joepistole:
You're going out of your way to avoid discussing the actual issue here, which is whether street harassment occurs and whether it is acceptable. Why can't you make a definite statement about that?
In the end, it almost doesn't matter if the video was an out-and-out fake with all participants being paid actors. What is important is the message that street harassment is unacceptable.
You seem desperate to paint this video as a fake. Why? Because then you can pretend that such harassment doesn't occur? Because then you can turn a blind eye?
You know what your attitude actually does? It dismisses the concern over street harassment as the rantings of a bunch of "politically-correct liberals", which you apparently despise. You're trying to distract from the actual issue and instead attack the messenger - like it's
her fault that street harassment is exposed like this, or perhaps that it occurs at all. And she
would put out this kind of video, because she's a
liberal, pinko feminist, and we all know they're a bunch of liars who will say anything to advance their careers.
I never endorsed harassment of any kind of anyone.
But you don't consider what the video shows to be harassment. Is that right?
The LOL was about your slavish devotion to your biases and the lengths and illogical arguments you go to and use to defend your biases.
Please list my biases and quote my illogical arguments, carefully explaining why they are illogical.
My argument here is (1) that the video shows street harassment and (2) that street harassment should not be accepted in an inclusive society. What's illogical about that? You can disagree, of course. You can claim that the video doesn't show harassment, and/or you can claim that harassment is acceptable in society. But instead, all I've seen from you is questioning of the legitimacy of the message. Unless, of course, you're trying to argue that the video doesn't show harassment because everyone in the video is a paid actor trying to advance his career. But if that's your argument, then I want you to address point (2). That's the important part. And so's the part where you explain what you consider to be street harassment and what you don't, because it's a cop-out to say "I'm against harassment, but I think that harassment hardly ever occurs, if it occurs at all."
How do you know it wasn’t staged?
Because it would be harder and more expensive to stage it than to simply go out and do it for real. And it would defeat the purpose.
As I stated in my last post, neither you nor I know if the video in question was staged. You just accept the video as gospel without question because it conforms to your biases.
You seem very hung up on my supposed biases. What are they, exactly? And why are they bad? You, of course, have no biases.
I guess you haven't learned, people do lie.
There's no
a priori reason to doubt the veracity of this video. If you have
any evidence that it was faked, please post it.
Calling into question this woman's truthfulness without any evidence is, in fact, another form of harassment. And this time it's you who is doing the harassing.
Yes, if the behavior in the video was harassment and it was crude and it was unacceptable.
Did you mean to write "if" there? Or are you now confirming that you think the behaviour in the video (as depicted, real or with actors) was representative of harassment, and that such harassment, were it to occur to a real non-actor woman, would be unacceptable?
joepistole said:
James R said:
And if, not, tell me where you draw the line (see link in my previous post). Or are you going to avoid answering that, too - just like the others who have been excusing harassment?
And yet another straw man fallacy. You know when you have to rely so heavily on fallacy, there just might be a problem with your position.
It's a straw man for me to ask you to state your position on what is and isn't harassment?
Can you state your position, or will you keep avoiding?
And why are you avoiding?
And yes, I know how this game is played. In the next post, you'll claim that
somewhere you've already stated your position, and that I haven't read your posts with a fine enough tooth comb to extract it, so it's my fault. The fact remains that you seem unable to classify the numbered statements I have provided for you into "acceptable" and "unacceptable". Why is that?
Did it ever occur to you that maybe those guys were paid? Did it ever occur to you that the struggling actress who starred in the video might be doing it to advance her career – a publicity stunt as I said previously? People earn money for content on YouTube. She and the producers certainly have motives.
They already published their motives - right there with the video. They were making the film on behalf of an initiative called "hollerback". You don't have to imagine what their motives might be. Just see what they said.
Why do you feel a desperate need to delegitimise the woman in the video, in particular, joe? So you can ignore her message? So other people will ignore her message? Can't you see that this is another form of harassment?
What don’t you understand about publicity stunts? This video and this struggling actress have never before received so much attention. And attention is everything in the arts.
This video was a publicity stunt. It was a stunt to promote the "hollerback" campaign. The makers of the video were up front about that. But it wasn't an "art" piece, joe. It was supposed to show what happens every day in New York to countless women. It's documentary.
And again you try to denigrate the woman while knowing nothing about her. Why is that, joe?
And as I previously wrote, just because other women have been harassed in the past, it doesn’t mean that this woman was harassed and it doesn’t mean this video is truthful.
So, is street harassment a live issue, or isn't it? Want to venture an opinion? Is it only something that happened in the past? Has it never been a big problem? Is it not a big problem now? Should we not worry about it? What?
joepistole said:
James R said:
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that you're right and this video turns out to be 100% faked. All those guys were actors, etc. etc. Would that then prove to you that street harassment of women doesn't occur, Joe?
Except, I didn’t say it was “100% faked” – damn minor detail again! I have said harassment occurs. It occurs on the streets, it occurs everywhere. And it isn’t something that should be condoned. But that doesn’t mean this video and this struggling actress are truthful in their representations with respect to this instance.
You have no reason at all to question their truthfulness. Your aspersions are based on nothing other than your desire that the video be fake.
joepistole said:
James R said:
Nice "liberals" jibe, Joe. Always good to try to put a political spin on sexism. Well done. Very clever of you.
Except, it isn’t about sexism, it is about people like you who resort to bullying people who are different from yourself, people who have the audacity to not blindly buy into your party line. It happens on both ends of the political spectrum. So don’t feel alone. Our so called conservative brethren are equally guilty.
Oh, poor Joe. Do you feel bullied? Am I harassing you, joe? Well, at least I'm just words on a screen, eh, and not physically invading your space as you walk down the street or something.
What exactly is your issue with "people like me" who speak out against street harassment of woman - or, perhaps more importantly, people like the woman in the video? Does the problem go away when you've conveniently labelled us as people not like you?
Except Joepistole hasn't been part of that conversation, nor does he endorse harassment of any kind - Damn minor details again!
Then joe should have no trouble going down the list and saying what is or isn't acceptable to him.
