3 ms·

Without judgment or implication-- I'm curious if you feel the same standard applies to a woman who notices a man is staring at her chest.

by Cushman 13y ago

freehunter 13y ago
Naked? In the bathroom? With an expectation of privacy? Yes. Yes I do. Crimes don't exist in a vacuum, there are factors that make the actions cross lines. A man glancing at a women's chest or a woman glancing at a man's rear end is not becoming of a professional, but it's not a crime. Repeated offense and an escalating situation? Then it becomes a crime. Likewise, nudity and expectation of privacy are factors that go into determining the appropriate response. If I walked up behind a woman and started breathing heavily on her neck while she was cornered in a room with only one exit, she would be completely within her rights to use violence as a means to get away from me even though I never touched her.
- Cushman 13y ago
  No, to clarify, I mean just in public on the train or at a concert or a bar or whatever. The sorts of places where "mild" sexual assault of women by unfamiliar men is rather routine-- I'd posit much more common than assault of men by unfamiliar men in public restrooms, though I'm open to correction on that. My underlying question being, at what point does looking put one in enough fear of touching that preemptive escalation to violence is warranted? Because from what I'm told by female friends, that fear is fairly commonplace in their lives, while violence is rather more rare.
  - freehunter 13y ago
    I think I've adequately described the situation I'm referring to and the reason I feel violence is justified in that situation. Somehow you're ignoring all that. If you're in a bathroom, you're inherently close quarters, there's generally only one exit, there is an implied expectation of privacy, and witnesses are not plentiful. It's pretty obvious when looking has potential to turn to touching. That line exists right around the distance that touching is possible. If I can land a solid punch on someone's nose without taking a step, they're too close. I'm trying to figure out what your agenda is; if you're trying to lead me into a trap. Are you trying to catch me saying that I don't hold the same standard to women? Because your "at a concert or on a train or in a bar" example misses the whole "nude" and "expectations of privacy" part of this story, not to mention the "trapped in a room with one exit and no witnesses". Would I cross the room to punch someone? No. Would I use force to get them away from me? Well, isn't there a whole industry built up around women's self defense courses? I'm not answering your question because I don't feel comfortable with your intentions. I think you know the answer, I just don't know what you're trying to get me to say.
    - Cushman 13y ago
      I feel like I was pretty honest in my last paragraph: My sense is that the sort of fear of sexual assault that you're describing is something women I know experience fairly often in public, fully clothed, with witnesses. (And their fear is reasonable, since sexual assault occurs in those same circumstances.) Their reactions vary, but never is preemptive violence on the table, for obvious reasons. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with extending your standard of self-defense to women who feel uncomfortable with the way men are behaving in public, but I also feel it would be hugely challenging to our social structure and I'm curious where you fall on the issue.
      - freehunter 13y ago
        What I'm not comfortable with is saying "no, women shouldn't feel as frightened as I would" because the two situations are completely different. I'm not talking about how common these situations are, or how commonly violence is the outcome. I'm talking about how I would react in the very specific situation that is being outlined in this specific story. I would urge everyone to reserve violence until it is absolutely necessary in your mind to prevent injury to yourself. But if it is necessary, I wouldn't blame anyone for it. Naked, vulnerable, cornered, and threatened has potential to bring out violence in anyone. It's basic fight or flight, except the flight option is taken out. I wouldn't punch someone on the train for staring at my clothed body and merely making me feel uncomfortable. I would punch someone on the train for staring at me and breathing heavily while keeping me from walking away. Feeling uncomfortable isn't the line I'm trying to draw, feeling trapped and threatened is.
        Dylan16807 13y ago
        I can understand using force to prevent someone from touching you inappropriately. But that has the huge caveat that you must have reasonable evidence they are going to touch you inappropriately. Them standing and staring is not good enough. Punching someone on the train for standing in your way is not reasonable either.
        13y ago
  - Nrsolis 13y ago
    Consider this: if I bump you (even unintentionally), by the strictest reading of the law, I committed assault and battery. That's obviously ridiculous, so we use our common sense to keep society functioning. We consider intent, and the likelihood that someone would feel genuinely threatened by someone else's actions. SO, to paraphrase your example: an average woman, who might lack the physical means to feel safe in the presence of someone who might be larger and looking at them in a sexual way, would be justified in feeling threatened.

Without judgment or implication-- I'm curious if you feel the same standard applies to a woman who notices a man is staring at her chest.

by Cushman 13y ago

Without judgment or implication-- I'm curious if you feel the same standard applies to a woman who notices a man is staring at her chest.

freehunter 13y ago

Naked? In the bathroom? With an expectation of privacy? Yes. Yes I do. Crimes don't exist in a vacuum, there are factors that make the actions cross lines. A man glancing at a women's chest or a woman glancing at a man's rear end is not becoming of a professional, but it's not a crime. Repeated offense and an escalating situation? Then it becomes a crime. Likewise, nudity and expectation of privacy are factors that go into determining the appropriate response. If I walked up behind a woman and started breathing heavily on her neck while she was cornered in a room with only one exit, she would be completely within her rights to use violence as a means to get away from me even though I never touched her.

Cushman 13y ago
No, to clarify, I mean just in public on the train or at a concert or a bar or whatever. The sorts of places where "mild" sexual assault of women by unfamiliar men is rather routine-- I'd posit much more common than assault of men by unfamiliar men in public restrooms, though I'm open to correction on that. My underlying question being, at what point does looking put one in enough fear of touching that preemptive escalation to violence is warranted? Because from what I'm told by female friends, that fear is fairly commonplace in their lives, while violence is rather more rare.
- freehunter 13y ago
  I think I've adequately described the situation I'm referring to and the reason I feel violence is justified in that situation. Somehow you're ignoring all that. If you're in a bathroom, you're inherently close quarters, there's generally only one exit, there is an implied expectation of privacy, and witnesses are not plentiful. It's pretty obvious when looking has potential to turn to touching. That line exists right around the distance that touching is possible. If I can land a solid punch on someone's nose without taking a step, they're too close. I'm trying to figure out what your agenda is; if you're trying to lead me into a trap. Are you trying to catch me saying that I don't hold the same standard to women? Because your "at a concert or on a train or in a bar" example misses the whole "nude" and "expectations of privacy" part of this story, not to mention the "trapped in a room with one exit and no witnesses". Would I cross the room to punch someone? No. Would I use force to get them away from me? Well, isn't there a whole industry built up around women's self defense courses? I'm not answering your question because I don't feel comfortable with your intentions. I think you know the answer, I just don't know what you're trying to get me to say.
  - Cushman 13y ago
    I feel like I was pretty honest in my last paragraph: My sense is that the sort of fear of sexual assault that you're describing is something women I know experience fairly often in public, fully clothed, with witnesses. (And their fear is reasonable, since sexual assault occurs in those same circumstances.) Their reactions vary, but never is preemptive violence on the table, for obvious reasons. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with extending your standard of self-defense to women who feel uncomfortable with the way men are behaving in public, but I also feel it would be hugely challenging to our social structure and I'm curious where you fall on the issue.
    - freehunter 13y ago
      What I'm not comfortable with is saying "no, women shouldn't feel as frightened as I would" because the two situations are completely different. I'm not talking about how common these situations are, or how commonly violence is the outcome. I'm talking about how I would react in the very specific situation that is being outlined in this specific story. I would urge everyone to reserve violence until it is absolutely necessary in your mind to prevent injury to yourself. But if it is necessary, I wouldn't blame anyone for it. Naked, vulnerable, cornered, and threatened has potential to bring out violence in anyone. It's basic fight or flight, except the flight option is taken out. I wouldn't punch someone on the train for staring at my clothed body and merely making me feel uncomfortable. I would punch someone on the train for staring at me and breathing heavily while keeping me from walking away. Feeling uncomfortable isn't the line I'm trying to draw, feeling trapped and threatened is.
      - Dylan16807 13y ago
        I can understand using force to prevent someone from touching you inappropriately. But that has the huge caveat that you must have reasonable evidence they are going to touch you inappropriately. Them standing and staring is not good enough. Punching someone on the train for standing in your way is not reasonable either.
        13y ago
- Nrsolis 13y ago
  Consider this: if I bump you (even unintentionally), by the strictest reading of the law, I committed assault and battery. That's obviously ridiculous, so we use our common sense to keep society functioning. We consider intent, and the likelihood that someone would feel genuinely threatened by someone else's actions. SO, to paraphrase your example: an average woman, who might lack the physical means to feel safe in the presence of someone who might be larger and looking at them in a sexual way, would be justified in feeling threatened.