How to deal with unwanted attention?

Post Reply New Topic

So how do you propose that men find romantic and sexual partners?

'Cause I can tell you right now that guys sitting around and waiting for someone else to initiate those relationships just plain doesn't work.

I never said to expect that no one talk to you-
I said if YOU pick some random person to talk to and communicate you wanna bone them or date them,
some people will find it bizarre and act in a disgusted way, because they're truly-disgusted.

You're attempting to impose your definitions of normalcy on other people,
and conclude them "@ssholes" for responding to unsolicited approaches from people they don't know in a way YOU find less-than acceptable.



It certainly doesn't "count" for more, I just don't automatically assume that when a given person posts something, that they are being untruthful. And to be honest, whether their misogynist posts indicate misogynist actions or no, I find the former repulsive by themselves. Lots of people post racist and sexist crap online- it still causes racism and sexism by perpetuating racism and sexism.

Last edited by ValentineWiggin on 12 Oct 2012, 7:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

no. I'm imposing society as a whole's definition of normal. Which, being basically an average of what the people in that society consider normal, is the only version of "normal" that is of any use when determining how to interact with a stranger. Believe me, it's far from the system I would prefer.



Nor do I. But I see a difference between venting at no one in particular and hurtful statements directed at specific individuals and delivered in person.

No, you're taking your own personal opinion, amid different ones, in a discussion about people with different ones,
and concluding it "society",
making subtle appeals to moral relativism in so doing,
and proclaiming those people and anyone who disagrees "@ssholes".
I'd expect more on a support site for people with considerable experiential and perceptional differences.




...based on those individuals' actions, as opposed to irrational mass-generalizations based on a laughable sample size.

Again, agreed. Think of it another way... would you be offended if someone walked up to you and gave you some money or similar nice gift along with a smile? (Note, that's a gift, not bribe or payment for something he wants.)
And how would you feel if someone walked up, frowned, then hit you and/or took something away from you and walked away.

The words and actions decribed here are not very different from that. Is someone approaching you trying to be friendly - or are they trying to be a sleazy horndog?
REACT ACCORDINGLY, but give the benefit of the doubt by using a non-hostile response first.

believe me when I tell you that I most certainly am not equating my views with that of society. My beliefs regarding what our culture considers normal or abnormal come from years of careful observation, and a metric shitload of trial and error trying to get it right. It's far from what would suit me, but it's the way things are and if one wishes to achieve ones goals in life then they'd best learn how to deal with it.

As for moral relativism, I don't buy into that crap. You're the one making appeals to it, talking about how certain types of negative behavior are acceptable from certain groups based on their past experiences.



So, men make generalizations based on a small sample size, and that's bad. Women commit negative actions which themselves come from generalizations (being as we're talking about strangers approaching them, they cannot know the person and thus are generalizing when they decide that this person deserves that treatment) that were formed based on an equally small sample size, and that's okay.

I think being able to approach strangers is really brave, and I really wish I could.
On the other hand I think guys should not take it personally if a girl tells them to f**k off, even if they think they have been polite.
I mean, you don't know this girl, you have no idea what her day has been like, maybe her dog just died, and talking to strangers is the last thing she wants to do.

Maybe next time they could try reading her body language, does she look approachable? if so, go ahead. does she look sad? angry? better leave her alone.

Yes, exactly.

Guy comes up and says "Hey! You should totally touch my penis!" then go ahead and smack him.

Guy comes up and says "Hey! Can I buy you a drink?" then a "No, thank you" should be enough. Followed by a stern "not interested" if he persists, then go ahead and smack him if that doesn't work.

That doesn't mean the vast majority of people want to be appraised aloud by strangers when they're out minding their own business.
Even if it did, why are we appealing to the "majority", again?

Then maybe they shouldn't initiate the ratings game with people they don't know?
Why are we appealing to the "majority", again?

Wait, I thought it was because we wanted a date or sex...which is it?
All the men hitting on pretty girls are just do-gooders, now?

Right, because you take your own personal definition of "undeserving", and judge people accordingly.
Circular logic is circular.

That was essentially the major legal argument for years against adopting strong sexual harassment policies into the workplace,
and wide-eyed pretended obliviousness on the part of harassers.

I would find both bizarre, and act accordingly.

Pretty sure freaked-out/disgusted people tend to react first and then think second by definition.
As I said, there's no right to not get your feelings hurt in a social interaction, especially one you initiated, unsolicited.
Although, even if we ran with your premise that intent matters, I'm pretty sure the intent we're talking about in this thread is either getting sex or at least getting a date- the INTENT of the interaction is to GET SOMETHING.

I agree with this.
The only issue is "touch my penis" guy allwaaays claims he's "I just want to buy you a drink/be nice/be friendly" guy.
Dude grinding on you on the bus always says it's accident. Dude on the sex offender registry for public masturbation always claims it was just public urination. The guy taking pictures of your ass is always just doing some "photography". We're always over sensitive shrews who apparently deserve misogyny for being meanies.

At the same time, she has no idea what's going on with him either. Maybe a polite "no thanks" would have done the trick, and the "f**k off" only serves to exacerbate his already low self-esteem, contributing to his downward spiral of loneliness and self-loathing.

Having people react to you like that can really f**k with your head.

I dunno. I really don't understand this. All I'm trying to say here is that maybe it's a good thing to be nice (or at least polite) to people until they give you a reason to act otherwise. And conversely, being cruel to them because *gasp, shudder* they thought you were pretty and tried to talk to you makes you kind of a dick.

And this is the essential problem.

Because they say the same things, a polite refusal the first time (which I agree is always the best idea) - is often ignored completely by the types DWH is talking about.
Which I understand is why you are advocating to take it to the next level after that, mds_02, which I agree with.

But in this case the OP is feeling extremely vulnerable due to recent events with extremely good reason- and that needs to be taken into account and I have no seen anyone of this thread doing that yet, taking her recent personal experiences into account.

Last edited by Kjas on 12 Oct 2012, 8:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Ah, so your personal opinions are "society" and mine make me an "@sshole" cause you consider yourself more informed and Declare it So.

The problem with that argument is that I can essentially say "Me too, ME TOO!! !"
and I've refuted your whole damned argument.


In other words, you have no freaking idea what Moral Relativism is, do you?
Hint: implying it's wrong to act as does a "certain group based on their past experiences"
(ya know, because it's not the LARGER group, based on the same thing) means you're still appealing to it.




I would argue purging sexist crap online is a negative action.

Nah, a random person approaching and soliciting your attention just as dozens before did,
thereby increasing the irritation and therefore response to each identical successor doesn't involve a"generalization" of any kind.

Women studying at school, reading, shopping in the supermarket, etc AREN'T THERE TO GET TO KNOW YOU, AND AREN'T OBLIGATED TO. They're there to study, read, shop, etc.
It involves no conclusion, negative or positive, about an entire sex of people.
Mmmkay?
The same way some people would swat a fly before they'd beg it to go away.
It involves a basic response to someone being annoying/irritating/creepy.

Last edited by ValentineWiggin on 12 Oct 2012, 8:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

But what about the genuinely friendly guy, who really did just wanna buy you a drink? Or the guy who really did bump into you on accident? Or the dude who really was just peeing?

I'm just saying, those guys are a lot more common than the assholes. But we're always oversexed douches, just waiting for a chance to treat a woman like a collection of orifices (that knows how to wash our socks!).

Um...did your Mama never tell you that the world ain't fair?

Here, I'll say it again:
there is no right to not get your feelings hurt in an unsolicited interaction with a stranger which you initiated.

I'm shocked that this is even controversial.