Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Manchu wrote: Huh? Sexual harassment often happens exactly because the perpetrator thinks they can get away with it socially.
Which is obviously a delusional thing to think, cause you, I, or any reasonable person knows it isn't. I.E. We're dealing with individuals who somehow managed to miss all the oh so obvious social ques. I've dealt with my share of jerks in my life. You can say it right to the face, and they still don't care.
LordofHats wrote: Yes. Something bad happens, we all say "you shouldn't do that", and all becomes right with the world. That's how the world- Wait a minute.
People who do this sort of thing, don't care what we think.
In this particular instance they might care if they were named and shamed, since they appear to be interviewing her for a vidcast of some sort...
LordofHats wrote: We're dealing with individuals who somehow managed to miss all the oh so obvious social ques.
It's that [somehow] part that makes this relevant news to our crowd. This guy isn't just a jerk, although to be sure he is one. He's a jerk who thought he could get away with sexual harassment in a public place. He was also with a bunch of other guys who were going to let him get away with it and encouraging him to do it. The hypothesis is that chauvinists feel more empowered to be chauvinists in certain spaces, like a comic book convention or a table top wargaming discussion forum.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/23 15:37:21
LordofHats wrote: Honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if doing this for their vidcast was the whole point. There's always money to be made in being socially outrageous.
There is, you are right. But at least from the way that SHE described the incident this didn't strike me as one of those types of situations, it just seems like a couple of guys overstepping boundaries just out of pure social ineptitude...
Interestingly, a girl next door hired a stripper for a birthday party here once. Things got out of hand when she touched the guy. He was fuming and refused to do any more dancing.
The girl was alittle shocked and heavily embarrassed.
I don't understand the double standard where women believe doing this is ok, yet simple dialogue like in this story isn't. Shouldn't both be wrong?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/23 15:52:23
LordofHats wrote: Honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if doing this for their vidcast was the whole point. There's always money to be made in being socially outrageous.
But at least from the way that SHE described the incident this didn't strike me as one of those types of situations, it just seems like a couple of guys overstepping boundaries just out of pure social ineptitude...
I don't think that's the case, otherwise we'd have seen their video by now.
Interestingly, a girl next door hired a stripper for a birthday party here once. Things got out of hand when she touched the guy. He was fuming and refused to do any more dancing.
The girl was alittle shocked and heavily embarrassed.
It's like stripper rule 1.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/10/23 15:53:18
Avatar 720 wrote: You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
Mr Hyena wrote: I don't understand the double standard where women believe doing this is ok, yet simple dialogue like in this story isn't. Shouldn't both be wrong?
Wait, in your story, the woman touched the male stripper, the male stripper was mad, and as a result the woman who touched him was embarrassed. How does this indicate a double standard? If the woman in your story did something inappropriate, shouldn't she feel embarrassed?
Wait, in your story, the woman touched the male stripper, the male stripper was mad, and as a result the woman who touched him was embarrassed. How does this indicate a double standard? If the woman in your story did something inappropriate, shouldn't she feel embarrassed?
The fact that she felt embarrassed doesn't change the fact that she actually did it, much like the men in this incidence did it (though the men showed a crass lack of shame, ideally they should feel like she did).
The double standard is we do not see the same level of outrage as in this incidence. Are men really supposed to just 'take it'? when the roles are reversed? or is that just reinforcing gender stereotypes? Really, what should be done is a gender-neutral focus towards stopping behaviour like this in either example.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/23 15:59:45
MeanGreenStompa wrote: Changing perceptions and attitudes towards women and their treatment by men have been rapidly ongoing throughout the last century.
The masses define reality, if the masses decide that this is not acceptable, it will become more fringe and frowned upon.
And I'm sure some people thought racism would go away forever 20 or 30 years ago. Yet we still have racists in the world. Some things never go away. We can either accept that that's just the way things are, or spend over a dozen pages on the internet talking about it... Or both...
Ask an older black person living in the Deep South of America if racism is the same today as it was 60 years ago? Simply travelling on the bus or attending a college were segregating issues, they are not any more.
These things will likely always exist, but we can certainly reduce them, ostracize them and ridicule them.
The casual and endorsed sexism that was culturally acceptable a few decades ago is now against the law.
We can move this sort of behaviour from the mainstream to the fringe and make it clear that it's not acceptable.
This woman should have been prepared to encounter this level of clumsy rudeness, she reads as though she was not and I have limited sympathy for her outrage, given her choice of costume and the underlying misogynistic role she was dressing as. She clearly states she's dressed as a male fantasy figure and I'm cynical about how naive she was about possible outcomes. But what she encountered was wrong and certainly open to legal prosecution, should she have chosen to take that option.
Fuckwits exist, but they should be made to realise they are being fuckwits and given notice to remedy their behaviour. You are right that bigotry will always exist, you're wrong in saying that it doesn't change, it certainly has over the last century.
Wait, in your story, the woman touched the male stripper, the male stripper was mad, and as a result the woman who touched him was embarrassed. How does this indicate a double standard? If the woman in your story did something inappropriate, shouldn't she feel embarrassed?
The fact that she felt embarrassed doesn't change the fact that she actually did it, much like the men in this incidence did it (though the men showed a crass lack of shame, ideally they should feel like she did).
The double standard is we do not see the same level of outrage as in this incidence. Are men really supposed to just 'take it'? when the roles are reversed? or is that just reinforcing gender stereotypes? Really, what should be done is a gender-neutral focus towards stopping behaviour like this in either example.
There has been a massive and ongoing suppression of one half of the population of the world due to their gender, it's getting slowly better in the Western World and remains one of the reasons I have problems with the Islamic world's behaviour. It is therefore a bigger issue regarding women being groped and objectified by men. In possibly more countries than not, women are still second class citizens, beaten, voiceless and violently suppressed.
I think you do have a valid point, albeit down something of a tangent, that women have been guilty of taking their newfound liberation, in certain instances, and behaving as badly as the men they accused half a century ago. The Ladette culture for example, or the ridiculous conversations I've overheard from women being incredibly cruel about men that don't conform to a standard of hairless, skinny blokes with feminine hair, falling prey to the very forces that make men objectify women to look like Megan Fox. There are certainly examples of an annoying double standard, consider the Diet Coke adverts that would consist of a group of 30-40something women leering at a 20something male in a state of undress and ponder how those adverts would have gone down if we swapped out the genders...
Your example proves that stupidity isn't gender bias.
But it's still stupidity and should not be tolerated.
Whoa whoa whoa. She doesn't say that at all. You're headed down a very mistaken path there. What she said is that some guys think of her as representing their fantasies. This is the mistake AustonT has been blithely insisting on: that his perception = reality. "A woman can only be sexy because I want her to be."
MeanGreenStompa wrote: Fuckwits exist, but they should be made to realise they are being fuckwits and given notice to remedy their behaviour.
Whoa whoa whoa. She doesn't say that at all. You're headed down a very mistaken path there. What she said is that some guys think of her as representing their fantasies. This is the mistake AustonT has been blithely insisting on: that his perception = reality. "A woman can only be sexy because I want her to be."
Yeah we get it Manchu, reality be damned; she just wanted to be acknowledged for the accuracy of her costume. If you yell loudly enough, maybe someone will believe you. She put herself in the obvious role of a masturbatory fantasy made manifest. She doesn't have to wear a sign around her neck, she put herself in a position to be objectified: deliberately. If you want to hem and haw about not seeing evidence; there's no evidence outside Ms.Caruso's blog that this even happened.
In case you're wondering
still running on empty
Boo, you whore. A message of tough feminism we can all appreciate.
Avatar 720 wrote: You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
AustonT wrote: She put herself in the obvious role of a masturbatory fantasy made manifest.
I can tell that you like and know a lot about comic books.
Yeah I need to prove my nerd cred to you.
I may hire this guy to write for me. I should have just posted it's entirety but I'm perfectly happy to paraphrase it to answer your ridiculous white knighting.
When a woman appears at primarily male gathering dressed as an intentional male masturbatory graphic fantasy figure, she is viewed as what she is not only portraying, but bringing to life, and some individuals go further, and actually treat her accordingly. Do you expect anyone to believe that you appear as a credible avatar of Black Cat so that so people won’t ogle you? The character you are playing is dressed like that in her natural surroundings—comic books—so young men will ogle her, you know, and think exactly the same thoughts that some of them spoke to you. She’s not dressed like that because a skin-tight, cleavage-flashing suit is really an asset in hand-to-hand combat
Avatar 720 wrote: You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
Manchu wrote: I ask again, what does white knighting have to do with saying women do not deserve to sexually harassed?
You might see yourself in here.
White Knight wrote:
On an internet forum, a person who defends a member who is clearly wrong, usually with the hopes of gaining brownie points with said member.
Avatar 720 wrote: You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
Manchu wrote: I ask again, what does white knighting have to do with saying women do not deserve to sexually harassed?
You might see yourself in here.
White Knight wrote: On an internet forum, a person who defends a member who is clearly wrong, usually with the hopes of gaining brownie points with said member.
You believe that my argument that women do not deserve to be sexually harassed is really an attempt to score points with a woman who is extremely unlikely to ever come across this discussion.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/23 17:23:15
Whoa whoa whoa. She doesn't say that at all. You're headed down a very mistaken path there. What she said is that some guys think of her as representing their fantasies.
What message does this image convey to women and what does it convey to men?
As an intelligent woman with a successful career and strong convictions on the rights and freedoms of womankind, why would she choose this character? It reinforces everything sexist about comics. Why not Jenny Sparks? Why not Tank Girl? Gaiman's Death character?
This Black Cat character and the costume reinforces the sexist viewpoint of comics and facilitates the fantasizing of dweebs like the ones she encountered.
Manchu wrote: I ask again, what does white knighting have to do with saying women do not deserve to sexually harassed?
You might see yourself in here.
White Knight wrote:
On an internet forum, a person who defends a member who is clearly wrong, usually with the hopes of gaining brownie points with said member.
You believe that my argument that women do not deserve to be sexually harassed is really an attempt to score points with a woman who is extremely unlikely to ever come across this discussion.
It's like a broken Labour Leader.
Avatar 720 wrote: You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
White Knighting, btw, is only white knighting when the female in question or sympathetic females can see the defense and the defense is designed to cast the guy defending in a good light for further ingratiation. It isn't really applicable here.
Manchu wrote: You believe that my argument that women do not deserve to be sexually harassed is really an attempt to score points with a woman who is extremely unlikely to ever come across this discussion.
It's like a broken Labour Leader.
No, it's you making a delusional argument contrary to reason and dignity.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
MeanGreenStompa wrote: This Black Cat character and the costume reinforces the sexist viewpoint of comics and facilitates the fantasizing of dweebs like the ones she encountered.
I've been thinking that over since you part-way mentioned it yesterday ("comic books are sexist!" or words to that effect) and I think it is absolute rubbish. Being sexy is not the same thing as being a feth toy.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/23 17:43:57
MeanGreenStompa wrote: This Black Cat character and the costume reinforces the sexist viewpoint of comics and facilitates the fantasizing of dweebs like the ones she encountered.
I've been thinking that over since you part-way mentioned it yesterday ("comic books are sexist!" or words to that effect) and I think it is absolute rubbish. Being sexy is not the same thing as being a feth toy.
So, you think counter to the entire feminism movement of the last century then? Being sexy is, by it's definition, creating a sexual urge in others.
Many comics certainly stereotype women and reinforce body image issues and rampant sexism. Provocative imagery designed to arouse sexual interest in a fictional woman.
I'm gonna side with MGS and Auston on the bit that women are objectified in comics. There really isn't a argument that they aren't. Look at half their costumes
I wouldn't say 'comic books are sexist' but women being objectified in media is pretty standard. Black Cat especially. When she was first introduced she was just a walking sex idol. Contrast to Jean Gray or Susan Storm. Sure they're drawn to be very attractive and wear skin tight outfits, but they're not flaunting their sexuality and cleavage like (classic) Wonder Woman and Black Cat.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/23 17:54:19
LordofHats wrote: I'm gonna side with MGS and Auston on the bit that women are objectified in comics. There really isn't a argument that they aren't. Look at half their costumes
I wouldn't say 'comic books are sexist' but women being objectified in media is pretty standard. Black Cat especially. When she was first introduced she was just a walking sex idol. Contrast to Jean Gray or Susan Storm. Sure they're drawn to be very attractive and wear skin tight outfits, but they're not flaunting their sexuality and cleavage like (classic) Wonder Woman and Black Cat.
I couldn't help but think of Jubilee when I was reading your comment.
I haven't read the whole thread to be honest. But I am a long time comic fan and thought I'd share my thoughts.
To me it comes down to "Dress how you want to be treated". Inappropriate behavior is GOING to happen. In fact, expect it to happen. So, dress like a whore = get treated like a whore. Some guys will not do it but some will. Expect it to happen though. Don't be shocked by it when you know perfectly well guys are going to look at your chest rather than anything else. Is it right behavior? No of course not. But society has not changed much over the years and it's not going to change soon. If you really don't want the attention or comments that maybe you should dress up as a character from "Little House on the Prairie."
5000 pts +/-
6000pts +/-
New Shangri-La Peace Force
Combined Army Shasvastii painting Blog