Are you sure? I think a lot of guys act as they do in that video because it is how they flirt. If it turns off 99% of women, well, there’s always that 1%…
So Stringbean, you can’t admit that you brought up sex with children for no reason whatsoever? I think it’s been clear from the get-go that you have nothing substantive to say.
If you think hollering at women is flirting, I’d be surprised if you get even that 1% to respond to you. And I imagine you end up paying the ones that do.
Stringbean I honestly cannot tell at this point if you have sincerely been whooshed or are being deliberately disingenuous. Little help?
Nah, he has a valid point.
I like to tell the (entirely apocryphal) story of my college buddy who would walk up to women and ask “Hey, wanna fuck?” He’d get disgusted looks, occasionally get the shit beat out of him…but maybe one time in a hundred he’d get laid. He felt it worthwhile.
There are women who respond to hollering. Very few, but they’re out there.
That does not in any way justify the behavior.
I think he didn’t actually read the thread before posting. Now, I have some expertise on message board etiquette, having written quite a few posts on message boards. And the fact is, it’s generally considered bad form to post in a thread without reading it.
On the other hand, there are some people who enjoy reading posts written by people who don’t read the thread. My point is that posting without reading the thread sometimes works.
I see what you’re doing here.
I like it.
yes, but it makes the point men can be objectified and harassed with intrusive comments as well. but no, he’s not unsafe. but it gets 2 out of 3.
so, in other words, you are going to defend harassing 99 women from the defense that that 100th out of 99 will appreciate your attention
Explaining the phenomenon in evolutionary terms (cat-callers are somehow reproducing aren’t they?) is not the same as defending the behavior.
right :rolleyes:
I did read most of the thread, and I do faintly recall the story of the minivan handing out candy and how some of the parents were weirded out. Ho-hum, I could see that coming from a mile away.
However, I am genuinely wooshed by the relevance to what I said. The only connection I see is that both activities are creepy: cat-calling is creepy and handing out candy to kids from a minivan is creepy. But my point was not that cat-calling is creepy; my point was that the sexual dynamics of our society do not preclude cat-calling from working on occasion. Again, what I am missing is why the story of BrightNShiny giving out candy to kids from his minivan is relevant to what I said. Yes, it is creepy and most people don’t like it. I got you up to there, and then…what does it have to do with picking up women?
Well, it isn’t. I never excused the behavior. I’m sorry I tried to shed light on possible motives or cat-calling. Let us continue on our stuporous “cat-calling is bad har dee har” campaign. Understanding is ignorance, I guess.
Well, look. I have some expertise in evolution, as it was covered in a whole chapter in the book in Mrs. Carson’s ninth-grade biology class. And the fact is that we evolved to like candy. So, by giving candy to children, I was only following evolution.
ah, ok, and for your next trick, what are you going to do, explain to us why that compulsive gambler gambled away his kids college tuition?
All right, fine. I can’t believe I actually have to spell this out. Your argument is both stupid and irrelevant.
-
You point out that some women may like the attention. Big fucking deal. Most of us are well aware that people exhibit a wide range of sexual preferences. What does that have to do with anything? A lot of women are saying that they find this particular type of behavior uncomfortable, and your great point to add to the discussion is “well, some women like it.” Obviously, we’re not talking about the women who like it, or we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.
-
You reference Craigslist, which is completely irrelevant to the discussion. The person putting the ad on Craigslist is the one initiating contact (as opposed to the video). And on top of that there’s no physical proximity on Craigslist until everyone involved decides to meet up. Craigslist is completely voluntary, consensual activity, so why bring it up? Oh, to let us know that some women like this type of behavior. Yeah, well no shit, Sherlock. See my point #1.
The fact that kids may like getting free candy is irrelevant to a discussion about whether or not its appropriate to drive around handing out free candy. And the fact that some women may like this attention isn’t some big revelation, and it’s equally irrelevant to the discussion we’re having.
Why is it inappropriate to talk about the women who like this behaviour if we are discussing whether or not it’s appropriate behavior? Why is it only the women who do not like it who’s opinion matters? I’m curious how you arrived at this conclusion.
It’s perfectly relevant. It doesn’t excuse the behavior, it helps to explain it. I haven’t seen anyone actually address the underlying motivation for this behavior, at least from the perspective of strategic reproduction. So I pointed out one possible explanation. If cat-calling never worked, guys wouldn’t do it. That’s a completely relevant, if uncomfortable, observation.
Bringing up your minivan story is actually what is irrelevant. I was discussing cat-calling from an evolutionary perspective. Your story is tangential as best to such a discussion. We both agree cat-calling is inappropriate, as is driving around giving candy to kids. I never disputed that, and my point, again, was about competitive sexuality. Unless your minivan story has such a component, which you outright declare it does not, then it’s a rather useless analogy.
No, I’m going to run from the ugly truths of life and hide behind politically-correct platitudes.
I’ll thank you to do the same, lest we learn something.
Oh, my, yes, you’ve spoken great truths which are too uncomfortable for us to hear. Who cares?
No, it’s not, and I’ve explained clearly why.
Oh, this ought to be good. Please tell me what your background in evolution is. I seriously doubt you have ever studied the topic, because if you had, you wouldn’t be making these arguments in this context.
The only thing useless here is your posts in this thread.