Ogling

He he, I can help you out with one tid bit.

American women are the most feminist on the earth. Sometimes I greatly appreciate this, at other times I don't.

soz,

While I agree that an assaulted woman should not in any way be held responsible for their actions neither should the guy robbed at an ATM after counting his money there late at night.

It's human nature to use stupidity as a scapegoat.

And I totally get your point about the way some responses can be used to trivialize.

But I think Tomas makes a valid point, in a perfect world we'd be able to do things like wear a Corinthians jacket in front of a SPFC club game late at night alone.

I knew damn well that I was either gonna get lynched or worse but I decided to get off the bus anyway. Why? Because nobody, nobody dictates how I dress.

So I did, for a minute I thought I'd get away with it. I didn''t.

Now, I know damn well that I was not in the wrong, if I had to do it again I'd keep the jacket on again.

But the people who cared about me were furious, the even stole my Corinthians clothes from then on. They said they never wear any sports apparel outside their homes.

They were furious that I would do something like that. I was limping for a week and nodbody was sympathetic, they all thought I was stupid.

Ok, here's a US centric example.

In a city in California I was walking with a friend late at night, he was a big Raiders fan and many gangs use sports apparel as their uniforms. Raiders apparel happens to be one used my a major gang.

We were accosted and held at gunpoint while we were asked what side of the city we were from (the gangbanger was high as a kite so I had some fun with him saying "the right side" etc).

For that reason my school had a dresscode forbidding sports apparel. For reasons pertinent to this thread they forbade daisy dukes and halter tops.

My long drawn out point is that while the clothes you wear is no excuse for the bad things that happen to you, there is an element of responsibility for your actions. As untoward as it is for the victim of anything to be held "responsible" for the criminal or untoward acts of others this is an element of life.

Ok, now the flip side.

women who do not in any way dress "provocatively" are often harassed. While, say, not wearing a bra and clearly showing one's nipples might be a cause of more unwelcome attention what about the woman who simply is quite attractive?

Does having large breasts make the woman responsible somehow? I pose this question to Thomas as another facet to consider. I realize that I'm playing both sides against the middle here but what I'm trying to do is concede that yes, some behavior can be altered to get the results one desires, even if that behavior is perfectly within one's right. But at the same time I understand the complaints that focusing on the victim's behavior trivializes the issue. First of all because the victim should be able to wear what she wants but also because even if she wore a potatoe sack this behavior is not exlcusive to clothing.

I think the main qualms the women here raise is that the ogling sometimes degenerates into the intentional desire to make the woman uncomfortable. And the discomfort is often due to valid fears about their physical safety. Not just a guy appreciating their beauty in a classless way.

This is a line that in my earlier discussions about this I bristled at. I angrily argued that the participants in my discussions were takiing horn-beeping and equating it with sexual assault.

But there is a connection of sorts. I wish the disticntion would be made clear because depending on which end of the spectrum you are speaking of the issue is far different.

But without going into horror stories the extreme edge of ogling is indeed sometimes indicative of worse acts to follow. Will an ignored catcall be follwoed by a hand on the shoulder? etc etc.

Ok, I'm making fewe points and fewer freinds by playing both sides against the middle so I will talke about somethign else now.

On of the many many reasons i do not ogle is that I WANT women to wear the halter tops and mini skirts!

In Brazil, I spent over a year jitting the clubs every noght and a few stories are pertinent.

Once when a friend commented as we were walking into a club about how much he hated when a crowd on the street would sit on a car I said, "go tell them that".

He responded that it was not his car and he didn't care.

My answer was that the only time his car was ever sat on was when he was in a club, and the only way he can avoid that happeing is for the promotion of the social behavior as a whole to change.

If he didn't want people sitting on his car he should do something about otehr people sitting on other people's cars. Afetr all, the only way he could protect his car while he was not there was if other people were concious of this being an "untoward" act.

Anywho, this IS related to the ogling. When my friends would ogle and comment I'd smack 'em upside their heard and ask a few questions (tehya re obviously aimed at teenage minds but with such mentalities the questions were succesful).

A) Did that cat call get you any closer to her pants?
B) If not do you think you made her happy? (a few idiots always say yes, they think they are god's gift to women).
C) Don't you think you only made her more wary and therefore less trusting for the next guy who approaches her?
D) Don't you wish more women would dress is sexy clothing without fear of harassment?
E) Don't you want to meet her in a club without her extra defences up (due to trepidation)?

In short I was telling them, yes, we both know you weren't trying to pick her up. But the next gal you try to pick up might be "stuck up", " difficult" or what have you BECAUSE of someone else doing the same thing.

It was a good selling point to my friends. If they wanted girls to be comfortable with the clothes we like to see on them and to have less defense mechanisms when we wanted to talk to them we had to promote a culture of respect. Because while a catcall is often not intended to be a pickup line it does make the next pickup attempted more difficult. :-)

My freinds used to relate to that.

I'm making preciosu little sense here but what I'm getting at is this:

Yes, if they didn't wear mini skirts they might feel more comfortable. But yes, they should be able to wear mini skirts if they want (and I want them to be ABSOLUTELY comfortable with this! :-)).

Other pertinent issues relate to teh fact that independant of any behavior on teh victim's part this type of thing can happen. It's in no way exlusive to women who dress a certain way.

And I need a beer.

You deserve one! Lots of good points.

Yeah, How many billions do they spend on cosmetics every year? If they don't want attention, that sure is a funny way to spend their money. c.i.

The difference might be smaller than you think it is. If I sit in a bus and I see this woman who has obvious girlfriend potential, but I know it's hopeless because either she or I will get off that bus in a few minutes and then we'll never see each other again -- then I honestly cannot guarantee I won't ever fall back in "looking at a statue" mode. I honestly believe that I do catch signals of discomfort and stop it when I do, but now that you mention it, I'm much less sure than you that the "looking at a statue" look has nothing to do with romantic interest.


Me too. I totally agree.

Before I go to bed, I'd like to make another attempt to explain your "why put the onus on the women?" concern, because I don't think I've got it across so far. Let's try another one of those analogies. A few months ago, when America started a war on Iraq for no good reason, there were lots of demonstrations against it here in Germany. One of the standard complaints conservative German politicians made about the demonstraters was articulated in a series of rhetorical questions: "Where were these people when Saddam gassed his own citizens? Where were they when he murdered tens of thousands of Shiites in 1991? Why do demonstrators always get in the face of America, who may not be perfect, but which is certainly a much better country than the dictatorships it is fighting?"

I usually answer this complaint by saying that this accusation is unfair: By focusing their protests on American policies, the demonstrators aren't making a statement about the relative wickedness of the policies they are protesting against. They simply know that demonstrations can change the policies of America and its allies, but that no amount of demonstrating will ever turn the Saddam Husseins and Robert Mugabes into constructive members of the international community. This is not a statement about ethics, it's a reflection of the world we're living in, and about what we can realistically do about this world.

Getting back to your question "Why focus on the mini-skirt?", I'd say you have the same situation. The guys you were talking with weren't telling you that you are as bad as the guys who stared at you -- they are simply focusing their efforts on the changes you can realistically control. I think your implication that we are making a statement about your moral rottenness relative to the ooglers' would be unfair in my case, and I suspect it is also unfair in the case of the other guys who gave you such opinions.

Not sure if that worked better

-- Thomas

soz,

A few more quibbles. I am certainly apt to be wrong on this but in no way shape or form can I bring myself to believe that the only staged element of the picture was a comment to teh bikers.

Thing is, I may be projecting here. I was almost expelled from school for a picture I once took for the school paper.

I took a picture of a kid shooting up right in front of the school mascot.

It was entirely staged, I planned it for weeks. But I was inclined to downplay the staged aspects. I notice this is journalism as well. It's hard to capture reality and the mere fact that it's being observed changes it (no need for me to rant about taht, I'm sure you've read the studies). I have found people in that area more inclined to downplay the staged aspect and also the fact that there mere fact that it's being documented makes a scene.

Another unrelated point I've been meaning to bring up is that in teh picture the woman (to me) is average and her dress is pedestrian.

Just a comment about how she's not wearing a halter top or anythigng.

___________


One more comment. I keep seeing you try to differentiate between the simply graceless ogling and the attempts to make women uncomfortable.

I know what you are getting at, some ogling seems more means spirited and an actual attempt to repulse rather than attract.

But I posit that while this distinction exists it is an issue confused by both sides. The difficulty in quantifying negative elements of ogling is such that I think men are more inclined to believe that women interpret ogling as hostile at an inordinate rate and women likely to think the converse about men.

Just a quibble but I want to make the point that while we all agree the lines are hard to draw, there is also the element of two different lines.

------------

snood,

Not for the life of me would I call it PC or not PC but I brought up the succubus. I'm sure it made few freinds and fewer happy people but I do think teh women who reward certain behaviors that other women complain about, do indeed affect the issue.

That my more untoward friends were rewarded more so than my respectful freinds is relevant.

Many men who make women uncomfortable are actually attemting a boneheaded "manly display".

And yes, some women actually reward it. I have seen it too.

Thomas,

You are making perfect sense. But at the same time call me quixotic but I'd liek to change the oglers so that the women don't get told to put away teh mini skirts!

Along those lines... I've mentioned that I used to live in a housing co-op with a clothes-optional policy. There was much nakedness, no ogling. If there had been ogling, less nakedness. (There were a few confirmed exhibitionists.)

Thomas,

You are making sense, but I don't think I ever said "why focus on the miniskirt?" I said that wearing a miniskirt was stupid, I knew it was stupid, I said it was stupid at the very very beginning of this discussion (I forgot about the fact that I would have to take the bus to the orthodontist's, and would have been wearing something else if I had remembered), I'm just pissed off that it was stupid and that by wearing clothes that were comfortable, seasonable and fashionable in school I had to go through such a gauntlet.

Not Quixotic. Just young, in the sense that I believe it to be a natural phenomenon for one's perception of his own sphere of potential influence to alter (shrink, alas) with the passing of time.

snood,

I entertain no illusions of my ability to change anything.

I have a quibble with the "young and idealistic" saw.

Many of us young'uns know damn well we have little chance to change the world. We jsut try to change our corner of it. And even if we can't cahnge our corner we try.

I think with age comes the lessened inclination to even try, moreso than a realization of futility.

Thing is, perfection is impossible, I strive for it while recognizing that it's a goal I'll not reach.

even so it's worth a try.

As I age I will probably become less inclined to try, not because I have a greater understanding of my capacity to change but because of a lessened disposition to attempt it as well as a lessened ability to bring about change.

I have changed my young friends and they ahve changed me. As we age we will be less likely to change each other.

anywho, that's a hole different soft spot of mine.

agism. And I react poorly to taht as well so me is gonna find a beer dammit!

It was shorthand for your paragraph leading up to the question "Why put the onus on the woman?" It wasn't a literal quote, and I shouldn't have made it look like one -- sorry about that.

I see. I think Craven put it best -- I see what you're saying about women taking responsibility, I just would like to see men taking responsibility in whatever way they CAN, too. Smacking upside the head is good.

Last summer, I was walking around the neighbourhood doing some shopping, and a few of the local private school girls were sitting on the corner chatting. No, I was not ogling, I was checking traffic, to make sure it was safe to cross, when all of a sudden, one of the girls, probably about 15-16, pulls a Sharon Stone and uncrosses and crosses her legs, and no undies whatsoever....holy crap was I embarrassed, and I wasn't even looking in THAT way! Then I thought, why should I feel bad for having caught a glance of something that I wasn't even looking for? I did feel bad though....in a big way...very very icky and uncomfortable...

Soz,

The really relevant question is if you were among the exhibitionists. :-)

BTW, I wanna ask about something I have observed.

In my life I have seen a trend which seems to go like this:

Young women, and i'm talking about the years right after they discover their sexuality, have in my experience been more inclined toword the "please look" rather than the "don't look".

Without having experienced any uncomfortable situatoins (or at least being unaware of them) the new found attention seek to cultivate it.

After a few years the "don't look" activity starts to increase.

I saw this more often in places where revealing clothing is more common and where the culture is more sexual than others.

anyone see anything similar? Just trying to better understand my experiences.

Craven,

That's a normal activity for very young girls...it has been called, testing their "girl power" (newly acquired).

As you point out, that behavior diminishes in time, except I suppose, for some women with poor self esteem for whom it is the only way to feel good about themselves.

jjorge,

I was pretty sure it was normal. Heck in my life it has. Nice to get positive confirmation.

Slightly tongue in cheek: I think one reason the testing of the waters diminsishes is when they realize it's an ocean. :-)

As soon as they discover that the power is there with or without effort on their part I guess they reserve it.

I said nothing about "idealism" - I was referring to ignorance (and I don't confuse that with stupidity - you're very obviously smart). And arrogance - as illustrated by your assumption that aging makes one less inclined to try, as opposed to becoming better at choosing battles.

I suppose, that yes, there are a great deal of ways to say it, some favorable others less so.

And yes, picking battles wisely is another, more positive, way. I have often found myself wishing I'd pick them more wisely.

I reference idealism because it's iften expressed to me as "idealistic youth" and in other such ways. I'm completely willing to concede that youth, hubris, idealism and many other things share a relation.

Anywho, I'd rather not take on my own ageism on an already complicated topic. But maybe on another day, another thread.

Just trying to pick my battles and fit them into the schedule. :-)

LOL!

I went to Russia just the once - eight years back. (And Thomas, remember - I was young <giggles>). At the time I looked like this (or would often look like this): long hair, sunglasses, black, tight-fitting fake-leather trousers with laces on the sides up to the waist, bootlike-shoes.

Russian guys did not like this. Would get dirty, agressive looks. I was approached by these guys, who asked, are you metal? No. Hippie? No. You must be a pederast, then. We will beat you up. (I sat down with them, bought them a coupla beers, tried out my mediocre Russian, "invited" them to a party in the students flat, and by then they were OK).

To my surprise, however (considering I was getting prepared to be seen as some alien weirdo), many of the women liked it! Saw them look, smile at me ... I dont think they minded the "innovation". F'example, in the Summer Garden this group of teenagers that was being toured around crossed my path twice, and one of these kids approached me, would I mind being in a photo? Me: no, course not - he goes to tell his friend, turns out: this girl wanted to be in a picture with me, she's all shy about it. <grins>

(Of course I tried to adapt to local standards a little more the rest of the month ... tho I really didnt have the right clothes for it ...

Anyhow. I have no deep thoughts about this issue. Ive been raised to be very cautious, to not be an ass about it, to respect women - and I also think I've been raised to overdo that. Too cautious. At the same time, it gave me a hard time, cause I just *love* looking at the beauty in the world <grins>. I mean, girlfriends would point out beautiful girls to me, cause, err, they knew Id be interested. <g>. So, a contradiction there.

I still go out of my way to avoid causing any feeling of threat (who else here stops walking or crosses the street to avoid "following" a woman walking somewhere in front of you, when its evening time, to avoid possibly making her nervous?). And of course, I try to be polite - no catcalls from me, duh.

But at the same time I get annoyed about women complaining about being looked at per se, especially if its stated like its about some universally applicable human rights / gender struggle issue. I mean, I understand it can be a pain. Especially for really beautiful women, who have it happen all the fcking time. And I can see where it could cause fear, even, depending on context. But on the other hand its just too gliding a scale, also in terms of deliberate / undeliberate, and theres simply too much variation for it to be a reasonable.

For one, some women do like being watched - to some extent. Thomas is right about culture playing a role. I once had a Portuguese lover, and we lived in Hungary at the time; and she complained about the Hungarian men, cause to her mind, they were offensively disinterested, to the point of being rude. They didnt look, didnt honk or catcall from their cars, didnt make any kind of (eye) contact on the street. Now in Portugal, she'd usually be annoyed at how intrusive the men were. But this, again, was too much the other way - what was wrong with them?

But its not just about culture. Craven already noted that its his most "aggressive" pals who "scored" the most. Just the other day, I was waiting for a train at some provincial station, and these kids were hanging around there ... being rude, looking at girls passing by, calling things to them - BUT, at least twice the girls who passed by called something back in jest, nudged each other, giggled, looked back - it worked.

In the end, its like all those arguments about how men should be less macho, but all the same, one likes a manly man - the instructions are contradictory, and while women tell us 'from the head' to 'behave', from the gut many instinctively turn to those who flaunt their admonishments most. As in everything else, one thing is true: as long as it works, it will be done. As long as (some) women fall for machos, (some) men will act like machos, and this is just one more example. In that sense women do have the solution in their own hands, overall - just stop rewarding so-called "bad" behavior!