When did feminism go completely crazy?

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Mise, I think casual sex itself is immoral for all parties involved, but I get called a hater if I make a stand on that too hard, so I roll with a society that largely doesn't share my views on that.

If I buy your premises, and they're not unreasonable, so let's buy them, I cannot really come up with a situation in which a man can approach a woman that he does not know, with sexual interest implied where, absent an active flag being flown by her(such as on a dating site), the following:



...is not nearly always true.

Is that basically where we're going to end up in this conversation? Or somewhere else. I'm trying to gauge. Social approaches carrying the possibility of sexual interest to women by men are only morally acceptable through pre-designated mediums and situations? Do we need to start making a list? While it's something you are probably able to convince me is true, it seems so very... medieval. It doesn't seem like it's being your sort of liberal.

I think there are usually social cues that present themselves when sexual approaches, or, well, approaches with the end goal being sex, are accepted as part of the socializing going on. There are also locations where, conceivably, the risk to the woman is reduced. Like, say, a busy restaurant (although certainly never fully minimized). I don't think aforementioned social cues will ever be given off at an elevator at 4am. I mean, if they are, then elevators are a lot more entertaining than I ever imagined. And the risk in a situation like that seems proportionately large.

The two are in no way equivalent.

It's not a credible source either way! You are quoting a personal blog titled "feministbrainwash" and asking us to take it seriously! It'd be preposterous in any verbal setting, it's just as preposterous here.

 

[Arwon]

Whatever the vagueness and greyness of prepositioning random people for sex, let me suggest that as a starting point is avoiding situations where the other person is alone or otherwise at a disadvantage.

Don't trap people in elevators, in bus seats, wherever. Don't hit on people being paid to be nice to you - the checkout staff are trying to do their jobs, and can't end the conversation in a forthright manner because of customer service norms.

Basically anything that conveys "my desire to talk to you/proposition you is more important than you feeling safe or having any control over the situation".

Oh and don't friggin touch.

Do these things really have to be explained?

Beyond that it's really treating people like people. Having genuine interest in the person, something to actually talk about, smiling and good body language, etc etc.

 

[jackelgull]

I don't really see anything reasonable about approaching random strangers for sex, outside tightly controlled circumstances where it's clear the random strangers are in fact interested in sexual activity.

I mean, for crying out loud. You don't (or barely) know the person, you have no reason whatsoever to think they might be interested in sex, let alone with you. They don't know the least thing about you, and there is nothing whatsoever about the circumstances that invite any kind of sexual encounter, other than your lack of control over your own urges.

Yes, approaching them for sex is in fact creepy as all hell.

You know, all of this talk about the coffee invitation has got me interested in concocting a scenario in which the whole affair doesn't sound creepy or at least isn't about sex

Okay, so I have just been at a party all night long. I didn't drink because I had to be the designated driver for my friends. When I come home after driving them, I'm tired and stumble onto the elevator and lo behold! What do I see but a pretty lady sharing the elevator with me. I'm in a panic. This is a social setting I'm unfamiliar with. What are the rules? Why say anything? But silence when another person around is awkward and weird. So I start with the safe basics. "Hello" I tell her. That's safe and non committed right? So she says hi back, and I reply with some more safe trivialities. The conversation seems to be flowing well, and in the back of my mind I'm still some what in party mode. And in a party social setting, when you hit it off with a person, especially an attractive female, you invite them somewhere (At least that is what I surmise from what I understand of party going people- I am not actually part of that crowd, so someone who is can educate me on the social etiquette and expectations). So out of my mouth I blurt the invitation. Because it is four AM I don't realize a) Holy Crap! It is 4 AM. Who wants coffee at 4 AM. b) at 4 AM in an empty elevator an invitation to coffee is much less innocuous then one at 6 PM in a crowded party. c) etc. other people have already pointed out the various problems
She says no. I realize my mistake.

This probably didn't happen, but the insistence of most people that this was about sex got me interested in seeing if I can create a scenario in which it is not. Because it is a sad society we live in if every social encounter between a man and a woman in non work related settings has to be about sex.

That said, don't approach strangers. It forces the both of you into an uneasy social interaction for which there is no guide lines. Everyone loses, and in some cases one loses more than the other.

 

[warpus]

5) The probability of a negative outcome for the woman is much MUCH greater than a negative outcome for the man

Yeah, you're definitely right there. I don't think I considered this when writing my last couple posts.

I was trying to imagine someone hitting on me in an elevator at 4am, and most of the things that popped into my head were comical. But for a woman.. yeah.. I have to admit that it's reasonable to expect a woman to be on the defensive in a situation like that, unless she knows the person well enough.

 

[JollyRoger]

Also, would the gender of the person hitting on you alter your perceived level of threat?

 

[warpus]

To be perfectly honest.. the gender, height, ethnic background, accent, clothing, etc. all would have an impact on that.

 

[Evie]

As a (female) character in a short story I was reading recently put it in her thoughts: most women have to live with the fact that at least half of the world's population is bigger than them, stronger than them, heavier than them and that they're NOT likely to come up on top in a physical confrontation with that half of the population. Even being trained in martial arts and all sort of defensive technique, while it help the odds, only goes so far, and make a physical confrontation a bad idea.

Worrying and feeling threatened BEFORE it comes down to a fight, even if that's not what the other side meant, is kind of a necessary defense mechanism in that situation.

 

[Farm Boy]

So this page is basically coming down as getting in the elevator with a lone woman, trapping her with you, at four in the morning, as a man, is innately threatening/fear inducing. Which I'm more than willing to believe. One would, if he was a decent guy who cared about her comfort, have walked smaller and waited for the next elevator. Speaking with her, much less with what was an invitation for further socialization was just exacerbatory. If he was particularly big, or particularly black, or particularly hairy, this onus of decency is reasonably expected to increase.

 

[Arwon]

Nah all those things are pretty secondary to maleness in terms of actual threat. That idea that non-white males are more threatening is a bit of intersectionality. And honestly even a small bloke can be a potential threat, since there's that whole thing where even less people will believe you than would anyway.

 

[Flying Pig]

So this page is basically coming down as getting in the elevator with a lone woman, trapping her with you, at four in the morning, as a man, is innately threatening/fear inducing. Which I'm more than willing to believe. One would, if he was a decent guy who cared about her comfort, have walked smaller and waited for the next elevator. Speaking with her, much less with what was an invitation for further socialization was just exacerbatory. If he was particularly big, or particularly black, or particularly hairy, this onus of decency is reasonably expected to increase.

I still maintain that actually talking to said lone woman makes you look exponentially more threatening, and that mentioning a subject (such as sex) about which men are known to get violent does so to an even greater extent.

 

[Cutlass]

15 pages in 2 days, and the OP hasn't even participated after the OP. As troll threads go, this one has been quite successful.

 

[BvBPL]

One might even say crazy successful.

 

[Cutlass]

I just skimmed, but from my perspective, best contributions, Arwon, BvBPL, Mise, Flying Pig.

 

[sophie]

I just skimmed, but from my perspective, best contributions, Arwon, BvBPL, Mise, Flying Pig.

CLIQUE CLIQUE CLIQUE

allcaps

 

[onejayhawk]

One might even say crazy successful.

It was a great title.

I am reminded of an old feminist meme, that more women were abused on Super Bowl Sunday than any other day. Someone did a study. Fewer women were abused on Super Bowl Sunday than any other day.

It's all in the narrative.

J

 

[Cutlass]

CLIQUE CLIQUE CLIQUE

allcaps

You're just mad that I didn't mention you.

 

[sophie]

You're just mad that I didn't mention you.

nooooooooo....

 

[Farm Boy]

I still maintain that actually talking to said lone woman makes you look exponentially more threatening, and that mentioning a subject (such as sex) about which men are known to get violent does so to an even greater extent.

Which is why with good manners you bury invitations to potential sex behind coffee, or something similar. So the rejection wasn't a sexual rejection. "I'm talking about sex but I'm not talking about sex'' is one of the typically socially mandated methods of walking smaller. An unspoken apology/plausible deniability for male sexual interest, as it were.

 

[Cutlass]

nooooooooo....

I didn't even really read the thread. Just skimmed through it.

 

[caketastydelish]

Again, unconvinced. It must still be quite unpleasant to be on the other side of that exchange, having to trust entirely to another person's good nature and knowing that if they're not going to be a gentleman then the best case scenario is a rather one-sided fight in a lift - there's certainly a case to be made that putting someone in that situation is insensitive, at best.

People can theoretically beat you up anywhere, anytime. I'm a man in my early 20's and there's still plenty of dudes that are stronger than me. So what? Am I going to be afraid to go outside just because of it? I judge people on what they actually do instead of what they could/might of done, because yeah, that's the reasonable thing to do.

Coffee hardly means coffee at that time! The problem with people being caught is that you're always caught after the fact... and, for the record, women are far more likely to be raped or attacked by men that they know - say a neighbour in the lift on the way home late at night.

act interested in sexual activity (for example, a bar dedicated to hooking up for casual sex).[/QUOTE]
... If he knows the camera were there rolling (I'm guessing he did as they would be in just about any elevator), he'd have probably have known better than to commit a felony on film in the first place.

I mean, for crying out loud. You don't (or barely) know the person, you have no reason whatsoever to think they might be interested in sex, let alone with you. They don't know the least thing about you, and there is nothing whatsoever about the circumstances that invite any kind of sexual encounter, other than your lack of control over your own urges. All they know is that you feel it's appropriate to request sex from you.

She was overreacting like crazy, and Dawkins was certainly within the right to laugh at it. If some woman asked me for coffee at 4 in the morning I would probably laugh it off. She should have done the same... Especially because nothing happened.


So? I ask for things and sometimes the answer is no, sometimes the answer is yes. I asked for a raise today and my manager said I haven't been there long enough yet. I wasn't offended by her answer, and I don't think she was offended by my question. I even ask things (unlike that) where the answer has only about a one in a million chance being "yes", but I still ask just in case. Honestly I'm not seeing the big deal. He asked her for coffee (which apparently is a code word for sex. First anti racist is a code word for anti white, now coffee is a code word for sex. I really need to update my dictionary, thanks guys) and she said no. That ended it.


Yes, that makes you creepy as hell, and very unpleasant.[/QUOTE]

Whatever the vagueness and greyness of prepositioning random people for sex, let me suggest that as a starting point is avoiding situations where the other person is alone or otherwise at a disadvantage.

Don't trap people in elevators, in bus seats, wherever.

I read the article and couldn't find any indication that he actually trapped her.

Don't hit on people being paid to be nice to you - the checkout staff are trying to do their jobs, and can't end the conversation in a forthright manner because of customer service norms.

Fair enough. I work in customer service myself and know how annoying that can be.

Also, would the gender of the person hitting on you alter your perceived level of threat?

Not at all. Not unless you believe Misandry is a real thing. (exclusively targeting men in a negative way is by definition what misandry is. I personally don't think Misandry is particularly real but if you would exclude men in a negative way, perhaps you believe otherwise)

As a (female) character in a short story I was reading recently put it in her thoughts: most women have to live with the fact that at least half of the world's population is bigger than them, stronger than them, heavier than them and that they're NOT likely to come up on top in a physical confrontation with that half of the population. Even being trained in martial arts and all sort of defensive technique, while it help the odds, only goes so far, and make a physical confrontation a bad idea.

Worrying and feeling threatened BEFORE it comes down to a fight, even if that's not what the other side meant, is kind of a necessary defense mechanism in that situation.

Sure, but she didn't have the right to complain about it on a public blog. Ok, she had the right to complain but Dawkins had the right to lulpwn her for complaining about something that wasn't that big a deal.

I just skimmed, but from my perspective, best contributions, Arwon, BvBPL, Mise, Flying Pig.

So in other words "best contributions" simply means everybody which agrees with your side of the story.