itt a strange man asks if you saw the ass on that one

this is a thing that happens

is "that one" Alicia Keys

see also: drunk guy at the bar while yr ordering drinks, giving a ~significant look~ after the cute bartender leaves, "i know, right?" *leers*

it's like a real life WS thread but with horrible men no one else wants to talk to

http://cdn-write.demandstudios.com/upload//6000/600/30/7/36637.jpg

lol college and a guy on your floor suddenly puts his arm around you after staring glassily at a poster on the wall and confides that, shhhhhhhh! ...he's pretty sure he's gonna get some pussy tonight

lock up your kittens

unacceptable behavior

"cool. man. uh, with who?"
"...................waht? oh dude this girl kristeneooooHHHHH no way the CAPO is here!!! THIS GUY IS A FUCKER AAAAAaaaahhhhhh what the hell c'mere man"

*gets a beer*

http://www.alessonislearned.com/cmx/lesson006.jpg

u you want to be all yes dude just cause hey sure but like what are you getting yrself into - the neediness having actually nothing to do w/any sort of observed hotness - so ur just all yup - basically ~this~ guy

omg that cartoon is kinda awesome

the only panel that jars is the funeral service one, i don't think that one is necessary, or at least, it could stand to be less wacky/crude

"take the punchline out" says j@ggr

most of those comics aren't that great but that one is pretty good. There are a couple other good ones

it works if it's just meant to be a snapshot of the funeral service i guess - bathetic life going on beneath as he succumbs to the trappings of empty nirvana -

u you want to be all yes dude just cause hey sure but like what are you getting yrself into - the neediness having actually nothing to do w/any sort of observed hotness - so ur just all yup - basically ~this~ guy

― ice cr?m, Friday, November 20, 2009 6:08 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah this. i don't want to step all over a person's awkward gesture of community ("let's agree on THIS") but almost every time i've been like haha sure man get after it i've been pulled into an orbit around what appears to be a slightly hostile planet

"haha sure man she's a good one"
"you know it!...hey, you know who ~I'd~ like to fuck?"
"*(oh christ)*"

lool

Crepes passing in the night

im generally not tolerating guy talk - lets talk abt chix but really we r talking abt us - and its much worse w/some weird random

I heard "sometimes the skirt's so short you just gotta stare" last week

lol i tend to seize up when strangers speak to me in general so i think i'd be like "uhhhh yeah" and haul ass outta there

often more than slightly, plus mostly awful

that is about the planet of ass guy

re: hostility of

swear that at bars the people that decide randomly to talk to me are these guys or they are v drunk girlfriends sitting bored next to boyfriends who are laughing with their bros. all rolling their eyes over at those dudes and asking me, hey what's with that shirt (ed: it is just a shirt) hahahahaha i'm kidding, man i would kill for a cigarette, you got one?

I heard "sometimes the skirt's so short you just gotta stare" last week

― super sexy psycho fantasy world (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Friday, November 20, 2009 6:25 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i have also heard this! like word for word!

lewd men and their thoughts: my life as a clueless nerd

by G.B. Xavier

between this and the latest video on 'o_O posts' i am feeling a bit ill, gah

yeeks double guilty

yes i just watched part of that and completely regret it. at least gbx's guy is, like, trying to connect irl?

like, i have been on a bit of a feminist tip recently, but stuff like this is just really unsettling in a way some of the more obviously awful stuff isn't

used up cumrag made ill by cartoon

Got that cartoon, framed, in a box somewhere in my mom's basement. It hung in my dormroom, and made me different.

it's like a real life WS thread but with horrible men no one else wants to talk to

this isn't that different from 77 WS thread

u you want to be all yes dude just cause hey sure but like what are you getting yrself into - the neediness having actually nothing to do w/any sort of observed hotness - so ur just all yup - basically ~this~ guy
― ice cr?m, Friday, November 20, 2009 6:08 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah this. i don't want to step all over a person's awkward gesture of community ("let's agree on THIS") but almost every time i've been like haha sure man get after it i've been pulled into an orbit around what appears to be a slightly hostile planet

― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Friday, November 20, 2009 7:19 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

had prepared a whole post abt how i think figuring out how to deal with "this guy" is an impt part of growing up and learning to be a human--but really there is no way to ever deal with this guy is there

i've never gotten this, but i get strangers saying racist things to me and expecting me to agree with them.

yah i never get rando dudes tyrna bond with me over their sexual interest in some women

voted chick was slammin I will not lie

i feel like a disproportionate # of ppl ask me for directions tho which makes me feel guilty abt never knowing where anything is

A homeless guy once said it to me while I was passing him by. He was lounging on some wall, I think. I couldn't help but burst out laughing. I think I thanked him. But I'm not sure.

I heard "sometimes the skirt's so short you just gotta stare" last week

This is true, but not in the way it was meant, I don't think. Norah Jones was on Colbert last week, sitting on a bar stool in a skirt that was never meant to see a bar stool. She was clearly uncomfortable. She kept her hands folded in her lap the entire interview, presumably to keep from going the full hoo-ha. It was distracting. So yeah, I stared, but it was more like, "Yikes. That's an accident waiting to happen!"

As for pointing out asses and engaging in overfamiliar, lewd conversation: I have gotten this a lot from cab drivers. Sometimes it's disgusting leering, and sometimes it's complaining about their wife or girlfriend in a tone of, "You know how WOMEN are!" Nothing you can say, really, plus you're stuck inside a moving vehicle with ~this~ guy.

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

~THIS~ guy is a hero tbh, tellin it like it is. asses be slammin.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

a strange ass asks if you saw the man on that one

lol @ results

lots of ~this~ guy's on ilx

no one cares if it was yr gf or sister :/

strange men are just friends all the other ~this~guys haven't met yet.

Same as ever -- if ILX did this poll about race there would be open warfare.

i can't see the results due to
ZING

:-/

but I bet laurel is otm

i am trying to imagine how this poll could be about race

i've never gotten this, but i get strangers saying racist things to me and expecting me to agree with them.
--Pedro Paramore (jim)

like this

"Did you see that black on that nigger? That is some black-ass nigger."

A. Dude is right, that nigger was DARK.
B. ~This~ guy.
C. Ah, he's harmless.
D. etc

tbf thinking a chick is hot is not sexist, its expressing it in a way that creates a negative environment so they're not quite parallel

hey Laurel, i think you're great, but i hate it when you do this. you could make your point without setting racism and sexism against each other like that; they don't exist discretely like that in the world.

I think the poll results make the point for me, actually. I'm just picking trigger issues that are close to the bosom of ILX to begin with.

i mean, being physically attracted to someone is obv incorporating lots of constructions & such but its also at some level about evolutionary reproduction etc whereas racism is entirely a social construct

still can't see em

what won?

dude is right, that chick was slammin 28
~this~ guy 10
ah he's harmless 4
or you heard him say it, about you! 2
agreed, despicable behavior 2
oh? what if it was yr gf or yr sister he was talking about 0

oh geez guys you're really going for it.

wow! not the results I was expecting! for real!

i guess my point is pretty bad bcuz being ~that~ guy is probably more about ... i dont know what ... insecurity? general corniness? lack of empathy? than it is about actual attraction

Try "ownership."

try "tildes" ("~")

well I sort of assumed that ~this~ guy would win, but i did not expect the lechers to take it.

ugh ZING

ilxors going for the only funny/stupid answer in a poll shocker

I think I could be unclear on who "~this~ guy" is. Is it supposed to be me, subjectively? If so, I mis-voted. I thought it was kinda like, "Get a load of THIS guy. Sheesh. What an asshole."

no kenan, that is what it meant, the guy is an asshole

Laurel sometimes you seem like the only one that makes sense in this entire crazy internet.

good job ilx

a+ on ironically aligning yourself with the creepiest dude in all of minnesota

didn't vote but imo appreciation of others' beauty is not a matter for crude homosocial bonding, hence why i don't participate in the WS thread...in this case it's opportunistic, needless and sinister. i'd probably be like 'no' then move away

im always like *weakly smiles, makes sound like "heh," sprints out of door*

Jesus Christ, Laurel, do you actually have to blatantly offend people who have absolutely nothing to do with this argument to make a point or are you just an idiot?

If I translate it to Dutch the line dude is right, that chick was slammin annoys the fuck out of me. And I do mean ANNOY the HELL out of me. It's extremely demeaning. The choice of words is just plain NO.

But y'know, fuck it, I'm not gonna froth at the mouth when some dude says it to me (like he'd ever say it now).

...this thread

yeah maybe it was a mistake :(

smh...only ilx can fail to see the humor in perfectly normal occurrences

xp no! the key word is "strange man"...that's where the humor is, not in the "yeah dude DIME imo!" *hi five*

xp nah dude it is not your fault it's actually an interesting question and yr poll responses were solid

whew

i really sort of love stuff like this, though, in life. not the creeping i mean but the sheer left-fieldedness

"a creep said x to me" thread goes nowhere

"a creep said x to me DO YOU AGREE Y/N POLL" komedy gold!

basically the way i read the question is like you're walking outta the dry cleaner and some random dude decides to tell you he thinks the chick across the parking lot's got a nice ass. which is just funny in its absurdity, not the whole homosocial let's mark our territory kind of thing

tbf thinking a chick is hot is not sexist, its expressing it in a way that creates a negative environment so they're not quite parallel

― ice cr?m hand job (deej), Monday, November 30, 2009 8:12 PM (Yesterday)

this otm, duh

the strange man is the key part of this poll, not the ass

o jeez guys

which is just funny in its absurdity, not the whole homosocial let's mark our territory kind of thing

right!

haha yeah i love running into moron fuckheads if they aren't harming me in any way

once i was in a hurry to get to a movie. my friend ran into a gas station to use the atm. the guy in front of him opened up a brand new credit card out of the envelope, plugged it into the machine and withdrew several hundred dollars. he turned to my friend and said something like "dude do you see this? fuckin awesome!!" and then split. he cashed the atm out, it was out of order after that. we had to go somewhere else.

that dude did harm me come to think

ok "do you see this fuckin awesome" is hilarious

strange dude is no creep. he's just being a good citizen and making sure i get a chance to check out that ass, just in case i missed it.

yeah the true creep says something to the chick about her ass.

I have never considered a girl's ass my "territory"

well there are all kinds of true creeps to be fair

i can't imagine saying to a woman i don't know at all "i enjoy looking at your ass"

but a woman youre acquainted with

yeah i still wouldn't say it

But y'know, fuck it, I'm not gonna froth at the mouth when some dude says it to me (like he'd ever say it now).

― Nathalie (stevienixed), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 12:52 PM (30 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah yr right he DOES have a kid now

i'll be like thanks strange dude and then give him a thumbs up or down after i've made my assessment.

he, he assessment

lol ASSessment

i think it is acceptable to tell someone yr acquainted with that you enjoy looking at their ass! i mean, if the terms of your acquaintance are such that admiring their ass is an acceptable and even desirable thing!

is this related to singing 'feelin on yo booty' in public at all?

yeah but see i'm not really an ass man

i can't imagine saying to a woman i don't know at all "i enjoy looking at your ass"

I can, if she is leading a donkey by the reins and I am actually a character in a "Naked Gun" movie.

I don't understand how anyone who spends any amount of time here could be surprised about the outcome of this poll; this comment up thread is basically OTM with the caveat that turning it into an anecdote makes it easier to sockpuppet the original dude into a harmless creep: it's like a real life WS thread but with horrible men no one else wants to talk to

where is the option for 'back that ass up'

i like how you verbed sockpuppet xpost

braggin: girl who was friends with my roommate a few years ago apparently described me as "he doesn't talk much but he's got a cute ass and I can't help but stare at it." I have no problem with this afaik.

"pics or it didn't happen"

turning it into an anecdote makes it easier to sockpuppet the original dude into a harmless creep

well yeah

honestly i was just hoping ppl would post their own, weird interactions with strangers sharing their opinions

that aren't reposts from ilx

heyo

tbh I have no idea which side dan took with that post

what about if the ass the strange man is referring to is his own?

ok that would be hilarious

"did you see the ass on that one?" *points to self*

lmao I wish ppl would do this ^

Oh I was trolling to a large degree, no doubt.

no one cares if it was yr gf or sister :/

― harbl, Monday, November 30, 2009 7:27 PM (Yesterday)

was mostly joking when i said that btw
i, for one, am not taking this poll seriously

when guys do this, they're doing it instead of actually approaching the women, it's kind of weird and almost passive-aggressive maybe.

I'll tell a story I love that's relevant here (and b/c though I want to contribute to this thread, I dare not in any other way; it's a tinderbox)

Le Corbusier was at a party with his wife, Yvonne Gallis. She's an odd duck. She's bored at the party, so she walks up to one of the guests and says "L'avez-vous vu ?" [Have you seen it?] The guest doesn't know what she's talking about, and says, "Qui?" She replies, "Mon cul!" [My ass!].

I use that line all the time now, on my generous and loving wife. It never fails to crack me up (my wife is tolerant).

My driving instructor was also a female friend's driving instructor. One day, on learning that we knew each other, he said "That girl's got some HEALTHY legs, don't she?"

when guys do this, they're doing it instead of actually approaching the women, it's kind of weird and almost passive-aggressive maybe.

― jØrdån (omar little), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 2:44 PM (47 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

think this is a better answer than it being about "ownership" (???)

i mean the only guys who have ever done this ime are guys who i figure to be completely, 100% lost around women, so they deal with them through trying to find some common ground with other guys, like "hey we're all in this together, right?"

Pretty sure that it's more common than you think? Much like whatsits in your thingy.

lol omar, thx for explaining the impulse behind the WS threads on 77 so succinctly

trying not to wince at "whatists in your thingy"

I pass guys pretty reg who are discussing other women walking around. So it's not said TO me but I think it's common. Also have had guy friends tell me they're walking w a friend or GF and having strange men congratulate THEM on the female companion's rack/ass/etc.

http://www.tatteredcoat.com/images/heat-pacino-buggy.jpg

i don't think it's uncommon, but i think the strange man walking by is usually some sad-sack looking dude who wants to feel like part of "the brotherhood of men"

Also have had guy friends tell me they're walking w a friend or GF and having strange men congratulate THEM on the female companion's rack/ass/etc.

this is just nuts, i wouldn't even know what to say if someone said that to me.

these are the same guys who think Hank Moody is a rock star, and not a sad, sorry person whose life is in shambles.

Anyway, yes, a good point on thread is that a ~that guy~'s impulse to do this is in a solid relationship to his feelings of disempowerment/alienation from the status quo.

This is how it is about entitlement/ownership: if men feel shut out from a normal or "successful" world, one of the first things they do is band together against outsiders, frequently women, who have less power/lower status and can be safely used to prop up men's egos, even without the woman's knowledge (like when her azz is rated out of her hearing).

- Also have had guy friends tell me they're walking w a friend or GF and having strange men congratulate THEM on the female companion's rack/ass/etc.

- this is just nuts, i wouldn't even know what to say if someone said that to me

you say thank you and get on with your life. i used to date a model and guys would do this to me once in a while. esp at parties. the odd girl would do it too. i never really thought too much of it.

gbx did you, in fact, see "the ass on that one"?

i'd also like to say i think this thread is retarded.
xpost

pretty disrespectful if it's rack and ass comments. i mean general "wow she's really attractive" comments are not a big deal.

i mean the only guys who have ever done this ime are guys who i figure to be completely, 100% lost around women, so they deal with them through trying to find some common ground with other guys, like "hey we're all in this together, right?"

― jØrdån (omar little), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 2:36 PM (43 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

totally otm. i might also sub "around people" for "around women," for the reasons laurel stated (ie dudes are kinda out of the mainstream in general and women are a 'safe' bet for singling out because, hey, they're just chicks right!). that being said, it still seems like the appropriate other guy response to that guy is still just sort of a wan smile or total disregard.

dan, i actually didn't!

yeah that's kinda what i do.

xxx-post i was gonna say, its pretty polite commentary to be like "yr signficant other is attractive" but there really isn;t a male analogue to balance out "i was @_@ yr lady's can". not like any of my wife's friends are like "daaaaaaamn your husband's got some dick on him".

This is how it is about entitlement/ownership: if men feel shut out from a normal or "successful" world, one of the first things they do is band together against outsiders

To be totally clear, this impulse is universal and not unique to men...but when women do it, they aren't able to target the opposite gender because that shit really only rolls downhill one way, and issues of sexual aggressiveness/public embarrassment and definitely physical/sexual risk leave women at a disadvantage every time.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v201/sevenxviii/Irespectyouasaperson.jpg

i hope that marc loi engages in homosocial bonding by going to strip clubs and giving stern lectures to the patrons.

i think if i met marc loi i would feel compelled to say something lewd about a woman's can, just to get the full experience

considering starting a madrigal group called The Marc Loi Experience

i would like to subscribe to yr madrigal group's newsletter

i still kinda object to the "ownership" and racism-equating here. if i see a guy standing on top of the space needle and point it out to a random passerby (recently happened), i am not claiming ownership over the event or person in question. i'm just expressing interest, and sharing that interest, attempting to forge some human connection, however trivial/momentary.

the expression of sexual interest is more complex and socially loaded, but underlying impulse is similarly value-neutral. ~that~ guy sees a woman, and since he doesn't know her and won't approach her, she's abstract to him. because he doesn't know her, she cannot be anything but abstract to him. a shape, an idea, a set of possibilities - some gross, some not. we all "own" our conception of strangers in this sense, but there's nothing wrong with any of it.

in sharing his ass-fancy with some stranger, ~that~ guy attempts to expand his vision out from himself, to forge some human connection with it. since he's not shouting about it or approaching the woman in question, we suppose that he understand the social boundaries involved well enough not inflict himself on her directly. but his crudity is nonetheless off-putting.

i guess i don't see the transgression. to see and to lust is neither right nor wrong, it's simply how human beings work. it'd be nice if we were all more gracious in dealing with this, but we're not, so...

the expression of sexual interest is more complex and socially loaded, but underlying impulse is similarly value-neutral.

disagree

ass-fancy is a little too close to fuck-want

admittedly a better read than cat-fancy

assage

allow me to assage you all

oh god what is this i wield

there's this weird tacit vibe i'm getting that finding someone attractive and wanting to have sex with him or her is an inherently bad or wrong thing

itt a ass man asks if you saw the strange on that one

kevin you should be in church

This is how it is about entitlement/ownership: if men feel shut out from a normal or "successful" world, one of the first things they do is band together against outsiders, frequently women, who have less power/lower status and can be safely used to prop up men's egos, even without the woman's knowledge (like when her azz is rated out of her hearing).

I don't know where to begin with this - "band together against outsiders"?

there's this weird tacit vibe i'm getting that finding someone attractive and wanting to have sex with him or her is an inherently bad or wrong thing

Really struggling w any kind of answer to this, tbh. I don't THINK that's what I'm saying but then again I can remember the few times that someone's appearance has made me think of sex. Usually it just isn't even connected.

the dude is reaching out to another human being because he is sexually and emotionally frustrated. it has nothing to do with asserting or taking advantage of gender status.

I mean obv he is crepey

http://www.ugo.com/lifestyle/school-fashion/images/entries/Band-of-Outsiders-Trench-Coat.jpg

it kinda does

not something that can be easily explained on the internet though bc people will get all "are you saying wanting to have sex w/ someone is BAD?!?!?!"

tbf they would irl too but it's different

Curtis, that is just not true. Given the existing ugh...power? I don't know the approved academic words for this -- disparity between genders, it's not even possible! When men perve on women to other men, esp women doing nothing more than minding their own business in public, it is about having the right to make them a thing, a body part, to other people!

I can remember the few times that someone's appearance has made me think of sex

i can remember the 10+ times today that someone's appearance has made me think of sex.

FACTS
XP?

Maybe I was being a little hyperbolic w the "band together" thing but that seems like a human nature 101 thing to me, that when under perceived threat, people pull their personal or group identities inward to exclude those who might be part of the threat or at least are Not Like Them. That guy who shot a bunch of women in a gym is the extreme of this, but basically talking about women on the street is like the "harmless" end of the same thing. Not actually harmless at all of course.

When men perve on women to other men, esp women doing nothing more than minding their own business in public, it is about having the right to make them a thing, a body part, to other people!

do you think this is still true if a man is talking to a close (male or female) friend? just curious.

it's hard for me to conceptualize sexual interest and/or the desire to express that interest as good or bad, right or wrong. that's what i meant by "underlying impulse".

understand that some forms of real-world sexual expression are socially undesirable (perhaps threatening or even harmful), therefore appropriately shunned or even punished. but it's perfectly okay to desire and to wish to express it, right? it seems to me that people desire and objectify not because they want to or choose to or are taught to, but simply because they do. because that is the way the human animal works.

i would fault ~this~ guy for the crudity and thoughtlessness of his attempted camaraderie, but not for anything else.

if only ~those~ guys would sack up and respectfully approach the women they find so attractive maybe there'd be more love in this fucked-up little world

i was gonna post the ready or not scene where the disgusting jr high boys give rates out of 10 to all the girls that walk down the hallway by their locker but the clip is like 10 mins long

i would fault ~this~ guy for the crudity and thoughtlessness of his attempted camaraderie, but not for anything else.

^^

and the crudity has a lot to do with what laurel is saying - but I don't think that secretly thinking "dude is right, that chick was slammin" puts you at the same fault as creepy dude

~8===D~

do you think this is still true if a man is talking to a close (male or female) friend? just curious.

Not sure, Jordan. I guess at least if you say smething to a friend, you presumably know how that will be received by the other person; you aren't just assuming that they're gonna be down with it cos they have a penis, for instance, like it's something universal that all men share.

crutidy

what if the strange man was saying "did you see the ass on that one?" to a super butch chick about another chick

and i'll post the gilmore girls episode where lorelai rates the pizza delivery guys on a scale of 10, come on xp

(I hope my saying chick so much is not bad form itt)

if only ~those~ guys would sack up and respectfully approach the women they find so attractive maybe there'd be more love in this fucked-up little world

Were you there when I started panicking b/c I coulnd't get pizza place guy to leave me alone while I was waiting for my order last night? :( I shouldn't have panicked I guess but he was ignoring ALL my social cues to stop being familiar w me, and he kept getting closer and closer.

"did you see the crazy guy with the tinfoil on his head?"
"no, and I totally see through your attempy to objectify him due to your sense of exclusion from society, crepe."

really, ~that~ guy COULD be doing what Laurel is saying, but to categorically say ALL such guys who do that are is bad sociology 101.

That guy who shot a bunch of women in a gym is the extreme of this, but basically talking about women on the street is like the "harmless" end of the same thing. Not actually harmless at all of course.

― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 3:23 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

no. i do not accept this. this is a wrongheaded and terribly, terribly pernicious way to conceptualize male sexual desire and the communication of such. to see and to desire is basic, absolutely basic, to the human psyche. to attempt to communicate this desire to someone "safe", someone who presumably will not object to the expression, is the most natural and harmless thing in the world.

is there a sort of "us and them" conceptualizing going on in the though-process that chooses another man as the "safe" object of such communication? sure. but it is again perfectly natural, normal and harmless.

it has NOTHING to do with the radical sort of psychotic alienation that would lead someone to shoot a bunch of people. we can compare the two things in an abstract sense as they're both examples of dividing people into mental groups, but beyond that the comparison is horribly unfair.

I guess part of the panic is my reluctance to be bald-faced rude about it, I keep hoping that you know, being frosty will send the msg, cos I don't want to go over the edge in public and start yelling at people.

this is one of those things that i feel like is deeply ingrained in what dudes do all the time and it's one of those things that might creep women out even when it's casual and harmless, but we can't really imagine why or how it would be creepy. it's likely just one of those things women catch just on the periphery as they're passing by, but it weirds them out, and over time it just builds into this thing where you start to feel like guys like this are just repulsive.

gear once more bringing truth to mayhem

yeah. i agree that there's a weird complicity involved in a stranger doing this, but would fight for my right to engage in general smash-talk with friends.

xxxp

like it's something universal that all men share.

some guys are like that, though. esp ~that~ guy ie obnoxious gregarious guy. they're always making comments about the bonehead play the local quarterback made or how their old lady is raggin on them and you know how that goes, my man har har.

There does seem to be an "us against them" dynamic in this kind of behavior, but it doesn't have to be rooted in a perceived threat. More often than not, I think ~these guys~ just don't know how to relate to women on an equal civil level, and they probably take their cues from pop-culture depictions of the two sexes as separate alien species.

this is one of those things that i feel like is deeply ingrained in what dudes do all the time and it's one of those things that might creep women out even when it's casual and harmless, but we can't really imagine why or how it would be creepy. it's likely just one of those things women catch just on the periphery as they're passing by, but it weirds them out, and over time it just builds into this thing where you start to feel like guys like this are just repulsive.

Truth. I am getting like nervous and cry-y just thinking about the pressure that I feel from the behavior discussed in this thread.

i don't feel like most guys that say shit to you in public places feel threatened. though feeling threatened is sometimes an element of sexist behavior.

yeah. i agree that there's a weird complicity involved in a stranger doing this, but would fight for my right to engage in general smash-talk with friends.

tbh my stance is that there is a line which dudes have gotta learn. many choose not to. crossing this line is an act of mild sexual terrorism, rising to rape. fostering a gang mentality regarding the treatment of women creates a situation where men can act (initially talk, then physically behave) in a sexually barbaric manner. ~this~ dude approaching you is the first step on this ladder.

hence i can totally see where laurel, harbl etc are coming from.

I get nervous and cry-y when I think about the possibility of approaching the opposite sex because I'm worried that they will think I am a creepy dude

Plus, I love doing this with girls about guys, too.

crut i don't have the impression you should worry

i talk about women all the time with my male friends, and banter about it with my female friends sometimes too, but i think you just have to be respectful. that public ogling shit, the "hey bro you see that one?", i dunno...it does weird me out when i'm drawn into it.

take her, dude

in a way, i see the caveman communication of desire for profoundly alienated people as a kind of relief valve. they're all alone in their heads and trapped with this sense of frustrated longing - unless they can share it with someone else. it's a way of easing the burden, of turning separation into a cause for community.

of course, there are solo rapists, who don't even need a social or family situation to terrorise women (admittedly, their problems may have begun in such situations). these people scare me the most, but they aren't nearly so widespread. most rape is familial/social.

i think gear/other hoos/omar little/whatever we're calling him these days regularly displays class and discernment on threads like these - heed him imo

also i <3 contenderizer's awesome overthinking - never change, sincerely, plus your ponderings on my username have been noted and <3'd

Laurel's mention of cues missed at the pizza joint is quite important here. Sometimes, girls want to be flirted with, quite saucily, even, and others they want absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with you. It's really quite easy most of the time to figure this out and quite quickly.

a situation where men can act (initially talk, then physically behave) in a sexually barbaric manner.

Thanks, LJ - I know I am hard on you but in this case you've got what I was trying to say.

Also, the thing about the psychotic shooter guy -- it's documented that he thought men had the right to act in a certain proprietary way toward women, and that he was being denied that right based on not being man enough, or successful enough, and so on. His resentment at being shut out of something that was his "right" is what directed the nature of his violence. Would he still be a paranoid nut under other circs? Well I mean, probably? But killing women for this reason is fed by the same impulse as belitting women/acting like their bodies and sexuality are "yours" to publicly evaluate because you can't "have" them but you can talk about them and make them feel like shit.

It's way to "have" them without their permission or even involvement.

this thread is alternately hilarious and frightening

if there's one lesson i've applied over the years (a lesson i don't apply anymore these days being that i'm taken), it's that if i am unsure whether or not a girl wants to be flirted with, i choose to not flirt.

It's really quite easy most of the time to figure this out and quite quickly.

not if your social signals are the only ones that matter - it is a matter of broadmindedness, and awareness of everyone's individuality, incl one's own - don't fall prey to the idea of self as purely sexual being, the typical 'horny lad' out for a fuck, who cannot be stopped by flood nor fire - you are a thinking, malleable beast with cares, not a penile battering-ram

is there a rolling feminism thread btw? serious question

another thing about a lot of ~these guys~ (not all) is that they will make sure the girl hears it, or they don't care if the girl hears it.

it's that if i am unsure whether or not a girl wants to be flirted with, i choose to not flirt.

Why bother flirting with someone who doesn't want to flirt back?

you are a thinking, malleable beast with cares, not a penile battering-ram

I curse you character limit feature

don't fall prey to the idea of self as purely sexual being, the typical 'horny lad' out for a fuck, who cannot be stopped by flood nor fire - you are a thinking, malleable beast with cares, not a penile battering-ram don't fall prey to the idea of self as purely sexual being, the typical 'horny lad' out for a fuck, who cannot be stopped by flood nor fire - you are a thinking, malleable beast with cares, not a penile battering-ram don't fall prey to the idea of self as purely sexual being, the typical 'horny lad' out for a fuck, who cannot be stopped by flood nor fire - you are a thinking, malleable beast with cares, not a penile battering-ram don't fall prey to the idea of self as purely sexual being, the typical 'horny lad' out for a fuck, who cannot be stopped by flood nor fire - you are a thinking, malleable beast with cares, not a penile battering-ram don't fall prey to the idea of self as purely sexual being, the typical 'horny lad' out for a fuck, who cannot be stopped by flood nor fire - you are a thinking, malleable beast with cares, not a penile battering-ram don't fall prey to the idea of self as purely sexual being, the typical 'horny lad' out for a fuck, who cannot be stopped by flood nor fire - you are a thinking, malleable beast with cares, not a penile battering-ram

it has sort of worked tho xp

Anybody who says it in such a way that the girl hears it should say it directly to her face. That way she can smile or tell you to fuck yourself but at least you've made your admiration public in adirect way and allowed her the dignity to respond how she sees fit.

It wouldn't really creep me out if some insanely well porportioned, incredibly well-dressed, or otherwise very noteworthy person was pointed out to me - almost as an exclamation - but I do rather find it annoying when I am afterwards supposed to agree, deny or otherwise give a fuck what some stranger thinks.

Anybody who says it in such a way that the girl hears it should say it directly to her face. That way she can smile or tell you to fuck yourself but at least you've made your admiration public in adirect way and allowed her the dignity to respond how she sees fit.

Yes but past a certain level of disrespect/crudity/impropriety, just doing THIS is an assault of a kind.

Of course.

there is a line which dudes have gotta learn. many choose not to. crossing this line is an act of mild sexual terrorism, rising to rape. fostering a gang mentality regarding the treatment of women creates a situation where men can act (initially talk, then physically behave) in a sexually barbaric manner. ~this~ dude approaching you is the first step on this ladder.

― a. cole, u thic (acoleuthic), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 3:36 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark

i agree with this. helps me see what laurel was getting at. BUT. you could put that "first step" anywhere. you could put it at looking at a woman for a moment too long. (being ridiculous but bear with me.) the social line that separates acceptable from unacceptable expressions of sexual interest is not absolute. it's a cultural construct and it wavers all the time. it varies from culture to culture and even varies within any given culture depending on circumstance.

it may be that ~this~ guy is behaving in a transgressive, aggressive manner. i've seen that happen a lot - supposedly "casual" sexual banter from creepy strangers that DOES seem to sublimate hostility. but i've seen it be just sad, poorly socialized weirdos trying to reach out in a manner that isn't at all abnormal in their little cultural niche. so i'm loathe to judge the hypthetical.

Yes but past a certain level of disrespect/crudity/impropriety, just doing THIS is an assault of a kind.

But a world where no-one ever dared to pay someone, even a random
stranger, would be a very lonely and grim place, indeed. Plus I think this is very much a situationalist thing; it depends on the culture, on the kind of person, on how they're dressed, how they move, what expression is on their face, what kind of neighborhood it is, etc...

For the record, I've never been raped or even attacked/physically assaulted. I can't begin to imagine where your comfort line with this kind of shit shifts to after you have. I figure I might as well make the arguments now while I still can, eh?

it's hard out here for a laurel

It's really quite easy most of the time to figure this out and quite quickly.

don't remember who said this, but i don't think it's true at all. it's easy for me, but it wasn't when i was younger. and i don't think it EVER gets easy for some people. their social sense is lacking or distorted due to nature and/or nurture, and they just can't sort it out. they're handicapped, basically, though in a way that's not usually recognized. this is why they're alienated weirdos in the first place, and why they're liable to express themselves in ways that make others uncomfortable.

I've known a few people who have been attacked and they often find it hard to talk about it without being triggered into flashbacks or worse.

Contenderizer, I think the first step is any kind of approach. It can be a verbal approach. But any kind of unasked or unwanted approach, any kind of sexual familiarisation with the 'target', is the first step. Even if they're maladjusted, it's bad news. Your latest post is sadly OTM, though.

but I do rather find it annoying when I am afterwards supposed to agree, deny or otherwise give a fuck what some stranger thinks.

Yeah, the presumptuousness is what's off-putting to me: the notion that should I happen to agree that the chick was slammin', then that somehow aligns me with him and his worldview, which doesn't take into account the possibility that, beyond our shared appreciation for the woman's appearance, I might have more in common with her than with him.

yes

I think I'm responding partly to the fact that I see and hear this kind of male behavior a lot, contenderizer, and not from people who are considered weird or alienated by their peers. If anything, I wd think the men of ILX are probably MORE likely to be uncomfortable w ~that guy~ than the average male adult person in this country, let's say. But in my life, it's kind of normal for me to witness comments, or have them directed at me, and other men to laugh and/or join in. So...yeah.

totally get where yr coming from, laurel. i'm a guy, so i don't live in a world that's threatening in this regard, and it's therefore easy for me to be all abstract about stuff like this. maybe that sucks, i dunno...

This is prob one of those situational/cultural things that people are talking about. But it's also about class, and race, and poverty, and other stuff.

is there a rolling feminism thread btw? serious question

i disagree w/ the idea of a 'rolling feminism thread' in the sense that it should be a sorta constant mindset on ilx at some level

i mean, if someone had something they wanted to discuss about feminism specifically as a concept that makes sense, but in the context of this thread it seems reasonable to bring it up in this thread

I figure I might as well make the arguments now while I still can, eh?

dude really?

why they're liable to express themselves in ways that make others uncomfortable.

socially inept or not turning girls into porn is p creepy i mean

is there a rolling feminism thread btw? serious question

there are many informative threads by famous ilx feminism theorist Calum Wadell

yeah deej this is a good thread imo for all its flaws but i mean a thread to collect news issues, personal revelations, good bits of feminist writing, marc loi in

and discuss why sarah haskins is so great

we already have no boys allowed in the room

^^^not enough marc loi content

xp ...which is about make-up, mostly.

i would not like to have such a thread though. i would like to not segregate that stuff, what deej said

that is a good point, i have to admit. it should inform every social-issue ilx thread. although sometimes people do write/say very good things directly relating to feminism which might not get posted to ilx otherwise.

btw i have no hesitation in describing sarah haskins as my #1 (well, pretty much my only) celebrity crush - i hope that does not make me ~this~ guy

the first step is any kind of approach. It can be a verbal approach. But any kind of unasked or unwanted approach, any kind of sexual familiarisation with the 'target', is the first step. Even if they're maladjusted, it's bad news. Your latest post is sadly OTM, though.

― a. cole, u thic (acoleuthic), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 4:01 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark

yeah, but that only applies when we conceive of sexual aggression in an entirely negative light. it IS negative in many circumstances, but it's also what allows humans to sexually connect with one another. the combination of moderate sexual aggression (on someone's part) and mutual sexual interest is what makes sex happen.

we're all allowed to make the "first step", right? to bare our teeth a little (so to speak), at the right time and in the right place. and the social rules that define right time & place are mutable, change a lot between groups. all of which we negotiate pretty easily if we're moderately attractive and socially skilled.

if not, we're creeps. our mildly aggressive first steps repulse people and we're reduced to commenting on strange asses outside liquor stores. all of which is too kind, because some of these guys would do worse, much worse, if they felt like they could get away with it. hell, some of these guys ARE much worse. but i don't like the suggestion that "the first step" is necessarily pointed towards something awful.

there are dudes who are creeps who are also socially skilled & pretty

lj you could start threads to discuss a particular person or article! no one is stopping you

There's such thing as an honourable approach. It comes through gauging both the circumstances and the individual one has chanced upon. It is manifested by an instant and PERSONAL revealing of oneself as interested or affable party. Thus, not so much an 'approach' in the predatory sense as a commingling of selves. There's a subtle difference. When the affability is a mask for creepiness, then that there is trouble. Women often learn to spot this type, but sometimes they don't. :(

Harbl, I guess!

there are dudes who are creeps who are also socially skilled & pretty

http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/Gavin_Newsom_Oggling.jpg

I think the best way to respond to this is to engage in debate with that man, make it clear to him how his taste in asses sucks, "that one" does not possess a good ass, certainly not as good as the one on your ex! In fact ass-men are all latent homosexuals anyway trying to sublimate their homosexuality in faux-appreciation of the female rear.

lol ok i'm out

but i don't like the suggestion that "the first step" is necessarily pointed towards something awful.

I think there's a bit of self-protection in stuff like the poll results, based on exactly what you're talking about -- because you recognize SOME part of the impulse in your perfectly normal behavior, and you don't want yourself to be classed as crepey and wrong, so there's a natural tendency to want to make sure a space is left open for the more defensible facets of the behavior.

But this is kind of what I was mad about yesterday when the poll results came in, b/c men who mean the best of the possible end up justifying the worst of the possible sometimes b/c they're conflicted about it. Just because YOU wouldn't doesn't mean people don't.

yeah totally

there are dudes who are creeps who are also socially skilled & pretty

― ice cr?m hand job (deej), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 4:19 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark

yeh, no argument. i'd formed a (possibly inaccurate) mental picture of ~this~ guy based on my own real-world experience of liquor store commenters of various sorts, and that's what i was talking about. sketchy, clingy, sad/creepy street folk.

Well fair enough, that's what this thread was orig about. But the rush to be as jokey as possible about it in a way that, if it were even like 30% truly what ILX guys really thought, would be fostering an attitude that endangers women...it really burned my shit up.

I think there's a bit of self-protection in stuff like the poll results, based on exactly what you're talking about -- because you recognize SOME part of the impulse in your perfectly normal behavior, and you don't want yourself to be classed as crepey and wrong, so there's a natural tendency to want to make sure a space is left open for the more defensible facets of the behavior.

― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 4:24 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark

i, i don't know what to say. i thought i answered the way i did because the "slammin" answer was so retarded and awful, thus kinda funny. dumb shit, what can i say.

the word "defensible" bugs me cuz there's nothing to defend. the behavior i'm talking about is right and natural and god-fearing. the baby jesus smiles upon it. and the guy in question is totally being a horrible creep, no question. hope i haven't implied otherwise.

btw i have no hesitation in describing sarah haskins as my #1 (well, pretty much my only) celebrity crush - i hope that does not make me ~this~ guy

I saw her pantsless a few months ago.

(U.S. pants, not U.K. pants.)

i know - you're like a friend of hers - i am p-envious as cankles or ~this~ guy might put it

lj.xls o_O

Yeah, I know xxxp. ILX likes to be as ironic/noize as possible about everything in the world EXCEPT race, because people like DP and others make sure that reasonable boundaries stay up, and call people out on missteps, etc. hs, this is why I tend to compare racism and sexism on ILX -- NOT out in the world, where yes, they function very differently.

Nobody patrols ILX for gender issues/sexism, and it gets left to the "so ironic cos we're over it/past it as modern enlightened people" that it goes full force into "so disgusting that it's automagically hilarious" but then when THAT tone is considered normal, there's nothing to set it apart from what people really think and I just get worn down and sick feeling.

i think ilx is pretty good on gender issues - like better than most non-feminism-specific sites i've seen; there are a few noisy exceptions but the main caucus of regulars evince progressive and gender-equal viewpoints AFAICT

if i am wrong then i would be delighted to see and assist in the denunciation of counter-examples!

uh oh

No, I'm not at all interested in that. I mean the WS thread has already been brought up a few times here, no one needs me to do that again.

what about when there's a woman who is exceptionally gorgeous and two guys are noticing that they're both noticing her hotness and they give one another a knowing look/smile? is that egregious/threatening, Laurel?

it's kind of gay?

otm

:)

is there going to be a whole thing itt of cooking up champagne commercial scenarios to see if laurel is so hysterical that she would denounce them

or actually i don't know this board well enough to know who knows each other and is joking nvm if that is the case

otm, cut it out, and also lol @ "champagne commercial scenarios"

xpost that was otm to your first post, ABC

again, similar to seeing a really crazy person, it's an object of note in your common environment. "whew boy get a load of that one". i mean to go out of your way to acknowledge it to a stranger is weird, yes.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v201/sevenxviii/Irespectyouasaperson.jpg

lol I'd never noticed the time elapsed between these posts before

filling the awkward "silence"

*respects you furiously*

fwiw, laurel, i might have voted the same way in yr hypothetical race poll. not cuz i'm so ironically superior, but cuz it's hard to take polls seriously. especially when they're serious.

and i'm not liable to snicker at noise-style "mock" sexist bullshit. i occasionally make crass jokes about all kinds of stuff, but i think i know where to draw the line. ymmv, of course...

i fundamentally object to the idea that ~this~ guy's grody expression of ass-lust must be seen as a kind of evil. he's a blank slate, after all. we can imagine him as a hostile, predatory pervert waiting to strike - or as a sad, neglected nobody reaching out awkwardly for affirmation. or both, i dunno. it probably says something about me that i default to the latter.

(fwiw it is amusing that after all, the only bits of loi we fundamentally needed were those first two posts, and the first sentence of the third one crutis originally posted)

*respects you furiously*

― bnw, Tuesday, December 1, 2009 5:11 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark

holy lol

i don't want to shock you but you are ~~overthinking some shit~~

― I wanna change your name to mrs. smash (some dude), Saturday, April 4, 2009 8:08 AM (7 months ago)

@ thread

*respects you furiously*

― bnw, Tuesday, December 1, 2009 5:11 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark

ahahahahahahahahaha

woah. I have been away from the internet all day. Can someone kindly explain what has transpired here? TIA.

haha, i thought the same thing, but i'm just gonna say "omar has been otm"

xp people overanalyzed stuff; no one was really "wrong" or "offtm" yet everyone carried on anyway

itt a strange man asks you if you saw the results on that poll

Yeah I'm just not sure why that caused this thread explosion. *shrugs* Will read later. Too tired atm.

clue: there are a lot of posts from myself :D

to be honest, gbx's advice about omar little being bang-on is itself accurate; other hoos played a stunning hand

Oy. I should have known. OK maybe I will just read Omar's posts.

2nd omar's consummate otmsmanship throughout

or 9th or whatever

if you really want to save time, just read my posts itt

new poster "rise" had a good argument as well

OK now I might as well read the whole damn thing.

OK I sort of skimmed it but think contenderizer made some good points as well namely:

i fundamentally object to the idea that ~this~ guy's grody expression of ass-lust must be seen as a kind of evil. he's a blank slate, after all. we can imagine him as a hostile, predatory pervert waiting to strike - or as a sad, neglected nobody reaching out awkwardly for affirmation. or both, i dunno. it probably says something about me that i default to the latter.

This is actually extremely interesting to me. Especially the following comment:

I've never been raped or even attacked/physically assaulted. I can't begin to imagine where your comfort line with this kind of shit shifts to after you have.

I have been assaulted and this whole issue doesn't bother me nearly as much. Sure this happens and it's sort of gross but I don't find it that threatening and it would never make me teary eyed. IDK I just sort of figure that dudes who catcall women are either losers or idiots who should go fuck themselves so I don't really worry about it. I have enough to worry about it already. Why let those assholes get to me?

That probably doesn't make much sense and I realize it's not much of an argument but it's late and I'm tired and that was my initial reaction.

Nobody patrols ILX for gender issues/sexism, and it gets left to the "so ironic cos we're over it/past it as modern enlightened people" that it goes full force into "so disgusting that it's automagically hilarious" but then when THAT tone is considered normal, there's nothing to set it apart from what people really think and I just get worn down and sick feeling.

― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 7:39 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark

OK I can understand this and it's a fair point. I guess I just try not to take anything on ILX or anywhere else on the internet so seriously that I would let it bother me.

And maybe I'm in the wrong and should have higher standards regarding these issues it just doesn't seem like that big of deal to me in this context tbh.

well, i think the equation is shaky, too. racism = racism, but i don't know that ~this~ guy's behavior is best understood as simple sexism. that's part of it, sure, but looking and wanting and even objectifying aren't necessarily sexist, nor is expressing desire in an uncivil manner.

it's more complex than that, and reducing it to an insistent "that's sexist and wrong, and you're wrong to disagree!" only polarizes the discussion.

Yes exactly. You've just articulated what I would have liked to say if I weren't mentally exhausted right now.

but looking and wanting and even objectifying aren't necessarily sexist, nor is expressing desire in an uncivil manner.

^^ this

yes

but looking and wanting and even objectifying aren't necessarily sexist, nor is expressing desire in an uncivil manner.

this is academic, imo

funny too because my argument there is basically that while you are all correct on that point, it isn't generally the case as it happens: there is a (perceived) high correlation between actual creeps and the kind of person that says gross stuff, as opposed to just plain socially isolated but well meaning weirdos that say gross stuff. they're out there, but i'd say that most of the ppl that have given unsolicited sexual observations might actually have some issues with, like, women. which is unfair, but it works as a functional rubric. some might be normal, respectable ppl with temporary confessional breaches, but most aren't.

anyway: that kind of shorthand ("~that guy~ is usually a crepe") is definitely a cousin to the same shit that underwrites your more casual racial/sexual/whatever comments (or jokes, really). probably not a valuable irony, but w/e, it seems like it explains a lot of our defense mechanisms!

there is a (perceived) high correlation between actual creeps and the kind of person that says gross stuff

CASE IN POINT: my AP english teacher who flirted inna skeezy professorial way with the girls. one day i was having a mandated one-on-one talk with him up at his desk about the paper we'd had to turn in that week, and his Primary Lust Object #1 walked by the desk on her way to the pencil sharpener and then back again, and he made this show of watching her the whole time and then turned back to me and smirked a little and said, "sorry, got distracted." and i just wanted my little conference with him to be OVER NOW.

like, what 40-something dude thinks you can say that shit to a 17-yr-old and i won't still remember it 22 years later? did he think i would think he was being all cool and manly? was it supposed to be a bonding moment? ugh.

there is a (perceived) high correlation between actual creeps and the kind of person that says gross stuff, as opposed to just plain socially isolated but well meaning weirdos that say gross stuff. they're out there, but i'd say that most of the ppl that have given unsolicited sexual observations might actually have some issues with, like, women. which is unfair, but it works as a functional rubric.

― crazy farting throwback jersey (gbx), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 9:43 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark

totally agree w this.

plus tipsy's story is super gross. glad that i pretty much always had smart, cool, reasonable-boundary-observing teachers.

IDK I just sort of figure that dudes who catcall women are either losers or idiots who should go fuck themselves so I don't really worry about it.

I guess, EN! Realizing now that I feel like men's...thoughts about me (hypothetically) affect me personally -- that I'm dishonored and made less if what they think is disrespectful or plain gross or whatever. Because they'll think of that whenever they see me, and if I have to deal with them, I can't take the time to worry about that behind-the-scenes and still get what I need from the exchange (courtesy, help, customer service, etc).

But also repugnant to me just because I've given them no reason to take that license and it's frustrating-to-the-point-of-panic to me that my image(?) isn't within my control no matter how circumspectly *I* behave. I guess because I was taught that if YOU do the right things, others will too and you'll be safe. Which is awfully silly, now that I think about it.

looking and wanting and even objectifying aren't necessarily sexist, nor is expressing desire in an uncivil manner.

I can't accept any of that. Incivility by men toward women IS sexist, if it's more than simple human rudeness and takes her sex or appearance into account. If you use a woman's discomfort with being publicly sexualized to influence her behavior/reaction, THAT IS SEXIST.

oh man, tipsy's story reminds me of the English teacher I had in 11th and 12th grade who would low-level flirt with the girls in class; we thought it was essentially harmless until he divorced his wife and married his daughter's best friend, after which it became retrospectively gross.

Then there's the opposite direction, like the choir director who was coerced by a group of junior women into taking his shirt off so they could count the hairs on his back; I kind of don't even want to know how that all came about. Oh, and the female teacher who attempted to cover up an affair with a student by faking brain cancer. (gbx, weren't you actually there when that happened?)

(sorry for straying off into "my fucking high school" territory)

Yeah, I had a HS math teacher who gave me the creeps and was a bully (also one of the football coaches -- surprise!) and whose wife coached the cheerleading squad. One day she had all the cheerleaders over to her house for a sleepover. You can imagine where this is going, because it's basically the plot of every porn ever.

I think the point being argued is that this:

us(ing) a woman's discomfort with being publicly sexualized to influence her behavior/reaction

is not actually a goal on the minds of the people doing this. Catcalls yes, but what is being discussed here is closer to the impulse that drives people to partake in celebrity gossip than anything else; you are making idle chatter/judgments about someone that would completely mortify you if they got back to the subject.

Dang. I had a HS math teach who was a football coach and had made some unusual wink-nudgey comments to me about how Dark Side of the Moon was really meant to be heard in quadrophonic stereo. After the graduation ceremony, he propositioned one of my classmates.

Laurel - I do understand where you're coming from. I reread what I'd posted last night and made a mental note not to post when exhausted. Want to write more but have to go to work now. ugh. Maybe later.

I told the story of how my Spanish teacher asked me out after I transferred out of his class, right? (well actually that's pretty much the entire story, so if I didn't before I just did now)

Catcalls yes, but what is being discussed here is closer to the impulse that drives people to partake in celebrity gossip than anything else; you are making idle chatter/judgments about someone that would completely mortify you if they got back to the subject.

― Huckabee Jesus lifeline (HI DERE), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 9:47 AM (39 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i dont know if this is always true--a lot of "check out the ass on that one" comments (ime) are made with the full intent of being heard by the subject

Yeah, this is where I go into "unfair semantic distinction" mode and say that if you are intending the person to hear it, you are catcalling.

Nobody patrols ILX for gender issues/sexism, and it gets left to the "so ironic cos we're over it/past it as modern enlightened people" that it goes full force into "so disgusting that it's automagically hilarious" but then when THAT tone is considered normal, there's nothing to set it apart from what people really think and I just get worn down and sick feeling.

― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 7:39 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark

OK I can understand this and it's a fair point. I guess I just try not to take anything on ILX or anywhere else on the internet so seriously that I would let it bother me.

― bear say hi to me (ENBB), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 11:05 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
And maybe I'm in the wrong and should have higher standards regarding these issues it just doesn't seem like that big of deal to me in this context tbh.

― bear say hi to me (ENBB), Tuesday, December 1, 2009 11:09 PM (Yesterday)

yeah this is a t bomb and sort of the elephant in the room in that whole discussion

Yeah, this is where I go into "unfair semantic distinction" mode and say that if you are intending the person to hear it, you are catcalling.

― Huckabee Jesus lifeline (HI DERE), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 9:52 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

o ok well thats fair then--fwiw all of these things are creepy so

oh I was DERE dan

also lol at Spanish teacher, I know who tha is ...

Dan my experience is strongly that men mean for you to hear it and also use it to reaffirm their bonds w one another. Catcalling IS a group behavior, or at least a public one, meant either for other men to hear and identify with, or to make a specific woman afraid/uncomfortable. Or on a bonus day, both!! This distinction is pretty meaningless to me because I think people who will do either are happy to do both if the opportunity arises.

my experience is strongly that men mean for you to hear it

Your experience is based only on the ones that you've heard though.

My experience is that the guys who actually mean for women to hear it are either drunk and trying to be funny or flat-out assholes that are actually disliked by or massive embarrassments to their friends who are not dislikable embarrassments.

The only way a woman can be included in that dynamic, or have status in that group, is to accept and show that she's okay with her image/self being sexualized by everyone freely, without her having any control over it -- that it's just The Way Things Are. I guess some women are more okay with this system than others -- Southern Belle Syndrome and so on. Me, it makes me want to vomit.

as long as we're sharting creepy teacher stories: my science teacher in eighth grade always made pretty weirdly sexual comments to this one friend of ours, usually in front of the class. we weren't at the age where we could really parse how fucked up it really was, but suffice it to say that i wasn't exactly surprised (though i was sad) to hear about a year ago that he'd been fired on grounds of sexual harassment of students and dumped by his wife

errr......."sharing"

bathetic typos

I assumed the strange man in the story did not want the woman to hear it

looking and wanting and even objectifying aren't necessarily sexist, nor is expressing desire in an uncivil manner.

I can't accept any of that. Incivility by men toward women IS sexist, if it's more than simple human rudeness and takes her sex or appearance into account. If you use a woman's discomfort with being publicly sexualized to influence her behavior/reaction, THAT IS SEXIST.

― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 9:38 AM (27 minutes ago)

see we still can't understand what the hell you really mean when you make these huge sweeping statements s/a "i can't accept ANY of this". you really think that looking at and wanting someone of the opposite sex is sexist?? the latter part i get

xp crut otm too

i dont think what laurels saying is really all that weird? let me put it another way: "if you are a jerk to someone in such a way that their sex or appearance is a major component of your jerkiness, you are being sexist"

"expressing desire in an uncivil manner" = "being a jerk to someone in such a way that their sex or appearance is a major component of your jerkiness"

us(ing) a woman's discomfort with being publicly sexualized to influence her behavior/reaction

is not actually a goal on the minds of the people doing this.

do you really think we're supposed to care what the goal is? i mean if it's obviously just a socially inept person trying to flirt with you it might be easy to decide it's harmless and walk away, but in general with guys on the street or public transit (or whatever, even guys you work with) i don't believe they usually say things thinking "yeah i'm gonna make this girl want to crawl into a hole." but it doesn't matter, you can tell sometimes that making people uncomfortable excites them on an unconscious level. that or they can't recognize discomfort or link visible discomfort to actual fear. it happens too much to just be like oh, he's just trying to be nice. who cares.

yes, that part i understand and sympathize with. i was incredulous that she's so offended that people find others attractive

i made that point earlier and harbl was 100% right to call me out on strawmanning, but now laurel's ACTUALLY saying it

xp

k3vin: No, that's fair, I can't really touch on the first part at all b/c I don't think about sex when I see attractive people around me. Or if I do, it only occurs to me as "I wonder if that would make me think 'x' if I were a man?" sort of speculation, because "appearance" doesn't make contact with "sex" in my brain without a lot of intermediary ideas, so sometimes I wonder what it's like.

just to contextualize, a woman who experiences this has experienced many instances of it before, sometimes accompanied by continued verbal harrassment/physical assault/threat. we can't tell if we don't know you that you're not a rapist, you know?

I don't want men to think of me like that, and threads like this make me want to crawl into a hole because it seems like all men want this to be the case secretly even if they seem polite. Sorry it's my personal issue.

o harbl said it better

I mean if that's the case then I'm not safe anywhere, is my emotional reaction.

okie dokie, i think you're in for a lifelong uphill battle if you're going to be constantly worried about who's looking at you and who's thinking what, but i understand you on a basic level

xps

haha k3v it wasn't just you in particular!

show that she's okay with her image/self being sexualized by everyone freely, without her having any control over it

How, exactly, does one have control over someone else's reactions to one?

Well the polite and "right" thing to do is to NEVER MENTION IT, duh. Flirtation is transgressive in this way, it invites people to cross the line of what is polite, it makes a different space where that is okay. That's why it's exciting on a lot of levels. But outside of a mutually entered-into place for that, it's offensive to me.

Okay not offensive like oh I dunno, genocide or something, but it's unwelcome, let's say.

That's possibly a better way of putting it than a 'commingling of selves' but yeah!

How, exactly, does one have control over someone else's reactions to one?

Obv you can't! But since you can't, the right thing for the other person to do is to never let on that this is happening. Because if it's unwelcome, you have no recourse, and that puts you in an unworkable situation.

So harbl, you kind of glossed over the subsequent post where I said that the people who are catcalling (ie, making lewd comments intended to be overheard by the target) are in fact exactly the type of creepy ass you guys are condemning. I think there's also a fair point to be made that making these types of comments without the intention of being overheard is also rude; this is why I likened it to gossiping. I'm not trying to excuse the behavior as much as I'm attempting to reframe it in a context that makes more sense than "men are attempting to control women via their sexiness".

xp: Laurel that is never, ever, ever going to happen.

idk if this is any consolation laurel, but men asking other men if you saw the ass on that one is still considered "not acceptable guy behavior" AFAIK, and it would never occur to many men (including myself) to do so in the first place.

Really, because that to me is normal polite behavior. It's the basic minimum in the workplace and among my social groups, and, as much as I can encourage it, in all my interactions w strangers for sure.

I feel like I'm at the opposite end of the spectrum from Laurel on this somehow. The idea that I should feel guilty about basic animal instincts seems like the road to social dysfuntion and unhappiness. Should I be ashamed to be hungry or sleepy or to need to use the restroom? It's not shame one should feel but empathy for someone else wrt how someone else might perceive one's expressed desires. It's ok to lust after someone's ass. It's less okay to blurt it out to all and sundry without any kind of determination as to how the object of one's desires might feel about it, especially considering that they might very well feel threatened or just annoyed, and all and sundry might not want to be implicated in one's boorishness. Most of the time, if someone points out someone for the beauty, I find it annoying because I either already noticed, thank you kindly, and have no interest in 'sharing the moment' w/anyone, or don't care or am indifferent, or really don't want the moment spoiled by a blatantly socially inept person.

I need to recuse myself here, guys. This is making me really tired and sad and now I can't stop crying at work.

sorry hi dere, i didn't gloss over so much as i just don't think it matters in general what the goal is. but yes i misunderstood you.

I mean, if no-one ever dared be 'impolite' about declaring their interest or saying something w/o being 100% sure that the other party is receptive to it, very little would ever happen in the world. I beleive people have a right to express their opinions and a duty to their own dignity to express them as eloquently and effectively as possible and that goes just as much to the flirter as to the rejector. If someone I am not interested in flirts with me and pays me a compliment, I will politely respond with a glacial 'thank you' and if that's not enough I know how to escalate my verbal displeasure gradually and retain my personal right to dispassionately tell them to bugger off.

the title of this thread keeps making me think about "disgusting ass partner"

Observing someone's beauty is fine, Michael. However, when it comes to interacting with them, interact with them as a PERSON, not as an ass. Engage with them, open yourself up to them, don't approach them like a pitbull approaches a raw steak. I'm sure a man of your sophistication knows this already, but it bears repeating. It IS possible to have a libido and a sexual desire without being oppressive.

Also, sorry, Laurel, I'll just grab me coat.

what have I wrought :-/

It IS possible to have a libido and a sexual desire without being oppressive.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v201/sevenxviii/ThereISfeministpornyouknow.jpg

If someone I am not interested in flirts with me and pays me a compliment, I will politely respond with a glacial 'thank you' and if that's not enough I know how to escalate my verbal displeasure gradually and retain my personal right to dispassionately tell them to bugger off.

Wait before I go b/c I really do care about what MW means here: Michael, you can say that b/c their expressed attraction isn't threatening to you, you can not feel too rattled about it, one hopes, and can feel like the experience didn't really change the tone of your day.

A lot of that isn't true about unwelcome advances toward women, and I am NOT talking about the nice dorky guy at the bar, here, who tries to buy you a drink.

And it IS possible to flirt with someone, to initiate a discourse of flirtation, in the right circumstances, and with the right amount of mutual understanding! To crowbar that situation upon someone who doesn't want it is crass. Different people want different levels of discourse; that's a fact of life, but one is expected to be discerning.

LOL crutis

xp to self, continuing: When someone shows by their persistence that they're ignoring or not understanding any of your signals to them, what else are they going to misunderstand and ignore? Suddenly all bets are off, you don't have a comfort zone anymore, and you don't have any control over what happens next, everything has been escalated. This is where I think, "How much of a public disturbance am I willing to cause?" because I want to be prepared if that's what I have to do, no matter how embarrassing.

LJ, of course. Reducing someone to a mere physical body is creepy and sad. The porn star dude who infamously said, "You can't fuck a personality," always seemed not only completely wrong but abjectly pathetic. Who the hell would just want to order up a bot for boffing? Where's the fun in that, the romance, the thrill, the charm?

Laurel, point taken. I kind of mean the drunk gay dude at the gay bar when I'm with my friends who seems kind of oblivious to all my mentions of a gf and to my withering looks and snarkiness. Not exactly comparable to be sure, but I have known some very powerful women use this technique not only very effectively but also to some often hilarious result.

order up a bot for boffing

I think you just out-me'd me XD

'Bot for boffing' had such a dulcet alliterative charm to it, I couldn't resist.

I liked it, but unfortunately ILX has a history of getting all EMERGENCY EYEWASH about such phrasings!

Anyway, yeah, for me it's ALL about the mental connection, which often INCORPORATES an imagined physical connection but doesn't assume one. As you say, it's a giddy combination of social, sexual and personal discourses.

I really enjoyed reading this thread! Thank you to all the participants, it was interesting!

How, exactly, does one have control over someone else's reactions to one?

Obv you can't! But since you can't, the right thing for the other person to do is to never let on that this is happening. Because if it's unwelcome, you have no recourse, and that puts you in an unworkable situation.

― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 10:27 AM (34 minutes ago)

this is so, so weird - it's like your ideal world is one in which we all live in bubbles and the expression of feelings is prohibited. it's like one step away from advocating for arranged marriage to save young people the hurt of finding the right person

why is everyone misunderstanding each other on purpose

this is starting to remind me of tuomas in that "how can i make money thread" last night

dude its simple u gotta mediate between horny young buck & enlightened interpersonal discourse

the first rule of Clusterfuck is: try not to understand Clusterfuck

Even ignoring the different physical threat levels between unknown guy approaching woman with no apparent regard for her discomfort and vice versa, I think it bears remembering that for most women an unwanted approach or comment on her looks is not a one-off but part of a potentially demoralising series, to an extent that it appears - how would I know? - not to be for most (white, not physically deformed or disabled or unusually obese) men

(sure you probably get teenagers yelling "nice threads" or "hey baldy" the second your hairline recedes even slightly, but women get shit off those people too PLUS completely random adults who appear to think that it's just perfectly acceptable to stop you in the street and tell you that they would or would not fuck you and what your worst or best feature is)

and when it keeps happening you do start to think, y'know, if THIS percentage of guys will just say it outright, what is the percentage of men who just don't let me know about it to whom I am permanently a chunk of livestock at a cattle market, waiting for their public appraisal of whether my flesh is acceptable because nothing else about me matters? When I am talking to even the nice-seeming guys, when I am in a job interview with potential future managers, are all the decisions about me already made?

sorry, tldr, but I thought the more "get over it" responses were a little glib

fwiw i am v sympathetic to what laurel is getting at. i don't think she objects to desire or dudes pursuing ppl they desire. in the latter scenario, there is (at the very least) some level of engaging The Person and not just pursuance of dat azz. the sort of attempted bro moments by this guy...it's like he wants to remain disengaged from a live person (even in a catcall i would guess there's no expectation of some dialogue beyond "fuk u asshole"). i can see that as sexist since he essentially is reducing the woman to a set of features and not expecting a human reaction. if i'm reading this thread right...

last month*

to look at this from a male perspective, chicks dig smart men who know boundaries

and yeah miss spacecadet has given eloquent voice to a regular feature of most women's lives, one which men are often only too happy to ignore

sure you probably get teenagers yelling "nice threads" or "hey baldy" the second your hairline recedes even slightly

I usually get random strangers calling me gay for some reason -- I have gotten "are you gay or what, kid???" or "you look like you like to get fucked in the ass" among other things -- this puzzles me especially because I do not dress/act particularly gay

why is everyone misunderstanding each other on purpose

Everyone isn't misunderstanding each other on purpose, everyone is talking about entirely different situations as if they were equivalent. I'm talking about encounters you can randomly have in social situations, such as being patrons in a bar or passing someone in the street, and Laurel is talking about interactions with people where some level of professional transaction is taking place, like interacting at work or buying something in a store. In both cases, conflating the two in terms of expected behavior isn't conducive to understanding the other person's point of view.

I think Laurel is correct that these types of interactions shouldn't happen in most reasonable professional situations (lol pr0n). I don't think racism and sexism are particularly equivalent but I know that if I let the degree to which people discuss/make judgments on me about my race make me ill, I would never be able to leave the house.

back in the early 80s a guy standing next to me on a street corner turned and said "I'd like to fuck you in the ass" I was like hey I know this is NYC and all but wtf. seriously living in a largely gay neighborhood back in those days gave me a different perspective on the "nice butt" shout-out issue.

x post

(wait I didn't edit that properly, Laurel is talking about social interactions as well and treating them equally; I do not treat them equally)

itt a butt

(__!__)

and when it keeps happening you do start to think, y'know, if THIS percentage of guys will just say it outright, what is the percentage of men who just don't let me know about it to whom I am permanently a chunk of livestock at a cattle market, waiting for their public appraisal of whether my flesh is acceptable because nothing else about me matters? When I am talking to even the nice-seeming guys, when I am in a job interview with potential future managers, are all the decisions about me already made?

and i'd say you are likely ~overthinking some shit~ and i pity you not being able to smell the damn roses every once in a while

dan is right about there being different situations here, although there are a few universals. of course, in my last few posts i have been ignoring the primal desire to comment on ass w/o further action or disclosure to owner of ass; i am going straight for the 'approaching and making oneself known' stage. some men enjoy clandestine ass-comment; they're assholes, but they're not molesting. trouble is this behaviour is a slippery slope TOWARDS molesting and is a mindset to be avoided.

curtis they were jealous of u

Everyone isn't misunderstanding each other on purpose, everyone is talking about entirely different situations as if they were equivalent. I'm talking about encounters you can randomly have in social situations, such as being patrons in a bar or passing someone in the street, and Laurel is talking about interactions with people where some level of professional transaction is taking place, like interacting at work or buying something in a store. In both cases, conflating the two in terms of expected behavior isn't conducive to understanding the other person's point of view.

this is so, so otm and what i wanted to post an hour ago but couldnt be bothered to b/c i was on my phone

which is why i likened it to the tuomas thread

your mom is a clandestine ass-comment

OK so I remembered a pretty good example if we're talking about this sort of thing in a professional context that happened when I was living in London. I was attending an external meeting with my boss and two other colleagues. Upon arriving my boss introduced me to the other parties present and one of them, an older Jamaican man, said while shaking my hand, "Erica B0c!h@rt? More like Erica Break your heart!". It did catch me off gaurd but because I was shocked that anyone would say this sort of thing at a business meeting and I was honestly think he was, in his own weird way, trying to be sweet. Maybe if he had said something that was lewd I would have felt differently but my reaction to this was more lol @ the inappropriate old Jamaican dude than anything else.

some men enjoy clandestine ass-comment; they're assholes

*or they are teenagers

to whom I am permanently a chunk of livestock at a cattle market, waiting for their public appraisal of whether my flesh is acceptable because nothing else about me matters? When I am talking to even the nice-seeming guys, when I am in a job interview with potential future managers, are all the decisions about me already made?

It's incredibly depressing to me that anyone would view the world this way. I am sure that there are men who think this way exist but I'd like to think they're few and far between but maybe that's naive of me, I don't know. Regarding those men who do think this way - they are obviously people who are not worth even five minutes of my thoughts and anyway, I am confident that the minute I open my mouth it will become clear that I am a lot more than "a chunk of livestock at a cattle market".

I don't think it's that the men who do this are few and far between; it's that the men who do this CONSTANTLY NON-STOP AT ALL TIMES REGARDLESS OF SITUATION AND BOUNDARIES are few and far between.

some men enjoy clandestine ass-comment; they're assholes, but they're not molesting. trouble is this behaviour is a slippery slope TOWARDS molesting

Really?

lol so lj you realize you just said that everyone on the 77 WS threads is on the slippery slope to becoming molesters, right

we already knew that

Guys, it's 11:30 on the East Coast. Time for a Diet Coke break.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdrE1VMxzoE

Doing it on an internet forum about celebrities is very different from doing it in real life about people who breathe the same air. I still find it distasteful here but it's more art-crit than raptor.

I am confident that the minute I open my mouth it will become clear that I am a lot more than "a chunk of livestock at a cattle market".

― bear say hi to me (ENBB), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 10:26 AM (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I don't think it's that the men who do this are few and far between; it's that the men who do this CONSTANTLY NON-STOP AT ALL TIMES REGARDLESS OF SITUATION AND BOUNDARIES are few and far between.

― Huckabee Jesus lifeline (HI DERE), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 10:27 AM (9 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

both A+ posts. Laurel seems to have a problem with people judging her on her looks before even getting a chance to know her on any other level. Very few people AREN'T bothered by that, men or women. It sucks but it's a fact of life. Obv being rude in any way about it or harrassing someone is abhorrent.

i'm starting to wonder if there's something wrong with me because this just doesn't bother me very much
it happens, somewhat infrequently, but just doesn't offend me in the same deep way it seems to get to laurel
it rarely actually offends me at all

you've got a tough hide...er let me rephrase that

example: one of my students winked and called me "ladyfriend" once and i just said "i am your teacher, not your ladyfriend" and he never did it again. he's just a doofus, not some predatory man-wolf.

ladyfriend?? is he like 70 y.o

well I think the thing is that ppl have wildly variable internal responses to ~this guy~ but I'd hope we'd all agree that a) it's not wrong for anyone to be just deeply upset by it and b) regardless of how you feel about the structural/sexual/political/metaphysical w/e that underpin this behavior, it's still not allowed and ought to be discouraged, basically because of (a)

just be excellent to each other imo

Doing it on an internet forum about celebrities is very different from doing it in real life about people who breathe the same air.

hey here is a shocking newsflash for you: CELEBRITIES ARE PEOPLE WHO BREATHE THE SAME AIR AS YOU DO

xp: I would remove the "still not allowed" part because it is patently obvious that it IS still allowed; otherwise yes, I agree.

i meant it in a poetic 'same immediate air, are in vicinity, are accessible IRL' way but whatevs

I don't think it's that the men who do this are few and far between; it's that the men who do this CONSTANTLY NON-STOP AT ALL TIMES REGARDLESS OF SITUATION AND BOUNDARIES are few and far between.

This is the opposite of what this thread is saying, a lot of guys on here are saying, that's normal, all men think like that all the time, get used to it because it's not up to you. Now you want to have that both ways?

well the behavior I was referring to was that of the dude at the liquor store, not some hypothetical ilxor checking someone out

he was being a creep and should cio

he's like, 25? 26?
either way it was laughable and nothing else. i guess i have never expected that i am in control of my public image, and people are going to think whatever they want. how they behave is another matter -- it's not acceptable to continue to make people feel uncomfortable after they have expressed (verbally or otherwise) that they are uncomfortable.

That is actually not at all what this thread is saying, Laurel.

Or, at least, that is not what I'm saying.

It wasn't the original topic, but it has been said on this thread, and is frquently taken as true on ILX in general, and DEFINITELY in the world at large. Hence my over-emotional response, probably.

has anyone posted haters gonna hate dot gif? it is relevant to this thread!

I'm sorry guys - you lost me. Can you just clarify exactly what it is that is frequently taken as true on ILX and in the world at large? thx.

I was wondering that too just cuz a I did not read all of yesterdays business and b I think ppl are talking at cross purposes, which is normal for a clusterfucky thread

okay different women can have different responses to something and nobody need be considered "over-emotional"

well I think the thing is that ppl have wildly variable internal responses to ~this guy~ but I'd hope we'd all agree that a) it's not wrong for anyone to be just deeply upset by it and b) regardless of how you feel about the structural/sexual/political/metaphysical w/e that underpin this behavior, it's still not allowed and ought to be discouraged, basically because of (a)

― crazy farting throwback jersey (gbx), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 11:56 AM (12 minutes ago)

i think this is right. i'm not that emotional about it the majority of the time because what is there to do, and i am a hetero and i know a lot of nice ppl, but i do wish people wouldn't act like getting upset and having it color your interactions with "normal" dudes is totally irrational and you should get over it. patronizing in my opinion

lol me & horseshoe forever

<3 <3 <3

yeah I was gonna say: what bothers me the most itt is that laurel feels the need to have to defend her rxn.

yeah and that passing spacecadet said she didn't like how people were all like "get over it" and guess what she got

i just want to say, Laurel, apart from the race stuff, i think you are routinely brave and awesome in these threads and i thank you!

I don't think it's that the men who do this are few and far between; it's that the men who do this CONSTANTLY NON-STOP AT ALL TIMES REGARDLESS OF SITUATION AND BOUNDARIES are few and far between.

This is the opposite of what this thread is saying, a lot of guys on here are saying, that's normal, all men think like that all the time, get used to it because it's not up to you. Now you want to have that both ways?

― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 12:00 PM (7 minutes ago)

for the billionth time, you're not distinguishing 'thinking' and 'acting'. i have the right to objectify anyone i like; the onus is on me to react to these feelings in an appropriate manner in a working or social environment, or suffer the legal/disciplinary or social consequences (respectively)

Of course it's not wrong. If it upsets you, it upsets you! I'm just still a little unclear to what exactly it is that ppl find upsetting. Is it the fact sometimes people say wildly inappropriate things based on a woman's appearance? That's what I thought this was initially about. However, it seems to have become about men making judgements about women based around whether or not they find them sexually attractive. If it's the later then I really don't understand why this is upsetting. Of course men do this. We all do this on some level whether we realize it or not.

i've known enough crepey dudes in my life that laurel's rxn is justified

kevin the component of this that you are missing is exactly the thing that a passing spacecadet articulated that you then blew off as "overthinking"

I think there are two entirely distinct ways of interpreting the phrase "everyone does this offensive behavior nonstop". One is that, at any given point in time, someone is exhibiting the behavior described. The other is that everyone is exhibiting this behavior at all times. It is certainly understandable to be creeped out when you are talking about scenario B and someone else is talking about scenario A.

yeah kev you are sort of missing the point imo?

srs: breifly describe the "point"

If he is missing the point than I am too. Sorry but it's just not clear. There is a huge distinction between thinking and acting that needs to be made but hasn't.

the social interaction part of this b/n the two guys is massively uncomfortable imo. its like the guy is telling you he has a boner

lol!

It's like he's leading into inviting you over to his house to watch videos.

lol bnw otm

kev I guess what I perceive u missing is what spacecadet laid out: even tho u and lots of ppl routinely "objectify" or w/e attractive ppl in the street, it is still perfectly acceptable and rational to find that fact upsetting

i think laurel is totally reasonable and otm itt

Except for the predilection towards writing "nigger" for no reason, you mean.

ok if i havent made this clear, i don't disagree with that (3rica has said the same thing). i just don't think that's what we've spent 500 posts arguing about!

xp gbx

when I worked at a library the dudes who used to come in and watch porn always brought two liter bottles of sprite in with them for some reason

You ran a porn library?

kev I guess what I perceive u missing is what spacecadet laid out: even tho u and lots of ppl routinely "objectify" or w/e attractive ppl in the street, it is still perfectly acceptable and rational to find that fact upsetting

― crazy farting throwback jersey (gbx), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 12:23 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

GBX - please clarify whether you are talking about people doing this and voicing it outloud or just doing this internally.

nah I worked in the basement of a university library, on my training day the dude showing me around was like "uh people come in here and watch porn, call the cops if its child porn"

Were the bottles empty?

okie dokie, i think you're in for a lifelong uphill battle if you're going to be constantly worried about who's looking at you and who's thinking what, but i understand you on a basic level

xps

― brutt fartve (k3vin k.), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 10:20 AM (2 hours ago)

^^this is what i said earlier, how we've still been discussing this for 2 hours is anyone's guess

hammering on the but it's just thoughts aspect is unproductive, if only because everyone gets so defensive! ppl that check ppl out don't want to be lumped in with the creeps, and ppl that are uncomfortable with that kind of behavior don't want to be lumped in with hysterical prudes (I am guessing). xps on ZING

the bottles were full

one day a dude had a root beer bottle

bnw killin' it in this thread

btw it strikes me as fundamentally unfair that this thread is happening while Tuomas is tied up with the 80s album poll

I guess social networking blew up their spot though because people at the school just started posting their pictures up online with the words LIBRARY MASTURBATOR and shit

I stopped showing up to that job at some point

mostly i think my saying that there's nothing wrong with lusting someone has been confused for finding illegitimate the negative reactions of those who do

if desire begets speech then can one speak on desire

OK. Since nobody is answering the question and it has definitely not been clear throughout this thread . . . here's how I see it:

GENERALLY GROSS AND NOT OK AND PERFECTLY RATIONAL TO BE UPSET BY = Men making unwelcome advances or lewd comments to random strangers or women in pretty much any setting.

TOTALLY OK AND NOT ALL THAT RATIONAL TO BE UPSET BY = The fact that all people regardless of gender make judgements and have opions on one another based on our outward appearances which may lead to us thinking sexual thoughts about people we see but do not know. This means that yes someone who sees you walking down the street may think a sexual thougt about you and in their eyes you are nothing but your outter appearance but if you have not had any other interaction with them, of course this is going to be the case. We are animals and sex is a huge part of our world and interaction with one another.

patently false

for example

hammering on the but it's just thoughts aspect is unproductive, if only because everyone gets so defensive! ppl that check ppl out don't want to be lumped in with the creeps, and ppl that are uncomfortable with that kind of behavior don't want to be lumped in with hysterical prudes (I am guessing). xps on ZING

― crazy farting throwback jersey (gbx), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 12:30 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

ppl that check ppl out

^^ This is pretty much every single person at least on some level and so I am sorry but I do think that, while not wrong, it is a little unhealthy to be uncomfortable with this idea.

yep

patently false

― super sexy psycho fantasy world (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 12:37 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

OK. I respect your right to think that and mine to believe otherwise.

ENBB OTM I kinda can't fathom any argument to the contrary (but feel free to go ahead and make one)

totally agree w/ENBB

Lock thread?

ENBB OTM I kinda can't fathom any argument to the contrary (but feel free to go ahead and make one)

― strange asses outside liquor stores (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 12:43 PM (2 minutes ago)

http://static.pyzam.com/img/funnypics/4/pyzamnothanks.jpg

i dunno, it's true but i feel like plain old ppl that check ppl out were never in question. maybe i'm wrong because this thread has too many words
oh, no? ok.

im not sure what happened to this thread and i still couldnt tell you what any of the arguments are

me neither. oh well.

mostly i think my saying that there's nothing wrong with lusting someone has been confused for finding illegitimate the negative reactions of those who do

― brutt fartve (k3vin k.), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 12:34 PM (16 minutes ago)

this is basically my position, i'm gonna let yall have at it now

no thanks

I used to say "I claim zis ass in ze name of france" to women I met, as a funny kind of hello

never again

I think we're all learning something here today

lonely guy just lusting bout things. xxp

Watching "Sex Rehab" made me think about how lucky everyone on this thread is; there was a dude there who didn't understand why telling a fellow patient "I would rape the shit out of you" wouldn't be seen as a harmless attempt at levity intended to (DIRECT QUOTE) "bring joy into her life" and who also had the gall to be worried and concerned because she told everyone that she would cut his balls off if he tried to rape her.

So, um, congrats everyone for not being that dude.

i feel lucky for not watching "sex rehab"

how can you be sure that wasn't k3vin k

or maybe max

just sayin

ENBB otm otm otm. that's what i was trying to say yesterday. brutt f too.

it's okay to have thoughts of whatever kind in your own head. this may be a horrible thing to say, so i'm sorry in advance, but -- if you're a reasonably attractive person and spend any amount of time out in public, it is VERY likely that a great many people will have passing, trivial sexual thoughts about you EVERY SINGLE DAY. coworkers, friends, strangers, housemates, bums, prospective employers, whatever.

people have sexual thoughts about other people sometimes. there is nothing wrong with this, ever, at any level. it is not "perving", it is not creepy, it is not attempted psychic ownership and it is most certainly not sexist.

it is perfectly okay, of course, for someone to be grossed out by this idea, or even to feel violated by it. but the sooner we accept and embrace - even enjoy this basic fact - the happier we'll all be.

that's thing one. thing two is that laurel is absolutely otm that people need, for the most part, to keep their wonderful, harmless sex-thoughs safely ensconced INSIDE THEIR HEADS. i agree that women are (or at least can be) oppressed by constant unwanted sexual attention. but "unwanted" is a sticky wicket. like i said yesterday, we have to be able to break the bubble sometime, and there aren't hard-and-fast rules for when/where/how to go about this. in order to flirt properly, we have to know how to step out of the comfort zone - while still respecting it. and that's where people get in trouble. especially the sort of freaks who make comments about to strangers about asses.

finally, the word "sexism" is troublesome to me in this discussion. i object to its casual use because, like racism, it's so loaded with condemnatory power. to be sexist is to be WRONG, perhaps irredeemably so. the word is often used like that, as a kind of rhetorical weapon. and that's okay, but given that it bears that kind of power, i think we're obliged to be somewhat careful in how we use it.

i say this because i think the word "racism" has become horribly distorted by careless use. as a result, it's all but impossible to speak sensibly about race in public/with strangers. the whole subject is a minefield. this is somewhat less true of gender issues. most of us are less hypersenstive to them (though hopefully still sensitive), and i think this is a good thing. it allows some measure of flexibility and accommodation in discussion. it allows us to carry this potentially contentious discussion out at some length without anyone freaking out and trashing the room.

guys i think everyone knows its ok to have sexy thoughts

coming from a guy who hasnt read the thread

sorry. probably should have edited that down, or broken it up over several posts or something...

i do think at the beginning of the thread i was right to point out that racism vs. sexism fight is not parallel bcuz of the different discursive functions of 'race' vs. 'sex' in society

plus the actual function of sex/gender/reproduction vs. the fact that race is a cultural construct

thats what i meant bro

So you would like to point out that you have been OTM in this thread?

wouldnt be the first time

i would like to point out that all of the asses on this thread are otm

but looking and wanting and even objectifying aren't necessarily sexist, nor is expressing desire in an uncivil manner

i disagree with this last bit btw, it's not difficult to just be civil *and* flirtatious to a woman you also happen to desire. if we are talking about how to deal with women as opposed to how you talk with your bros behind closed doors. and even on the latter, you can maintain some civility.

unrelated but: there was this weird neighbor my fiancee used to have whom she never actually met but i guess was a little "strange guy" to her, and then one day he said, "hello audrey." (audrey was the name of her wireless connection, not her actual name)

okay that is grade-A creepy

stalker

did you see the ass on NETGEAR?

I hope none of my neighbors think my (or my wife's) name is "furburger"

x-post

if someone calls me "carlos' salty balls" i'll have to point them to the guy across the street

c over tcp/ip

i disagree with this last bit btw, it's not difficult to just be civil *and* flirtatious to a woman you also happen to desire. if we are talking about how to deal with women as opposed to how you talk with your bros behind closed doors. and even on the latter, you can maintain some civility.

― jØrdån (omar little), Wednesday, December 2, 2009 12:19 PM (9 minutes ago) Bookmark

totally agree. my objection was limited to the use of the world "sexist" to describe the type of wrongness in question. i mean, incivility (or perceived incivility) might be a product of actual sexism, and can certainly function in a sexist way, but the word rankles when used in such an offhand manner. it bothers me because it threatens to substitute this big condemnatory blot ("SEXISME!") for a nuanced consideration of the issues involved.

it IS gross and potentially threatening to leer and catcall and pressure. but shy of something that dramatic, civility can be very hard to pin down. good flirting is all about knowing where the lines are and edging up to them without crossing over. not everyone gets it right everytime. and there may be things at work in the dynamic that are more subtle than the word sexism will admit.

Don't understand the objection to the word "sexism" at all -- it's just a thing that things can be. Sometimes more definitely so, other times there are margins and boundaries and stuff but...??? Arguing that something that is aimed at a subset of people to make them afraid or change their behavior based on personal characteristics shouldn't be characterizes as such, is like Repubs arguing against hate crimes legislation because they secretly DO think that gays and etc really are inferior/wrong...? It's neither crazy nor confusing.

ctdr, I am not calling you sexist or your ideas sexist or w/e, but I don't get why you can't call a simple thing what it is because the word might...scare people?

in this case i think a comparison w/ racism is totally legit -- i disagree, much like w/ race, regardless of the 'intent' -- as if that can be measured -- simply ignorance/lack of awareness is not an excuse for being inappropriate xp

Sorry, I actually went home from work and slept a couple of hours. I don't know what's wrong with me but everything is too close to the surface today.

this is like when ppl were arguing whether or not kramer's racist ... its like, if hes not, then who is?? yes its more discursively useful to regard actions as sexist & not worry about trying to divide ppl up into "sexist" & "not sexist" camps, because otherwise ppl w/ sexist ideas are constantly saying 'i'm not a sexist' & think that gives them a pass to say sexist shit. But at the same time, just as we casually call dudes 'creeps' i think casually calling dudes 'sexist' is pretty reasonable.

for the purposes of this abstract discussion, i mean

i think thats one of the things that the sexism debate has over the racism debate -- that debates about race often come down to "i'm not a racist," while i'm not sure the same is true for sexism, that ppl are more likely to identify sexist *actions* and less likely to worry about 'being a sexist'

it's on another level entirely and i'm not saying that about anyone here, but it reminds me of tucker max's defense that he "loves women, they're his biggest fans," etc

XPOST MINDMELD This is beginning to remind me of the Michael Richards thread and the argument over whether the dude was incontrovertibly a RACIST versus a guy who behaved in a racist fashion (or even, to take the R-word out of the equation entirely, a guy who acted thoughtlessly and tastelessly).

its like, if hes not, then who is??

Someone who exhibits a long history of prejudice and discrimination against those of another race?

No one has accused anyone here in this giant clusterfuck thread of Being An Sexist. I used the word like twice to refer to actions.

right but what does that guy have to do w/ michael richards? its like, brownie points for not being hitler but you're still an asshole xp

but it reminds me of tucker max's defense that he "loves women, they're his biggest fans,"

right, that's like the classic "i can't be a misogynist, i love women!" defense

laurel, exactly -- thats what im saying. im agreeing w/ you and disagreeing w/ contenderizer

Well, sure, he's an asshole, but I'm not sure he's a racist.

my point was that in debates about racism, there's a subtext that someone is always trying to identify "a racist" -- even when its never stated -- while i think w/ debates about sexism it tends to get into debates about actions, whether particular actions are sexist. I think that in terms of discussion, on some level that makes debates about sexism more productive

yeah guys like that love women who adore them, but if women challenge them the misogynist comes out

xxxp

jaymc, i disagree, but i think that arguing about it is kind of useless & pointless -- its a question of semantics

"love" i should say

in my semantic definition of 'a racist,' kramer is probably 'a racist,' although really having determined what that means is ultimately not really engaging w/ any of the actual pressing problems at hand