Sexism on L&D

Post Reply New Topic

Believe me, we wish you would grow up as well...

I am grown up, and have learned to deal with life and the situations encountered. I learned to deal with them myself and learned perspective. Whats so wrong with wishing that others could do the same?

Tell me how I'm not grown up then. Tell me exactly how my stance on this issue is childish and overblown.

Guess what, we're ALL grown, and we've all learned to deal with life and the situations that life entails. There is absolutely nothing wrong with wishing others could do the same, but there's maybe something wrong with assuming we're all children who never learned how to live just because we don't do things the same way you do.

What I see here is a group of strong women who are trying to take a stand against the disrespect they experience not just every day, but everywhere they go.

You seem to see a bunch of children in need of your guidance so the things you say tend to ooze condescension.

Ah?here again is something I consider to be problematic based on the same principle as the OP? What exactly is assault?

Assault, in terms of legal charges, most often assumes that there is an intention to do harm or to achieve a goal at another's expense. Technically if someone so much as pointed a water pistol at me, it would count as assault with a deadly weapon since, for all I or anyone else besides the assailant knew the gun was real and my life really was in danger. If we're playing paintball, it's still assault in effect although it is within the context of a game or sport in which getting shot with a non-life-threatening weapon is actually expected.

Kissing isn't something that is by nature life-threatening, nor is someone being attacked outright unless someone is deliberately trying to spread a disease or something. It IS by nature invasive and intimate, which is part of why so many of us like it. But it need not be viewed as threatening or inherently harmful JUST BECAUSE someone misreads body language and makes a mistake by "going for it." There's no intentional harm here. At worst it's negligence.

I've met very few women who'd actually give verbal permission for a kiss. For those women, if a guy HAS to ask, the answer is automatically NO.

One experience I had was with a girl who'd never been kissed before (at least so she said after I kissed her). There was a pretty intense mutual attraction there and we both knew where this was going. I actually DID ask what she'd think about me kissing her. She said, "I don't think." I asked if that meant yes or no. She said, "I told you, I don't think. I'm shutting my brain off at this point and whatever happens, happens." I wasn't at all sure what that meant for ME, but I went for it giving her every opportunity to back away. I took a risk and it seems we both got what we wanted. But she technically never gave me any consent other than making it obvious she wasn't going to fight me.

So, did I assault her? And before you answer, bear in mind I'm not asking with a preconceived right/wrong answer here. Based on what you've presented as a definition of assault, which is ambiguous to the point of meaning pretty much anything, it would seem I DID assault her. I didn't (and don't) believe it was assault, else I wouldn't have kissed her. Was it assault, and if so/if not, exactly of what significance is it?

They are seeing a boogyman and a threat where there isn't one. Lots of things on the internet offend others. There is a line that can be crossed where those things should be removed. I don't think these guys crossed a line at all. I think they were whining.

Do you have any clue as to how many things can be spun so that they can be taken as sexist rather than what they are? Just because something offends a female, and it comes from a male, doesn't make it sexist.

This is very true, and I don't recall anyone suggesting that EVERYTHING said by a man that offends a women is sexist. None of the people I've seen advocating for stronger moderation have come across as that unreasonable to me.

Tarantella's main issue seems to me that she doesn't (can't?) distinguish between guys picking up on actual signals from women that they want to be kissed, and guys just making up those signals on their own as an excuse to make a move. When a man isn't sure of the signals he's receiving, tarantella doesn't trust men to use discretion and err on the side of caution by not making a move; she insists the man must ask every time. Now, do some men actually make up whatever excuse they want to make a move on a woman they fancy, including "she wanted it"? Oh yes, that happens... if they're an a**hole. But most guys I know aren't a**holes, myself included. What it comes down to is that tarantella doesn't trust men. I can't say I blame her given her experience, but many other women don't have the same issues or background that she does and it's not as big a deal for them whether a guy kisses them without explicit, verbal permission. She doesn't speak for all women, as much as she'd like to think she does.

I was at a graduation party last night and I posed this kissing scenario to the other guests, and both women attending (one 48 and the other 33) said to 'go for it' because spontaneity is hugely romantic for both of them. One woman commented how she likes being "taken" by men. One guy, her boyfriend, pointed out how asking every time before kissing comes off unassertive and dense, both of which tend to be unattractive qualities. I agree. I trust myself to know better when to make a move and when not to, and "knowing better" doesn't mean "knowing what she's thinking" but rather "knowing how to behave and be respectful".

Last edited by onewithstrange on 29 Jun 2014, 5:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Some of us are more grown than others. OOM and I don't see eye-to-eye on EVERYTHING, but her kids are all grown-up whereas my oldest is only just about to turn 7. Compared with where she is on a lot of things in life, I still feel like a kid when it comes to raw experience. I tend to admire older folks for what they've been through that I haven't gotten to yet.

There's also wipe-your-butt syndrome that you might be dealing with. It happens any time you're trying to convince someone to see it your way when that person is sufficiently old enough to have wiped your butt at some point in your life. There's just something about having changed someone's diaper and seeing/smelling their crap that makes it almost impossible to take them seriously later on in life.

To any men I may have initiated a kiss with over the past 60 years. If you interpreted it as a sexual assault, [and how could you possibly not have] I BEG your forgiveness for my "blatant sexism." You seemed to like it. I should have been aware that you were actually too terrified to tell me otherwise.

You're not wrong here, sly. Kissing IS romantic and emotional bonding. Which is kind of the point I keep trying to make - you have to have some sort of established relationship (not saying you have to be "in a committed relationship" but you have to have least had a few dates) before kissing as romantic and emotional bonding is appropriate. Once you're in a relationship, it's already been established that each of you is someone the other person wants to be with and therefore would not object to a nice interlude of kissing (and/or cuddling).

Everyone has different levels of tolerance. Apparently there are also a lot of black and white filters being applied to much of what is being said here.

On a first date (or, worse, BEFORE), if a guy grabs me and kisses me, and I wasn't yet sure if he was someone I wanted to have a physical relationship with (or was already sure I didn't), yes, I would consider that assault, and yes, he would know unequivocally, and in no uncertain terms, to NEVER do that again.

In a relationship where a physical component has already been established, you bet your booties I don't mind if MY guy grabs me and kisses me. And, if I want him to do more of that kind of thing, I will absolutely make sure he knows that.

Well, thank you AngelRho. We disagree strongly on quite a few things and have been round and round in debate here, but you were always a gentleman and I tried to be nice and I do see you as a gentleman and I hope you see me as a lady. We can disagree even without hating each other.

The wipe your butt syndrome thing, I think might be close to what I feel. It's not their ages that get me, it's more the fact that I saw what actual sexism was like and what it did back before we were thought of as equals. You can be offended by someone's statements without trying to define them as a type of discrimination or bigotry and that's what is bothering me. If they would stop trying to make it an issue about sexism and feminism and a women's issue, then I wouldn't care either way and would just go on about my business wishing they would learn to ignore it, but I wouldn't care either way. However, when they want to equate a guy's whining vents on an internet forum with something that made life as we know it very different and difficult for women, until it was stopped, that's when I have a problem.

Also, since I've actually lived through those times, and also since I've had a hell of a lot of experience learning how to and actually making myself stand up for myself and not taking crap from people and it's drastically improved my life, I tend to want others to learn to do the same thing if I think they would be happier and feel better about things. It's the same thing as when your kid comes to you and says "Jimmy called me a name". You can either say "Call him something back then" or you can call Jimmy's mother, the ACLU, file a suit, sue the school, or whatever else you want, but that doesn't stop Jimmy from calling somebody else a name and it doesn't teach him to respect anybody, and it teaches your kid that he has to have others fight his battles. Same with teaching your kid to hit Jimmy back when Jimmy hits them first. That was my thing with my kids when they were little. I'd say "Unless he had a ball bat or something or is a lot bigger than you, then I don't want to hear it unless you hit him back" and they learned to hit the bullies back. I never learned it until I was much older and it was hard for me to do it. This that they are concerned about doesn't even have a real world impact on anybody, let alone the whole female sex.

If the statements they were making were actually very sexist, then yes I'd stand up to them! I had a good friend years back who was one of the most sexist guys I've ever know. He was a nutcase and hated everybody who didn't buy into his ideology, but he was nice when you got to know him. He was that priest who was advocating killing abortion doctors. I interviewed him once and we got to talking after, because at the time I was a devout Catholic but I was also pro choice and a feminist. He was anything but those two last things, and we argued, debated, played devil's advocate for each other, etc in conversations. He respected me though, and told me. I respected him as well and told him. Neither of us respected the opinions of the other person, and until the day he died we tried to change them, but that never happened. I never tolerated his sexist or severely anti-woman crap and he stopped saying it to me and around me unless we were just debating and discussing an issue. He changed a little bit about the sexism near the end. He even said he was wrong about women not being able to do jobs like doctors and lawyers after he met several women in those professions who proved him wrong. For decades women had been screaming at him and trying to shut him up and all, but it was seeing the evidence that he was actually wrong that did it for him.

So sexism is sexism and it's still around, but whining about "all women" isn't it. It's incorrect blanket assumptions and a failure to use logic. That's a very different thing.

lol Yay! More condescension! You get the gold star for today

I've met enough older people with a complete lack of respect for others and a complete lack of wisdom or any sort of common sense to know that age guarantees absolutely nothing. I've also met people younger than myself with more wisdom in their little finger than any of the more aged people I've met.

I've also noticed a common resistance to change amidst the older generations, which isn't to say all older people are resistant, but the longer you've lived a certain way the harder it is to change the behaviour.

I'm reminded of people like my dad who believed that they you should "respect your elders" just because they've lived longer and blah blah blah. Unfortunately for him he spent his entire life disrespecting all of us so my response has always been, "Screw that!"

Age can mean an awful lot, but it can also mean absolutely nothing so don't give me that shite.

Also, I believe I'm older than anyone else participating in this thread.

I accept that anyone who takes the position of an activist must advocate for MUCH more than what they really want or expect to get, and you don't get much without a broad scope to your activism. If you're in a bargaining situation as a buyer, you're going to offer pennies on the dollar compared to what you really think an item is worth, and the seller is going to start out with a much higher price than actual worth. In the end, what you pay is something you both can agree upon?a price that grants the seller a profit and is cost-effective for you as a buyer. An activist can't SAY what she's willing to settle for because there is a possibility, however remote, she might get all she wants. I get that. I also get the concept of eating an elephant (one small bite at a time). At a certain point someone has to make a stand and say, "hey, I'm not letting feminists or anyone else shame me or make me feel guilty about something that's not really a problem. This far and no further or whatever." I'll support feminists when equality really is the goal. But often the goal in activism is not equality but something that favors the activist at the expense of others. Affirmative action by black civil rights advocates is an excellent example, and recent court decisions show that affirmative action is actually guilty of the evils it purported to correct. I'm not convinced that the sexism issue really is any different than affirmative action. Note that I never said that sexism doesn't exist here and that NOTHING should be done about it.

That said, you seem to be saying that tarantella and perhaps even starvingartist are projecting their experiences here. If that's what you mean, and correct me if I'm wrong, I'd have to say it certainly appears that way. I don't believe in burning the whole house down over one or two (male) jerks, although at least one I'm thinking about seems to be trying to correct his own behavior. Message received.


That's been my experience almost every time.

Actually, once a girl actually did tell me NOT to kiss her. I asked her if she'd mind telling me why I shouldn't. She told me why. The reason wasn't good enough, so I kissed her anyway (it wasn't because she didn't want me to, and the details aren't worth going into). It turned out kissing her was actually what she wanted me to do, otherwise I'd have left the whole thing alone.

My point is not to encourage guys who have trouble reading signals to kiss girls who tell them not to. It's that dating and physical intimacy are convoluted aspects of life that aren't always as simple as "consent." There's subtle innuendo and between-the-lines that people (men and women) engage in that are variably more or less deliberately confusing. What I used to tell girls all the time is "I'm only as serious as you are." In my experience, manipulating a person into making the first move who expects the man to make the first move is frustrating and counterproductive. But as a man, the opposite is also manipulative (women expecting men to make the first move in the first place). I'm the kind of guy who needs an invitation, and the kind of girl who gives invites is, again, an extremely rare find in my experience. So?exactly what does a guy do? Not even try?

The way I've always chosen to handle this is by 1) making my intentions pretty obvious (my nose is three inches from yours?gee, what do you think I might be doing here?) and 2) never putting a woman in a position she couldn't back out of at any time. Before my wife and I started seriously dating, I tried to kiss her on a few different occasions. I'd lean in for a kiss and suddenly find I got nothing but cheek. OK?'nuff said? So?see you at the party this weekend? Assuming a guy respects any boundaries at all, I've found that's the safest way to go. You preserve the spontaneity, and yet everyone has a way out if they feel the need and signals have been misread. I never got in a situation like Brian did, at least not that I'm aware of, anyway.

I'm not resisting any kind of positive change. Not at all. I'm resisting overreaction when somebody whose feelings are hurt gets on here and posts about an entire sex. It's pretty much a common reaction when somebody has been romantically hurt or ignored. How many times have you heard females say that all men are pigs, or just want sex, or they all lie and cheat, etc, after romance went south? I've said it! I've heard it at one point or another from most of my female friends. I've heard a similar blanket statement from my male friends when their s**t went bad too. That doesn't mean the speaker believes it or wants to have the other sex locked down into slave status. It means that they are pissed off at the whole sex for something one or two people did to them and they will get over it. Unless they are just bitter, they get back up on that horse and keep trying till it works and then their rants from when they were pissed are completely forgotten. In other words, it's not somebody saying it who is sexist and calling for political change against women.

If I were to run across a sexist practice out there in the world, I would speak up against it and try to get others involved to get it stopped or at least call attention to it. I would do the same against any discriminatory practice. However, I wouldn't have a knee jerk reaction to something when somebody was just bitching because of their own failure. That's all this is. Unsuccessful guys bitching about women because they fail with women. That's it. They aren't drumming up crowds to make speeches to, they aren't trying to stage a political coup to take over the world and eliminate women, they aren't actually doing anything but bitching on the internet. If they really believed that women were so terrible, they wouldn't be out there trying to get a romance started in the first place. Consider the type of guys actually doing the talk there. Do you see them out there with any power at all over women? Do you see them having any say about what chances we have? Do you hear anybody else giving their whines any weight at all except the few here who are calling it sexist and getting their panties in a wad over it? No. Those guys have zero influence over anyone. They have been told time and again what they are doing wrong. It doesn't sink in. If they were to walk up to a woman in the real world and say those same things to them she would more than likely either laugh in his face, tell him off, or just roll her eyes and walk away, because she knows he's nothing to even bother with about that. Why anybody on here is even giving them that much power over themselves is a mystery to me.

Actually, we're trying to give them more power over themselves, which will turn out to be essential for them to eventually find happiness with another person.

Sure, everyone vents from time to time - that is not the issue that is causing blowback here. The issue is with a few who repeatedly blame all of their woes on the female gender.

There are a few male members here who used to gripe about women, but who subsequently got their act together and now have a much happier life (including, like, girlfriends and all that stuff). Can't we attempt to do the same with others instead of indulging their negative ideas, which is likely only to perpetuate their unhappiness?

And, of course, anyone at all should be more than welcome to gripe about any particular bad thing happening to them. I just very strongly feel that it is counterproductive for them to be encouraged to continue to view themselves as a victim, particularly when they view themselves as victims of A WHOLE CLASSIFICATION of people, such as women, or blacks, or jews, or college professors, or cheerleaders, or gas station attendants.

How does it empower the whiners to encourage them to continue feeling like victims?