"Men should not disrespect women" is a non-controversial statement, according to Dagrabbit and Raggaholic.
Yet disrespect of women is apparently so commonplace that a woman who wears revealing clothing in public should have a reasonable expectation to be the brunt of disrespect.
Well, I would agree with you, but VC convinced me that it's impossible to disrespect a stranger and that it's wrong to call ogling, rude comments or heck grabbing a big ol' handful of booby "disrespectful." The word has some special VC definition we all need to learn.
And no, I am not exaggerating, strawmanning, or making this up.
I think the problem I have with this thread is that there is no middle ground. Most people I know can both respect people and acknowledge their aesthetic appeal. In fact, most of the people I know are both respected and on occasion acknowledged for their aesthetic appeal without feeling objectified. I am not sure when these became mutually exclusive. I also have heard some humourously sexist statements in this thread. You people are aware that women check out guys as well. Does that automatically make those women shallow, terrible people, who might be rapists.
Name Removed: Pfft
Name Removed: He thinks too small
Name Removed: What you really do
Name Removed: Get that T-shirt
Name Removed: One X large and one small
Name Removed: Get a fat man and a small boy (Or girl that passes for a boy)
Name Removed: The small boy says his name is "Fatman"
Name Removed: The fatty says his name is "Little Boy"
Name Removed: Have them go into a Sobe stakehouse and insist on having their steaks served with atomic hot sauce.
"Men should not disrespect women" is a non-controversial statement, according to Dagrabbit and Raggaholic.
Yet disrespect of women is apparently so commonplace that a woman who wears revealing clothing in public should have a reasonable expectation to be the brunt of disrespect.
Well, I would agree with you, but VC convinced me that it's impossible to disrespect a stranger and that it's wrong to call ogling, rude comments or heck grabbing a big ol' handful of booby "disrespectful." The word has some special VC definition we all need to learn.
And no, I am not exaggerating, strawmanning, or making this up.
Actually, yes you are. I made none of those claims. I stated that respecting a person and respecting their rights are entirely different things. I said that you're not obligated to respect any person, but are obligated to respect all of their rights. And the last one came right out of your ass.
To be clear, none of this applies to getting unwanted sexual attention because, as Elki pointed out, it hasn't been shown that wearing less revealing clothing will have a noticeable impact on your likelihood of being stared at compared to other factors.
This is the important part that people keep skipping over.
Sheesh, if someone wants to wear something they like, and makes them feel attractive, more power to them. If someone ends up looking in a way that makes the wearer uncomfortable, it's obvious the person looking has a problem.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
the problem...with this thread is that there is no middle ground
Indeed.
Either you declare that all women are victims, or else you are pro-rape.
The moment that you suggest that it might be helpful for a person to consider the implications of their actions you are, apparently, imposing on their freedom to act.
Sheesh, if someone wants to wear something they like, and makes them feel attractive, more power to them. If someone ends up looking in a way that makes the wearer uncomfortable, it's obvious the person looking has a problem.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
I didn't think it would be much more complicated.
People want to be able to tell you you did something wrong by wearing the watch. I don't understand why.
To be clear, none of this applies to getting unwanted sexual attention because, as Elki pointed out, it hasn't been shown that wearing less revealing clothing will have a noticeable impact on your likelihood of being stared at compared to other factors.
This is the important part that people keep skipping over.
The claim has understandable logic behind it, but still doesn't have hard evidence. I say this fully acknowledging that "wear less revealing clothing" is not a good solution on a societal level and never could be, and is in fact a completely terrible and idiotic thing to say.
What I have been trying to express was that for each individual there's a correlation between pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing and receiving sexual harassment and that there is really very few good reasons for pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing by any one person on an individual basis in this particular culture and society and I would personally discourage a young woman from doing so if she was not trying to make an important statement by doing so. Damn, is that clear enough for you? I've said repeatedly that this is not a solution to the larger problem of preventing sexual harassment and that I think we should change the subject, but every time I've said something that is apparently so obvious that it should not be said I've been challenged on it (and by VC no less, who seems to make absolutely every argument the defining aspect of your character, god forbid if you want to play devil's advocate) every single time. I would gladly stop talking about it, because in the long-term it's completely moot and not the solution, but everyone seems to just want to talk about how wrong we are for talking about it!
Furthermore, I seriously can't believe that Feral just spontaneously suspected everyone on the opposing side of the conversation of being sexist pigs. I know I wasn't one of the posters directly highlighted, but I don't think I've ever been to a place where more words have been put into my mouth in my entire life. Yes, I honestly do think that sexist pigs do not post on the Penny Arcade: Debate and Discourse forums, for the same reason that I think that hardcore racists don't. I have at least enough faith that we're an educated and liberal enough crowd that this seriously shouldn't be a problem, and just look at the primaries thread if you want proof that the boards are biased towards a specific type of person. Additionally, we're on a freaking message board how scared can you be that the "obvious subliminal sexist subtext" of our posts are going to twist the minds of some malleable innocent bystanders on the edge of coming to sexist conclusions? We're not on a TV show, we're not producing best-selling novels, pretty much everyone who is going to read this thread is going to "get it", alright, we don't need to carefully pick our words so as not to negatively affect the whole world who is watching us post back and forth about some boobs at a sci-fi convention.
You have absolutely no right to accuse anyone in this forum of being a 'closet sexist' and it's even an entirely moot point if they are. Argue against what someone says, not what obscure ulterior hidden intent you've created for why they're arguing. Everyone has stated that they agree that victims of sexual harassment are never responsible for the fact that they were harassed, that they have every right to speak out against harassment that was perpetrated on them, and that wearing more conservative clothing is not and will never be a complete solution for preventing sexual harassment. If you don't think that they actually believe what they have clearly and plainly stated, get the hell over it. This is a freaking discussion board, not a psychoanalysis of the people involved, argue their points, not how oh-so-absolutely terrible of a human being they must actually be and what they certainly must absolutely really be thinking that is contradictory to what they've freaking said.
In short, I'm offended, and I just freaking want to talk about how what we can do to help solve sexual harassment in the long-term now.
Sheesh, if someone wants to wear something they like, and makes them feel attractive, more power to them. If someone ends up looking in a way that makes the wearer uncomfortable, it's obvious the person looking has a problem.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
I didn't think it would be much more complicated.
People want to be able to tell you you did something wrong by wearing the watch. I don't understand why.
No one is placing any value judgement on WEARING anything.
Seriously, this is trying to debate keeping abortion legal. You simply don't want to read the arguments that you are arguing against.
Sheesh, if someone wants to wear something they like, and makes them feel attractive, more power to them. If someone ends up looking in a way that makes the wearer uncomfortable, it's obvious the person looking has a problem.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
...
You do. Isn't that the point? It's not your fault you got mugged, but they're the one with your watch.
Sheesh, if someone wants to wear something they like, and makes them feel attractive, more power to them. If someone ends up looking in a way that makes the wearer uncomfortable, it's obvious the person looking has a problem.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
...
You do. Isn't that the point? It's not your fault you got mugged, but they're the one with your watch.
But if he had crossed the street to avoid being mugged, he would be profiling them and therefore being racist/sexist or whatever and impinging his muggers rights. His muggers inherent right not to have you think he looks suspicious and cross the street, so he can mug you.
Sheesh, if someone wants to wear something they like, and makes them feel attractive, more power to them. If someone ends up looking in a way that makes the wearer uncomfortable, it's obvious the person looking has a problem.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
I didn't think it would be much more complicated.
People want to be able to tell you you did something wrong by wearing the watch. I don't understand why.
No one is placing any value judgement on WEARING anything.
Seriously, this is trying to debate keeping abortion legal. You simply don't want to read the arguments that you are arguing against.
This isn't trying to debate keeping abortion legal. Are you confusing threads?
Sheesh, if someone wants to wear something they like, and makes them feel attractive, more power to them. If someone ends up looking in a way that makes the wearer uncomfortable, it's obvious the person looking has a problem.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
...
You do. Isn't that the point? It's not your fault you got mugged, but they're the one with your watch.
But if he had crossed the street to avoid being mugged, he would be profiling them and therefore being racist/sexist or whatever and impinging his muggers rights. His muggers inherent right not to have you think he looks suspicious and cross the street, so he can mug you.
Wait, who said that? Like seriously, someone link me the post where this was said, I missed it.
AJAlkaline40 on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Sheesh, if someone wants to wear something they like, and makes them feel attractive, more power to them. If someone ends up looking in a way that makes the wearer uncomfortable, it's obvious the person looking has a problem.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
...
You do. Isn't that the point? It's not your fault you got mugged, but they're the one with your watch.
But if he had crossed the street to avoid being mugged, he would be profiling them and therefore being racist/sexist or whatever and impinging his muggers rights. His muggers inherent right not to have you think he looks suspicious and cross the street, so he can mug you.
Wait, who said that? Like seriously, someone link me the post where this was said, I missed it.
See the personal security part of the argument earlier, starting around the Cats posts from a while back.
Edit: You see, this is why this entire argument is the most awesome retard catch-22 ever and I'm not playing into any of this stupidity. If you wear a nice watch and get mugged, it's your fault for wearing the watch (somehow). If you wear a nice watch and decide to not go through an area you know you'll get mugged, because you see some rough looking people you are being racist/sexist or whatever nonsense. You can't do something and then protect yourself logically, you have to make the argument something fucking stupid other than plain common sense. Plain common sense tells me not to walk around the rougher parts of my city at night with my laptop, am I being racist for not walking with my laptop in an area I know how a high rate of assaults and breakins? Or is this plain fucking common sense.
To be clear, none of this applies to getting unwanted sexual attention because, as Elki pointed out, it hasn't been shown that wearing less revealing clothing will have a noticeable impact on your likelihood of being stared at compared to other factors.
This is the important part that people keep skipping over.
The claim has understandable logic behind it, but still doesn't have hard evidence. I say this fully acknowledging that "wear less revealing clothing" is not a good solution on a societal level and never could be, and is in fact a completely terrible and idiotic thing to say.
What I have been trying to express was that for each individual there's a correlation between pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing and receiving sexual harassment and that there is really very few good reasons for pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing by any one person on an individual basis in this particular culture and society and I would personally discourage a young woman from doing so if she was not trying to make an important statement by doing so. Damn, is that clear enough for you?
So you can quantify that standard then, right?
ViolentChemistry on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited April 2008
How much skin is too much exactly? Toes? Ankles? A calf muscle? An arm?
Also demonstrate that there is only one societal standard for "revealing clothing", because if it's infinitely variable like it is in real-life your argument is meaningless.
To be clear, none of this applies to getting unwanted sexual attention because, as Elki pointed out, it hasn't been shown that wearing less revealing clothing will have a noticeable impact on your likelihood of being stared at compared to other factors.
This is the important part that people keep skipping over.
The claim has understandable logic behind it, but still doesn't have hard evidence. I say this fully acknowledging that "wear less revealing clothing" is not a good solution on a societal level and never could be, and is in fact a completely terrible and idiotic thing to say.
What I have been trying to express was that for each individual there's a correlation between pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing and receiving sexual harassment and that there is really very few good reasons for pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing by any one person on an individual basis in this particular culture and society and I would personally discourage a young woman from doing so if she was not trying to make an important statement by doing so. Damn, is that clear enough for you?
So you can quantify that standard then, right?
Not objectively, no, it varies heavily from place to place, as societal norms are wont to do. Like I said, this is on an individual basis. I think that it's advisable to consider how people will react to your clothing if you choose to push societal norms in any direction. I'm not saying you should bend to societal pressure, but you should certainly account for it, especially if there's a chance that you could create an un-intended effect.
Additionally, this is a personal angle on the whole thing, but I think that most instances in the US when a girl chooses to push societal norms for revealing-ness it's not for a good cause. Generally they're doing it under other societal pressures to look better, be sexier, or please men more. I can't think of any other explanation used as commonly for why one woman might want to dress in such a way, and I personally find it disgusting that there's societal pressure on women to dress in ways that put them in more danger of being noticed by a sexual harasser/predator/etc, and that this societal pressure is itself based on the concept of making women eye candy for men.
Well, Alkaline, some places are pretty hot. I'm almost certain my sister wore her smaller clothes in the 90-something degree weather we got back home because it was sensible. Sort of how like I wore shorts and sometimes *gasp* didn't wear a shirt at all.
Edit: Oh shit, and I made myself a target for child predators.
To be clear, none of this applies to getting unwanted sexual attention because, as Elki pointed out, it hasn't been shown that wearing less revealing clothing will have a noticeable impact on your likelihood of being stared at compared to other factors.
This is the important part that people keep skipping over.
The claim has understandable logic behind it, but still doesn't have hard evidence. I say this fully acknowledging that "wear less revealing clothing" is not a good solution on a societal level and never could be, and is in fact a completely terrible and idiotic thing to say.
What I have been trying to express was that for each individual there's a correlation between pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing and receiving sexual harassment and that there is really very few good reasons for pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing by any one person on an individual basis in this particular culture and society and I would personally discourage a young woman from doing so if she was not trying to make an important statement by doing so. Damn, is that clear enough for you?
So you can quantify that standard then, right?
Not objectively, no, it varies heavily from place to place
And from person to person. So how is a woman to be expected to hold to those standards?
Additionally, this is a personal angle on the whole thing, but I think that most instances in the US when a girl chooses to push societal norms for revealing-ness it's not for a good cause. Generally they're doing it under other societal pressures to look better, be sexier, or please men more. I can't think of any other explanation used as commonly for why one woman might want to dress in such a way, and I personally find it disgusting that there's societal pressure on women to dress in ways that put them in more danger of being noticed by a sexual harasser/predator/etc, and that this societal pressure is itself based on the concept of making women eye candy for men.
Sometimes women want men to find them attractive for reasons other than societal pressure. I don't see how that's a "not-good cause" or whatever. You're advocating social-pressure to dress a certain way and then following it up by decrying social-pressure to dress a certain way. These are not the sense making.
There doesn't need to be a universal standard. I'm not saying that "all women should dress this specific way, and that's the best". I'm saying that the reactions of people around you to your choice of appearance can be predicted for any one social environment, and if you can predict what social environment you're going to be in, you can predict how people in that environment will react to your appearance, and this should all factor into how you choose to dress yourself for any individual situation.
My beef is not that girls are dressing revealingly, I really couldn't care less. I just feel that it's extremely unfortunate that our society dictates that girls should not take their own safety into account over whatever goals they are seeking to achieve by dressing revealingly. I'm saying that there's this pretty horrible pressure in society that girls ought to think first about what will make them look more attractive to men, and ignore the possible negative attention this could bring to them, and that's what I'm interested in combating.
Well, Alkaline, some places are pretty hot. I'm almost certain my sister wore her smaller clothes in the 90-something degree weather we got back home because it was sensible. Sort of how like I wore shorts and sometimes *gasp* didn't wear a shirt at all.
Edit: Oh shit, and I made myself a target for child predators.
You know this is not what I'm talking about. When I refer to 'revealing' clothing I'm talking about clothing that is made in such a manner specifically for the purpose of being attractive to men. I am aware that there are practical reasons for wearing less clothing, regardless of what you think I'm not a complete idiot. However that has pretty much nothing to do with what we're talking about right now.
EDIT:
Additionally, VC, there's such thing as good and bad social pressure. Social pressure against racial discrimination is good. Social pressure to starve yourself so that others will love you is bad. I'm saying that one is better than the other in this situation, specifically that assuring your own safety is superior to being aesthetically pleasing to guys.
Sheesh, if someone wants to wear something they like, and makes them feel attractive, more power to them. If someone ends up looking in a way that makes the wearer uncomfortable, it's obvious the person looking has a problem.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
I didn't think it would be much more complicated.
People want to be able to tell you you did something wrong by wearing the watch. I don't understand why.
No one is placing any value judgement on WEARING anything.
Seriously, this is trying to debate keeping abortion legal. You simply don't want to read the arguments that you are arguing against.
This isn't trying to debate keeping abortion legal. Are you confusing threads?
Shall I add metaphor to the list of things you don't understand?
WHO is arguing that women SHOULD NOT WEAR certain items? I have not seen that argument. All I've seen here is the argument that women should consider their outfit before putting it on. That DOES NOT mean "don't put it on."
There doesn't need to be a universal standard. I'm not saying that "all women should dress this specific way, and that's the best". I'm saying that the reactions of people around you to your choice of appearance can be predicted for any one social environment, and if you can predict what social environment you're going to be in, you can predict how people in that environment will react to your appearance, and this should all factor into how you choose to dress yourself for any individual situation.
My beef is not that girls are dressing revealingly, I really couldn't care less. I just feel that it's extremely unfortunate that our society dictates that girls should not take their own safety into account over whatever goals they are seeking to achieve by dressing revealingly. I'm saying that there's this pretty horrible pressure in society that girls ought to think first about what will make them look more attractive to men, and ignore the possible negative attention this could bring to them, and that's what I'm interested in combating.
There is also a lot of societal pressure on women to cover up by way of blaming them for harassment and other on the grounds that they were dressed too revealingly, often when they're actually not dressed revealingly at all. I think that's just as important to combat. I think that the idea that women have to make a choice between being attractive and being safe is also important to combat. And there does need to be some vaguely consistent standard because otherwise you dump them in a catch-22. They can't really know how everyone they're going to encounter will respond to their clothes but they're expected to know and take it into account in selecting them.
There is also a lot of societal pressure on women to cover up by way of blaming them for harassment and other on the grounds that they were dressed too revealingly
So, can you show me the slew of court cases where a woman was found guilty of her own rape?
You are arguing against something that NO ONE is arguing for, and ignoring all of the ACTUAL arguments being made.
Well, Alkaline, some places are pretty hot. I'm almost certain my sister wore her smaller clothes in the 90-something degree weather we got back home because it was sensible. Sort of how like I wore shorts and sometimes *gasp* didn't wear a shirt at all.
Edit: Oh shit, and I made myself a target for child predators.
You know this is not what I'm talking about. When I refer to 'revealing' clothing I'm talking about clothing that is made in such a manner specifically for the purpose of being attractive to men. I am aware that there are practical reasons for wearing less clothing, regardless of what you think I'm not a complete idiot. However that has pretty much nothing to do with what we're talking about right now.
So wait wait. So tank tops are... not made to be attractive? Or are they, but they're sensible enough that a woman's not at fault if someone really gets off on shoulders and grabs her? Are short skirts and shorts particularly designed to divert the male gaze? If they aren't, does that mean girls get to wear heavy and uncomfortable clothing in the heat?
I mean, tell me an item of clothing that isn't designed for attractiveness. Maybe work clothes? Though god knows I like a woman in uniform...
There doesn't need to be a universal standard. I'm not saying that "all women should dress this specific way, and that's the best". I'm saying that the reactions of people around you to your choice of appearance can be predicted for any one social environment, and if you can predict what social environment you're going to be in, you can predict how people in that environment will react to your appearance, and this should all factor into how you choose to dress yourself for any individual situation.
My beef is not that girls are dressing revealingly, I really couldn't care less. I just feel that it's extremely unfortunate that our society dictates that girls should not take their own safety into account over whatever goals they are seeking to achieve by dressing revealingly. I'm saying that there's this pretty horrible pressure in society that girls ought to think first about what will make them look more attractive to men, and ignore the possible negative attention this could bring to them, and that's what I'm interested in combating.
There is also a lot of societal pressure on women to cover up by way of blaming them for harassment and other on the grounds that they were dressed too revealingly, often when they're actually not dressed revealingly at all. I think that's just as important to combat. I think that the idea that women have to make a choice between being attractive and being safe is also important to combat. And there does need to be some vaguely consistent standard because otherwise you dump them in a catch-22. They can't really know how everyone they're going to encounter will respond to their clothes but they're expected to know and take it into account in selecting them.
I'm not making expectations here, I'm giving advice. I'm not going to judge a woman and say she's an idiot if she decides to go into a seedy bar in a bikini, but I would definitely tell her that if she did so she'd get some pretty heavy ogling, and that she better not if she didn't want that sort of attention.
I totally agree with you that people who blame women for harassment are idiotic people. Likewise, people who decide that there's a specific sort of clothing that women should wear, and if they don't wear it they're "whoores" are idiots too (and probably old). There's a difference between saying that women should consider the possibility of a safety/attractiveness trade-off, and saying that all women should never show cleavage. Also, I think that the safety/attractiveness trade-off is very real in this society, and should be considered. I agree with you, however, that it shouldn't exist, and I'd be very open to discussion of ideas on how to remove it.
There is also a lot of societal pressure on women to cover up by way of blaming them for harassment and other on the grounds that they were dressed too revealingly
So, can you show me the slew of court cases where a woman was found guilty of her own rape?
Why would I have to? Oh right, because you're an idiot. No thanks.
And how many of those folks are posting in this thread right now?
edit: I am NOT saying that there are no idiot in the world, what I am saying is that there is no one (aside from a couple of one-off idiots who no one agreed with) arguing in their defense in here.
There is also a lot of societal pressure on women to cover up by way of blaming them for harassment and other on the grounds that they were dressed too revealingly
So, can you show me the slew of court cases where a woman was found guilty of her own rape?
Why would I have to? Oh right, because you're an idiot. No thanks.
Posts
Please link images of pictures that depict the clothing women should be wearing in Western culture if they wish to avoid this kind of attention.
Serious request.
And no, I am not exaggerating, strawmanning, or making this up.
I could tell you a story or two, but most people here have heard it already.
So I'll just note that it's not nearly as absurd as you assume it to be.
From MSN.
Actually, yes you are. I made none of those claims. I stated that respecting a person and respecting their rights are entirely different things. I said that you're not obligated to respect any person, but are obligated to respect all of their rights. And the last one came right out of your ass.
This is the important part that people keep skipping over.
Same thing with the watch. If I want to wear a nice watch, then I'll wear a nice watch. If someone wants to mug me for it, who has the problem?
I didn't think it would be much more complicated.
Indeed.
Either you declare that all women are victims, or else you are pro-rape.
The moment that you suggest that it might be helpful for a person to consider the implications of their actions you are, apparently, imposing on their freedom to act.
???
People want to be able to tell you you did something wrong by wearing the watch. I don't understand why.
I already posted those pics! (It was burkas and an amish chick!)
I want to see what Raggaholic thinks women should wear in order to be left the fuck alone.
The claim has understandable logic behind it, but still doesn't have hard evidence. I say this fully acknowledging that "wear less revealing clothing" is not a good solution on a societal level and never could be, and is in fact a completely terrible and idiotic thing to say.
What I have been trying to express was that for each individual there's a correlation between pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing and receiving sexual harassment and that there is really very few good reasons for pushing the societal norm for revealing clothing by any one person on an individual basis in this particular culture and society and I would personally discourage a young woman from doing so if she was not trying to make an important statement by doing so. Damn, is that clear enough for you? I've said repeatedly that this is not a solution to the larger problem of preventing sexual harassment and that I think we should change the subject, but every time I've said something that is apparently so obvious that it should not be said I've been challenged on it (and by VC no less, who seems to make absolutely every argument the defining aspect of your character, god forbid if you want to play devil's advocate) every single time. I would gladly stop talking about it, because in the long-term it's completely moot and not the solution, but everyone seems to just want to talk about how wrong we are for talking about it!
Furthermore, I seriously can't believe that Feral just spontaneously suspected everyone on the opposing side of the conversation of being sexist pigs. I know I wasn't one of the posters directly highlighted, but I don't think I've ever been to a place where more words have been put into my mouth in my entire life. Yes, I honestly do think that sexist pigs do not post on the Penny Arcade: Debate and Discourse forums, for the same reason that I think that hardcore racists don't. I have at least enough faith that we're an educated and liberal enough crowd that this seriously shouldn't be a problem, and just look at the primaries thread if you want proof that the boards are biased towards a specific type of person. Additionally, we're on a freaking message board how scared can you be that the "obvious subliminal sexist subtext" of our posts are going to twist the minds of some malleable innocent bystanders on the edge of coming to sexist conclusions? We're not on a TV show, we're not producing best-selling novels, pretty much everyone who is going to read this thread is going to "get it", alright, we don't need to carefully pick our words so as not to negatively affect the whole world who is watching us post back and forth about some boobs at a sci-fi convention.
You have absolutely no right to accuse anyone in this forum of being a 'closet sexist' and it's even an entirely moot point if they are. Argue against what someone says, not what obscure ulterior hidden intent you've created for why they're arguing. Everyone has stated that they agree that victims of sexual harassment are never responsible for the fact that they were harassed, that they have every right to speak out against harassment that was perpetrated on them, and that wearing more conservative clothing is not and will never be a complete solution for preventing sexual harassment. If you don't think that they actually believe what they have clearly and plainly stated, get the hell over it. This is a freaking discussion board, not a psychoanalysis of the people involved, argue their points, not how oh-so-absolutely terrible of a human being they must actually be and what they certainly must absolutely really be thinking that is contradictory to what they've freaking said.
In short, I'm offended, and I just freaking want to talk about how what we can do to help solve sexual harassment in the long-term now.
No one is placing any value judgement on WEARING anything.
Seriously, this is trying to debate keeping abortion legal. You simply don't want to read the arguments that you are arguing against.
...
You do. Isn't that the point? It's not your fault you got mugged, but they're the one with your watch.
But if he had crossed the street to avoid being mugged, he would be profiling them and therefore being racist/sexist or whatever and impinging his muggers rights. His muggers inherent right not to have you think he looks suspicious and cross the street, so he can mug you.
This isn't trying to debate keeping abortion legal. Are you confusing threads?
Wait, who said that? Like seriously, someone link me the post where this was said, I missed it.
See the personal security part of the argument earlier, starting around the Cats posts from a while back.
Edit: You see, this is why this entire argument is the most awesome retard catch-22 ever and I'm not playing into any of this stupidity. If you wear a nice watch and get mugged, it's your fault for wearing the watch (somehow). If you wear a nice watch and decide to not go through an area you know you'll get mugged, because you see some rough looking people you are being racist/sexist or whatever nonsense. You can't do something and then protect yourself logically, you have to make the argument something fucking stupid other than plain common sense. Plain common sense tells me not to walk around the rougher parts of my city at night with my laptop, am I being racist for not walking with my laptop in an area I know how a high rate of assaults and breakins? Or is this plain fucking common sense.
So you can quantify that standard then, right?
Any facial features or hair?
Depends on how much skin they have to show off. :P
Not objectively, no, it varies heavily from place to place, as societal norms are wont to do. Like I said, this is on an individual basis. I think that it's advisable to consider how people will react to your clothing if you choose to push societal norms in any direction. I'm not saying you should bend to societal pressure, but you should certainly account for it, especially if there's a chance that you could create an un-intended effect.
Additionally, this is a personal angle on the whole thing, but I think that most instances in the US when a girl chooses to push societal norms for revealing-ness it's not for a good cause. Generally they're doing it under other societal pressures to look better, be sexier, or please men more. I can't think of any other explanation used as commonly for why one woman might want to dress in such a way, and I personally find it disgusting that there's societal pressure on women to dress in ways that put them in more danger of being noticed by a sexual harasser/predator/etc, and that this societal pressure is itself based on the concept of making women eye candy for men.
Edit: Oh shit, and I made myself a target for child predators.
And from person to person. So how is a woman to be expected to hold to those standards?
Sometimes women want men to find them attractive for reasons other than societal pressure. I don't see how that's a "not-good cause" or whatever. You're advocating social-pressure to dress a certain way and then following it up by decrying social-pressure to dress a certain way. These are not the sense making.
My beef is not that girls are dressing revealingly, I really couldn't care less. I just feel that it's extremely unfortunate that our society dictates that girls should not take their own safety into account over whatever goals they are seeking to achieve by dressing revealingly. I'm saying that there's this pretty horrible pressure in society that girls ought to think first about what will make them look more attractive to men, and ignore the possible negative attention this could bring to them, and that's what I'm interested in combating.
You know this is not what I'm talking about. When I refer to 'revealing' clothing I'm talking about clothing that is made in such a manner specifically for the purpose of being attractive to men. I am aware that there are practical reasons for wearing less clothing, regardless of what you think I'm not a complete idiot. However that has pretty much nothing to do with what we're talking about right now.
EDIT:
Additionally, VC, there's such thing as good and bad social pressure. Social pressure against racial discrimination is good. Social pressure to starve yourself so that others will love you is bad. I'm saying that one is better than the other in this situation, specifically that assuring your own safety is superior to being aesthetically pleasing to guys.
Shall I add metaphor to the list of things you don't understand?
WHO is arguing that women SHOULD NOT WEAR certain items? I have not seen that argument. All I've seen here is the argument that women should consider their outfit before putting it on. That DOES NOT mean "don't put it on."
There is also a lot of societal pressure on women to cover up by way of blaming them for harassment and other on the grounds that they were dressed too revealingly, often when they're actually not dressed revealingly at all. I think that's just as important to combat. I think that the idea that women have to make a choice between being attractive and being safe is also important to combat. And there does need to be some vaguely consistent standard because otherwise you dump them in a catch-22. They can't really know how everyone they're going to encounter will respond to their clothes but they're expected to know and take it into account in selecting them.
So, can you show me the slew of court cases where a woman was found guilty of her own rape?
You are arguing against something that NO ONE is arguing for, and ignoring all of the ACTUAL arguments being made.
So wait wait. So tank tops are... not made to be attractive? Or are they, but they're sensible enough that a woman's not at fault if someone really gets off on shoulders and grabs her? Are short skirts and shorts particularly designed to divert the male gaze? If they aren't, does that mean girls get to wear heavy and uncomfortable clothing in the heat?
I mean, tell me an item of clothing that isn't designed for attractiveness. Maybe work clothes? Though god knows I like a woman in uniform...
Wow.
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1838061,00.html
I'm not making expectations here, I'm giving advice. I'm not going to judge a woman and say she's an idiot if she decides to go into a seedy bar in a bikini, but I would definitely tell her that if she did so she'd get some pretty heavy ogling, and that she better not if she didn't want that sort of attention.
I totally agree with you that people who blame women for harassment are idiotic people. Likewise, people who decide that there's a specific sort of clothing that women should wear, and if they don't wear it they're "whoores" are idiots too (and probably old). There's a difference between saying that women should consider the possibility of a safety/attractiveness trade-off, and saying that all women should never show cleavage. Also, I think that the safety/attractiveness trade-off is very real in this society, and should be considered. I agree with you, however, that it shouldn't exist, and I'd be very open to discussion of ideas on how to remove it.
Why would I have to? Oh right, because you're an idiot. No thanks.
And how many of those folks are posting in this thread right now?
edit: I am NOT saying that there are no idiot in the world, what I am saying is that there is no one (aside from a couple of one-off idiots who no one agreed with) arguing in their defense in here.
At least I'm literate.