Not to get all tumblr on you spag...
But I think this is a fairly important issue.
We've all done it. All those chuckles and drawn up faces at People of Walmart. No doubt, there are some people out there that wear some pretty weird shit, exposing their strange and less-than-magazine-material bodies for the world to see.
Then again, those magazine bodies are almost all photo-shopped, so I ask you, what is freakier:
The flabby, "unshapely" bodies laid bare by halter-tops? Man boobs glistening, soaked in sweat and indifference?
Or the fact that we base what bodies are SUPPOSED to look like on complete fabrications concocted by the very same corporations we Discordians tend to mistrust and dislike for the effects they have in our culture?
Human beings, despite what you have been told, are not really fit into any one particular mold. This goes for the architecture of our brains, our personalities, our desires and cravings and pretty much every facet of our existence. And yet, even the best of us are prone to enjoying the pointing and laughing of people who, by and large, cannot exactly help what they look like.
Exercise, you may say. Take care of yourself.
Well, just what IN THE FUCK do you know about it? Can you LOOK at another human being and ascertain the state of their biological machine? Do you KNOW that someone is just saying they have a thyroid disorder? How is that any different from that horrible faux pax where you assume someone is pregnant? And just what fucking business is it of yours anyway?
Too fat, too thin. Too tall? Too short? Hair not full and thick enough? You may or may not find someone personally attractive. BREAKING NEWS: That is not an invitation to criticize them.
And here's another bit of news you may be unaware of: YOU HAVE BETTER MOTHERFUCKING THINGS TO DO.
That's right, I, ALTY, while living, am telling to your fucking face that the time you spend judging and pointing and laughing at those who dare to have some random asshole snap their picture and post it online without permission (Which, BTW, is gross and creepy and something I doubt any one individual would appreciate. I highly doubt any of YOU would appreciate it if it happened to you) is time that is wasted.
You could be making art, or contributing to the aid of people who are getting fucked over EVERY SINGLE DAY by powers we will probably never fully overcome, or just sitting around masturbating in your own feces. Any of these things would be time better spent than making sure the whole fucking world knows what you think of some random strangers body.
Additionally, much like racist or sexist humor, it is so fucking boooooooring. It's the same tired ass shit that other stupid assholes have been repeating since time out of mind. There is nothing new there, folks. It's not funny because it is offensive, it's not funny because 9 times out of ten it just isn't funny. It's hackneyed humor, low hanging fruit, the dull efforts of a lazy, lazy mind that can't think of anything better.
Finally, again, about the god damned creeper shots. EWWWWWWWW. What the fuck is wrong with the people who take those pictures? It's weird, man. You see some body that fills you with disgust and the first thing you think to do is broadcast it to the whole world? How pathetic. How utterly lame. Is your life that uninteresting? Is that all you've got?
By further spreading those images you reinforce that kind of behavior, which is weird and creepy and so terribly unkind. You endorse it.
And, you know, the real litmus test, the one that stands the test of time and ignorant tumblr screeching is this: if you had one friend in the world, one single person who actually gave a fuck about you, and such a thing well and truly hurt their feelings, would you give a fuck? That's for you to say, but I think the answer says a lot about the kind of human being you are.
By the way, I have absolutely been made to feel shitty about my body, many a time, offhand and casually, by cowards who could not say it to my face. And when you are down and out, that is the last fucking thing you need. The last god damned thing.
What would Mr. Rogers say?
OR KILL ME.
That said, pretty much anything can be funny, in a certain light.
But, you know, actually make that shit funny or GTFO.
Feel free to channel tumblr any time you like, Alty. Total agreement on this.
I agree.
Fat or skinny, short or tall, lovely or butt-to-the-bone ugly, all human beings have the right, the obligation to SHAKE THAT and no other person has a moral right to give them shit for it.
I saw the picture that brought this on, and I think it's great.
It certainly lacks a certain level of class. I mean, I can understand going "huh" or maybe cracking a grin at the occasional "People-of-WalMart" style photo, especially when the person in question is clearly unhealthy or way out from the norm.
But for the most part, it's the 21st century equivalent of pointing and laughing at someone for being different from the norm, and it's not even done with them being aware of it (which may or may not be more cruel).
I mean, certainly, if people want to do that sort of thing, I suppose they should feel free to do so. But like I said, it definitely lacks class and style. And doing it often is pretty obviously a sign of some kind of mental insecurity or unhealthiness.
The same can be said, incidentally, for people who take pictures of gay couples kissing or holding hands in public and then fetishize it. Sure, it's less negative, but it's same kind of unhealthy preoccupation with others.
Quote from: Cain on February 20, 2014, 02:13:38 PM
It certainly lacks a certain level of class. I mean, I can understand going "huh" or maybe cracking a grin at the occasional "People-of-WalMart" style photo, especially when the person in question is clearly unhealthy or way out from the norm.
But for the most part, it's the 21st century equivalent of pointing and laughing at someone for being different from the norm, and it's not even done with them being aware of it (which may or may not be more cruel).
I mean, certainly, if people want to do that sort of thing, I suppose they should feel free to do so. But like I said, it definitely lacks class and style. And doing it often is pretty obviously a sign of some kind of mental insecurity or unhealthiness.
The same can be said, incidentally, for people who take pictures of gay couples kissing or holding hands in public and then fetishize it. Sure, it's less negative, but it's same kind of unhealthy preoccupation with others.
Sort of a carnival sideshow mentality, then.
I reserve the right to be snarky and shady about certain people's fashion choices.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 20, 2014, 02:19:00 PM
I reserve the right to be snarky and shady about certain people's fashion choices.
Can you give us an example, you horrible privileged CISHET shitlord? :lol:
The kind of things Tom and Lorenzo (http://tomandlorenzo.com/2014/02/maggie-gyllenhaal-in-lanvin-at-the-2014-bafta-awards/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tlofeed+%28Tom+%26+Lorenzo%29&utm_content=FaceBook) do, but with less famous people.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on February 20, 2014, 02:17:30 PM
Sort of a carnival sideshow mentality, then.
Yeah, that was exactly what I had in mind. It reduces people to personal entertainment and/or tokenism.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 20, 2014, 02:21:35 PM
The kind of things Tom and Lorenzo (http://tomandlorenzo.com/2014/02/maggie-gyllenhaal-in-lanvin-at-the-2014-bafta-awards/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tlofeed+%28Tom+%26+Lorenzo%29&utm_content=FaceBook) do, but with less famous people.
Oh, I dunno.
Beats the hell out of, say, neckties. Which make no sense.
Hey, I look good in a necktie.
I agree about the sideshow mentality, and in fact I agree in a large part with most of this. However, I also want to point out that it is absolutely normal for people to gawk at those who violate social norms. That's a factor that people like the Cacophony Society and others, including sometimes ourselves, use to our own advantage or delight.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 20, 2014, 02:39:20 PM
Hey, I look good in a necktie.
Neckties are things lowlanders wear to reduce all the unnecessary oxygen that they have available.
I like people looking weird. You will never see me mock someone for looking "weird"... I enjoy extremes. It's the suburban dull folk who raise my ire, but I still wouldn't mock them for how they look.
I prefer to poke at a person's personal character, if I'm going to start snarking.
Quote from: Cain on February 20, 2014, 02:13:38 PM
It certainly lacks a certain level of class. I mean, I can understand going "huh" or maybe cracking a grin at the occasional "People-of-WalMart" style photo, especially when the person in question is clearly unhealthy or way out from the norm.
Yes, that's entirely normal.
Nigel, yes, I do it, we all do it. Especially when something unusual comes out of nowwhere. I will even admit that I am taken off guard when I notice very suddenly that someone has a hook where there hand may once have been. Then I check myself and move on with my life.
LMNO:
Fashion, especially when it is an abiding interest is, is the sort of thing people want others to take note of. That seems to me to be a fair amount of the whole point. Whether good or bad attention is drawn seems like a sort of game, mostly in the spirit of fun, even when snarky.
That said, the key word is choice. Not everyone chooses what they wear. Some people are stuck with what they have, or, as with music, food, books, only know what their small slice of the world has shown them. How many people refuse to dance because they were mocked at some point and feel they "can't"? Not saying you would do anything like that, just that it happens.
I can say I have almost no fashion sense and view clothing from an almost completely wholly practical perspective. I own 3 slacks and about 10 pairs of pajama pants (currently, the ones I'm wearing are baby blue and covered with white snowflakes) and am considering giving up those stained and frayed slacks and switching to scrub bottoms because slacks restrict my movement and I think it may be contributing to my lowback pain.
I have recently walked into two resturaunts where two friends of mine each said, "Oh, it's you, I thought you were a homeless person." Because I do dress like an Alaskan homeless person. For one, it is warmer than the clothes needed by car owners or upper class Alaskan types in all that lycra and spandex while they jog. Secondly, it keeps me from getting mugged and/or fucked with.
AND it allows me to laugh at people who are just TERRFIED when we cross paths because they assume the kind of person I am. Which is a crazed, drunken savage, as they view all people who aren't like them. And all it would do to change.their minds about me is a change of clothes. That may be nornal, but it is no less silly.
Quote from: Alty on February 20, 2014, 05:13:15 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 20, 2014, 02:13:38 PM
It certainly lacks a certain level of class. I mean, I can understand going "huh" or maybe cracking a grin at the occasional "People-of-WalMart" style photo, especially when the person in question is clearly unhealthy or way out from the norm.
Yes, that's entirely normal.
Nigel, yes, I do it, we all do it. Especially when something unusual comes out of nowwhere. I will even admit that I am taken off guard when I notice very suddenly that someone has a hook where there hand may once have been. Then I check myself and move on with my life.
Idem Dito.
Quote
LMNO:
Fashion, especially when it is an abiding interest is, is the sort of thing people want others to take note of. That seems to me to be a fair amount of the whole point. Whether good or bad attention is drawn seems like a sort of game, mostly in the spirit of fun, even when snarky.
That said, the key word is choice. Not everyone chooses what they wear. Some people are stuck with what they have, or, as with music, food, books, only know what their small slice of the world has shown them. How many people refuse to dance because they were mocked at some point and feel they "can't"? Not saying you would do anything like that, just that it happens.
I am one of those people who refuse to dance or sing, it wasn't a point of mockery though, that only lasts for a few weeks or months. No it is being mocked for several years that gets you to internalize it.
Quote
I can say I have almost no fashion sense and view clothing from an almost completely wholly practical perspective. I own 3 slacks and about 10 pairs of pajama pants (currently, the ones I'm wearing are baby blue and covered with white snowflakes) and am considering giving up those stained and frayed slacks and switching to scrub bottoms because slacks restrict my movement and I think it may be contributing to my lowback pain.
I have recently walked into two resturaunts where two friends of mine each said, "Oh, it's you, I thought you were a homeless person." Because I do dress like an Alaskan homeless person. For one, it is warmer than the clothes needed by car owners or upper class Alaskan types in all that lycra and spandex while they jog. Secondly, it keeps me from getting mugged and/or fucked with.
AND it allows me to laugh at people who are just TERRFIED when we cross paths because they assume the kind of person I am. Which is a crazed, drunken savage, as they view all people who aren't like them. And all it would do to change.their minds about me is a change of clothes. That may be nornal, but it is no less silly.
I have no idea how i dress, all i know is people either double-take then ignore uncomfortably or dismiss me as too weird to be relevant.
Quote from: :regret: on February 20, 2014, 10:44:07 PMI am one of those people who refuse to dance or sing, it wasn't a point of mockery though, that only lasts for a few weeks or months. No it is being mocked for several years that gets you to internalize it.
This. Years of being treated like a monster is one of the surest ways of making a monster.
I grew up in small towns in Virginia bouncing from rural spot to rural spot and quickly learned that nomatter where I landed I these people are
unrelenting. If you are not 100% like them in every way you will be shunned, teased, insulted, attacked, and otherwise ground down until you either change into them, snap and kill people, or leave the area (possibly with mild PTSD from the experience). Something so small as what you wear, the color of your skin, or your weight can get you practically exiled.
You don't know isolation or hate until an entire town knows your name and has decided you are the outsider. Even worse, it's a snowball effect: people shame others to make themselves less of a target. Good luck finding any mercy as having mercy makes you a target.
I have noticed that the very people that treat others so poorly are often the very same ones who proudly shop at Walmart. This is because Walmart is always the big fashionable/cheap store in rural areas. They even boast about how big their Walmarts are!
They are the "People of Walmart" everyone else is laughing at!If anything, I find myself laughing more at the irony than the pictures circulated online.
Quote from: Red on February 23, 2014, 06:46:22 AM
Quote from: :regret: on February 20, 2014, 10:44:07 PMI am one of those people who refuse to dance or sing, it wasn't a point of mockery though, that only lasts for a few weeks or months. No it is being mocked for several years that gets you to internalize it.
You don't know isolation or hate until an entire town knows your name and has decided you are the outsider. Even worse, it's a snowball effect: people shame others to make themselves less of a target. Good luck finding any mercy as having mercy makes you a target.
Yup.
So many, fully convinced that THIS shape is the RIGHT shape, internalize that dogma so hard they perpeutate it against others who are so much like themselves. It's disturbing to me. As a kid I quickly learned there was no snese in reaching out to anyone as ostracized as myself because the only way they knew was the way they were treated, they modeled their behavior after what they saw as he natural way of things. I suppose that's perfectly natural as well, but ever so slightly less than what humans are capable of.
I always wear shorts,boots, and band shirt. It makes me look like a loser, and people leave me alone. I believe there's a haters gonna hate picture floating on here.
The most important thing of all. Shorts and Steel boots feel amazing!
(http://s29.postimg.org/iyhr7scv7/28187_387217932100_1651273_n.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/iyhr7scv7/)
Related, but on a psychological rather than aesthetic level are things like /r/LetsNotMeet and /r/creepypms.
Many of the entries are admittedly worrying, but many more seem to be encounters with harmless, lonely people who don't understand how to interact with others, being shamed as potential rapists or murders. The ignorance on both sides makes it a little difficult to know how to feel about this.
Quote from: /b/earman on February 23, 2014, 09:08:42 AM
I always wear shorts,boots, and band shirt. It makes me look like a loser, and people leave me alone. I believe there's a haters gonna hate picture floating on here.
The most important thing of all. Shorts and Steel boots feel amazing!
(http://s29.postimg.org/iyhr7scv7/28187_387217932100_1651273_n.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/iyhr7scv7/)
This is why you're awesome.
Quote from: monad on February 23, 2014, 10:43:09 PM
Related, but on a psychological rather than aesthetic level are things like /r/LetsNotMeet and /r/creepypms.
Many of the entries are admittedly worrying, but many more seem to be encounters with harmless, lonely people who don't understand how to interact with others, being shamed as potential rapists or murders. The ignorance on both sides makes it a little difficult to know how to feel about this.
I'll tell you though, as a woman it can be very hard to know who's harmless but socially inept, and who's going to turn into your creepy stalker who will eventually rape you.
That is what I meant by the ignorance on both sides making it hard to have a solid emotional response. Ignorance was maybe a harshly pathological word to use. It is possible to empathise with both the creeper and the creeped.
Sure, from an outside perspective looking in.
:lulz: I actually just spent like half an hour reading /r/creepypms and I still haven't run across one who seems anything like "harmless". Wow. :lol:
Guys who unintentionally come off as creepy simply need to understand the world they live in. You have to back off, cultivate a demeanor that is welcoming, not pushy, and just wait for women to accept you are not sleazy. Until society changes substantially there is no other way for women to protect themselves.
The trouble with that is there are very sick people out here that know this and use it.
So, it just takes time, or chemistry, or both. As a bisexual male I put guys through the wringer, few come out the other side. Very, very, very few.
Actually, no shaming creepers is not the same as.the OP. Shaming those who act wholly innapprorpiately with regard to sexual and ehical and social behavior is absolutely acceptable. It is usually the only way people learn.
Behavior is learned, body, social, and economic status are not.
There's a pretty large overlap between guys who seem harmlessly creepy due to social ineptitude and those whose social ineptitude causes them not to recognise or adequately respect the boundaries of others.
Nigel: I confess I didn't read the creepy PMs, I was speaking on second-hand information that it was similar to the other one.
Alty: Of course sexual assault or other misconduct is unacceptable, but in some of those cases it's simply that the creeped did not make it clear to the other that their interest was unwanted. At least two of them end at the point where they simply told the other they were not interested. Many similar complaints are made about people suffering from autism or other disorders that make them struggle with or incapable of easily learning the acceptable boundaries. There's no malice there, and they deserve sympathy, not persecution.
I'd rather not reddit from work. Can you quote examples where the responsibility should have been with the 'creeped' to more clearly communicate their lack of interest?
Quote from: Pæs on February 23, 2014, 11:05:58 PM
There's a pretty large overlap between guys who seem harmlessly creepy due to social ineptitude and those whose social ineptitude causes them not to recognise or adequately respect the boundaries of others.
I was just thinking something along those lines. I've had more than a couple of bad dating experiences where the guys behave absolutely horrifyingly due to bad boundary recognition and poor social skills, but even after I told them what was inappropriate about their behavior and why, they still couldn't seem to understand where they'd gone wrong.
I apologise; I don't think I'm stating my position very well. It's not a question of responsibility. Someone who is being made to feel uncomfortable is not to blame for it, moreso if they feel they're at risk. Both parties are victims of misunderstanding and deserving of some varying degree of sympathy.
QuoteI'm a regular reader of 'Let's Not Meet'. I actually had this experience just a few days ago, so this is still fresh in my mind.
In my school, we had this fundraiser in which we just answer a few of these test question things and you're matched with 10 random people in the school on Valentine's week. So my friends and I took it. It wasn't really that much of a big deal at that time; we thought it was funny.
My first match was this guy, Vajiggle. Even now, I don't know much about Vajiggle, only that he's in my Arabic classes. I kind of laugh at the results and just throw them away.
During my Arabic class, Vajiggle starts to walk to me. He says, "You're Jaggle, righ?" By now, I had no idea what to say. I was obvious Jaggle, so I just curled my lips and said, "Yeah." And then he asked, "Do you like me?" My heart dropped. I had no idea if he was joking. But luckily, the teacher called him back to his seat.
Throughout the Valentine's week and last week, Vajiggle literally appears out of no where. He 'accidentally' ran into like five times on one day. I started to get real weird notes in my locker, like "Will you go out with me" or "Behind the school, 2:00?" or other boyish things like that. I tried to ignore them, but they kept coming. I noticed Vajiggle kind of trailing in back of me, and trying to look nonchalant, so I just try ignore him.
To make the story short, I told the administrators, and within a few days, Vajiggle stopped following me. Well, that's it. Sorry if it isn't like other people's experiences xp
tldr: We took a random matchmaking quiz for Valentines Weekend. I get top match with some weirdo, who proceeds to stalk me around campus. I finally tell the administrators of my school, and he suddenly leaves me alone.
Vajiggle should have taken the hints, but that can be difficult for many people through no fault of their own.
Alty, shout out if you think this conversation fits better in a different thread.
Quote from: monad on February 23, 2014, 11:13:02 PM
in some of those cases it's simply that the creeped did not make it clear to the other that their interest was unwanted
I think this is an important point to come back to, even though you've gone on to say that you don't think it's a question of responsibility.
Because of the way our culture functions with regard to consent, especially if the power dynamic is unbalanced by gender, I feel an obligation to be aware that silence and anything like it cannot be interpreted as consent, not just wrt sex but in all social interaction. I think that guys talking to girls need to be aware that if they're feeling threatened (whether you think it's justified or not) straight up telling you "not interested" is not a viable survival strategy, which is part of the reason why "sorry, I have a boyfriend" is such a popular way to escape such interactions.
People who come off as creepy or threatening have to learn this. It's something they're doing wrong and it may be uncomfortable to face but it's a behaviour that I can't forgive with a simple "oh, he's just a bit socially awkward". That ignorance or inability has the potential to cause harm, so if you're aware that you have trouble in these situations, you've got to approach them with that in mind. If you're not aware, it may offend you to find out, but tough shit because that's preferable to your carrying on causing discomfort, best case scenario.
If our communities don't give this feedback to those who are behaving in dangerously abnormal ways, the bad signal they're running on is only going to multiply upon itself and running on that signal for too long creates all sorts of unhealthy relationships between these individuals and their communities.
Oh no, I never do mind unless it's drama.
Alty: I apologise, I didn't mean to derail. Socially unacceptable clothing seems related to socially unacceptable anything else. In both situations it's a question of what is socially acceptable.
Pæs: I agree entirely with what you're saying, but the issue is that (sometimes) they are not being told their behaviour is unacceptable, they're being told misleading and confusing things by people avoiding the topic because it's easier. "Oh I have a boyfriend" is not the feedback they need. That would only lead them to approach someone else in the same way.
I certainly do not mean to argue that their behaviour is acceptable or should be allowed to continue. I am no longer sure what my point is other than I feel they deserve some sympathy too. And an education in social adaptability would be helpful.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 12:23:37 AM
Alty: I apologise, I didn't mean to derail. Socially unacceptable clothing seems related to socially unacceptable anything else. In both situations it's a question of what is socially acceptable.
Pæs: I agree entirely with what you're saying, but the issue is that (sometimes) they are not being told their behaviour is unacceptable, they're being told misleading and confusing things by people avoiding the topic because it's easier. "Oh I have a boyfriend" is not the feedback they need. That would only lead them to approach someone else in the same way.
I certainly do not mean to argue that their behaviour is acceptable or should be allowed to continue. I am no longer sure what my point is other than I feel they deserve some sympathy too. And an education in social adaptability would be helpful.
Not a worry.
I would agree, we often engage in behavior that just isn't right in order to get what we want. And without proper feedback it is difficult to readjust. This problem is that of any society without strong communities. I encounter this with people who try to apply for rental space from me.
I do not have the time to explain that your resume should not be four pages long, in papyrus, listing every job you ever had except anything massage related, repeating the same phrases over and over. Though, if we all told people things like that straight away, we might not have some of these issue.
As a formerly socially inept person, I have some sympathy. But it's easy to see why most women don't want to have to explain to someone their behavior is unacceptable or unwanted, or, not that they don't want to, but when you can clearly see how it's not OK or wanted the immediate assumption is something is really wrong with that person.
I suppose that falls back the way we gawk at people who are vastly different from the norm, without first thinking of the larger perspective of variety that is within any group of people.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 12:23:37 AM
Pæs: I agree entirely with what you're saying, but the issue is that (sometimes) they are not being told their behaviour is unacceptable, they're being told misleading and confusing things by people avoiding the topic because it's easier. "Oh I have a boyfriend" is not the feedback they need. That would only lead them to approach someone else in the same way.
No, it's not the feedback they need, but you can hardly fault the person being creeped on for being more concerned about their safety than taking the opportunity to educate and better their harasser. IMO it's about everyone being visibly disapproving of that. It's the community's responsibility to enforce its own standard of acceptability, which for me means refusing to give mixed messages about whether their behaviour might be explainable because for so many, that's enough to justify continuing the cycle.
Sure, I understand why they are creeps. And yes, it's a shame that so many factors out of their control contributed to that but unless the buck stops with the individual, it's too easy to use the understanding of the cause to excuse not resolving the effect.
So tying back into this thread, it is fucked up that we will loudly and obnoxiously enforce our standard of acceptability when we're criticising someone's appearance but seem to so utterly fail to police ourselves when in comes to behavioural problems and abuses.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 12:36:02 AM
So tying back into this thread, it is fucked up that we will loudly and obnoxiously enforce our standard of acceptability when we're criticising someone's appearance but seem to so utterly fail to police ourselves when in comes to behavioural problems and abuses.
Jesus, that's a really good and disturbing point. Maybe because it's just more fun to point and laugh at fat people than it is to take time out of the day to say, "Hey, chill bro. Maybe just take a step back or two. Kay? No, it's cool, but boundaries are important."
More fun for some anyway.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 12:32:51 AM
but you can hardly fault the person being creeped on for being more concerned about their safety than taking the opportunity to educate and better their harasser.
I did not mean to imply otherwise.
It's all good, monad. We won't throw you the wolves just yet.
I mean, I won't.
Yet.
:lulz:
Speculation: It's because we place more value, personally, on looking good than we do on behaving well. So criticising someone else's appearance as an assertion of your own status deals a larger blow to them and a bigger boost to your ego and perception of your status than telling them that their behaviour was unacceptable.
Further speculation: Criticising appearance has a greater impact because of the insecurities this entire system gifts us with. If our culture's focus was on acceptable behaviour, criticism of that would be more effective.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 12:39:45 AM
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 12:32:51 AM
but you can hardly fault the person being creeped on for being more concerned about their safety than taking the opportunity to educate and better their harasser.
I did not mean to imply otherwise.
Yeah, I'll just keep spelling that out in case there's any confusion because I'm very aware of how easily a victim blaming mentality can sneak in. Please don't take it as an accusation.
Also, because "you're not presenting an argument for why I should respect you as a human being in a way which is comfortable for me" is the battle cry of the mens' rights activist and needs to be preemptively rejected, IMO.
To some degree both these hypothetical people are victims, blaming either is a victim blaming mentality. There are also creepy women, perhaps it would be best not to lose sight of that. Fewer, perhaps, but it is a human problem, not entirely* one of gender.
*Not to deny that it is often heavily skewed.
I'm happy holding the creeper responsible for their own actions, actually.
Being a victim of societal conditioning is so broad a definition of "victim" as to make the word useless and synonymous with "person". The victim of harassment is who I'm talking about, here. And while it may be an interesting semantic/philisophical excercise to consider whether aggressors are all victims in their own way, and is certainly useful not to simply characterise them as monsters, we're talking about the lived daily experience of thousands (Edit: drastic understatement) of people, mainly women, whose lives I don't see the utility of reducing to the background of a discussion about whether we can hold people responsible for the damages they do to others. Especially when tropes such as gender comparison in offending are starting to be trotted out.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 12:23:37 AM
Alty: I apologise, I didn't mean to derail. Socially unacceptable clothing seems related to socially unacceptable anything else. In both situations it's a question of what is socially acceptable.
Pæs: I agree entirely with what you're saying, but the issue is that (sometimes) they are not being told their behaviour is unacceptable, they're being told misleading and confusing things by people avoiding the topic because it's easier. "Oh I have a boyfriend" is not the feedback they need. That would only lead them to approach someone else in the same way.
I certainly do not mean to argue that their behaviour is acceptable or should be allowed to continue. I am no longer sure what my point is other than I feel they deserve some sympathy too. And an education in social adaptability would be helpful.
You would be amazed at the proportion of men who fly off the handle and become abusive/threatening when they are directly told no. That's a major contributor to why women and girls often won't tell a man directly that they're not interested. Online in particular, the majority of men I have politely turned down have immediately lashed out with verbal abuse, some even threatening to hunt me down and rape me. That's why I ignore online overtures from men I'm not interested in.
In person, turning men down flat can be dangerous. It's unfortunate, because IDEALLY women should feel safe being honest and saying "I'm not interested in you". But we don't.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:05:11 AM
I'm happy holding the creeper responsible for their own actions, actually.
Being a victim of societal conditioning is so broad a definition of "victim" as to make the word useless and synonymous with "person". The victim of harassment is who I'm talking about, here. And while it may be an interesting semantic/philisophical excercise to consider whether aggressors are all victims in their own way, and is certainly useful not to simply characterise them as monsters, we're talking about the lived daily experience of thousands of people, mainly women, whose lives I don't see the utility of reducing to the background of a discussion about whether we can hold people responsible for the damages they do to others. Especially when tropes such as gender comparison in offending are starting to be trotted out.
And this.
I feel like I am being put on the defensive here.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:05:11 AM
I'm happy holding the creeper responsible for their own actions, actually.
Being a victim of societal conditioning is so broad a definition of "victim" as to make the word useless and synonymous with "person". The victim of harassment is who I'm talking about, here. And while it may be an interesting semantic/philisophical excercise to consider whether aggressors are all victims in their own way, and is certainly useful not to simply characterise them as monsters, we're talking about the lived daily experience of thousands (Edit: drastic understatement) of people, mainly women, whose lives I don't see the utility of reducing to the background of a discussion about whether we can hold people responsible for the damages they do to others.
This seems to address the symptom and not the disease.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:05:11 AM
Especially when tropes such as gender comparison in offending are starting to be trotted out.
Perhaps they should not have been trotted out and we should have stuck with the hypothetical creeper and creeped, rather than making it a gender issue.
Quote from: Nigel on February 24, 2014, 01:11:10 AM
In person, turning men down flat can be dangerous. It's unfortunate, because IDEALLY women should feel safe being honest and saying "I'm not interested in you". But we don't.
That is not something I had taken into account. Of course not all rejections will result in violence, but the risk posed to women who give all the benefit of the doubt outweighs the good doing so would do. I have no issue with what you're saying. Again, education is needed, but it is not the responsibility of the creeped.
QuoteI feel like I am being put on the defensive here.
I felt that way for the first year I spent here,
lurking.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 01:32:14 AM
I feel like I am being put on the defensive here.
I feel like that's justified, given that you have expressed views which have been challenged and require defending.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 01:32:14 AM
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:05:11 AM
I'm happy holding the creeper responsible for their own actions, actually.
Being a victim of societal conditioning is so broad a definition of "victim" as to make the word useless and synonymous with "person". The victim of harassment is who I'm talking about, here. And while it may be an interesting semantic/philisophical excercise to consider whether aggressors are all victims in their own way, and is certainly useful not to simply characterise them as monsters, we're talking about the lived daily experience of thousands (Edit: drastic understatement) of people, mainly women, whose lives I don't see the utility of reducing to the background of a discussion about whether we can hold people responsible for the damages they do to others.
This seems to address the symptom and not the disease.
What is the disease then and how is it addressed? Does addressing the disease require us to not hold people responsible for their actions if they are products of their environments? When are they not? What do we do in the mean time, before the decade-long process of cultural upheaval is finished? Grin and bear it?
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 01:32:14 AM
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:05:11 AM
Especially when tropes such as gender comparison in offending are starting to be trotted out.
Perhaps they should not have been trotted out and we should have stuck with the hypothetical creeper and creeped, rather than making it a gender issue.
You want to address the disease and not the symptoms but would prefer not to address the intersection between gender and creepiness?
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AM
I feel like that's justified, given that you have expressed views which have been challenged and require defending.
I am a little confused. What views? That all people deserve sympathy and those in need should be helped?
I feel that in another conversation or situation I would be quite happily arguing the point of view you are now. I don't feel particularly comfortable defending "men" like this.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AM
What is the disease then and how is it addressed?
Ignorance, education.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AM
Does addressing the disease require us to not hold people responsible for their actions if they are products of their environments?
So it would seem.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AMWhen are they not?
Never.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AM
What do we do in the mean time, before the decade-long process of cultural upheaval is finished? Grin and bear it?
Anything you like, you are also the product of your environment.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AM
You want to address the disease and not the symptoms but would prefer not to address the intersection between gender and creepiness?
I would prefer not to address that intersection if it means pretending female-on-male, male-on-male, and female-on-female creepiness aren't issues, as well as agreeing to the binary gender system you seem to be presupposing. That would be homophobic, transphobic and ignoring all situations where the creepiness is not directly related to strictly heterosexual men making women feel uncomfortable because they want to sleep with them. I'm sure awkward cis men can cope with a little victimisation but trading the victimisation of one group for another (particularly whilst ignoring the problems of all other groups) is not a solution.
That seems like it abdicates all forms of personal responsibility.
Is that so bad? Rehabilitation is generally more effective than punishment.
Prevention and solutions are better than revenge.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 02:05:45 AM
Is that so bad? Rehabilitation is generally more effective than punishment.
Prevention and solutions are better than revenge.
Yes, it is. While I agree with your latter points, and do not advocate revenge, especially from within government, abdicating personal responsibility solves nothing and enables abbhorent behavior.
Solutions is tricky word in this context.
Quote from: Alty on February 24, 2014, 02:11:41 AM
abdicating personal responsibility solves nothing and enables abbhorent behavior.
I cannot form an opinion on this at this time.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 01:59:26 AM
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AM
I feel like that's justified, given that you have expressed views which have been challenged and require defending.
I am a little confused. What views? That all people deserve sympathy and those in need should be helped?
"the issue is that [...] they're being told misleading and confusing things by people avoiding the topic because it's easier. "Oh I have a boyfriend" is not the feedback they need"
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 01:59:26 AM
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AM
What is the disease then and how is it addressed?
Ignorance, education.
Right. We'll tell them that these behaviours are bad, but that it's not their fault and that they're a poor product of society, then we'll hope that they don't use that as a way out of the hard job of self-evaluation and betterment.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 01:59:26 AM
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AM
Does addressing the disease require us to not hold people responsible for their actions if they are products of their environments?
So it would seem.
33 posts to go.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 01:59:26 AM
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 01:38:11 AM
What do we do in the mean time, before the decade-long process of cultural upheaval is finished? Grin and bear it?
Anything you like, you are also the product of your environment.
Right, so while we're delicately reeducating the abusers, we should advise victims to be really careful not to hurt any feelings by implying that creepers accept personal responsibility for their actions.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 01:59:26 AM
I would prefer not to address that intersection if it means pretending female-on-male, male-on-male, and female-on-female creepiness aren't issues, as well as agreeing to the binary gender system you seem to be presupposing. That would be homophobic, transphobic and ignoring all situations where the creepiness is not directly related to strictly heterosexual men making women feel uncomfortable because they want to sleep with them. I'm sure awkward cis men can cope with a little victimisation but trading the victimisation of one group for another (particularly whilst ignoring the problems of all other groups) is not a solution.
Nobody is pretending that at all, nor proposing a gender binary. I am strictly speaking about the case where Person A who identifies as a female is creeped out by Person B who identifies as a male, which covers the majority of the interactions we're discussing and is, in my opinion, best illustrative of the issue for this audience. But sure, feel free to continue running headfirst into "devils advocate" tropes and dishing out red herrings like accusations of cisnormativity.
Are you unaware of how well torn-apart "BUT IT HAPPENS TO MENS TOO" is as a rebuttal?
Quote from: Alty on February 24, 2014, 02:11:41 AM
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 02:05:45 AM
Is that so bad? Rehabilitation is generally more effective than punishment.
Prevention and solutions are better than revenge.
Yes, it is. While I agree with your latter points, and do not advocate revenge, especially from within government, abdicating personal responsibility solves nothing and enables abbhorent behavior.
Solutions is tricky word in this context.
No Alty, solutions is how we fix the problem.
At this point we are veering far from the point of the thread, but that's OK.
It is all government can do to mitigate the mob mentaliy that is present in any given community trying to protect itself.
Let's take this to its logical conlucion: rapists should not be made to feel bad about their acts because they are a product of their society.
No, just no. If it were not for government most rapaists and child molsester, or those PERCEIVED as such, would be strung up the nearest tree. This is very much a part of human nature, to protect the group from those who would harm it.
If we are talking about shame, it must be known that such behavior is not only unacceptable, it is intrinsically, morally wrong. Period. There is no mitigating factor for rape. Not society, not a terrible childhood, not mental illness. It is just wrong. And if you tell people otherwise they will excuse their behavior and carry on doing it.
Naming and shaming of genocide, for example, is more effective than, well, saying it's not a countries fault they needed to clense ethnicities.
In naming and shaming acts which are harmful to innocent people, the prevalence of those acts are reduced.
Much in the same way the presense of police acts to impede crime before it happens. I may not LIKE police officers, I may detest the growing police state here in the US, but without police we would all be left to fend for outselves from whomever wanted whatever it is we have.
Having trouble believing that reducing the argument to "strictly heterosexual men making women feel uncomfortable because they want to sleep with them" is anything but a deliberate misreading, given the direction responses have taken.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 02:23:42 AM
Quote from: Alty on February 24, 2014, 02:11:41 AM
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 02:05:45 AM
Is that so bad? Rehabilitation is generally more effective than punishment.
Prevention and solutions are better than revenge.
Yes, it is. While I agree with your latter points, and do not advocate revenge, especially from within government, abdicating personal responsibility solves nothing and enables abbhorent behavior.
Solutions is tricky word in this context.
No Alty, solutions is how we fix the problem.
Must...adehere...to...50...post...ruuuuuuleuuuuhhhh.
*uncontrollable shaking*
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 02:26:59 AM
Having trouble believing that reducing the argument to "strictly heterosexual men making women feel uncomfortable because they want to sleep with them" is anything but a deliberate misreading, given the direction responses have taken.
If that's the case...fair play. Much more skillful than, say, brother nobbhil.
It's making the discussion about sex, which is misdirection. Still, yes, more subtle than BN.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 02:23:12 AM
"the issue is that [...] they're being told misleading and confusing things by people avoiding the topic because it's easier. "Oh I have a boyfriend" is not the feedback they need"
Yes. They're not being told what they need to know. "Oh I have a boyfriend" is useful in individual situations, but outside of the interaction between the creeper and the creeped upon, some other education is needed. I don't think we're disagreeing on this, we're just suffering from some miscommunication.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 02:23:12 AM
Right. We'll tell them that these behaviours are bad, but that it's not their fault and that they're a poor product of society, then we'll hope that they don't use that as a way out of the hard job of self-evaluation and betterment.
Yes, if you're trying to give them an education on the nature of responsibility. Which we're not. "You must not do this, it is bad. Here is why:" is the education.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 02:23:12 AM
Right, so while we're delicately reeducating the abusers, we should advise victims to be really careful not to hurt any feelings by implying that creepers accept personal responsibility for their actions.
That appears to be the total opposite of what I was suggesting.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 02:23:12 AM
I am strictly speaking about the case where Person A who identifies as a female is creeped out by Person B who identifies as a male, which covers the majority of the interactions we're discussing and is, in my opinion, best illustrative of the issue for this audience.
Then we have been speaking at cross-purposes.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 02:23:12 AM
But sure, feel free to continue running headfirst into "devils advocate" tropes and dishing out red herrings like accusations of cisnormativity.
I accused you of no such thing.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 02:23:12 AM
Are you unaware of how well torn-apart "BUT IT HAPPENS TO MENS TOO" is as a rebuttal?
Even if I was unaware, it seems irrelevant as that is not what I said.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 01:59:26 AM
I feel that in another conversation or situation I would be quite happily arguing the point of view you are now. I don't feel particularly comfortable defending "men" like this.
Quote from: Alty on February 24, 2014, 02:24:02 AM
Let's take this to its logical conlucion: rapists should not be made to feel bad about their acts because they are a product of their society.
You don't think that making them aware of the harm they've done would not be a by-product or even the goal of education?
Compassion is a wonderful thing, vilainizing abusers is not so wonderful. I think we can all agree to that.
RE: OP:
Look, just LOOK at this BULLSHIT:
http://www.m.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/news/20140220/average-obese-woman-gets-just-1-hour-of-exercise-a-year-study
Why does it matter what reason a person gives for saying no to something?
"Is there poison in this cake?"
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 05:45:06 AM
"Is there poison in this cake?"
I am talking about when someone sets a personal boundary, as in declining an invitation or declining to touch or be touched, declining a job, declining a date, declining a kiss, declining sex.
When someone says no to anything involving what they do with their person, at what point is it appropriate for the person being declined to second-guess them?
When they have pre-established that "no" is not the safe-word.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 05:52:54 AM
When they have pre-established that "no" is not the safe-word.
:troll:
For example, if someone asks me to attend a dinner party or art event, I might make up a more pleasant-sounding rejection than "No, I don't like your friends and it sounds painfully dull". I might say "Sorry, I can't, I have plans that evening".
And really, giving any reason at all is just a nicety. It's not actually anyone's fucking business why I don't want to go out with them.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 05:52:54 AM
When they have pre-established that "no" is not the safe-word.
In the case of someone asking someone else out, it's pretty safe to assume that conversation hasn't yet taken place, Michael.
No shit.
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 09:32:30 AM
No shit.
You seem te assuming others can read your mind.
A simple "I agree with this" would do wonders.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 24, 2014, 03:06:54 PM
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 09:32:30 AM
No shit.
You're gonna go far, kid.
My favourite part is that originally that post read "I am being sarcastically snarky because I fully agree with the answer you have in mind." or similar and was changed when he decided to go full asshole, having decided that "be a bit of a douche, sulk about backlash" wasn't a viable strategy for short-term jollies.
Quote from: Pæs on February 24, 2014, 08:02:48 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 24, 2014, 03:06:54 PM
Quote from: monad on February 24, 2014, 09:32:30 AM
No shit.
You're gonna go far, kid.
My favourite part is that originally that post read "I am being sarcastically snarky because I fully agree with the answer you have in mind." or similar and was changed when he decided to go full asshole, having decided that "be a bit of a douche, sulk about backlash" wasn't a viable strategy for short-term jollies.
My money says he's from TDS.