# Shoshana Roberts, a street walker (10 hours,) films herself being "harassed." **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 29, 2014, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930 "2014-10-29T20:25:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 33
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2014, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/641 "2014-11-03T22:09:40Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > (my bold) > On a separate note, I was at the store this weekend and while waiting in line a lady had the gall to ask me how old my kid was\*. It was like she was demanding an answer, and I never felt so threatened. I have no idea why a person would engage in behavior they know for a fact that some portion of the world may find hurtful and threatening. I felt so harassed I just didn’t know what to do. But then, I remembered we were under some arbitrary roof, so that meant I should be fine with the interaction. WTF, I didn’t put that roof there, and I didn’t ask this person to try and talk with me. How dare she! I should make a video. Hey, **Bricker** , here’s a poster making your “pet gerbil” argument on this very page! Please drop some of your knowledge on him. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2014, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/642 "2014-11-03T22:17:04Z")
> [@kstarnes](#): > > Some questions to consider: > > 1. Do people have the right to occupy public space without sharing it with other people? > 2. IF you share public space with others, do they have the right to look at you? To greet you? Even to compliment the way you look? Street walker is a common euphemism for a prostitute in the United States. Did you intentionally refer to Shoshana Roberts as a prostitute or was that just a happy coincidence on your part? ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2014, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/643 "2014-11-03T22:17:36Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > Hey, **Bricker** , here’s a poster making your “pet gerbil” argument on this very page! Please drop some of your knowledge on him. This isn’t a “pet gerbil” argument, it’s a “the arguments made in this thread are idiotic” argument. It’s clearly a stupid hypothetical, but it is consistent with how some of the posters in this thread have characterized their positions. You know, a parody. I thought yours was funnier though. For real, I thought it was quite witty. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2014, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/644 "2014-11-03T22:27:00Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > This isn’t a “pet gerbil” argument, it’s a “the arguments made in this thread are idiotic” argument. It’s clearly a stupid hypothetical, but it is consistent with how some of the posters in this thread have characterized their positions. You know, a parody. I thought yours was funnier though. For real, I thought it was quite witty. Well, thank you for the compliment. But according to **Bricker** , making a parody doesn’t save you from charges of “pet gerbilism.” So, I’m afraid he’s still going to have to drop some **Bricker** knowledge on you. I am wondering what these rules are for when parody is okay and when it’s not? Why is parody in response to parody okay, but parody isn’t okay? ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2014, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/645 "2014-11-03T23:21:56Z")
“When you say 'I can’t say hello?”, what you’re actually saying is, ‘but what about my right to engage women in a manner that I feel is best?’." - Elon James White ---
**Author:** ![Nema98](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/d2c977/32.png) [@Nema98](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nema98)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2014, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/646 "2014-11-03T23:25:32Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > She was an actress hired by the producers of the video to walk down the street while getting filmed. She was hired for a job and did the job. > > It shouldn’t be surprising, I suppose, that the one getting attacked for this video is the actress and not the (male) producers, but it is pretty revealing. I did not know who really was behind the group and the idea for this video, I assumed it would be her. Now that you mention it, I think neither her nor the producers should get much attention. They made their point. I am not attacking her for being female or anything. Nothing wrong with acting for a video. Not much attention was given to the woman who was shot and killed by a creep after she rejected his advances in Detroit. That case needs attention, not this script. ---
**Author:** ![Nema98](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/d2c977/32.png) [@Nema98](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nema98)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2014, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/647 "2014-11-03T23:27:11Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Are you trying to say that you don’t think she’s attractive enough to harass? No I am saying in my view I would not pay her much attention, even if I were a thug harasser. All women are capable of being victims of unwanted attention for the most part. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2014, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/648 "2014-11-03T23:56:11Z")
> [@Nema98](#): > > No I am saying in my view I would not pay her much attention, even if I were a thug harasser. Sorry, still not getting it. Are you saying that if you were a thug harasser you might pay attention to a prettier woman, but not to her? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2014, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/649 "2014-11-03T23:56:14Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > (my bold) > The sarcasm and parody are humorous and amusing, but constitute a poor argument and are not persuasive. The reason it fails is as \*\*Bricker \*_described and because of the bolded section above. The reasoning is not the same. Like the expression, “if my grandmother had wheels…” > On a separate note, I was at the store this weekend and while waiting in line a lady had the gall to ask me how old my kid was_. It was like she was demanding an answer, and I never felt so threatened. I have no idea why a person would engage in behavior they know for a fact that some portion of the world may find hurtful and threatening. I felt so harassed I just didn’t know what to do. But then, I remembered we were under some arbitrary roof, so that meant I should be fine with the interaction. WTF, I didn’t put that roof there, and I didn’t ask this person to try and talk with me. How dare she! I should make a video. > > \*in reality, we talked about the kids’ school, completed our purchases, and were on our way. Hilarious. And by “hilarious” I mean utterly useless as argument. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/650 "2014-11-04T00:27:23Z")
We can’t all be as clever as BrightNShiny. I shall persevere. When I was walking to the car while coming home from work I noticed a person receiving what appeared to be unwanted catcalls. Being an upstanding citizen very concerned about this grave injustice, I immediately went to the victim and said, _“I’ve been looking everywhere for you. We have to meet our friends!”_ Obviously I was trying to disrupt the harasser’s antics but can you believe it, the victim seemed shocked, frightened, and I think they thought I was attacking them in some way. Maybe because we were outdoors and there wasn’t a roof involved. I think I shouldn’t have taken the advice mentioned by\*\* Heffalump and Roo\*\* in post [#591](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17866431&postcount=591) when s/he linked to the [Business Insider](http://www.businessinsider.com/what-to-do-when-catcalled-2014-7) article. #yesallwomen ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/651 "2014-11-04T00:41:14Z")
> [@Nema98](#): > > I did not know who really was behind the group and the idea for this video, I assumed it would be her. Now that you mention it, I think neither her nor the producers should get much attention. They made their point. I am not attacking her for being female or anything. Nothing wrong with acting for a video. > > Not much attention was given to the woman who was shot and killed by a creep after she rejected his advances in Detroit. > > That case needs attention, not this script. The video has already been viewed 30 million times and has had numerous articles and media comments about it. The video did bring some awareness to the Detroit shooting. It was mentioned in a discussion of the video on CNN. Here’s someone’s comments about the video from the thread in IMHO: > [@Thoughts on the viral 'New York catcalling' video?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thoughts-on-the-viral-new-york-catcalling-video/703179/143): > > \ > CNN has a [conversation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HI4DC18wCg) between comedian Amanda Seales and author Steven Santagati on the topic that–sadly–is mirroring a lot of what we’re seeing here on the Dope. Can’t wait for a chorus of guys to tell us what a voice of reason the dude is. > > Seales does address the “hello” issue, pointing out that she’s from Grenada, where saying “hello” is the polite thing to do, but… > > Seales: “A lot of these men they’re not just saying hello. They say hello and when you say hello back, what that means is that’s an invitation to now holler at you.” > > Wow, Santagati just told women to be strong and stand up for themselves if they want catcalling to stop. It’s like you guys all get a primer on how not to listen to women. > \ After Santagati told Seales that women need to stand up for themselves, Seales mentions that a woman who stood up for herself was just shot for it in Detroit. He then told her that she should carry a gun. Santagati also told Seales that women enjoyed compliments they got on the street. Despite Seales’ protesting that she doesn’t, he maintained his position. Some commentary on that exchange: The headline to the _Huffington Post_ reaction to that video: [CNN Just Aired The Most Insane Reaction To The Catcalling Viral Video](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/02/cnn-catcalling-video-steve-santagati_n_6090534.html) ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/652 "2014-11-04T00:56:54Z")
That guy on CNN was trolling. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/653 "2014-11-04T01:30:11Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > We can’t all be as clever as BrightNShiny. I shall persevere. > > When I was walking to the car while coming home from work I noticed a person receiving what appeared to be unwanted catcalls. Being an upstanding citizen very concerned about this grave injustice, I immediately went to the victim and said, _“I’ve been looking everywhere for you. We have to meet our friends!”_ Obviously I was trying to disrupt the harasser’s antics but can you believe it, the victim seemed shocked, frightened, and I think they thought I was attacking them in some way. Maybe because we were outdoors and there wasn’t a roof involved. I think I shouldn’t have taken the advice mentioned by\*\* Heffalump and Roo\*\* in post [#591](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17866431&postcount=591) when s/he linked to the [Business Insider](http://www.businessinsider.com/what-to-do-when-catcalled-2014-7) article. > > #yesallwomen Did someone once explain to you that countering poor argument with equally poor argument someone creates good argument, like multiplying two negative numbers produces a positive? They were lying. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/654 "2014-11-04T01:47:05Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > We can’t all be as clever as BrightNShiny. I shall persevere. > > When I was walking to the car while coming home from work I noticed a person receiving what appeared to be unwanted catcalls. Being an upstanding citizen very concerned about this grave injustice, I immediately went to the victim and said, _“I’ve been looking everywhere for you. We have to meet our friends!”_ Obviously I was trying to disrupt the harasser’s antics but can you believe it, the victim seemed shocked, frightened, and I think they thought I was attacking them in some way. Maybe because we were outdoors and there wasn’t a roof involved. I think I shouldn’t have taken the advice mentioned by\*\* Heffalump and Roo\*\* in post [#591](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17866431&postcount=591) when s/he linked to the [Business Insider](http://www.businessinsider.com/what-to-do-when-catcalled-2014-7) article. > > #yesallwomen That’s not a parody. That’s just pure bad fiction. You’re just confirming that you haven’t been in the situation so you don’t know how the people would respond. Is it bad advice? I could see how it might work but I have my reservations as well. If the person claiming to be a friend also kept their distance but allowed the harassed person to get out of the area with the distraction, it could be helpful. If the person just became an additional harasser as in your story, that would obviously add more problems. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/655 "2014-11-04T02:09:32Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > No, I don’t think that’s the point. I think the point is to show that those same arguments, when applied to another behavior, don’t produce _plausible_ results. This suggests that the reasoning of the arguments is flawed. > > The “unpalatibility” of the parody subject certainly does some rhetorical work here, but behind the rhetoric is a logically plausible reductio argument. “You’re saying that X, thought unpalatable by some, is actually acceptable. But if we apply the same reasoning to Y, also thought unpalatable by some, we should (if your reasoning works) see that Y is actually acceptable. But we don’t. This suggests there is a flaw in your reasoning.” > > It’s similar to the “perfect island” reply to the ontological argument–it shows that _something_ is wrong with the reasoning, though it doesn’t show _what_ is wrong with the reasoning. But **BrightNShiny** ’s parody doesn’t claim to diagnose the problem with the arguments, rather it is just intended to show that the problem exists. Ah, now I have some time to speak on this in more detail, and this analysis is correct. I just want to add a few points: 1. If we look at the way I laid out the parody hypo, each specific component in it is innocuous on its face. There’s nothing wrong with giving away candy to children on Halloween. There’s nothing wrong with driving a minivan. My motivations were pristine as the snow. And yet, when we combine all the elements together, something sinister happens. Why? Because if we examine the hypo in light of the societal context and in light of parents’ experiences within that society, a lot of us will arrive at the conclusion that something sinister is going on. And a lot of posters in this thread are trying to detach the video from its societal context and from the experiences of the women. But by doing that, these posters aren’t actually responding to the argument at hand. Part of point of the parody is to show that when you detach the discussion from societal context and personal experience, the results are silly. Now to be fair to **Bricker** , his argument seems to be that the societal context varies in different parts of the country. I don’t really have an issue with that. I’m not a sociologist, but I have been in places where a lot of people do seem to have causal exchanges with strangers. I also have personal experience with people who have very complex gender rules, and prefer that strange men don’t talk to them. So, my only response to that particular argument of **Bricker** ’s is that I don’t think it’s really a bizarre concept that women might prefer strange men to not talk to them. I think it’s something you’ll find in various of places, but I’ll also acknowledge that there are cultural groups for which a certain amount of stranger action is acceptable. But at least **Bricker** isn’t trying to remove all societal context from the situation the way other posters have tried to. 1. There’s also a lot of rules-lawyering going on here. Some posters are attempting to nitpick and slice and dice the issue of talking to women rather than looking at the picture as a whole. They want to pull out a very small component of the issue, analogize it something, and then stick it back in. So, the parody makes fun of that, because if we slice-and-dice the candy/minivan hypo, we can arrive at pretty much any result we want. What I did with the candy/minivan hypo was parody an argument that isn’t useful at all. This is the “pet gerbil” argument, and I was showing that you can come up with any result you want if you start doing that. So, that’s the purpose of the candy/minivan parody. And from where I sit, **Bricker** , every criticism you have made of the parody is actually restating the parody argument in serious form. And these criticism should be directed at the original arguments, because the parody argument is meant to highlight the flaws in the original arguments. On another note… There are also a number of dumb arguments that have been getting made that I parodied: A. Phony Experience: Well, I’ve already covered this in a couple of posts, and the explanation has been roundly ignored, so I won’t rehash that. B. Why aren’t you worried about rape/domestic violence/etc.: This argument is really dumb. First of all, I have trouble believing that anybody who has actually worked on these issues would be making this argument. I occasionally run up against rape and DV issues in my volunteer work, and the issues raised by the video aren’t wholly distinct from those other issues. They aren’t the same (which I think is fairly obvious), but they are interconnected, and anybody who had actually done some work in this area should know that. So, when someone starts making this argument, I suspect that they don’t actually do anything about any of these issues. It’s also a self-refuting argument, because if someone thinks that there are more important things to worry about, then why are they in this thread at all? Why aren’t they spending their valuable time actually, you know, working on those issues? And it’s also a dumb argument because people are capable of dealing with more than one issue at the same time. C. I know a woman who agrees with me: Ok, first of all, women aren’t some monolithic group, and I think it’s obvious that women will express a wide range of opinions. Secondly, there are women misogynists, so pointing at the fact that someone making an argument is a women doesn’t really tell us anything about the quality of the argument. Additionally, if everyone were okay with this behavior, we wouldn’t even be discussing anything at all. The reason we’re having this discussion is because some people object to the behavior, and they are expressing why they object to it. Telling us that some people don’t object doesn’t actually address the arguments at hand. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/656 "2014-11-04T02:10:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Did someone once explain to you that countering poor argument with equally poor argument someone creates good argument, like multiplying two negative numbers produces a positive? > > They were lying. I thought that’s what we were doing here, no? Rediculous scenario and argument time? It is the next step after recreational outrage. \*it’s not really countering. More like mockery. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/657 "2014-11-04T02:50:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s not correct. In post 385, **Frylock** says: > > **Kimstu** also rejects the claim. > > So while I grant that it wasn’t discussed in the OP, I don’t agree it has “nothing” to do with the subject of the thread. i mean your mentioning it is a red herring :smack::smack::smack: no one has said you shouldn’t say hello in the NORMAL course of events you are making big deal out of a side issue that is not even a issue ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/658 "2014-11-04T07:23:46Z")
**BrightNShiny** , I love your parodies. I laughed a lot, so thanks for that. It was nice to see some fun in the thread. I wouldn’t mind seeing more of them. But I have to agree with **Bricker** that parody arguments aren’t generally useful. In this case, because I think I mostly agree with your assumptions, I see the humor. But if I were on the other side, rebuttal is not possible because the parallels are assumed. Unless you’re willing to deconstruct the whole analogy and show which parallels correspond, parodies just add an additional layer to explain. Often, parody arguments just bond and solidify arguments that people already believe. People who agree with the parody think that the parallels are obvious. But people who don’t agree don’t think the parallels line up exactly. IMO, they don’t shed light on new ways of seeing things without more explanation. Sometimes they can help by taking people out of the current argument, but mostly, they just add more complexity instead of simplifying the arguments. > [@Frylock](#): > > I can say a little more about why I find this unbelievable. It’s not exactly a contradiction in terms, but it’s a kind of pragmatic contradiction. By saying hi you are initiating a social interaction. But to initiate a social interaction while at the very same expecting no social response is… well, impossible. If you’re expecting no social response, then whatever you intend to do, you’re not intending to initiate a social interaction. I think that one of the reasons that you’re struggling to believe that reciprocation is not required is because the social norm is not an equal reciprocation. If a male stranger on the street says hi to a woman, the only acceptable responses are a positive social response in return or silence. A negative response is not acceptable. That’s because the social norm is now largely based on chivalry. I pulled this quote (which is almost the only part I agreed with in the article) from [an article I read on the catcall video](http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/11/03/street-harassment-catcall-video-race-women-gender-equity-column/18373531/): > [@](#): > > Nobody, of course, should face rude or threatening interactions when they’re out and about, even on the mean streets of New York City. And some people would like it if we returned to the halcyon days of chivalry. But as a system, chivalry both drew distinctions between men and women, and imposed behavioral obligations on women as much as it did on men. In today’s egalitarian society, it’s hard to see how a system based on such distinctions and obligations can survive. Chivalry dictates that women respond with a deferential response. It’s possible that if the social norms were different, the woman might choose to respond with a negative response. Under the current social norms, that would be a rude response. Why might a woman respond in that manner if the social norms were different? Because as you point out, the woman may not be interested in the same social interaction that the man is interested in engaging in. Yes, she could ignore it. But if the norms were more equal, she could also give her assessment of the interaction. It’s actually difficult to come up with an example negative response because it would come across as rude since it would be judged under the current system of social norms which are largely based on chivalry. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/659 "2014-11-04T14:11:59Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > **BrightNShiny** , I love your parodies. I laughed a lot, so thanks for that. It was nice to see some fun in the thread. I wouldn’t mind seeing more of them. > > But I have to agree with **Bricker** that parody arguments aren’t generally useful. In this case, because I think I mostly agree with your assumptions, I see the humor. But if I were on the other side, rebuttal is not possible because the parallels are assumed. Unless you’re willing to deconstruct the whole analogy and show which parallels correspond, parodies just add an additional layer to explain. Often, parody arguments just bond and solidify arguments that people already believe. People who agree with the parody think that the parallels are obvious. But people who don’t agree don’t think the parallels line up exactly. IMO, they don’t shed light on new ways of seeing things without more explanation. Sometimes they can help by taking people out of the current argument, but mostly, they just add more complexity instead of simplifying the arguments. > I think that one of the reasons that you’re struggling to believe that reciprocation is not required is because the social norm is not an equal reciprocation. If a male stranger on the street says hi to a woman, the only acceptable responses are a positive social response in return or silence. A negative response is not acceptable. > > That’s because the social norm is now largely based on chivalry. I pulled this quote (which is almost the only part I agreed with in the article) from [an article I read on the catcall video](http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/11/03/street-harassment-catcall-video-race-women-gender-equity-column/18373531/): > > Chivalry dictates that women respond with a deferential response. It’s possible that if the social norms were different, the woman might choose to respond with a negative response. Under the current social norms, that would be a rude response. > > Why might a woman respond in that manner if the social norms were different? Because as you point out, the woman may not be interested in the same social interaction that the man is interested in engaging in. Yes, she could ignore it. But if the norms were more equal, she could also give her assessment of the interaction. > > It’s actually difficult to come up with an example negative response because it would come across as rude since it would be judged under the current system of social norms which are largely based on chivalry. That’s an extremely thought-provoking analysis. I agree that the current social framework is sort of a blend of chivalry and modern egalitarianism, and it suffers from a certain hybrid deficiency as a result. One thing we have not discussed, and I think it sheds some light on our views, is to turn it around. I have argued – and still believe – that it’s not rude in the least to nod and greet passers-by with a short phrase such as “Hi,” or “Morning!” But now I ask myself: what if a woman were to do the same thing? And the answer is: I expect that the majority of people would respond positively, but not alarmingly. And I believe that an unacceptably large percentage of men would take even such a neutral greeting as an invitation of some sort. And it’s thus fair to say that – especially in a large city setting – women really can’t participate in that ritual on one side, so is it fair to make them the recipient of it, harmless as it is? I don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2014, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930/660 "2014-11-04T16:28:40Z")
On the other hand. Is the whole [“Alex from Target”](http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/alex-from-target?bffb) thing relevantly analogous (or even equivalent) to catcalling? (And btw how old is Alex?) You know which side of the catcalling issue I’m on, but these seem like obvious questions to ask… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930.md?page=32) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shoshana-roberts-a-street-walker-10-hours-films-herself-being-harassed/702930.md?page=34)