:eek:
:D:p:)
But- you cant sue the undead.
There’s plenty of evidence of men acting creepy in Walmart and elsewhere but somehow you’re hung up on “looks”.
Then perhaps, dont post here? 
I wouldnt miss you, nor Pm asking you come post, I promise.
I am sure there is. Just like there is plenty of evidence of black men committing crimes.
However, the meme writer didnt mention any such behavior. If she had, I wouldn’t have posted. Instead she advocated assaulting people without them committing any crimes, based solely upon her judgement they were 'creepy" .
So, no matter how many horror stories you post about bad things at Walmart,** they have absolutely nothing fucking at all to do with that meme.
**
Just like no matter how many stories you post about other black men committing crimes- you can’t justify shooting that black youth because you thought he was “looking suspicious”.
No mention of “looking creepy” = acting creepy. Which everyone who isn’t you seems to get.
And you’re still assuming that the “advocating assault” isn’t hyperbole.
Is that your purpose? To silence women by this stupidity? To waste our time and effort? To get us to give up and quit? To annoy us into submission?
And the SDMB wonders why women leave.
In my experience, people are deemed ‘creepy’ based on behavior, not appearances. Leering is creepy; heavy breathing is creepy; not respecting personal boundaries is creepy; weird small talk is creepy.
People who are just dirty or smelly don’t rate ‘creepy’ when they are minding their own business. Gross? Sure, they’ll get that. Disgusting? Unkempt? Unappealing? Sure, all those. But ‘creepy’ is as ‘creepy’ does.
Again, you don’t know what her judgement of “creepiness” was based on. Maybe her criterion for men being “creepy” does in fact involve them committing crimes. We have no way of telling for certain, based on that single mention of “some creepy dude” in the meme.
Since you didn’t seem to understand it the last three times:
Once again: you don’t know that. All you know is that the author of the meme didn’t explicitly define “creepiness” as unmistakably intimidating, lewd or criminal behavior.
But given that so many of the online stories about “being followed at a Walmart by some creepy dude” do involve descriptions of unmistakably intimidating, lewd or criminal behavior, it seems fairly likely that that’s what she did intend. Certainly, it makes much more sense than your peculiar notion that she was advocating hitting dudes with cans of beans merely for “looking creepy”.
It’s a tempting thought, but unfortunately, the mission of fighting ignorance includes resisting your repeated attempts to defend idiotically illogical arguments.
Silence? *She *was the one who said i was wasting her time.:rolleyes:
There’s a whole lotta beans / violence/ internet-toughguygal-ism going on in here.
Doubt anyone will have fiber issues this week. Walmart people maybe creepy as f-ck, but its you folks that make me glad I shop over the internet.
How in hell do you stay out of jail?
But you know what? If you are going to change this from advocating violence against innocent persons into a women’s rights thing, you win.
I dunno about creepy but they do have a reputation for being strange.
That was Jimmy Chitwood who said that, actually, though I agreed with him. In any case, criticizing someone’s posts is not the same thing as explicitly discouraging them from posting at all, although I acknowledge that in my case both approaches tend to have about the same level of effect, which is to say zero.
:rolleyes: The whole point here is that you completely made up the “advocating violence against innocent persons” interpretation.
Nobody in this thread is in favor of advocating violence against innocent persons. And you have shown no evidence whatsoever that the author of the meme advocating violence against “creepy dudes” following people in Walmarts was including innocent creepy dudes in her condemnation.
You may want to reread my posts in this thread. This time for comprehension.
But you know what? If you’re going to take a hyperbolic facebook comment that’s at worst an empty threat to a specific category of people exhibiting generally undesirable behavior, and react to it as if it’s an existential threat to your personal shopping outings, congratulations, you’re the creepy man at WalMart.
I will say that the meme in question is a good idea.
First, because DrDeth is completely wrong about it being about looks. Women don’t think someone is creepy because they didn’t shave, or are wearing a wife beater. Women think men are creepy because they act creepy.
Secondly, the creepers are predators, and they have a fine tuned sense of where the lines are, and more importantly, who are prey that will allow them to cross over those lines.
They are getting their jollies by creeping women out.
And the best defense against this type of creep is to be mentally prepared to beat the ^&*% out of the person if they get too close, or if you see them doing something they shouldn’t do.
You know why? Because just being prepared to do that will change most people’s body language from prey body language to predator language. And predators will not mess with other predators. I believe that there is enough anecdotal data from interviews with sexual predators, plus statistics about who gets raped, to bear out this line of reasoning.
First, as advocated at a workplace anti-harassment training several years ago, put them in a spotlight. For example: wandering hands? Grab a hand, hold it high, loudly proclaim that you found said hand about your body, and ask if anyone knows who it belongs to.
Then step it up if the sudden attention doesn’t put 'em off.
DrDeth, to quell your worries, try this, or this, or this or enrol in an etiquette class, or call your mom and ask her what you missed, because it is nigh-certain she warned you against all of the behaviors various women cited in this thread complained of as creepy. If that’s too hard, let me boil it down: be reasonably clean, move purposefully to get your shopping done, don’t stare, keep your hands visible, and keep your distance. Four feet is beyond the reach of most cooking sprays, and allows you to duck thrown vegetables. Problem solved.
To quell your concerns about the potential injustice of it all, I believe that it is only a certain class of men who entertain the crack-brained notion that, short of actual assault, they are entitled to behave any way they want toward others, especially women and children, with impunity. As far as I’m concerned, the soft thump of a can of Libby’s best between the eyes falls on the “discouraging admonition” end of the violence scale, and should be presumed permissable unless proven otherwise.
Besides, it was clearly a humorous reminder that retail employees are apt to be less than helpful, and that women may not always rely on them to deal with creepy guys.
Shaming someone will work on most people, and your willingness to do so will come through in your body language.
However, keeping violence in the back of your mind as an option will also come through in your body language, and will stop those who would just wait until you were alone to attack you.
I know Kimstu already called this out for the logical fallacy it is, but I think this really gets at the heart of the matter. DrDeth thinks women are idiots. He cites as evidence the fact that we don’t recognize every single threat in time to protect ourselves or others, which conveniently also makes us responsible for violent acts committed against us or other vulnerable individuals, rather than the perpetrators–or the men who also failed to notice the pedophile or rapist under the “nice man” exterior. (It’s only the moms he quotes, not the dads. Why do they get a pass?)
But failing to detect some threats doesn’t mean you’re wrong when you do perceive one. If anything, it’s all the more reason to pay attention when you do hear your inner alarms. By way of analogy: I’m a scuba diver, and one of the risks you learn about is getting carbon monoxide in your tank. This can happen as a result of a car engine idling outside near the compressor’s intake, or as a result of lubricants in the compressor getting overheated. Carbon monoxide is of course odorless, but the other byproducts of combustion may have an odor. There’s a lively debate about whether all divers ought to test their air with a CO analyzer, but there’s a consensus that if your air smells funny, you shouldn’t dive with it.
Violent intentions, like CO, cannot be detected by the human senses. Unlike CO, there’s no objective test to establish the presence of violent intentions before you actually get hurt. But there is sometimes an accompanying smell, or other sensory warning, that’s worth heeding.
We do not owe it to the men of this world to wait to be assaulted before taking steps to protect ourselves. Literally no one–not even the hyperbolic meme you’re complaining about–suggested assaulting someone who merely looks a certain way. Even the original meme mentioned turning around and verbally confronting the creep, and calling police while in the store, before getting to the bean throwing and belt strangling. The clear implication is to fight back when threatened, when confrontation hasn’t worked, rather than relying on the minimum-wage store clerks to handle the situation.
You can bet that the women this meme speaks to, and who are responding to it, have already thought of walking away and hoping the guy leaves them alone. I promise you every one of us who has been followed has made four right turns in a row to be sure. This is not about women freaking out at the mere presence of unattractive men in public places. This is about women facing real risks and having genuine, justified fears about them, and men like you refusing to believe our experiences could possibly be legitimate.
But I bet you wouldn’t dive with that smelly tank.