Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edd360)
    You're fooling yourself if you think I'm going to go anywhere near that amount of trouble to prove a point to someone I don't even know. Either don't believe me or find out for yourself. I don't really care.

    To me it seems logical that if a woman had no rights, it would be expected that they would just brush off a wolf whistle without thinking twice as they would be used to it. Even today some women experience it so often they don't notice it. Such as my friend Emma Parkinson, who told me this on August 13th 2010 at I think 14.13.
    ...yeah, no, you're an idiot. You seriously think that at a stage where our value was determined by the fact that we went into marriage virgins and never slept with anyone else so that all our offspring could be proved to be our husbands, our fathers and our husbands would have tolerated sexual approaches by anyone who wasn't married to us? Women had to put up with a lot, including marital rape, but guys who claimed complete sexual ownership of their women were HARDLY going to stand by and let some stranger do stuff like that.

    Quit playing with "logical" and if you're going to build a whole argument on "WELL, IN HISTORY IT WAS ACCEPTABLE, SO.." maybe, yanno, actually make sure it WAS acceptable in history first?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foreveranon)
    Okay, stop and let's rewind a moment. You are arguing that you should be "allowed" to say "nice breasts" because it's a compliment. But what exactly is the aim with a compliment? Because if I, personally, give a compliment it's because something is good and I want to make someone feel good about it.

    But you're correct, different cultures feel differently about different things. Something which is viewed as a good asset in the UK might be something someone from a different culture is very self-conscious about, and would be upset if I commented on.

    Now, if I were made aware of this, I would stop commenting on it to people from that culture. Because it was meant to be a compliment and compliments shouldn't have to be things people should grin and bear, or put up with. If I'm consciously forcing someone to feel uncomfortable with a compliment, be that compliment "nice breasts" or "hey, you have awesome hair" or "that was smart of you!" I am Doing It Wrong. Sure, I might not know people were hurt by it until told, but when I've been told, if I keep arguing the point and forcing someone to deal with that, I'm no longer giving a compliment. I'm not trying to make someone feel good. I'm being an ass.

    Now, you? You know the current culture is that a lot of women might feel uncomfortable about attention from a stranger being focused on their breasts. You've said so. But you're going to keep RIGHT ON doing anyway because dammit, you want to! At this point, you're not trying to make people feel good. You're trying to prove a point at the expense of making other people uncomfortable and unhappy. You, sir, are being an ass.
    Ok you really didn't have to explain the fundamental reasons which form society.

    Basically to sum up:

    > saying nice tits is wrong

    > everyone is expected to know this and believe this

    > therefore if I say it, it must mean I am wrong and I am saying it to cause offence

    I get it. It doesn't mean I have to agree with it. I think that it is complete bull****. And if I find a woman's tits nice and I want to tell her I can't because she will assume that being someone who says this knowing it is wrong I must be a weirdo/ bad person.

    Am I being an ass? depends based off what. Am I being an ass because I am not conforming to how people expect me to be even though I don't believe in it? Then yeh I agree. What can I do? I don't go up to people and tell them they have nice tits, because of the reasons we've discussed. I'm not an idiot, I know how to behave in front of people. But as I said, it distresses me knowing this. If everyone had my mindset, we would all be better off.

    Like I said earlier, there is no "right" and "wrong". Only context.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mancini)
    Stick to what you dolls and doll houses.
    That sentence doesn't even make sense. :facepalm2:

    Jheez, you can even insult people properly, is English your first language?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edd360)
    Ok you really didn't have to explain the fundamental reasons which form society.

    Basically to sum up:

    > saying nice tits is wrong

    > everyone is expected to know this and believe this

    > therefore if I say it, it must mean I am wrong and I am saying it to cause offence

    I get it. It doesn't mean I have to agree with it. I think that it is complete bull****. And if I find a woman's tits nice and I want to tell her I can't because she will assume that being someone who says this knowing it is wrong I must be a weirdo/ bad person.

    Am I being an ass? depends based off what. Am I being an ass because I am not conforming to how people expect me to be even though I don't believe in it? Then yeh I agree. What can I do? I don't go up to people and tell them they have nice tits, because of the reasons we've discussed. I'm not an idiot, I know how to behave in front of people. But as I said, it distresses me knowing this. If everyone had my mindset, we would all be better off.

    Like I said earlier, there is no "right" and "wrong". Only context.
    Wow I like what you doing your a positive guy with a good message , but know this discussing things with a feminist is like discussing things with a wall the wall won't change the wall already likes its view of the world.

    If you notice feminists like two we have here like most woman to be honest resort to name calling.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I think this is an insult to what feminists set out to do in the first place.

    You can't help but suspect that actions like this are not designed for 'equality'- rather, they're simply reactions to appease a deeply ingrained hatred and the complementary envy many so-called feminists feels towards men.

    There are far more pressing women's issues. One cannot help but feel that if they were so dedicated to the cause they'd go out their way to raise awareness of places like Saudi Arabia, or raise money for countries like the Congo.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foreveranon)
    ...yeah, no, you're an idiot. You seriously think that at a stage where our value was determined by the fact that we went into marriage virgins and never slept with anyone else so that all our offspring could be proved to be our husbands, our fathers and our husbands would have tolerated sexual approaches by anyone who wasn't married to us? Women had to put up with a lot, including marital rape, but guys who claimed complete sexual ownership of their women were HARDLY going to stand by and let some stranger do stuff like that.

    Quit playing with "logical" and if you're going to build a whole argument on "WELL, IN HISTORY IT WAS ACCEPTABLE, SO.." maybe, yanno, actually make sure it WAS acceptable in history first?
    "Women had to put up with a lot, including marital rape, but guys who claimed complete sexual ownership of their women were HARDLY going to stand by and let some stranger do stuff like that"

    Yeah, and that's obviously bad for them. But what you said doesn't really take credit from anything I said. If a woman got wolf whistled at and their guy goes over and does something, that's a completely different story. Now like you said, they had to put up with a lot, so I highly doubt they would have been bothered by being whistled at. Now since you are making the claim that they were offended by it, you are gonna have to prove that to me, I can't prove that they weren't offended by something.

    I will play with "logical" all I want, whatever that even means. Do you do a degree in history or something and you just want to feel involved?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rlw31)
    That sentence doesn't even make sense. :facepalm2:

    Jheez, you can even insult people properly, is English your first language?
    *Can't

    lolirony
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    These feminists will only understand the pain they do to the world when its there own son's or husband and boyfriends that are the victim of feminist discrimination.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    They lav it they do, THEY LAV ITTTT!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rlw31)
    When did I say or imply that I think that because something is legal it is therefore acceptable:confused:

    Why isn't violence a topic of political correctness? Either it's considered politically incorrect or it isn't.

    Going by your 'bingo' point, violence, such as characters being hit, beaten, electrocuted, tied up etc wouldn't be showed in children's cartoons as it's socially unacceptable.

    Or perhaps we portray things in children's cartoons despite the fact that we don't consider it acceptable for people to do and we expect even children to be able to grasp the concept that what happens on TV isn't always acceptable in real life :rolleyes:
    Well you were saying "just coz something was fine back then doesnt mean it is now" or something like that. So I was using it to prove that legality is not a good barometer for morality, like I have already explained.

    And it is a topic of PC, just not as hot a topic as sexism and racism, which it why it is more over looked when it comes to cartoons.

    and anyway isn't tom and jerry like 30 years old? Do they still show it with all the violence they used to?

    Anyway, here is a clip from a video i saw as a child http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASW3UCc17AI

    (it might not have been that clip, but it was a disney cartoon with hitler in)

    All I can say to justify my point is, I DO NOT think that would be acceptable these days. Do you? It's a cartoon for children after all.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edd360)
    Well you were saying "just coz something was fine back then doesnt mean it is now" or something like that. So I was using it to prove that legality is not a good barometer for morality, like I have already explained.

    And it is a topic of PC, just not as hot a topic as sexism and racism, which it why it is more over looked when it comes to cartoons.

    and anyway isn't tom and jerry like 30 years old? Do they still show it with all the violence they used to?

    Anyway, here is a clip from a video i saw as a child http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASW3UCc17AI

    (it might not have been that clip, but it was a disney cartoon with hitler in)

    All I can say to justify my point is, I DO NOT think that would be acceptable these days. Do you? It's a cartoon for children after all.
    By fine I meant socially acceptable.

    Tom and Jerry is very old but it is still shown nowadays. However, a few years ago there were complaints about the various clips of smoking. Was Tom and Jerry banned because of this, no. Instead scenes were edited to remove the scenes of smoking. Funny that the smoking scenes were banned, but they didn't think think violence was bad for kids to watch.

    No I don't think that clip you posted would be acceptable nowadays (I didn't watch all of it though, my internet is cack). But my point is just because something is socially acceptable in a children's cartoon doesn't mean that it's reflected in real life. I still have no idea why you brought the cartoon into this discussion. And even if it were socially acceptable in the past, what bearing has that got on today?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edd360)
    "Women had to put up with a lot, including marital rape, but guys who claimed complete sexual ownership of their women were HARDLY going to stand by and let some stranger do stuff like that"

    Yeah, and that's obviously bad for them. But what you said doesn't really take credit from anything I said. If a woman got wolf whistled at and their guy goes over and does something, that's a completely different story. Now like you said, they had to put up with a lot, so I highly doubt they would have been bothered by being whistled at. Now since you are making the claim that they were offended by it, you are gonna have to prove that to me, I can't prove that they weren't offended by something.

    I will play with "logical" all I want, whatever that even means. Do you do a degree in history or something and you just want to feel involved?
    No, I just got taught to actually investigate my arguments before I use them. I don't claim that a coding language does something unless I'm damn sure it does, I don't base an argument on a culture unless I know enough about that culture to back it up, I TRY not to make "most people" arguments unless I can actually find statistics and I don't claim "BACK IN HISTORY..." unless I've checked.

    Because I'm a grown up, and this is stuff that affects real life so if I'm going to make an argument I'd better make damn sure I have more support than "I think..". Again, we're all students. We have journals at our fingertips. We have access to all this KNOWLEDGE and if we're ignoring it to blithely make stuff up because it backs up our arguments it's a horrible WASTE. If someone gives me an argument that actually sounds like it has substance I investigate it. Because there's always room to be proved wrong. Don't you care more about making sure you're making the RIGHT argument than proving your argument right? "Logic" and "it's obvious that" proved the world round, for god's sake. We're in academia. I thought we knew BETTER than that.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hareandhound)
    The question is, are your feelings rational. Personally I think not. And you're talking about extremes, any women knows that if a man persistently shouts 'i want to **** you' they can call the police and have him arrested for verbal assult.
    I don't think she is talking about extremes - that's the trouble. An extreme is getting raped when walking from a to b, which believe it or not does happen. These guys are seen as shockingly criminal and locked away from years when caught, just like murderers. The punishment for assult is less, quite rightly so, they both contain the same thing though - violence. Just as both rape and sexual harrasment contain unwanted sexual advances. But, we live in a society that embraces rape culture, so a lot of peole probabaly think assualt is a lot more serious then harrasment, but if it involves groping then, both crimes involve being touched in a way that it causes harm. Yes we might not bleed or have anything broken, but being harrassed makes you feel so violated and frightened and causes psychological damage *personal experience* my sister took years before she could get sexually intimate with a guy because her immediate reflex to someone putting their hand on her was to slap their hand away, as she had to with so many strange men thinking they can put their hands where they want. We both genetically have stupidly large breasts which I think means we get more attention then most, like some guys think when breasts get that big they are public property or something :confused:
    Although, I think men are worse in social situations then the street. I won't go anywhere without my boyfriend because men get more gropey when they are drunk. If I tell them what you are doing is legally classed as sexual harrasment they usually laugh in my face. I've even had a guy come back with 'n'aww you're even cuter when you're all mad.' (then squeezing my butt for empathasis) I'm 5ft, men are physically a lot bigger and a lot stronger then me. It's very intimidating. It's not rare, and it's not extreme it's happened to me many times in my short life, unless I'm some kind of abnomalie.
    It would be really great if this campaign raises awareness for the street, hopefully it'll make people think more in social settings too.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    So are people still arguing that they think it's all fine?

    If your mum, sister or girlfriend was walking down the street on her own and a car full of guys slowed up next to her and started calling her sexy and asking for her number, then when she ignored them, called her a ***** and drove off, you'd think that is acceptable behaviour? You wouldn't have preferred that one or more of the guys in the car had suggested to his mates that they not slow down and talk to her?

    Because that's what this whole thing is essentially about.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arturo Bandini)
    So are people still arguing that they think it's all fine?

    If your mum, sister or girlfriend was walking down the street on her own and a car full of guys slowed up next to her and started calling her sexy and asking for her number, then when she ignored them, called her a ***** and drove off, you'd think that is acceptable behaviour? You wouldn't have preferred that one or more of the guys in the car had suggested to his mates that they not slow down and talk to her?

    Because that's what this whole thing is essentially about.
    Its not acceptable behaviour but it happens. Yeah, life isn't fair, but if that happened to someone I know I would expect them to move on (if the only thing that happened was them calling her a *****, if they touch her thats different). As we've seen in this thread, starting feminist groups for the cause only makes people take it less seriously than before.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lewroll)
    Its not acceptable behaviour but it happens. Yeah, life isn't fair, but if that happened to someone I know I would expect them to move on (if the only thing that happened was them calling her a *****, if they touch her thats different). As we've seen in this thread, starting feminist groups for the cause only makes people take it less seriously than before.
    I'm not saying women can't move on, or that they need to break down and cry over it. But this and similar things happening to somebody regularly can be pretty unpleasant. And if all it takes is men to make more of an effort to tell their friends to stop acting like dicks, then why NOT try to encourage that?

    All the group is really doing is highlighting a particular anti-social behaviour and encouraging people to show their disapproval of it. What we've seen in this thread is idiots blowing things out of proportion and getting upset just because they've seen the word feminist.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    While I think this is an awesome idea, everyone hates people who shout at women on the street, why's it just about women? I'm ginger and therefore have had my fair share of street-abuse.

    Obviously women get the majority, but making it about how men are the perpetrators and women are the victims will only deepen the divisions
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arturo Bandini)
    I'm not saying women can't move on, or that they need to break down and cry over it. But this and similar things happening to somebody regularly can be pretty unpleasant. And if all it takes is men to make more of an effort to tell their friends to stop acting like dicks, then why NOT try to encourage that?
    But the thing is, men wont stop doing it. The guys that shout at women in the street are probably the type of guys to not care about what anyone thinks. They will continue to act in this way regardless of what anyone says. It is already socially unacceptable to shout at women in the streets.
    All the group is really doing is highlighting a particular anti-social behaviour and encouraging people to show their disapproval of it. What we've seen in this thread is idiots blowing things out of proportion and getting upset just because they've seen the word feminist.
    I still think the group is unnecessary. Sensible people will continue to be sensible, while anti-social people will continue to be anti-social - you can't change that. I still don't think there is a problem if the men are just shouting at the women, sure its not nice, but its not the end of the world. The problem arises when men try to take it further- following the woman, trying to touch her etc. This is completely unacceptable, but it probably doesn't happen so much.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lewroll)
    But the thing is, men wont stop doing it. The guys that shout at women in the street are probably the type of guys to not care about what anyone thinks. They will continue to act in this way regardless of what anyone says. It is already socially unacceptable to shout at women in the streets.

    I still think the group is unnecessary. Sensible people will continue to be sensible, while anti-social people will continue to be anti-social - you can't change that. I still don't think there is a problem if the men are just shouting at the women, sure its not nice, but its not the end of the world. The problem arises when men try to take it further- following the woman, trying to touch her etc. This is completely unacceptable, but it probably doesn't happen so much.
    :congrats:Spot on. Absolutely spot on. What you've just said has been argued already so many times on this thread. But good luck trying to convince him about that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lewroll)
    But the thing is, men wont stop doing it. The guys that shout at women in the street are probably the type of guys to not care about what anyone thinks. They will continue to act in this way regardless of what anyone says. It is already socially unacceptable to shout at women in the streets. I still think the group is unnecessary. Sensible people will continue to be sensible, while anti-social people will continue to be anti-social - you can't change that.
    Well, I guess that's the difference between saying "unpleasant things happen, oh well, we'll have to deal with it forevermore", and, "unpleasant things happen, let's make a small effort to change things".

    If you just assume that nothing can ever be changed then nothing ever gets changed.

    (Original post by Lewroll)
    I still don't think there is a problem if the men are just shouting at the women, sure its not nice, but its not the end of the world. The problem arises when men try to take it further- following the woman, trying to touch her etc. This is completely unacceptable, but it probably doesn't happen so much.
    Well that's where our opinions differ. My girlfriend and sister both get shouted at pretty regularly when they're alone and they both hate it. That makes me pretty unhappy.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 3, 2011
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.