How many is a few? Is this another one of your surveys?
This is what I was asking you before: do you really think people are just born creeps or non-creeps, and there’s nothing that can affect their behavior? That seems like very lazy thinking.
We all know what cleavage is. We’re asking about revealing because several posters have said a woman who shows too much skin ought to know what she’s in for and shouldn’t complain.
Aren’t most people taught “don’t stare” as children? There’s really nothing else to that part of it. If you take a quick glance at someone you’re not that likely to have a problem; if you stop what you’re doing and stare, there’s a good chance you’ll make someone else uncomfortable.
I thought about this today, a hot, humid summer day. A bunch of us families were at the park and one of the women was wearing something which, gasp, showed some cleavage. Her husband, also one of the friends, was there and the rest of us husbands managed the whole morning to interact normally without staring at her boobs.
Is it really that difficult?
You’ve invented a strawman here.
If you cannot get the difference between an innocent glance and gawking, then learn to not look. It really is that simply.
At a 4th party last night there was a pregnant pause when we all saw hotdog condiments slide off a woman’s bun, going directly down her cleavage. Nobody wanted to be the first to laugh. Then someone did and all joined. Nice group of people, so nobody offered to go in after it.
ETA: it was diced onion, sauerkraut, mustard, relish.
Do you reckon that the rule of thumb is the same for each individual, or that there is a wide tolerance? Do you suppose some might take offense if you avoid looking at them/the affected area?
So you’re saying that to a certain extent you get to determine where the line is and whether what you’re doing is gawking or simply seeing? And in those cases if someone were to take offense it wouldn’t be your fault? Where is this line and is it cross-cultural and universally applicable? The Fonz isn’t sailing over a shark on water skis here. This point was actually the basis for my involvement in the thread. Martian Bigfoot expressed guilt over fleeting glances at women. Dangerosa responded that it was a proper sense of shame for gawking. If you search for “caught ogling” it seems to have a very wide definition.
Sure. But can you appreciate the difference between saying, “[she] ought to know what she’s in for and shouldn’t complain” and “if the thought of someone looking at your cleavage makes you particularly uncomfortable, then perhaps you shouldn’t bare your cleavage.” The latter, which is what I’m saying, is that any heightened sensitivity a woman feels when her cleavage is visible, any narrowing in her tolerances of what she considers “ogling” when it comes to her cleavage is not the responsibility of anyone but herself.
And we’re right back where we started. What’s staring? How long is a quick look? Who sets the standards and gets to decide what’s offensive? Is it the same for all body parts or does it vary? If it varies, why? If while scanning your surroundings your eyes fix on a woman’s cleavage for what most people would consider brief moment, but she sees it and takes offense are you at fault for her discomfort? Is there ever a point at which the offense taking can be blown off as an over-reaction?
Yes. That is correct. That is the solution. That is the only possible alternative. It was a thoroughly well thought out suggestion when proffered on page 1 and it’s even more appropriate now. In a perfect world women would have other alternatives to tops that reveal cleavage; articles of clothing like these and these and many of these and these, but sadly they are from a bygone era. There is simply no middle ground anymore. They must walk around in pasties or shield themselves with a burqa. Woe be unto them.
I wear a jewel neck a lot - doesn’t keep men from gawking. That and turtlenecks are the work neckline. Even my scoop neck tank tops don’t show breast tissue unless you happen to be looking down my shirt.
And sometimes I go out with my husband, and I wear something that does show the curve of my breasts. He likes that. That doesn’t mean I want the waiter staring down my shirt, or the bartender asking my breasts what they would like to drink. And yes, I do expect men to behave better.
And sometimes, I don’t have too much choice - I haven’t seen a lot of swimsuits with a jewel neckline.
I hate to tell you this, but both statements are stupid. And they both tend to shift responsibility to the woman and her clothes. The thing is, it’s pretty easy to check out a woman even if her clothes aren’t particularly revealing and don’t expose much. You can stare at her breasts even if she’s not exposing any cleavage. Revealing clothing might result in more stares, but there isn’t a one-to-one relationship here. And of course different guys prefer different body parts, so at a certain point you might realize this is unreasonable.
I’m not sure this is back where we started. I was trying to illuminate some of the details of this issue; this reads more like a determined attempt at nitpicking.
I addressed this already: people have the right to come to their own conclusions about their own experiences. You may be reasonably discrete about looking at a woman and she may not like it anyway. That doesn’t mean she’s unreasonable or that you’re a huge perv; it’s two different people with different ideas about an event. I hate to tell you this, but if you’re looking for some formula where no reasonable person can object to your behavior, you’re SOL. And we’re going to eliminate all disagreements. I do think it’s incumbent on people to be respectful and take responsibility for their own behavior precisely because there are gray areas here. If you’re checking someone out, don’t blame their clothes.
Shifting responsibility for what? What I find unreasonable is the idea that an objectionable, or even shameful act has been committed simply by looking at someone–for however long that may be. At a certain point we all have to be responsible for our feelings, and IMHO within the given context the line is looking. You can call it shifting responsibility to women if it makes you feel better; to me it seems to place the burden of responsibility for their feelings precisely where it belongs. I feel the same when guys express anger over getting checked out by other guys. Meh, they’re just enjoying the view.
If you go back and reread the first post of mine you responded to you’ll find that it’s precisely where we started. If you don’t have an answer or don’t think it has an answer, which seems to be what you’re saying, that’s fine. But don’t try to hand wave it away as nitpicking, because it seems to be a rather important point: If we can’t define what gawking is and how it differs from an innocent look, then I don’t know why we should take anyone’s objections to gawking seriously. In each case it would seem to be an attempt to make another person responsible for what’s really our own insecurity, shame, hang-ups, whatever.
I’m not sure I would go as far as “shameful,” but yes, staring at people tends to make them uncomfortable. That’s a secret to precisely nobody. All kinds of minor social interactions can make people feel good or bad. This is ingrained in us so deeply that the failure to pick up on those social cues is considered a type of disorder. If you [the general you] take the view that that stuff doesn’t matter and you shouldn’t have to pay attention to it, you’re being a jerk.
Yes, we do. And determining that point is complicated.
I’m calling it that because that’s what it is.
And I mean, isn’t the woman really reflecting light at you? Shouldn’t she take responsibility for sending particles of light at your eyeballs? … It shouldn’t be news to anyone that social interactions can be complex and subtle and the details can be hard to pin down. That doesn’t mean you can say “look, you’re the one with all the hangups- I’m gonna do what I want” without the result of people thinking you’re rude and inconsiderate. After all you are declaring your intent not to consider other people’s feelings.
If our caveman ancestors had had such a view, none of us would be alive today. Being able to recognize and respond appropriately to a threatening person well before an attack is a basic survival skill, and anyone who would shrug off an encounter with a leering stranger under some Pollyanna belief like the one in bold is showing that they lack such survival skills. They are essentially the same kind of idiot that will play patty cake with a venomous snake.
It doesn’t happen very often that I notice when people are staring at me (friends usually have to point it out to me when it happens because I tend to be oblivious to my surroundings), but when I do, it can be unnerving the same way unnerving when a crazy person gets on the train and starts raving and ranting at ghosts. People that deviate from socially accepted behavior usually are unpredictable and often have no problem with violating other people’s boundaries. At best, this means they are a nuisance. At worst, a danger.
With all this talk about taking responsibility for one’s feelings, it puzzles me why you would let yourself be bothered by what others considered offensive. If a woman gets angry at you because you’ve pinged her perv meter, what’s it to you? By your logic, this reaction should just roll off your back like gravy.
The latest in the “How low can we go” series of reality shows seems apropos here, as the debate over whether clothing is too revealing or not becomes moot:
NSFWDating Naked
Notice the first couple to be shown naked, where the guy is staring creepily and purposefully into her eyes, saying he’s not going to look down for 20 minutes.
It’s a vicious circle. I catch myself looking and make myself look away and then get caught looking and get angry glares and stare AWAY pointedly, only to have my eyes fall upon someone else close by.
If I close one eye, can I stare/gawk/look for twice the acceptable length of time?
(tho that might appear I’m winking at the subject, which could open up a different can of worms)
AMEN, for men as well. Tried buying men’s shorts that end above the knee lately? Geez, just wear trousers.
Quoted because apparently it was missed before.
“But the titties are there for me!”
I think there’s some vagueness to the original statements.
Let’s see if we can put some context to the words. “Observing” means you notice. “Glancing” is a momentary observation and then shifting eyes away. “Staring” means you keep looking for some undefined length of time but is generally fairly socially understood. “Gawking”, “ogling”, and “leering” bring the reaction of the observer into the equation, including facial gestures, or changing body position to get a better look, etc.
Cameras are deceptive because they capture that momentary glance and freeze it for all to see, draw it out into the stare of a lifetime.
I would say step back, the line of concern should be between a momentary glance and staring. Leering is right out.
Certainly if a woman has a self-consciousness about her body, her own sense of modesty involved, she should be aware of that and respond accordingly. But at the same time, her clothing choices shouldn’t be considered free rein for men to stare, or make comments, or shift around to get a better look, or move closer, or otherwise draw attention to that observation.
I think if someone takes offense at a momentary glance, I would still feel a bit bad about making them uncomfortable.
I scrolled down on each of those pages, and I didn’t notice a single woman with a cup size over size D, possibly even a C. As has been mentioned before in this thread, women with larger breasts can wear the same cut of an outfit and it will still be more revealing.
Even full coverage can still scream “boobs”. Case in point, I was watching “Heroes of Cosplay”, and one of the stars is Riki. She has fairly large breasts, and isn’t afraid to use them in her cosplay. But one outfit stuck out to me, and it wasn’t showing any cleavage. She was being interviewed for those observational/reflection segments on reality competition shows, and she was wearing a red outfit that fully covered her chest. But something about the outfit just screamed “my, that sure is a lot of material”. Unfortunately an image search isn’t uncovering that image, but here is one costumethat doesn’t show any cleavage and yet somehow still conveys big boobs.
Or check out this Rocketeer outfit. The coat comes up to her neck, but it still screams boobs.
