#MeToo has caught on, good thing or bad thing ?

pconn062

A member of our wedding band was recently sexually assaulted.

At a gig we did recently a group of people dancing near the stage thought it would be funny to "pretend" to grab the genitals of one of our members while they performed. Several people in the group tried this, while the rest of the group encouraged them and laughed. Then one person went too far and actually grabbed their genitals, again to the delight of the members of the group. Our colleague was visibly upset and when they told the group to go away they got verbally abusive and defensive. This happened in front of many onlookers (men and women) who found the whole situation frankly hilarious, laughing as it occurred.
Our colleague called over the manager asking that the group be removed after explaining what had happened, but the manager refused, claiming it was just harmless fun. The group then remained for most of the night, and before leaving, spat some drink in the direction of our colleague.

Our colleague is a man and the group were all women.

This post is not meant to spark a men vs women debate, but just to highlight how commonplace sexual assault can be (to both sexes) and how easily it can be dismissed by people in positions of authority. In the managers mind, it can't be sexual assault when it happens to a man, just harmless fun.

professore

Unfortunately a lot of women like an asshole. That's why vampire and 50 shades films are so madly popular. Also probably explains why sexual harassment is so common - it gets you laid. If it didn't it would have disappeared from the gene pool long ago. Being a nice guy gets you abuse and ridicule from a lot of women.

And the elephant in the room is that these monster men were largely raised and educated by women - in moat cases would defend their sons bad behaviour to the ends of the earth.

So as with most things, it's not as simple as it seems.

hatrickpatrick

LLMMLL wrote: »

I'm not talking about situations where you get talking to a woman at a picnic randomly. You could easily get talking to a male colleague at a work event randomly. If you're standing at a bus stop, the bus is late , you make a comment to the woman next to you about the bus being late, you get chatting and things move from there. That's all fine. Could easily happen with two.men having a nice chat while waiting for the bus.

The example I gave of a female friend being harassed a few weeks ago was a guy approached her and said "I think you're beautiful can I have your number". He then continued bothering her after she said no but that initial approach is creepy.

I wonder how many of your and the other poster who met his gf at an airports friends made that kind of approach? I'm betting they all got talking in a friendly manner to these women over some random comment that they might easily have made to another male.

This is a very strange comment - you're saying that the only acceptable way to come on to a woman is to initially hide one's intentions and only behave as one would if interacting with a guy? I can't quite get my head around this, it's bizarre. There are a great many people - both male and female - who greatly appreciate direct communication without unnecessary beating around the bush. Now, in Ireland, as a society, we tend to unnecessarily beat around the bush all the time with pointless small talk because we're taught that this is somehow polite - but I can tell you that it irritates just as many people as it pleases. There are plenty of people out there who would prefer that others be upfront from the beginning about their intentions. I for one certainly appreciate it. One of exes was the same. In fact, one of her pet peeves was lads who would make a coy, "testing the waters" kind of approach like you describe instead of just coming out with their interest at the beginning.

Basically if you approach a woman going about her daily business with he intention of coming onto her it's creepy.

In your opinion. A vast number of men and women would massively disagree with people.

Have you never met a woman (or indeed a man) who specifically fantasised about being "swept off their feet" in this exact manner? I could type out a looooong list of names of people I know who have. For some people, directness and cockiness are attractive - and conversely, indirectness, shyness and coyness are very much not.

To put this another way - for every guy who complains that a woman seemed interested and then "friend zoned" him, I've seen or heard a woman complain that a guy seemed to approach her platonically at first and only later dropped the fact that he was attracted to her, which she regarded as a massive waste of her time - when she thought she might be making a new friend or social contact only to discover that it was just a slow-burning lead-in to a chat-up attempt.

RayM

professore wrote: »

Unfortunately a lot of women like an asshole.

I'm not sure that's true. Although reading this thread, I can't help but applaud some people's efforts.

hatrickpatrick

professore wrote: »

Unfortunately a lot of women like an asshole. That's why vampire and 50 shades films are so madly popular.

I don't think this is really fair, to be honest. Being sexually submissive or even masochistic doesn't necessarily mean being attracted to assholes or being a pushover outside the bedroom, and being sexually dominant or even sadistic in the bedroom doesn't necessarily mean being an asshole outside it.

In fact, to be honest, I've generally found that one's sexual personality can often be a diametric opposite of one's everyday personality - have you never met or heard of a quiet, shy person in a group being the kinkiest of them, or the high-powered, driven executive who likes to be tied up? These examples are so common that they're practically character tropes at this stage.

hatrickpatrick

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Oh f*CK off. I hate this 'oblivious' ****.
I'm just reading an article from an Irish woman on why she used #metoo. She said in her primary school, the principal would call them up one at a time to the desk to recite something, and that each of the students spent the time trying to dodge his fingers under the desk.
This has happened to all of us, touching, not looking, not talking. I refuse to live in a world where this happens anymore or to listen to entitled men who dismiss it out of hand.
The time has come where women will no longer be treated the way they were.

Everyone in this thread would agree that this is a horrific and totally unacceptable example of sexual assault.

Surely then you would agree that people using #MeToo to talk about the time they got asked out at what they deemed to be an inappropriate moment are the ones who are hijacking this very serious issue and opening it up to the kinds of argument we're having in this thread?

hatrickpatrick

LLMMLL wrote: »

I think you're pretending you don't know the difference between a normal approach and a creepy one.

Say this guy arrives at his work picnic. There are 30 people there spread out maybe in little subgroups. He marches straight over to the best looking woman who he's never met before and introduces himself and starts flirting. Creepy. And I'm betting that's not the way it happened.

Why should that be considered creepy? This is something that happens regularly in various social scenarios, from nightclubs to house parties. Why should people change their social behaviours just because they happen to work with the people involved?

I think you're honestly mixing up "creepy" and "not the norm in repressed, pathologically self-conscious Catholic Ireland", to be honest. I really do. Approaching strangers and flirting with them because you like the look of them is how dating is done in pretty much every other country I've ever visited. Ireland is bizarre by Western standards in terms of how much beating around the bush we do in social situations - not just in sexual ones, in all social situations.

I for one regard this as a prime reason so many young Irish people feel the need to get drunk before they ask someone out - we're conditioned to be so self-conscious and indirect in our social behaviours that it takes a serious lowering of inhibitions for people to act on their instincts. This type of repression is not a positive thing, psychologically - it's something this country badly needs to deal with, in my view, if we're ever going to sort out our substance abuse issues.

One eyed Jack

RayM wrote: »

I'm not sure that's true. Although reading this thread, I can't help but applaud some people's efforts.

Ouch!!

I have to agree with prof on this one Ray, he said 'a lot', not most, not all, but a lot.

However I would suggest that like prof says - it's really not as simple as that either. It depends upon factors like age and maturity (or lack thereof), socioeconomic circumstances, upbringing and their exposure either to heathy or unhealthy relationships and role models in their lives.

There's no amount of social media advocacy will change a persons attitude to the polar opposite of their lived experience, it just doesn't happen, because people for the most part gravitate online towards places where they know their beliefs will be reinforced, where their beliefs and their attitudes won't be questioned, where they won't be forced to question their beliefs, attitudes and behaviours.

Surreptitious

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Just trying to help you.

I'll ask all the straight women on this thread a quick question.

Would you pick a feminine guy or masculine guy as your partner?

I'll ONLY go out with him if he wears a dress and make up.

anewme

professore wrote: »

Unfortunately a lot of women like an asshole. That's why vampire and 50 shades films are so madly popular. Also probably explains why sexual harassment is so common - it gets you laid. If it didn't it would have disappeared from the gene pool long ago. Being a nice guy gets you abuse and ridicule from a lot of women.

And the elephant in the room is that these monster men were largely raised and educated by women - in moat cases would defend their sons bad behaviour to the ends of the earth.

So as with most things, it's not as simple as it seems.

I'm a woman and can safely say they don't.

The majority of women I know thought 50 shades was, well, fifty shades of ****.

EL James was a woman whose ambition was to buy a Passat, so let's just leave it there.

the p u a people (did not know what that was till tonight) will only attract similar (empty vessels)

You've seen the posts by the guy labelled as a p u a, he was thick as pig **** quite frankly, i would worry for anyone falling for the " playful conversation" it sounds mind numbingly boring. It was clear he'd had a complete sense of humour bypass. He'd have to consult the manual to find out what his own name is.

I suppose what I'm saying is; there's someone for everyone.

What's the new Dogs Trust Ad? Find your special someone.

I know a guy who was the typical nice guy. He's finished well, personally, Professionally and financially.

You just need to play the long game.

One eyed Jack

anewme wrote: »

I'm a woman and can safely say they don't.

The majority of women I know thought 50 shades was, well, fifty shades of ****.

EL James was a woman whose ambition was to buy a Passat, so let's just leave it there.

Oh come on now, the Twilight and 50 shades franchise have been phenomenally successful, as have the Sex and the City and Bridget Jones franchises. Why? Because women could relate to them. They may not have been yours and your friends cup of tea, but they were hugely popular with the millennial women's demographic all the same. Plenty of women I know too thought 50 shades was indeed 50 shades of shyte, but not only did they buy the trilogy of books, they made a night out of going to see the films too!

the p u a people (did not know what that was till tonight) will only attract similar (empty vessels)

You've seen the posts by the guy labelled as a p u a, he was thick as pig **** quite frankly, i would worry for anyone falling for the " playful conversation" it sounds mind numbingly boring. He'd have to consult the manual to find out what his own name is.

True, but while they may well be empty vessels, they're still women, and that's all that counts really when the idea is notches on the bedpost rather than any kind of meaningful relationship. The popularity of online dating and straight-up hook-up apps speaks for itself really - convenience and ease of access as opposed to feeling the need to make any more effort than is strictly necessary.

That goes not just for men, but more and more for women too, as they aren't as dependent on men for security as they once were, they have their own means now, but still when there's an itch that needs scratching, they can whip out the mobile and in a couple of swipes as easy as ordering a pizza, they'll have arranged an evenings entertainment - Netflix and chill, if you will

I suppose what I'm saying is; there's someone for everyone.

What's the new Dogs Trust Ad? Find your special someone.

I knew a guy who was the typical nice guy. He's finished well, personally, Professionally and financially.

You just need to play the long game.,

Ain't nobody got time for that nowadays, and that's why I'm not particularly worried about the metoo phenomenon. I expect it will go out out fashion as soon as the next social justice issue starts trending, and then all those on the metoo bandwagon will abandon it in their droves so they can be viewed by their peers as forward thinkers always up to date with the latest trends in social justice.

Any day now I expect selfies and belfies of women burning their bras and knickers and tagging their friends on social media to do the same, similar to the bra burnings in the 70's. That'll learn the menz :rolleyes:

222233

I think it's empowering but at the same time I think social media can be really dangerous when it comes to matters that need in depth and possibly legal examination or interpretation. While I think the idea is great I personally think people with legitatime stories should be encouraged to go to the appropriate authorities so as claims can be investigated and both sides of a story can be heard.

I also think we have to acknowledge that there are different degrees and or perceptions of assault /abuse. I for example would not consider a remark passed by a man to me in a nightclub to constitute any form of sexual harrassment whereas another girl or man might consider it otherwise. Surely that doesn't fall under the same severity as assault ? Can one hashtag really measure and catagorise the very different experiences and different perceptions of people?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Probably shouldn't take a dig at my social life one post after saying you worked at home and didn't have many friends

Not going to bother continuing this since you love to reinterpret everything to suit your own opinion. TBH I keep thinking you're trolling me. Enough. Neither of us is introducing anything new to the thread and just going around in circles.

anewme

anewme wrote: »

the p u a people (did not know what that was till tonight) will only attract similar (empty vessels) .

You really should know more about the PUA material before making such a wide sweeping generalization. There are various philosophies within the PUA system, but for simplicity, we can break them into three groups.

The majority are those looking for sex. These will be people (not just men) who view women as objects and will trick women into having sex with them. They will often follow the concept of neg-hitting a woman by insulting her to generate interest or using props to make them look better. gold chains, fancy watches, etc. Chat-up lines are a huge part of their mentality. These people generally behave like scum, and are the ones that give the PUA scene such a terrible reputation. Retards.

On the other hand, there are those that started in the PUA scene, didn't like the negativity within it and have gone a different direction. They learn NLP to better understand the meanings of conversations, body language, meditation to center themselves, and will generally behave as gentlemen. The common theme is "leaving a woman better than when you found her". For them, the dating is not about sex as a primary reason, but because they're looking to expand their life experiences, or find a successful relationship.

Lastly, there are those already in relationships and use the PUA techniques to improve their own relationship. They both go to the seminars, and they soak up all the information about understanding each other better. I know a few married couples who every year go to various PUA seminars because they think its interesting.

The thing about dating is that there is no education in how to do it. Some men/women know from the start how to approach each other easily, and some others just get lucky finding a series of girlfriends/boyfriends with little effort. But for many other people, who either lack confidence or have various social/physical disabilities, they don't know how to meet women successfully.

So they go find a book which gives silly advice that doesn't work, or read on forums which also gives advice that doesn't work for them. And then they find the PUA scene, which promises results, and they do get results. The morality of that success comes down to the person using the material, but then TBH that's the same for anyone dating regardless of whether they're using PUA or not.

I don't particularly like the mainstream PUA scene. It's revolting to me the manner in which they view and treat women... but it works because so many women enjoy being treated badly. Seems rubbish but I've seen it happen. The women who constantly have relationships with guys who cheat on her, hit her, or treat her like a slave. These women totally bypass the nice gentle guys because they're not exciting enough for her. Perhaps they have confidence issues or they have some sort of psychological hangups but there are quite a few women in every society that behave that way.

I started in the PUA scene about twenty years ago, and lasted about three years. I went to a few seminars and did it for a year or two, but I was raised by my mother to be a gentleman. I've never wanted to treat women in such manner, and I refuse to. But the PUA scene did introduce various other methodologies and ideas regarding dating that I continue to use to this day. I have zero interest in the PUA scene now, since I have enough experience to know how to encouage women to enjoy being with me.

Development of better tonality so that I can control my voice, NLP to understand conversations better, pacing, Psychology to recognize problems before they arise, meditation to help me control my emotions better, etc. None of which would I have found in Ireland if I had just followed the traditional dating scene.

So, The mainstream PUA scene is poison... but there is a lot of good material that doesn't teach men to mistreat women. The issue is that the **** material is quick and easy. The good material takes a lot of time and effort to learn. People tend to seek quick/easy answers.

anewme

anewme wrote: »

There are a lot of people on this thread who obviously live in a vacuum, with no idea of normal day to day life is.

Welcome to 99% of the internet.

dogbert27

This is where the #metoo has gone too far.

Really?? The 93 year old, wheel chair bound, George HW Bush, picked this moment, a photograph with his wife right beside, he picked this moment to sexually assault the woman! I mean come on!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5014447/Actress-alleges-George-H-W-Bush-sexually-assaulted-her.html#comments

The last line of the article says it all:
"The actress has not offered definitive evidence of the alleged misconduct."

B0jangles

Deleted User wrote: »

You really should know more about the PUA material before making such a wide sweeping generalization. There are various philosophies within the PUA system, but for simplicity, we can break them into three groups.

The majority are those looking for sex. These will be people (not just men) who view women as objects and will trick women into having sex with them. They will often follow the concept of neg-hitting a woman by insulting her to generate interest or using props to make them look better. gold chains, fancy watches, etc. Chat-up lines are a huge part of their mentality. These people generally behave like scum, and are the ones that give the PUA scene such a terrible reputation. Retards.

On the other hand, there are those that started in the PUA scene, didn't like the negativity within it and have gone a different direction. They learn NLP to better understand the meanings of conversations, body language, meditation to center themselves, and will generally behave as gentlemen. The common theme is "leaving a woman better than when you found her". For them, the dating is not about sex as a primary reason, but because they're looking to expand their life experiences, or find a successful relationship.

Lastly, there are those already in relationships and use the PUA techniques to improve their own relationship. They both go to the seminars, and they soak up all the information about understanding each other better. I know a few married couples who every year go to various PUA seminars because they think its interesting.

The thing about dating is that there is no education in how to do it. Some men/women know from the start how to approach each other easily, and some others just get lucky finding a series of girlfriends/boyfriends with little effort. But for many other people, who either lack confidence or have various social/physical disabilities, they don't know how to meet women successfully.

So they go find a book which gives silly advice that doesn't work, or read on forums which also gives advice that doesn't work for them. And then they find the PUA scene, which promises results, and they do get results. The morality of that success comes down to the person using the material, but then TBH that's the same for anyone dating regardless of whether they're using PUA or not.

I don't particularly like the mainstream PUA scene. It's revolting to me the manner in which they view and treat women... but it works because so many women enjoy being treated badly. Seems rubbish but I've seen it happen. The women who constantly have relationships with guys who cheat on her, hit her, or treat her like a slave. These women totally bypass the nice gentle guys because they're not exciting enough for her. Perhaps they have confidence issues or they have some sort of psychological hangups but there are quite a few women in every society that behave that way.

I started in the PUA scene about twenty years ago, and lasted about three years. I went to a few seminars and did it for a year or two, but I was raised by my mother to be a gentleman. I've never wanted to treat women in such manner, and I refuse to. But the PUA scene did introduce various other methodologies and ideas regarding dating that I continue to use to this day. I have zero interest in the PUA scene now, since I have enough experience to know how to encouage women to enjoy being with me.

Development of better tonality so that I can control my voice, NLP to understand conversations better, pacing, Psychology to recognize problems before they arise, meditation to help me control my emotions better, etc. None of which would I have found in Ireland if I had just followed the traditional dating scene.

So, The mainstream PUA scene is poison... but there is a lot of good material that doesn't teach men to mistreat women. The issue is that the **** material is quick and easy. The good material takes a lot of time and effort to learn. People tend to seek quick/easy answers.

Isn't discussion of all that PUA crap banned on boards?

B0jangles

B0jangles wrote: »

Isn't discussion of all that PUA crap banned on boards?

No idea. I'm not exactly promoting it or seeking a discussion about PUA. Surely some clarification on PUA is acceptable. Still, knock your socks off and report it.

PUA always just sounds like the most neck beardy thing ever.

kylith

222233 wrote: »

I think it's empowering but at the same time I think social media can be really dangerous when it comes to matters that need in depth and possibly legal examination or interpretation. While I think the idea is great I personally think people with legitatime stories should be encouraged to go to the appropriate authorities so as claims can be investigated and both sides of a story can be heard.

I also think we have to acknowledge that there are different degrees and or perceptions of assault /abuse. I for example would not consider a remark passed by a man to me in a nightclub to constitute any form of sexual harrassment whereas another girl or man might consider it otherwise. Surely that doesn't fall under the same severity as assault ? Can one hashtag really measure and catagorise the very different experiences and different perceptions of people?

This is the problem with #metoo, what one person would see as a compliment or a trivial annoyance another could be deeply affected by. I'd explain it as like a phobia; some people aren't bothered by rats at all, some people will scream for help should they have so much of an inkling that there's a mouse somewhere in the house. Therefore you shouldn't go lobbing rodents at someone unless you know them well enough to know how they will react. Similarly; be polite and respectful in your remarks to other people: you don't know what they have gone through in their life.

Deleted User wrote: »

PUA always just sounds like the most neck beardy thing ever.

I can never help but imagine that PUA guy is Wolowitz from Big Bang Theory when he shows up.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not going to bother continuing this since you love to reinterpret everything to suit your own opinion. TBH I keep thinking you're trolling me. Enough. Neither of us is introducing anything new to the thread and just going around in circles.

Ah man it's a little immature to claim you're having trolled when you got detailed replies to all your points. Sure some stuff you said got.misinterpreted because that's what happens on the net. How many people have claimed that I am saying no man can ever approach any woman in any situation even though I've said multiple times that that's not what I'm saying.

And you completely ignored me asking how you felt about the women that you may have bothered. I don't think you're trolling but I do think you need some classes in empathy.

kylith

kylith wrote: »

This is the problem with #metoo, what one person would see as a compliment or a trivial annoyance another could be deeply affected by. I'd explain it as like a phobia; some people aren't bothered by rats at all, some people will scream for help should they have so much of an inkling that there's a mouse somewhere in the house. Therefore you shouldn't go lobbing rodents at someone unless you know them well enough to know how they will react. Similarly; be polite and respectful in your remarks to other people: you don't know what they have gone through in their life.

I can never help but imagine that PUA guy is Wolowitz from Big Bang Theory when he shows up.

Or this

kylith

Deleted User wrote: »

Or this

Nah, he looks more like one of those guys who thinks women are vending machines where you put 'being nice' in and sex falls out, then whines about the 'friendzone' while the woman is like, 'but I thought we were friends!'

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Ah man it's a little immature to claim you're having trolled when you got detailed replies to all your points.

Once again. Not what I said. I said that sometimes I thought you were trolling because you did reinterpret posts to suit yourself.

As for not answering your question, you also didn't answer a few of mine. Doesn't matter though. You have your own opinions about dating/harassment which are very different than mine. We're just having circular arguments which adds nothing to the thread.

Let's leave it at that without directing comments about either of our personalities.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

On the other hand, there are those that started in the PUA scene, didn't like the negativity within it and have gone a different direction. They learn NLP to better understand the meanings of conversations, body language, meditation to center themselves, and will generally behave as gentlemen. The common theme is "leaving a woman better than when you found her". For them, the dating is not about sex as a primary reason, but because they're looking to expand their life experiences, or find a successful relationship.

I actually had a feeling you were involved with PUA. You sounded like a milder version of that other poster. Whats common to both of you (he was more explicit about it but there were hints of it in your posts and you're being explicit now) is this frankly naive and creepy view that you're improving these womens lives. I don't think it's a respectful view at all. It seems incredibly narcissistic. And you never acknowledge that you can bother women, even though you know.women can be bothered by Polite approaches.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Once again. Not what I said. I said that sometimes I thought you were trolling because you did reinterpret posts to suit yourself.

As for not answering your question, you also didn't answer a few of mine. Doesn't matter though. You have your own opinions about dating/harassment which are very different than mine. We're just having circular arguments which adds nothing to the thread.

Let's leave it at that without directing comments about either of our personalities.

I'm happy to answer any question. Some points I didn't respond to if I felt I'd already covered them

I'll ask again: how do you feel about the women who do not like to be approached by strangers in public that you have bothered?

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No idea. I'm not exactly promoting it or seeking a discussion about PUA. Surely some clarification on PUA is acceptable. Still, knock your socks off and report it.

I only only discovered what p u a was last night...and I googled it. I've lived this long without knowing what it was with no loss.

It is a complete crock.

With respect to you, I can see from your posts that you are an advocate of this. Not in the extreme sense like the weird person who constantly gets banned, but enough to have some rather unusual opinions, and in my mind, unhealthy ones.

anewme

LLMMLL wrote: »

I actually had a feeling you were involved with PUA. You sounded like a milder version of that other poster. Whats common to both of you (he was more explicit about it but there were hints of it in your posts and you're being explicit now) is this frankly naive and creepy view that you're improving these womens lives. I don't think it's a respectful view at all. It seems incredibly narcissistic. And you never acknowledge that you can bother women, even though you know.women can be bothered by Polite approaches.

I was typing this at the same time as you and totally agree it's clear the poster is a milder version of the weirdo stuff but still very unhealthy and odd and sexist.

The post about using breasts as showpieces makes perfect sense now. As do some of the other extreme opinions.

It is clear to me as a woman that this poster does not respect me as an equal.

anewme

anewme wrote: »

With respect to you, I can see from your posts that you are an advocate of this. Not in the extreme sense like the weird person who constantly gets banned, but enough to have some rather unusual opinions, and in my mind, unhealthy ones.

I am not an advocate of PUA. I am an advocate of men learning how to communicate better, and learning to respect both themselves and the women they meet.

It's funny in a way. I suggest that men can approach a woman, be polite, and walk away from a refusal without any drama or harassment... and in return, it's somehow unhealthy.

It's also amusing that I'm an advocate of PUA when I clearly state my opinion of it. Did you even bother to read the post or simply decide to agree with LLMMLL for the sake of convenience?

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's funny in a way. I suggest that men can approach a woman, be polite, and walk away from a refusal without any drama or harassment... and in return, it's somehow unhealthy.

Just because there's no drama doesn't mean there's no harassment. I guarantee you've approached women who have felt harassed by you, especially of you were doing this when you lived in NYC.

anewme

anewme wrote: »

The post about using breasts as showpieces makes perfect sense now. As do some of the other extreme opinions.

"Breasts as showpieces" was in relation to womens fashions that can often be revealing or provocative. Some women do seek the attention of men in how they dress. But that doesn't matter because men should never stare at a woman without her express permission.

It is clear to me as a woman that this poster does not respect me as an equal.

Tell me something. Have I insulted you at all? Have I made any observations about you as a person or poster on boards?

I haven't about you. You have about me. Perhaps think about that?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Just because there's no drama doesn't mean there's no harassment. I guarantee you've approached women who have felt harassed by you, especially of you were doing this when you lived in NYC.

How can you guarantee anything of the sort?

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How can you guarantee anything of the sort?

Just by going on realistic probabilities. There's clearly a significant number of women who view this as harassing such as brie Larson, many of the women posting on#metoo, my sister, all her friends etc. They don't care if the guy is polite and leaves straight away. They just don't want to be approached by yet another guy while out doing their day to day business.

If you think you've NEVER tried to chat up one of these women then you're mad.

B0jangles

Deleted User wrote: »

I am not an advocate of PUA. I am an advocate of men learning how to communicate better, and learning to respect both themselves and the women they meet.

It's funny in a way. I suggest that men can approach a woman, be polite, and walk away from a refusal without any drama or harassment... and in return, it's somehow unhealthy.

It's also amusing that I'm an advocate of PUA when I clearly state my opinion of it. Did you even bother to read the post or simply decide to agree with LLMMLL for the sake of convenience?

Ok, can you accept that if a woman lives somewhere that this kind of tactic is common then she may be approached very frequently?

That your polite, non-dramatic, non-harrassing approach might be the second, or third, or fourth she's had to deal with just that day?

You say that YOU are polite, YOU are nice, but the women you approach have no earthly way of knowing that.

Your tactic also relies heavily on the fact that most women know from experience that telling guys like you to piss off can get very loud and very threatening. So you should realise that they are not always polite because they are flattered; they are just trying to stop the situation getting aggressive and possibly violent.

But's all that's worth it, as long as you get what you want, eh?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

If you think you've NEVER tried to chat up one of these women then you're mad.

I've already said that I've been outright ignored by a few women. And other women were able to give me a simple refusal, and carry on with whatever they were doing. Were they irritated by me? It's definitely possible.

Was it a damaging experience to them? Highly unlikely. It is possible, of course... but its far more likely that she would have forgotten the incident ten seconds after it happened because there was no threat or pressure involved.

B0jangles

B0jangles wrote: »

But's all that's worth it, as long as you get what you want, eh?

Can you point to anywhere in my posts where I suggested anything like that?

Fact is... I've received positive reactions to my approaches. As I've repeatedly said I have also been ignored a few times, and I've received polite declarations of no interest, or that they have a boyfriend. No problem.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I've already said that I've been outright ignored by a few women. And other women were able to give me a simple refusal, and carry on with whatever they were doing. Were they irritated by me? It's definitely possible.

Was it a damaging experience to them? Highly unlikely. It is possible, of course... but its far more likely that she would have forgotten the incident ten seconds after it happened because there was no threat or pressure involved.

Damaging is not the measure of harassment. Nobody's suggesting that these women are curled up int he shower crying because you chatted them up. But you are bothering at least some of those women you approach and they are feeling harassed.

Like the example I gave of a female friend who literally had to leave an area to stop a guy bothering her. She's not damaged. But you yourself think he harassed her.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Like the example I gave of a female friend who literally had to leave an area to stop a guy bothering her. She's not damaged. But you yourself think he harassed her.

Your example spoke of a guy who was refused and wouldn't stop pestering her. That is harassment. Approaching a woman once, finding the answer, and withdrawing immediately, is not harassment. Simple.

Look. I get it. I've read your posts and I understand your opinion on the matter. I just don't agree with your perception.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Your example spoke of a guy who was refused and wouldn't stop pestering her. That is harassment. Approaching a woman once, finding the answer, and withdrawing immediately, is not harassment. Simple.

It's actually not simple in the context of other guys doing it as well. If as a previous poster you are the 4th guy to do it to a woman that day that will leave her feelings harassed even if you feel you haven't harassed.

What is your opinion on women who do. It want to be approached? Is it a "tough luck that's life" kind of thing for you?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

It's actually not simple in the context of other guys doing it as well.

Collective responsibility, is that it? Nope. I don't agree with that.

I am not responsible for your behavior simply because we share a gender. Just as I am not responsible for the behavior of other single guys, simply because we're single.

If as a previous poster you are the 4th guy to do it to a woman that day that will leave her feelings harassed even if you feel you haven't harassed.

She might feel harassed. She might not feel harassed. She might feel happy to meet someone different from these "others". She mightn't even care in the slightest. You don't know and I don't know. It's pure guesswork.

What is your opinion on women who do. It want to be approached? Is it a "tough luck that's life" kind of thing for you?

I don't see it as a particular issue because I've never experienced this level of exasperation that you believe is so common in women who get approached. I've always found women to be perfectly capable of expressing their like or dislike about any given situation, and I haven't heard any women express your sentiments. I'm sure that there are some women who feel as you do... but I haven't, to my knowledge, met any of them.

And before you seize on "to my knowledge", I will repeat that women are fully capable of expressing themselves on any given subject. If they felt harassed by my approach, they'd likely tell me...

And, once again, we're repeating the same argument of the last few pages. It's all been discussed. you keep bringing up the same arguments to things I've already replied to. We have different opinions on this subject.

erica74

I have been reading this thread since my first post in it, which is waaaay back in the pages, and thought some might find this interesting.
I was just out for my lunch, I was walking along a footpath, on my way to the bank to lodge a cheque, thinking about how long it would take to clear and that I then have to lodge that money into another account so my mind was occupied.
I heard some commotion from a car driving beside me, even though I was wearing earphones and looked to my right. There was 3 men in a car and the 2 passengers had their windows rolled down and were saying something in my direction. I thought they were asking for directions so I took out my earphones and asked if they were okay? One of the passengers said "alright love, where are you going?" and I started walking again because 3 strange men in a car don't need to know where I'm going. One of them took offence to this and called me an "ugly munter" and as I put my earphones back in, they were all shouting abuse. The driver then went up and all the way around the roundabout just so they could all give me the finger as he drove by. I went into the bank then, looking over my shoulder while at the self service atm, hoping they wouldn't appear.

And do you know what the sad thing about that is? That's the normal way for these types of interactions to end. I could have told you that exchange would go that way from the minute the first one said "alright love".

And, as I said in my first post, I still think #metoo is a load of bollox.

Zulu

erica74 wrote: »

And do you know what the sad thing about that is? That's the norm.

No it is not.

Let's be very clear here, the norm is all the other cars that drove past you that didn't even notice you.

professore

erica74 wrote: »

I have been reading this thread since my first post in it, which is waaaay back in the pages, and thought some might find this interesting.
I was just out for my lunch, I was walking along a footpath, on my way to the bank to lodge a cheque, thinking about how long it would take to clear and that I then have to lodge that money into another account so my mind was occupied.
I heard some commotion from a car driving beside me, even though I was wearing earphones and looked to my right. There was 3 men in a car and the 2 passengers had their windows rolled down and were saying something in my direction. I thought they were asking for directions so I took out my earphones and asked if they were okay? One of the passengers said "alright love, where are you going?" and I started walking again because 3 strange men in a car don't need to know where I'm going. One of them took offence to this and called me an "ugly munter" and as I put my earphones back in, they were all shouting abuse. The driver then went up and all the way around the roundabout just so they could all give me the finger as he drove by. I went into the bank then, looking over my shoulder while at the self service atm, hoping they wouldn't appear.

And do you know what the sad thing about that is? That's the norm. I could have told you that exchange would go that way from the minute the first one said "alright love".

And, as I said in my first post, I still think #metoo is a load of bollox.

Let's face it, they were skangers .... they would harass anyone, male or female. It's not the "norm". It's the norm from people of a certain socioeconomic group.

B0jangles

erica74 wrote: »

And do you know what the sad thing about that is? That's the norm. I could have told you that exchange would go that way from the minute the first one said "alright love".

And, as I said in my first post, I still think #metoo is a load of bollox.

You really should have checked with these guys ^^^ before you posted; they obviously know more about what happened to you that you do.

B0jangles

Bambi985 wrote: »

The first time I recall receiving a scary level of male attention was when I was on J1 in New Jersey as an 18 year old and couldn't walk down the street without being gawked at, yelled at, whistled at, cat called and even followed. I'd have to say that America is a hotbed of activity for this and to completely generalise, a lot more sexist. Some parts are worse than others obviously, but walking through the streets of New York on your own as a woman can be bloody eye-opening.

There's cultural aspects to it too, certain ethnic communities are more susceptible to it, I even see it in London when the prolonged stares and cold approaches will most often be African or Asian men.

It certainly isn't a socially acceptable way to talk to women in Ireland, but I have to say when you live in a country where "cold approaches" are the norm and every man on the street is viewing you as a potential conquest, it gets bloody old very fast. The majority of women - especially Irish women - are not going to respond positively to that. I'd compare it to chuggers - who's ever happy to be faced with an over-enthusiastic head yelling about famine in Africa and trying to get money off you when you're trying to get from A to B? Probably 2 percent of people at a conservative guess.

And as with chuggers, it's not illegal, I wouldn't label it sexual harassment (except for the following or the ones that don't take no for an answer) but I'm always dismayed when people try to encourage it as a way of meeting women because the vast majority of women don't leave the house hoping or expecting to be picked up or to have their appearance commented upon freely and when they respond negatively to it out roll the "Irish women are beeatches" remarks and round and round we go.

I never thought of the similarity before and you know what, it really is a perfect comparison.

It really is just chugging, but with a higher chance of being insulted.

Irish Guitarist

I'm a man and I've often had idiots shout abuse at me. I was minding my own business walking into town one day when some idiot shouted at me from a car "you look like a faggot". I told him to fuck off. This is only one incident. I guarantee you I've been shouted at in the street at least as much as the average woman has.

If you do a search on Twitter for '#metoo' you'll find women complaining about similar incidents and comparing it to rape or sexual abuse. In my view these women are attention seekers and idiots. Complaining about a scumbag annoying you is one thing but comparing it to being raped is idiotic.

Christy42

professore wrote: »

Let's face it, they were skangers .... they would harass anyone, male or female. It's not the "norm". It's the norm from people of a certain socioeconomic group.

I would put good money on them harassing more women than men.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Christy42

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

No one has said otherwise that I have seen. I believe that's the norm was referring to the norm of men who have started a conversation in a manner similar to the story given.

What has been said is that a large proportion of women have suffered due to this minority of men.

Irish Guitarist

There's a woman I used to see around who used to ask me for money and I used to ignore her. One day she started shouting at the top her voice "YOU FUCKING CUNT". Then every time I saw her she would shout something at me. One day I was walking along minding my own business when I saw her across the road. There was another girl approaching me and she shouted at this girl something to the effect off "watch out for him or he'll try and rape you".

If I judged all women by the actions of this scumbag as well as all the other women that have shouted abuse at me over the years I'd hate all women. I realise that would be a stupid way to think. It's amazing the number of women that think it's acceptable to hate all men and bang on about 'rape culture' because of their interactions with male scumbags. Some women seriously need to get over themselves. No, all men aren't out to rape you.