5 ms·

> Maybe you, y'know, shouldn't engage in so-called "locker room talk" (because let's be really real here, the "locker room talk" going around right now is bragg

> Maybe you, y'know, shouldn't engage in so-called "locker room talk" (because let's be really real here, the "locker room talk" going around right now is bragging about committing sexual assault). No, that's reframing it in the context of the current presidential election. The sort of thing that I'm talking about is "Hey, what are you doing this weekend? Oh, I'm going out with this Cuban girl I just met. I hear they're supposed to be tigers in the sack". Notice no sexual assault there, just a conversation females might kick up a big fuss over. "Stop objectifying and stereotyping us." Or even "What happened to your car? Oh, the transmission guy bent me over and fucked me good for 800 bucks to replace some shitty gears he probably yanked out of a junkyard". These things should be allowed and have a safe place where you can say them.

eropple 10y ago
The former is a conversation I--as a white male--would think you are, at best, skeevy, objectifying, and a little bit racist for having. Thinking that is not restricted to women at all. And you can be that kind of asshole anywhere you want to be. But you'll be considered in the context of the world you live in when you do. Why do you need a "safe space" where you can be shitty? Why not just don't be shitty? The latter--I've used very similar phrasing in conversations with feminist advocates and not gotten a bit of static because the context they were used in was perfectly clear and not avowedly harmful, as per your first example. I think you're misunderstanding the objections that would be raised about your speech.
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  It's very interesting the quick journey from "skeevy, objectifying and a little bit racist" to shitty and asshole and avowedly harmful. I fail to see how that statement is harmful at all. > feminist advocates and not gotten a bit of static because the context they were used in was perfectly clear and not avowedly harmful Do they even have the right to complain? You use whatever language you want, and they can choose whether or not to hang out with you. "He's boring to talk to, all he wants to talk about is Yankees baseball". Any allegation of misogyny these days or even worse, sexual misconduct will ruin the life of a man. Even if he managed to clear himself of criminal wrongdoing, his career is over.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    That's not so much true as a thing that "mens rights" advocates seem to enjoy saying. In fact: the available evidence points sharply in the other direction.
    - jimmywanger 10y ago
      Case in point, duke lacrosse players and Derrick Rose. Heck, Derrick Rose's accuser didn't even have her name made public whereas Derrick Rose had his name dragged through the mud and had to spend plenty of time and money on lawyers. Whatever happened to the legal system being public record? That's the best case scenario. The woman was trying to settle, but ended up trying to sue for 21 million. Again, that is the best case scenario, that you have enough time and resources to lawyer up. If somebody accuses you of something like that when you're at work, there is no due process when it comes to HR. You can sue for wrongful termination, but that's hard to prove and requires expensive lawyers.
      - tptacek 10y ago
        Neither of these examples support the point you attempted to make.

eropple 10y ago

The former is a conversation I--as a white male--would think you are, at best, skeevy, objectifying, and a little bit racist for having. Thinking that is not restricted to women at all. And you can be that kind of asshole anywhere you want to be. But you'll be considered in the context of the world you live in when you do. Why do you need a "safe space" where you can be shitty? Why not just don't be shitty? The latter--I've used very similar phrasing in conversations with feminist advocates and not gotten a bit of static because the context they were used in was perfectly clear and not avowedly harmful, as per your first example. I think you're misunderstanding the objections that would be raised about your speech.

jimmywanger 10y ago
It's very interesting the quick journey from "skeevy, objectifying and a little bit racist" to shitty and asshole and avowedly harmful. I fail to see how that statement is harmful at all. > feminist advocates and not gotten a bit of static because the context they were used in was perfectly clear and not avowedly harmful Do they even have the right to complain? You use whatever language you want, and they can choose whether or not to hang out with you. "He's boring to talk to, all he wants to talk about is Yankees baseball". Any allegation of misogyny these days or even worse, sexual misconduct will ruin the life of a man. Even if he managed to clear himself of criminal wrongdoing, his career is over.
- tptacek 10y ago
  That's not so much true as a thing that "mens rights" advocates seem to enjoy saying. In fact: the available evidence points sharply in the other direction.
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    Case in point, duke lacrosse players and Derrick Rose. Heck, Derrick Rose's accuser didn't even have her name made public whereas Derrick Rose had his name dragged through the mud and had to spend plenty of time and money on lawyers. Whatever happened to the legal system being public record? That's the best case scenario. The woman was trying to settle, but ended up trying to sue for 21 million. Again, that is the best case scenario, that you have enough time and resources to lawyer up. If somebody accuses you of something like that when you're at work, there is no due process when it comes to HR. You can sue for wrongful termination, but that's hard to prove and requires expensive lawyers.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      Neither of these examples support the point you attempted to make.