6 ms·

Exactly. You don't seem to be introspective enough to realize that your problem is thus not with "men", but with unattractive men. Pretty obligatory link: htt

by temphn 15y ago

Exactly. You don't seem to be introspective enough to realize that your problem is thus not with "men", but with unattractive men. Pretty obligatory link: http://www.dailyhaha.com/_vids/sexual_harassment.htm http://www.dailyhaha.com/_vids/sexual_harassment.htm It's not unwelcome if Tom Brady does it. So computer scientists get it in the neck twice, as they are enriched for unattractive men AND blamed for excluding women.

demallien 15y ago
Bzzzt! Thanks for playing! No, I would have a problem with it from anyone if the attention was unwanted. It is the 'unwanted' aspect of things which is important. A woman in a bar is not necessarily looking for any action - she may already be in a committed relationship, she may have just had a hard week at work and is unwinding with some friends, she might be a lesbian, or whatever. For your information I have also had to blow off very physically attractive men in much the same way. In some ways they are even worse than the fat bald guy, because they seem even less willing to believe that they are being blown off. EDIT: Oops, forgot to make my main point. I used the example of an unattractive man because I felt that people would be better able to empathize with it, not because the situation would have been any different for an attractive man.
- hcles 15y ago
  > Bzzzt! Thanks for playing! Please don't do this.
- temphn 15y ago
  > I am always conscious that I am being objectified sexually ...fat, bald guy Again, lack of introspection. You complain about being objectified sexually while dissing fat, bald (and no doubt short) guys. Of course men are going to objectify women, just as you and other women objectify men. In other words you have nothing to complain about.
  - demallien 15y ago
    "introspection" You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Seriously. Well, either that or your reading comprehension could do with some work. Also, you seem to suggest that I am sexually objectifying men if I don't find every single one of them attractive? Absurd.
    - mentat 15y ago
      No, he's saying that judging sexual attractiveness is inherently objectification and that both sexes do it. Though I believe it is a fallacy to say that you can't dislike to be objectified if you are in fact objectifying others, in non-logical areas (like here) it does tend to weaken one's perceived case.
      - demallien 15y ago
        Oh, you too. That is not what sexual objectification means, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification Specifically, sexual objectification is when you see someone as nothing other than a sexual object - they have no other characteristics in your eyes. Now, knowing that, I would like you to explain to me how making the judgement that someone is not attractive is in any way shape or form sexual objectification...
        mentat 15y ago
        Well, assuming that you're referring to objective qualities (fat, bald) and tying that to attractiveness in an non-platonic sense, I think it's a simple deduction that that is sexual objectification. I would say that the second paragraph of that article agrees with me. I'm interested in understanding how you're reading this that doesn't lead to that conclusion. Though it seems that you think I'm a random person on the Internet harassing you, I've studied sexual ethics with feminists for quite some time and seriously am interested in coming to a common understanding or agreement about differences of opinion on this subject. Arguments about authoritative definitions tend not to be interesting, but I think that the claim is that using physical characteristics as judgment points leads to "insufficient regard for a person's personality or sentience" and that that insufficient regard is not limited to one sex. Hopefully this at least clarifies the point I was trying to make and addresses a little of the "you too" that you're feeling. Perhaps not, we'll see if this thread persists.
- WesleyJohnson 15y ago
  >No, I would have a problem with it from anyone if the attention was unwanted. It is the 'unwanted' aspect of things which is important. Disagree. It should be the 'being objectified' aspect of things which is most important as that's the topic we're dealing with. Even if your dream man approaches you and you want the attention, it shouldn't matter - objectifying women is still objectifying women whether it's from someone you're into or the fat, bald guy.
  - dfxm12 15y ago
    >>No, I would have a problem with it from anyone if the attention was unwanted. It is the 'unwanted' aspect of things which is important. >Disagree. It should be the 'being objectified' aspect of things which is most important as that's the topic we're dealing with. Even if your dream man approaches you and you want the attention, it shouldn't matter - objectifying women is still objectifying women whether it's from someone you're into or the fat, bald guy. I disagree too. I think it is the "if" part that is most important. Sometimes it is being fun to be objectified, even if you had a hard day at work or are a lesbian (not sure why OP had to make this distinction)... or something. The problem is there is no way for people to show "I'm here at this place where people normally go to look for dates, but I am not looking for a date this time." Some women are going to go on social networking sites, network socially and enjoy all the comments they get that others MIGHT find unwanted. This doesn't mean all women will, and it doesn't mean that all men are going make these types of comment. Most importantly, this is a real life problem, not a G+ problem, but G+ gives us the option of a block button, while real life does not.
simplify 15y ago
I don't understand your point. It goes both ways; most men would have a problem being forcefully harassed by an unattractive woman, and perhaps not when by an attractive one. Her point is that she's being harassed by someone she does not want to be harassed by. Don't turn this into a bitter "you don't give unattractive men a chance" argument. The same concept applies with men towards women.
- temphn 15y ago
  You say "harassed", but the correct phrase is "hit on". Which makes all the difference in the world from a legal and moral perspective.
  - simplify 15y ago
    I'm sorry, but I don't see how a man "grinding his crotch up against your leg" can be considered a "hit on" a woman. I think you're arguing about something else entirely.
scott_s 15y ago
Unwanted is unwanted, but I can easily see how the other person being physically unattractive to you making it even more unwanted. Imagery also helped make her example real.
- salemh 15y ago
  Semantic argument about an asshole grinding on a woman in a club which was undesirable, even in the face of potential influence of "looks," even if it was a Brad Pitt type, the attention could have been undesirable. Please picture 8 foot tall gigantic men wanting to sexually have at you on a 24 hour basis whence in public, and maybe you'll have an idea of what a women feels like. Or, go to jail as a frail man, then get the same idea (I'm reaching / exaggerating, but these discussions are getting very "all the dudes I know would never.." vs the reality of data, supporting evidence, statistics, and just the fact that the majority of men can overpower the majority of women. It is a physical dynamic men can't understand, unless the above extreme examples, or if you have had your ass kicked, badly, in a physical confrontation.)

by temphn 15y ago

demallien 15y ago

Bzzzt! Thanks for playing! No, I would have a problem with it from anyone if the attention was unwanted. It is the 'unwanted' aspect of things which is important. A woman in a bar is not necessarily looking for any action - she may already be in a committed relationship, she may have just had a hard week at work and is unwinding with some friends, she might be a lesbian, or whatever. For your information I have also had to blow off very physically attractive men in much the same way. In some ways they are even worse than the fat bald guy, because they seem even less willing to believe that they are being blown off. EDIT: Oops, forgot to make my main point. I used the example of an unattractive man because I felt that people would be better able to empathize with it, not because the situation would have been any different for an attractive man.

hcles 15y ago
> Bzzzt! Thanks for playing! Please don't do this.
temphn 15y ago
> I am always conscious that I am being objectified sexually ...fat, bald guy Again, lack of introspection. You complain about being objectified sexually while dissing fat, bald (and no doubt short) guys. Of course men are going to objectify women, just as you and other women objectify men. In other words you have nothing to complain about.
- demallien 15y ago
  "introspection" You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Seriously. Well, either that or your reading comprehension could do with some work. Also, you seem to suggest that I am sexually objectifying men if I don't find every single one of them attractive? Absurd.
  - mentat 15y ago
    No, he's saying that judging sexual attractiveness is inherently objectification and that both sexes do it. Though I believe it is a fallacy to say that you can't dislike to be objectified if you are in fact objectifying others, in non-logical areas (like here) it does tend to weaken one's perceived case.
    - demallien 15y ago
      Oh, you too. That is not what sexual objectification means, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification Specifically, sexual objectification is when you see someone as nothing other than a sexual object - they have no other characteristics in your eyes. Now, knowing that, I would like you to explain to me how making the judgement that someone is not attractive is in any way shape or form sexual objectification...
      - mentat 15y ago
        Well, assuming that you're referring to objective qualities (fat, bald) and tying that to attractiveness in an non-platonic sense, I think it's a simple deduction that that is sexual objectification. I would say that the second paragraph of that article agrees with me. I'm interested in understanding how you're reading this that doesn't lead to that conclusion. Though it seems that you think I'm a random person on the Internet harassing you, I've studied sexual ethics with feminists for quite some time and seriously am interested in coming to a common understanding or agreement about differences of opinion on this subject. Arguments about authoritative definitions tend not to be interesting, but I think that the claim is that using physical characteristics as judgment points leads to "insufficient regard for a person's personality or sentience" and that that insufficient regard is not limited to one sex. Hopefully this at least clarifies the point I was trying to make and addresses a little of the "you too" that you're feeling. Perhaps not, we'll see if this thread persists.
WesleyJohnson 15y ago
>No, I would have a problem with it from anyone if the attention was unwanted. It is the 'unwanted' aspect of things which is important. Disagree. It should be the 'being objectified' aspect of things which is most important as that's the topic we're dealing with. Even if your dream man approaches you and you want the attention, it shouldn't matter - objectifying women is still objectifying women whether it's from someone you're into or the fat, bald guy.
- dfxm12 15y ago
  >>No, I would have a problem with it from anyone if the attention was unwanted. It is the 'unwanted' aspect of things which is important. >Disagree. It should be the 'being objectified' aspect of things which is most important as that's the topic we're dealing with. Even if your dream man approaches you and you want the attention, it shouldn't matter - objectifying women is still objectifying women whether it's from someone you're into or the fat, bald guy. I disagree too. I think it is the "if" part that is most important. Sometimes it is being fun to be objectified, even if you had a hard day at work or are a lesbian (not sure why OP had to make this distinction)... or something. The problem is there is no way for people to show "I'm here at this place where people normally go to look for dates, but I am not looking for a date this time." Some women are going to go on social networking sites, network socially and enjoy all the comments they get that others MIGHT find unwanted. This doesn't mean all women will, and it doesn't mean that all men are going make these types of comment. Most importantly, this is a real life problem, not a G+ problem, but G+ gives us the option of a block button, while real life does not.

simplify 15y ago

I don't understand your point. It goes both ways; most men would have a problem being forcefully harassed by an unattractive woman, and perhaps not when by an attractive one. Her point is that she's being harassed by someone she does not want to be harassed by. Don't turn this into a bitter "you don't give unattractive men a chance" argument. The same concept applies with men towards women.

temphn 15y ago
You say "harassed", but the correct phrase is "hit on". Which makes all the difference in the world from a legal and moral perspective.
- simplify 15y ago
  I'm sorry, but I don't see how a man "grinding his crotch up against your leg" can be considered a "hit on" a woman. I think you're arguing about something else entirely.

scott_s 15y ago

Unwanted is unwanted, but I can easily see how the other person being physically unattractive to you making it even more unwanted. Imagery also helped make her example real.

salemh 15y ago
Semantic argument about an asshole grinding on a woman in a club which was undesirable, even in the face of potential influence of "looks," even if it was a Brad Pitt type, the attention could have been undesirable. Please picture 8 foot tall gigantic men wanting to sexually have at you on a 24 hour basis whence in public, and maybe you'll have an idea of what a women feels like. Or, go to jail as a frail man, then get the same idea (I'm reaching / exaggerating, but these discussions are getting very "all the dudes I know would never.." vs the reality of data, supporting evidence, statistics, and just the fact that the majority of men can overpower the majority of women. It is a physical dynamic men can't understand, unless the above extreme examples, or if you have had your ass kicked, badly, in a physical confrontation.)