This is no good. Nothing good will come from this. This is PC Wanker, Simpism, #MeTooOverKill.
“Intrusive staring of a sexual nature is sexual harassment and is not tolerated.”
Who are the arbiters that determine whether a "look" is a glance, a leer, flirting, maybe the person is not even actually looking at the person in question, or is but it's slightly askance, glowering, or off to the side, over her head, trying to make eye contact with someone behind her. Maybe the person is drunk, or in a minor trance, staring off into space, contemplating something important to them, totally unaware that in their field of vision there is a woman, or they might be...blind.
Where does this misguided notion come from that we, human beings, women and men, somehow have the right to go through life being unoffended by other human beings. Clothing, something printed on a T-shirt or a hat, is absolutely assured to offend someone, somewhere. Music overheard from a sidewalk, a car, a concert, a church, the Opera, someone humming a tune, or whistling, is guaranteed to offend someone, somewhere. Taking cell pics, someone taking a selfie, but way off in the background is another person, who loses their mind wondering if their image was captured in the photo. Politics, fashion, perfume, Television programming, the color you paint your home, the color of your car, the way someone walks, the way someone laughs or talks...100% guaranteed to piss off someone, somewhere.
My question to the proponents of this is...what sort of world are you trying to create? What is the ultimate and final objective here? Create laws that say that no male may look at, talk to, or even be near a female? You know who has laws like that? Hardcore religious fundamentalists like the Taliban. Complete and total separation of the sexes. I mean, to truly enact a system where this would work, to avoid any remote possible confusion, would require a draconian law where males and females are never, ever, ever, in the same room together.
My main point here Ladies and Gentlemannsss, is a few uptight women, do *not* speak for me or the bulk of women everywhere.
Just because they possess a loud "bullhorn" and throw massive conniption fits, doing all the #Hashtaggy "You go girlfriend Sister, Speak Your Truth, Band Together, Rise up Anti-Sex Misandrist Femininst" does not mean they are right, correct, or have the support of the majority of other women. We are unique. We are not homogeneous. There is no one size fits all. If I walk past a bar or a construction site and no guys whistle or catcall me...I'll think I "lost it" and turn right around and walk past again thinking/saying..."Okay, lets try this again boys".
Obviously I'm not talking about groping, assault, rape, molestation or anything of that nature. And neither are they. They are talking about "looking" at a female...which means they've crossed the chasm from responsible advocacy for women that are actual victims of crimes, to being nutty insane fucking fruitcakes. :)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
An alignment of Earth, Mars, Venus, Saturn and Jupiter (From Africa at 4 AM) 3 days ago.
.jpg)
Posters found inside the restrooms of Synagogues.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.JPG)
Vanessa - i don't often disagree wit you but on this i do. i think the point being made here is not to stop someone from staring, we all do and there is nothing wrong with that. It is when some men (and it generally is) stare lewdly and in a way in which is intended to make the person being stared feel extremely uncomfortable, intimidated or objectified. To me that is wrong and uncalled for.
ReplyDeleteIt is different to a situation where someone is quite happy (even encouraging of) being stared at/objectified. That is consensual and should be obvious from the person's demeanour/response that they are comfortable with or encouraging of that response. Context is everything here and i agree it will be interesting to see how/whether it is even possible to police. In my view if a man stands and stares at women in such a sexually aggressive manner that they feel intimidated from passing/scared by that person then absolutely the police should intervene. However, I suspect that in most cases it is probably more a case of just plain good manners and not treating someone (male or female) in a way that clearly makes that person uncomfortable in an unwelcome way.
i would like to live in a society where people of any gender or orientation feel comfortable visiting any place/doing any activity that they like/presenting to the world as they like. We can still admire people, just don't go out of the way to make that person feel so uncomfortable to the extent that they feel threatened or intimidated.
p
x
I totally take your point and agree...in theory. My point is, who decides what a "lewd" stare is? Does the stare have to last 5 seconds, or 3 minutes? Does it have to be done within 2 feet of her, or is 9 feet the "allowable" distance? What is the procedure for prosecution? What are the charges? What is the sentence? Are witnesses required? Video? Testimony? Does this apply only to men? What about a woman checking out a guy? What about two gay men, or lesbians? Does a police officer have to witness it? What about some petty, spiteful, vindictive bitter lady that files false charges maliciously?
DeleteWhat about a guy that has an odd looking face, where "lewdness" is perceived by her, but not at all intended by him? Maybe he just has an odd way of looking at people. What if a guy has one side of his face drooped due to a stroke? It freaks her out, but he has zero designs on her, and is in fact, celibate, or gay? I could go on and on, but I'm sure you see where, this is impossible to enforce. It would require a gazillion extra police and manhours, bog down the courts and in the end...what happens? 10 years in jail for looking at a woman? 2 months of community service? That would never stand in the USA and other countries, and I hope it will not stand in yours.
Some chick has a bad day, is pissed off about life, riding the tube, some guy glances at her for 2 seconds, maybe in reality he finds her revolting, she calls for the police, he gets...what...arrested, charged, fined or incarcerated? For what? For looking in her general direction? He never spoke to her, never talked to her, never approached her, never touched her. He did nothing wrong to her. What about women that tend to think all men of a particular race are...bad, evil, perverted? Is it going to be suddenly the vast majority of these accusations are made by white women against, black men? Again...a guy *looked* at a female...that is not a crime. There was no harm done. There is no victim, there was no actual violation or injury...there was no crime. I just don't see how anyone can think this is "justice" or within the criminal realm.
Where we do agree is that the context is crucial and yes, i do agree that it opens the possibility of being mis-used (your white women and black men point). But equally if it also stops some men from being dickheads then that would be a win. Maybe a situation where just the threat of a punishment is sufficient enough to deter certain behaviours is the best that could come from it with only the most blatant example ever leading to an actual prosecution. Given how lamentably awful the conviction rate for actual rape is then i can't see there suddenly being an avalanche of cases of staring being brought. But, if it causes just one neanderthal to think again then that would be good.
ReplyDeletep
x
We will never agree on this. Conflating rape conviction rates with some guy looking at a woman...quite a stretch. I would posit again, someone looking at someone, even if it makes them uncomfortable, is not, and should not be a crime. I can't imagine this will ever pass into law, or not be overthrown on appeal, but your system works different than ours.
DeleteA quick search for unsolved rapes in the UK brought up: *Nearly 2.2 million crime cases, including murders and rapes, were closed by police last year without being solved.* which obviously also includes murder. That's a horrible statistic. I would imagine in the USA it's many, many, many times higher. These are violent crimes were funds are needed to solve them. Women with hurt feelings because some guy checked them out while out in public? Nah. :)
Fair enough, happy to agree to disagree on this one.
Deletep
x
Yea well...I'm happy to give you a telepathic atomic wedgie on this one. :)
DeleteVanessa you make a very good point.....it has seemed over time that a man can no longer appreciate the beauty of a Woman from afar without being guilty of being a perv.....and while I agree somewhat with poppet, that a gentleman should not cause a Woman to be uncomfortable with his appreciation from afar, I certainly do not think it should be considered a crime....
DeleteAnd no I don’t believe Women are guilty of attracting unwanted viewing....Women should be able to dress and act for who they are...I think we are meant to be attracted to one another and can enjoy just the most casual of compliments.......
As I said, I just believe that it is human nature for most men and Women to be attracted to one another...even those of us who are married....just because you are on a diet doesn’t mean you can’t read the menu....with appreciation and wonderment ..
I am an older gent, always tried to give Women the respect and deference they deserve....but even now every once in a while I am lucky enough to see a Woman of great outer and inner beauty, so magnetic and alluring and possessing such a strong Charisma, that it is impossible to tear my eyes away....I mean nothing perverse..and hope I never creep out a Woman....I just find Women to be God’s and nature’s most wonderful creation and appreciate from a far such a great work of art.
And crime closing stats from the US...unless one of these happens cases are never closed.
Within the U.S. criminal justice system, criminal cases can be cleared (or closed) one of two ways. The first is through arrest, which means that at least one person has either been arrested, charged with an offense, or turned over to the court for prosecution. The second way a case can be closed is through what is called exceptional means, where law enforcement must have either identified the offender, gathered enough evidence to arrest, charge, and prosecute someone, identified the offender’s exact location, or come up against a circumstance outside the control of law enforcement that keeps them from arresting and prosecuting the offender.
Hairstyles, makeup, short skirts, heels, tight jeans, Botox, fillers, tanning, liposuction, breast implants, ass implants, tattoos, chin shaving, plastic surgery, anal bleaching, Brazilian waxing, nipping, tucking, diets, exercise, jewelry, fashion, elocution lessons and a myriad of other examples are done to make oneself attractive, the majority of the time to members of the opposite sex as in....look at me, look at me, look at me.
ReplyDeleteNo one is advocating for someone, male or female, to be creepy or a stalker or threatening, but that's not what I read from this article, or at least that would not be the end result. Looking at someone, what those "looks" mean, how they are intended or recieved, is subjective. Touching, grabbing, molestation and things of that nature are "not" subjective, and are obvious crimes. For me this ties in with the "woke" mentality where people conflate crime...with getting their feelings hurt. Harsh words, invective, insults, being dismissed, being turned down, someone having a contrarian opinion, is *not* a crime, nor should it be. It's an insult to minimize the effects of someone assaulted, the trauma from that, with someone that thinks some dude was checking out some chicks ass. One has nothing to do with the other. Plus, it has to be pointed out, the alleged aggrieved female is only offended *if*, I say if, she does not find the guy attractive. On the one hand, if she doesn't like the guy, she claims to be offended, on the other hand, if she thinks he's hot, she gives him her phone number. It's nuts...and people should not support this sort of garbage. Anyway, I'm off for the gym soon, where I will be sexually assaulting guys...with my eyes. :)
Nicely said.....actually totally agree with your perspective....from a Woman’s point of view... on the “woke” in our society....in this area especially....thank you for sharing...
ReplyDeleteWhen "woke" becomes insane...count me out. :)
DeleteThe wing nuts just invent words and get Fox to put them on a loop. Antifa, cancel culture, woke, critical race theory, snowflake, BLM etc. These words are meaningless. They always project their own stupidly on the rest of us. They learned from trump, the past master of projection…….
ReplyDeleteWC
Making up words is easy for them...so is making up "facts". :)
DeleteTrue…..WC
ReplyDeleteTrue…..WC
ReplyDelete