Hmm. I don’t want to re-direct the thread to me or my sex life, but the views are mine and I do live by them. I see them less as romantic and more as old-fashioned, as I was raised by my grandparents and greatly admired them, especially my grandfather. Those same values mean I’ve had few partners, always long-term, so you’re right that I’m not “getting plenty.”
The nice guy/tough guy thing is tricky, as I have different views on what being tough is. As an example - I’ve been to every Twilight movie since the series started. My friends uniformly see this as me being a pushover, uncharacteristically so given my personality. From my perspective, I don’t see how a grown man, most of whom see themselves strong and/or tough, or even the ones that see themselves as sensitve and caring, can stand in a theater lobby whining like a 5 year old about spending a measly 2 hours making someone he cares about happy. I shut up and go.
Which brings us back around to the thread topic, and where I started. To me, you can’t claim to be a man with all the implications people pile onto the word when they throw it out, then moan and rationalize and whine about how you can’t be expected to control your helpless little self, as so many were about the cleavage issue. Just shut up and stop staring. Is that attitude being a tough guy, a nice guy, or just a man? I always shoot for the last and leave the interpretations alone.
I call it plain common sense. Integrity. Basic human decency. Having a clue about social interactions. Self-respect expressed in showing respect to others. Taking responsibility for one’s own actions.
That’s true, but not relevant to my point. Which is, again, that you can’t prove a concensus from a non-representative sample.
Because there are two people involved.
Not sure what this means.
I’m not sure I quite understand what you’re saying here. But to the extent that you’re ruling using a logical process, ISTM like a way to translate feelings into fact, and thereby give the trump card to whoever has the strongest feelings about it. If you’re saying something else, then I’ve missed it.
Looking is fine, but don’t stare. I think the women here have made it quite clear that there is a line between a peek and an ogle. If you cannot behave yourself in polite company where its not ok to stare, then yes, it is your fault. Women aren’t responsible for your own eyes nor should it be expected of them. The fact that they dress in a way that sometimes shows some cleavage does not give you the right to leer at them. They’re not doing it for you, they’re doing it for them
It’s relevant. The only representative samples we can account for, are from members motivated enough to respond to the OP’s question(s). Of that group, the majority of respondents have done so in an overwhelmingly similar fashion, consisting mostly of women, but certainly not limited to.
The operating word here, is consensus, and based on what I’ve read, one has been established, meeting the criteria of a largely subjective social question. So while I wouldn’t use the word “prove” (because I don’t think it applies), we certainly have found our answer(s).
But one belongs. Unless you’re invited to interact with her buxom in a way that she sees comfortable, then one view is recognized, and understandably, that’s the one that matters. Our perspective is inherently extroverted, and as such, has very limited bearing on how a given woman chooses to conduct herself (mishap or otherwise). With this understanding, it leads to the response, below.
There is a line called “sexism” which can potentially be crossed, when a perspective is equally used as justification for actions:
-“Hey, why are you adjusting your shirt? If I can see your girls, I have a right to look…what? I’m not being lecherous.”
The above is what the OP essentially expressed, in what can be viewed as a loaded (with implications), question. In the original context that you entered, a person created an analogy between a woman’s breast and that of a hat with blinking lights, claiming they were both noticeable-- sure, that’s his perspective, but it’s a bit disingenuous when you consider the core of the argument and what motivates a person to wear a hat with blinking lights, versus what a woman naturally comes equipped with. The fact that many of the responding women had already debunked the premise in the OP, drove it home.
When you add other touches of your perspective, such as: “Women have a lot of emotions that men don’t share and find very puzzling.”, it may not be your intention, but it does come across as sexist, so you have to tread carefully.
The OP didn’t lead with questions that were traditionally objective, where you would promote discussion by pushing facts and proof to bolster a point. His questions were loosely structured, so as to invite subjective qualitative feedback, in order to establish a greater understanding.*****
So far as logic should be applied, most of the women responded more logically about what actually happens when cleavage is exposed, as opposed to the idea that it’s sexually motivated. Go figure.
*****[ul][li]Why do many women wear shirts that show cleavage, then move their hands to cover it up, by moving the shirt up or closing their outer garment, when a man is talking with them?[/li][li] Why not just don’t wear a shirt that shows cleavage in the first place rather than implicating the man of lechery with the adjustments?[/li][/ul]
Who can disagree that talking into our leering at a women’s chest is socially unacceptable behaviour ? MRAs aren’t concerned about the right to stare at your ta-tas unfettered, get over yourselves seriously. MRAs are about true equality for men which isn’t quite there yet. e.g. Divorce, custody issues, reproductive rights etc… Your off, way off.
I work with a lot of women, I don’t talk to their tits. I do check them out when it’s safe. I’m sure if I had eyes in the back of my head I’d catch a lot of women checking out my ass. Some times I catch women checking out my crotch. Big deal, if it bothers women that much tell them not us.
If you have an unrepresentative sample, the fact that it may be the only sample that you have does not imbue it with more meaning.
There are posters in this thread who have said that they don’t care what men find distracting and so on, and the only thing that counts WRT how they dress is them themselves, but that’s not what I was responding to. I was responding to those who made declarations of fact about what men would or would not find distracting, and in this context it’s ludicrous to assert that only a woman’s perspective counts.
[Which is besides for the fact that despite a lot of tough talk about HR, ultimately the voluntary cooperation of men is what’s being being requested.]
I disagree that the OP said anything of this sort, but even if he did, I certainly didn’t.
Two things can be similar in some ways despite being dissimilar in other ways. The distinction you draw is valid, but despite that distinction uncovered breasts and blinking lights are the same WRT the specific issue of whether they can be distracting. Which is what the issue that I commented on.
I disagree that anything has been “debunked”. Many women accurately pointed out that often women are not intending to reveal anything, but ISTR that there were also some who said that they did (just that they still didn’t want to be ogled anyway) and even if there weren’t, the sum of our knowlege is not derived from this thread, and there is no doubt that some women intentionally wear revealing clothing.
I don’t want to make too much of this, because I agree that that the answer to the OP’s question is generally because of reasons given in this thread (e.g. discomfort with perceived leering, different standards for bosses, clothing shifts, and so on), but it’s worth noting anyway because so many posters have attempted to monopolize opinion on this subject.
That’s fine, but the discussion went a lot futher than that, and that’s where I came in.
Sorry I didn’t come back earlier…eye-raping women’s cleaveage while kicking puppies is a lot of fun, but is sure takes a lot of time.
Wow, you goin’ for the stereotype? (Chile: Female presindent, possibly getting a second term, Brazil: Female prez, Argentina: Ditto, Peru: Female candidates going to runoff in 2 of the last 3 elections)
You’re American so that possible means you’re either mass-shooting kids in a school or attacking a country a killing civilians with drones.
Since I’m not hurt, offendend, or angry about anyone expressing the opinions here, I’ll simply pass on those comments.
Women’s perspectives have value in all threads, saying they don’t is simply trying to earn some cheap pity-points.
I completely and unreservedly aree with your definitions of creep.
Lack of self-control? Do point out where I showed it.
You make my point better than I could when you said “women’s bodies can be noticed and admired without causing any ruffled feathers or an HR incident.”, because that’s what I said (or tried to).
I clealry said that staring was wrong.
If I’m ever in a literal sea of boobs, I’ll be distracted.
Put up? Never. Telling them to fuck off is closer. Maybe you’re projecting.
Your lion-loincloth story woud be a nice Disney story. However, Lion-loincloth societies have, in a gigantic majority of cases, been absolutely shitty to women, you really don’t want to go there for sex issues. It is only when societies have advanced a lot that a creep can be rightfully clasified as “making women feel unconfortable with his demeanor” and not "seeing them as “just spread your legs and then make me dinner”.
No slack-cutting here, stealing is stealing. However, if you told your friends that you left 1000 bucks and then act all surpised that you didn’t find them a week later I imagine you won’t get a lot of simpathy.
The dog story is perfect. They got a look and were classy about it; that is what I would call normal behaviour. Expecting them to cover their eyes and going to hypnosis therapy to erase any memory of the incident is silly.
Only my wife gets to do stuff with my ass.
If “bustin yo ASS up” means “absolutely missing the point” then I agree.
Creeps are creeps and should be treated as such, like garbage.
Stealing a glance is not being a creep.
Wow, what a low bar you have set, when a completely wrong arument is a good one.
So what? India had a female prime minister. Doesn’t mean a damn thing for the rank-and-file women of the country. Anyway, I’m not saying you’re sexist because I know that you live in Latin America. I’m saying you’re sexist because you keep posting sexist things. You’re welcome!
I work with undergraduates all the time. Frequently fairly young ones – seventeen, eighteen, nineteen. Perhaps 40% of them are male. Lots of them are international students. China’s very well represented here, for instance.
My job doesn’t really have a dress code. We wear everything from suits to shorts and T-shirts. As long as we’re not offensive, no one’s worried. And I do have a few low-cut tops. I often don’t really think about it: as long as my bra’s not showing, it can’t be too bad, right? Except there’s this one Empire-waisted blouse that I always forget about. Somehow, I don’t know how, whether it’s the pattern or the cut of the neckline or what have you, it makes me look like the prow of a ship.
Let me tell you, there are few things more irritating and embarrassing (and more embarrassing than irritating) than trying to have a consultation with a freshman boy who is firmly and fixedly staring at my cleavage the entire time. I wish I were kidding.
A glance at the girls? That’s fine. They’re large. They’re fabulous. I know it. I don’t assume that you’re going to keep your eyes off (though men who manage to get through five minutes’ conversation with no more than a brief glance get bonus points). I will probably notice and probably not judge if you glance down every once in a while. I would, too. They’re really nice. I don’t mistake it for flirting or attraction.
But if you try skeeving on me (skeeving defined as “talking to my breasts and hanging around me for no particular reason when I’m neither inviting nor receptive”), you won’t get anywhere and I’ll start pulling out the button-ups and Amish tops.
Plus: you say we are more inviting toward men we find attractive. Is that somehow a bad thing? I’m carrying quite a few extra pounds apart from Thelma and Louise up here. I’m willing to bet you’d rather I didn’t hit on you or hover (balloon-like!) around your desk and distract you while you’re trying to work. You’re allowed not to be attracted to me. That’s fine. You really aren’t required to flirt with me or to look at me as if I’m appealing to you, and if I’m acting inappropriately, you have every right to call me on it.
Typically, the men I’m attracted to are confident (Some of them are attractive, but I usually go for quirky-attractive rather than craggy and would go for David Tennant over Daniel Craig eight days out of seven. It’s amazing what a girl can find attractive, and for me it’s generally men who are optimistic, confident, pleasant, and funny). They don’t stare and drool because they don’t need to. They aren’t afraid that these are the last breasts they’ll see before the end of days.
Take control of your actions. I don’t expect you to control your thoughts, but I expect you’ll find that women in the real world don’t act like the ones in that famous diet Coke commercial with the construction workers. Publicly, anyway. Privately, we may gossip to our friends about how nice your shoulders are. Or your hands. Or even your rear. But we don’t tend to stare: we glance and use our peripheral vision and remember these when doing our daydreaming. By and large, we’re subtle. And men, too, are subtle about it by and large (Hehe. About tit. By and large).
Aji, if you think that staring is wrong, what exactly are you arguing about here?
Nobody on this thread has said a glance is wrong; nobody has said men should be mind-wiped for noticing boobs; everybody has said glance, don’t stare. Look back at the thread and what people have actually posted rather than focusing on your own ridiculous caricatures.
I’m curious about this, too. This discussion was mostly hilarious until Ají and others confessed to telling women to cover themselves, that’s when the shitstorm began. His POV seems to have evolved from this:
I’ll say it again (speaking only for myself) because he and Fotheringay-Phipps seem deaf to dissension, but if what I am wearing meets dress code, is similar to what other modern women are wearing, and doesn’t draw negative attention from the other men in the building, I really don’t care if one guy in 1,000 is “distracted” or rendered boorish in my presence. Never in my life has a man considered telling me to cover up so that he can conduct himself politely and professionally in my presence. Unless that man is doing me a kindness by warning me that I missed a button, that kind of corrective behavior shows an appalling lack of manners and social cluelessness.
This thread went weird fast, didn’t? Never expected a “hey, no fair, I was peeping those” to veer towards “better cover those up if you know what’s good for you, little lady”.
I was instructed on post 295 "As an adult, you should be able to walk through an office full of buck-naked supermodels without batting an eye or dropping your gaze. " and then to follow a womaniser-molester-assassin as a role model.
When I said “telling a friend to cover up” it was interpreted that it was because I couldn’t control myself; it is a nice gesture towards a friend; not that I couldn’t controlmyself. Somehow, my tiniest dissent with the majority opinion turned me into an uncontrolable rapist.
No, sorry, you said “Maybe it is not this guy’s fault he is such a backwards Billy. Let’s face it, Latin America sucks rocks when it comes to gender issues.” you just realised you went into ethnic stereotype territory and are backing up.
Did you say, “Hey girl, I don’t know if you checked yourself in a mirror, but that button ‘under the shelf’ there is gapping in a big way and you might want to grab a safety pin,” or was it more like, “Whoa, cleavage?! Put on a sweater!” Because the latter - unless seriously, literally, the entire office is trying to figure out how to address the extreme dress code violation - is kind of like telling a tall woman that she’s awfully tall. She knows.
Since I’d only do it with somebody I know enough, it goes (discreetly if there’s other people) like this “Suzie… the girls”; which means “Suzie, since I know you I’d think you don’t want to be showing that much here, why don’t you give he girls a check” and not “cover thyself, whore of Babylon, or forever suffer in the fires of the Gehenna” or “cover yourself because if I continue masturbating to your tits I’m gonna dehidrate”.
You may attribute noble motives to yourself and for the sake of politeness I will not gainsay you. You know best what you do. Age quod agis.
All I ever see of MRAs, though, are the shitheads who troll feminist blogs and mansplain women’s issues to women while devaluing women’s own perspectives on women’s issues. Mainly: our bodies, our choices, and our personal security. If you do not perpetrate this shoddy behavior, consider yourself unaccused.
Although “get over yourself” is too often characteristic of the shoddy discourse used by misogynists to devalue women’s perspectives. Might want to watch that if you intend to maintain a nobly righteous profile, just sayin.
To my knowledge no one has claimed that anyone who dresses in the way you describe needs to worry about what anyone else thinks. And certainly not me, at any rate. We are discussing women who push the envelope.
Per my experience with professional circles in the NY/NJ area, showing cleavage - which is what this thread is about, per the title and OP - in a professional setting is very much the exception. And just to make sure, I did a bit of a search and it seems to confirm my impressions. See for example: 9 Things Your Coworkers Won’t Tell You
Sure. But at least in my case, I’ve had the ogling and staring happen with no cleavage at all, or with the kind of cleavage that the angle has to be right to get a peek.
Now, I happen to be rather chesty. I’m also, as I pointed out above thread “of a certain age”. To top it off, ive been told that im intimidating, haughty, and unapproachable to men. in other words, I’m no longer and easily cowed 22 year old. And yet there are two gentlemen in the office who even in this shirt look at me like I’m a wounded gazelle and they are a hungry lion.
Now I don’t think either of those outfits are work inappropriate (though I wouldn’t weat the second to work myself, I see a lot of women who do, and who are Corporate Officers, so it hasn’t been career limiting). And yet, I’m still obviously a “distraction” wearing them.