VERBAL RAPE!!! No means NO, oppressor! DOWN with the middle-class white male patriarchal heterodigm!
I thought all the shrill shrews were on Tracy’s side. Apparently not.
Yep. Flirtatiousness becomes outright hostility if it’s persisted in once the other person makes clear that they don’t enjoy it. But, by the same token, many types of flitation (or even ‘hitting on’) that go on can be seen as offensive to some, cheesy to others, and hot to some others.
Part of the process of flirting is that men (generally) can’t know how a woman will respond to a given ‘line’ or ‘tack’ or what have you. Their initial contact is generally like a sonar pulse, you never know what the reflection will be. And while the vast majority of women would be deeply offended by requests to “show us your tits!” some women will, well, drop trou.
That’s part of the problem with trying to proscribe a method of flirting, or demanding that a man be sure that he’s going to be well received before he starts flirting with/hitting on a woman with a particular schtick. Men already have to deal with the (not always negligible) impact of second guessing, dealing with rejection, etc… Asking that a man not try to flirt with a woman unless he already knows how it will be received ends up putting most guys back in high school (or middle school) and being unable to talk to a woman unless they already know she’s interested.
And after all, that’s part of the point of flirting, to find out.
A man who flirts with a woman by trying to talk about Star Trek and gets a rolleeyes in return knows that she’s not his kind of woman. Same goes for a man who tries to hit on a woman by suggesting (or saying) that they should go have sex.
And let’s be clear, even mege-super-ultra geniuses can be blunt enough to ask a woman “will you have sex with me?” as part of the ‘flirting’ process. And, it can work.
Exactly. As long as you are out of your house (or posting in a public forum if you’re in it), you should expect that people might interact/talk/address/flirt with you. That doesn’t mean that you are obligated to find their small talk/smiles/conversation/flirting charming or even pleasant, but if you’re in public, you can not have a reasonable expectation to go totally invisible.
Of course, you always have the right to tell someone to fuck right the fuck off if they bother you, and they land squarely in the wrong if they don’t, but that’s a separate issue.
What you appear to be missing is that after Tracy made accusations of sleaze and sexism, people were responding to those accusations, not the original post. If she had said “I know I just told you all about how amazing my boobs look, but on second thought please don’t mention them” there would have been no issue.
The two responses that did mention them were not out of line with the original post. Both were extremely mild. Tracy posted that her shirt made her waist look tiny and her boobs look amazing, and two people said they would like to see her wearing the shirt.
The mildness of the responses, and the fact that they were completely in line with the original post, tends to be lost because some people are making up exaggerated, imagined responses, or trying to retroactively shift the topic to actual inappropriate responses they saw in a different thread at a different time.
While I agree it’s a bit obnoxious to get DDD implants or wear a Showgirls-inspired diamanté bikini then complain that you’re being stared at, it doesn’t really make a difference in the grand scheme of things – you’re judging the behavior of those around you, most of whom, I would assume, do not know whether or not you’re cosmetically enhanced.
Really, anything less than a full-fledged burqa could be worn in an attempt to draw attention to or away certain body parts.
(missed edit window)
Really, anything less than a full-fledged burqa could be worn in an attempt to draw attention to or away certain body parts. Breasts are especially interesting in this way – I’ve mentioned this before, but there were several girls in my school who got breasts first and they pretty much had no more say in how they were perceived for the next few years. They became sex objects first, people second (to the point where one of them became anorexic in an attempt to get rid of her curvy body and de-sexualize herself). Certainly no one has full control over her image – but big breasts, or even lack of big breasts, manage to define some women in ways that are completely out of their hands. Maybe because they’re one of the first things that separates the women from the boys.
I know there are some big-busted women on the Dope who complain about dressing for work – and again, a skinny, flat-chested woman and a curvy woman can often wear an identical outfit and only one will be accused of showing off her ‘goods.’
Wanting to look good in a dress is, essentially, the same thing as wanting to look good in a suit – and plenty of women and gay men find men in suits hot – but who’s going to accuse a male newscaster or CEO of showing off his ass or broad shoulders?
I may be confused here, so please clarify:
Are you saying that a woman has a ‘right’ to not have anybody flirt with/hit on/gawk at her unless she’d enjoy their flirtation/sexual advances, or merely that she’s got the right to be left alone once she makes her wishes clear?
If she does have this right to be ‘protected’ from being ‘victimized’ by initial contact, do others? If a man is walking down the street wearing an attention catching shirt, can he be legitimately upset (or as some have alleged, a “victim”) if people stare at his shirt? Is the response to someone handing out pamphlets on a street corner or a preacher up on a soap box to claim that you’ve been “victimized” by them, or to simply accept that the public sphere involves input that some might find distasteful, and go about one’s business?
I’m just not getting the problem some people are bringing up, and I’m not sure if you’re agreeing with them or not. In a nutshell, I don’t get what’s so wrong about even initial unwanted sexual advances that’s any more wrong than someone asking you if you’d like to hear more about Jesus or trying to sell you a vacuum cleaner. The problem of being flirted with/hit on obnoxiously and thus made a “victim” seems so absurdly blown out of proportion as to be a self-caricature. People are rude, obnoxious, etc… all the time. And while it’s aesthetically displeasing, I can’t manage more than a “Yeah, that sucks, but so what?” Someone wears too much perfume, has bad BO, listens to music too loud? “Yeah, that sucks, but so what?” Would you contend that the dynamic is different enough that if someone obnoxiously says “hey baby!” that the response is then “stop victimizing me!”
it seems as if some posters here are saying that unwanted flirtation/sexual advances are somehow a serious, or at least a significant sort of a burden rather than just one of life’s many annoyances that should best be ignored as you go about your the rest of your day.
Whether other people know is immaterial to the fact that if one makes a conscious choice that results in a specific situation within social norms, they must accept partial responsibility for the existence of this situation.
Consider a different example: A woman puts on a short skirt and low cut blouse, goes to a known local pick-up bar and drinks an alcoholic beverage, and makes eye contact with males in the bar. This woman would have to accept partial responsibility for any flirting that occurs pursuant to this behavior.
**Finn **and Carmady, thanks for the replies.
It depends on the nature of the flirting and the person’s response to your rejection of their advances. Some flirting is flattering, some of it is creepy, and some of it is downright gross. Some guys take your rejection with grace, some with indifference, and some become aggressive dicks. There’s no way to say if it’s just going to be a little annoyance or if it’s going to ruin your day. I’ve had flirtations that run the gamut, though thank god the wedding band put an end to all that.
I was going to find a way to call you Boobieshriek, but I did some soul-searching and concluded that I’m a better man than that.
Oh, good christ. Is it too much for you (and the long line of posters you claim) to accept that someone else might think differently? Sometimes people do. Some of them are called women. Not all of them are out to castrate you and rob you of your dangly bits; they just have a freaking different perspective. Get over it.
I don’t disagree with this and god knows, I’ve had my fill of older men (usually with really bad teeth or gold teeth–even worse) 1. actually thinking that they had any sort of any chance with me and 2. making truly offensive comments to single, young me.
BUT. Here’s the thing: men aren’t mindreaders (and neither are women). We cannot blame men in toto for the uncomfortable feelings their attempts at connection bring out in us, especially when sometimes those exact same attempts will NOT make us feel uncomfortable. Context matters too much to be able to do any kind of blanket rule–life sure would be simpler if we could have a few blanket rules.
Do some use this gray area to be complete and total dicks about flirting? Absolutely, as do some bosses , dates, BILs etc. Dicks are everywhere. But so are nice guys and clueless guys who thought they’d be funny or whimsical and it went completely wrong (see 4 Weddings and a Funeral for Best Man speeches–a related topic–one goes quite well; the other is gruesome). And let’s not forget the perpetually immature–sadly, they exist among us as well…
That’s why most of the posters here have been saying “hey, if the woman tells you to stop, only a jerk keeps doing it.” The difference in this scenario is that **TL **didn’t just tell them to stop–she called them sexist, and here we are.
I still contend that if anyone says in public that their top makes their boobs look amazing, she is opening the floor to comments. I don’t want women to shut up, just to be aware that the subject has now been broached.
And to think we haven’t truly yet breached the nasty subject of women who do dress to provoke and then slap down guys when they get the reaction they deliberately tried to elicit. They exist, too. In a sad, small world, but they exist… (I don’t think that was TL’s intent, but we’ll never really know her intent).
Oh yeah, I can see that. You’re HILARIOUS. I’m so glad I really tried to participate honestly in this thread just so you could make this joke and try to humiliate me. If I laugh, I guess I’m a good sport, har har. If I don’t, you win, I’m a shrill harpy. I guess I really just want you to go fuck yourself. I actually used to enjoy your posts, but my humorless feminazi side is going to win out on this one. You’re a tool.
All righty then!
Yeah, call Lamia a dyke, make some lame, mean-spirited joke about my name, all righty then! Your work taking a piss on us in this thread is DONE! All in the name of having a sense of humor, I’m sure, lighten up, don’t take everything so seriously. If you can’t, I’m sure my little joke will make you feel like shit for it. Good job.
Seriously, VT… have you gone off your meds, or something? You’re normally so much more lovable.
I think he asked a woman to show him her boobies once, and she cruelly refused him. This thread is giving him flashbacks and making him mean.
I asked Rodney Dangerfield to show me his boobies once, and he cruelly obliged.
Suse, you are good for a chuckle.
Not at all, that’s why I wrote " you might think that referencing the enhanced attractiveness of breasts is non-sexual, and for you it might be . . . "
Obviously the above indicates that I am aware of that.
And some of those who agree with me are called women, too. In fact, eleanorigby (a woman? a Beatles fan? both?) posted just after you to say:
Never said they were. Any value your opinion might have to others is crushed by this sort of hyperbole.
I think it’s pretty clear that I am aware that some folks (like you) might have a different perspective than mine and that perspective might cause them to reach a different conclusion regarding whether the gratuitous mention of “boobies look[ing] amazing” to a mixed company of strangers in a thread about stain removal could be seen as carrying, at least in part, a “sexual” conotation. I think those folks are naive. Again we are talking about what one should expect perceptions to be, not what one would desire perceptions to be.
Physician, heal thyself!