12 ms·

"Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!"...As I'm getting older, I see how sexist and demeaning this is. At the risk of revealing my

• richardk 15y ago
  "Start wearing sweaters, even though my breasts feel like they're boiling in there (yup, that's one reason women like low tops, guys)?"
  • Tichy 15y ago
    I find it hard to believe that low cut dresses are the only possible solution here.
    • seanc722 15y ago
      Erm.. Why does it have to be a low cut dress. I see plenty of light dresses that would be suitable for professional situations that wouldnt bring out these comments. Men should be allowed o have there shirts unbuttoned down to their chest because their chests are hot from all the hair?
      • msbarnett 15y ago
        > I see plenty of light dresses that would be suitable for professional situations that wouldnt bring out these comments. Am I seeing this? Are you saying that if she didn't want to hear inappropriate comments, she shouldn't have dressed that way?
        • loganfrederick 15y ago
          I think most people in most modern societies would agree a line should be drawn somewhere. If she wore a bikini to work, is it really fair to expect every guy to not say something? Now, that "something" should be closer to "you should change your outfit" than "I'd hit that", but still, the responsibility for the dress and generally accepted code of conduct falls on the woman in that case. I don't see this stance as sexist because, as others have noted, we expect similar conduct from men.
          • estel 15y ago
            But isn't saying "You're not dressed in line with our code for dress and appearance" the complaint here? I thought that with respect to low-cut/suggestive tops, the problem was never that they weren't professional clothing (with respect to the workplace in question) - which of course is an entirely independent and asexual issue - but that some people made inappropriate comments and thought it acceptable.
            • MPSimmons 15y ago
              I think that a dress low-cut enough to be considered unprofessional is a sexual issue by default. Professional standards and decorum exist, in part, to prevent a sexualized environment. How is it judged that a man's pants are too tight to be professional, or a woman's dress is too short, and what are the reasons? The reasons are sexual, and I might be wrong in this, but I would guess the line exists where people of either gender would begin commenting.
      • Cushman 15y ago
        > Men should be allowed o have there shirts unbuttoned down to their chest ...yes?
      • erikpukinskis 15y ago
        I see plenty of light dresses that would be suitable for professional situations that wouldnt bring out these comments I think you might not be fully aware of the extent of body-related comments that women get. I know women with breasts of such a size that they ALWAYS get comments, regardless of what they're wearing.
      • cbs 15y ago
        >Men should be allowed o have there shirts unbuttoned down to their chest because their chests are hot from all the hair? We can, and I do. There are very different showing-chest expectations from us, we can even show our nipples in non-work public.
      • Jem 15y ago
        I can tell you have absolutely no idea how hard it is to find flattering clothes for larger breasts.
        • Tichy 15y ago
          I think you meant unflattering clothes?
          • Jem 15y ago
            No?
    • estel 15y ago
      Does it matter? It can still be the complete account of someone's reasoning for wearing particular clothing.
      • dbecker 15y ago
        This is about to get massively downvoted... but oh well. Of course it matters! Would you say it's "complete account of my reasoning" if I wore t-shirts to work because they are comfortable? But I wear a dress shirt and tie because my company is trying to project just that type of stuffy image. The tie is uncomfortable... but that's life. The breast-comment in this story wasn't the appropriate way to tell her if she was dressing unprofessionally... but most of us sacrifice comfort to dress professionally every day we go to work. Are you suggesting that she is an exception, and she should wear whatever is most comfortable?
        • rosser 15y ago
          You're the one that chose to work in an environment where a coat and tie are de rigueur, and the comment about a low-cut dress had fuck-all to do with whether she was dressed professionally or not. It was verbal leering, pure and simple.
          • Tichy 15y ago
            She chose to work in an environment where wearing such a dress elicits leery comments. I guess her impression is that there are only such environments, but I seriously doubt that.
    • djcapelis 15y ago
      I find it hard to believe that you think women should have to dress differently so as not to attract a running commentary.
      • tomp 15y ago
        Maybe not should, but could? I'm not saying that it's their fault, but there certainly are ways to prevent what they're experiencing. We men have to deal with another type of assault, physical assault. Most of my male friends were assaulted in one way or another (in clubs, on the street, ...) before the age of 20, in Slovenia. Yes, we could blame other people, but a matter of fact is that we are more likely targets than women, and it pays off to avoid situations that could result in physical violence.
        • wpietri 15y ago
          You're not just saying could. Because there are a lot of things she could do. She could flap her arms and make chicken noises. She could read a newspaper. She could tazer somebody. She could fold everybody paper hats. There are pretty much an infinite number of things she could do, and we all know that. So when you focus on some small set of those, you're not just saying "could". When you say, "Oh gosh, if only those women could learn from my youth and just avoid situations where people might be sexist (say, by staying home and making babies)," then you're shifting the burden of action from the culprit to the victim. It's bullshit. Everybody has the right to go to work without having to deal with sexual, sexist crap like this. But suppose she followed your advice and wore only turtlenecks. Golly, then we've eliminated one symptom. But as she remarks in the article, she's just gone from "slut" to "ice queen". What do you recommend she wear to fix that? And what outfit keeps people from seeing her as the person to organize a potluck or take notes?
      • Tichy 15y ago
        I didn't say any such thing. What you wear projects a message, though. I didn't say that it gives people the right to treat you in whatever way, but it might be worth thinking about. Some companies choose to introduce uniforms...
  • ryanwaggoner 15y ago
    Mens' clothes are completely different from womens', though, particularly in what constitutes "sexually attractive" clothing (which the term "low-cut dress" seems to imply). Do women have a higher body temperature that they have to wear less clothing to account for?
    • richardk 15y ago
      So, do guys wear shorts to draw attention to their legs or because it's more comfortable? Because it's more comfortable. So, maybe it's possible that a woman might wear a low cut dress because it's more comfortable?
      • gaius 15y ago
        Well, it's more subtle than that. A male may wear shorts to be comfortable, but he's wearing a sleeveless top because he wants to show off his biceps. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
        • reddit_clone 15y ago
          > A male may wear shorts to be comfortable, but he's wearing a sleeveless top because he wants to show off his biceps. Or to air out his armpits !
        • scott_s 15y ago
          At work, I wear polo shirts because it's hot, not because I want comments on my arms. And no, I'm not presenting an absurd example as contrast. My hobbies are strength training and jiu jitsu. I have large arms. I also know what women with large breasts must feel like, because the first few times I wore short-sleeved polo shirts to work, I could literally watch people's eyes track my arms. I understood why - I had only previously worn long sleeve shirts, and my arms are larger than most, so they stand out. And I got no comments, but I would have felt uncomfortable if I had.
      • Tichy 15y ago
        Sure it's possible, but I don't get to wear my pyjama at work. In fact in most places I would feel awkward with shorts, too. (Now we could argue if it is the work place or the pyjama wearer who is at fault, fair point).
• deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
• Swizec 15y ago
  Public perception (as judged by art, which usually represents a slightly caricatured version of reality) seems to imply that your attractiveness and the appropriateness of your comments are inversely correlated. That is to say, if you tell a woman she looks good, it will be a compliment if she likes you, a sexist remark if she doesn't.
  • jiggy2011 15y ago
    There's some truth in this, I have observed women who will happily let some strange guy basically feel them up in a club if he is good looking and call him "cheeky". Whereas an ugly looking guy who makes eye contact or smiles at them is regarded as a creep or potential rapist. In fact I remember reading somewhere that a persons physical attractiveness had a fairly significant affect on the likely verdict where they to be the defendant in a trial.
    • dlitz 15y ago
      They're all creeps. Some just get away with it.
  • ryanwaggoner 15y ago
    There's a running joke on Reddit that the best way to avoid being labeled creepy when hitting on a woman is to: 1. Be attractive. 2. Don't be unattractive. And there is definitely truth to this.
    • scott_s 15y ago
      Then it's a good thing this isn't Reddit.
      • freshhawk 15y ago
        Yeah, the conversation here has been so much more enlightened.
        • 15y ago
• ajross 15y ago
  This is always where geeks run off the rails in discussions like this. We want to come up with rules for things: either this statement is "sexist" or it is not, and here is the objective reason for that decision. But it misses the point. Context matters. In a utopian environment where women felt equally respected, sure, a sideways/slightly-inappropriate comment would be fine. In some workplaces today that might even be true. But it's not the norm, and in the real world people feel disrespected by this kind of treatment. Not everyone (but some, sure, as I'm sure someone will point out needlessly) likes the fact that their perfectly "normal" clothing choice can make them "attractive" in one context but the butt of a joke in another. Men, on the whole, don't deal with that.
  • yummyfajitas 15y ago
    We want to come up with rules for things: either this statement is "sexist" or it is not, and here is the objective reason for that decision. Um, yes - geeks want objective rules which allow us to figure out that an activity is either legitimate or not. This principle is called the "rule of law". Are you advocating that we should abandon the rule of law in cases of sexism?
    • apenwarr 15y ago
      Laws are the bare minimum set of rules for your moral behaviour - the stuff that's so bad we have to punish you if you do it. If you can't do better than the bare minimum, then you're doing very poorly at morality. Not all good behaviour can be written down as clear-cut rules. I sure wish you could, but you can't. It's a bit like the story of what happens if you try to measure programmer productivity: whatever measurement you use (eg. lines of code), someone will find a way to game the system. Yet people can still be "obviously" more productive even if we don't have a numerical way to prove it.
    • jdp23 15y ago
      What apenwarr said. Also the "rule of law" is nowhere near as objective in the geek sense as you seem to think. It's filled with concepts like "the reasonable person" and "mens rea" which are heavily contextual and subjective.
• wpietri 15y ago
  It is offensive and inappropriate because it's sexist in this context.
• drostie 15y ago
  Sexism is endemic to the society and to the relationships which generate that comment. So, right. Imagine that you're a woman. You're told from a very young age that you have to watch what you wear, and where you wear it, and how you walk in it, how well-lit it is -- you don't want that sort of Attention. And wear high heels, they make you more attractive -- but don't wear high heels because they might be clumsy if you have to flee from Unwanted Attention. The problem isn't the clothes. The problem is the Unwanted Attention. As a man, your defenses against sexual assault -- at least the ones that you're taught by the culture -- are chiefly, "don't go to jail." That's because that's the only major place you have to worry about Unwanted Attention. There are maybe some Bad Neighborhoods which you're asked to memorize and route around in addition. "I know where I'm sitting!" paints women as the objects of your sexual indulgence, and commits to undressing them with your eyes. That's probably Unwanted Attention, but it is not the Problem. The Problem is "Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention?" -- where you imply that the woman is ultimately responsible for the sad state of affairs culminating in the Unwanted Attention, rather than the males thus attendant and the culture thus pervasive.
  • javascriptlol 15y ago
    Sexual assault is no joke. But so what if someone gives you "unwanted attention"? We have become a culture of whiners and rationalisers. It would be like me, as a man, going on and on about how unfair it is that I'm expected to hide fear and put the safety of females before my own. Of course, we're well along the way to destroying that tradition. People ignore the myriad of subtle advantages to this "sexist" approach, starting with the fact that in an emergency no thought needs to be exercised - men know reflexively that they are to put themselves between danger and other people. Maybe we can weaken this a bit and use some different criteria like "the best and bravest should protect others". But if we let the more fantatical egalitarians run the show it will end up with unworkable madness like demanding equal representation in self-sacrifice between men and women.
    • jiggy2011 15y ago
      That's pretty much exactly the conversation the military is having about letting women serve in front line combat roles.
• drhayes9 15y ago
  > Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention (in the majority of cases)? Yes, Virginia, this is sexist. Holy hell, is it sexist. You are characterizing a woman's behavior in terms of how it makes you, as a man, feel. There are many reasons that a human might dress a particular way, but by characterizing it as a gender-based, "she wore that to make me do this" kind of transaction you have incorrectly emphasized a single way. This woman wore it for no other reason than to attract male attention? Really? Are you sure? Her decision is entirely based on how it would make a man feel? I'm a heterosexual man and I wear certain jeans because I like to show off my butt. That's fine. But am I doing it because I want to attract "female attention"? Not exactly. This turns on a subtle point, but it's very important: I wore them for me, not for anyone else. Feeling attractive is not the same as receiving attention. I don't want to be honked at, felt up, leered at, or even commented on. But I do want to look good. Does that make sense? This situation is only exacerbated when you bring in gender dynamics: men and women are equal, yes, but women are the ones who've been oppressed for centuries and are struggling up the slope to reach equality. What a man says to a woman exists within this context, so simply reversing the roles and pointing out that it's okay HERE but not THERE is not sufficient. Check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaze http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaze The section about feminism and the male gaze applies here, too.
  • ryanwaggoner 15y ago
    Are you sure? Of course I'm not sure. But when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras. Why do all the waitresses in Hooters wear low-cut tops? Is it for comfort? Is it because they couldn't afford the other 30% of the shirt? Or is it because that's proven to be very effective at gaining male attention? I wore them for me, not for anyone else. This makes no sense. In a post-apocolyptic world where you're the only person on earth, would you dress the same way you do now? Would the last woman on earth wear low-cut dresses and mini-skirts? I doubt it. Being "attractive" specifically refers to other peoples' attention and emotions towards you. I'm not saying that it's ok to leer at women, to verbally or physically harass them, etc. But it's incredibly ludicrous to me to think that someone dressed in a manner usually considered "provocative" probably did so without any intention, or that anyone responding to that mode of dress is automatically sexist. Would it be appropriate for a woman to start coming into the office topless? Would it be sexist of me to find that sexually arousing? If so, I guess I'm a sexist. My only consolation is knowing that I'm not alone and that you (if you're a heterosexual male) are almost certainly right there with me :)
• maco 15y ago
  Depending on your proportions, some necklines might work better for movement or fit. Like, high necklines on a rectangular t-shirt, if you're well-endowed, have a tendency to creep up and get all chokey. Scoop necks do a better job of this. Some people might consider scoop neck to be "low cut" (because the collar bones are visible--something generally not accepted/expected of men) while others might not call something "low cut" til cleavage is visible. Now, a button-up shirt does a nice job of leaving space for your throat so you don't feel like you're choking, but in case you haven't noticed, it can be difficult these days to find button-up shirts for women that have all the buttons. It has become extremely common to manufacture women's blouses without the second button, or rather, with the second button roughly 6 inches below the first one. I suspect this is due to rules in schools and workplaces allowing for the top button to be left unbuttoned. That way, you're following the rule and showing some decolletage. I once went through every button-up blouse I could find at Target. I came away with having found one rack that had shirts with an upper-chest button. (Oh, and if you button all the buttons on one that's missing that upper-chest one, it just gapes open) If the shirt itself is not quite wide enough to accommodate being well-endowed, a lower neckline can allow the fabric to move horizontally to better fit around the girth involved by opening up a bit wider. On the one hand, you could get a bigger size (if that's even available--there are limits), but if you've got a small waist, there's a tailoring problem for you. And if you've got shoulders that are narrow but a chest that isn't, that's a much more difficult tailoring problem. --- Re: bar. I'd rather be asked "read any good books lately?" than told "that dress makes your boobs look good." But then I'm someone commenting on Hacker News, so that might be to be expected. --- Re: your wife. I suspect there's a standing agreement with her regarding how you interact in terms of expressing your sexuality. I doubt you'd comment to a male coworker on how his trousers make his lower half look, but if you were married to a man, you might to him.
  • ckpwong 15y ago
    Thank you for pointing out the nuances of female tops commonly available today and how they look on different body shapes. With regard to button-up shirts, tailoring is a much bigger problem for women's shirt than men's shirt. Ready-made men's shirts are measured in collar size in 1/2" increments and sleeve length in 2" increments. This allow for much better fit, as men's shoulder and chest measurements tend to correlate with these two numbers. For women's shirts, you're at the whim of the mythical "sizes" running usually in increments of 2 from 0 to 14 (larger if you're at the "plus" section). Each size up is usually scaled up at all measurements: chest, shoulder, waist, collar, shirt length and sleeve length. In other words, even though there's a much wider variety in women's body shapes than in men's, men's shirts' come in much finer increments in terms of sizing. In addition to the problems you've describe, I have a few more gripes regarding button-up shirts: There's the problem of large gaps opening up in between buttons for the well-endowed, thus offering others glimpses of your undergarment (read: bra). Opting for a larger size would make the shirt too loose ("not fit") at the shoulders. Another common problem with button-up shirts for women is, they tend to run much shorter than men's shirts, as they are intended to be worn not tugged in. Depending on body shape and the cut of the bottom garment, certain movements (such as raising the entire arm) may expose skin along and possible above the waistline. Unfortunately, button-up shirts are part of the de facto business casual attire. Depending on the physical environment, adding a vest, cardigan, or jacket for cover-up may not be suitable or desirable. (Female jackets tend to hang above the hip bones anyway, so they're not offering much help in the regard of protecting skin from being exposed.) In other words, no, I don't want to expose my skin or cleavage in the office, but sometimes it's unavoidable.
• scott_s 15y ago
  A friend of mine has large breasts. A difficulty she has is that any top that is open at all shows a lot of cleavage. And, yes, if you make a sexually charged comment on a co-worker, it is sexist. Context matters.
• georgieporgie 15y ago
  Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention (in the majority of cases)? So, I'm not going to agree or disagree with you, since I don't really know exactly what you're saying. I will say this, though: there is professional attire for women. Generally speaking, this doesn't involve form-hugging clothing. A fitted women's dress shirt is not form-hugging, by the way. Personally, I recognize that I have an unfortunate automatic physiological response to breasts. I've discussed this with female friends whom I've respected and liked strictly as friends. If exposed to low-cut tops, I find my eyes darting to them, particularly when I'm distracted or concentrating on some thought. If I were in a position where a well-endowed female coworker were wearing very snug or revealing clothing, I'm honestly not sure how I would handle the situation.
  • outworlder 15y ago
    > Personally, I recognize that I have an unfortunate automatic physiological response to breasts. I've discussed this with female friends whom I've respected and liked strictly as friends. If exposed to low-cut tops, I find my eyes darting to them, particularly when I'm distracted or concentrating on some thought. If I were in a position where a well-endowed female coworker were wearing very snug or revealing clothing, I'm honestly not sure how I would handle the situation. I have been in that situation years ago, and I remember it to this day. It didn't help that I was much younger then. Anyway, I found it incredibly hard to concentrate on what she was saying, because I was concentrating on keeping my eyes away. It didn't help that she was absolutely gorgeous, well-endowed and was wearing a dress with a cleavage probably modeled after the Grand Canyon. Thankfully, she was not a coworker. But even worse, she was a potential client. I don't want to be too quick to blame it on instinct, but it is there. I wonder if I were (proportionally) as well-endowed as she was, and wore tight shorts. Some female friends told me that they do look - but women seem to be more discreet, on average. Is this sexism? Or just normal human behavior?
    • reneherse 15y ago
      Your attraction is normal. How you choose to act, what conclusions you draw about the other person, are the important things in this context. Sexism would be if your attraction influenced your professional behavior towards your prospective client in any way, negatively or positively. As you hinted, being able to be less distracted by an attractive figure is a matter of self-mastery, which often comes more easily with maturity, and to some degree familiarity. But a modern gentleman knows to treat others as persons first, not as sexual beings, especially in a professional context.
• Czarnian 15y ago
  - Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention (in the majority of cases)? It's none of your concern why a woman dresses the way she does. As long as she isn't violating company policy, she is under no obligation to justify her wardrobe to anyone else. And if she is violating company policy, that's between her and HR, not you.
• nl 15y ago
  is this kind of response sexist and demeaning Yes Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention (in the majority of cases)? Because they think it looks good or is comfortable or is fashionable or they didn't have anything clean or their sister bought it for them and they are seeing them for lunch. Have you heard of the Bechdel Test[1]? It's a simple way of seeing gender bias in a movie: It has to have at least two women in it, Who talk to each other, About something other than a man. By thinking the way a woman dresses is about men your comment shows the same bias. Turn it around: why do men buy Ferraris if not attract female attention? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dykes_to_Watch_Out_For#Bechdel_test http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dykes_to_Watch_Out_For#Bechdel_...
  • mitchellhislop 15y ago
    Bad example: we buy them for the thrill of driving fast. The #1 thing on my list when I was car shopping was how it felt on twisty roads and freeway entrance ramps - and I got a new Focus, not a 458. Shirts don't cause adrenaline responses like that by wearing them.
    • natep 15y ago
      It doesn't matter if the response to an attractive outfit is different from the response to a fast car. In both cases, it is possible that one is motivated by something other than gaining the attention of the desired sex. By providing your reason, you proved GP's point.
      • mitchellhislop 15y ago
        Yeah, reading that again this AM, I totally missed that point. Somehow read it as the inverse. I agree with it 100%
    • nl 15y ago
      That's exactly my point. Many people think men choose a Ferrari to impress women. That just isn't the case. Nor can one generalize why women wear anything.
• oodalolly 15y ago
  I've never understood this question. "Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention?" Women wear low cut dresses because they feel good in them, because they feel they look good in them. Showing off your breasts, if you consider them an attractive part of you, is like showing off your face, or arms, or legs. This question is like asking, "Why do women brush their hair, if not to attract male attention?" Feeling good gives you confidence, and that confidence occurs internally, not because a man can give you external validation of sexual appeal. (My cleavage may turn you on, but it doesn't turn me on, or make me feel sexual just because it's there.) Women rarely get dressed with men in mind, and it's fascinating to me that men think otherwise. And similarly, feeling good about oneself is not equivalent to feeling sexually attractive. And having someone point out my sexuality all day long, when it's not even on my mind, is extremely uncomfortable, invasive, and (for lack of a less cliched term, apologies in advance) objectifying.
  • toyg 15y ago
    Actually, women always get dressed with men in mind; it's just that it's so ingrained, they don't really think about it. Their concept of "looking good" is shaped by magazines and tv shows (still much more so that men, on average); and if you look at your average magazine, you'll see oozes of sex emanating from advertising and content. The concept of "looking good" in western society is equivalent to "looking sexy/desiderable to the opposite sex". Why would women's skirts emphasize one's ass otherwise? When in a suit/tailleur (pardon me, I'm not a tailor), it's among the most professional attires a woman can wear, and it's been sexualized to high heaven. Why? Because it makes women feel powerful. And why do they feel powerful? Because they can attract men, and that's what society tells them their power should be. So whoever tells herself that she wants to look good "to feel better" is, unconsciously, accepting sexism in society almost as much as one who'd crack a joke about it; she's just doing at a much deeper level, one which women still refuse to deal with (it would mean dropping the whole "fashion" industry like a hot potato).
    • elptacek 15y ago
      Not true. We get dressed with other women in mind. We also shop off each other's bodies and generally take fashion cues from each other. This is why women in the Loop are wearing short skirts and strappy sandals and women in the far west suburbs wear print turtlenecks from Land's End.
• ckpwong 15y ago
  This is almost along the lines of the "if you don't want to get raped, don't dress like a whore" argument. Low cut dress can be functional (as described by Katie). Or maybe she's out for a date after work (in which case there's feminism is appropriate, encouraged, and even sometimes needed for the benefit of the relationship). Or she just like that dress or the way the dress looks on her (in much the same way some really rip guys love to wear tight tops). Most women do realize when they wear low cut dresses, she will attract attention, both positive and negative. At the same time, it doesn't give her coworkers free rein to make comments like that -- the comment was made to other male in the room but was directed at and objectified her.
• araneae 15y ago
  >Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention (in the majority of cases)? I would say for the most part it's not all that conscious. We buy the dress if we like it. In some cases we might not buy it if it looks too revealing, or buy it because it's especially sexy, but for the most part dresses are cut to the style of the day and it has little to do with the intentions of the woman wearing them. Personally I've started consciously looking for low-cut tops and dresses for the first time in my life, because they're easier to breastfeed in. Most of my dresses and tops are cut too high to do that easily so I need to expand my wardrobe. So sorry, all that cleavage is not for you, it's for my baby :).
• pygorex 15y ago
  >> "Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!"...As I'm getting older, I see how sexist and demeaning this is. > At the risk of revealing myself to be a chauvinistic jerk, is this kind of response sexist and demeaning, or just inappropriate for the workplace? Well since the quote essentially boils down to "damn look at dem titties" then yes it is very demeaning & disrespectful! It's also sexist. Why? Because it's self-absorbed. Whoever spoke that quote wasn't thinking about how their words might make Katie feel in a room-full of people. "I'm a man I like titties and anyone else's thoughts and feelings don't matter." That's sexism in a nutshell: that the default and correct perspective is the male perspective. That anyone who doesn't hold this perspective just needs to "chill out".
• Tichy 15y ago
  I think if you are Brad Pitt or George Clooney (or some other desirable man), that comment is fun and flirtatious, otherwise it is creepy. If you are not Brad Pitt or George Clooney, you should make yourself invisible in the presence of women. Or maybe you could offer foot massages.