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, 05:48 AM   #201
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,848
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Why would following someone in a public area constitute stalking? And if you genuinely think following is the same thing as stalking, why did you list stalking and following as two separate things?
I'm having a conversation about looking.

If you want to explore the limits of acceptable movements in a public space when one has noticed an attractive woman then go ahead, but it's not the conversation I'm having. I have enough on my plate as it is. Sorry.
__________________
Up the River!
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, 05:49 AM   #202
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,848
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
It's your argument taken to an extreme to prove a point. It does so admirably.
No, no it isn't.
__________________
Up the River!
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, 05:49 AM   #203
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,980
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I'm having a conversation about looking.

If you want to explore the limits of acceptable movements in a public space when one has noticed an attractive woman then go ahead, but it's not the conversation I'm having. I have enough on my plate as it is. Sorry.
It's kinda related, as it is about social norms which you and others in this thread seem to have all kinds of trouble with.
__________________
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, 05:51 AM   #204
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,980
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
No, no it isn't.
Yes, yes it is.
__________________
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, 05:51 AM   #205
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,848
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
So we're no longer discussing the 40-year-old and the teenager? I'm sorry, but I get dizzy whipping my head around this fast.
If you read it again, it's pretty clear what I was referring to.


Quote:
Do whatever the hell you want, man. I'll still support a woman calling you out when you oogle her.

And I would tell you to go away, in no uncertain terms, if you did.


Quote:
And this still has absolutely nothing to do with #metoo, the supposed subject of this thread.
Agreed. This thread and the dodgy equivalences between looking and assault are a mockery of the Metoo thing.
__________________
Up the River!
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, 05:51 AM   #206
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by erlando View Post
Noone is making that argument.
It was being made early in the tread, that assualt was only assualt if you tell them to stop and they don't. But the discussion has shifted away from that. But it is not true to say no one made that.

See

Originally Posted by mike81 View Post
I agree (to a point) this needed to happen. It has got out of control though. It seems it's nothing but a witch hunt now. It's got to the point that if you "put some moves on", try to kiss, or have sex with a girl/woman/female, that you risk being accused of something much worse and losing everything. Even if she is enjoying it and going along with it.
So there was a clear context that people are arguing for "putting the moves" on someone until they say no. So could you try to keep things factually correct about what people have advocated on this thread?
__________________
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, 05:53 AM   #207
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 21,584
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I'm having a conversation about looking.
So am I. I'm just talking about looking for a longer period of time than you are. Expectations of privacy are greatly reduced in a public space, or so I hear.

But, no, I don't blame you for not having the courage to actually explore what you've said and the implications thereof.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim 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 11th January 2018, 05:54 AM   #208
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,848
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Yes, yes it is.
No.

The difference is in choice.


Anyone who dons clothing that is unusual in any way at all, is going to be looked at in public. This is a choice. Being disabled in any way is not a choice.


One who chooses to leave the house in unusual clothing, whether that be a noticeably low cut top, a clown suit, a singlet and shorts in December, whatever, has made a choice to draw attention to themselves. If they can't deal with the consequences of that choice then they've made really, really bad wardrobe decisions.
__________________
Up the River!
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, 05:54 AM   #209
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
A woman who wears a low cut top, a top deliberately designed to show off her secondary sexual characteristics - characteristics which anthropologists tell us have specifically developed in the female human to attract a mate and to cause arousal - and, in all likelihood also a brassiere specifically designed to enhance all of the things that are developed by evolution to cause arousal in males has no cause to complain when her efforts cause, not only attractive me but all men to look.

I feel the need to add - not touch, not stalk, not follow, not catcall, just look.
What is the defintion of Low Cut? What about wearing a T shirt and having large breasts, that certainly gets much the same kind of attention even if it is not a V neck. Is it creepy then or is it just one of those things women with breasts need to deal with in public? Men certainly do not limit this kind of "friendly" staring to only those women in low cut shirts after all.
__________________
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, 05:55 AM   #210
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 74,727
Originally Posted by erlando View Post
Maybe not go directly to "PERVERT!"?

Are men not allowed to react to such outbursts?
Well no, see, if you do, you're invalidating her feelings, which is the worst sin. Shut up, patriarch!

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Yes women and the disabled who do not want to be stared at should simply just never leave the house.
The solution is to jail people who offend others.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... 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 11th January 2018, 05:55 AM   #211
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by erlando View Post
What's with the kids? Noone is trying to say that it's ok to "stare lustily" at kids. Stop trying to build that strawman, it's silly.
Then what are the limits of who you can stare at for your sexual gratification in public? When does it cross the line?
__________________
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, 05:57 AM   #212
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,848
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
So am I. I'm just talking about looking for a longer period of time than you are. Expectations of privacy are greatly reduced in a public space, or so I hear.

But, no, I don't blame you for not having the courage to actually explore what you've said and the implications thereof.

That's really, really low. Not likely to cause me to engage.
__________________
Up the River!
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, 05:58 AM   #213
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
If a young lady doesn't want to be the object of attention she should not wear clothes that draw attention. Very specifically, in this discussion, a low cut top.

We're not talking here about a lady dressed in jeans and a tshirt, we're not talking about a wallflower out in public for the first time wearing as many clothes as she can because she's petrified of the outside world.
Why not? Why does she have the right to complain about been looked at? How low cut must a top be specifically to negate her right to complain about this?

You are also insinuating motive on the part of random people you see in their attire.
__________________
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, 06:01 AM   #214
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,980
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
No.

The difference is in choice.


Anyone who dons clothing that is unusual in any way at all, is going to be looked at in public. This is a choice. Being disabled in any way is not a choice.
Unusual? To whom? What culture? What century?
__________________
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, 06:01 AM   #215
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 21,584
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
That's really, really low. Not likely to cause me to engage.
You've already said you're not going to engage. I see no reason not to give an honest take on your behavior.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim 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 11th January 2018, 06:03 AM   #216
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,848
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
What is the defintion of Low Cut? What about wearing a T shirt and having large breasts, that certainly gets much the same kind of attention even if it is not a V neck.

This is a good point and I'll be honest, which may not help my cause.

I try not to look at ladies with large breasts who are not wearing clothes designed to show them off. I'll notice, I really will, and I may sneak a glance and I'll feel guilty that my biology has run away with my civilised veneer.

The same lady wearing a top designed to show off her assets - totally different story.


Quote:
Is it creepy then or is it just one of those things women with breasts need to deal with in public? Men certainly do not limit this kind of "friendly" staring to only those women in low cut shirts after all.
Yes, and I draw a distinction between the two. As I have been saying, it's an issue of choice. A choice to wear a revealing top shows a willingness for people to look. And, again, one can't wear a top that's only revaing for the cute mechanic that's fixing your car. It's still low cut when you have to walk past the receptionist you find repulsive.
__________________
Up the River!
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, 06:03 AM   #217
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
If you think it's outside of the realm of usual behaviour, i.e. perverted, for a grown man to look at a grown woman's breasts (again, with all the anthropology that comes with) then I think your views are unreasonable in the real world.
So we are at it is fine to stare at a woman's breasts, with no caveats about personal attire now.

Hint no one has said not to glance or notice, it is the staring that people are objecting to. So unless you are strawmanning the position, you are defending staring at women's breasts.
__________________
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, 06:04 AM   #218
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by mike81 View Post
If it is displayed "in public", then I or anyone else is allowed to look.
And we are back to staring at kids. The lack of the caveats about low cut and so on also means we can ignore all that sexually mature crap too.
__________________
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, 06:05 AM   #219
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,848
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Unusual? To whom? What culture? What century?
I don't see

Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
very revealing tops with a neckline that plunged almost to their belly buttons.
Very often outside of clubs, so I define that as unusual. They may be all over the place where you are.
__________________
Up the River!
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, 06:06 AM   #220
mike81
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 477
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
So we are at it is fine to stare at a woman's breasts, with no caveats about personal attire now.

Hint no one has said not to glance or notice, it is the staring that people are objecting to. So unless you are strawmanning the position, you are defending staring at women's breasts.
Who gets to decide what staring is? Am I supposed to read her mind and know what she would consider staring?
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, 06:06 AM   #221
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by erlando View Post
What's the difference between "looking" and "staring" and who gets to be the judge of that?
The people involved, just like they get to decide if the clothing is "revealing" and such asking to be stared at.
__________________
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, 06:07 AM   #222
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,848
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
You've already said you're not going to engage. I see no reason not to give an honest take on your behavior.

That's really going to help...

I'll get over it.
__________________
Up the River!
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, 06:08 AM   #223
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by erlando View Post
The strawmen are coming hard and fast from you.
You where just saying there is no difference between looking and staring, and now suddenly there is one? Make up your mind.
__________________
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, 06:08 AM   #224
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,848
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
So we are at it is fine to stare at a woman's breasts, with no caveats about personal attire now.
No, i just got fed up of typing the whole damn scenario because Ive had to about fifteen times now.

Quote:
Hint no one has said not to glance or notice, it is the staring that people are objecting to. So unless you are strawmanning the position, you are defending staring at women's breasts.
Again, as clearly stated upthread, no break of gait, no change in direction, no movement that wasn't intended before the lady was spied, just staring as one walks past.
__________________
Up the River!
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, 06:11 AM   #225
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Just hyperbole all over the place.

Again - women who wear low cut tops, designed to show off their tits do not have the right to yell at men who look at the very part of them they've taken pains to display.
WHen is a top designed to show off their tits? If they were in ordinary T-Shirts is it then ok for them to call out the guys for staring? If not at what level of clothing does it become acceptable?

No one who is arguing for staring at someones tits in public is giving any kind of indication what clothing a woman can wear that they would feel she is justified calling out men who are staring at her chest. Why don't you give that?
__________________
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, 06:12 AM   #226
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Ignoring hyperbole.
Refusing to ever give a situation where the woman is justified by not dressing provocatively in calling out the men staring at her you mean.
__________________
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, 06:15 AM   #227
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
No.

The difference is in choice.


Anyone who dons clothing that is unusual in any way at all, is going to be looked at in public. This is a choice. Being disabled in any way is not a choice.
What about dressing in a usual way but say having breasts, is that enough to justify staring or as it is not a choice is it not. How unusual does the clothing have to be to justify staring? How normal does it have to be to call out the staring?
__________________
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, 06:18 AM   #228
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
This is a good point and I'll be honest, which may not help my cause.

I try not to look at ladies with large breasts who are not wearing clothes designed to show them off. I'll notice, I really will, and I may sneak a glance and I'll feel guilty that my biology has run away with my civilised veneer.

The same lady wearing a top designed to show off her assets - totally different story.
The problem is also it can be hard to find clothing that fits and does not show off such assets. A scoop neck shirt is more forgiving of a large bust than other neck lines. Some people can not wear button up shirts because they will always gape.

How do you know exactly what their intent in their clothing choice is? And what baseline are we using.
__________________
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, 06:20 AM   #229
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 74,727
Originally Posted by mike81 View Post
Who gets to decide what staring is? Am I supposed to read her mind and know what she would consider staring?
Just don't look at women at all until they ask you to.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... 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 11th January 2018, 06:26 AM   #230
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,980
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I don't see
You said people who dress in unusual clothes should expect to be looked at. Who should it be unusual to? You? The person who wears it? Someone else?
__________________
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, 06:27 AM   #231
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 74,727
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
You said people who dress in unusual clothes should expect to be looked at. Who should it be unusual to? You? The person who wears it? Someone else?
Why does it matter? People look at things they consider to be unusual or interesting.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

Belz... 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 11th January 2018, 06:31 AM   #232
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,445
What if the man was actually cross-eyed and had been trying to read a notice above her head, did she have the right to embarrass him about his disability by calling him a pervert?

We have at least one person that says we are perverts if we even notice someone has secondary sexual charactistics!

This is getting rather silly, obviously we all have different boundaries on what we consider to be socially acceptable behaviour.

To get back to the topic of the thread...

Is there anyone here who believes Weinstein's behaviour fell within what we should find acceptable?

I really doubt any of us do, the man used his power over others to get away with (according to the accounts I read) rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment. And to compound his terrible attacks we have to face up to the fact that he only got away with it because he wasn't challenged by his peers who knew what was happening. This is an area that I think is perhaps being sidelined by the #me2 approach, it should not just be up to victims to do something about this type of apparently endemic behaviour it is the responsibility of the criminal's peer group, they are the ones with the ability to police behaviour before it can get to the level of even harassment. Men and women should be able to tell their peers "that's not appropriate behaviour" before it becomes a serious problem.

That's pretty much the slight criticism I have with so much focus on the #me2 "campaign", other people's culpability isn't being addressed.

This is a problem that we all have to solve, such crimes only persist when we allow them to. Look at the widespread abuse of children, this was allowed by society for a long time it was only when us (as society) decided we wouldn't ignore it any longer that anything changed.
__________________
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, 06:34 AM   #233
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 8,329
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Yeah, a 40 year old man thinking he's in his full right staring a way at a teenager's breasts without her full consent is probably a pervert or slightly delusional.
Smartcooky said "late teens early 20's."
Information Analyst 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, 06:37 AM   #234
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,980
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
Smartcooky said "late teens early 20's."
Aren't one a teenager when in the late teens? I could have said "young woman". My point was, it's unlikely she was out scoping for middle-aged men, and he should not have assumed she was.
__________________
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, 06:37 AM   #235
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,107
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Instead of trying to second guess my motives, I'd appreciate if you simply answered the question.



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.
I'm not in this conversation.......but the word is "ogle". Single "O".
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG 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 11th January 2018, 06:38 AM   #236
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 25,269
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
If a young lady doesn't want to be the object of attention she should not wear clothes that draw attention. Very specifically, in this discussion, a low cut top.

We're not talking here about a lady dressed in jeans and a tshirt, we're not talking about a wallflower out in public for the first time wearing as many clothes as she can because she's petrified of the outside world.

What we're talking about is a lady wearing an extremely low cut top. Now, if this lady doesn't want her cleavage ogled then I would firmly suggest that she does not wear a low cut top that is very specifically designed to show her cleavage.

It follows, very logically that my suggestion is that a lady who does not want her cleavage ogled not wear a low cut top.
Well now I'm confused

Does this mean that a woman wearing a tshirt has the right to confront a man she feels is staring in an unwelcome way at her ?

At what point does a woman lose the right to confront someone staring at her ?

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
When she's not wearing a low cut top that's been very specifically designed to show off her body.

If I went out i my clown suit and people stared, would I be within my rights to complain about it? Or would it be my fault for so obviously trying to draw attention to myself.
Of course you are within your rights to complain about it.
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, 06:38 AM   #237
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,980
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
We have at least one person that says we are perverts if we even notice someone has secondary sexual charactistics!
I'm sad this was what was taken away from my arguments. I haven't done a very good job then. I'll remind you that I'm an ESL speaker and typer, and that culture vary even within the Western world.
__________________
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, 06:40 AM   #238
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,980
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
I'm not in this conversation.......but the word is "ogle". Single "O".
Noted and taken onboard. Thank you.
__________________
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, 06:40 AM   #239
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,219
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
What if the man was actually cross-eyed and had been trying to read a notice above her head, did she have the right to embarrass him about his disability by calling him a pervert?

We have at least one person that says we are perverts if we even notice someone has secondary sexual charactistics!

This is getting rather silly, obviously we all have different boundaries on what we consider to be socially acceptable behaviour.

To get back to the topic of the thread...
The whole point of this thread was to insinuate what the purpose of the MeToo was. From everything saw it was about making a statement about how pervasive sexual harassment and assault is. I personlly figure virtually all women have had some form of sexual harassment and assault.
Quote:
Is there anyone here who believes Weinstein's behaviour fell within what we should find acceptable?
When did he move from putting the moves on these women to full out assault? The people advocating freedom to put the moves on women don't seem to be any better about giving guidelines on when that is OK vs when it is OK to stare at a woman's breasts.
__________________
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, 06:42 AM   #240
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 8,329
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
No doubt there are women in this world who dress to flaunt their sexuality and who appreciate any and all attention that they receive as a result. The fault IMO is to assume that many, most or all women feel that way and to place the onus on the women to deal with the consequences of unwanted and unwarranted attention and not the men to behave in a reasonable fashion.
I wonder how that first group of women will up their game if men end up too terrified to react to them...?
Information Analyst 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 05:58 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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.