Which perspectives are welcome here?

[Fan_of_Meehl]

I really don't want to get back into the whole metoo vs alt right/white supremacists vs 4 chan argument. However, to add to the gender conversation overall I took the advice here and showed the post I made to my wife (she was wondering what I had been reading on my phone). She read the original posts and the follow-ups, understood my point that all three utilized social media to engage groups of people that otherwise may not have come together, and had no idea why other posters became so upset about it. So, another datapoint for everyone. That said, she is not much of a social justice or feminist movement person, though some of her good friends are. And to those that might be wondering, she has no problem disagreeing with me and getting into it.

That said, I am not sure why the OP is equating agreeing with her points to wanting her to be a part of the community. I might not agree with everything she says, but what a boring place this would be if we all agreed with each other!

Good post.

First an assumption and then a question (for the group):

Assumption (for the sake of clarifying other assumptions that may be latent): let's assume that there has been problematic posting behavior (styles?) that are exhibited in the forum.

Question: What is it that is 'problematic,' exactly? Is it:

(a) 'problematic dominant' *behavior* itself, or
(b) that a particular gender/sex is exhibiting dominant behavior?

Is dominant posting behavior exhibited by men 'bad' while dominant posting behavior exhibited by women is 'good?'

Why?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[cara susanna]

Just to clarify - I also consider Aziz Ansari's behavior on the spectrum of sexual assault. Confusion about consent--and gender discrepancies in communicating it--have been documented in research as a factor in sexual assault (not that all sexual assault is related to confusion about consent, of course).

 

[Sanman]

Just to clarify - I also consider Aziz Ansari's behavior on the spectrum of sexual assault. Confusion about consent--and gender discrepancies in communicating it--have been documented in research as a factor in sexual assault (not that all sexual assault is related to confusion about consent, of course).

Speaking for myself, I understood that you thought so. You also mentioned that all of it is not black and white. I personally disagree that it should be characterized as sexual assault, but I also understand how a reasonable person can come to a conclusion different than my own. The conversation starts when we both agree it was not black and white. Counter to that Weinstein's behavior that does appear more black and white to me and there is little for anyone to disagree about in that case. As a friend once called it, the "edge" cases are more interesting as it fosters discussion.

 

[cara susanna]

Speaking for myself, I understood that you thought so. You also mentioned that all of it is not black and white. I personally disagree that it should be characterized as sexual assault, but I also understand how a reasonable person can come to a conclusion different than my own. The conversation starts when we both agree it was not black and white. Counter to that Weinstein's behavior that does appear more black and white to me and there is little for anyone to disagree about in that case. As a friend once called it, the "edge" cases are more interesting as it fosters discussion.

Oh, yeah, that's why I said on the spectrum. Glad I was clear in my initial comment.

 

[StellaB]

Question: What is it that is 'problematic,' exactly? Is it:

(a) 'problematic dominant' *behavior* itself, or
(b) that a particular gender/sex is exhibiting dominant behavior?

Is dominant posting behavior exhibited by men 'bad' while dominant posting behavior exhibited by women is 'good?'

Why?

Speaking strictly for myself:

It is a. No, dominant behavior is not "bad" when by men and "good" when by women; it is "bad" when it is directed at newcomers who are expressing vulnerability (operationalized as identifying as an undergrad / new applicant / first-generation college student / person already overloaded with student loans, etc.), when the dominant behavior has nothing to do with an OP's post or question, when there is a gratuitous amount of self-aggrandizement (e.g. response to a heavily indebted poster with comments about one's personal wealth), etc. There is just a general pattern of male posters engaging in this more frequently than female posters- not exclusively. Not all male posters are doing this, not all posters doing this are male.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

I guess it depends on how the continuum is defined. I see rape with intent as a violent crime that is an expression of power. Miscommunication is not that same. The effects may be similar psychologically. And, of course, could still be criminal and classified as rape. But, to me, they are different continuums because of intent.

I also agree with your comment about affirmative consent being a valuable way of combating the latter issue. The bleed over of that to the aziz situation is why I think that case stands as a jumping the shark moment for some relative to the national narrative on the topic.

And the tricky thing about continua or spectra is that--depending on how far in either direction you stretch the ends of the spectrum--a whole lot of behavior can be placed 'on the same spectrum' that most would agree are categorically different in terms of their impact/importance.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Speaking strictly for myself:

It is a. No, dominant behavior is not "bad" when by men and "good" when by women; it is "bad" when it is directed at newcomers who are expressing vulnerability (operationalized as identifying as an undergrad / new applicant / first-generation college student / person already overloaded with student loans, etc.), when the dominant behavior has nothing to do with an OP's post or question, when there is a gratuitous amount of self-aggrandizement (e.g. response to a heavily indebted poster with comments about one's personal wealth), etc. There is just a general pattern of male posters engaging in this more frequently than female posters- not exclusively. Not all male posters are doing this, not all posters doing this are male.

Thank you, that was genuinely helpful.

 

[StellaB]

I guess it depends on how the continuum is defined. I see rape with intent as a violent crime that is an expression of power. Miscommunication is not that same. The effects may be similar psychologically. And, of course, could still be criminal and classified as rape. But, to me, they are different continuums because of intent.

I think this comment is a good example of the perspective divide that occurs with gender. You are right, of course, intent does change the nature of a crime and the way crimes are prosecuted. However when you think about the perspective of a victim (men can be victimized by women, of course - this was actually my thesis research topic - but it more frequently goes the other way), the intent does not matter. Intent has to do with the mindset of the perpetrator, and very little / nothing to do with the impact on the victim. Having worked with a lot of sex offenders, I can tell you most child molesters do not intent to harm the children, their intent is emotional intimacy. The #MeToo movement is about recognizing impact.

 

[Seven_Costanza]

Speaking for myself, I understood that you thought so. You also mentioned that all of it is not black and white. I personally disagree that it should be characterized as sexual assault, but I also understand how a reasonable person can come to a conclusion different than my own. The conversation starts when we both agree it was not black and white. Counter to that Weinstein's behavior that does appear more black and white to me and there is little for anyone to disagree about in that case. As a friend once called it, the "edge" cases are more interesting as it fosters discussion.

I agree that it is not always so black and white, like in Ansari’s situation. I think the issue that may have been triggering for some members here was dismissing it as a “bad date”, which completely invalidates the experience of so many women when dating. If someone says that they don’t want to engage in further activity, that should be a full stop. There shouldn’t be any more pressuring after that. I went on what I still consider to be a great date, but during the good night kiss, the person kept putting his hand all the way up my dress. And I kept removing it. And he kept putting his hand all the way up. I was able to get out of the situation, but the next day when I told him I wasn’t interested in seeing him anymore, he called me every name in the book. I have a number of other experiences I could share here just from the 2-year period I was online dating. Many of you may not be able to understand how upsetting it can be when someone doesn’t respect your established boundaries because it doesn’t happen to you very often, if ever. This is not just a “bad date” - it’s a major violation.

With that said, I do think that we’re all learning, and thank goodness for that! What was accepted in the past, or even encouraged (“men must be assertive and take the lead”) doesn’t mean we can’t try to be better moving forward. For some of these more gray area situations, I do think that some level of grace should be extended because many just don’t know better. This is not what they learned. And the best way to facilitate this learning is to not shut down or vilify everybody who makes a mistake (again, Weinstein and Co don’t fall into this category), but to continue having open and earnest dialogues about our experiences. This is how change has been facilitated for all of our years.

I consider myself to be a bleeding heart liberal, but I do think this “litmus test”, all or nothing mentality of folks on both sides is doing a major disservice to our society.

Edited to add: by grace, I mean that I still think the behavior should be called out and discussed, but I don’t think the individual should necessarily be blacklisted for life...in these more gray area situations.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Right. Which is why I said, “psychologically similar.”

But, a common scenario of alcohol plus sexual activity amongst consenting adults is one that is prone to miscommunication. Especially, if you throw on young (Eg college) and inexperienced with both. Which again, is not an observation intended to absolve of responsibility either party, but to point out that the issue can be extremely grey and difficult to parse. That’s problematic given the nature of some of the national discussion on the issue.

And I don't think there's a man on this board who would disagree with the following:

1) no means NO
2) it is not okay (and it is assault) for a man to physically continue to attempt sexual escalation when encountering any resistance/protest e.g. (NO in any form)
3) it is also not okay to take sexual advantage of someone whose mental/ physical capacity to consent has been significantly compromised

 

[Seven_Costanza]

And I don't think there's a man on this board who would disagree with the following:

1) no means NO
2) it is not okay (and it is assault) for a man to physically continue to attempt sexual escalation when encountering any resistance/protest e.g. (NO in any form)
3) it is also not okay to take sexual advantage of someone whose mental/ physical capacity to consent has been significantly compromised

I would note that even if all the men on the board would say they agreed with this, actual behavior doesn’t always match up with values. For example, Ansari being vocal about support for the feminist and consent movement while engaging in #2 on your list.

 

[StellaB]

Right. Which is why I said, “psychologically similar.”

But, a common scenario of alcohol plus sexual activity amongst consenting adults is one that is prone to miscommunication. Especially, if you throw on young (Eg college) and inexperienced with both. Which again, is not an observation intended to absolve of responsibility either party, but to point out that the issue can be extremely grey and difficult to parse. That’s problematic given the nature of some of the national discussion on the issue.

I don't think everyone who supports #MeToo is in lockstep with cancel culture, though there is certainly a lot of media spin that this is the case. If that was so, why would the Aziz story have been so fraught and caused so much division within the movement? At the heart of it, I think this is part of what people found so offensive about #MeToo (a new movement started with the intention to make more visible the sheer number of people who have experienced sexual abuse) being lumped in rhetorically with White Supremacy (a long-standing movement responsible for countless murders and horrific violence to assert the continued dominance of one race to the explicit detriment of others) and 4Chan (an amoral site that has become a breeding ground for radicalizing young men, several of whom have posted manifestos there before going on murderous rampages): One of these leaves room for grey areas, the other two... I mean, let's hope this conversation doesn't go the route of defending those?

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

I would note that even if all the men on the board would say they agreed with this, actual behavior doesn’t always match up with values. For example, Ansari being vocal about support for the feminist and consent movement while engaging in #2 on your list.

This is a fair point. People should be held accountable for their actual behavior.

 

[Sanman]

I don't think everyone who supports #MeToo is in lockstep with cancel culture, though there is certainly a lot of media spin that this is the case. If that was so, why would the Aziz story have been so fraught and caused so much division within the movement? At the heart of it, I think this is part of what people found so offensive about #MeToo (a new movement started with the intention to make more visible the sheer number of people who have experienced sexual abuse) being lumped in rhetorically with White Supremacy (a long-standing movement responsible for countless murders and horrific violence to assert the continued dominance of one race to the explicit detriment of others) and 4Chan (an amoral site that has become a breeding ground for radicalizing young men, several of whom have posted manifestos there before going on murderous rampages): One of these leaves room for grey areas, the other two... I mean, let's hope this conversation doesn't go the route of defending those?

Something to be clear about here. I do not believe in the 4 chan craziness or the Alt Right movement. However, I do think that people characterizing them as fringe and dismissing them are making a mistake. 4 chan has 22 million users worldwide. The article below suggests up 11 million Americans sympathize with the alt right. This isn't 10 guys in a basement. There is, unfortunately, an audience for both. As I said in the original post, my comparison is not about intent. Just about the strength of social media in creating communities and movements. Also, it fosters groupthink, IMO.


Study: 11 million white Americans think like the alt-right

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Something to be clear about here. I do not believe in the 4 chan craziness or the Alt Right movement. However, I do think that people characterizing them as fringe and dismissing them are making a mistake. 4 chan has 22 million users worldwide. The article below suggests up 11 million Americans sympathize with the alt right. This isn't 10 guys in a basement. There is, unfortunately, an audience for both. As I said in the original post, my comparison is not about intent. Just about the strength of social media in creating communities and movements.


Study: 11 million white Americans think like the alt-right

And I would suspect they are not 22 million white supremacists on 4chan. If anything, most people perusing that site are probably attracted by the complete lack of censorship and the fascination with car wreck craziness. If you censor speech, it will go underground (and likely become more radical/paranoid). Far better to go light on the censorship so the crazy/dangerous folks identify themselves openly for all to see.

 

[Sanman]

I would note that even if all the men on the board would say they agreed with this, actual behavior doesn’t always match up with values. For example, Ansari being vocal about support for the feminist and consent movement while engaging in #2 on your list.

This is where it gets fuzzy. The original story is gone from a quick search, but Ansari did back down. They watched tv and drank more, he attempted again, they had oral sex and some point, she became uncomfortable, they stopped again, etc. Until she finally left several hours later (or the next morning?). I think that it is something to have a conversation about and to discuss who has responsibility for what. Was there consent that was withdrawn? Did he simply 'wear her down' and so she consented? Etc. There are issues of consent, boundaries, and general dating culture.

However, categorizing it as sexual assault also walks the line of making any guy that misreads any signal and goes too far as as guilty of sexual assault even if he backs down when it is made clear.

Bill Burr does a great commentary on this in his most recent comedy special...

He says "No!" means no

However. "No, you're bad, OMG, we shouldn't" Doesn't necessarily mean no. That is where body language and other things complicate the issue.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

This is where it gets fuzzy. The original story is gone from a quick search, but Ansari did back down. They watched tv and drank more, he attempted again, they had oral sex and some point, she became uncomfortable, they stopped again, etc. Until she finally left several hours later (or the next morning?). I think that it is something to have a conversation about and to discuss who has responsibility for what. Was there consent that was withdrawn? Did he simply 'wear her down' and so she consented? Etc. There are issues of consent, boundaries, and general dating culture.

However, categorizing it as sexual assault also walks the line of making any guy that misreads any signal and goes too far as as guilty of sexual assault even if he backs down when it is made clear.

Bill Burr does a great commentary on this in his most recent comedy special...

He says "No!" means no

However. "No, you're bad, OMG, we shouldn't" Doesn't necessarily mean no. That is where body language and other things complicate the issue.

If I'm not mistaken, I think there was an actual law proposed (California state legislature) that would have required formal (written?) consent prior to engaging in sexual behavior. Talk about a buzzkill.

Edit: quick search turns up a law relating to 'affirmative consent'--but not necessarily written.

 

[GradStudent2020]

Speaking strictly for myself:

It is a. No, dominant behavior is not "bad" when by men and "good" when by women; it is "bad" when it is directed at newcomers who are expressing vulnerability (operationalized as identifying as an undergrad / new applicant / first-generation college student / person already overloaded with student loans, etc.), when the dominant behavior has nothing to do with an OP's post or question, when there is a gratuitous amount of self-aggrandizement (e.g. response to a heavily indebted poster with comments about one's personal wealth), etc. There is just a general pattern of male posters engaging in this more frequently than female posters- not exclusively. Not all male posters are doing this, not all posters doing this are male.

Thank you for breaking this down/explaining it so well.

 

[Sanman]

If I'm not mistaken, I think there was an actual law proposed (California state legislature) that would have required formal (written?) consent prior to engaging in sexual behavior. Talk about a buzzkill.

That's why I bring my lawyer and a registered notary to all my dates. It is getting really expensive to pick up the tab though.

 

[StellaB]

Something to be clear about here. I do not believe in the 4 chan craziness or the Alt Right movement. However, I do think that people characterizing them as fringe and dismissing them are making a mistake. 4 chan has 22 million users worldwide. The article below suggests up 11 million Americans sympathize with the alt right. This isn't 10 guys in a basement. There is, unfortunately, an audience for both. As I said in the original post, my comparison is not about intent. Just about the strength of social media in creating communities and movements. Also, it fosters groupthink, IMO.


Study: 11 million white Americans think like the alt-right

I didn't call 4chan fringe, nor did I dismiss it.

 

[Sanman]

Maybe. But, if we change the culture such that the latter results in not continuing sexual activity regardless of body language, maybe we can reduce some of the misunderstandings.

Teach men to lean towards interpreting no and both women and men to be more clear in communicating their wishes.

Perhaps, but that is where a national conversation about American dating norms needs to take place.

 

[Sanman]

I didn't call 4chan fringe, nor did I dismiss it.

I wasn't speaking to you specifically, rather the general commentary from the discussion and people taking offense generally.

 

[GradStudent2020]

If I'm not mistaken, I think there was an actual law proposed (California state legislature) that would have required formal (written?) consent prior to engaging in sexual behavior. Talk about a buzzkill.

Edit: quick search turns up a law relating to 'affirmative consent'--but not necessarily written.

California’s law regarding affirmative consent?

I’ve NEVER found it to be a turn-off to confirm that my partner actually wants to engage in sexual acts with me. What about that is a buzzkill?

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Perhaps, but that is where a national conversation about American dating norms needs to take place.

Right. I think a lot of people understandibly have concerns about how far the government should go in attempting to regulate non-violent and non-criminal sexual/dating activity. It could quickly get absurd/oppressive.

But conversations about norms and expectations are called for.

Edit: And it must be a two-sided conversation (both men and women) and not unilateral

 

[GradStudent2020]

That's why I bring my lawyer and a registered notary to all my dates. It is getting really expensive to pick up the tab though.

Btw, these are the kind of comments I would call “toxic”.

 

[Sanman]

Btw, these are the kind of comments I would call “toxic”.

These are the kind of comments I call funny. We definitely have different opinions on that matter. I'm not sure how that would get resolved, but thanks for letting me know.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

California’s law regarding affirmative consent?

I’ve NEVER found it to be a turn-off to confirm that my partner actually wants to engage in sexual acts with me. What about that is a buzzkill?

I was speaking more to the fact that there's an actual LAW regulating such a thing. That is, making it illegal, say, for a guy to make a move to hold hands or kiss a girl without formally asking permission ('e.g., may I hold thy hand, fair lady? or, 'may I kiss you now?')

 

[GradStudent2020]

These are the kind of comments I call funny. We definitely have different opinions on that matter. I'm not sure how that would get resolved, but thanks for letting me know.

Yes, exactly. In the midst of a conversation about sexual assault and affirmative consent, you saw an opportunity for a joke. Even after posters are sharing or at least implying that they’ve had these uncomfortable experiences.

This is the kind of behavior that makes it difficult (for some) female posters to engage in conversations here. It is extremely dismissive of others to make a joke here.

 

[GradStudent2020]

I was speaking more to the fact that there's an actual LAW regulating such a thing. That is, making it illegal, say, for a guy to make a move to hold hands or kiss a girl without formally asking permission ('e.g., may I hold thy hand, fair lady? or, 'may I kiss you now?')

I am against over-regulating... basically anything. It’s not a law I find problematic, though. Unless I’ve already verbally given permission, my partner SHOULD confirm I want to engage in sexual behaviors with them. Asking is “making a move”, IMO.

Does the law say anything about hand holding?

 

[Sanman]

Yes, exactly. In the midst of a conversation about sexual assault and affirmative consent, you saw an opportunity for a joke. Even after posters are sharing or at least implying that they’ve had these uncomfortable experiences.

This is the kind of behavior that makes it difficult (for some) female posters to engage in conversations here. It is extremely dismissive of others to make a joke here.

If we stopped making jokes about the human experience comedy would die. My joke was about having formal written consent for dating behavior, not sexual assault or affirmative verbal consent.

 

[GradStudent2020]

I was speaking more to the fact that there's an actual LAW regulating such a thing. That is, making it illegal, say, for a guy to make a move to hold hands or kiss a girl without formally asking permission ('e.g., may I hold thy hand, fair lady? or, 'may I kiss you now?')

I want to add that I don’t hold any ill will towards you for this attitude. Men and women are socialized to think that affirmative consent is a romance killer. Men should pursue and women should play coy, or whatever.

 

[GradStudent2020]

If we stopped making jokes about the human experience comedy would die. My joke was about having formal written consent for dating behavior, not sexual assault or affirmative verbal consent.

Ok. You’ve been asking for examples of the behaviors female posters have an issue with.

Making a joke here (any joke) feels dismissive and patronizing (to me).

You don’t have to agree with me.

 

[Sanman]

Ok. You’ve been asking for examples of the behaviors female posters have an issue with.

Making a joke here (any joke) feels dismissive and patronizing (to me).

You don’t have to agree with me.

And I already thanked you for bringing it to my attention. Simply voicing my opinion on why I don't think it is offensive.

 

[GradStudent2020]

And I already thanked you for bringing it to my attention. Simply voicing my opinion on why I don't think it is offensive.

Humor is great, timing and audience matters.

 

[Sanman]

Humor is great, timing and audience matters.

Agreed, My intended audience was @Fan_of_Meehl.

 

[GradStudent2020]

Agreed, My intended audience was @Fan_of_Meehl.

Ah, ok. So your intended audience is one other poster, even though the conversation is with several.

This is also a behavior that makes this forum unwelcoming.

 

[Sanman]

Ah, ok. So your intended audience is one other poster, even though the conversation is with several.

This is also a behavior that makes this forum unwelcoming.

Well, you can't please everyone. So, why try?

 

[GradStudent2020]

Well, you can't please everyone. So, why try?

That’s a pretty dismissive response. You have asked several times for concrete examples. Some posters have even shared that there seems to be no point in sharing them, as posters are likely to dismiss them, deny them, or otherwise not take those “examples” seriously.

I would have hoped that these “good faith” attempts would help illustrate the concerns shared here.

 

[Sanman]

That’s a pretty dismissive response. You have asked several times for concrete examples. Some posters have even shared that there seems to be no point in sharing them, as posters are likely to dismiss them, deny them, or otherwise not take those “examples” seriously.

I would have hoped that these “good faith” attempts would help illustrate the concerns shared here.

Actually, I never asked for concrete examples. That was another poster.

 

[StellaB]

Actually, I never asked for concrete examples. That was another poster.

Yeah, that was another guy - which, if that guy was making these jokes, I would also take offense, given the rest of his comments on this thread.

I read @Sanman's jokes a bit differently, though it's to personal taste, of course. The rules of dating are changing as women gain more of a voice socially, and some men have anxiety about how to be romantic without doing what Aziz did. Jokes about that anxiety seem like a natural response; kind of a nervous "ok, but if I can't yawn and stretch to test putting my arm around her, what do I do?"

Men seem to underestimate how romantic an honest, "may I kiss you?" comes across. Admittedly, asking rather than just going for it requires a lot more verbal vulnerability, and our culture has ill-prepared most boys to do this, and the risk of shame is high. I feel empathy for that. But not to the point that I think we shouldn't keep moving forward. It all goes back to that saying - men are afraid women will mock them; women are afraid men will kill them. Shame sucks, but coercive sex sucks more.

 

[Sanman]

That’s a pretty dismissive response. You have asked several times for concrete examples. Some posters have even shared that there seems to be no point in sharing them, as posters are likely to dismiss them, deny them, or otherwise not take those “examples” seriously.

I would have hoped that these “good faith” attempts would help illustrate the concerns shared here.

It isn't about being dismissive. That joke was aimed at one poster who "liked" it. I do refrain from joking with or targeting posters that will not get my humor. That said, I won't censor myself because someone in the wider public audience may get offended. That is censoring my free speech and enjoyment of this forum.

 

[msgeorgeeliot]

I agree that it is not always so black and white, like in Ansari’s situation. I think the issue that may have been triggering for some members here was dismissing it as a “bad date”, which completely invalidates the experience of so many women when dating. If someone says that they don’t want to engage in further activity, that should be a full stop. There shouldn’t be any more pressuring after that. I went on what I still consider to be a great date, but during the good night kiss, the person kept putting his hand all the way up my dress. And I kept removing it. And he kept putting his hand all the way up. I was able to get out of the situation, but the next day when I told him I wasn’t interested in seeing him anymore, he called me every name in the book. I have a number of other experiences I could share here just from the 2-year period I was online dating. Many of you may not be able to understand how upsetting it can be when someone doesn’t respect your established boundaries because it doesn’t happen to you very often, if ever. This is not just a “bad date” - it’s a major violation.

With that said, I do think that we’re all learning, and thank goodness for that! What was accepted in the past, or even encouraged (“men must be assertive and take the lead”) doesn’t mean we can’t try to be better moving forward. For some of these more gray area situations, I do think that some level of grace should be extended because many just don’t know better. This is not what they learned. And the best way to facilitate this learning is to not shut down or vilify everybody who makes a mistake (again, Weinstein and Co don’t fall into this category), but to continue having open and earnest dialogues about our experiences. This is how change has been facilitated for all of our years.

I consider myself to be a bleeding heart liberal, but I do think this “litmus test”, all or nothing mentality of folks on both sides is doing a major disservice to our society.

Edited to add: by grace, I mean that I still think the behavior should be called out and discussed, but I don’t think the individual should necessarily be blacklisted for life...in these more gray area situations.

Hey @Seven_Costanza , I know you shared that anecdote to illustrate a broader point, but I wanted to say I’m sorry that you were violated in this way, and that it was in no way an isolated experience while you were online dating.

I was on a really fun date with a great man recently. Toward the end of dinner, our genial waiter thought it would be cool/funny (?) to sneak up behind me and screech BOO! in my right ear while goosing me under my armpits. When I turned around in shock, he registered that he had done something wrong and tried to fix it by hugging me. I said clearly, “please don’t touch me.” But he didn’t stop trying to hug me until my date told him to stop.

To be clear, I share this anecdote not to solicit anyone’s sympathy or reactions. I really had no intention of participating further on this thread, but your story hit home with me. Thanks for your thoughtful comment.

 

[Sanman]

Yeah, that was another guy - which, if that guy was making these jokes, I would also take offense, given the rest of his comments on this thread.

I read @Sanman's jokes a bit differently, though it's to personal taste, of course. The rules of dating are changing as women gain more of a voice socially, and some men have anxiety about how to be romantic without doing what Aziz did. Jokes about that anxiety seem like a natural response; kind of a nervous "ok, but if I can't yawn and stretch to test putting my arm around her, what do I do?"

Men seem to underestimate how romantic an honest, "may I kiss you?" comes across. Admittedly, asking rather than just going for it requires a lot more verbal vulnerability, and our culture has ill-prepared most boys to do this, and the risk of shame is high. I feel empathy for that. But not to the point that I think we shouldn't keep moving forward. It all goes back to that saying - men are afraid women will mock them; women are afraid men will kill them. Shame sucks, but coercive sex sucks more.

I certainly don't think that being more vulnerable is a bad thing. However, from my perspective, using strong language to condemn what some consider coercive and others might consider more normal dating behavior may serve alienate some of the people who's very behavior you are trying to change.

 

[StellaB]

I certainly don't think that being more vulnerable is a bad thing. However, from my perspective, using strong language to condemn what some consider coercive and others might consider more normal dating behavior may serve alienate some of the people who's very behavior you are trying to change.

I think I get what you're saying. At the same time, I think it's a bit too much to ask of an early movement that is just gaining its legs - people speaking up and speaking freely about their experiences of sexual assault - to be concerned with behavior change and how the message is received by others. This stuff is messy. People still risk absolutely everything by coming forward with their stories. Give it time to get to that level of finesse, there is a lot of pent up hurt and rage that has to come out first.

 

[StellaB]

Right, but this is where continuum things come into play to me. Social norms do play some role here. I've certainly had women that are too handsy or familiar, or that invade my personal space a lot. I don't like it. As an example, touching my arm or leg when talking to me. Pretty normal behavior for some, even in professional environments. I accept it, but it does not make me comfortable. Hugging is another. I'm not a hugger. But, many women are, even for acquaintances. I've had, in bar situations, women whom I don't know just come up and kiss me. I'm sure there was alcohol involved. And, perhaps, the privilege of being an attractive woman. If I did it to a random woman, it would be perceived likely much differently. And, I didn't appreciate it. The violation feeling from these types of behavior seem very different to me than a rape/sexual assault continuum. Kind of the physical version of someone making a bad joke or saying something uncouth that reflects a poor upbringing. But, the intent was not to do something bad.

Those things you're describing are not acceptable. I think where people experience this stuff on a continuum often comes down to how many women have experienced the worst end of that spectrum (by stats alone, we're having this conversation with people who have). Being kissed in a bar by a drunk person is a violation. When that happens and you've been raped before, it just starts to feel unsafe to be in public at all, because even though being kissed is way more minor, the flavor of the experience is the same.

 

[Sanman]

I think I get what you're saying. At the same time, I think it's a bit too much to ask of an early movement that is just gaining its legs - people speaking up and speaking freely about their experiences of sexual assault - to be concerned with behavior change and how the message is received by others. This stuff is messy. People still risk absolutely everything by coming forward with their stories. Give it time to get to that level of finesse, there is a lot of pent up hurt and rage that has to come out first.

You may be right and it may get there. Or, it may not. For the moment though, that is where #metoo has limitations and concerns for me and where I become concerned as the rage sometimes alienates those of us who sympathize more often than not. Rather than starting the conversation and establishing norms, and being balanced, it often only focuses on the individual emotions of the (most often female) victim to the exclusion of other issues.

 

[GradStudent2020]

Actually, I never asked for concrete examples. That was another poster.

My mistake.

 

[StellaB]

You may be right and it may get there. Or, it may not. For the moment though, that is where #metoo has limitations and concerns for me and where I become concerned as the rage sometimes alienates those of us who sympathize more often than not. Rather than starting the conversation and establishing norms, and being balanced, it often only focuses on the individual emotions of the (most often female) victim to the exclusion of other issues.

Women are socialized to be aware of the feelings of others, and to acquiesce to the needs of men, which is part of what makes women more vulnerable to abuse in the first place. I hear what you're saying, and I still think it's an expectation that is too high given the current state of things. It puts people in a double-bind: some listeners won't get the message if it's not angry enough (huh, seems made up, she didn't really seem that upset), while others will be turned off by the anger. It's not about changing minds at this point in time, it's about finding a voice. It's not going to emerge pitch-perfect after being smothered for so long, because how could it possibly be?

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

I am against over-regulating... basically anything. It’s not a law I find problematic, though. Unless I’ve already verbally given permission, my partner SHOULD confirm I want to engage in sexual behaviors with them. Asking is “making a move”, IMO.

Does the law say anything about hand holding?

So hand-holding without formal ve

Yeah, that was another guy - which, if that guy was making these jokes, I would also take offense, given the rest of his comments on this thread.

I read @Sanman's jokes a bit differently, though it's to personal taste, of course. The rules of dating are changing as women gain more of a voice socially, and some men have anxiety about how to be romantic without doing what Aziz did. Jokes about that anxiety seem like a natural response; kind of a nervous "ok, but if I can't yawn and stretch to test putting my arm around her, what do I do?"

Men seem to underestimate how romantic an honest, "may I kiss you?" comes across. Admittedly, asking rather than just going for it requires a lot more verbal vulnerability, and our culture has ill-prepared most boys to do this, and the risk of shame is high. I feel empathy for that. But not to the point that I think we shouldn't keep moving forward. It all goes back to that saying - men are afraid women will mock them; women are afraid men will kill them. Shame sucks, but coercive sex sucks more.

I think exchanges like this are useful, where both men and women give their perspective. And I took the joke as laughing at the absurdity of government intervention and regulation of the minutiae of dating and sexual behavior---not making light of rape or sexual assault.

Then again, hand-holding could be said to be part of the same continuum as coitus (just opposite ends) so there's the tricky question of where you draw the line in terms of lawmaking.

 

[GradStudent2020]

So hand-holding without formal ve


I think exchanges like this are useful, where both men and women give their perspective. And I took the joke as laughing at the absurdity of government intervention and regulation of the minutiae of dating and sexual behavior---not making light of rape or sexual assault.

Then again, hand-holding could be said to be part of the same continuum as coitus (just opposite ends) so there's the tricky question of where you draw the line in terms of lawmaking.

To clarify, I take no issue with the joke made and did not misunderstand it as a joke about sexual assault. My issue with the joke is the timing, the context, and the implication that getting a laugh from a buddy is more important than having a reflective conversation about sexual assault and affirmative consent.