Street Harrassment.!!!

[joepistole]

whats the high road ignoring it? i've seen so many times that people in a position to help those that are being harrassed and bullied and oppressed do nothing. i was one of those people that could have been helped and was ignored because it was convientent. I will never stay quiet. we have an obligation to help.

You don't need this video to make that story known. You don't need this video to be true to make a point that harassment is a problem and shouldn't be condoned or that people need to be more sensitive to harassment. I don't think anyone here is advocating harassment.

 

[iceaura]

The fact is so called progressives are using this instance as a banner for their cause without knowing if it is truthful. That is like leading with your jaw. What happens if in a few days, weeks or months it comes out this was all faked?

If it was, against all appearances and common sense, faked, does that make it a false presentation of its alleged reality?

Folks like you who accept this stuff without question are just asking to be set up for a fall. I have never accused my brethren at either end of the political spectrum as being intelligent. Ideologues operate in a world divorced from reality, a land where ideology always triumphs over reason. That is not the land I live in friend. There is a middle road, a road that uses common sense and rational thought.

I don't think common sense would lead to serious doubt about the the general validity of the men's behavior photographed in that video.

And I don't think truthfulness is any more common in the middle of the road than in other areas of it.

As far as rational thought - it's rational to argue an issue from any reasonable portrayal of a situation, even a completely fictional one: slavery can be argued about using Uncle Tom's Cabin, say. Do you find the video improbable and alien and unrepresentative of the world you know?

If you want to have a discussion about harassment, you don’t need this video and you don’t need the actress to have that discussion.

Apparently, we did. As with Abu Ghraib, or Mitt Romney's 47% remarks, or Alan Greenspan's Congressional testimony, or the napalming of villages in Vietnam, matters completely familiar to readers of accounts and analysis become much differently apparent to many more people when they see it for themselves.

And the reverse is also notable: if only we had had a video of Nancy Reagan consulting with her personal astrologer in the setting up of America's military and economic negotiations with the USSR, domestic policy and economic strategy with America's major bankers, etc. It's one thing to have had that documented in prose - watching it happen would have had a far different level of impact on the political scene in the 1980s, one would think.

 

[joepistole]

If it was, against all appearances and common sense, faked, does that make it a false presentation of its alleged reality?

I don't think common sense would lead to serious doubt about the the general validity of the men's behavior photographed in that video.

And I don't think truthfulness is any more common in the middle of the road than in other areas of it.

As far as rational thought - it's rational to argue an issue from any reasonable portrayal of a situation, even a completely fictional one: slavery can be argued about using Uncle Tom's Cabin, say. Do you find the video improbable and alien and unrepresentative of the world you know?

Apparently, we did. As with Abu Ghraib, or Mitt Romney's 47% remarks, or Alan Greenspan's Congressional testimony, or the napalming of villages in Vietnam, matters completely familiar to readers of accounts and analysis become much differently apparent to many more people when they see it for themselves.

And the reverse is also notable: if only we had had a video of Nancy Reagan consulting with her personal astrologer in the setting up of America's military and economic negotiations with the USSR, domestic policy and economic strategy with America's major bankers, etc. It's one thing to have had that documented in prose - watching it happen would have had a far different level of impact on the political scene in the 1980s, one would think.

Well you are welcome to your opinion. But I disagree, for all the reasons endlessly repeated in this thread.

 

[milkweed]

Why him?

Them, its two people.

Just to see their reaction when they give up.

Without it being illegal, that's a lot of "hey baby"-ing. If these numbers are correct, then women are potentially running a gauntlet of mostly unwanted attention every day, in NYC at least. The individual act is motivated by that desire for a hookup so it's not a uniform thing, it's a pressure directed at women. Again, not illegal - unless it's egregious like those two specific assholes - and, yes, the desire to be left alone needs to be stated before it enters into the area of illegality. But consider if the numbers are correct: constant, regular oblique and casual interrogations for sex, or else just comments on appearance. Do men undergo such pressures? No. Women appear to be running a gauntlet of this. This society needs to change its outlook on this behaviour. Or at the least in the trouble spots.

As the video shows, Harmless hey baby-ing. Not one grope, touch, impeadment of walking/surrounding of woman, solicitation for sex (in ny??) or any action of substance. We are asked to change our outlook on behavior that isnt a threat because someone may imagine it to be?

I'd go as far as 'unethical' and 'patriarchal'. Sure, everyone wants to meet girls. But over the long distance and the 10-hour term, this is incredibly oppressive. Imagine yourself running through that every day. We need to change our outlook and this is one of the ways in which it needs to change.

Do you seriously think that if she lived in the neighborhood and became a known face it would continue?

Do you seriously think the old guys (one who shouted smile, Smile) after she passed by would have done anything but chat if she had stopped? fer krists sake they had folding chairs and obviously sat out infront of that place (unknown if it was their residence or a business) and spent their day trying to strike up conversation with anyone. Lonely old guys? Me, I would have probably turned back and given him a smile (unless I was in a crabby mood). Make the old farts day... But then I got a soft spot for old people...

It's possible that this weirdly encouraged some of the men - but if the girl says nothing, isn't that reason enough to move on? There I think it approaches the legal issue regarding consent I think. And our societal tolerances - or again, at least in NYC - are screwy.

Sorry but I just cant take that video as a serious representation of harm to anyone.

 

[iceaura]

As the video shows, Harmless hey baby-ing.

As the video showed, "hey-babying" is not harmless.

Do you seriously think that if she lived in the neighborhood and became a known face it would continue?

No - as soon as there were consequences and accountability, the harassment from all but perhaps a few dominant bullies probably would stop. Guys don't treat women like that if they might be subject to consequences.

It's hard to be known and neighborly over very many square blocks of a large city, of course, so the harassment documented in the video would continue to afflict the woman's life.

Sorry but I just cant take that video as a serious representation of harm to anyone.

Which is part of its educational value for the rest of humanity: it's not just ignorance we have to deal with here - there is a percentage of US citizens, mostly but not exclusively male and young, who cannot see the problem with this kind of abuse even when its corrosive nature is plastered on a screen in front of their faces.

 

[Liebling]

If it's so "friendly" and "harmless" when why don't men do it to other men?

Just asking all you apologists.

 

[zgmc]

I think we need a video of a good looking dude walking that same route. Lets see how many compliments he gets about his pants.

If it's so "friendly" and "harmless" when why don't men do it to other men?

Just asking all you apologists.

 

[Liebling]

And more dodging...

I am asking a serious and honest question. Do you guys who are excusing off this behaviour as just being "friendly" or "harmless" address complete male strangers walking down the street like this?

As far as I've ever seen, even my male friends who are gay don't address other males like this outside a bar/club scene. Why is it okay when doing that to a woman?

Here's another question for you apologists; Would you be okay with it if it was your mother/sister, girlfriend or wife?

How about in an unfamiliar area, when they are walking alone? How about at night?

 

[zgmc]

And more dodging...

I am asking a serious and honest question. Do you guys who are excusing off this behaviour as just being "friendly" or "harmless" address complete male strangers walking down the street like this?

I Wasn't dodging anything. Im with you on this.

 

[Liebling]

I Wasn't dodging anything. Im with you on this.

My apologies zgmc, I did make the assumption you were challenging my assertions. I am sorry.

 

[parmalee]

You don't need this video to make that story known. You don't need this video to be true to make a point that harassment is a problem and shouldn't be condoned or that people need to be more sensitive to harassment. I don't think anyone here is advocating harassment.

Hmmmm…

Joe said:
Doesn’t anyone think it odd that in a city of 9 million people, she is the only woman this happens to?

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/street-harrassment.142928/page-5#post-3239858

Joe said:
Where are all the other videos? Where are all the other complaints? There are roughly 4.5 million women in New York. One would think at least a few of them have access to cameras and can post on Utube. So if this is legit, just the law of large numbers suggests there should be more evidence. There are a lot of hungry reporters/journalists in New York in search of a story not to mention a host of female celebrities.

It’s odd that in a city with more than 4.5 million women that someone wouldn’t have noticed this before and reported it. Perhaps terrorists infected the male population of New York overnight with a “bore” virus which compels men to act like jerks no matter how ugly or plain she maybe. I just don’t think so. I think this is more likely a publicity stunt which appears to have worked very well.

[urlhttp://www.sciforums.com/threads/street-harrassment.142928/page-6#post-3239945[/url]

Google—and in this instance, Youtube—are your friends. Examples of such harassment are abundant, both in NYC and elsewhere.

 

[joepistole]

Hmmmm…


http://www.sciforums.com/threads/street-harrassment.142928/page-5#post-3239858


[urlhttp://www.sciforums.com/threads/street-harrassment.142928/page-6#post-3239945[/url]

Google—and in this instance, Youtube—are your friends. Examples of such harassment are abundant, both in NYC and elsewhereels

So because some women have been harrased all women are honest and victims of harrasment. Ok...next@

 

[Bells]

So because some women have been harrased all women are honest and victims of harrasment. Ok...next@

Wow, nice dishonest paraphrasing there..

What does a woman's honesty have to do with it? Or are you saying that women who report street harassment are dishonest about it?

I have to admit, the lengths to which some men on this site are going to to defend the right of males to harass women on the street is spectacular.

 

[joepistole]

Wow, nice dishonest paraphrasing there..

What does a woman's honesty have to do with it? Or are you saying that women who report street harassment are dishonest about it?

I have to admit, the lengths to which some men on this site are going to to defend the right of males to harass women on the street is spectacular.

Wasn't that Parma's argument? Correct me if I was wrong. Parma's argument doesn't get better with repetition. What was the point in bringing out unrelated incidents?

I'm amazed the lengths some people will go on this site too, to misrepresent what others have said in order to satisfy their biases.

 

[Motor Daddy]

Just had one of those thoughts pop into my brain...

If males are being accused of defending THE RIGHT to harass women, then presumably they have that right to begin with, it just needs defending???

 

[GeoffP]

I think we need a video of a good looking dude walking that same route. Lets see how many compliments he gets about his pants.

Well, sure I'll do it.

... what pants?

 

[GeoffP]

So because some women have been harrased all women are honest and victims of harrasment. Ok...next@

How the hell does this extend go generalized reporting?

 

[joepistole]

How the hell does this extend go generalized reporting?

Ask Parmalee and James, they have used the argument to prove the veracity of the video and those who produced it. I have debunked this before, but it keeps coming back from folks like Parma and James. Just because some women were harassed, it doesn't follow that this woman was harassed and it has no bearing on the veracity of the video or the folks who produced it. Didn't you notice the wink at the end of the post? It was to note the absurdity.

 

[Tiassa]

If males are being accused of defending THE RIGHT to harass women, then presumably they have that right to begin with, it just needs defending???

Effectively, yes, they do. And that's the problem.

Think of it this way—Bob the Average Harasser says:

(1) I get to "compliment" women this way.

(2) But you better not "compliment" this woman because she is my wife, and it's inappropriate to speak to my wife that way.

(3) And you better not "compliment" this other woman because she is my daughter, and it is inappropriate to speak to my daughter that way.

(4) What do you mean it's inappropriate for me to speak to that woman that way? In fact, the bitch should be grateful.​

First of all, the functional contradiction should be apparent.

Secondly, what is "inappropriate" about speaking to his wife or daughter in that way? Is it because it is inappropriate to speak to women that way, or is it inappropriate to speak to "his women" that way?

It's almost like breathing; one of the reasons we don't notice it going on around us is because we are immersed in it. I mean, I was at least in my twenties before the contradiction started to become apparent. Most of the time, we don't notice the air unless there is something wrong with it, like a bad smell, or, worse yet, we fear we will not have enough of it.

However, yes, men have effectively had the right to sexually harass women, and it's so conditioned that it becomes nearly reflexive.

And, no, it is not surprising that so many men, under circumstances in which they must notice what is going on, fall into ego defense and lash out to protect this tacit right. But if they look honestly at its functional context, they will see a version of those four points in their own behavior. The standards any one person invents are often the hardest for that person to meet.

• • •​

... what pants?

Part of me says it would be hilarious to see how long you last before being arrested, but there is also a danger that you'll just be beaten to death, and that wouldn't be funny. Well, maybe if you decided to crack wise, and maybe pull a rubber ducky out of your ass, so you could leave us laughing. Then I would laugh in order to honor your memory.

 

[Motor Daddy]

Effectively, yes, they do.

Then effectively you don't have a case of street harassment, because they have that right. I mean, you want to play word games?

If the letter of the law does not prohibit that behavior, then it is not illegal behavior. You find it disgusting? Write Congress and tell them you find it disgusting and want action NOW!