Sometimes, when I read the Twitter, I feel myself morphing into Andrea Peyser or the dudes on Fox News. Case in point! The "catcall" video from evvvvery day, alllll week, which everybody is very SEE!???! about. There is much outrage from our feminist sistren, and much shamed head-hanging from our feminist men.
I was really trying not to personalize this, I don't think you were saying causing flashbacks is OK. My point was more that this is actually what was happening in that video. I guess it's the danger of switching from discussing a concrete to discussing abstractions - it can be hard to keep them separate.
Are you really that stupid that you can't see that the attitude that walking down the street is an invitation to follow a woman haranguing to respond with emotional blackmail like "oh is it because I'm too ugly that you won't speak to me" is exactly the fucking point of the video? Take your attitude that women invite harassment simply by existing in public, slather it with Dave's Ultimate Insanity and shove all the way up your ass.
At no point do I think that me saying Good Morning to anyone would or should make them uncomfortable. So it is not with cavalier disregard that I utter such a benign greeting, but with genuine friendliness and neighborly spirit. So no, I am not conceding the fact that a Good Morning can not just be a Good Morning.
And no, I do not let some vague fear of impressions censor my opinions. If I was so afraid to offend anyone, I got hired by the WRONG website, and I would never say Good Morning.
<blockquote>if you take offense to it, that is not my problem.</blockquote> <blockquote>they might have squishy feels about it</blockquote>
You acknowledge the possibility. It has been expressed here repeatedly that it is not always welcome. So yes, it <em>is</em> with cavalier disregard - in fact, I&#039;d replace cavalier with callous - that you have chosen to substitute how you believe others should react to you for how you have demonstrated awareness that they will sometimes react to you. That&#039;s straight-up disrespectful.
People read this website because they choose to. They can equally choose not to. A woman who lives and works in NYC cannot choose not to walk on the street. It&#039;s different in really important ways.
&quot;being greeted almost 100 percent respectfully&quot; - I call bullshit on this. There is nothing friendly, sociable, or respectful about this street dynamic. It is aggressive from the get-go. Women who ignore it are &quot;frigid.&quot; Women who acknowledge it are inviting further approaches. Either way, a woman walking down the street, minding her own business, is reminded relentlessly and constantly that no matter how much she may imagine that she&#039;s a person, really she&#039;s just a piece of meat.
Most of the rest of the conversation was already there, and it does make the second half of my comment largely redundant, but I think the point I was trying to make in the first part still stands. As an end, meaningless sex with random people is a thing that I&#39;m not willing to condemn, but it&#39;s possible to separate that expression of sexuality from the means used to try to achieve it. Even if you accept that catcalling on the street is a method to try to obtain sex (which I strongly doubt in most cases), it has an effect on many women that the ends cannot justify. On the other hand, there are plenty of websites advertising that they will connect people for no-strings hookups, so other, presumably better-tailored, means are available where there is at least some reason to expect that one&#39;s approaches will be welcome.
I&quot;ll agree that 10% is probably a lie. BUT - if being a complete and total dick worked 10% of the time how often would being polite work? Got to be at least twice that.
I doubt they ever expect to get laid. They&#039;re just showing the other dude-bros in their little group how totally not-gay they are. Sort of like apes banging their chests to establish who&#039;s the alpha of the group.
You know, Lizzie really doesn&#039;t have to put words in your mouth, you&#039;ve just clearly expressed awareness that your words might not be welcome combined with an utter disregard of this fact. This closely exemplifies the point that people arguing that even a &quot;Good Morning&quot; is not just a &quot;Good Morning&quot; are making. And I bet her impressions and dwell times <em>are</em> on your radar (if not, why not?) so maybe you want to stop and think for a moment about how respect levels might feed into that.
What exactly is the devil&#039;s position here? That it&#039;s OK to make some women relive the experience of being sexually assaulted every time they walk down the street just on the off chance of finding someone else that is DTF a total stranger? Sounds like a trade-off from hell.
Being attracted to someone on purely physical grounds is not the same as denying their personhood, for example by refusing to accept their expression of their preference not to be approached on the street. Speaking to someone who makes eye contact and smiles is a very different thing indeed from speaking to someone quick-marching with eyes straight forward.
I brought it up because <a href="http:\/\/www.rawstory.com\/rs\/2014\/10\/woman-catcalled-100-times-in-viral-video-tells-cnn-i-was-reliving-past-memories-of-sexual-assault\/" target="_blank">it&#039;s what happened while they were making the video</a>.
I was really trying not to personalize this, I don&#039;t think you were saying causing flashbacks is OK. My point was more that this is actually what was happening in that video. I guess it&#039;s the danger of switching from discussing a concrete to discussing abstractions - it can be hard to keep them separate.
Are you really that stupid that you can&#039;t see that the attitude that walking down the street is an invitation to follow a woman haranguing to respond with emotional blackmail like &quot;oh is it because I&#039;m too ugly that you won&#039;t speak to me&quot; is exactly the fucking point of the video? Take your attitude that women invite harassment simply by existing in public, slather it with Dave&#039;s Ultimate Insanity and shove all the way up your ass.
At no point do I think that me saying Good Morning to anyone would or should make them uncomfortable. So it is not with cavalier disregard that I utter such a benign greeting, but with genuine friendliness and neighborly spirit. So no, I am not conceding the fact that a Good Morning can not just be a Good Morning.
And no, I do not let some vague fear of impressions censor my opinions. If I was so afraid to offend anyone, I got hired by the WRONG website, and I would never say Good Morning.
<blockquote>if you take offense to it, that is not my problem.</blockquote> <blockquote>they might have squishy feels about it</blockquote>
You acknowledge the possibility. It has been expressed here repeatedly that it is not always welcome. So yes, it <em>is</em> with cavalier disregard - in fact, I&#039;d replace cavalier with callous - that you have chosen to substitute how you believe others should react to you for how you have demonstrated awareness that they will sometimes react to you. That&#039;s straight-up disrespectful.
People read this website because they choose to. They can equally choose not to. A woman who lives and works in NYC cannot choose not to walk on the street. It&#039;s different in really important ways.
Exactly.
&quot;being greeted almost 100 percent respectfully&quot; - I call bullshit on this. There is nothing friendly, sociable, or respectful about this street dynamic. It is aggressive from the get-go. Women who ignore it are &quot;frigid.&quot; Women who acknowledge it are inviting further approaches. Either way, a woman walking down the street, minding her own business, is reminded relentlessly and constantly that no matter how much she may imagine that she&#039;s a person, really she&#039;s just a piece of meat.
.
Most of the rest of the conversation was already there, and it does make the second half of my comment largely redundant, but I think the point I was trying to make in the first part still stands. As an end, meaningless sex with random people is a thing that I&#39;m not willing to condemn, but it&#39;s possible to separate that expression of sexuality from the means used to try to achieve it. Even if you accept that catcalling on the street is a method to try to obtain sex (which I strongly doubt in most cases), it has an effect on many women that the ends cannot justify. On the other hand, there are plenty of websites advertising that they will connect people for no-strings hookups, so other, presumably better-tailored, means are available where there is at least some reason to expect that one&#39;s approaches will be welcome.
Wow. This thread got lively. Imagine if wonket actually allowed comments
Bezoar:
I&quot;ll agree that 10% is probably a lie. BUT - if being a complete and total dick worked 10% of the time how often would being polite work? Got to be at least twice that.
&quot;Smile? You want me to smile?
&quot;Step in front of a bus and I&#039;ll fucking laugh my ass off.&quot;
Girl from Ipanema libul!! 1!
See? Both sides (of the equator) do it.
I doubt they ever expect to get laid. They&#039;re just showing the other dude-bros in their little group how totally not-gay they are. Sort of like apes banging their chests to establish who&#039;s the alpha of the group.
You know, Lizzie really doesn&#039;t have to put words in your mouth, you&#039;ve just clearly expressed awareness that your words might not be welcome combined with an utter disregard of this fact. This closely exemplifies the point that people arguing that even a &quot;Good Morning&quot; is not just a &quot;Good Morning&quot; are making. And I bet her impressions and dwell times <em>are</em> on your radar (if not, why not?) so maybe you want to stop and think for a moment about how respect levels might feed into that.
What exactly is the devil&#039;s position here? That it&#039;s OK to make some women relive the experience of being sexually assaulted every time they walk down the street just on the off chance of finding someone else that is DTF a total stranger? Sounds like a trade-off from hell.
Being attracted to someone on purely physical grounds is not the same as denying their personhood, for example by refusing to accept their expression of their preference not to be approached on the street. Speaking to someone who makes eye contact and smiles is a very different thing indeed from speaking to someone quick-marching with eyes straight forward.
You&#039;ve gone too far now, I could only imagine such a vision.
sigh, even Colbert has taken to mocking those misogynist man-children
I brought it up because <a href="http:\/\/www.rawstory.com\/rs\/2014\/10\/woman-catcalled-100-times-in-viral-video-tells-cnn-i-was-reliving-past-memories-of-sexual-assault\/" target="_blank">it&#039;s what happened while they were making the video</a>.