It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)how fair is this statement?(63 posts)(63 posts)
(63 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
This is my favourite topic
Posted January 02, 2012
avatar
Adzeth: snip
avatar
keeveek: Men not wearing shirts and being sweaty in buses, queues etc should be executed. Publically.

Unless it's miami or other city near coast with hot weather.
Depends, if he's worked his ass off to be a hulk and wants to go around shirtless I usually contend he pretty much earned himself the right:)
Posted January 02, 2012
Well, maybe, but most cases of "shirtless dude" look pretty much like this:

http://media.nowpublic.net/images//e9/8/e98a226dd5c30c1f384b0570b1e2651c.jpg

Also, being well trained ("packed") doesn't reduce the sweaty odor factor caused by the fact you wear nothing to cool off your body (and then it produces sweat). Yes, white t-shirt cools your body off more than wearing nothing at all.
Post edited January 02, 2012 by keeveek
Posted January 02, 2012
I think it's not fair to blame women for getting upset for wearing something they feel comfortable in. It isn't limited to just women, though. Being judged for the way you look, or getting certain types of looks, etc. for just being who you are isn't right.

However, that being said, I also do believe context has a lot to do with it. If it's a passing glance, no harm done, after all, it should be expected when you wear revealing clothing. However, like others have mentioned, anything more than that is when things start to get creepy. In circumstances like these, I think getting angry is perfectly justifiable, but getting angry at EVERY passing glance (Talking about an innocent passing glance) is also just as silly.
Posted January 02, 2012
avatar
WarZombie: Being judged for the way you look, or getting certain types of looks, etc. for just being who you are isn't right.
It's a natural mechanism in species who live in herds.

Being surprised that you attract people attention when you dress/act/look differently than other is just being stupid. Sorry. And of course it isn't limited to women's clothing.
Post edited January 02, 2012 by keeveek
Posted January 02, 2012
avatar
hedwards: Trust me, that's not true. They do want certain men looking at them, but they get pissy regardless of who looks.
Well we're speaking in generalizations here, but my point is that if you're seeking attention you want it from people you find attractive, interesting or otherwise valued. I've certainly seen plenty of incidents in my time where a woman was all too happy to gather the attentions and looks of certain men but was disgusted by others doing the same thing.

It really all comes down to looks versus stares and leering, and tons of factors can turn one into the other. Attention from someone deemed undesirable can turn a brief look into an uncomfortable leer for a lot of people.

avatar
WarZombie: Being judged for the way you look, or getting certain types of looks, etc. for just being who you are isn't right.
avatar
keeveek: It's a natural mechanism in species who live in herds.
Indeed. Some people like to pretend we're "above that" as a species, but it's a ridiculous notion. The good thing is you can be valued for a lot of different things and the key is to find someone who values what you have.
Post edited January 02, 2012 by StingingVelvet
Posted January 02, 2012
avatar
hedwards: Trust me, that's not true. They do want certain men looking at them, but they get pissy regardless of who looks.
avatar
StingingVelvet: Well we're speaking in generalizations here, but my point is that if you're seeking attention you want it from people you find attractive, interesting or otherwise valued. I've certainly seen plenty of incidents in my time where a woman was all too happy to gather the attentions and looks of certain men but was disgusted by others doing the same thing.

It really all comes down to looks versus stares and leering, and tons of factors can turn one into the other. Attention from someone deemed undesirable can turn a brief look into an uncomfortable leer for a lot of people.

avatar
keeveek: It's a natural mechanism in species who live in herds.
avatar
StingingVelvet: Indeed. Some people like to pretend we're "above that" as a species, but it's a ridiculous notion. The good thing is you can be valued for a lot of different things and the key is to find someone who values what you have.
You hit the nail on the head. If you dress conspicuously, it's to make a statement to certain persons you want to impress, or attract, or put in their place. And the fact that other people intrude on your delivering that statement is just irritating, even if it is unavoidable.

With women, though, don't leave out the possibility that they're dressing competitively. A lot of women's fashion is for the purpose of one-upping other women, not attracting the attention of more or less desirable men.

But I also agree, leering is inexcusable, and trying to blame women for making you leer at them is just despicable.
Post edited January 02, 2012 by cjrgreen
Posted January 02, 2012
avatar
cjrgreen: With women, though, don't leave out the possibility that they're dressing competitively. A lot of women's fashion is for the purpose of one-upping other women, not attracting the attention of more or less desirable men.
Great point we all neglected.
Posted January 02, 2012
One would say that competing with other females is to impress males indirectly.

Like we, the men, don't need any woman for goofying around and making stupid shit, but without any women nearby it has no point. :P
Post edited January 02, 2012 by keeveek
Posted January 02, 2012
avatar
keeveek: One would say that competing with other females is to impress males indirectly.

Like we, the men, don't need any woman for goofying around and making stupid shit, but without any women nearby it has no point. :P
That would be one of the more annoying things that women do. I've experienced that first hand and quite frankly there are few things they could do that are more degrading to me than to fight with each other over my attention. Even if I was interested in one or the other there's no way in hell that I'm going to go along with being treated like some sort of prize.
Posted January 02, 2012
avatar
keeveek: One would say that competing with other females is to impress males indirectly.

Like we, the men, don't need any woman for goofying around and making stupid shit, but without any women nearby it has no point. :P
At least arguably, it has not even an indirect connection to impressing men; it's between women, and it's what an ethologist would call a dominance display. For example: Liz Jones, "Carol Vorderman and the ugly truth about competitive dressing", with pictures of just what I'm talking about.
Post edited January 02, 2012 by cjrgreen
Posted January 02, 2012
avatar
keeveek: One would say that competing with other females is to impress males indirectly.

Like we, the men, don't need any woman for goofying around and making stupid shit, but without any women nearby it has no point. :P
avatar
cjrgreen: At least arguably, it has not even an indirect connection to impressing men; it's between women, and it's what an ethologist would call a dominance display. For example: Liz Jones, "Carol Vorderman and the ugly truth about competitive dressing", with pictures of just what I'm talking about.
Crap publication, interesting article. Somehow that bothers me a lot less than the notion of women dressing up for men, even if it does bring up troubling alternatives.
Posted January 02, 2012
avatar
cjrgreen: At least arguably, it has not even an indirect connection to impressing men; it's between women, and it's what an ethologist would call a dominance display. For example: Liz Jones, "Carol Vorderman and the ugly truth about competitive dressing", with pictures of just what I'm talking about.
avatar
hedwards: Crap publication, interesting article. Somehow that bothers me a lot less than the notion of women dressing up for men, even if it does bring up troubling alternatives.
Yeah, Liz Jones is a good enough writer on fashion and women's issues to be entertainingly controversial; it's a shame she has to write for such egregious wastes of newsprint and ink, but every good British writer suffers from the same handicap.
Post edited January 02, 2012 by cjrgreen
Posted January 03, 2012
avatar
HoneyBakedHam: Right... because there are no men who have that problem.
avatar
StingingVelvet: You're the second person to do this recently, which I hate. In no way did I say women are alone in such things. In no way did I even knock them for it, or use it as some sort of sexist justification. The topic is on women, so I was talking about women. Yes, of course men do the same thing... we're all fucking flawed humans, that's the point.

Your smug little dig for sexism where it doesn't exist doesn't make you look wise or superior, it just makes you look silly.
Many men, online and off, sure do spend a awful lot of time telling people what "women" think. It is interesting that none of these men are women, so where the insight originates is a mystery, but these pontifications on the inner workings of the female mind are quite common. That isn't sexist?

In your case it didn't seem misogynist, or malicious, or vindictive, or even particularly conscious.

But it is a man making a sweepingly general, all inclusive, absolute statement about the internal thought processes of all women, in reaction to a hypothetical that is chock full of zero meaningful details about an abstract woman having a vague and potential emotion in response to an abstract (presumably a) man doing something as undefined as "looking" in some unsubscribed manner for an unspecified period of time... long story short, it was a stupid question.

I wasn't looking for sexism... I responding to the sexism that was there.

Am I calling you out? Well, I wasn't... I was merely saying men can be guilty too. And I'm really not calling you out now. I'm not better than you. I'm not less sexist. We are human. We are all guilty from time to time of -isms... and because we are such narcissistic animals, we are rarely actually aware of it.
avatar
HoneyBakedHam: Now, replace "look" with oggle, leer, stare, peer, or any other description of a rude behavior that might make a reasonable person uncomfortable... and I'd then say we have something to talk about.
avatar
orcishgamer: Not really, they're in public, end of story. Good manners are nice but not required. The female in the OP's scenario also lacked good manners, imo.
The female in the OPs scenario is a abstract who is engaged in no action whatsoever, and is only attributed with a description of clothing that is at best... incomplete. I fail to see how she can possibly be rude.

And being in public doesn't mean you are required to be the victim of someone else's rudeness. Sure, I am not required to be polite, and I can leer suggestively at your wife's fine tits... but I think you'd agree that we should be living in a world with consequences, and I fail to see how your wife lacks the right kick me in the sack. :-)
Post edited January 03, 2012 by HoneyBakedHam
Posted January 03, 2012
avatar
HoneyBakedHam: Many men, online and off, sure do spend a awful lot of time telling people what "women" think. It is interesting that none of these men are women, so where the insight originates is a mystery, but these pontifications on the inner workings of the female mind are quite common. That isn't sexist?
I'll be sure to tell all my college professors that my sociology and psychology education only applied to men. Sure limits the usefulness of my degrees! Oh well.

avatar
HoneyBakedHam: I wasn't looking for sexism... I responding to the sexism that was there.
Piss off, asshat. You're the worst kind of wannabe white knight.
Post edited January 03, 2012 by StingingVelvet
Posted January 03, 2012
avatar
HoneyBakedHam: Many men, online and off, sure do spend a awful lot of time telling people what "women" think. It is interesting that none of these men are women, so where the insight originates is a mystery, but these pontifications on the inner workings of the female mind are quite common. That isn't sexist?
avatar
StingingVelvet: I'll be sure to tell all my college professors that my sociology and psychology education only applied to men. Sure limits the usefulness of my degrees! Oh well.

avatar
HoneyBakedHam: I wasn't looking for sexism... I responding to the sexism that was there.
avatar
StingingVelvet: Piss off, asshat. You're the worst kind of wannabe white knight.
You know what... fine... I don't fucking care that much.

You aren't a stupid person and you goddamn well know that human beings frequently say things without really hearing how they sound to others. I took the same classes.

When men pretend to have some insight into women, it's usually wrong. The reverse is almost always wrong as well. Sexism, racism, whatever-ism is pervasive throughout every level of our society and in all of us at some level... and that's what I was saying.

But I guess with all your education, the best you can counter with is calling me an asshat.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)how fair is this statement?(63 posts)(63 posts)
(63 posts)