Sexual harassment

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by tali89, Aug 22, 2015.


What is the main reason you think women behave like they did in the news article?

  1. Nature

    0 vote(s)
  2. Nuture

    1 vote(s)
  3. Other

    3 vote(s)
  1. tali89 Registered Senior Member

    Here is the example:

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. tali89 Registered Senior Member

    Also, a video for further discussion:

    In the above video, a man rides the subway with a bulge in his trousers. A number of women ogle, take photos, and make lewd comments and gestures. Is this objectification of men by women part of their nature, or some form of rape culture?
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Rape culture?

    What on Earth are you trying to talk about?
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    I'd like to start by pointing out a small issue with the poll question. The question refers to "women", but this is disrespectful since obviously not all women engage in this kind of behaviour. Perhaps the poll should be amended to read "some women". Do you agree, tali89? Otherwise, you risk having a twitter hashtag following you around.

    In the poll, I voted "other". The "other" would be drunkenness, probably. The poll options seem a bit ill-thought-out, so I don't see that the responses will tell us anything very useful.

    Could you please expand on what exactly you mean by "nature" and "nurture" in this context?

    But, ignoring the slight niggles, I'm glad that this important story was brought to our attention by the intrepid university lads at, not to mention yourself tali89. This sort of upskirt harassment shouldn't be tolerated . Thanks, tali89!

    The video on the train seems unrelated to the original story. You asked:
    Again, you've made the silly error of talking about "women" rather than "some women", but I'm sure you'll remedy that in future.

    Please explain what kind of "rape culture" you think might be at work here.

    Also, I'm interested in how you think men are being objectified.

    Finally, you have presented your readers with a binary choice. Do you think that an open-ended question might have been better here? What if the objectification of men is due to neither nature nor rape culture? Is that possible, do you think?
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2015
  8. tali89 Registered Senior Member

    I find it rather strange that you feel the wording of the poll title is the pertinent issue, rather than the actual sexual harassment that occurred to the men in the example I posted. More curious is that you failed to make such a distinction when another member posted a similar poll with the title "What is the main reason you thank Men behave like they did in the OP video.???". Indeed, you were quick to criticize the collective behaviour of men, rather than quibble over the title of the poll.

    So being drunk gives a woman the right to sexually assault someone? Or is it simply a mitigating factor? If so, does the same apply to men? And do you automatically assume that every man who sexually harasses a woman must be drunk?

    Are women born with a genetic predisposition to fondle and ogle men without their consent, or is it instilled by a culture which objectifies men?

    I'm glad that after spending a couple of paragraphs quibbling over the title of the poll, you finally deigned to address the actual sexual harassment that occurred. Should such behaviour be prosecuted? Should educational programs be put in place in school and colleges to teach women not to engage in such behaviour?

    They are related in the sense that the women in both examples sexually harass men who are simply going about their daily lives without attempting to solicit such attention. Unless you feel going up to a man to comment on his phallus is appropriate behaviour for a stranger?

    You don't see how groping, leering, or making sexual comments towards a man, without any consideration for his feelings, might not be objectifying? If not, then why does such behaviour objectify women? I'm sure you'll elaborate on this apparent double standard in future posts.
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    You should read the whole post before you start replying to it line by line.

    Link please.

    I didn't talk about the right to sexually assault somebody. I was simply responding to your poll question about why the women in your article did what they did. I don't think being drunk is a mitigating factor in sexual assault. And I think that the same standards should be applied to women as to men. I make no assumptions about "every man who sexually harasses a woman", and note that you are broadening the scope from sexual assault to harassment.

    I believe that both women and men are (mostly) born with a predisposition to have a sex drive, yes. That means that heterosexual men tend to be interested in looking at women, and heterosexual women tend to be interested in looking at men. I think you're being a bit precious if you demand that people get your explicit consent before they are allowed to look at you. As fondling is part of sex, generally, you could also say that men and woman are predisposed to fondle.

    What about consent? Separating that issue out so we can look at it, you're asking: are women born with a genetic predisposition to ignore the consent of other people when they want to engage in a sexual activity? Now, that might be a reasonable question to ask if we were to reduce the "women" to "some women". And, we might ask the same question about "some men". The answer, I think, is: nobody knows. Perhaps you can suggest how such a thing could be investigated.

    To the other half of your question, are you asking whether the culture in England (or wherever it was) is one that objectifies men, and as a by-product teaches women to ignore the consent of men etc. etc.? Again, you're opening up quite an extensive topic for discussion there. What do you think? I get the impression that you feel insecure because you live in a culture in which you believe that men like yourself are objectified. What is it about your culture that you think particularly objectifies men?

    Also, are you at all concerned about the possible objectification of women? Is objectification bad for both sexes, or just one?

    Certainly, the barmen involved could report any sexual assaults to appropriate authorities if they chose to. Do you think such behaviour should be prosecuted? It's your thread.

    I think that educational programmes in schools should certainly teach children to respect other people and their personal boundaries, and not to engage in inappropriate sexual behaviour. In fact, I think that many schools already have such programmes. Do you agree? Do you think that school education in this area is lacking?

    But in your video, the guy on the train was trying to solicit such attention. He deliberately enlarged his groin region. Moreover, he took a hidden video camera to film the results of his deliberate provocation. Then he posted the video on the internet to solicit even more attention. And finally, I see no evidence of any harassment of him in the video. Do you?

    Why are you trying to put words in my mouth about what I feel is "appropriate behaviour for a stranger"? If you want to know what I think, ask me. Don't assume. It makes you sound like you only want to elicit the responses you expect - like you have some kind of agenda.

    There you go again making assumptions.

    I agree that groping, leering and making sexual comments to either a man or to a woman without consideration of his or her feelings might be objectifying.

    There's no double standard that I can see (so far). I hope you'll clarify what you're talking about in future posts.
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2015
  10. tali89 Registered Senior Member

    For the audience, I would like to re-iterate my claim:

    I find it rather strange that you [James R] feel the wording of the poll title is the pertinent issue, rather than the actual sexual harassment that occurred to the men in the example I posted. More curious is that you failed to make such a distinction when another member posted a similar poll with the title "What is the main reason you thank Men behave like they did in the OP video.???". Indeed, you were quick to criticize the collective behaviour of men, rather than quibble over the title of the poll.

    Here is the thread I referenced:

    In the above, you did not quibble over the title of the poll, and did not make the distinction between 'all' men and 'some' men. Why not? Why is such a distinction only pertinent when discussing examples of bad behavior perpetrated by women? It's almost as if you have an agenda.

    You used alcohol as an excuse for women behaving badly in regards to sexual assault. More importantly, how do you know that all the women engaging in sexual harassment were indeed drunk? Are you saying that women only engage in such behaviour when inebriated?

    You may say that, but then you effectively argue against that contention in the next breath.

    That's a nice bait and switch. I wasn't talking about 'looking' (although ogling is considered sexual harassment by many), but mainly groping and indecent remarks. And I'd argue that simply having a sex drive doesn't make one abuse others. So what caused the women in my examples to perpetrate the harassment? Did they have a genetic predisposition towards humiliating others, or are women culturally indoctrinated to treat men as sexual objects?

    I'm looking for a valid explanation as to why women engage in such behavior. I don't consider 'they were drunk' or 'they have a sex drive' to be tenable explanations.

    Also, are you at all concerned about the possible objectification of women? Is objectification bad for both sexes, or just one?

    Program revolving around sexual harassment are predominately aimed at teaching males not to engage in harassing behaviour, which establishes a dichotomy that men are the harassers, and women the victims of said harassment.

    So if your wife or daughter stuffed her bra to make her breasts look bigger, or wore tight fitting pants to enunciate her buttocks/labia, you wouldn't have a problem with strangers ogling her, pulling cunnilingus faces, or paying her camel-toe sleazy comments? Would you teach your daughters to approach strange men and compliment them on their bulge?

    You mentioned earlier that you did not consider 'looking' to be sexual harassment.
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    Read my very first reply to that thread. I asked "How many of those men ..." (i.e. the ones in the video from the opening post to that thread). In the same post I wrote "So, what are these guys really saying ..." I asked "why is it that these guys egos are so bound up with whether a woman on the street notices them or not?" And I ended that post with "I think this is mostly about these men making themselves feel powerful and controlling and high-status."

    Now, given that I specified the guys in the video no less than 4 times in the first post I made to the thread, whatever made you think I was talking about all men? Was it not clear from the context that I was restricting my comments to the men in the video?

    A little further down, I commented on the poll question, saying "But I think that what makes men do it is a combination of nature and nurture (as with most other complex behavioural traits), so I voted "other" in the poll." The "some men" is implied in this, because clearly not every man harasses women as they walk down the street (as I had already discussed). Notice that my response to that poll was the same as my response to your poll in this thread. There are no double standards - just consistency in my position on sexual harassment.

    You need to read my posts more carefully before you criticise me for supposedly holding double standards. Frankly, it makes you look a bit silly.

    No. In my first reply to the current thread I wrote "This sort of upskirt harassment shouldn't be tolerated." And then there was this from me: "I don't think being drunk is a mitigating factor in sexual assault."

    I couldn't be much clearer than that, could I? And you didn't have to look far to find what I thought, seeing as it was in the very post you were replying to.

    Please stop the knee-jerk attempts to demonise me, tali89. If you wish to interact with me, try to do so honestly at least. Don't misquote me. Don't put words into my mouth that I didn't say. Don't accuse me of holding the opposite opinion to one that I only just expressed to you.

    I don't know. Again, in my first reply to this thread I wrote: "In the poll, I voted "other". The "other" would be drunkenness, probably." That is, I applied my brain and drew what I would say is a reasonable conclusion given the information I was given.

    Look at the context of your article, tali89. These were barmen being groped by women in a bar. Do you think they were all sober? Do you know they were all sober? Do you think it would be reasonable to assume that at least some of them were not sober?

    No. If I wanted to say that, I would say it.

    Wrong again.

    If you weren't talking about "ogling", why did you mention it? Some advice: don't mention turtles if you don't want to talk about turtles. It makes things easier for everybody.

    I addressed the matter of "fondling" that you also raised along with "ogling". This is your first mention of "indecent remarks", as far as I can tell.

    I agree.

    I replied to that question in my previous post. You ignored my response. You'll need to do me the courtesy of reading it and responding to what I wrote if you want to engage with me further on this matter.

    What tenable explanations do you suggest? Or are you mystified as to what might cause such behaviour?

    You left another question of mine hanging, and even included it in your reply. It was this: "Also, are you at all concerned about the possible objectification of women? Is objectification bad for both sexes, or just one?" You might like to address that in your next response.

    Most of the time men are the harassers, especially at the more extreme levels of harassment. When it comes to actual sexual assault and rape, women are overwhelmingly the victims and men the perpetrators.

    Being the expert in school programmes dealing with sexual harassment that you are, tali89, could you perhaps enlighten us as to what is usually taught in such programmes? A few references to curriculum material would be interesting, too. Thanks.

    You're trying to put words into my mouth again. Try to interact politely with others, tali89. Otherwise, you will tend to put them off side early in the interaction, and you won't win many friends.

    Before I respond to this, I have a couple of questions for you. First: does "ogling" involve more than looking or staring? I'd like to get to the issue of what you find harassing about ogling, so I need to know how you define that term, and what you think is harassing about it. Second, what is a "cunnilingus face"? That is something I'm not familiar with. Since you obviously are, I hope you can enlighten me.

    On the matter of sleazy comments, I would strongly urge you to read my quite extensive and helpful replies in the thread that you linked to in your post above this one. My opinions should be clear enough from that thread. If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask.


    Would you teach your sons to approach women in the street and compliment them on their breasts?

  12. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    What about a sex drive combined with overconsumption of alcohol?

    Would that make sexual harassment more likely in your opinion in the setting of, say, a bar or pub?
  13. tali89 Registered Senior Member

    So you acknowledge that at no time did you take the original poster to task over the title of the poll, which was "What is the main reason you thank Men behave like they did in the OP video.???" Quite the contrary, you instead took to task another poster who queried whether simply saying 'Hello' to a woman constituted sexual harassment. At no time did you quibble with the poster over the fact that his poll title wasn't accurate. Why is that, I wonder?

    You're assuming that those women were drunk, and that inebriation is the causes of sexual harassment. You tendered the following explanation for street harassment committed by men: "I think this is mostly about these men making themselves feel powerful and controlling and high-status." Could that explanation also be plausible in the case studies I put forward? Why would you assume alcohol is the cause of bad behaviour in women, but egotism and a controlling personality are the cause in men?

    I mentioned a variety of behaviors that constituted sexual harassment, from ogling to crude comments and groping. Choosing to focus on 'ogling' after rebranding it as merely 'looking' is a bait and switch.

    The same explanation one would give for men who engage in sexual harassment. Do you feel that women who engage in sexual harassment are egotistical and have controlling personalities, and if so, why isn't this being adequately addressed by society?

    We had a 20 page thread which was dedicated to discussing the objectification and harassment of women. I'd like to focus more on the objectification of men, and why society ignores the issue. Please don't turn this thread into a 'What about the wymenz!'

    Not only is the above statement debatable, it's also irrelevant. Men are sexually harassed and objectified, as I've demonstrated in this thread, hence why I am asking society chooses to ignore it.

    Such information is readily available on the internet. You're welcome to research this in your own time if you're that interested, but it's a given that sexual harassment interventions focus on preventing undesirable behavior in men. If you disagree, well, I'm not overly interested in trying to persuade you.

    Ogling involves staring in a sexually suggestive manner, usually at the sexual organs. Such behavior is commonly accepted as low-level sexual harassment.

    Spreading your index and middle finger, and flickering your tongue in between the two, much as one would do if performing cunnilingus. The male equivalent is pressing your tongue against the cheek, to simulate a penis being thrust into the mouth. A woman in the video I posted performed such a gesture after ogling the man's 'lump'. Do you think alcohol is an explanation for her behavior as well?

    Which also occurred in the video posted. Why do some women exhibit such behavior? And I don't think 'Well, the guy had a lump in his pants!' is an excuse, since as I pointed out, women stuff their bras to enunciate the size of their breasts. And as you admit, it would still be sexual harassment for a man to comment about the woman's breasts
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    Is this thread about me, or about the topic?

    If you thought that the poll topic should have been queried in the other thread, you could have done it yourself. You don't need my help for that.

    Half right. I'm guessing that those women were probably affected by alcohol, for the most part. I do not believe that inebriation causes sexual harassment. It's obviously more complicated than that. If it wasn't, then people would sexually harass others every time they got drunk.

    Once again, I have not assumed that alcohol is the cause of bad behaviour in women. You seem to want to search for a single cause that explains all harassing behaviour. I think that's a futile quest you're on. Human social (or anti-social) behaviour is complex.

    You have suggested that perhaps there was an element of power and status in the behaviour of the women. I agree with you that this is possible.

    I addressed all the points you made.

    So you agree with me that some of the causes of sexual harassing behaviour by men are probably the same as for sexual harassing behaviour by women. Good. Because sometimes it seems to me that you have a Mars/Venus attitude to men and women - that they are fundamentally different. Men and women are both human. On the other hand, that does not mean that there are no behavioural differences between men and women on average.

    I don't have enough data to draw such a specific conclusion about women who engage in sexual harassment. Do you have any relevant data on that?

    You also seem to assume that this problem of sexual harassment carried out by some women is not adequately addressed by society. Maybe you can expand on where you think society is going wrong in that area, and what you think needs to change.

    Yes. Did you argue in that thread that the behaviour of the men on the street was acceptable? I don't recall.

    It would be silly for you to try to debate it, and you know it. That's why you claim it is irrelevant.

    What makes you think that society ignores it? Your barman case, for example, made some kind of news site. You found out about it. The story even mentioned action being taken to address the problem.

    Given your premise, do you have any thoughts of your own about why society chooses to ignore the sexual harassment and objectification of men, or do you expect me to solve that problem for you? After all, it's your thread. You probably started it with some thoughts in mind, right?

    How widespread a problem is the sexual harassment of men? Do you have any data on that? How does it compare, say, with the sexual harassment of women? This could be relevant because if it turns out that sexual harassment of women is a bigger problem then it might be fair to concentrate efforts to remediate the problem there.

    And what particular harms are you worried about when it comes to the objectification of men?

    Fine. I thought that since you raised the issue of school education about harassment, you would be interested in discussing it with reference to actual data. But it's ok. We don't have to discuss that, and I trust you won't raise the issue any further. If I want to, I will research the matter in my own time, as you suggest.

    Ok. Thanks.

    The video is 8 minutes long, and I believe I watched it once when you first posted it. I don't really want to go through the 8 minutes to check for what you're referring to.

    In response to your previous question and in light of your explanation, I do not think that pulling a "cunnilingus face" would be socially appropriate behaviour in general society, in any circumstance.

    I'll take your word for it.

    You didn't answer my question: "Would you teach your sons to approach women in the street and compliment them on their breasts?"

    It seems a little strange to me that you felt the need to ask me the question, so I am asking you the same thing.

    Let's hear what you think, then we can discuss some more. I've given you a couple of suggestions. This is a conversation, so now it's your turn.

    Ok. You've told me a lot of things that you think don't explain such behaviour. So what do you think might explain such behaviour?

    Oh, and you forgot to reply to this:
    I would be grateful if you could address that suggestion that in your next reply. Thanks, tali89.
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2015
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    One more thing.

    As you point out, we had a similar thread about the sexual harassment of women, here:

    In that thread, you commented on the video posted by a woman who had filmed men harassing her as she walked down the street. You wrote:
    I am wondering what you think the important difference is between the video discussed in that thread and the one you posted of the women ogling the guy on the train at the top of this thread. For example, suppose somebody were to reply to that video with something like this:

    "A man who designed an experiment aimed at attracting the attention of others supposedly received said attention? Shocking. I didn't know you considered a single sketchy case study a reliable form of evidence."

    You would tell this poster that, no, your train video really is significant because... ?

    See, I'd hate to think you have double standards, tali89. For somebody so quick to accuse others of double standards, you must be squeaky clean yourself.
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    In fact, the more I look at that previous thread, the more apparent inconsistency I find in your position, tali89.

    For example, you wrote:
    So, on the one hand you claim that men are strong and not fragile, such that they can "get over" an unwanted look or advance and forget about "in an hour's time". Any yet, here you are starting a thread on the problem of unwanted looks and advances directed at men.

    It seems to me that either you think unwanted looks and advances are a problem for men or you don't. So which is it?

    Would you agree that for (some) men, attention is currency, and that some men attempt to create drama in their lives, but when they receive attention they feign indignation?

    I hope you're not one of those men, tali89.
  17. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    Sorry for the string of posts, but I keep finding apparent inconsistencies in your views. I hope you can show me how your views are really consistent after all.

    And you wrote:
    I'm glad we can agree that it is poor etiquette to harass others. At least, I hope this is still your view, so we can agree on it.

    Are you as concerned about men feigning indignation over an innocent look or comment as you are about women doing the same thing? Are you worried that some men are too fragile? Perhaps those men should toughen up and forget about harassment in an hour's time, like real men?

    Is this your view?

    I'm sure that you're not feigning indignation by posting this thread, because that would really be hypocritical, wouldn't it?

    I look forward to you explaining your position on harassment and your lack of double standards, in light of all of your posts - particularly the ones that I have highlighted here.
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    A few more:
    Of course, you'd advise the same for men, wouldn't you?

    Men are autonomous beings, too, as I'm sure you'll agree. Therefore, you'd advise them that their response to unwanted advances is in their court, and that they should take control of their feelings and actions.

    How would you advise a barman to take control of his actions to respond to an unwanted fondling or inappropriate look or comment, tali89? What advice would you give to a guy on a train who was being ogled by nasty harassing women?

    In light of this, it seems to me that you can't want "special protections and privilgeges" for men who are harassed in a bar or on a train, for example. Instead, you'd advocate that these men should use the power within themselves to interpret and respond to events. Is that correct?

    I'm trying to figure out the point of this thread. You are trying to understand why (some) women harass men. And then what? Will this help the men to use the power within themselves to deal with the harassment, without "special protections", as you think they should?
  19. billvon Valued Senior Member

    No. Was there a rape in the video? I must have missed it if there was.
  20. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    There are always complications; it's good to see the pub management get around to dealing with the issue.

    However, the Unilad article raises a question all pub owners and managers should probably consider:

    "You get large groups of drinking women circling around when you are collecting glasses and asking whether you are true Scotsman -- and they find out for themselves," Iain Howie, assistant manager of Hootananny, told the Inverness Courier. "The first few times it is funny. But when it is really busy and everyone has to work fast and hard, and your hands are full of glasses, you feel quite vulnerable."

    "You are thinking, 'Are you going to get broken glasses, or is your kilt going to get lifted up again?' They see it as a bit of fun, but it is a bit of an embarrassment," Howie said.


    This is actually what Kit Fraser, the pub owner, responded to when he called the situation "pure sexism", and counterpointed the question of what may seem funny.

    When groups of people are surrounding and groping your staff, those patrons need to be ejected from the bar. It would seem that someone in the pub management made a mistake and allowed the harassment to continue, perhaps because they thought it was funny, or maybe for profit, or simply because the workers weren't making a fuss; there are, of course, plenty of reasons the workers themselves might choose to not make a fuss until they absolutely must. But in the end, the responsibility falls to house management, which makes Mr. Fraser's politicking―"We fellows are very, very aware of sexism. I think the women need to catch up"―seem very disingenuous. The problem occurred repeatedly, and the solution is to change the clothes in order to quell the temptation instead of expecting people to behave decently. This is backwards, as well.

    It is a disgrace that Mr. Fraser, or anyone else, should attempt to use this situation so cyncially.


    Hooper, Ben. "Scottish pub swaps kilts for pants after female patrons get handsy". United Press International. 13 July 2015. 26 August 2015.
  21. tali89 Registered Senior Member

    Well, I have tried to discuss the topic, but it's hard not to discuss the inconsistencies in your views when you attempt to make my thread all about you and your personal biases. Or do you think that the opinion pieces you post should be immune from scrutiny?

    It's not the topic of the Street Harassment poll that bothers me, it's the fact that you jumped down my throat over the wording of my poll, while failing to do so in another thread you participated in. I started this topic in an attempt to determine why some women engage in sexual harassment, and instead of addressing this, you chose to take me to task over the wording of the poll, which didn't bother you when a similar discussion was held in regards to men.

    'For the most part'? Initially you only put forward alcohol as being the cause, but now you're backpedaling.

    Yet when you first responded to this thread, you only cited alcohol when attempting to explain the cause of the harassment. If you think that the causes of said harassment were complex, why did you not say so initially, instead of simply dismissing such behavior as being caused by alcohol?

    So we are in agreement that women who engage in sexual harassment, as demonstrated in both of my examples, are egotistical and have control issues? You thought it was that simple for the men in the Streetwalker video, so why not in this case as well?

    What relevant statistical data did you draw from when you claimed that the men featured in the 'Street Harassment' experiment were egotistical and controlling? It seems like you are all too ready to chalk up any supposed sexual harassment permitted by men as being due to a character flaw, whereas are reluctant to do the same for sexual harassment perpetrated by women.

    It's not so much that I can't support my observation, it's that I don't want to invest the time in doing so for something that should be readily apparent to the audience. I also suspect that no number of examples I provided would satisfy you, as this is nothing more than a transparent attempt to control the narrative.

    Men are subjected to unwanted sexual attention by women, and they often do forget about it 'in an hour's time'. The purpose of this thread is to determine why women engage in such behavior, and why such behavior is treated far less seriously than when men show women unwanted sexual attention. Men certainly don't need my protection, and I'd argue that they have far more pressing concerns to their health and well-being. This thread is purely an educational activity, much as the 'Street Harassment' one initially started out as, before being hijacked by individuals with a personal agenda. Do you have a problem with attempting to determine the underlying causes of sexual harassment?

    Ah, but in neither example I provided did the men act indignant. In the first example, the men being groped changed their uniforms in order to avoid further sexual assault. One can only imagine the out-roar if female employees had to stop wearing skirts in order to stop men from fondling their vagina! In the second video, the man who performed the experiment is not spearheading a campaign to end sexual harassment of men (unlike the lady in the Streetwalker video). Instead, he's simply making the point that sexual harassment is not solely perpetrated by men, and that yes, men can be on the receiving end. Do you have a problem with someone highlighting this?

    Oh, most definitely. However, how seriously does society take a man when they complain about unwanted sexual advances from women? I suspect a man who complained about being treated as a sex object wouldn't be taken quite as seriously as a woman who made the same complaint.

    You are being rather disingenuous here, as the two scenarios aren't symmetrical. The Street Harassment video had a woman who had a number of ambiguous comments made towards her. Indeed, much of that thread was devoted to divining what the intent of those men were, and whether a simple 'Hello, how are you.' was intended to be sexual in nature. On the other hand, the two examples provided in this threads aren't ambiguous. The first example I provided had numerous women groping mens' sexual organs. The second video had a woman pantomiming fellatio, and another woman complimenting the man on his phallus. If a woman was groped, or given a sleazy comment on her breasts, she'd be well within her rights to assume that the man's intentions were sexual. But assuming ill intent over a simple 'Hello' is ludricuous, and yes, I think such people need to harden up.

    You'd be better served ironing out the numerous inconsistencies in your own worldview.
  22. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    Do you realise that your reponses are often more telling in what you choose to leave out than in what you say?

    I asked you a number of pertinent questions about your views. Instead of answering then honestly, you have tried to make this thread about me again. Why is that? Why did you really start this thread?

    How about you answer the questions I asked you? Then I'll address your post.
  23. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    While I wait for you to catch up, I'll respond to just one point you raised.

    Why does it matter if women sexually harass men?

    If men are resilient and quickly get over it (in an hour's time), is there a problem that society needs to address? I suppose that any action that should be taken would at most have to cover only that one-hour period between being groped under the kilt and forgetting it ever happened an hour later. Since there are no ongoing repercussions for the resilient men, it doesn't seem like a big issue to me. What do you think? I mean, those barmen would just go home and the next day they'd turn up for their next shift saying "I was groped yesterday by a bunch of women. But it doesn't matter. I'm well over it now. Today is a new day!"

    See, the difference in the case of street harassment of women is that as a women, when you're harassed every 6 minutes (on average) as you walk down the street in New York, you don't tend to shrug it off. It makes you worried about walking down streets. You fear future harassment. It makes your life less pleasant overall. And you feel like you shouldn't have to put up with it just to help some self-centred men stroke their fragile egos.

    "Take control of your feelings and actions!" Pull yourself together, women! shouts tali89. Why can't you be like men and forget it ever happened in about an hour? You're at fault here, not your harassers! You need to toughen up and get with the programme. The harassers aren't the ones at fault here. It's your fault because you're all a bit wimpy. If you could be more like me - er.. like men I mean - then you'd see that males have every right to wolf-whistle and proposition you on the street and make lewd comments about your breasts. They don't mind when you do it to them, so toughen up!

    In summary, tali89, maybe you have answered your own question. Why is harassment of men by women treated less seriously than harassment of women by men? Because, according to your theory, the harassment is always minor in case of men and quickly forgotten about. With women, however, it is not quickly forgotten about. It has ongoing negative effects. This is according to your own theory, of course; don't mistake it for my opinion.

    Since men don't need any protection from sexual harassment, does it matter why women harass them? Is it a purely academic interest you have, tali89? A "purely educational activity", as you say? Are you just trying to get some insight into the minds of women? Is that what this thread is about?

    Do I have a problem with attempting to determine the underlying causes of sexual harassment by women? No, I say to you: go right ahead. But if the behaviour itself isn't significant for anything and has no impact on men's lives, then I agree with you that they have far more pressing concerns to their health and wellbeing. Maybe you should devote some attention to those other concerns as well.

Share This Page