Yes, absolutely. I employ this tactic at the gym too, and even then, some guy actually grabbed my arm to get my attention *while I was running on a treadmill *just to say “hi” :rolleyes:
(and no I was not dressed in provocative gym clothes, in case anyone tries to go there)
Uh, yeah, that would be, e.g., Bouncer, who used the argument about men being “visually stimulated to a sexual response” to claim that this makes incidents of men harassing attractive women who are wearing normal clothing “nearly inevitable”.
If straight men expect gay men to refrain from harassing them on the street no matter how sexually delicious they look, then women can sure as hell expect straight men to refrain likewise. And yes, there do seem to be posters in this thread who have a hard time grasping that concept.
Very true. As a native NYer, people (men and women) are just moving picks that I try not to walk into. Usually, my mind is elsewhere. I joke that on the subway, a naked model could be across the way and I wouldn’t notice unless she invaded my personal space.
That’s not the same thing.
You can think it’s wrong to treat women that way and still think women who dress this way share some responsibility for it.
Because not everyone is going to act properly, and you have to know it.
It’s like if you walk alone into a dangerous neighborhood at night flashing cash or expensive bling, you bear some responsibility for what happens to you, and have less right to sympathy from people to whom you complain about it. But that’s not to say that the actions of the muggers are in any way justified.
I think this is something that has been hashed out on this board before in similar threads, so I’m not sure if there’s genuine confusion about it.
Note: this is not to say that the women currently under discussion has done the equivalent or bears any responsibility. Just to say that someone who does argue that she bears some is not necessarily arguing that the actions of these men are justified. These are two separate things.
Someone who makes this argument believes that the woman deserves some form of chastisement for the choices she made – YogSosoth’s tone was appropriate, in my view, because only the catcallers deserve to be chastised for their behavior.
Exactly.
What I object to is not the tone in isolation, but the attempt to bolster and justify it by pretending to be mocking something other than what was actually said.
[I’m aware from prior discussions that you personally don’t believe in honesty once you’ve decided to mock something, but I disagree and in any event wasn’t addressing you.]
So, what about my Starbucks situation in Post 187? I’m not condoning catcalling or any behavior such as that, and I assume that we both agree that smiling at or giving a nod across the room are “acceptable” forms of behavior, so long as it doesn’t become some act of leering.
This woman was clearly dressed for attention, wearing less than half of any other patron in the coffee shop. If someone was to approach her while she was sitting down, waiting on her order, and give her a general compliment (“Excuse me, I don’t mean to bother you, but you are a very attractive woman.”), could she really act like she was completely surprised by being approached or acknowledged in such a fashion?
I’m not asking for an opinion as to the appropriateness of the comment, I’m asking if she should be shocked that someone would give her that attention.
Oh yeah, the 28th Amendment. I always forget that one.
I’m not sure what mocking you’re referring to.
Not that I understand what you’re saying here, but I don’t think I’ve mocked anyone in this thread, unless my memory is very poor. I’ve certainly been harshly critical of a few people.
I don’t know if she should be shocked, but that’s not my point – my point is that treating her differently because of what she chooses to wear is wrong, barring extremely outlandish circumstances (like she wears a Nazi uniform, or she is completely naked, or wears a suit of human skin, etc.), and no one is responsible for this bad behavior except for the folks who behave badly.
I didn’t notice you mocking anyone here either. But to repeat - from something you just quoted: “I […] wasn’t addressing you.”
But you brought up mocking (from someone else, I presume) – what mocking were you referring to?
In my experience, this is standard practice – inject yourself into any SDMB conversation you want. But if you don’t want to talk about it any more with me, that’s fine. I just didn’t (and still don’t) understand what your criticism of YogSosoth was about.
Make up your mind, doofus. Are you claiming that women who walk down a busy public street dressed in attractive normal clothing and minding their own business “share some responsibility” for the fact that they are repeatedly and constantly harassed by men, or aren’t you?
Because if you are, you’re entirely and cluelessly wrong. While flashing cash in a dangerous neighborhood is unconventional and inappropriate behavior, walking like a properly dressed normal person down a busy street IS NOT.
Your idiotic analogy might have some merit if the woman in question were walking down a city street blowing kisses at strangers or gyrating in a striptease routine. Even then, of course, the people who harassed her would be the ones responsible for their own actions, but it could justly be argued that her extravagantly unconventional and inappropriate behavior was contributing to the problem.
But simply being an attractive normally dressed woman minding her own business walking down a public street IS NOT OUT OF LINE OR UNCONVENTIONAL OR INAPPROPRIATE TO THE SITUATION.
And any man who whines that the mere existence of such a woman is an irresistible provocation to lewd or annoying behavior, and that the woman in question therefore “shares some responsibility” for such behavior, can eat a bag of dripping dicks for the stupid sexist cumstain that he is.
I’ve spoken to plenty of women who don’t mind in the slightest a polite “hello.” So unless you know a specific woman objects to that, then treat everyone as though a polite “Hello,” is ok.
Why isn’t that the rule?
Presumably because one would prefer to risk that a woman might think you a bit unfriendly rather than a woman might feel threatened and/or uncomfortable.
I would not mind in the slightest if I walked down the street during a Pride event and had gay men say, “Hello,” or “Afternoon!” to me. Or straight men. Or gay women. Or bisexual men. Or men who identify as straight except after a few beers.
Pay attention. “Lots of women speaking up”, i.e., reinforcing a general etiquette convention via widespread public opinion forums in a society, is not the same as you personally “speaking to plenty of women” as a private individual.
Dumb troll is dumb, or else genuinely doesn’t understand the different connotations of the term “speaking” in different contexts. In which case, still dumb, but less a troll.
On the west coast it’s quite common to greet strangers that way, and honestly, I’ve never heard a woman complain about being harassed because some man smiled and said “hello” to her.
I don’t agree that the rule you’ve advanced constitutes a “general etiquette convention.”
Is your name Emily Post, perchance? Or do you have some other authority which would elevate your assertion to a level at which I cannot simply disregard it as nonsense?