(War on Women) NYC: 10 hours of Harassment or Compliments?

[presence]

But according to some people here, it would do women a world of good if they acted more prudish!

If you want to be treated like a nun act like a nun.
If you want to be treated like shorty shorts, act like shorty shorts.

If you act like shorty shorts and want to be treated like I nun... don't mind if I laugh.

why is it so difficult to grasp that a great deal of women don't see catcalling as something that works on them

why is it so difficult to grasp that when a woman walks around NYC, in a skin tight black outfit, to the locals:


SHE IS CATCALLING


and the "cat callers" are just responding.


The absurd suggestion that men shouldn't whistle at women
is at par with the suggestion that all women should have to wear naqib.

Whether speaking in body language or whistles... its all the same.

1st amendment freedom of speech

 

[kahless]

But according to some people here, it would do women a world of good if they acted more prudish! These people can't have it both ways. That's granting that you even have your causality right - I'm not getting how not wanting to be bothered by rude and unnecessary comments ("nice tits"...etc) in completely unrelated contexts, such as running errands or walking to work, relates to prudishness. Furthermore, either a "good evening" is innocent or it's not - why is it so difficult to grasp that a great deal of women don't see catcalling as something that works on them, therefore they're going to encourage men to stop doing it?

PaulConventionWV, a lot of feminists don't oppose women carrying arms to defend themselves. I certainly do not. Best not to tar all of us with the same brush... but I can just imagine the hysteria when a woman decides to shoot a catcaller whom she determines to be too aggressive.


This would be a witty comment if it were the case that all men catcalled or approved of catcalling... but it just falls flat here. Sorry.


Actually, I have. Go back and read the entire thread.


Way to assume that I must be pissed off at the world if I don't want some random stranger coming up and telling me to smile. Again, it's completely disrespectful and implies the person has no regard for a woman's feelings. Men aren't routinely told to smile for a reason - they're expected to be stoic and unemotional. It comes off as a sexism thing.

I personally understand how to handle catcallers - headphones in and walking straight ahead generally works. But it's definitely not too much to ask for a little civility. A little history refresher: the streets of medieval Europe were exceedingly violent; in fact, we could even say this violence was normalized. This overt violence eventually was extinguished from the public eye precisely because of changes in thoughts and societal expectations. I see no reason why catcalling can't follow a similar trajectory.


In what world is wearing a tshirt and jeans dressing like a tramp?

Exactly.

 

[JK/SEA]

is this really a big problem?....

i will confess that when i go somewhere with my 30 year old beautiful daughter, and my beautiful wife (my daughter has been on billboards around the Seattle area) i walk behind them and get to witness guys of all ages pratically fall over themselves checking out their butts....i have great self restraint, but it begs the question....do women really want a stop to the whistles and butt checking?.....not sure it would be possible....ever...its human nature...part of the pro-creation mandate thats been in human DNA since forever....

 

[jmdrake]

But according to some people here, it would do women a world of good if they acted more prudish! These people can't have it both ways. That's granting that you even have your causality right - I'm not getting how not wanting to be bothered by rude and unnecessary comments ("nice tits"...etc) in completely unrelated contexts, such as running errands or walking to work, relates to prudishness. Furthermore, either a "good evening" is innocent or it's not - why is it
so difficult to grasp that a great deal of women don't see catcalling as something that works on them, therefore they're going to encourage men to stop doing it?

Funny how out of 10 hours of walking the woman in the OP didn't get a single "nice tits" or "nice ass" comment. Funny how that works. Funny how you have to resort to hyperbole not even in the OP video to prove your point. And frankly I don't care if women act more prudish or less prudish as long as they understand the kind of attention they are attracting.

This would be a witty comment if it were the case that all men catcalled or approved of catcalling... but it just falls flat here. Sorry.

Gunny's point, that went right over your head, is most of the activity highlighted in the silly video that started the thread is normal behavior that normal men would do. Men who say "Good evening" or even "You look like a thousand dollars." There wasn't a single "nice tits" quip in the entire video. So if the type of behavior in the video needs to stop, then ban men. Oh but you have to talk about actions not in the video to "prove" your point. And kahless has to go so far as to talk about a hypothetical situation of men ejaculating on women on the subway, which would already be a felony (sexual battery) to prove a point that we need "new laws" or may need "new laws."

Actually, I have. Go back and read the entire thread.

Read through 400+ posts just to see your opinion when I don't already think much of it? No thanks. If you have a really good idea you can just repeat it. After all talking about solutions is much more productive than droning on and on about how supposedly uncaring the rest of us are.

Way to assume that I must be pissed off at the world if I don't want some random stranger coming up and telling me to smile. Again, it's completely disrespectful and implies the person has no regard for a woman's feelings. Men aren't routinely told to smile for a reason - they're expected to be stoic and unemotional. It comes off as a sexism thing.

Way to assume your own view of the world must be right and that nothing anyone else has experienced matters. Way to ignore the fact that I've been told to "smile" before and I'm a man.

I personally understand how to handle catcallers - headphones in and walking straight ahead generally works. But it's definitely not too much to ask for a little civility. A little history refresher: the streets of medieval Europe were exceedingly violent; in fact, we could even say this violence was normalized. This overt violence eventually was extinguished from the public eye precisely because of changes in thoughts and societal expectations. I see no reason why catcalling can't follow a similar trajectory.

Laws were passed against public violence. You're saying you are against new laws. And according to you, telling someone to "smile" is "uncivil"...at least it's uncivil when it happens to a woman. When it happens to a man you just pretend it doesn't happen.

In what world is wearing a tshirt and jeans dressing like a tramp?

I depends on the jeans.

versus

 

[Rothbardian Girl]

If you want to be treated like a nun act like a nun.
If you want to be treated like shorty shorts, act like shorty shorts.

If you act like shorty shorts and want to be treated like I nun... don't mind if I laugh.

And women are never the victims of sexual violence in countries where the expectation is that they be covered from head to toe.
The fact is, women will experience harassment regardless of how they dress.

Dannno, what if the reason catcalling works on some women is precisely because of its ubiquity and reinforcement within pop culture? "I'm supposed to respond to this guy because that's just what they do." In other words, if the norm shifted such that catcallers were mocked and derided at every turn, and it no longer became an acceptable method of picking up women, how would this change the tradeoffs you mention in your post? In such a society, it may be more obvious "which women are which"; it's not at all clear that women would respond positively to catcalling if it weren't so legitimized and trivialized in popular discourse. Again, logically there are better options available that don't involve possibly creeping the woman out and aren't inherently random.

Violent people are violent regardless of their access to sex. How will legalizing prostitution (a move I agree with for different reasons) solve the problem of people who require violence for sexual gratification? How can you be so sure that the woman the violent person has sex with won't end up the victim of sexual violence? I just don't understand your argument. There are plenty of other reasons to legalize prostitution, but that isn't a particularly compelling one.

 

[pessimist]

Let's not forget about the libertarian "mind your own business" aspect.

Who the hell wants to be bothered in the street by complete strangers? Chances are you're not going to meet your potential SO by some meet and greet in the street. I highly doubt a smooth come on like: "damn girl! you got it going on" is going to have positive effect on a woman just wanting to get to her car after an 10 hour day at the office or whatever.

 

[jmdrake]

Did you see where I wrote "hypothetical question". I have heard stories about it happening but no I of course just made that up.

You understand that hyperbole is understood to be made up right? The point is that your "hypothetical" was so ridiculously over the top that no one needs to take it seriously and even think about it.

I had said prior to that I do not see why existing laws would not cover most forms of sexual assault. What possible scenario or loop hole would you need for a new law for, I do not know. So trying to look at it from the other side that was the best scenario I could come up with at the time.

Look. We don't need to be "hypothetical" here. The "Hollaback" organization has made it clear that they want to criminalize the very behavior on the video. Just "saying something sexual" (whatever that means) should be a crime in their book. If there was any real case of any real violence against women that wasn't somehow cover by law, rest assured that would easily be fixed. The one thing the prison industrial complex thrives on is more law.

 

[Rothbardian Girl]

Gunny's point, that went right over your head, is most of the activity highlighted in the silly video that started the thread is normal behavior that normal men would do. Men who say "Good evening" or even "You look like a thousand dollars." There wasn't a single "nice tits" quip in the entire video. So if the type of behavior in the video needs to stop, then ban men.

Logically, his statement doesn't make sense because not every man was represented in that video. It just came off as a very petulant and silly quip. There were plenty of men off-camera and on-camera, I'm sure, that managed to make it past the actress without commenting at all.

Laws were passed against public violence. You're saying you are against new laws. And according to you, telling someone to "smile" is "uncivil"...at least it's uncivil when it happens to a woman. When it happens to a man you just pretend it doesn't happen.

Those laws didn't just pass in a vacuum, they were passed because attitudes and expectations changed. If laws passed in a vacuum, what would be the point of any activism or revolution at all?

As for the jeans thing, I will stop wearing skinny jeans when men stop wearing gym shorts and going shirtless at the beach. Quid pro quo.

 

[euphemia]

If you want to be treated like a nun act like a nun.
If you want to be treated like shorty shorts, act like shorty shorts.

That sword cuts two ways.

If you want to be treated like a jerk, act like one.
If you want to be treated like a man, act like one.

 

[kahless]

You understand that hyperbole is understood to be made up right? The point is that your "hypothetical" was so ridiculously over the top that no one needs to take it seriously and even think about it.

It is not really that far fetched when women have been masturbated and ejaculated upon in the subway.

Look. We don't need to be "hypothetical" here. The "Hollaback" organization has made it clear that they want to criminalize the very behavior on the video. Just "saying something sexual" (whatever that means) should be a crime in there book. If there was any real case of any real violence against women that wasn't somehow cover by law, rest assured that would easily be fixed. The one thing the prison industrial complex thrives on is more law.

I was not responding at that point about Hollback. I was trying to make a point that maybe in some rare cases would Gunny ever support a new law where the existing law was not locking those committing sexual assault.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

PaulConventionWV, a lot of feminists don't oppose women carrying arms to defend themselves. I certainly do not. Best not to tar all of us with the same brush...

Believe it or not, that defense actually has a name, NAFALT (Kinda sounds like a toddler trying to say "Not My Fault!")

Here is my answer to that:



If you want to hear the short summary, fast forward to 17:00, but I highly recommend watching the whole video for some of the juicy quotes from the foremothers of the feminist movement.

but I can just imagine the hysteria when a woman decides to shoot a catcaller whom she determines to be too aggressive.

Yeah, and just imagine the outcry if anything remotely like the quotes in the video was said about women instead of men. You can be famous and say bad things about men, but if you say them about women, you're toast. Imagine if a man tried to sue his wife for not giving him sex while married. Guess what, though, women have sued successfully for the same reason.

Here's another video explaining NAFALT:



If you're not all like that, then show me the feminists fighting against all these false labels. What do feminists have in common? We're not allowed to say that they all vilify men, and yet that does seem to be a recurring theme. When will you denounce this? If feminism is about equality, then why is it called feminism and not egalitarianism or humanism?

 

[jmdrake]

And women are never the victims of sexual violence in countries where the expectation is that they be covered from head to toe.
The fact is, women will experience harassment regardless of how they dress.

I sincerely doubt any women wearing burkhas get catcalled while walking down the street. What's a guy going to say? I love your eyes? That tent you're in looks like a thousand dollars? Yes women face oppression in such countries but it's likely of a different nature. (Incest. Spousal rape. etc).

Dannno, what if the reason catcalling works on some women is precisely because of its ubiquity and reinforcement within pop culture? "I'm supposed to respond to this guy because that's just what they do." In other words, if the norm shifted such that catcallers were mocked and derided at every turn, and it no longer became an acceptable method of picking up women, how would this change the tradeoffs you mention in your post? In such a society, it may be more obvious "which women are which"; it's not at all clear that women would respond positively to catcalling if it weren't so legitimized and trivialized in popular discourse. Again, logically there are better options available that don't involve possibly creeping the woman out and aren't inherently random.

But you already stated that most men don't cat call. So why would a woman think that most men cat called? I can pretty much guarantee you that most people that you are trying so hard to "convince" in this thread to take your outlook don't go around saying "Hey baby! Nice tits!" to strangers. I doubt even Dannno does that. You're far more likely to find men like Gunny who have been so traumatized by the "If you smile at a woman to hard she might think you want to rape her and get scared" that they clam up and don't say anything to the women they like at all. So this "Let's be careful and not scare the ladies" line could have the opposite effect. The thugs who aren't going to give a rip about your "socialization campaign" are going to keep doing what they are doing because it works on 1 in X (100? 1,000?) women and they don't care how many times they have to get rejected or how badly they get "put down". So the end result is the nice guys become even less likely to approach women leaving even more territory for the thugs.

Violent people are violent regardless of their access to sex. How will legalizing prostitution (a move I agree with for different reasons) solve the problem of people who require violence for sexual gratification? How can you be so sure that the woman the violent person has sex with won't end up the victim of sexual violence? I just don't understand your argument. There are plenty of other reasons to legalize prostitution, but that isn't a particularly compelling one.

So now we've gone from "Good evening" to "You look like a thousand bucks" to "Nice tits" to "Sexual violence?"

 

[pessimist]

I highly doubt that she was afraid. She had people watching her. If she wanted him to go away, she should have said something to him. Most women would say something to someone who was walking right beside her, but she didn't so we can't compare this to a normal situation.

Yeah you're right. She looked completely comfortable in that situation.

 

[jmdrake]

It is not really that far fetched when women have been masturbated and ejaculated upon in the subway.

It's far fetched to think that's a fad. It's extremely far fetch to suggest that "liberal judges" would let such men off with a fine.

I was not responding at that point about Hollback. I was trying to make a point that maybe in some rare cases would Gunny ever support a new law where the existing law was not locking those committing sexual assault.

I will let Gunny answer that. But from my perspective, I don't think that there is any possible scenario where there isn't already a law against what any sane person would call sexual assault. Now considering that in the wake of the Obama administration's BS statistics about sexual assault on college campuses, I could see new laws against "unwanted kissing" being passed. (That was part of the "1 in 5 women have been sexually assaulted in college" statistic.)

 

[pessimist]

As a guy, I do not like to be bothered by strangers. If I am walking down the street, I don't want disgusting, smelly, possibly dangerous humans invading my space or asking me questions.

If I was a woman, I would be enraged and insulted by being continuously bothered and harassed in the street. And yes, "you lookin' good, baby" passes as harassment if she hears it from every other guy she walks by.

 

[jmdrake]

Logically, his statement doesn't make sense because not every man was represented in that video. It just came off as a very petulant and silly quip. There were plenty of men off-camera and on-camera, I'm sure, that managed to make it past the actress without commenting at all.

It was a pretty good statistical cross section. There were men who walked by and didn't pay her any attention at all, men who were polite and said "Hello", men who were a bit pushy and said "You're not going to say hello back?"and men who walked beside her and gawked. The only men she didn't negatively acknowledge were the men who totally ignored her as if she didn't exist. So "ban all men" may have been over the top, but "ban all interactions with men" is a straight up accurate "quip."

Those laws didn't just pass in a vacuum, they were passed because attitudes and expectations changed. If laws passed in a vacuum, what would be the point of any activism or revolution at all?

Right. And so Hollaback wants activism so that the stage can be set to pass new laws.

As for the jeans thing, I will stop wearing skinny jeans when men stop wearing gym shorts and going shirtless at the beach. Quid pro quo.

I will stop wearing gym shorts and going shirtless at the beach when women stop flirting with me.

 

[jmdrake]

As a guy, I do not like to be bothered by strangers. If I am walking down the street, I don't want disgusting, smelly, possibly dangerous humans invading my space or asking me questions.

If I was a woman, I would be enraged and insulted by being continuously bothered and harassed in the street. And yes, "you lookin' good, baby" passes as harassment if she hears it from every other guy she walks by.

Note to self. Be sure and be the first guy to hit on the sexy lady walking down the street so that it won't be viewed as harassment.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

And women are never the victims of sexual violence in countries where the expectation is that they be covered from head to toe.
The fact is, women will experience harassment regardless of how they dress.

Dannno, what if the reason catcalling works on some women is precisely because of its ubiquity and reinforcement within pop culture? "I'm supposed to respond to this guy because that's just what they do." In other words, if the norm shifted such that catcallers were mocked and derided at every turn, and it no longer became an acceptable method of picking up women, how would this change the tradeoffs you mention in your post? In such a society, it may be more obvious "which women are which"; it's not at all clear that women would respond positively to catcalling if it weren't so legitimized and trivialized in popular discourse. Again, logically there are better options available that don't involve possibly creeping the woman out and aren't inherently random.

Violent people are violent regardless of their access to sex. How will legalizing prostitution (a move I agree with for different reasons) solve the problem of people who require violence for sexual gratification? How can you be so sure that the woman the violent person has sex with won't end up the victim of sexual violence? I just don't understand your argument. There are plenty of other reasons to legalize prostitution, but that isn't a particularly compelling one.

So you're telling me that women who enjoy it and respond to it are just fooling themselves and they don't really think what they think they think?

 

[JK/SEA]

As a guy, I do not like to be bothered by strangers. If I am walking down the street, I don't want disgusting, smelly, possibly dangerous humans invading my space or asking me questions.

If I was a woman, I would be enraged and insulted by being continuously bothered and harassed in the street. And yes, "you lookin' good, baby" passes as harassment if she hears it from every other guy she walks by.

my daughter ignores the comments. Simple.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Let's not forget about the libertarian "mind your own business" aspect.

Who the hell wants to be bothered in the street by complete strangers? Chances are you're not going to meet your potential SO by some meet and greet in the street. I highly doubt a smooth come on like: "damn girl! you got it going on" is going to have positive effect on a woman just wanting to get to her car after an 10 hour day at the office or whatever.

Unlikely, but it still happens.