SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

I know the real reason you won't, although you continue to try to convince us the cost to ratio fallacy

Okay please enlighten me what my true motivation is for not getting involved in hypothetical 'accidentally' bus groping.

There is literally nothing a woman can wear in order to avoid male attention. Even a white t-shirt turned brown from years of not washing and covered in gravy stains and a skirt made out of strips of insulation won't do it.

Perfect.

So by simply existing, men assume that I am trying to impress them.

And when I say otherwise, 218937125731248 men chime in and tell me that I am wrong.

Not only am I wrong, but it is sexist of me to expect better.

Cool.

[This message edited by HeartBreaker11 at 2:04 PM, April 5th (Friday)]

I agree that a society where we all stand up for each other sounds great, but it's just not in the cards. Especially with everyone buried in their phones. We're as disparate as ever. There needs to be some kind of unifying factor, but in real life, and those aren't that prevalent. People are too siloed in their thinking, always have been, mixed with a heaping helping of "not my fight".

I have to prove that I was indeed assaulted in order not to be charged for protecting myself. Thus, if someone is going to attack me I gotta let them have the first hit and hope I can stay upright then spray them or whatever the case.

Totally fucked up!

Yes!! Something we can agree on! Yes, that's an insane standard. In my state was have a "castle doctrine" and no duty to retreat. So, it's a LOT better, I have to prove my life was in danger to use deadly force, not that I let him get the first shot off. However, as I said above, even then, I'm not allowed to escalate the conflict. I'm not allowed to bait someone in to shoot them, and that could very well have been the claim that day on the subway if my seatmate had said something that was clearly going to escalate the situation. However, the same is not true if there was a woman being groped, she could use deadly force because the situation was already escalated for her, I could not because the situation wasn't life/death for me. Let me say, if the guy with the gun had stood up and said something and wound up having to use his gun, it would have been a very legally gray area. He could have been charged and could have spent a lot of time in jail for it. Which is basically a good way of saying, "it's a huge risk". Much bigger than the risk is for the person actually being harassed because they are, by definition, already at risk by physical contact. Some states do have good Samaritan laws, which reduces (and in some cases, eliminates) this risk, but not all of them.

so.. as long as she's not tooo felt up and as long as there's a possibility the guy might never have a chance with a gal and calling him up might "shame him" then you're not going to do it.

Did you read that from me? Because if so, no, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that I'm not going to escalate something to violence unless that's the only option. And saying something as a man has pretty decent chance of turning into a violent confrontation. It's got to be "bad" (which is entirely in my eyes, and I realize that's unfair, but I'm the one being compelled to act here) before I'd consider it.

I know the real reason you won't, although you continue to try to convince us the cost to ratio fallacy.

And what would that "real reason" be?

Guess I need to just walk around armed. I guess that's a good philosophy- if ladies shoot all the assholes out there, there will be none left.

Not a bad plan; I ask my W to do exactly that. But here's the thing, when they hand you your CCW (carry permit), your going to have some training before you get it. And that training is something I feel like would be really helpful for a lot of posters here. No, you don't get to shoot assholes. You don't get to shoot the deli guy because he's looking at your boobs. You don't get to walk down the street in a gstring and pasties and shoot the first guy who says something. You have to face a clear danger, and very, very few of the posts here have had anything that approaches that in them. A clear danger of pissing you off, or making you feel annoyed an upset does not meet, in any state/law anywhere the criteria for "pull my gun". It doesn't even meet the criteria for a crime. It's just being an asshole. And sadly, that's not illegal.

As to the "what should I wear" question, it depends where your going. If you wear something out of sorts for where you're going, you're gonna get a lot of attention. Wear the most modest evening gown in the world to Home Depot, people are going to stare. Wear you muddy jeans and stained flannel shirt to a polo club, people are going to stare. And that applies for me too, if I wear a tux to the swimming pool, you guessed it, people are going to stare. And, for women, I do firmly believe, it is different because if you happen to be really attractive and/or wear something tight, even if it's appropriate, people are going to stare. Some will say something, most won't but many will stare.

[This message edited by Rideitout at 2:16 PM, April 5th (Friday)]

This topic has clearly devolved to the point of absurdity. This talk of guns and carrying around tasers is insane.

This all started because another poster earnestly asked what they could do to help in such situations...... Some good faith suggestions were made. Nobody suggested inserting yourself into situations of violence. There are many things that men can do to diffuse situations.

My experience is that in most cases, social disapproval (even if it is just disapproving looks from other guys) can be very powerful. Maybe this guy will just go ahead and do it again when you're not there, but maybe some other guy will see that it's not cool and never do it himself. The more that this behavior is seen as inappropriate, the less likely it is to be done in the future. Regardless if whether this guy does it again however, it is reassuring for the victim in the scenario to feel supported.

Obviously, you're not obligated to do anything. Most people do not (unfortunately). Doesn't make you an ally to women or a righteous person but to each his (or her) own.

No, you don't get to shoot assholes. You don't get to shoot the deli guy because he's looking at your boobs. You don't get to walk down the street in a gstring and pasties and shoot the first guy who says something.

Yup, I am aware of this.

But I can (and do, and will continue to do so) do EVERYTHING in my power to make them feel really uncomfortable.

The last guy I caught leering at me as I walked by, I shouted loudly that he was making me feel uncomfortable for starting at my breasts. Everyone around him looked. He was red in the face. Women and men glared at him. My husband shook his head and said, "Dude, what is wrong with you? Why would you treat women that way?"

Pretty sure he will find a way to control his stares in the future or at the very least be more discreet about it.

I do firmly believe, it is different because if you happen to be really attractive and/or wear something tight, even if it's appropriate, people are going to stare. Some will say something, most won't but many will stare.

And again, hence my frustration.

By simply existing, it is apparently implied that I am getting dressed in the morning with the intention to give every dude I pass a raging boner.

I say otherwise? Nope, I'm wrong.

I want to do something to prevent this? Sorry, nothing I can do. Just have to deal with it.

I'm disgusted by it and think that men are perverse? I'm sexist.

I think men can do better? Nope, they can't and shame on me for thinking so.

I'm very done with this thread and the others like it.

I have learned a lot and will change my interactions with men I encounter accordingly.

My experience is that in most cases, social disapproval (even if it is just disapproving looks from other guys) can be very powerful

I guess that was a big part of my response, that in my opinion the dudes who do this often already know its frowned upon and don't care. That the best way to reinforce that to the desperate or hardheaded is with pain. As far as using it as a preventative measure to dissuade others from doing it too, I imagine seeing someone maced or tazed would go much further in that regard.

There is *just nothing* other men can do to hold each other accountable.

FUCKFUCKFUCKFUCKFUCK this. Fuck all of this.

Are other women to blame for not stepping in when my ex wife was raging at me and hitting me in public? If not other women, who? Can't women hold women accountable? If so, where the fuck were all of you, because it happened all the time, and while the inaction of men in this situation bothers you, imagine the barely hidden snickering of everyone when it was happening to me.

We are REALLY fucking good at assigning blame and responsibility, especially when it isn't our own. How about any human supporting any human that is in need of help? Where do the women in this thread stand on intervening in hypothetical bus groping? Where do they stand on intervening in a situation where there is a raging bitch hitting a man on the street? Because I saw that last summer and I fucking stopped and got between them and told the woman in no uncertain terms that hitting anyone is unacceptable, no matter who you are.

Try getting whaled on by someone that you CANNOT HIT BACK sometime. It's a fucking joy.

Don't ever tell anyone it's their responsibility to do something that you haven't done yourself.

By simply existing, it is apparently implied that I am getting dressed in the morning with the intention to give every dude I pass a raging boner.

I don't know any dude that's said that. A few pointed out some ladies do have that intention, but that isn't the same.

Can you show me where in this thread that a man said all women dress for men's attention?

Can you show me where in this thread that a man said all women dress for men's attention?

Isn't that the implication in this whole thread? If we wear something that we like, something that we think is pretty or is the right cut for us, we had better be sure it is appropriately conservative and concealing or we are obviously choosing to give every guy a raging boner? That has been my understanding of this thread. In summary:

Ladies, you have been warned. If you wear something that we men feel is sexy or attractive, you must know that many of us will respond accordingly. So don't be fools; dress conservatively if you don't want this reaction.

Is that not right? How would you summarize this thread, NTV?

[This message edited by OwningItNow at 3:17 PM, April 5th (Friday)]

Dress conservatively = good women who don't want men's attention.

Dress in any way we men see as not conservative enough = bad women who obviously want men's attention.

So when HeartBreaker says "all women dress for men's attention," she means all women who didn't choose their clothing properly that day. Is that right? And if she is not careful enough that day, she will be intending to give every guy improper thoughts? Just because she chose poorly that day?

That makes it all women because on any given day in any given year, we can get it wrong.

[This message edited by OwningItNow at 3:23 PM, April 5th (Friday)]

I don't think men in here are saying (at least right now, I'm not going through this thread and spot-checking responses) "don't dress how you want to", just "yeah, if you dress provocatively, men will notice". And really, I think, men will notice anyway. Nothing's going to change that. There's no point in complaining about wet water. Some men go on to become extremely successful in their careers and have great relationships with their family and friends and demonstrate their value through material things and whatever else you can heap on top of the reverse situation analogy, so should they complain when some women take notice?

"Um, excuse me miss, but I kicked ass in life for *me*, not to attract the likes of *yoooou*."

Just being honest, this is what the argument has devolved into. Doesn't mean you're wrong to be put off by the state of things. The world is full of disappointment. We roll with it and carry on and do as we please, world be damned. That's true empowerment.

Saying that some men are likely to react a certain way to a certain style of clothing (or lack thereof) is the same as an assumption of motivation for what you wear???

Connect the dots for me here.

Lets say I plan walk outta the house butt assed naked in all my dad gorgeousness, and you tell me some women will look and laugh at my abundant nudism. How to we get to the assumption that I'm walking outta the house for giggles?

But I can (and do, and will continue to do so) do EVERYTHING in my power to make them feel really uncomfortable.

The last guy I caught leering at me as I walked by, I shouted loudly that he was making me feel uncomfortable for starting at my breasts. Everyone around him looked. He was red in the face. Women and men glared at him. My husband shook his head and said, "Dude, what is wrong with you? Why would you treat women that way?"

Pretty sure he will find a way to control his stares in the future or at the very least be more discreet about it.

That's great! But see, in this example, you used the operative word. YOU did it. Not your H (although, in this case, he helped). This is something where YOU are the one who can do the shaming, and do the things necessary to change male behavior. Frankly, I can't do it because I don't see it. My trips to the grocery store, I just don't see the men leering at women non-stop. But you do, and YOU are the one who can change it. Sure, I can help, I can shame men when I see it (but I almost never do, they're not looking at me), I can tell that asshole behind the deli counter "not cool man" after the woman who's ordering goes off on him, and I would. But I don't see it, so I can't be expected to act, and, even if I do see it, I have no idea if it's "right" to act. Does she know he's staring at her? F**k, for all I know, it's a H/W out doing a little roleplay. But that's almost entirely hypothetical because I just don't see the world that a lot of women here seem to inhabit. In fact, most of the time, I see men ignoring women. The time I see leering is when a woman is wearing something that's revealing, especially in a place where that's not expected (mowing the lawn in a gstring is going to get leering, no doubt about it, wearing a gstring as a dancer in a all nude bar is probably going to get barely a look).

By simply existing, it is apparently implied that I am getting dressed in the morning with the intention to give every dude I pass a raging boner.

I say otherwise? Nope, I'm wrong.

I want to do something to prevent this? Sorry, nothing I can do. Just have to deal with it.

I'm disgusted by it and think that men are perverse? I'm sexist.

I think men can do better? Nope, they can't and shame on me for thinking so.

Your intention does not matter. Yes, I do think that some women do get dressed with that intent, and, to the OT, are trying to impress men. But, it doesn't matter because they WILL impress (original topic) or "bonerfy" men (much better way to put it) if they wear certain outfits. Intent has nothing to do with the reaction you get. I can wear a terribly offensive t-shirt to an all Muslim neighborhood and stroll around. My intent might be "this is a really comfy tee", but, let me tell you, that is NOT what they will think and they will whip my ass sure as the day is long if I try to pull that one off.

You have every right to be disgusted by it. I don't think it's sexist at all to say that, in fact, I kind of think "your right" and feel the same way myself sometimes. But, of course, my disgust, even at myself sometimes (like the poster who had the "flash image" of the very tall women in a sexual act), doesn't change the fact that it happens to me (and I think a lot of other men) when we see women dressed in a way that we find attractive or seductive.

Can me do better? Probably. We can certainly hide it better; again, the leering deli clerk could avert his gaze, there's not question. But can he stop himself from think "wonder what she looks like naked". I really don't know. I have trouble doing that when I see a woman in sexy clothes (not as much trouble when they are wearing something less sexy, yeah me, I'm not the worst person out there). Some are going to be worse, some are going to be better.

I have learned a lot and will change my interactions with men I encounter accordingly.

I'm not sure if this is a "FU, I'm mad" or your being serious, but, if your serious, good. Because you now have, IMHO a more realistic view and can conduct yourself in a way that aligns with it. Doesn't mean you need to change ANYTHING, but at least you know now that at least some of the time, this is what men are going to think when they see you dressed a certain way. Me personally? I give no f**ks about it. You think I'm hot and are mentally undressing me? Knock yourself out, actually, since your at it, add an inch or two in your imagination. You think "he shouldn't have left the house dressed like that" (something I'm 100% sure a LOT of people have thought about me), again, not a single f**k given. You want to whistle/cat call me? Go for it, I don't care (but this is almost always gay men, not women). Stare away, take a picture, it'll last longer. :) But if you touch me, well, that's different and s**t is gonna get real quick, so, it better be worth it.

so should they complain when some women take notice?

No! As long as those women do not say anything to him, but if they do--yes, he should complain.

A grown ass woman who dresses like this KNOWS that they sending an "UNWANTED MESSAGE"

That will make anybody think that the " unwanted message" is not that "unwanted"

The women are responding to comments like this. We are being told that if we dress "like this" we are sending a wanted message, even if we say we're not and that we were dressing in a way that felt attractive to us.

So we need to be smart, right? And careful? With what we choose? So that all men approve by leaving us alone?

Just trying to grasp the message in this thread.

I mean, I thought I was allowed to choose my own clothing. But it turns out, I'm not. My clothing is not clothing, it's a message. I need to touch each of my pieces of clothing to see if it sparks joy, and now I need to stare at it and understand its message.

I wonder if I should get a ruler out for my shorts? That might help. Are high heels allowed with jeans? What if my jeans are baggy, then can I wear heels? How about sweaters? Is a tank top with a sweater a conservative enough message? What about jewelry? Is that allowed? Maybe I should stop exercising because my muscles could be sending an unintended message.

So many things to think about as I shop and dress and live.

Ugh.... at the risk of getting myself drawn into this already VERY OFF TOPIC debate which I already fear is doing far more harm than good....

I guess that was a big part of my response, that in my opinion the dudes who do this often already know its frowned upon and don't care. That the best way to reinforce that to the desperate or hardheaded is with pain. As far as using it as a preventative measure to dissuade others from doing it too, I imagine seeing someone maced or tazed would go much further in that regard.

NTV - I understood your point when you made it initially. It seems to fall victim to the nirvana fallacy however. Just because a suggested possible solution does not solve the entire problem, does not mean that it does not have merit. I wont go into all the reasons why it would be impractical, unsafe (and potentially illegal) to taze a catcaller/letch/bus groper, in most cases, because that seems pretty obvious.

I agree that most/many of the guys that do this stuff know it is 'frowned upon'**, but they also know they get away with it, often without consequences because most people turn the other cheek. Again, it's up to you whether you want to do the same. You're not obligated to do anything.

**The irony of the phrase "frowned upon" is not lost on me considering I was literally suggesting disapproving looks.

sorry, deleted as realised info too personally identifying irl.

apologies

[This message edited by Edie at 6:18 AM, April 6th (Saturday)]

I am wondering where the Hell everyone lives. I have never noticed any of that going on while grocery shopping. I am not saying it doesn't exist. Maybe I just don't see it. I am usually just thankful I don't have to drag my kids with me. I work with all women. All. In a grocery store for 11 years. I have never had one complain to me about customer harrassment. Being rude and entitled, yes. So, if their is locker room talk and if the past is any indication...it is about me made by women in my locker room at work. Which they have. So, that crosses both sexes. I don't live near the city or construction either. The worst I have seen in calling is parents being douches to their kids and refs playing soccer and hockey.

For the record we didn't say we wouldn't let our daughter go to parties. We would tell her not to drink. She is 10 and we already have the creepy friend's dad talks and make sure she is safe with sleepovers and other girls taking youtube videos. There are men out there that have drugged their daughters friends! WTF! That one serial killer was a father, church member, and boyscout leader for God's sake. My wife was sexually abused as a child by her stepfather and she is proactive and hypervigilent. I will never deny her parenting from her experience. I never want my daughter to go through what she did. Believe me she has a radar for child pervs. She does make some men feel uncomfortable if they are crossing lines she sees. Mainly some dudes from church. One guy made a comment to my daughter last year about being a fine young lady in some worded way that was creepy and she told him it was wildly inappropriate in front of everyone. I wasn't there, I don't go to church.

I need to touch each of my pieces of clothing to see if it sparks joy,

Sorry to go off topic. No shit. My wife did that. Then, she thanked what she gave away. She did that Marie Kondo thing.