Lewd remarks - banter or not?

Johro

Frozen Pirate wrote: »

Men don't wolf whistle to attempt to get a woman into bed, they do it to feel good about themselves. To feel in control. They generally expect a bad reaction, that's what they want.

F#ck that, they do it to show off to their mates.

Femme_Fatale

Jimoslimos wrote: »

There isn't an equivalent behaviour perpetrated by groups of women towards men

In fairness, there definitely is. And a big problem associated with it is the mindset that it's no big deal for a man, shur men enjoy it etc.

pharmaton

Thatdoesnt looksafe tome AHHHHHHH wrote: »

To me it seems a bit overdramatic, Its true that nobody has a right to say anything that may upset you, but jesus



She decided to wear a dress out that she really liked and because she did the passengers on the train were staring at her because she was sexy and that was the last thing she wanted....

ah no. Her form of writing might be a tad dramatic (given the nature of her profession) but I think what she was trying to imply *turns on woman translator* was that the incident made her feel vulnerable and that was reflected by her questioning her appearance in public.

Johro

Johro wrote: »

F#ck that, they do it to show off to their mates.

It's the same thing. Call out to the woman across the way, a whistle, a gesture, a howl, a remark about getting up close and personal with her genitals. Makes you look brave, makes you look in control, you've showed her who's boss and now your mates think you're neat. She spends anything between the next two seconds and the next few months feeling self-conscious, embarrassed, and like she can't go out looking well without being at fault for asking for such treatment.

There's one day a week I purposely dress very conservatively into work, because a certain group of men come in and make me feel horribly uncomfortable. Even if it's just me and one of them, they still treat me the same, so it's not just about showing off, it's about feeling like a big man, be it for the benefit of his mates or for his own entertainment.

Jimoslimos

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

In fairness, there definitely is. And a big problem associated with it is the mindset that it's no big deal for a man, shur men enjoy it etc.

I'd disagree, if only for the reason that any attention will never have the same underlying risk for violence. Making anyone feel uncomfortable is wrong of course, but most men would not fear physical aggression from strange women.

Johro

You must notice though that it's much less likely to get that kind of thing from a bloke who's on his own, and much more likely from a bloke with mates around him.

Johro

true-or-false wrote: »

It's the same thing. Call out to the woman across the way, a whistle, a gesture, a howl, a remark about getting up close and personal with her genitals. Makes you look brave, makes you look in control, you've showed her who's boss and now your mates think you're neat. She spends anything between the next two seconds and the next few months feeling self-conscious, embarrassed, and like she can't go out looking well without being at fault for asking for such treatment.

There's one day a week I purposely dress very conservatively into work, because a certain group of men come in and make me feel horribly uncomfortable. Even if it's just me and one of them, they still treat me the same, so it's not just about showing off, it's about feeling like a big man, be it for the benefit of his mates or for his own entertainment.

Again, a group. Because they like to show off to their mates. They don't need to prove themselves to themselves, but to their mates. Big heroes that they are.

Rho b

Johro wrote: »

Pretty sarcastic remark. I would have thought that would be seen as obvious tbh. Standing up for women does not mean you don't believe men have rights ffs.

I can assure you that women in a certain group/situation - I prefer the term "bitch pack" - can be as pass remarkable/vocal as any male group.
Of course men have rights, Jeez.

Ace Attorney

pharmaton wrote: »

ah no. Her form of writing might be a tad dramatic (given the nature of her profession) but I think what she was trying to imply *turns on woman translator* was that the incident made her feel vulnerable and that was reflected by her questioning her appearance in public.

I reread it there i getcha now

SV

I couldn't read that because yer one just annoys the shít out of me.
In general she's probably right, she'd just need to stop being so bloody dramatic about it.

Femme_Fatale

Rho b wrote: »

I can assure you that women in a certain group/situation - I prefer the term "bitch pack" - can be as pass remarkable/vocal as any male group.

Are you referring to bitchy remarks or lewd remarks though?

Of course men have rights, Jeez.

Johro didn't dispute that.

darkpagandeath

drunken hen parties don't make suggestive remarks or attempt to touch people in an inappropriate manner do they.

srm23

sounds like the guy was just paying her a complement

pharmaton

Thatdoesnt looksafe tome AHHHHHHH wrote: »

i got the part where she felt embarrassed by the "high vis gangs" comment alright but this part



i mean like because shes a woman and wore a dress it made her sexy and an object compared to a shapeless blob in what she normally would wear and she gets mad at herself for wearing the dress and she feel dirty. that bit feels a bit overdramatic

I dunno. I stopped wearing anything particularly feminine or flattering years ago and maybe subconsciously there is an element of that about it, but mostly I suspect it's because I valued things differently. I do remember years ago when I worked as a waitress in a pretty well known cafe, I used walk to work every morning in my garb (blouse and skirt) and having to cross through a set of lights on a busy thoroughfare, I had cars honk as I crossed the road, or the odd wolf whistle from a wound down window but it would all happen in slow motion while the green man ticked and it was like ALL the cars in the universe were stopped at that crossing and having a laugh at the banter.
I used to get to work totally flushed and while I wasn't scared and don't believe it was done to cause offence, I was fairly self conscious and spent a lot of time walking around with my head down. (and still do a bit)

For sure I don't mind having a bit of craic with someone if it's done in the right way, I don't remember how many times I was asked how big my baps were (I manned the sandwiches) to the overly emphasised breast in a bun joke with regular customers but it often leaves me wondering if we're not all just a bit desensitized to the sexualised nature of our every day interactions. Like, by all means pay someone a compliment if you feel you want to, just maybe do it in the right kind of way.

Rho b

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Are you referring to bitchy remarks or lewd remarks though?

Johro didn't dispute that.

1. Both
2. Acknowledgement of same.

darkpagandeath wrote: »

drunken hen parties don't make suggestive remarks or attempt to touch people in an inappropriate manner do they.

I would also suggest that they are not always drunk.
TBH it pees me off why some women get upset when a guy wolf whistles/comments but on the other hand in certain situations they reciprocate similar tendencies.

syklops

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

In fairness, there definitely is. And a big problem associated with it is the mindset that it's no big deal for a man, shur men enjoy it etc.

I had my ass groped by a woman, flesh on flesh at a wedding and it was "Shur just a bit of craic". It would've been very different if I'd done it to some one else.

TBH, What I read of the article I got:

Single white female in high heels and presumably other attractive attire lifts bike down steps and sees 5 males and feels safe and secure and at no point thinks she will be raped and gets offended at one of their remarks which she over hears. Very much #first world problem.

I've overheard numerous things about me. Ive regretted hearing them all. She's lucky to over hear something about herself which is positive(they'ed like to be the saddle).

Non story.

Czarcasm

true-or-false wrote: »

I've heard much worse from colleagues, sure, but does that make it okay?

I've given this some thought since the thread started, and tbh as Femme_Fatale and others pointed out, it really DOES depend on context. Ok you're probably asking the wrong person about this as I'd probably be regarded as woefully sexist by some, and very respectful of women by other people, really depends on who you ask, but this thread DID remind me of this incident from a while back -

Czarcasm wrote: »

This thread DID remind me though of an incident in work last week when my boss had me up in the office. The conversation went something like-

"Now <Czarcasm>, in a meeting yesterday you mentioned you'd a pain in a certain part of the male anatomy"...

She could see I wasn't sure what she was referring to, so she continued-

"You're working in an all female environment, and you made reference to a certain part of the male anatomy when talking about the filing system we use here"...

Then it clicked! She was referring to the fact that at a meeting the previous day, the exact phrase I used was-

"I have a pain in my balls with all this paperwork!". I mean, yes, it really IS a pain in the balls, made worse yesterday then when she pointed out that I hadn't filled out a petty cash voucher for a pint of milk-

"Balls! Oh, oh shìt, sorry, sorry!"

Fcuking disaster! :pac:

Basically IN MY MIND at least, my boss was taking something I'd said, and blowing it out of all proportion. It wasn't so much that she was offended by it, it was an attempt to have me "know my place" as such. She's the boss, I'm a contractor so to speak. She's a bit of a ball breaker if I'm to be perfectly honest about it and she's hard to work with, and because she's adamant about asserting her authority, she's very hard to take seriously.

The journalist here reminds me of that sost of woman - takes a trivial incident and blows it out of all proportion, trivialising incidents of actual sexual harassment where an individual IS actually subjected to sexual harassment. In previous employment I managed a team of girls and we got on great, we could talk freely to each other and there was flirtatious chats and nobody batted an eyelid. Only once did I have to deal with a case of sexual harassment when a manager from another department would make letcherous comments and physically intimidate some of my team members.

I'm glad and impressed that she's chosen to take a step back to analyse and complain about the incident. I usually let these things slide, knowing that if I say anything I'll be branded a "hysterical woman", and I don't see these instances as being bad enough to be worth the reputation I'd gain if I said anything. So I think it's a good thing that she put the experience down on paper (or screen). I certainly wouldn't put my feelings the way she has put hers though.

In the example given above, the journalist in this case would've known how to make a complaint to the proper authorities to resolve the incident if she was really all that put out by it and this is one of the reasons why I'm skeptical it ever happened - because she took to social media and twitter to publicise her grievance first of all, then the "masochist" in her decided she had to listen to some talk show on the radio as it dissected her story, and THEN, she had to go write a whole piece for the journal (daily mail standard "news" site) about it...

And in the footnote we read that the journalist is also a trainee psychologist that's writing a non-fiction* book about women who are subjected to sexual assault.



*The emphasis on non-fiction was my own, purely to point out the fact that the journalist felt the need to include that phrase in case anyone might think she was making up half the stories that she will no doubt be including in her book.

Johro

I thought it was general knowledge, or at least it should be, that most men behave differently when they are with other men than they would on their own. A guy who whistles and yells 'look at the arse on that' is pretty much guaranteed to be surrounded by other men and wouldn't dream of doing so were he on his own, with none of his mates to show off to. There are of course exceptions to the rule, but most men have this constant need to prove themselves to other men, be it at work or when they're out, and this makes them behave like proper assholes.
It's a pack behaviour. That's just how it is. The guy doing the yelling might even cringe inwardly at the stupidity of it but the approval of his mates is what he wants more. One of his mates, or all of them, might think 'oh shut up you jerk' but none of them will say so because they are afraid to be singled out as soft or whatever. Not part of the group.
It's sad but true and until blokes stop trying to look for approval from other blokes in every f#ckin thing they do they just never grow up.
Jesus you see it all the time in threads on AH and elsewhere, in youtube comments particularly, and in the comments on the article. Guys making insulting or trolling comments desperate for thanks, and more following, all trying to outdo the other in the 'Oh no you didn't' funniness of it all. Be a f#ckin real individual and say what you think and not what you think is expected of you.

Czarcasm

Czarcasm wrote: »

In the example given above, the journalist in this case would've known how to make a complaint to the proper authorities to resolve the incident if she was really all that put out by it and this is one of the reasons why I'm skeptical it ever happened - because she took to social media and twitter to publicise her grievance first of all, then the "masochist" in her decided she had to listen to some talk show on the radio as it dissected her story, and THEN, she had to go write a whole piece for the journal (daily mail standard "news" site) about it...

I dunno, there are an awful lot of things I feel quite comfortable saying on the internet that I'd never say in real life. She said she was shaking after the incident, plus she could very likely have been pushed for time etc. and not seen it as worth it. However the internet is an accessible forum for her to air her issues with the way she was treated.

we'llallhavetea

Ugh these threads and the bitching and moaning, some women just love being victims and some men cannot cope with or handle it if women have it harder than them. "I'm worse off!! Naa naa naa" stfu!

Ace Attorney

Johro wrote: »

I thought it was general knowledge, or at least it should be, that most men behave differently when they are with other men than they would on their own. A guy who whistles and yells 'look at the arse on that' is pretty much guaranteed to be surrounded by other men and wouldn't dream of doing so were he on his own, with none of his mates to show off to. There are of course exceptions to the rule, but most men have this constant need to prove themselves to other men, be it at work or when they're out, and this makes them behave like proper assholes.
It's a pack behaviour. That's just how it is. The guy doing the yelling might even cringe inwardly at the stupidity of it but the approval of his mates is what he wants more. One of his mates, or all of them, might think 'oh shut up you jerk' but none of them will say so because they are afraid to be singled out as soft or whatever. Not part of the group.
It's sad but true and until blokes stop trying to look for approval from other blokes in every f#ckin thing they do they just never grow up.
Jesus you see it all the time in threads on AH and elsewhere, in youtube comments particularly, and in the comments on the article. Guys making insulting or trolling comments desperate for thanks, and more following, all trying to outdo the other in the 'Oh no you didn't' funniness of it all. Be a f#ckin real individual and say what you think and not what you think is expected of you.

In fairness thats not completly true, yes there are assholes out there that will wolfwhistle at women to the delights of his colleagues, but thats certainly never happened in any of my group of friends, yeah we might comment on the attractiveness of the women but its never loud enough for the person to hear. Its not like once we get into a group we lose all manners and try to outdo each other. You get people that are assholes that will hang out with other assholes and behave like that.

Czarcasm

true-or-false wrote: »

I dunno, there are an awful lot of things I feel quite comfortable saying on the internet that I'd never say in real life. She said she was shaking after the incident, plus she could very likely have been pushed for time etc. and not seen it as worth it. However the internet is an accessible forum for her to air her issues with the way she was treated.

Where absolutely nothing will come of it.

Whereas if she had gone to the proper authorities and reported the incident, at least there would be a record of it happening. I understand what you're saying about being pushed for time, but "not seen it as worth it"? She went to an awful lot of trouble to document the incident afterwards, where it wouldn't just be viewed by five pairs of eyeballs, but five thousand pairs of eyeballs, who would do absolutely nothing about it, because there was no record of it actually ever happening.

seenitall

Czarcasm wrote: »

The journalist here reminds me of that sost of woman - takes a trivial incident and blows it out of all proportion, trivialising incidents of actual sexual harassment where an individual IS actually subjected to sexual harassment. In previous employment I managed a team of girls and we got on great, we could talk freely to each other and there was flirtatious chats and nobody batted an eyelid. Only once did I have to deal with a case of sexual harassment when a manager from another department would make letcherous comments and physically intimidate some of my team members.

First bolded bit contradicts second bolded bit.

Lecherous comments are considered sexual harassment in workplaces. You can't just go around making lewd remarks to your co-workers, can you? Not on, disrespectful, intimidating.

Yet when the exact same remark is uttered to you by somebody you don't know, on the street, then it becomes "a trivial incident blown out of proportion which trivialises incidents of actual sexual harassment where an individual IS actually subjected to sexual harassment".

Interesting.

April O Neill

Deleted User wrote: »

You know, there's a good reason I rarely get involved in these kind of threads.

If we actually stopped making this stuff about gender, and started making it about people.

The linked article is gender-focused though. Why does this happen to women etc. etc.

Johro

Thatdoesnt looksafe tome AHHHHHHH wrote: »

In fairness thats not completly true, yes there are assholes out there that will wolfwhistle at women to the delights of his colleagues, but thats certainly never happened in any of my group of friends, yeah we might comment on the attractiveness of the women but its never loud enough for the person to hear. Its not like once we get into a group we lose all manners and try to outdo each other. You get people that are assholes that will hang out with other assholes and behave like that.

Oh I know, I'm saying that the ones that do, do so for the other guys to snigger at.
It doesn't happen in my group of friends either coz they're not assholes, and if one of them did I'd tell him to not be a moron.
I'm not saying all men are like that. I was just talking about the ones who do and the reasons why they do it, which are pathetic.
There's obviously nothing wrong with guys having a drink or something or working together, commenting on anyone's looks in private, it's when you make it a public display like that for the amusement of yourself and others it becomes intimidating. But like you say, assholes attract assholes, and we're not all assholes, thankfully.

April O Neill

true-or-false wrote: »

(although she herself seemed to have a questionable attitude towards people in hi-vis, but that's off topic).

Hmmm, I'm not sure she did. She said they were professionals. Nothing questionable about that really. She was pointing out that they were men doing a job, and were acting unprofessional on the job, when they shouldn't be, like anyone doing any job shouldn't be.

April O Neill

Czarcasm wrote: »

It was the typical "Sub-intellectual manual labourer types demeaning me, how dare they? Who do they think they are?" type stuff. In other words she was passing judgement on the men as much as they were passing judgement on her, well, one of them anyway, apparently.

Well now, TBH, the men weren't helping themselves there, were they, by playing into a well-trod stereotype?

Ronin247

Its called humour, and it works both ways.




Oh my, as a man I am so offended by Coca cola objectifying a man in this manner........ this is causing the ruination of our society

seenitall

syklops wrote: »

I had my ass groped by a woman, flesh on flesh at a wedding and it was "Shur just a bit of craic". It would've been very different if I'd done it to some one else.

TBH, What I read of the article I got:

Single white female in high heels and presumably other attractive attire lifts bike down steps and sees 5 males and feels safe and secure and at no point thinks she will be raped and gets offended at one of their remarks which she over hears. Very much #first world problem.

I've overheard numerous things about me. Ive regretted hearing them all. She's lucky to over hear something about herself which is positive(they'ed like to be the saddle).

Non story.

You took from that article that she felt safe and secure? I totally believe you. :rolleyes:

Newsflash: there is nothing 'positive' in having a lewd remark thrown at you for the delectation of a bunch of boyos while you're walking about your business.

But I guess some people will never ever get this concept - and THAT is the real non-story of this thread.

April O Neill

She should have done this*:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEMM9N3cTP4

* PLEASE don't let this being an scene from Sex and the City put you off, it's actually a great scene with the best character from the show.

Czarcasm

seenitall wrote: »

First bolded bit contradicts second bolded bit.

Lecherous comments are considered sexual harassment in workplaces. You can't just go around making lewd remarks to your co-workers, can you? Not on, disrespectful, intimidating.

Yet when the exact same remark is uttered to you by somebody you don't know, on the street, then it becomes "a trivial incident blown out of proportion which trivialises incidents of actual sexual harassment where an individual IS actually subjected to sexual harassment".

Interesting.

See that's why it's all about context, because at first the manager in question, the girls had told him in no uncertain terms that his comments were unwelcome, and so he escalated, and was persistent. It wasn't simply a case of a one off incident, and it certainly wasn't harmless comments that had no need to be taken seriously.

The girls had spoken to the guy about it, I had spoken to the guy about it, he didn't take it seriously and so further disciplinary action was necessary.

On the street you can ignore people and carry on about your business. In a work environment where you have to work with that person every day, it's not so easy to ignore them. That's the difference.

Mint Aero

Honda boya hupsa ata kid ya

Johro

Ronin247 wrote: »

Its called humour, and it works both ways.




Oh my, as a man I am so offended by Coca cola objectifying a man in this manner........ this is causing the ruination of our society

If you can't see how this is different I don't know what to say to you.
So I'm not gonna bother.

seenitall

Czarcasm wrote: »

See that's why it's all about context, because at first the manager in question, the girls had told him in no uncertain terms that his comments were unwelcome, and so he escalated, and was persistent. It wasn't simply a case of a one off incident, and it certainly wasn't harmless comments that had no need to be taken seriously.

The girls had spoken to the guy about it, I had spoken to the guy about it, he didn't take it seriously and so further disciplinary action was necessary.

On the street you can ignore people and carry on about your business. In a work environment where you have to work with that person every day, it's not so easy to ignore them. That's the difference.

So, the difference is it is made more convenient, or easier, to do something about it where there are proper channels in place to tackle it for what it is - sexual harassment.

The exact same thing, that is - sexual harrassment, gets nothing done about it cos I'm not going to bother about going to the police about it if I can just take a different route to my destination next time, or that construction job will be finished next week.

It is one and the same thing, though. It is just the context that is different.

Czarcasm

April O Neill wrote: »

Well now, TBH, the men weren't helping themselves there, were they, by playing into a well-trod stereotype?

That's my point April, is that this journalist used a well trod stereotype in her story, which is why I'm skeptical that it actually ever happened in the first place.

canadianwoman

Hitchens wrote: »

Spotted this article and wondered have we become totally desensitised to peoples feelings.

http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/making-lewd-remarks-to-women-on-the-street-is-not-banter-1116509-Oct2013/

I think the authoress is making too much of a big deal over it. Men are always going to say lewd things to women. Personally, I would have just gave him a loud "Only in your dreams buddy!" and went on my way as his friends were laughing at him.

pharmaton

Czarcasm wrote: »

That's my point April, is that this journalist used a well trod stereotype in her story, which is why I'm skeptical that it actually ever happened in the first place.

I don't doubt it happened, but it seems it's triggered something of a greater issue for her personally. You did highlight the fact that she's working on a book dealing with sexual violence toward women so I'd hazard a guess that she's become very absorbed in her work and maybe highly sensitive to seeing associations in male behaviour toward women and their objectification most likely. (I've experienced this myself, it's an easy road to go down)

Czarcasm

seenitall wrote: »

It is one and the same thing, though. It is just the context that is different.

It's the context that's important though, so it's not "just" the context. That's why some random stranger commenting on a person on the street is not the same as someone you have to work with every day making exactly the same comment.

"Some randomer made a pass at me today" is trivial.

"So and so made a pass at me today" is a lot more serious, because the person is known to them.

April O Neill

Czarcasm wrote: »

That's my point April, is that this journalist used a well trod stereotype in her story, which is why I'm skeptical that it actually ever happened in the first place.

I'd tend to believe it, because sadly I've seen it happen plenty of times in my own lifetime.

Sunglasses Ron

Bloody good rep

seenitall

Czarcasm wrote: »

It's the context that's important though, so it's not "just" the context. That's why some random stranger commenting on a person on the street is not the same as someone you have to work with every day making exactly the same comment.

"Some randomer made a pass at me today" is trivial.

"So and so made a pass at me today" is a lot more serious, because the person is known to them.

Not a snowball's chance in hell.

"Some randomer stole my bike" - trivial.

"A man I'd never seen before raped me" - trivial.

"So and so stole my bike" - a lot more serious, because the person is known to them.

"So and so raped me" - a lot more serious, because the person is known to them.

Or is it only verbal intimidation/sexual harassment that you would give special dispensation to on the basis of how well acquainted with each other those involved in the incident are?

Czarcasm

pharmaton wrote: »

I don't doubt it happened, but it seems it's triggered something of a greater issue for her personally. You did highlight the fact that she's working on a book dealing with sexual violence toward women so I'd hazard a guess that she's become very absorbed in her work and maybe highly sensitive to seeing associations in male behaviour toward women and their objectification most likely. (I've experienced this myself, it's an easy road to go down)

I've absolutely no doubt pharmaton it's a fairly typical scenario, and no doubt fairly common, but if she's actually researching a book about sexual violence against women, well, some random guy making a pass at her is setting the bar fairly low for an indicator of her idea of sexual violence.

To be perfectly honest about it, I haven't made up my mind yet whether she's more like Bridget Jones or Samantha Brick!

pharmaton

Czarcasm wrote: »

I've absolutely no doubt pharmaton it's a fairly typical scenario, and no doubt fairly common, but if she's actually researching a book about sexual violence against women, well, some random guy making a pass at her is setting the bar fairly low for an indicator of her idea of sexual violence.

To be perfectly honest about it, I haven't made up my mind yet whether she's more like Bridget Jones or Samantha Brick!

The objectification is the association she's making. I don't know if that's due to personal experience or if she is dealing with survivors of abuse or the focus from a psychological perspective but once you are exposed to that link it's can be very difficult to tune out from that frequency. Something seemingly benign can become something depressingly malignant and with those diagnostic tools every experience becomes a projection of it.

Czarcasm

seenitall wrote: »

Not a snowball's chance in hell.

"Some randomer stole my bike" - trivial.

"A man I'd never seen before raped me" - trivial.

"So and so stole my bike" - a lot more serious, because the person is known to them.

"So and so raped me" - a lot more serious, because the person is known to them.

Who said anything about stealing bikes and raping people? We could be here all night if we started at that craic - "So where do you stand on daddy or chips?".

Or is it only verbal intimidation/sexual harassment that you would give special dispensation to on the basis of how well acquainted with each other those involved in the incident are?

For the third time - It all depends on the context of the situation.

seenitall

Czarcasm wrote: »

For the third time - It all depends on the context of the situation.

Yes, I got that, Czarcasm. Luckily the justice system doesn't agree with you.

narddog

For ****s sake get a sense of humour. Some silly **** makes a throwaway remark and ye get your panties in a twist.

Czarcasm

pharmaton wrote: »

The objectification is the association she's making. I don't know if that's due to personal experience or if she is dealing with survivors of abuse or the focus from a psychological perspective but once you are exposed to that link it's can be very difficult to tune out from that frequency. Something seemingly benign can become something depressingly malignant and with those diagnostic tools every experience becomes a projection of it.

I think you may have hit the nail on the head there pharmaton tbh. That's probably the best explanation of her over-reaction to what most people would pass off as par for the course. She would be of course more attuned to it and notice it everywhere and as you say every experience or interaction would be a projection of her inner thoughts as such.

I think too the "affirmations of self-love" bit and her whole "last thing I wanted to feel was sexy" were tbh, just a bit too much. The guy didn't sexually assault her, he sexually harassed her, but he didn't sexually assault her.

seenitall

narddog wrote: »

For ****s sake get a sense of humour. Some silly **** makes a throwaway remark and ye get your panties in a twist.

HAHAHAHAHA. So funneeee.

Hilarious.

Any better?

eeeee

true-or-false wrote: »

I've heard much worse from colleagues, sure, but does that make it okay?

I'm glad and impressed that she's chosen to take a step back to analyse and complain about the incident. I usually let these things slide, knowing that if I say anything I'll be branded a "hysterical woman", and I don't see these instances as being bad enough to be worth the reputation I'd gain if I said anything. So I think it's a good thing that she put the experience down on paper (or screen). I certainly wouldn't put my feelings the way she has put hers though.

This ^^^


Actually I find being commented on in the street by strangers intimidating, patronising, creepy and horrible. I HATE it.

It is NEVER acceptable to leech on people like that, male, female or other.
Ever.

It makes you feel so uncomfortable and it's just plain unnecessary. There is no justification for it. Keep it to yourself or say it to your friends and leave people alone.

seenitall

gadetra wrote: »

Actually I find being commented on in the street by strangers intimidating, patronising, creepy and horrible. I HATE it.

You and me both. Some people, though, think we should lighten up? Take it as par for the course?

Not like we have to listen to this in the office - oh no, that would be unacceptable; and at least we haven't actually been assaulted, you know. Suck it up, gadetra. Deal with it.