4 ms·

No, but people being free to stare at whatever they like in public means that they are free to stare at you.

by throwawaylinux 4y ago

afiori 4y ago
Just because there is physical distance it does not mean it is not harassment.
- throwawaylinux 4y ago
  And just because something upsets you doesn't mean it's against the law.
  - afiori 4y ago
    We can make a very long chain saying vaguely related truism forth and back. Or I could recommend reading https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/12/weak-men-are-superweapons/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/12/weak-men-are-superweap... instead.
    - throwawaylinux 4y ago
      It's not a truism that people are not free to cast their eyes in any direction they like in public.
      - afiori 4y ago
        This is exactly why I posted that link. I never said anything about what people can or cannot do in public or in private, I only pointed out that "just looking" is not an ironclad defense. Harassment is better defined in terms of both side intent, personal effects, and reasonable expectations, especially when anonymity and safety can be at risk.
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        People are free to stare in public. I don't know how else to put this to you.
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    And just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right. They're orthogonal dimensions. What's your point?
    - throwawaylinux 4y ago
      That it's not illegal. That's the thing about going about in public, you have accept that others will be there and tolerate what they do even if you don't like it. Try go acting the clown in public and see if people won't stare and record you.
      - kelseyfrog 4y ago
        Sorry, but I'm not following. How do you make the connection from going out in public to you have to accept what others do? It feels like you're bringing in NAP or something without actually saying it.
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        > Sorry, but I'm not following. How do you make the connection from going out in public to you have to accept what others do? Start with the context https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32673550 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32673550 I don't know what you're having trouble understanding. > It feels like you're bringing in NAP or something without actually saying it. I don't know what NAP is or how that might address what I wrote.
        kelseyfrog 4y ago
        No, I mean, please explain why you have to accept what others do. Are there people who are going to make me? If so, then they have some justification to do so - what is it?
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        > No, I mean, please explain why you have to accept what others do. Because the law allows them and prevents you stopping them. > Are there people who are going to make me? Police officers perhaps. Depending what you mean by not accepting it. > If so, then they have some justification to do so - what is it? Who and what? I don't really follow. People are free to look at what they like in public. I feel I'm repeating myself, I don't quite know what the difficulty is with this. And what is NAP?

No, but people being free to stare at whatever they like in public means that they are free to stare at you.

afiori 4y ago

Just because there is physical distance it does not mean it is not harassment.

throwawaylinux 4y ago
And just because something upsets you doesn't mean it's against the law.
- afiori 4y ago
  We can make a very long chain saying vaguely related truism forth and back. Or I could recommend reading https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/12/weak-men-are-superweapons/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/12/weak-men-are-superweap... instead.
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    It's not a truism that people are not free to cast their eyes in any direction they like in public.
    - afiori 4y ago
      This is exactly why I posted that link. I never said anything about what people can or cannot do in public or in private, I only pointed out that "just looking" is not an ironclad defense. Harassment is better defined in terms of both side intent, personal effects, and reasonable expectations, especially when anonymity and safety can be at risk.
      - throwawaylinux 4y ago
        People are free to stare in public. I don't know how else to put this to you.
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  And just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right. They're orthogonal dimensions. What's your point?
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    That it's not illegal. That's the thing about going about in public, you have accept that others will be there and tolerate what they do even if you don't like it. Try go acting the clown in public and see if people won't stare and record you.
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      Sorry, but I'm not following. How do you make the connection from going out in public to you have to accept what others do? It feels like you're bringing in NAP or something without actually saying it.
      - throwawaylinux 4y ago
        > Sorry, but I'm not following. How do you make the connection from going out in public to you have to accept what others do? Start with the context https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32673550 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32673550 I don't know what you're having trouble understanding. > It feels like you're bringing in NAP or something without actually saying it. I don't know what NAP is or how that might address what I wrote.
        kelseyfrog 4y ago
        No, I mean, please explain why you have to accept what others do. Are there people who are going to make me? If so, then they have some justification to do so - what is it?
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        > No, I mean, please explain why you have to accept what others do. Because the law allows them and prevents you stopping them. > Are there people who are going to make me? Police officers perhaps. Depending what you mean by not accepting it. > If so, then they have some justification to do so - what is it? Who and what? I don't really follow. People are free to look at what they like in public. I feel I'm repeating myself, I don't quite know what the difficulty is with this. And what is NAP?