I’m reminded of the people who hear “Black Lives Matter” and self-righteously retort “No, ALL lives matter”.
If harassment of men is so rare, then stopping it will hardly be noticed. Asking someone to give up something that they don’t do in the first place is no sacrifice. It’d be like if my doctor told me to give up kale.
Discourse has a lot of new features but I don’t think it has that functionality.
(If it does, the SDMB definitely has more options for making money.)
LOL! You win the thread.
That’s ridiculous. The less common a crime is, the more resources will have to be devoted in order to reduce its frequency even further. Want to reduce jaywalking, just tell the cops to make it a priority and they’ll have no trouble writing a hundred tickets a day. On the other hand, look at the Herculean effort the Republicans are having to go to in order to try to find even a tiny bit of voter fraud.
But whatever, people here don’t want to acknowledge that patriarchy and sexism are things that exist and affect women more than men. Have fun with that. As a practical matter, it’s hard to imagine any effective campaign against harassment that wouldn’t benefit both sexes, even if it was primarily designed to help one or the other.
Goddamn you. Do you have any idea how Scotch feels up the nose?
One point I’d like to make, which is going slightly off-topic (but heck, I started the thread), is on the thing of being judged based on looks.
It’s true that being ogled is generally a different phenomenon between men and women.
Men are not going to feel unsafe in an environment where women are ogling them (unless we talk about extreme examples like being in a pop band). And frankly, men’s sexuality does usually run different such that we’re happy to have more options.
I was popular with girls in my younger days and it never bothered me, and nowadays I have friends who are very handsome and they enjoy that attention too.
(DemonTree gave a good example of the kinds of rare situation where a guy might feel uncomfortable though)
OTOH, being “judged on your looks” for most people is going to mean people implying that you’re not good-looking or not masculine or look old or whatever. And it’s one of those “being a man” things that you’re supposed to laugh it off and say something self-deprecating. But I can see that it stings, and even tough guys give a very forced smile.
I get told, usually indirectly, that I’m not good-looking now pretty frequently, and I don’t even hit on girls. For guys trying to get themselves out there, it must be absolutely constant.
In other words, short people and tall people both get the same twelve-inch stool so they can see over the seven-foot fence.
Yes, I disagree. Even though it affects one sex much more than the other, that doesn’t mean all men are or should be fine with it. @Mijin makes a good point that objectifying people also includes judging their appearance negatively, and men may find this at least unpleasant.
Having the same rule for everyone avoids favouritism and the appearance of favouritism, whereas different rules for different groups can lead to resentment. Since there is no particularly compelling benefit to allowing objectifying men, and there are benefits to banning it, I think we should ban both.
I don’t think anyone has failed to acknowledge that this affects women more than men. Some of us think having the same rule for everyone is better nevertheless.
A more accurate analogy for this situation would be tall people and short people both getting a 3 foot stool to see over the 7 foot fence, since we are giving men protection they may not need rather than failing to protect women.
How, practically speaking, do you suggest we “ban” objectification? Are we all going to have to wear unisex burqas? I think we can move towards discouraging the public expression of blatantly sexist attitudes and encouraging attitudes that support gender equality…of course, when people try to do that they’ll be attacked for being “politically correct”. It’s a process of gradual social change, not something that can be accomplished with an edict that XYZ is now “banned”.
Ask the mods if you’re not sure what the rules are. They’ve already said they’re going to try and treat men and women the same, outside of obviously asymmetrical things like pics of topless men vs pics of topless women.
Oh, I see, when you said we should ban objectification, you meant “we” as in the SDMB, not as in “society in general”. I suppose the name of the forum should have given me a clue. Yes, as far as SDMB moderation I agree that treating everyone the same is a good policy.
I think it’s a good rule in general to treat everyone/all groups the same unless there is a really compelling reason not to. That seems to be the rule most countries follow too, in prohibiting discrimination.
Moderation of this board is not the same as police prosecuting crimes. We don’t have to take resources off of some crimes to look for others.
The rules should be the same for all genders. If threads which objectify men as so rare that they’re not a problem, then no one will miss them when they’re gone.
Well, if he didn’t want that kind of attention I guess he shouldn’t have come out dressed like a tart, should he?
Sorry again. I got turned around and forgot that we were only talking about SDMB moderation policy rather than the much more complex topic of how we should deal with the broad social issue of objectification. My bad.
No other words are needed, just the ones I used. I find that people that need to rephrase an argument in order to score some kind of rhetorical point are not interested in discussion. If you would like to talk about what I said, let me know. If you want to talk about what you said, I’m not interested.
You’re just using the wrong theme. Mine does that and more but it asks first. And it’s free.
I’d swap but my wife wouldn’t be happy about it. 
Yes, it’s weird to have your wife be jealous of your computer.
It just that he can find that wand button in the middle of the G/H/B keys. But…