This crazy world of witch hunts...

[farflungstar]

So the minister for defense has resigned over making a pass at a journalist and touching her knee. This it seems is sexual assault. WTF. What we don't know is how the woman concerned was behaving, but being a journalist after a story no doubt she was being very nice and perhaps flirtatious and so messages could quite easily get mixed. He got the wrong message, made an awkward pass and touched (oh my god) her knee. For this his life has been destroyed.

I'm a gay man. I see both sides equally. But this is pathetic. There's a huge difference between getting gang raped in a field, or having your tits groped by someone on a train and a man making a clumsy pass. A huge number of relationships begin this way.

He tried it on, she said no. End of story. But it's not - now his life is in shreds. Holy crap.

[Spectral Morn]

So the minister for defense has resigned over making a pass at a journalist and touching her knee. This it seems is sexual assault. WTF. What we don't know is how the woman concerned was behaving, but being a journalist after a story no doubt she was being very nice and perhaps flirtatious and so messages could quite easily get mixed. He got the wrong message, made an awkward pass and touched (oh my god) her knee. For this his life has been destroyed.

I'm a gay man. I see both sides equally. But this is pathetic. There's a huge difference between getting gang raped in a field, or having your tits groped by someone on a train and a man making a clumsy pass. A huge number of relationships begin this way.

He tried it on, she said no. End of story. But it's not - now his life is in shreds. Holy crap.

Firstly Adrian try posting in the right place Secondly are you for real ? You don't ever touch anyone ever without consent ever. Doing so is a violation of consent. And touching someone in a sexual way, groping bum, touching leg, breast, crotch, male or female, done by either male or female is sexual assault.

Plus victim blaming much, the lady didn't ask to be touched or come on to :doh:

I suspect he hasn't resigned over that, but something else.

[farflungstar]

I thought I put it in Blank canvas - is that wrong?

My point was men and women make stupid passes all the time - I've seen it - but to elevate it to a level equal to rape, in my opinion, is ridiculous.

People have touched my knee and made it obvious they were making a pass. I didn't make a complaint of sexual assault - I put it down to the person being an idiot. Things should be kept in proportion. There are some sick individuals out there - to lump everyone in the same category isn't logical.

I'm a teacher and have had students make very overt offers of sex but I'm not stupid and have never encouraged or done anything I might regret. I don't touch anyone period.

But an idiot making a pass is not a rapist.

[Spectral Morn]

I thought I put it in Blank canvas - is that wrong?

My point was men and women make stupid passes all the time - I've seen it - but to elevate it to a level equal to rape, in my opinion, is ridiculous.

People have touched my knee and made it obvious they were making a pass. I didn't make a complaint of sexual assault - I put it down to the person being an idiot. Things should be kept in proportion. There are some sick individuals out there - to lump everyone in the same category isn't logical.

I'm a teacher and have had students make very overt offers of sex but I'm not stupid and have never encouraged or done anything I might regret. I don't touch anyone period.

But an idiot making a pass is not a rapist.

Non hifi topics go in Abstract Chat.

No, but if that pass involves touching, sexually then that is a violation of consent and sexual assault. I suggest you read up on Consent Culture.

http://onlywithconsent.org/blog/consent-culture

It is your choice to decide what is ok for you, but beyond that respect that others may not agree and may feel boundaries were crossed and in a negative way. No one can know how or what an other is feeling, how they react so accept that the folks coming forward feel they were violated and are unhappy with what happened to them. I support them and it is not my place to question their feelings about what happened.

[struth]

Of course we dont really know the context so its difficult to make a comment on it. I dont like people trying to take advantage, especially their position and that happens a lot, but also there has to be scope for an innocent attempt(if clumsy) to get a date etc. It is also true that some folk are overly touchy(pun intended) about being touched, whereas most dont mind too much as long as its not the goodies. The complainant may be one of these or may just be wanting to ake a point, I dont know.
I do find the way the world is going decidedy sad alas, and glad I wont be around that much longer

[Spectral Morn]

Of course we dont really know the context so its difficult to make a comment on it. I dont like people trying to take advantage, especially their position and that happens a lot, but also there has to be scope for an innocent attempt(if clumsy) to get a date etc. It is also true that some folk are overly touchy(pun intended) about being touched, whereas most dont mind too much as long as its not the goodies. The complainant may be one of these or may just be wanting to ake a point, I dont know.
I do find the way the world is going decidedy sad alas, and glad I wont be around that much longer

Its pretty simple, you ask, they say no, or yes, that's it. No touching or groping required.

[farflungstar]

Then if an admin can move it that would be great.

Yes you're right, you never know how a person might take it.

But - the construct that women are not sexual beings, capable of the same as men, is a male construct. I've seen my female friends behaviour when out clubbing or when flirting at dinner - just as bad as my male friends, sometimes worse. But say anything to them and they immediately take offence - the construct - a girl who sleeps around is a slut, a man who sleeps around is a king.

As I say I'm gay - I see both sides. If there is a difference between men and women it's that men are naive and women way more aware.

If a woman feels violated because a man touches her knee then the context needs to be examined. Only a sicko would go uninvited or under a mistaken delusion and touch anyone.

When I was 15 my mom, with whom I was very close, asked me for advice. She was thinking of having an affair with her boss (yes she was married). I told her to do whatever felt right. I realised then that my preconceptions of women were not quite right. They were just the same as men, but couldn't be seen to be so.

I'm sure most guys have touched the shoulder or elbow of a work colleague - without ever thinking of sex. We recently saw what can happen in a sexually repressive state like Saudi Arabia where a guy touched another guys hip in a crowded pub. That is the extreme. Proportion and blame with honesty and context is the best route.

[Edward]

Rumour is that Michael Fallon resigned ahead of a new story about him that will appear in a paper tomorrow. Touching Julia Hartley-Brewer's knee at a dinner 15 years ago was not the reason for the resignation - apparently.

[Spectral Morn]

Then if an admin can move it that would be great.

Yes you're right, you never know how a person might take it.

But - the construct that women are not sexual beings, capable of the same as men, is a male construct. I've seen my female friends behaviour when out clubbing or when flirting at dinner - just as bad as my male friends, sometimes worse. But say anything to them and they immediately take offence - the construct - a girl who sleeps around is a slut, a man who sleeps around is a king.

As I say I'm gay - I see both sides. If there is a difference between men and women it's that men are naive and women way more aware.

If a woman feels violated because a man touches her knee then the context needs to be examined. Only a sicko would go uninvited or under a mistaken delusion and touch anyone.

When I was 15 my mom, with whom I was very close, asked me for advice. She was thinking of having an affair with her boss (yes she was married). I told her to do whatever felt right. I realised then that my preconceptions of women were not quite right. They were just the same as men, but couldn't be seen to be so.

I'm sure most guys have touched the shoulder or elbow of a work colleague - without ever thinking of sex. We recently saw what can happen in a sexually repressive state like Saudi Arabia where a guy touched another guys hip in a crowded pub. That is the extreme. Proportion and blame with honesty and context is the best route.

Already moved.

I agree that women can behave in as wrong away as men can particularly when drink or drugs are in and the wit is out. Behaviour that makes anyone feel uncomfortable is wrong.

Sorry the only thing that matters is the persons feelings, by talking about context you seek to remove or reduce that persons feelings about what happened. Of course it is possible that someone who feels violated and that their consent was not sought and a law not be broken, but in the cases coming up in the media all I have heard so far fall under either sexual assault and rape, which are against the law.

Consent and understanding what it is and how it applies to folks and situations is sadly not that well understood among most people. They just don't think often beyond their own self.

[farflungstar]

Already moved.

I agree that women can behave in as wrong away as men can particularly when drink or drugs are in and the wit is out. Behaviour that makes anyone feel uncomfortable is wrong.

Sorry the only thing that matters is the persons feelings, by talking about context you seek to remove or reduce that persons feelings about what happened. Of course it is possible that someone who feels violated and that their consent was not sought and a law not be broken, but in the cases coming up in the media all I have heard so far fall under either sexual assault and rape, which are against the law.

Consent and understanding what it is and how it applies to folks and situations is sadly not that well understood among most people. They just don't think often beyond their own self.But this argument can equally be applied to the journalist, who may well have been flirting wth the politician to get what she wanted. If that context is true she got what she wanted, a story, he didn't. He tried by touching her knee, as sexually arousing as an elbow, and she said no. End of story. Games. Played all the time.

[struth]

waiting 15 years to bring it up is a bit strong tho;)

[farflungstar]

waiting 15 years to bring it up is a bit strong tho;)No, the climate is right only now. But I've just heard the journalist on the radio say that it was absurd that he's resigned over it. In which case she should have kept her mouth shut.

[Spectral Morn]

But this argument can equally be applied to the journalist, who may well have been flirting wth the politician to get what she wanted. If that context is true she got what she wanted, a story, he didn't. He tried by touching her knee, as sexually arousing as an elbow, and she said no. End of story. Games. Played all the time.

I accept that she feels she was touched in appropriately I won't blame, shame, seek to reduce or dismiss her feelings on the matter - or anyone else's, ever.

[farflungstar]

I accept that she feels she was touched in appropriately I won't blame, shame, seek to reduce or dismiss her feelings on the matter.From what I've just heard on the radio she didn't say sexually assault - the media/witch hunt said it. Which was my initial point.

[Spectral Morn]

waiting 15 years to bring it up is a bit strong tho;)

Not really Grant. Many victims don't immediately go to the police or do what we think they should do, they deal with it, or not, whatever it is and it could be they come forward the next day, years later or never. Frankly I think anyone at any time coming forward should be taken seriously, supported and helped. Sadly though not coming forward on the day, or immediately after the incident means the evidence is damaged or lost so a police case looses its strength and sadly legal action may not be possible.

I can but imagine how difficult it is to deal with these things, and even if you do go to the police and the evidence is strong there is no certainty the case goes through to a prosecution or a successful case.

I think the rest of us should try to understand the difficulties, the sensitivities and be supportive, not judgemental or seek to dismiss others valid feelings about what happened to them.

[farflungstar]

I'm listening to the woman in question on radio 4.

To quote.. it was mildly amusing (the knee incident)... It's a witch hunt..... The most absurd reason in the universe for him to resign.


From the woman involved. As I said. Witch hunt.

[struth]

Not really Grant. Many victims don't immediately go to the police or do what we think they should do, they deal with it, or not, whatever it is and it could be they come forward the next day, years later or never. Frankly I think anyone at any time coming forward should be taken seriously, supported and helped. Sadly though not coming forward on the day, or immediately after the incident means the evidence is damaged or lost so a police case looses its strength and sadly legal action may not be possible.

I can but imagine how difficult it is to deal with these things, and even if you do go to the police and the evidence is strong there is no certainty the case goes through to a prosecution or a successful case.

I think the rest of us should try to understand the difficulties, the sensitivities and be supportive, not judgemental or seek to dismiss others valid feelings about what happened to them.

female reporters are as hard as nails, and someone touching her knee I doubt would actually bother her. They will get a lot more than that at the paper and the ones Ive met can give as good as they get.

[farflungstar]

I don't totally disagree with dalek in principle. But sanity must be applied. We live in the real world where both sexes play games. Where things rightly or wrongly were a little different 15 years ago. The fact that people treated me like crap 15 years ago does not mean I am going to take them to a tribunal today for homophobic reasons - that was then and now is now. Likewise touching a knee or propositioning someone 15 years ago should be past history.

There are limits, rape was illegal then and is now. But chatting up a girl and being a bit touchy was acceptable. What next - ban the Carry on films - pray God no!

[perlogalism]

Well I'm going to put my head above the parapet and say I'm with Adrian on this. As the Journalist herself has said, "I believe it is absurd and wrong to treat workplace banter and flirting - and even misjudged sexual overtures - between consenting adults as being morally equivalent to serious sexual harassment or assault." She goes on to say that doing so demeans genuine victims of REAL offences.
There's some news this evening that another MP has been accused of "asking someone out"......... I seriously doubt the future of the human race if we can't risk asking someone out or making a "clumsy" pass at them without being vilified.

Right, I'm off my soapbox now... ;-)

[montesquieu]

I'm with Adey on this. It's clear that abuse of power for sexual favours shouldn't be tolerated. But it's all getting a bit silly and out of proportion. I feel really sorry for my 19 year old lad. I was chatting to him once about a girl he fancied at his school, but he was 17 and she was 15 and there was no way he'd even ask her out in case he got into trouble over it. Terror of getting on the wrong side of PC in word, deed or even thought is drummed into them now from an early age and a sensitive lad like him listens and takes it all in without any common sense filter that an adult born a few years earlier would apply. Be no surprise if he's still living with his mum at 30 at this rate.

An ex of mine made a very clear and obvious move on me after an office do when she was 19 and I was 34 - I had been (I thought subtly) flirting with/courting her boss for some weeks and but it became clear that night she was attempting to cut in. (Successfully as it turned out). She wasn't my subordinate, just a junior employee - but would I be so bold these days to take her up on it, especially after a night on the sauce (both of us)? Could I be hauled in front of a court some day? (This is over 20 years ago I hasten to add and we went on to have a relationship. But what if we hadn't?).

Several great articles in today's Spectator on the topic. Not sure if they can be read by non-subscribers but I'll give the links anyway.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/11/am-i-the-only-one-to-find-the-metoo-ing-over-harvey-weinstein-a-little-creepy/

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/11/the-sexual-reformation-has-opened-up-a-schism-between-women-and-men/

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/11/the-consequence-of-this-new-sexual-counter-revolution-no-sex-at-all/

[ReggieB]

I agree too. It's not wrong to make an advance, what is wrong is to ignore the rejection of that advance.

[Len Co]

I agree too. It's not wrong to make an advance, what is wrong is to ignore the rejection of that advance.

Agreed. Where's it all going? Now (some say) you have to ask permission to kiss someone apparently otherwise it's assault.
No, you get to a point where you think it's allowable, desired even, and try it. Applies to men and women.
Soon we'll have to be asking permission to ask permission! Pre-kiss agreements perhaps.

[montesquieu]

Agreed. Where's it all going? Now (some say) you have to ask permission to kiss someone apparently otherwise it's assault.
No, you get to a point where you think it's allowable, desired even, and try it. Applies to men and women.
Soon we'll have to be asking permission to ask permission! Pre-kiss agreements perhaps.

As it says in one of the links I posted, army officers in the UK are being recommended to get FILMED consent before jumping into bed. Could be the way the world is headed.

[Macca]

if I'd took a woman out on a date and touched her knee that is fine, you are already on a date, so that hurdle has been cleared. In the example cited in the o/p the bloke is being interviewed in a professional capacity, he is not on a date with the woman, in that situation knee touching without consent is therefore overstepping the boundaries.

Not in any serious way, granted, and any women who went to the authorities about something so trivial needs marking down as a potential bunny boiler. But still crossing a boundary that anyone without mental health issues should be aware of.

That aside it is a bit of an odd come-on anyway. Is that how they teach them to pull birds at Eton? 'Don't bother chatting them up or asking them out first or anything, just start touching and bob's yer uncle.'

[struth]

its all gone to the dogs. Do good liberals always go too far with things as do people with equality issues and human rights. Certainly feel for young folk just coming into all this minefield of issues. Like smacking your kids, you cant. you cant even grab them when they are trying to just do what they want, so you end up with a parent either breaking the law or letting the kid go to hell. I never hit my kids but it was on the menu, and tbh thats all it needs to be.

[montesquieu]

if I'd took a woman out on a date and touched her knee that is fine, you are already on a date, so that hurdle has been cleared. In the example cited in the o/p the bloke is being interviewed in a professional capacity, he is not on a date with the woman, in that situation knee touching without consent is therefore overstepping the boundaries.

Not in any serious way, granted, and any women who went to the authorities about something so trivial needs marking down as a potential bunny boiler. But still crossing a boundary that anyone without mental health issues should be aware of.

That aside it is a bit of an odd come-on anyway. Is that how they teach them to pull birds at Eton? 'Don't bother chatting them up or asking them out first or anything, just start touching and bob's yer uncle.'

I agree it's a weird way of signalling anything.

[struth]

she might have been giving him the come on, although not meaning to. x-ed signals happen all the time ffs

[Macca]

You can still physically chastise your children, in the UK at least, smack on the legs or suchlike is okay. You can't take your belt off to them no more though.

Surprising how many people I know who think any level of corporal punishment is 'barbaric'. God only knows where they get that from. Of course their children are nasty little spoiled brats who are going to get eaten alive in the real world, but what great parents they are.

[struth]

not in Scotland now.

[montesquieu]

You can still physically chastise your children, in the UK at least, smack on the legs or suchlike is okay. You can't take your belt off to them no more though.

Surprising how many people I know who think any level of corporal punishment is 'barbaric'. God only knows where they get that from. Of course their children are nasty little spoiled brats who are going to get eaten alive in the real world, but what great parents they are.

Hell is Other People's Children.

It's amazing how many parents let their kids make complete nuisances of themselves in restaurants - I thought that's what McDonalds was for. Discipline is no longer a thing it seems.

Grant is correct any kind of corporal punishment has been banned north of the Border by the SNP ... they have the initials the wrong way round it stands for Nanny State Party (or perhaps National Socialist Party - that's true to their 1930s roots at least).

It seems that the more useless they are at running health, education, police etc, the more they double down on ordering citizens about ... minimum alcohol pricing, smoking (banned just about anywhere now never mind in pubs), reducing the drink drive limit (under a great pretense that drink drive accidents are generally down someone who has one pint) etc etc etc.

[WESTLOWER]

You can still physically chastise your children, in the UK at least, smack on the legs or suchlike is okay. You can't take your belt off to them no more though.

Surprising how many people I know who think any level of corporal punishment is 'barbaric'. God only knows where they get that from. Of course their children are nasty little spoiled brats who are going to get eaten alive in the real world, but what great parents they are.

Martin, Hitting a child is basically not right. I have 2 grown up 'kids' 20 & 25, I smacked them both. I regret it, it really didn't achieve anything, it was a glaring sign i had lost control of the given situation and my own self control.
I was brought up smacked, and, like the argument for smacking goes, "it never did me any harm". Well it did actually, it taught me that physically striking a child was OK. The result was me doing it to mine.
It's a lazy way of dealing with your off spring and I reckon it does have latent lasting effects on the kid, even if it means they go into adulthood thinking hitting is ok.

Sorry, It's a load of bollocks to say without striking your child he/she will turn into a feral brat.

[struth]

The famous John Brown would decide on a punishment say of 12 smacks with the belt. first he gave the kid six then made the boy give him 6. cured the kids of being bad.;)

[WESTLOWER]

Hell is Other People's Children.

It's amazing how many parents let their kids make complete nuisances of themselves in restaurants - I thought that's what McDonalds was for. Discipline is no longer a thing it seems.

Totally agree it's bloody annoying to have your meal/ drink ruined by kids...but lets get it right, that's not the kids, thats the poxy parents. The parents just need to respect other people around them and control
the kids. That doesn't have to be physical. Take time out to explain BEFORE you enter the restaurant the kids boundaries, they are quick kids, they actually get it!

[Macca]

Sorry, It's a load of bollocks to say without striking your child he/she will turn into a feral brat.

I never said that, and there are plenty of feral brats who did get belted.

I certainly don't agree with administering corporal punishment in anger, or because you have lost control. Discipline needs to be imposed without emotion for it to be truly effective.

Done correctly there is nothing 'wrong' with physical discipline. The most upsetting idea to me is the one that says that it is acceptable that the 'Government' can dictate how I raise my children (if I had any).

[walpurgis]

Bring back the birch I say! :eek:

[struth]

I never said that, and there are plenty of feral brats who did get belted.

I certainly don't agree with administering corporal punishment in anger, or because you have lost control. Discipline needs to be imposed without emotion for it to be truly effective.

Done correctly there is nothing 'wrong' with physical discipline. The most upsetting idea to me is the one that says that it is acceptable that the 'Government' can dictate how I raise my children (if I had any).

It only works, like shouting, when done rarely. Usually the threat of it is enough to wise up kids who have just got too high. If you yell at kids all time, like someone across rd from me, the kid just now ignores it because it has lost its meaning

[walpurgis]

Unlike my daughter, who shouts all the time at them, I don't shout at the grand kids. If things get silly, I just say 'enough' firmly. That tends to work, 'cos they know I mean it!

[Macca]

Unlike my daughter, who shouts all the time at them, I don't shout at the grand kids. If things get silly, I just say 'enough' firmly. That tends to work, 'cos they know I mean it!

Yep that's like my granddad was. He never actually had to even raise his hand to us, we were that scared of him. But he would have belted us one if we had pushed him to it.

[WESTLOWER]

Done correctly there is nothing 'wrong' with physical discipline. The most upsetting idea to me is the one that says that it is acceptable that the 'Government' can dictate how I raise my children (if I had any).
Well Lets agree to disagree.. IMO it's wrong to strike a child. Period. They will just either fear you or hate you..not respect you. With fear of patronising you, I can see you are not a parent with comments like
"Discipline needs to be imposed without emotion for it to be truly effective" ..... Kids can & will drive you bloody mad most of the time, you try not getting emotional with that situation.
There Martin is the crux... it's virtually impossible to be a parent and not be emotionally stretched and rinsed. What did you envisage, Dad stepping calmly from his study, with pipe and cardy clad, to impose the much needed discipline in a controlled manner!?
Hilarious!

I also don't like that lot telling me how to bring up my lot either, but telling us we can't strike our kids ain't a biggie though, it's a bloody no brainer, unfortunately some folk do actually need boundries to keep them in check!

[Macca]

Well Lets agree to disagree.. IMO it's wrong to strike a child. Period. They will just either fear you or hate you..not respect you. With fear of patronising you, I can see you are not a parent with comments like
"Discipline needs to be imposed without emotion for it to be truly effective" ..... Kids can & will drive you bloody mad most of the time, you try not getting emotional with that situation.
There Martin is the crux... it's virtually impossible to be a parent and not be emotionally stretched and rinsed. What did you envisage, Dad stepping calmly from his study, with pipe and cardy clad, to impose the much needed discipline in a controlled manner!?
Hilarious!

I also don't like that lot telling me how to bring up my lot either, but telling us we can't strike our kids ain't a biggie though, it's a bloody no brainer, unfortunately some folk do actually need boundries to keep them in check!

True I am not a parent so maybe some patronising of me is necessary ;). But my dad belted me and my brothers, when it was warranted and sometimes when it wasn't. We did not fear or hate him but we did love and respect him. These things are never that clear-cut.

[WESTLOWER]

True I am not a parent so maybe some patronising of me is necessary ;). But my dad belted me and my brothers, when it was warranted and sometimes when it wasn't. We did not fear or hate him but we did love and respect him. These things are never that clear-cut.
Agreed but kids need protecting from potentially bully adults. I think we would all agree to that.

Thinking back to my childhood...
I was giving my mum a load of mouth (relatively speaking) back in the 70's, she was taking a loaf of frozen bread form the freezer...she snapped, she didn't even think about it, she spun round and belted me across the nut with it.
Looking back it was very funny, she'd probably have the social workers on her now for that. :lol:
My ol' man never hit me, not once, he just had to do THE LOOK...it was enough, it shit the life out of me. job done!

[Macca]

IIRC violence was every where back then. You'd get hit at school, hit at home, even strangers were not averse to giving lippy children 'a clue round the ear' as my granddad called it. Children were tough nuts and even those who were not (like me) had to be that way or you would just become a target. Children today, speaking from my general observations, seem more relaxed and less violent so that is a good thing I suppose.

[karma67]

It is also true that some folk are overly touchy(pun intended) about being touched, whereas most dont mind too much as long as its not the goodies.

i dont mind being touched by the goodies,how ever i draw the line with the giant cat up the post office tower!!

[Macca]

i dont mind being touched by the goodies,how ever i draw the line with the giant cat up the post office tower!!

That did cross the line I agree. But it was 'The Seventies'. Buckaroo!

[farflungstar]

I just listened to any questions - I didn't know wolf whistling was a criminal offence and sexual harassment. Does this mean that saying someone looks nice is also forbidden, which in effect is what a wolf whistle means? I know a few women whose day is made if someone says that or whistles at them. Thank God I'm gay and closer to the grave than the crib!

[walpurgis]

I won't get in trouble, I can't whistle.

[Ninanina]

If only I could get a wolf whistle these days... :D

On a serious note when I did get wolf whistles I can assure you it didn't "make my day".. just felt rather embarrassed to be honest ;)

[farflungstar]

If only I could get a wolf whistle these days... :D

On a serious note when I did get wolf whistles I can assure you it didn't "make my day".. just felt rather embarrassed to be honest ;)I think that makes the point - everyone is different. That then begs the question - where do we set the limits, to favour who?

[karma67]

hmm tough one,lets ask Bernard Manning :D

[Ninanina]

I think that makes the point - everyone is different. That then begs the question - where do we set the limits, to favour who?

Well I guess if something could be taken offensively then one shouldn't do it.. just a thought ;)

[montesquieu]

When I hear wolf whistles and the like, or some bunch of oiks flashing lights and shouting things out of van windows at women or girls walking along the street minding their own business, I just cringe. It's an embarrassment to be male, I feel for the poor woman who could be my daughter, wife, or whatever, and think how awful it must be to have to put up with that shit.

Getting admiration from someone you are close to, or who you fancy is one thing, but having to deal with that sort of brutish ignorance from the dregs of society is something different entirely.

I'm not saying it should be criminalised though - it's just bloody bad manners.

[farflungstar]

Good no!

I often tell my female students they look fantastic, they know I'm gay so I don't see how they could take offence. I also say it to guys on the rare occasion they've made the effort! It depends on how it's said. I'm an extremely popular teacher so I don't think I've offended anyone - but I don't see how complimenting someone can be bad - unless whispered in a pervy way or something.

[Ninanina]

Good no!

I often tell my female students they look fantastic, they know I'm gay so I don't see how they could take offence. I also say it to guys on the rare occasion they've made the effort! It depends on how it's said. I'm an extremely popular teacher so I don't think I've offended anyone - but I don't see how complimenting someone can be bad - unless whispered in a pervy way or something.

Now that's a completely different thing entirely, of course no one would take offence to that

[farflungstar]

When I hear wolf whistles and the like, or some bunch of oiks flashing lights and shouting things out of van windows at women or girls walking along the street minding their own business, I just cringe. It's an embarrassment to be male, I feel for the poor woman who could be my daughter, wife, or whatever, and think how awful it must be to have to put up with that shit.

Getting admiration from someone you are close to, or who you fancy is one thing, but having to deal with that sort of brutish ignorance from the dregs of society is something different entirely.

I'm not saying it should be criminalised though - it's just bloody bad manners.I agree Tom. But a builders wolf whistle as a pretty girl walks by isn't such a crime - but again that's in my eyes and everyone is different. A load of louts behaving like w*nkers isn't acceptable.

[Ninanina]

I agree Tom. But a builders wolf whistle as a pretty girl walks by isn't such a crime - but again that's in my eyes and everyone is different. A load of louts behaving like w*nkers isn't acceptable.

Absolutely not a crime but I can assure you it's not the most pleasant thing I've ever experienced either...

[farflungstar]

Now that's a completely different thing entirely, of course no one would take offence to thatI think the same. BUT imagine I do that in an English classroom with a radical feminist student. She complains. I'm hauled offer the coals and for her sake my other students lose out.

[montesquieu]

I agree Tom. But a builders wolf whistle as a pretty girl walks by isn't such a crime - but again that's in my eyes and everyone is different. A load of louts behaving like w*nkers isn't acceptable.

You have to think of it from a woman's point of view. Physically they are vulnerable, fragile, compared especially to the build on manual workers. They have no choice in the matter. Putting myself in their place I'd certainly feel threatened and uneasy, which is no way to make anyone feel. It would piss me off for sure.

Women have to put up with all sorts. One of my wife's (academic) male colleagues was incredibly rude to her recently. She handled it well, but it occurred to me that I bet he wouldn't talk to one of his male colleagues like that - too much of a risk it would end up in the car park. Which is where he would have ended up if he'd spoken to me like that.

[farflungstar]

Yes it's obvious I have no agenda - but it will be a sad world when a man cannot compliment a pretty girl. It's a difficult dilemma - but either extreme is wrong.

Personally I think men (some) treat women atrociously and need stringing up. But equally I think women need to be honest about themselves.

[farflungstar]

You have to think of it from a woman's point of view. Physically they are vulnerable, fragile, compared especially to the build on manual workers. They have no choice in the matter. Putting myself in their place I'd certainly feel threatened and uneasy, which is no way to make anyone feel. It would piss me off for sure.

Women have to put up with all sorts. One of my wife's (academic) male colleagues was incredibly rude to her recently. She handled it well, but it occurred to me that I bet he wouldn't talk to one of his male colleagues like that - too much of a risk it would end up in the car park.I agree with you Tom, but some girls don't like it and some do. Maybe for that reason it should be discouraged, but not criminalised with a record on the sex offenders register. No one should feel uncomfortable walking down the street - but there has to be sensible limits.

For example, I don't think anyone should be charged for calling me names - even though that is homophobic and illegal, which I don't agree with. It's only a name.

[WESTLOWER]

Yes it's obvious I have no agenda - but it will be a sad world when a man cannot compliment a pretty girl. It's a difficult dilemma - but either extreme is wrong.

Personally I think men (some) treat women atrociously and need stringing up. But equally I think women need to be honest about themselves.
Complimenting women can be done with manners and respect..

[Ninanina]

Complimenting women can be done with manners and respect..

+1

[farflungstar]

Complimenting women can be done with manners and respect..Again I agree. That's the problem, trying to untangle the complexities of communication or a blanket ban. The latter is easier but is a sad option.

[struth]

I remember a guy on a site doing this with a woman walking his way.. turned out when she got close she was about 70;) Guess who was embarrased most.
He never did it again.:D

[farflungstar]

I guess maybe this isn't my area of expertise, but I have a couple of friends like Bev who feel uncomfortable when someone whistles at them, and a few who spend half an hour psychoanalysing why no one whistled at them. Difficult to apply rules to suit everyone.

[Minstrel SE]

I am just open mouthed that Weinstein and others think they can get away with that sort behaviour. Not only do they assume they are untouchable but they get away with it for long periods of time which beggars belief.

Sexual assault is criminal behaviour and a criminal offence. Serious bullying and manipulation comes under the law of criminal harrassment.

I know there are reasons but I do have a hard time understanding why the matter was not reported immediately.

I have been well brought up with standards of common decency. Its not even that...I know the boundaries stop well before touching people or making lewd suggestions especially from a position of power.

It seems endemic in society and the Weinstein case heightens the awareness. Maybe some good comes out of these major stories in that we can start to clamp down on this sort of abuse.

All these names start to come up of actors and abuse happening say 20 years ago. I dont understand why it was not reported at the time to let the courts decide.

Is there a grey area with this? I just see mental illness and criminal behaviour in a society where people cant control themselves. Why are we still dealing with this in 2017?

[farflungstar]

I am just open mouthed that Weinstein and others think they can get away with that sort behaviour. Not only do they assume they are untouchable but they get away with it for long periods of time which beggars belief.

Sexual assault is criminal behaviour and a criminal offence. Serious bullying and manipulation comes under the law of criminal harrassment.

I know there are reasons but I do have a hard time understanding why the matter was not reported immediately.

I have been well brought up with standards of common decency. Its not even that...I know the boundaries stop well before touching people or making lewd suggestions especially from a position of power.

It seems endemic in society and the Weinstein case heightens the awareness. Maybe some good comes out of these major stories in that we can start to clamp down on this sort of abuse.

All these names start to come up of actors and abuse happening say 20 years ago. I dont understand why it was not reported at the time to let the courts decide.

Is there a grey area with this? I just see mental illness and criminal behaviour in a society where people cant control themselves. Why are we still dealing with this in 2017?I don't think anyone would disagree with you. The length of time thing also raises questions, but perhaps it's about people feeling able to raise the issue. Without a doubt there are sexual predators, but there are also clumsy stupid people, and also the totally naive. It's a minefield.

[Macca]

IAll these names start to come up of actors and abuse happening say 20 years ago. I dont understand why it was not reported at the time to let the courts decide.

Is there a grey area with this? I just see mental illness and criminal behaviour in a society where people cant control themselves. Why are we still dealing with this in 2017?

As far as the Weinstein situation goes it appears that they were worried that it would end their careers. Which it might well have done. 'You'll never work in this town again' was not an empty threat coming from him.

[montesquieu]

I know there are reasons but I do have a hard time understanding why the matter was not reported immediately.

[...]

All these names start to come up of actors and abuse happening say 20 years ago. I dont understand why it was not reported at the time to let the courts decide.



It's plain as day why people didn't report it - Weinstein had a huge amount of power in the entertainment industry, some women literally did not work again in Holywood after rejecting him (he even had a film part taken away overnight from one actress's boyfriend).

Then there's the question of who gets believed (as we say with Saville, Rolf Harris etc) - some unknown/ordinary person, or some big shot with pots of money and connections? It's perfectly understandable how in this sort of culture people are too scared to report things.

[struth]

Its always been this way tho and probably always will be, to an extent. That is one of powers' attractions. Royal family silenced many folk as did pretty much every leader.. Hell, Truman was once in the KKK;)

[ReggieB]

I agree too. It's not wrong to make an advance, what is wrong is to ignore the rejection of that advance.

Having watched this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv1vDXGTO-k

I think I should add: It is also wrong to make an advance in a situation where it is impossible or very difficult for the other party to reject that advance.

[farflungstar]

I was listening to any answers today on radio 4 and this was the main topic. Of 3 women who called re wolf whistling one liked it, one didn't really have an opinion, the third didn't like it. Pretty balanced. But when a woman caller mentioned that she'd seen female work colleagues sexually harassing v male colleagues on numerous occasions it was acknowledged but not explored, where as a woman caller was encouraged to talk by about her sexual harassment. Let's be honest - this debate will not be balanced.

[farflungstar]

In my opinion this is a symptom of a much bigger issue and one in which the media is absolutely complicit along with the fashion industry. They've made it their job to sell sex, and aided in the sexualisation of kids.

The feminist brigade are hypocritical - they laude stars such as Beyonce as female icons - someone who dresses in as little as possible on stage and shakes her ass and t*ts in the faces of male audience members. (Surely sexual harassment). Kids copy her style and actions - meanwhile boys watch vile porn on their mobiles where women wearing the same clothes and behaving in the same way are victimised by men. WTF. How are the next generation supposed to know how to interact appropriately?

I've had this discussion in class on many occasions - girls always say the same, it is their right to dress and behave like a whore if they wish - but not for a man to respond. I find the argument flawed and thank God I'm gay where the rules are a little more clear cut.

[Len Co]

I've had this discussion in class on many occasions - girls always say the same, it is their right to dress and behave like a whore if they wish - but not for a man to respond. I find the argument flawed and thank God I'm gay where the rules are a little more clear cut.

I've had this clothing discussion with my wife several times - some (a lot actually) of girls and women wear such tight leggings and jeans that there is little left to the imagination, ditto low-cut and tight tops, and ultra-short skirts. Teenage schoolgirls walking down my road have skirts at least half-way up their thighs. Of course it's their right but they should realise that boys and men find that very attractive and provocative and might generate an inappropriate or offensive response.
If men paraded down the high street in ballet tights with their 'lunch boxes' on full view that would undoubtedly be labelled disgusting and probably classed as harassment.i agree this debate will never be balanced, it is overflowing with PC and the moral high ground and takes no account of normal human wiring.
Of course I in no way condone rape or sexual harassment but this dress thing does perplex me. Seems like ladies want to show themselves off and be ignored simultaneously. (My wife has no answer by the way)

[karma67]

thank God I'm gay .
oh the ironie,there's a 40 page thread right there :D

[farflungstar]

I am neither sexist or a mysogonist - I rant at my female students everytime they say mis padres (my fathers and not parents) mis hijos (my son's refering to daughters) etc. Spain is terrible that way. Women should have 'exactly' the same rights as men, period. But no more than men - it should be balanced and equal - and honest.

Stop the porn industry, stop Vogue etc promoting women as nothing more than meat and stop the fashion industry from putting it into stores. Then we can say that yes, how a woman dresses has no negative impact on them.

No one should ever violate a woman's right to say no - but equally Beyonce or anyone else should not be allowed to titillate men through their dress or behaviour then cry victimisation. It has to be balanced.

[Macca]

Make burkahs compulsory? That is Islam's answer to the problem.

it isn't a world I would want to live in.

Women dress to impress other women, not to impress men. Okay sometimes they want to impress men, or a specific man, but they don't want any bother from the men they are not trying to impress. If that sounds like they are trying to have their cake and eat it then I'd suggest re-assessing your viewpoint. They should have that right.

I think that blaming the porn industry or the fashion industry for male sexual harassment makes no sense. Men were harassing women long before those industries existed. In fact women have demonstrably had a much harder time of it in history than they do now. Like blaming TV and video games for violence, as though it had never occurred to anyone to use violence before they were invented.

It is always going to happen to an extent and legislation will not prevent it just like it does not prevent robbery or drug dealing or drink driving. The best we can hope for is that there is maintained a climate where it is culturally unacceptable, since that at least will deter the majority of potential offenders. I think we do have that climate currently, at least in the West.

[farflungstar]

Make burkahs compulsory? That is Islam's answer to the problem.

it isn't a world I would want to live in.

Women dress to impress other women, not to impress men. Okay sometimes they want to impress men, or a specific man, but they don't want any bother from the men they are not trying to impress. If that sounds like they are trying to have their cake an eat it then I'd suggest re-assessing your viewpoint. They should have that right.

I think that blaming the porn industry or the fashion industry for male sexual harassment makes no sense. Men were harassing women long before those industries existed. In fact women have demonstrably had a much harder time of it in history than they do now. Like blaming TV and video games for violence, as though it had never occurred to anyone to use violence before they were invented.

It is always going to happen to an extent and legislation will not prevent it just like it does not prevent robbery or drug dealing or drink driving. The best we can hope for is that there is maintained a climate where it is culturally unacceptable, since that at least will deter the majority of potential offenders. I think we do have that climate currently, at least in the West.I agree in part - but go down a dodgy area waving your Rolex around and you're asking fur trouble. Likewise putting your bits on display or behaving a certain way will attract certain types of men and trouble. Turning a blind eye to the effects of porn on the internet isn't wise, many studies of school kids have shown that boys think its normal to treat other girls the same way - wth no respect.

[Tim]

I think that blaming the porn industry or the fashion industry for male sexual harassment makes no sense.
Absolutely Martin.

I'm also surprised (well maybe not) at how many here are still living in caves, amazing how they get the electrickery in there to listen to their Hi-Fi and surf the net.

[struth]

I agree in part - but go down a dodgy area waving your Rolex around and you're asking fur trouble. Likewise putting your bits on display or behaving a certain way will attract certain types of men and trouble. Turning a blind eye to the effects of porn on the internet isn't wise, many studies of school kids have shown that boys think its normal to treat other girls the same way - wth no respect.

There will always be some who act that way but the industry does provide a service of sorts and overall probably prevents more than it causes. Banning just puts it underground and opens folk up to blackmail etc. Like prostitution it's not going to die out

[Macca]

I agree in part - but go down a dodgy area waving your Rolex around and you're asking fur trouble. Likewise putting your bits on display or behaving a certain way will attract certain types of men and trouble. Turning a blind eye to the effects of porn on the internet isn't wise, many studies of school kids have shown that boys think its normal to treat other girls the same way - wth no respect.

Again that assumes that prior to internet pornography men treated women with respect and the problem only started when the porn became available. Since that is demonstrably untrue I would question that there is any causal relationship, or at least that there is any proof of such. IME these 'studies' tend to show what the people conducting them/paying for them want them to show. For example there is a few studies that claim to show that incidences of rape and sexual assault have gone down significantly since access to hard core porn became universal. Guess who paid for those?

Maybe the problem started with the Romans, they liked their porno? But then so did earlier civilisations like your Minoans, Greeks, Indus Valley mob and so on. Loads of pre-historic 'mother earth' statues in the British Museum. Ironically we still have no idea if the makers of these statues displayed them on the mantelpiece or hid them under the bed.

[farflungstar]

It's not about living in caves. What message are your kids receiving watching someone like Beyonce or Rhianan dressed in a sparkly bikini riding an enormous banana whist sucking provocatively on a lollipop and singing equally provocative lyrics?

[farflungstar]

Again that assumes that prior to internet pornography men treated women with respect and the problem only started when the porn became available. Since that is demonstrably untrue I would question that there is any causal relationship, or at least that there is any proof of such. IME these 'studies' tend to show what the people conducting them/paying for them want them to show. For example there is a few studies that claim to sow that rape and sexual assault has gone down significantly since access to hard core porn became universal. Guess who paid for that study?

Maybe the problem started with the Romans, they liked their porno? But then so did earlier civilisations like your Minoans, Greeks, Indus Valley mob and so on. Loads of pre-historic 'mother earth' statues in the British Museum. Ironically we still have no idea if the makers of these statues displayed them on the mantelpiece or hid them under the bed.You're missing my point - I never said it started that way - im saying that don't promote something and then complain when some people, includng kids who had almost zero access to hardcore porn before the internet, get the wrong message.

[Macca]

It's not about living in caves. What message are your kids receiving watching someone like Beyonce or Rhianan dressed in a sparkly bikini riding an enormous banana whist sucking provocatively on a lollipop and singing equally provocative lyrics?

That some people will do anything to make a buck?

Sorry man, but I think that the idea that exposure to sexuality creates rapists and whores a bit nuts. To me it seems to be a layman's version of the whole extreme Christian / Victorian morality thing that supresses anything overtly sexual as bad and wrong and that, to me at least, seems more likely to create people with sexual 'issues' than an outlook that treats it as simply another aspect of normal life.

[farflungstar]

You obviously don't know me.

[struth]

Martin I would agree with a few exceptions

[farflungstar]

Neither have you understood what I'm saying. I have no problem with porn at all. What I'm saying is that it isn't logical for women to put out a given message and then not understand or complain when it is misunderstood either by sexual predators or by the immature, for example kids.

[Macca]

Neither have you understood what I'm saying. I have no problem with porn at all. What I'm saying is that it isn't logical for women to put out a given message and then not understand or complain when it is misunderstood either by sexual predators or by the immature, for example kids.

I understand your argument, I just don't agree with it. It isn't logical to be a sexual predator either. Okay so you could say it is a chicken and egg situation but as I said before the extension of your argument is for women to be fully covered at all times. Otherwise at what point to we draw the line? Legal skirt lengths? Maximum permissible make-up? No more than 2 cm of cleavage visible?

Or are you suggesting that the women self-police their dress and just tone it down a bit? Personally I don't see why they should have to compromise at all. I wouldn't.

[farflungstar]

Boys are not born believing they can abuse women - society conditions them to believe they can. Yes, this has always been true, or at least for as long as we have lived in a patriarchal society. Porn, media etc play their part - its society. So, either accept it or change it. It's not about banning, it's about making choices or finding a balance through education.

[Macca]

Boys are not born believing they can abuse women - society conditions them to believe they can. Yes, this has always been true, or at least for as long as we have lived in a patriarchal society. Porn, media etc play their part - its society..

So you are saying that although our society strongly condemns abusing women in its laws and in its public pronouncements, in fact it covertly encourages it (not necessarily intentionally) through the media?

[Mikeandvan]

Boys are not born believing they can abuse women - society conditions them to believe they can. Yes, this has always been true, or at least for as long as we have lived in a patriarchal society. Porn, media etc play their part - its society. So, either accept it or change it. It's not about banning, it's about making choices or finding a balance through education.

Children should be taught gender equality? I agree, although complete equality of the sexes in the UK and most other parts of western Europe is almost complete, there's still a few areas of inequality, like sexuality for instance. What about faith schools? Private schools? Suppose they have a get out clause?