped to consider that maybe it's not your attention that they're trying to attract?
So? I'm afraid the lady in the club with the low cut top or the gentleman in the club with the really tight trousers isn't in a position to dictate who looks at them.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
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 3rd April 2019, 10:15 AM   #180
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 52,601
I had no idea leggings were such a hot topic! If you feel yourself getting angry perhaps you simply have too tight a pair on.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 3rd April 2019, 10:19 AM   #181
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 21,146
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I had no idea leggings were such a hot topic! If you feel yourself getting angry perhaps you simply have too tight a pair on.
Because like almost all discussions here we have people arguing the real world and insane made up hypotheticals and demanding a universally consistent set of rules be applied to both.

Is roving bands of attention seeking but attention rejecting Victoria Secret models something we really need to factor into basic day to day politeness?
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 3rd April 2019, 10:25 AM   #182
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,866
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Is roving bands of attention seeking but attention rejecting Victoria Secret models something we really need to factor into basic day to day politeness?
If I have anything to say about it!
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 3rd April 2019, 12:21 PM   #183
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 24,787
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
Some meandering thoughts -

Sometimes, I think it would help if people (for example) didn't say "attractive" when they mean "beautiful." There's a difference in meaning that matters. There's reasons to want to look good and beautiful other than attracting sex. There simply are. I don't have sexual attraction to women, but I think women are beautiful and admire their beauty all the time, and their clothes, and their adornments and makeup styles. Exactly the same with men, many men, most of whom I would have no desire to sleep with in reality.

"Looks good" doesn't equal "want to bang," in like, tons of instances. I only want to bang one person in reality, but I think people are gorgeous constantly. It has nothing to do with sex in those cases. How did beauty get all exclusively wrapped up in sex? It's a big factor in sex and attraction, but we like beauty for other reasons too, man! Someone can BE wanting attention, but more the attention of being admired for their style and beauty. It doesn't have to mean he or she wants conversation or sex.
I agree. I'm really not at all in the market to bang young women, or even to bother them, even though beauty brings with it at least the theoretical and abstract rider of attractiveness. The world is a nicer place when there are beautiful people around, and we ought to be able to enjoy that without getting all humpy and dangerous.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto 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 3rd April 2019, 12:27 PM   #184
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 16,710
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Speaking as a man who works for an insurance company, I can tell you that the industry would love to be seen as the standard for all that is right and good.



But it really, really isn't. I don't give a flying one what the insurance company says about who's responsible for stealing my wallet. Neither do the police. And, if we could find the fellow with the wallet, then he's still getting prosecuted. He's still a thief. I'm still a victim.
Sure, but you are not a blameless victim.

Would you advise your children not to leave their wallets up for grabs, their bikes unlocked? If yes - why, exactly?
Do you advise them not to dress sexually provocatively in school, church, business? If your answer differs from your previous answer, please explain why?
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 3rd April 2019, 12:33 PM   #185
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,201
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Nope. A victoria's secret model, standing in her underwear with an I like to **** sign is definitely going out of her way to attract attention. Either that or she's being coerced or is mentally ill.

And given that that's a patently ridiculous example with no real-word basis, I fail to see why it was even brought up except to score cheap Internet gotchas.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.
luchog 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 3rd April 2019, 12:37 PM   #186
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 21,146
Okay so there's a train coming down the tracks. On one track is a scantily clad Victoria Secret Model. On the other is Hitler. But you've been up for 16 hours.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 3rd April 2019, 12:40 PM   #187
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,201
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Whether or not you care about someone else's reaction to your actions is a pretty damned fundamental aspect of social interactions. It's not a gotcha, it's at the heart of this entire conversation. When should we care about other people's discomfort, and when is it OK to ignore it?

The logic is based on the act and the context, which you've been around here long enough to understand the importance of.

Discomfort at seeing a nude body is nothing more than social conditioning, with a prominently religious basis, and varies hugely by culture. There is no reason to respect someone's delicate sensibilities in this area aside from social conditioning and pressure, which can easily go very wrong.

It comes down, ultimately, to what real, actual harm it does. Does seeing someone naked in a public place cause real, physical or financial harm to someone? Can anyone claim it causes any harm without resorting to religious taboos?

I notice that you've continued to ignore the substance of my posts and instead focus on this one tangential nitpick. I also notice that recognizing subtle irony is also not one of your strong points.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.
luchog 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 3rd April 2019, 12:44 PM   #188
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,866
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Sure, but you are not a blameless victim.

Would you advise your children not to leave their wallets up for grabs, their bikes unlocked? If yes - why, exactly?
Do you advise them not to dress sexually provocatively in school, church, business? If your answer differs from your previous answer, please explain why?
There's an even worse version of that sort of argument that I've run across on these boards: the argument that saying college women should avoid drinking so much they pass out at parties is blaming the victim. It's really quite stunning to see people get upset when you offer such common-sense advice for how to avoid getting into trouble.

And one of the things I figured out during those debates is that there's a temporal conflation going on in the accusation of victim blaming. If someone has been raped, you should not tell that person after the fact that how much they drank or what they wore is responsible for their rape. The rapist is responsible for their rape. To the extent that any of their choices could have prevented that rape (a different choice of clothing, staying sober), they will likely agonize over that themselves, they don't need me to tell them what they should have done but cannot now do because time travel doesn't exist. So saying that to a victim serves no purpose, and is likely to make them feel worse.

But if you tell a woman who hasn't been raped that it might be a good idea to dress differently or not get so drunk, that's not blaming the victim because at that point in time she isn't a victim. And the advice you give her might help prevent her from becoming a victim, which is a desirable outcome for pretty much everyone.

And I think that's where the source of confusion comes in: not recognizing the temporal distinction between these two scenarios. I believe that's how people who are trying to do the right thing still end up arguing against efforts to stop rape.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 3rd April 2019, 12:59 PM   #189
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,866
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
The logic is based on the act and the context, which you've been around here long enough to understand the importance of.
Oh, I absolutely do.

But then you have to argue for the specific merits under that context and those conditions. And you haven't done so previously. Your efforts to do so here are wholely inadequate, as we shall see in a moment.

Quote:
Discomfort at seeing a nude body is nothing more than social conditioning
Given the requirement that people become socially conditioned to function in society, I don't see why the fact that discomfort is socially conditioned means it can simply be ignored. You can't avoid social conditioning, and it's entirely reasonable to accommodate it. In addition, your discomfort at my argument is no less socially conditioned than someone else's discomfort at public nudity.

Quote:
It comes down, ultimately, to what real, actual harm it does.
My arguments in this forum do no actual harm.

Quote:
Does seeing someone naked in a public place cause real, physical or financial harm to someone? Can anyone claim it causes any harm without resorting to religious taboos?
How, exactly, would you test that?

Seriously, imagine you wanted to do a scientific experiment to figure this out, to prove to people that it does no harm. Religion aside, the most prevalent public concern is probably parents of children, who are worried explicit public sexuality will negatively affect their kids' sexual development. So you're going to prove their concerns wrong. How would you design a test to show that public nudity doesn't negatively affect kids' development? What would you measure? And could you even get it past an IRB?

You couldn't. There's not a chance in hell that an IRB is going to approve that sort of thing, because if you're wrong, if exposure to nudity like that negatively affects kids, then exposing kids to it in order to test that is completely unethical.

So there's never going to be scientific proof for this question. We have to come to a decision in its absence, using what we understand about human behavior to try to guide our expectations. And because we live in a democracy, the way we do that is ultimately through the vote.

You don't like how people have voted. Oh well.

Quote:
I notice that you've continued to ignore the substance of my posts and instead focus on this one tangential nitpick. I also notice that recognizing subtle irony is also not one of your strong points.
You don't even recognize glaring irony, you're not in a position to lecture me. Nor does it appear you even understand the substance of your own posts, such as it is.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 3rd April 2019, 03:02 PM   #190
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,677
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
However, I do think there's often a sort of judgment that enters into their assessment of the more scantily-clad attractive ladies. If a hot chick goes jogging in leggings and a sports bra, lots of people simply refuse to believe she might be doing it to be comfortable. She MUST want attention,

Well, some guys are pretty clueless. They not only believe that the women must want attention, but they must want THEIR attention. Those people are usually wrong on the first count and almost always wrong on the second.


That being said, I think there are two words that are kind of ambiguous. The first is "want". Does the hot chick jogging in the leggings and sports bra want attention? She probably doesn't "want" it, but she ought to be at least willing to tolerate it. It's going to come whether she wants it or not, and she ought to be aware of it. We all have our crosses to bear. Deal with it.

The second is "attention". Here, again, a lot of guys are clueless. There will be turned heads and ogling. We really can't help ourselves. Some of us have learned not to drool or be too obvious about it, but it really is what we do. It isn't going to stop, and indeed, it should not. If that's more attention than women want, they really should consider covering up more.

However, a lot of guys take it farther, and that's where the real problems come in. No style of dress, or even of undress, in public places should be considered an invitation to touch. Likewise, wolf whistles, catcalls, and the like ought to be consigned to history.

So, I don't think a scantily clad jogger "wants" "attention", but she should be aware that she's going to get a certain amount of it whether she wants it or not, so she shouldn't get upset about it. The only real problem is if the attention is so aggressive that it interferes with whatever she is actually trying to do (like jogging).

Quote:
EDIT - All that being said, there are still certain modes of dress (for both/any gender(s)) that are simply inappropriate for certain venues, and sexism has nothing to do with it. In my opinion, leggings as pants would not be a good choice for church. I don't attend church, but if I ever have to for some reason, I'll dress pretty conservatively. The same way I dress when going on job interviews.

For what it's worth, there is actually a difference between various sects about what is acceptable in church. When it came time for my son's Bar Mitzvah my family wanted to know what to wear. My mother was Catholic, and we were raised Catholic, so they had never been to a Bar Mitzvah. I told them "Protestant church attire". Catholic church attire is more casual.


I think even most Catholics draw the line at revealing too much flesh, or being too "sexy", as witnessed by the controversy that started this thread, but obviously there are plenty of people who don't agree, as witnessed by the fact that the request to not wear tight leggings was controversial. The general attitude of Catholics is that Mass is a religious requirement, and that they are happy that young people go at all, so they aren't going to throw a snit about what they wear when they get there. Obviously, though, some people are a bit less tolerant on that count than others.
Meadmaker is online now   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 4th April 2019, 08:03 AM   #191
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,466
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
That being said, I think there are two words that are kind of ambiguous. The first is "want". Does the hot chick jogging in the leggings and sports bra want attention? She probably doesn't "want" it, but she ought to be at least willing to tolerate it.
Why?

For pete's sake, talk about someone dressing appropriately for the activity! He said she is jogging. She is wearing leggings and a sports bra. In what way should she have to put up with nonsense about her appearance?

This isn't even a case where it's "she's wearing yoga pants but not doing yoga - ha ha! She is just doing it for the attention!" This is a case where someone is wearing a running outfit. It's not that she doesn't "want" attention. Hell, she is running. She doesn't want to be bothered.

I do a lot of running these days (see the thread in Forum Community) and have a friend who I run with sometimes, and she posts her runs on a running app, with commentary. The other night, her comment was that she got honked at by some guy and cat-called by some kids at a playground, and cut her run off early. Yes, she was probably wearing running pants (she generally does).

Why do you think she should have to tolerate that ****** Why can't the ******** mind their own ******* business, leave her alone and not be douchebags. And it's also worth mentioning the safety issues involved with it - especially the guy who honked at her. Recall that woman in Iowa who was murdered by the illegal immigrant was ... out jogging - women justifiably fear for their lives from people interacting with them. You think they should have to tolerate it? ********.

For ****'s sake, if you can't see that a woman out jogging does not have to put up with unwanted attention based on the fact that she is dressed for running, I don't know what can be said about any situation.

I just walked across campus and paid attention to what the women were wearing. 8 were wearing leggings, 5 had on skin-tight jeans (I would describe them as "you have to lay on your back to put them on) and 3 had other (one of those was ROTC in fatigues). Do you think that half of the women on campus walking to class want to be hit on by strangers?

OR

Maybe it's just a fashion thing? I remember back in college, we went through fashion period where all the women wore mint green sweaters and little brown boots. It's a fashion trend, it has nothing to do with trying to attract attention from strangers.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold 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 4th April 2019, 08:11 AM   #192
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,869
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
Why?

For pete's sake, talk about someone dressing appropriately for the activity! He said she is jogging. She is wearing leggings and a sports bra. In what way should she have to put up with nonsense about her appearance?

This isn't even a case where it's "she's wearing yoga pants but not doing yoga - ha ha! She is just doing it for the attention!" This is a case where someone is wearing a running outfit. It's not that she doesn't "want" attention. Hell, she is running. She doesn't want to be bothered.

I do a lot of running these days (see the thread in Forum Community) and have a friend who I run with sometimes, and she posts her runs on a running app, with commentary. The other night, her comment was that she got honked at by some guy and cat-called by some kids at a playground, and cut her run off early. Yes, she was probably wearing running pants (she generally does).

Why do you think she should have to tolerate that ****** Why can't the ******** mind their own ******* business, leave her alone and not be douchebags. And it's also worth mentioning the safety issues involved with it - especially the guy who honked at her. Recall that woman in Iowa who was murdered by the illegal immigrant was ... out jogging - women justifiably fear for their lives from people interacting with them. You think they should have to tolerate it? ********.

For ****'s sake, if you can't see that a woman out jogging does not have to put up with unwanted attention based on the fact that she is dressed for running, I don't know what can be said about any situation.

I just walked across campus and paid attention to what the women were wearing. 8 were wearing leggings, 5 had on skin-tight jeans (I would describe them as "you have to lay on your back to put them on) and 3 had other (one of those was ROTC in fatigues). Do you think that half of the women on campus walking to class want to be hit on by strangers?

OR

Maybe it's just a fashion thing? I remember back in college, we went through fashion period where all the women wore mint green sweaters and little brown boots. It's a fashion trend, it has nothing to do with trying to attract attention from strangers.
The issue is not what she is trying to do, it's what she is actually doing, willingly or not. Does she bear any responsibility for dressing in a way that will likely draw sexual attention?
Thermal 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 4th April 2019, 08:18 AM   #193
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,466
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The issue is not what she is trying to do, it's what she is actually doing, willingly or not. Does she bear any responsibility for dressing in a way that will likely draw sexual attention?
What is a jogger supposed to do to avoid it? Not dress appropriately for jogging?

As has been pointed out, men and society will find a way to make EVERYTHING about sexual attention. Cover up completely? Oh, there is an exposed ankle! She is responsible for dressing in a way that attracts sexual attention!

See my example about campus - half of the women are wearing these leggings. No one is giving them any "sexual attention." See? It's not that hard.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold 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 4th April 2019, 08:24 AM   #194
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,869
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
What is a jogger supposed to do to avoid it? Not dress appropriately for jogging?

As has been pointed out, men and society will find a way to make EVERYTHING about sexual attention. Cover up completely? Oh, there is an exposed ankle! She is responsible for dressing in a way that attracts sexual attention!

See my example about campus - half of the women are wearing these leggings. No one is giving them any "sexual attention." See? It's not that hard.
Agreed, on a college campus it might fade into the background with its ubiquitousness. In a church, as the OP brings up, maybe not so much.

I live in a beach town. Skimpy bikinis are everywhere in the summer, even in restaurants. Would you agree that a thong bikini is inappropriate for a church service? Might draw some unwanted attention? Think it through.
Thermal 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 4th April 2019, 08:28 AM   #195
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 21,146
"Sexual attention" the vaguest possible way to look at it, to the point the question is meaningless.

In general the idea that, in most cultures we're talking about, if you're a fit and attractive woman and you put on yoga pants and a sports bra to go jogging that nobody is going to look at you... probably not high up there on the "reasonable outcome" chart.

But being looked at is a far cry from being harassed or catcalled or worse.

So yeah if you're a 38DD wearing a dress where the neckline dips down to your navel and you pitch hissy fit because you catch a guy making a quick glance at your rack... probably need to dial it back a bit.

If you think a woman dressing sexy gives you some level of entitlement to approach her sexually beyond "Well lady you're in my line of sight what else am I supposed to look at" you're a creep at best, a predator at worst.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue 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 4th April 2019, 08:30 AM   #196
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,466
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Agreed, on a college campus it might fade into the background with its ubiquitousness. In a church, as the OP brings up, maybe not so much.
The church was on a college campus.

There is a reason why the letter writer's sons were not paying any attention to it - it's not an issue to them because it is common. As it would be to the wearers.

BTW, I am curious about your reply to my question of what joggers are supposed to wear in order to not deserve unwanted sexual attention. Are you sticking with your position that joggers dressed for jogging are responsible for any sexual attention they get?
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets

Last edited by pgwenthold; 4th April 2019 at 08:31 AM.
pgwenthold 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 4th April 2019, 08:30 AM   #197
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 15,744
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The issue is not what she is trying to do, it's what she is actually doing, willingly or not. Does she bear any responsibility for dressing in a way that will likely draw sexual attention?
No. At least not when it comes to wearing leggings for jogging..

Now, if it was a thong bikini, you might have a point...
__________________
" The main problem I have with the idea of heaven, is the thought of
spending eternity with most of the people who claim to be going there. "

Last edited by Skeptical Greg; 4th April 2019 at 08:33 AM.
Skeptical Greg 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 4th April 2019, 08:32 AM   #198
SuburbanTurkey
Master Poster
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 2,313
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Agreed, on a college campus it might fade into the background with its ubiquitousness. In a church, as the OP brings up, maybe not so much.

I live in a beach town. Skimpy bikinis are everywhere in the summer, even in restaurants. Would you agree that a thong bikini is inappropriate for a church service? Might draw some unwanted attention? Think it through.
I think there are two different issues here. Clothing that is thought of as revealing and/or inherently sexy, and just general formality. Most people might consider it in bad taste to wear a bikini to a church, but it would also be considered as bad manners to wear paint stained sweatpants and a ratty t-shirt. Dressing "up" is often seen as a way of communicating respect. Wearing neat and tidy clothes to a church is often seen as a show of respect, the same way that wearing a nice suit to a job interview is.

That's really the rub for me for this lady's prudish letter about yoga pants. She lives in a college town full of young women, her sons are just going to have to learn how to deal with seeing a bunch of hotties out and about. Hopefully they learn how to keep their baser thoughts to themselves and act like a decent person, it's an important step to becoming a mature adult.

I'd be willing to agree with this lady if her complaint was that yoga pants were too casual for church. Her complaining about seeing a shapely butt makes me less sympathetic.

Generally speaking, I don't think most women are so naive to not realize how they present themselves in public may affect how people think about them. I don't really see any clothing, no matter how sexual, as license to act like a rude ass to a woman. There are no thought crimes, but someone who is rude to strangers (catcalling, sexual comments, whatever) is a boor.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 4th April 2019 at 09:35 AM.
SuburbanTurkey 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 4th April 2019, 08:37 AM   #199
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,466
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
That's really the rub for me for this lady's prudish letter about yoga pants. She lives in a college town full of young women, your sons are just going to have to learn how to deal with seeing a bunch of hotties out and about. Hopefully they learn how to keep their baser thoughts to themselves and act like a decent person, it's a good skill to learn.
And I want to make it clear, for the record, that all indications are that they did that, at least in this case. She contends that they didn't pay any attention to it.

She did, but her sons didn't.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold 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 4th April 2019, 08:39 AM   #200
SuburbanTurkey
Master Poster
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 2,313
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
And I want to make it clear, for the record, that all indications are that they did that, at least in this case. She contends that they didn't pay any attention to it.

She did, but her sons didn't.
Yeah, that doesn't really help her though. Basically, she's freaking out for the temptation that hypothetically could have happened. She's like 3 steps away from anything that resembles a problem. This mountain isn't even a molehill.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey 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 05:08 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.