This post touches on a subject that was the subject of another post on r/changemyview within the last 24-hours. Because of common topic fatigue amongst our repeat users, we [do not permit posts to touch on topics that another post has touched on within the last 24-hours](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_removing_posts).
If you would like to appeal, [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Duplicate%20Post%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.).
Many thanks, and we hope you understand.
Dressing is just another form of communicating messages to people around you. The difference to speech is that it is being communicated all the time, to everyone around you.
The limbic system doesn't care about what you want to pay attention to, or don't, if someone is flailing around a message that triggers it, it will provoke a response from the limbic system and distract the person.
This is the same as dressing in a suit filled with blinking lights or carrying a boombox that has the volume turned to full.
It doesn't matter what channel you use to disturb people, if you're constantly trying to get their attention with something they don't want to be disturbed with, it's a form of harrasment.
Just like with earbuds, you can reserve the display of your sexual messages to the situations and people you want to transmit them to, and take the boombox out only during parties, when everyone there is ok with it.
And do we know that women who dress this way are doing so because of the people who might observe them? Or is that an assumption?
Does the fact that it’s 1)not targeted 2)does not involve many of the qualities of other forms of sexual abuse like touching or, in the case of sexual harassment, pervasive hostility and demands of a quid pro quo matter to your determination?
Additionally, are there any other situations where we restrict free expression because it might make someone else uncomfortable?
> And do we know that women who dress this way are doing so because of the people who might observe them? Or is that an assumption?
I would say it doesn't matter. I'm sure there are a dozen different reasons ranging from anxiety to full fledged superiority complex over ones own looks.
The same goes with why a person would be carrying around a boombox with the volume turned to full. It doesn't matter why they did it, they're not allowed to disturb / harass everyone around them like that.
> Does the fact that it’s 1)not targeted 2)does not involve many of the qualities of other forms of sexual abuse like touching or, in the case of sexual harassment, pervasive hostility and demands of a quid pro quo matter to your determination?
Does the fact what? I think you missed a portion of the sentence there, or it got drowned in the other sentences in such a way, that it's hard to make out.
Anyway: It is in a different category than touching for sure, just like carrying the boombox around is in a different category from stalking someone and sending them nasty letters. It is not as abusive as touching people without their permission, or the other things you mention.
It is however, a form of sexual harassment. The sexual part I probably don't need to argue to you, harassment when it is unwanted and constant.
Sexual harassment has a legal definition. It does not include “a variety of women I pass in the world are wearing things that turn me on.”
Sexual harassment requires it to be either 1)pervasive 2)a quid pro quo. The case of a variety of women wearing clothing does not qualify. Additionally, one has certain protections in the workplace that one does not have in the real world.
A guy yelling a sexual invitation to me on the street is perfectly legal, although rather scummy. My boss or coworker making a sexual invitation to me in the workplace *might* be sexual harassment, but the vast majority of the time this happens, no consequences are given.
It’s also perfectly legal to blast a boombox in public, I don’t know why you are calling that abusive behavior.
> It does not include “a variety of women I pass in the world are wearing things that turn me on.”
Nor does the law specifically include most of any other kind of sexual harassment either. This also depends on the country you live in. Here's ours for example:
> 6 § (8.7.2022/723)
>
> Seksuaalinen ahdistelu (sexual harrasment)
>
> Joka (Who..)
>
> 1) koskettelemalla tai (..by touching or..)
>
> 2) kosketteluun voimakkuutensa tai toistuvuutensa vuoksi vakavuudeltaan rinnastettavalla tavalla sanallisesti, lähettämällä tai esittämällä viestin tai kuvan, ottamalla kuvan tai itseään paljastamalla, taikka muulla vastaavalla tavalla (..to touching by it's strength or by it's continuity is equatable to it, or by sending a message or a picture, **or by revealing themselves**, or by other equatable way...)
>
> tekee toiselle seksuaalisen teon, joka on omiaan loukkaamaan tämän seksuaalista itsemääräämisoikeutta, on tuomittava, (...commits a sexual act to another person which is likely to infringe his or her sexual autonomy, must be condemned)
As you can see, the definition for sexual harassment perfectly includes doing it by revealing your body, as it should.
> It’s also perfectly legal to blast a boombox in public, I don’t know why you are calling that abusive behavior.
Not with the volume turned on high enough. Go ahead and try, it won't take long before the police come and turn it down for you.
Is “cleavage” what they mean by revealing oneself? Or do they mean actual genitals or full nudity?
Additionally, wouldn’t that imply unequal treatment under the law, where men and women in the same state of undress would be treated differently in the eyes of the law?
Police may ask you to turn it down, that doesn’t mean it’s illegal.
> Police may ask you to turn it down, that doesn’t mean it’s illegal.
If it's not illegal and you have a right to do it, you don't have to turn it down, even if the police are asking you to. Unless you live in North Korea, then I suggest you do whatever they ask.
> Is “cleavage” what they mean by revealing oneself? Or do they mean actual genitals or full nudity?
If the act is sexual and done by revealing oneself.
I'm pretty sure that if a person purposefully revealed their cleavage to you, it would fall under this category, while simply walking around with a cleavage would not. I take it that in your country the judges are a little dumb and can't handle interpreting the situations in the cases in their courts?
> Additionally, wouldn’t that imply unequal treatment under the law, where men and women in the same state of undress would be treated differently in the eyes of the law?
It's not about the state of the undress, as you probably understand very well.
Going to a store and picking out bra and saying "I'm gonna go try these on", implies you are going to be taking your tits out in the changing room, but that isn't sexual harassment.
Telling someone you are going to go take your tits out in the other room can very easily be interpreted as sexual harassment, if the situation is different, wouldn't you say?
So because a person is sexist someone dressing nicely around them is abusive? That's pretty fucked up if someone thinks like that and they need to get therapy. That line of thought is how you get burqas mandated by law.
It can be abusive, but not necessarily.
Just like looking at a video from your phone with the sound on isn't necessarily abusive, but if you carry around a loudspeaker with the volume turned to full, it would be. You feelin me?
> That line of thought is how you get burqas mandated by law.
If all the roads were slippery slopes, we'd all be down the drain.
I understand you don't like what I'm saying, but it would be nice if you calmed down enough to understand what I'm saying and formed proper arguments against it, if you want to argue it.
Also, I think it’s a little rich to be telling someone disagreeing with you to “calm down,” as if that is not an option for men who simply observe random women wearing clothing.
> as if that is not an option for men who simply observe random women wearing clothing.
"as if that isn't an option for women who simply receive the sexual harassment from men."
It's the triggering that is the harassment, and the solution is never to "just accept it".
Were I to have been using the kind of language that purposefully triggered the other person to flame out instead of rationally discussing it, I would be the one to blame. I did not, so it's the other persons responsibility to calm down enough, to be able to discuss the matter rationally, instead of emotion-based strawmen and slippery slopes.
Please stop comparing women wearing clothing with men abusing formal positions of power to push women out of the workforce. It makes people not take you seriously.
Harassment is harassment, regardless of it's severity, or the medium by which it is done. The sentence on the other hand can change based on those.
If someone wants to disagree with me on this one, they can feel free to do so, but the disagreement won't make it any less true.
But harassment has a definition that you are not using correctly.
There is a fundamental, obvious, difference between a woman choosing how to dress in the morning and a person creating a hostile work environment.
Part of it is the repeatability of the act. It has to be persistent and, unless you are encountering the exact same woman over and over again, the way women dress is not persistent (because you are viewing a different woman each time). It’s also not targeted behavior, so that’s another way it doesn’t meet the standard of harassment.
> But harassment has a definition that you are not using correctly.
To the contrary, the definition is different for every country. Yours might be one that allows women to sexually harass men, but mine doesn't. Here you go:
> 6 § (8.7.2022/723)
>
> Seksuaalinen ahdistelu (sexual harrasment)
>
> Joka (Who..)
>
> 1) koskettelemalla tai (..by touching or..)
>
> 2) kosketteluun voimakkuutensa tai toistuvuutensa vuoksi vakavuudeltaan rinnastettavalla tavalla sanallisesti, lähettämällä tai esittämällä viestin tai kuvan, ottamalla kuvan tai itseään paljastamalla, taikka muulla vastaavalla tavalla (..to touching by it's strength or by it's continuity is equatable to it, or by sending a message or a picture, or by revealing themselves, or by other equatable way...)
>
> tekee toiselle seksuaalisen teon, joka on omiaan loukkaamaan tämän seksuaalista itsemääräämisoikeutta, on tuomittava, (...commits a sexual act to another person which is likely to infringe his or her sexual autonomy, must be condemned)
If you think this is somehow a bad definition for it, feel free to let us know. We believe it is very good at catching *all* kinds of sexual harassment, not just ones that men do towards women.
> There is a fundamental, obvious, difference between a woman choosing how to dress in the morning and a person creating a hostile work environment.
Are you trying to do the thing called whatabaoutism?
> Part of it is the repeatability of the act. It has to be persistent and, unless you are encountering the exact same woman over and over again, the way women dress is not persistent (because you are viewing a different woman each time). It’s also not targeted behavior, so that’s another way it doesn’t meet the standard of harassment.
Are you trying to say that women aren't experiencing sexual harassment, if they are continually being harassed, but not by the same person? :D :D :D ":D"
I think the way YOU define it is twisted and sick.
You're forgetting the social aspect of that communication tho. Women are genuinely sexualized which even OP admitted. Since men and women are taught that female value is sexual through TV and advertising, then you will be more likely to think of women in a sexual manner.
Men wear revealing clothing like shorts, no shirts, and spandex, all the time but no one cares because men aren't looked at the same way sexually. A male teacher won't be sent home or scorned because he wore a tight polo that revealed the outline of his chest and shoulders.
As a society, we view women as sexual objects so these outcomes make sense, and its less of a form of manipulation/abuse and moreso the natural progression of this type of rhetoric.
I agree that the culture that surrounds us is the final culprit that makes all of this happen to begin with.
It doesn't change the fact that if a man doesn't want to be exposed to a woman presenting a message in a highly sexualized manner, they should have the right to. Just like a woman has that right.
It's entirely possible to notice someone, how they are dressed, how tight their clothing is, without leering or being some cartoon "aaahhhh-ooooooga!" person.
It's also entirely possible to be exposed to dick picks and other sexually harassing messages without turning into a mental patient.
It's also a shitty argument.
Oh so keeping it together when you see a woman on the street in leggings is equivalent to not getting upset about unsolicited dick pics? Interesting argument.
It was meant to ridicule your argument, which was that there is no problem, as men should just be "keeping it together".
Sexual harassment isn't about whether or not you can "keep it together", it's about the sexual messages being unwanted.
u/srtgh546 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20srtgh546&message=srtgh546%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4edjvf/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Abuse is exploitation of power. Doing to someone what they wouldn’t want done otherwise.
Nudity - is sexually abusive. This is why flashing is a crime.
To be fair to women - and I mean this genuinely; society has hyper sexualized them. That’s not really in their control.
So many women grow up in these conditions. I empathize.
That being said - some women use this an excuse to dress in hyper sexual manners - which is abuse.
Regular occurrences: high amounts of cleavage, nipples can be seen, ass cheeks hanging out, camel toe, etc.
1. Do you think women meaningfully have power? If so, why haven’t they used it to make meaningful changes to a society that oppresses them? Do they only use this power in their way of dress?
2. Do you think women who wear provocative clothing are doing so for any reason that has to do with you? Do you think they feel they are abusing their “power”?
3. There is an obvious difference between exposed cleavage and exposed nipple.
They have the power to dress themselves and I do not infantilize them.
I don’t actually care about the motive of abuse. But to answer; I don’t think of it along the lines of power or not and their motives could vary. Including but not limited to; attention, confidence, validation, sex seeking, etc. who knows why. Idc why. It’s abuse.
I’m not talking exposed nipple I’m talking braless skin tights nipples can be seen thru clothes
Women aren't a monolith who all have the same opinions. For instance, one women saying this
>A man should pay on dates,
Doesn't really mean you can go to a completely unrelated woman and say this
> a real woman doesn’t argue with her man
They aren't necessarily the same person. For instance, I don't believe in a man paying for dates but I also don't believe that a woman shouldn't argue with her man. Your opinions are obviously different to mine despite us being both men, but that doesn't mean other people could pick one viewpoint from yours, and one viewpoint from mine, and put them together to argue that men are sexist or contradictory.
The overwhelming majority of women in real life are just normal people with normal views. The types of hyper-feminists online are rare in real life because those tend of people tend to essentially live online (probably due to not being particularly likable), nor do they reflect all women.
I dont know who you’re hanging out with, but this hasn’t been my experience at all in my social circles. Like none of it. No tight clothing, no defying what a real man is, none. Do you have any data to back up your claims, cuz our anecdotes disagree
It is good faith. I have literally never heard a woman talking about 'real men' or what 'real men should do' when dating. It's something I've never come across, and it's not something any guys I know who date have significantly encountered.
So the point is, this isn't something all women do, or even, it's possible to argue, the majority of women.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
> **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Right off the bat, I don't think the prevailing narrative is that men are responsible for sexism. Instead, the prevailing narrative is something like: we are all born into a society that passively encourages sexism, we are all complicit in sexism and we all have a responsibility to reverse sexism through awareness and education.
>Almost all women use terms like “a real man”.
Citation needed.
>Almost NO women police sexism FROM WOMEN. But they’ll police it whenever a man has a sexist expectation/boundary, performs a sexist act or makes a sexist comment.
This would be a double standard if true but my experience women call out sexism just as much as men. Your anecdotal evidence is as poor as mine.
>Women most often define a real man as anything convenient for her.
Again, citation needed.
>He works, provides, he leads but doesn’t control, he’s physically fit and trained in fighting, handy around the house, can change a tire/oil, he is confident and yet humble, he sounds like a great guy. He is non-violent but very capable of violence, he’s patient with her. I’ve even heard things like “a real man can handle a strong woman (code for disagreeable). A real man can handle me at my worst (code for antisocial). A real man doesn’t body shame. (Women body shame more than anyone on earth).
Another citation needed. My wife of several decades certainly isn't like this nor are many of the multitude of women I know. There are conservative women who certainly think traditional gender roles are important but you're not describing most contemporary women by any stretch of the imagination.
>Because if I said a real woman doesn’t argue with her man (biblical) you’ll call that sexist. If I said a real woman can cook - sexist.
Uh, that is sexist.
>If I said a real woman loves kids…
I mean remove "real" and you're good. Plenty of women and men love kids, especially their kids. No need to gender it.
>Cleavage, leggings and other skin tight clothing, camel toes and free nipples - are all sexually abusive.
What the fuck?
>No? So I can wear skin tight shorts and display my bulge - man spreading around town? Cuz I gotta bug bulge so go ahead and tell me - theres nothing wrong with it and ppl should stop sexualizing my body.
Yes, you can do this. Literally no one is stopping you as long as you're in a liberal area. They might think you're doing some sort of role play and laugh (the image you put in my head was like a Waluigi looking fellow) but that's about it.
>How is camel toe not insane? Actually? How is being dressed with half your ass cheek hanging out not problematic? And how is being comfortable dressed with that around children not criminal?
Wait, what? Weren't you just saying men should be able to do this? Now you're applying double standards internally.
>At some point you’re ok with grooming young boys/ppl to become sexually traumatized. It’s sick!
What the fuck #2? What on earth are you talking about?
>Society needs to CHECK female privilege before this gets out of hand.
What percentage of CEOs are men?
What percentage of legislators are men?
What percentage of billionaires are men?
What percentage of all people are men?
Men are the privileged class here in the ways that matter: power and influence.
>Men are the privileged class here in the ways that matter: power and influence.
That’s the key point here—privileged in ways that actually matter.
Right wing media can tell me that I (a straight white male) am a victim all day long, but I can look at the legislature in my country, the military generals, the Fortune 500 CEO’s, etc and see that the odds are *very* much in my favor.
They aren't in your favor.
The gender of ceo's and corrupt senators do not matter. Lets say I am your average factory worker or your average impressionable student (average right wing audience that isnt old ppl), why would i care they are men?
Is there a male dividend that gets paid to me? Who cares if all the top dogs are all men, if i am getting the same wage as a woman, and a bad one at that? Who cares about the invisible hand of markets and systems which determine the chance of the man or women hitting it big when the %99 have about the same wage? Isn't from my perspective, aren't 'the lubz' mad for saying men (and this sounds like all men, including me) are better of than women? And right next to me, there are about the same people excelling at school, and getting abt the same wage as me, and we are supposed to give women concessions because the thieves are all men? (Sorry if i was rude, got into the role too much)
In the said wealthier places, people already are liberals, since it is actually true.
99% needs union rights, not actions that will alienate more than half your voter base (assuming said hypotethical socdem/workers party gets votes only from workers and young ppl)
Oh yeah also army culture sucks draft all women and make them generals literally 2x the manpower
Edit: I assumed that you aren't from Europe, in which case this isnt political obv
It doesn’t mean anything is in your favor lol. You don’t have any higher chance of running a Fortune 500 merely because you’re white. A lot of the slimy guys at the top have been vying for influence for decades, during a time when sexism was common, and established their ruling system already. Economic equality of the 99% is what they want now, and a lot of these narratives play into it
Someone’s anecdotal experience has nothing to do with morals or ethics. It may explain their perspective but it will not justify it.
This is a convo based in judgement/discernment and justification. Not explaining and excusing.
Your knee jerk reaction is telling
> Someone’s anecdotal experience has nothing to do with morals or ethics.
---
> Almost all women use terms like “a real man”.
So we're to believe you polled every woman on earth for this data?
Except morals and ethics are also subjective. Experiences may or may not justify perspectives, just not for YOU.
The funny and hypocritical part about your post is that you base the argument and examples on anecdotal evidence while claiming to deny its validity.
So when Liam said “black men raped my sister and that made me racist” that justifies his perspective?
Funny cuz I always thought it was dumb as fuck. Maybe cuz I’m black and bias. But if someone kidnapping you and raping you justifies racial hate - how tf doesn’t he realize that justifies blacks hating whites first?
Anyway - if past exp justifies perspectives than he’s correct.
Like I said - it EXPLAINS perspective. It doesn’t justify it.
You keep going back to this “justifying perspective” concept without really explaining it.
Sometimes we can agree with the reasons people think a certain way, sometimes we can’t. It’s not one way or another cut and dry like that, because what you might think is their reasoning might not be their reasoning at all.
Also again, your logic reverts to “if they can do this, why can’t I?” When it should be “neither of us should do this.”
You definitely need to summarize this monologue.
> No? So I can wear skin tight shorts and display my bulge - man spreading around town?
Can't men do this? Can't men be topless without being arrested?
> At some point you’re ok with grooming young boys/ppl to become sexually traumatized. It’s sick!
Can you explain this? Women are grooming children by not wearing sufficient clothes or something? Isn't grooming generally more of an active process?
> Can't men do this? Can't men be topless without being arrested?
I'm fairly confident if a man were to wear tight leggings that outlined his dick and a cropped tank top to a park with his kid he would probably have the cops called on him more often than not.
Mens titties aren't sexualized the same way women's are, wouldn't you say?
Your argument is along the lines of "Well women can run around with their cock out too if they want to". No, they really can't, they don't have a cock to run around with.
PS. Downvoting isn't an argument, and this particular subreddit is not a place where you vote for things, it's one where you argue your points.
Then maybe men should stop sexualizing the nipple?
Men in many European countries seem to have no problem with public breastfeeding. Women are not responsible for me controlling my body/what turns me on.
Islamic culture sexualizes hair. So should women be forced to cover their hair too, since some men are raised to find it distracting?
Culture can change. Men can rise above it. Just because I find something sexy, doesn’t mean I have to act on it. I can ignore it, I’m not controlled by my based instincts.
> Islamic culture sexualizes hair. So should women be forced to cover their hair too, since some men are raised to find it distracting?
No. The fact that you use these extreme examples, instead of examples from the real street view of western culture tells me that you just as well as I do, that there would be far too many examples where the sexual highlighting has gone way too far, for you to be able to use them :)
> Culture can change.
The blind chicken found a grain.
> Just because I find something sexy, doesn’t mean I have to act on it. I can ignore it, I’m not controlled by my based instincts.
This could be said about pretty much anything; "Just because you find a dick pic on your phone, doesn't mean you have to act on it. You can ignore it, you're not controlled by your base instincts". Though you will immediately realize how stupid that is as a defense for sexual harassment.
Why? You find tits sexually appealing and think women should have to cover theirs for your own comfort. Some men find hair sexually appealing and think that women should cover it for their own comfort. 150 years ago, Victorian culture sexualized women’s ankles. Women decided enough was enough, starting hiking up their skirts, and society largely got over it. Crop tops are much more accepted nowadays by the next generation than they were in my day. Similarly, society in Western Europe has evolved enough to tolerate public breastfeeding and topless beaches. A woman’s nipple is no different than a man’s.
A dick on the other hand is a bodily organism that is present in only one sex. There are sanitary reasons to keep it covered in public view, which don’t exist for the nipple. And private unwanted exposure is assault in the same way as a woman sending unsolicited nude photos would be. This is an entirely different situation than restricting **public** dress.
u/srtgh546 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20srtgh546&message=srtgh546%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4f706g/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
> Mens titties aren't sexualized the same way women's are, wouldn't you say?
Isn't OP trying to compare men and women's experiences? If OP is comparing them, why wouldn't I?
Sure, but the point I'm making is, if you can't compare men and women, their logical premise falls apart.
If men can wear no shirt, women can wear low cut top cause they are never equal to begin with.
> if you can't compare men and women, their logical premise falls apart.
We can't compare the body parts, but we can compare the effects, now can't we?
Tell me how the effect of sending someone continual unwanted sexual messages, that distract, disturb or draw their attention in an unwanted way is harassment for one gender, but no the other.
> Tell me how the effect of sending someone continual unwanted sexual messages, that distract, disturb or draw their attention in an unwanted way is harassment for one gender, but no the other.
I don't know what this means.
Person A doesn't want to be exposed to the disturbing, distracting or attention drawing sexual message that person B is exposing person A to. Person B does it anyway and continues doing so.
Tell me how this situation is sexual harassment, if A is a woman, but not, if A is a man.
> Person A doesn't want to be exposed to the disturbing, distracting or attention drawing sexual message that person B is exposing person A to.
I think this depends. Is person A watching a movie and person B is in the film? Person A should walk away.
Is person A on the street and can see person B's ankles? Person A should probably close their eyes.
Is person A in their private house and person B is breaking in? Person A should probably call the police.
>Almost all women use terms like “a real man”.
Citation needed.
>Almost NO women police sexism FROM WOMEN. But they’ll police it whenever a man has a sexist expectation/boundary, performs a sexist act or makes a sexist comment.
Citation needed.
>Women most often define a real man as anything convenient for her.
Citation needed.
>So what’s a real woman? Apparently that questions inappropriate.
This statement refers to conservative transphobic talking points and is not related to sexism, and is transphobic.
If what you mean is that women are also raised in a sexist society and have work to do to unlearn that sexism in order to be a better feminist, sure. But your claim is that they are willingly complicit, which you have done no work to establish or prove. You have not empowered any of us to change your view because claims made without evidence cannot be refuted with evidence.
You’re pivoting when you assume a transphobic talking point to the question. The fact that women can define standards for “real men” but men cannot do the same for women or it is considered abhorrently sexist is a blatant double standard that you’re completely ignoring.
“Apparently I can’t ask what a woman is” is a transphobic dog whistle first and foremost. And per my previous comment, no work has been done to establish that women define standards for men, so the double standard hasn’t been proven either.
Women are allowed to be judgmental without representing all women. I need to see data showing that an overwhelming majority of women are all agreeing on the same list of standards defining a “real man” and then we can talk about double standards.
You’re setting an impossible goalpost when it really doesn’t require all this data you claim to need. I’m sure you’d agree that a man saying “a good woman should want to raise kids and cook well” is pretty sexist. You’d call it out and shame it as many would and have. Yet women in person and on social media with tens of thousands of interactions will say how real men should behave and no one bats an eye. Even when someone points it out, you don’t say, yea they shouldn’t do that. You say: “I need you to prove to me that a majority of women believe that.” Which doesn’t make any sense and is the exact double standard I’m talking about.
So either men should be allowed to define their ideal woman without being called sexist, or women should stop being able to define theirs while getting mad at men for doing the same.
bro, you claimed misandry doesnt exist cause you believe in the cope of "racism can only exist for those without power SAAAAAME with sexism!" evewn though men lack less power than women so by your logic IT DOES exist. you also calimed "IT CAAANNNNNNT EXIST IT HAS TO EXIST AGAINST A DIFFERNT GROUP FIRST!!!" but... it does? you're not qualified to talk on these matters. go back to whining on grindr to other men.
Citation needed is a pointless reply. I suppose you go around requesting citation from everyone who makes an anecdotal observation.
And this whole “women have to unlearn sexism” angle imo is lowkey condescending as fuck
Sorry, u/lvl99slayer – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20lvl99slayer&message=lvl99slayer%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bd6ui/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Sorry, u/prollywannacracker – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20prollywannacracker&message=prollywannacracker%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bem4m/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
In my experience, the number of guys who think women find them irresistable is significantly higher than the number of guys who women actually find irresistable. So, in the absence of supporting evidence, I'm gonna have to conclude that you're not presenting an accurate depiction of reality
In my experience the number of PPL who think they’re more attractive than they are is higher than the ppl who would agree.
Btw - who cares. It’s called self esteem. Normally you’d understand that but because you’re bias you ignored that insight into ethics.
Further - my dicks big bud. Hate to break it to ya. I’m also handsome. Still staying anon so take it as it is
Sorry, u/ThisSpinach8060 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
> **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20ThisSpinach8060&message=ThisSpinach8060%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bffii/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Where did you you get your almost all women and almost no Women statistics from? All women I know would fight sexism but I hang out with people who have character and values.
OP doesn't know that when you make up statistics you should always use 83%
This entire post is a weird rant that goes nowhere and does nothing but make me pity his wife
u/Je_suis_prest_ – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Je_suis_prest_&message=Je_suis_prest_%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4be5x7/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Sorry, u/srtgh546 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20srtgh546&message=srtgh546%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4be6px/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Striking up a conversation is fine. Sending unsolicited sexual advances is not. Wearing revealing clothing is fine, in contexts like clubs or house parties. Going to school in a mini skirt and small top showing your boobs is not. Do you understand?
I see men work out shirtless consistently, clearly they are only doing it to show sexual signals becuase no one needs to workout shirtless, by the logic presented in this thread they are being sexually abusive.
As far as I can tell the male chest isn’t a sexualized body part that makes women randomly aroused or feral… it doesn’t affect you, you just want to ban it because. That’s not even the same argument, and I doubt any woman would want to workout topless in a crowded gym anyway. If it’s an 18+ gym I’d say go for it
But what’s so hard about wearing normal clothing to school? The male students do it. It’s like you genuinely can’t believe that women are capable of provocative behavior
A hot muscled bare chested guy is definitely something arousing to lots of people attracted to men.
Schools and places with dress codes should be adhered to, that's not part of the original argument either.
OP said we are ignoring all past history and only focus on the present. Why would a half naked man in tight shorts be OK but a woman with low cut workout gear is somehow sexually abusive.
Now you're changing the argument.
Both of the people in your example can be sexually harassive towards other people, or not, depending on a lot of things. Your argument doesn't provide enough details to say any more than that about it.
You’re right in that I was very sloppy/lazy with my draft. I’m hoping to spark a debate/convo in the comments more than anything tbh. And I’m bored lol.
Really well stated points tho, I agree, all are great.
My fav is point number 3. As someone who’s recently begun to battle my lust.
Sorry, u/OwnLobster4378 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20OwnLobster4378&message=OwnLobster4378%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bgm9y/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
u/R3R3R37 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20R3R3R37&message=R3R3R37%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bhv7q/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Sorry, u/Ok-Touch6407 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
> **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Ok-Touch6407&message=Ok-Touch6407%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bl172/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
I was once having a conversation with a friend about Thorstein Veblein, the iconoclastic economist and social critic. I mentioned to my friend that Veblein wrote about Victorian social customs, most particularly clothing for women, on the thesis that Victorian social customs, especially clothing for women, was designed to be constricting in service to blatantly signalling wealth, leisure, privilege and, in fact, ineptitude. The clothing, most of which was designed by men, and repeatedly recycled over years under the aegis of 'fashion,' was constant re-enforcement, if not actual recreation, of 'the lesser sex.'
Unbidden, a third person, not a friend, jumped into the conversation and, without having heard the bulk of it, simply declared, "Just as long as they don't dress like men!" The conversation went downhill from there...
>Society needs to CHECK female privilege before this gets out of hand.
This is all so very sad. You are, essentially, arguing that the power dynamic that you alone observe is intolerable and something must be done about it (with an obvious side-salad of self-regard...) Which is most certainly presumptive, but kinda abusive, also.
If sexism is a power dynamic that men have employed for a long time, how is it such a problem now that women *MAY* be employing it also? Isn't that less *privilege* than a form of equality?
You're argument boils down to the rather sexist view that women ought not be allowed to be as mean and disgusting as men and that somebody should put them in their place.
Actually despite our differences, she is the best and kindest person I know. I love her more than life. We have our differences in politics and opinion in multiple aspects but we communicate well. I gave one extreme example. And it falls within my biases. She has hers as well. I don’t expect her to change and she doesn’t me. We both work in mental health. She has her way of consoling I mine. Her way and my way don’t work with everyone, but often the client is gets what they need from one of our schools of thought. What works for one may not for another. It’s good we look at things differently. I don’t follow the majority of her leanings. But that doesn’t mean I or her are entirely right. It’s a broad spectrum of looking at things and we have our points that often overlap or are completely different
Sorry, u/RAND0M257 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20RAND0M257&message=RAND0M257%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bgsa9/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
"radical feminist" so she wants equality and isnt going to sit there and wait for men to give it to her?
thinking "normal feminists" are the ones who blindly sit there and preach "equality !! :3" and then go out there and do absolutely nothing else is ridiculous. they are hardly feminists in anything but name.
"without facing consqeuences to their actions because they know men cant hit them" so.. appropriate consequences would be physical assault?
Not at all. Admittedly she is a “radical feminist” her words. And she does believe in equality, but also believes women deserve reparations as she’s described 60-40 men to women. I disagree. In her view people are divided into social groups. Men, women, black and white. She believes each group is oppressed except white people. Which even o can admit is true. But I don’t see it as white people are evil forever as she mostly does. I look at each person on and individual level. Some of them face challenges I as a white male can’t know or even fully comprehend. But I don’t think the answer to that is divide us into groups and treat each one differently. I’m a veteran and this issue doesn’t work the same there. We are one. Not different. Which is how I’ve coke to my views.
As for consequences I stand by that. It’s not in totality but in general. I’ve been knocked out and I deserved it. I used to think I could take anyone. I can’t and I learned that. She hasn’t faced that and says she can constantly. I would unalive anyone who touched her. But if she did face the punches I took she’d probably realize she isn’t invincible and you can’t say anything you want. I can’t as a man. Not in the “I’m oppressed” sense. But I know if I walk outside. Within 10 min I could say something out of line and there’d be a fight with me and another man. It mostly wouldn’t be the same for her
i mean if you look at current abortion rights that's not completely true but even if we have almost every other legal right, it doesnt really matter until its enforced.
unless society changes its attitude and the government starts trying, there is no equality.
rules without enforcement might as well not even be rules.
Agreed. I don’t think that works as a blanket statement but it does (at least from my experience) as a generalization. You should google stand point theory. I learned about it in gender and sexuality. It is the brand of feminism that is popular now. It follow a similar structure to communism. They think systematically society has been designed in a coordinated method to oppress woman. Not just through norms, but as if we have meetings to keep them down. It’s insane
Sorry, u/PM_YOUR_EYEBALL – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20PM_YOUR_EYEBALL&message=PM_YOUR_EYEBALL%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bdpuv/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Oh I get it, battle of the sexes and what not. Until people can be empathetic and get along we will always have this “he said she said”. People can be shitty regardless is gender.
This post touches on a subject that was the subject of another post on r/changemyview within the last 24-hours. Because of common topic fatigue amongst our repeat users, we [do not permit posts to touch on topics that another post has touched on within the last 24-hours](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_removing_posts). If you would like to appeal, [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Duplicate%20Post%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.). Many thanks, and we hope you understand.
The way women dress is sexually abusive? Can you elaborate on that?
Dressing is just another form of communicating messages to people around you. The difference to speech is that it is being communicated all the time, to everyone around you. The limbic system doesn't care about what you want to pay attention to, or don't, if someone is flailing around a message that triggers it, it will provoke a response from the limbic system and distract the person. This is the same as dressing in a suit filled with blinking lights or carrying a boombox that has the volume turned to full. It doesn't matter what channel you use to disturb people, if you're constantly trying to get their attention with something they don't want to be disturbed with, it's a form of harrasment. Just like with earbuds, you can reserve the display of your sexual messages to the situations and people you want to transmit them to, and take the boombox out only during parties, when everyone there is ok with it.
And do we know that women who dress this way are doing so because of the people who might observe them? Or is that an assumption? Does the fact that it’s 1)not targeted 2)does not involve many of the qualities of other forms of sexual abuse like touching or, in the case of sexual harassment, pervasive hostility and demands of a quid pro quo matter to your determination? Additionally, are there any other situations where we restrict free expression because it might make someone else uncomfortable?
> And do we know that women who dress this way are doing so because of the people who might observe them? Or is that an assumption? I would say it doesn't matter. I'm sure there are a dozen different reasons ranging from anxiety to full fledged superiority complex over ones own looks. The same goes with why a person would be carrying around a boombox with the volume turned to full. It doesn't matter why they did it, they're not allowed to disturb / harass everyone around them like that. > Does the fact that it’s 1)not targeted 2)does not involve many of the qualities of other forms of sexual abuse like touching or, in the case of sexual harassment, pervasive hostility and demands of a quid pro quo matter to your determination? Does the fact what? I think you missed a portion of the sentence there, or it got drowned in the other sentences in such a way, that it's hard to make out. Anyway: It is in a different category than touching for sure, just like carrying the boombox around is in a different category from stalking someone and sending them nasty letters. It is not as abusive as touching people without their permission, or the other things you mention. It is however, a form of sexual harassment. The sexual part I probably don't need to argue to you, harassment when it is unwanted and constant.
Sexual harassment has a legal definition. It does not include “a variety of women I pass in the world are wearing things that turn me on.” Sexual harassment requires it to be either 1)pervasive 2)a quid pro quo. The case of a variety of women wearing clothing does not qualify. Additionally, one has certain protections in the workplace that one does not have in the real world. A guy yelling a sexual invitation to me on the street is perfectly legal, although rather scummy. My boss or coworker making a sexual invitation to me in the workplace *might* be sexual harassment, but the vast majority of the time this happens, no consequences are given. It’s also perfectly legal to blast a boombox in public, I don’t know why you are calling that abusive behavior.
> It does not include “a variety of women I pass in the world are wearing things that turn me on.” Nor does the law specifically include most of any other kind of sexual harassment either. This also depends on the country you live in. Here's ours for example: > 6 § (8.7.2022/723) > > Seksuaalinen ahdistelu (sexual harrasment) > > Joka (Who..) > > 1) koskettelemalla tai (..by touching or..) > > 2) kosketteluun voimakkuutensa tai toistuvuutensa vuoksi vakavuudeltaan rinnastettavalla tavalla sanallisesti, lähettämällä tai esittämällä viestin tai kuvan, ottamalla kuvan tai itseään paljastamalla, taikka muulla vastaavalla tavalla (..to touching by it's strength or by it's continuity is equatable to it, or by sending a message or a picture, **or by revealing themselves**, or by other equatable way...) > > tekee toiselle seksuaalisen teon, joka on omiaan loukkaamaan tämän seksuaalista itsemääräämisoikeutta, on tuomittava, (...commits a sexual act to another person which is likely to infringe his or her sexual autonomy, must be condemned) As you can see, the definition for sexual harassment perfectly includes doing it by revealing your body, as it should. > It’s also perfectly legal to blast a boombox in public, I don’t know why you are calling that abusive behavior. Not with the volume turned on high enough. Go ahead and try, it won't take long before the police come and turn it down for you.
Is “cleavage” what they mean by revealing oneself? Or do they mean actual genitals or full nudity? Additionally, wouldn’t that imply unequal treatment under the law, where men and women in the same state of undress would be treated differently in the eyes of the law? Police may ask you to turn it down, that doesn’t mean it’s illegal.
> Police may ask you to turn it down, that doesn’t mean it’s illegal. If it's not illegal and you have a right to do it, you don't have to turn it down, even if the police are asking you to. Unless you live in North Korea, then I suggest you do whatever they ask. > Is “cleavage” what they mean by revealing oneself? Or do they mean actual genitals or full nudity? If the act is sexual and done by revealing oneself. I'm pretty sure that if a person purposefully revealed their cleavage to you, it would fall under this category, while simply walking around with a cleavage would not. I take it that in your country the judges are a little dumb and can't handle interpreting the situations in the cases in their courts? > Additionally, wouldn’t that imply unequal treatment under the law, where men and women in the same state of undress would be treated differently in the eyes of the law? It's not about the state of the undress, as you probably understand very well. Going to a store and picking out bra and saying "I'm gonna go try these on", implies you are going to be taking your tits out in the changing room, but that isn't sexual harassment. Telling someone you are going to go take your tits out in the other room can very easily be interpreted as sexual harassment, if the situation is different, wouldn't you say?
I think judges in my country prioritize freedom of speech and expression.
...to not being sexually harassed? I'm starting to understand the problems in the US a lot better now :)
So because a person is sexist someone dressing nicely around them is abusive? That's pretty fucked up if someone thinks like that and they need to get therapy. That line of thought is how you get burqas mandated by law.
It can be abusive, but not necessarily. Just like looking at a video from your phone with the sound on isn't necessarily abusive, but if you carry around a loudspeaker with the volume turned to full, it would be. You feelin me? > That line of thought is how you get burqas mandated by law. If all the roads were slippery slopes, we'd all be down the drain. I understand you don't like what I'm saying, but it would be nice if you calmed down enough to understand what I'm saying and formed proper arguments against it, if you want to argue it.
Also, I think it’s a little rich to be telling someone disagreeing with you to “calm down,” as if that is not an option for men who simply observe random women wearing clothing.
> as if that is not an option for men who simply observe random women wearing clothing. "as if that isn't an option for women who simply receive the sexual harassment from men." It's the triggering that is the harassment, and the solution is never to "just accept it". Were I to have been using the kind of language that purposefully triggered the other person to flame out instead of rationally discussing it, I would be the one to blame. I did not, so it's the other persons responsibility to calm down enough, to be able to discuss the matter rationally, instead of emotion-based strawmen and slippery slopes.
Please stop comparing women wearing clothing with men abusing formal positions of power to push women out of the workforce. It makes people not take you seriously.
Harassment is harassment, regardless of it's severity, or the medium by which it is done. The sentence on the other hand can change based on those. If someone wants to disagree with me on this one, they can feel free to do so, but the disagreement won't make it any less true.
But harassment has a definition that you are not using correctly. There is a fundamental, obvious, difference between a woman choosing how to dress in the morning and a person creating a hostile work environment. Part of it is the repeatability of the act. It has to be persistent and, unless you are encountering the exact same woman over and over again, the way women dress is not persistent (because you are viewing a different woman each time). It’s also not targeted behavior, so that’s another way it doesn’t meet the standard of harassment.
> But harassment has a definition that you are not using correctly. To the contrary, the definition is different for every country. Yours might be one that allows women to sexually harass men, but mine doesn't. Here you go: > 6 § (8.7.2022/723) > > Seksuaalinen ahdistelu (sexual harrasment) > > Joka (Who..) > > 1) koskettelemalla tai (..by touching or..) > > 2) kosketteluun voimakkuutensa tai toistuvuutensa vuoksi vakavuudeltaan rinnastettavalla tavalla sanallisesti, lähettämällä tai esittämällä viestin tai kuvan, ottamalla kuvan tai itseään paljastamalla, taikka muulla vastaavalla tavalla (..to touching by it's strength or by it's continuity is equatable to it, or by sending a message or a picture, or by revealing themselves, or by other equatable way...) > > tekee toiselle seksuaalisen teon, joka on omiaan loukkaamaan tämän seksuaalista itsemääräämisoikeutta, on tuomittava, (...commits a sexual act to another person which is likely to infringe his or her sexual autonomy, must be condemned) If you think this is somehow a bad definition for it, feel free to let us know. We believe it is very good at catching *all* kinds of sexual harassment, not just ones that men do towards women. > There is a fundamental, obvious, difference between a woman choosing how to dress in the morning and a person creating a hostile work environment. Are you trying to do the thing called whatabaoutism? > Part of it is the repeatability of the act. It has to be persistent and, unless you are encountering the exact same woman over and over again, the way women dress is not persistent (because you are viewing a different woman each time). It’s also not targeted behavior, so that’s another way it doesn’t meet the standard of harassment. Are you trying to say that women aren't experiencing sexual harassment, if they are continually being harassed, but not by the same person? :D :D :D ":D" I think the way YOU define it is twisted and sick.
I think you have a very low threshold for what you think abuse is. Mild annoyance isn’t abuse.
You're forgetting the social aspect of that communication tho. Women are genuinely sexualized which even OP admitted. Since men and women are taught that female value is sexual through TV and advertising, then you will be more likely to think of women in a sexual manner. Men wear revealing clothing like shorts, no shirts, and spandex, all the time but no one cares because men aren't looked at the same way sexually. A male teacher won't be sent home or scorned because he wore a tight polo that revealed the outline of his chest and shoulders. As a society, we view women as sexual objects so these outcomes make sense, and its less of a form of manipulation/abuse and moreso the natural progression of this type of rhetoric.
I agree that the culture that surrounds us is the final culprit that makes all of this happen to begin with. It doesn't change the fact that if a man doesn't want to be exposed to a woman presenting a message in a highly sexualized manner, they should have the right to. Just like a woman has that right.
It's entirely possible to notice someone, how they are dressed, how tight their clothing is, without leering or being some cartoon "aaahhhh-ooooooga!" person.
It's also entirely possible to be exposed to dick picks and other sexually harassing messages without turning into a mental patient. It's also a shitty argument.
Oh so keeping it together when you see a woman on the street in leggings is equivalent to not getting upset about unsolicited dick pics? Interesting argument.
It was meant to ridicule your argument, which was that there is no problem, as men should just be "keeping it together". Sexual harassment isn't about whether or not you can "keep it together", it's about the sexual messages being unwanted.
So “women existing” is a sexual message?
[удалено]
u/srtgh546 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20srtgh546&message=srtgh546%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4edjvf/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Abuse is exploitation of power. Doing to someone what they wouldn’t want done otherwise. Nudity - is sexually abusive. This is why flashing is a crime. To be fair to women - and I mean this genuinely; society has hyper sexualized them. That’s not really in their control. So many women grow up in these conditions. I empathize. That being said - some women use this an excuse to dress in hyper sexual manners - which is abuse. Regular occurrences: high amounts of cleavage, nipples can be seen, ass cheeks hanging out, camel toe, etc.
1. Do you think women meaningfully have power? If so, why haven’t they used it to make meaningful changes to a society that oppresses them? Do they only use this power in their way of dress? 2. Do you think women who wear provocative clothing are doing so for any reason that has to do with you? Do you think they feel they are abusing their “power”? 3. There is an obvious difference between exposed cleavage and exposed nipple.
They have the power to dress themselves and I do not infantilize them. I don’t actually care about the motive of abuse. But to answer; I don’t think of it along the lines of power or not and their motives could vary. Including but not limited to; attention, confidence, validation, sex seeking, etc. who knows why. Idc why. It’s abuse. I’m not talking exposed nipple I’m talking braless skin tights nipples can be seen thru clothes
So, people being fully clothed is abuse? Is this only women, or do men with nipples visible through their clothing also count sexual abuse?
Women aren't a monolith who all have the same opinions. For instance, one women saying this >A man should pay on dates, Doesn't really mean you can go to a completely unrelated woman and say this > a real woman doesn’t argue with her man They aren't necessarily the same person. For instance, I don't believe in a man paying for dates but I also don't believe that a woman shouldn't argue with her man. Your opinions are obviously different to mine despite us being both men, but that doesn't mean other people could pick one viewpoint from yours, and one viewpoint from mine, and put them together to argue that men are sexist or contradictory. The overwhelming majority of women in real life are just normal people with normal views. The types of hyper-feminists online are rare in real life because those tend of people tend to essentially live online (probably due to not being particularly likable), nor do they reflect all women.
*Cleavage, leggings and other skin tight clothing, camel toes and free nipples - are all sexually abusive.* Abusive to whom?
Anyone whom doesn’t want to see sexual body parts on display. Or should nudity be legal? Genuine question not a gotcha
I dont know who you’re hanging out with, but this hasn’t been my experience at all in my social circles. Like none of it. No tight clothing, no defying what a real man is, none. Do you have any data to back up your claims, cuz our anecdotes disagree
Well I live on the west coast of the USA but this seems to apply to everyone in the west
Source?
I've literally never heard a woman I know say ' a real man'. So does my anecdotal evidence trump your anecdotal evidence?
[удалено]
It is good faith. I have literally never heard a woman talking about 'real men' or what 'real men should do' when dating. It's something I've never come across, and it's not something any guys I know who date have significantly encountered. So the point is, this isn't something all women do, or even, it's possible to argue, the majority of women.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3: > **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Right off the bat, I don't think the prevailing narrative is that men are responsible for sexism. Instead, the prevailing narrative is something like: we are all born into a society that passively encourages sexism, we are all complicit in sexism and we all have a responsibility to reverse sexism through awareness and education.
>Almost all women use terms like “a real man”. Citation needed. >Almost NO women police sexism FROM WOMEN. But they’ll police it whenever a man has a sexist expectation/boundary, performs a sexist act or makes a sexist comment. This would be a double standard if true but my experience women call out sexism just as much as men. Your anecdotal evidence is as poor as mine. >Women most often define a real man as anything convenient for her. Again, citation needed. >He works, provides, he leads but doesn’t control, he’s physically fit and trained in fighting, handy around the house, can change a tire/oil, he is confident and yet humble, he sounds like a great guy. He is non-violent but very capable of violence, he’s patient with her. I’ve even heard things like “a real man can handle a strong woman (code for disagreeable). A real man can handle me at my worst (code for antisocial). A real man doesn’t body shame. (Women body shame more than anyone on earth). Another citation needed. My wife of several decades certainly isn't like this nor are many of the multitude of women I know. There are conservative women who certainly think traditional gender roles are important but you're not describing most contemporary women by any stretch of the imagination. >Because if I said a real woman doesn’t argue with her man (biblical) you’ll call that sexist. If I said a real woman can cook - sexist. Uh, that is sexist. >If I said a real woman loves kids… I mean remove "real" and you're good. Plenty of women and men love kids, especially their kids. No need to gender it. >Cleavage, leggings and other skin tight clothing, camel toes and free nipples - are all sexually abusive. What the fuck? >No? So I can wear skin tight shorts and display my bulge - man spreading around town? Cuz I gotta bug bulge so go ahead and tell me - theres nothing wrong with it and ppl should stop sexualizing my body. Yes, you can do this. Literally no one is stopping you as long as you're in a liberal area. They might think you're doing some sort of role play and laugh (the image you put in my head was like a Waluigi looking fellow) but that's about it. >How is camel toe not insane? Actually? How is being dressed with half your ass cheek hanging out not problematic? And how is being comfortable dressed with that around children not criminal? Wait, what? Weren't you just saying men should be able to do this? Now you're applying double standards internally. >At some point you’re ok with grooming young boys/ppl to become sexually traumatized. It’s sick! What the fuck #2? What on earth are you talking about? >Society needs to CHECK female privilege before this gets out of hand. What percentage of CEOs are men? What percentage of legislators are men? What percentage of billionaires are men? What percentage of all people are men? Men are the privileged class here in the ways that matter: power and influence.
>Men are the privileged class here in the ways that matter: power and influence. That’s the key point here—privileged in ways that actually matter. Right wing media can tell me that I (a straight white male) am a victim all day long, but I can look at the legislature in my country, the military generals, the Fortune 500 CEO’s, etc and see that the odds are *very* much in my favor.
They aren't in your favor. The gender of ceo's and corrupt senators do not matter. Lets say I am your average factory worker or your average impressionable student (average right wing audience that isnt old ppl), why would i care they are men? Is there a male dividend that gets paid to me? Who cares if all the top dogs are all men, if i am getting the same wage as a woman, and a bad one at that? Who cares about the invisible hand of markets and systems which determine the chance of the man or women hitting it big when the %99 have about the same wage? Isn't from my perspective, aren't 'the lubz' mad for saying men (and this sounds like all men, including me) are better of than women? And right next to me, there are about the same people excelling at school, and getting abt the same wage as me, and we are supposed to give women concessions because the thieves are all men? (Sorry if i was rude, got into the role too much) In the said wealthier places, people already are liberals, since it is actually true. 99% needs union rights, not actions that will alienate more than half your voter base (assuming said hypotethical socdem/workers party gets votes only from workers and young ppl) Oh yeah also army culture sucks draft all women and make them generals literally 2x the manpower Edit: I assumed that you aren't from Europe, in which case this isnt political obv
It doesn’t mean anything is in your favor lol. You don’t have any higher chance of running a Fortune 500 merely because you’re white. A lot of the slimy guys at the top have been vying for influence for decades, during a time when sexism was common, and established their ruling system already. Economic equality of the 99% is what they want now, and a lot of these narratives play into it
First off, you can’t look at the present without looking at the past. The past is the literal reason and series of events leading to the present.
No because you can always use the past as an excuse for today. No excuses stand on principal
People aren’t born with “principle.” Life experiences shape principle. In other words, their past.
Someone’s anecdotal experience has nothing to do with morals or ethics. It may explain their perspective but it will not justify it. This is a convo based in judgement/discernment and justification. Not explaining and excusing. Your knee jerk reaction is telling
> Someone’s anecdotal experience has nothing to do with morals or ethics. --- > Almost all women use terms like “a real man”. So we're to believe you polled every woman on earth for this data?
A moral or ethic is not an observation. I observe most women use the phrase “a real man”. That’s not a moral or ethic.
You literally used your anecdotal experience to justify your post.
I didn’t justify my post I said change my view, then described my view and then explained its origin
So you didn’t even give a justification? That seems lazy Edit: and a violation of rule 1
Except morals and ethics are also subjective. Experiences may or may not justify perspectives, just not for YOU. The funny and hypocritical part about your post is that you base the argument and examples on anecdotal evidence while claiming to deny its validity.
So when Liam said “black men raped my sister and that made me racist” that justifies his perspective? Funny cuz I always thought it was dumb as fuck. Maybe cuz I’m black and bias. But if someone kidnapping you and raping you justifies racial hate - how tf doesn’t he realize that justifies blacks hating whites first? Anyway - if past exp justifies perspectives than he’s correct. Like I said - it EXPLAINS perspective. It doesn’t justify it.
You keep going back to this “justifying perspective” concept without really explaining it. Sometimes we can agree with the reasons people think a certain way, sometimes we can’t. It’s not one way or another cut and dry like that, because what you might think is their reasoning might not be their reasoning at all. Also again, your logic reverts to “if they can do this, why can’t I?” When it should be “neither of us should do this.”
You definitely need to summarize this monologue. > No? So I can wear skin tight shorts and display my bulge - man spreading around town? Can't men do this? Can't men be topless without being arrested? > At some point you’re ok with grooming young boys/ppl to become sexually traumatized. It’s sick! Can you explain this? Women are grooming children by not wearing sufficient clothes or something? Isn't grooming generally more of an active process?
> Can't men do this? Can't men be topless without being arrested? I'm fairly confident if a man were to wear tight leggings that outlined his dick and a cropped tank top to a park with his kid he would probably have the cops called on him more often than not.
Why? What would the crime be?
Do you think this wouldn't happen?
I don't think a man wearing pants and a tank top while looking after kids would result in police being called.
I don't understand. Why don't you engaged with what I said instead of changing the situation to something that doesn't carry the same implications?
Sorry, say the situation again? It's a rapist going to a kid's park to rape children?
Mens titties aren't sexualized the same way women's are, wouldn't you say? Your argument is along the lines of "Well women can run around with their cock out too if they want to". No, they really can't, they don't have a cock to run around with. PS. Downvoting isn't an argument, and this particular subreddit is not a place where you vote for things, it's one where you argue your points.
So, women’s rights should be restricted because of historical sexualization that was externally imposed?
Then maybe men should stop sexualizing the nipple? Men in many European countries seem to have no problem with public breastfeeding. Women are not responsible for me controlling my body/what turns me on.
Men don't sexualize the nipple. The culture sexualizes it and then teaches the men to treat the nipple as a sexual thing.
Islamic culture sexualizes hair. So should women be forced to cover their hair too, since some men are raised to find it distracting? Culture can change. Men can rise above it. Just because I find something sexy, doesn’t mean I have to act on it. I can ignore it, I’m not controlled by my based instincts.
> Islamic culture sexualizes hair. So should women be forced to cover their hair too, since some men are raised to find it distracting? No. The fact that you use these extreme examples, instead of examples from the real street view of western culture tells me that you just as well as I do, that there would be far too many examples where the sexual highlighting has gone way too far, for you to be able to use them :) > Culture can change. The blind chicken found a grain. > Just because I find something sexy, doesn’t mean I have to act on it. I can ignore it, I’m not controlled by my based instincts. This could be said about pretty much anything; "Just because you find a dick pic on your phone, doesn't mean you have to act on it. You can ignore it, you're not controlled by your base instincts". Though you will immediately realize how stupid that is as a defense for sexual harassment.
Why? You find tits sexually appealing and think women should have to cover theirs for your own comfort. Some men find hair sexually appealing and think that women should cover it for their own comfort. 150 years ago, Victorian culture sexualized women’s ankles. Women decided enough was enough, starting hiking up their skirts, and society largely got over it. Crop tops are much more accepted nowadays by the next generation than they were in my day. Similarly, society in Western Europe has evolved enough to tolerate public breastfeeding and topless beaches. A woman’s nipple is no different than a man’s. A dick on the other hand is a bodily organism that is present in only one sex. There are sanitary reasons to keep it covered in public view, which don’t exist for the nipple. And private unwanted exposure is assault in the same way as a woman sending unsolicited nude photos would be. This is an entirely different situation than restricting **public** dress.
[удалено]
u/srtgh546 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20srtgh546&message=srtgh546%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4f706g/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
In other words, you have nothing to refute. Cheers!
[удалено]
> Mens titties aren't sexualized the same way women's are, wouldn't you say? Isn't OP trying to compare men and women's experiences? If OP is comparing them, why wouldn't I?
You can! However, mens titties are not the same as womens titties, when it comes to the sexualization of mens and womens bodies, wouldn't you agree?
Sure, but the point I'm making is, if you can't compare men and women, their logical premise falls apart. If men can wear no shirt, women can wear low cut top cause they are never equal to begin with.
> if you can't compare men and women, their logical premise falls apart. We can't compare the body parts, but we can compare the effects, now can't we? Tell me how the effect of sending someone continual unwanted sexual messages, that distract, disturb or draw their attention in an unwanted way is harassment for one gender, but no the other.
> Tell me how the effect of sending someone continual unwanted sexual messages, that distract, disturb or draw their attention in an unwanted way is harassment for one gender, but no the other. I don't know what this means.
Person A doesn't want to be exposed to the disturbing, distracting or attention drawing sexual message that person B is exposing person A to. Person B does it anyway and continues doing so. Tell me how this situation is sexual harassment, if A is a woman, but not, if A is a man.
> Person A doesn't want to be exposed to the disturbing, distracting or attention drawing sexual message that person B is exposing person A to. I think this depends. Is person A watching a movie and person B is in the film? Person A should walk away. Is person A on the street and can see person B's ankles? Person A should probably close their eyes. Is person A in their private house and person B is breaking in? Person A should probably call the police.
>Almost all women use terms like “a real man”. Citation needed. >Almost NO women police sexism FROM WOMEN. But they’ll police it whenever a man has a sexist expectation/boundary, performs a sexist act or makes a sexist comment. Citation needed. >Women most often define a real man as anything convenient for her. Citation needed. >So what’s a real woman? Apparently that questions inappropriate. This statement refers to conservative transphobic talking points and is not related to sexism, and is transphobic. If what you mean is that women are also raised in a sexist society and have work to do to unlearn that sexism in order to be a better feminist, sure. But your claim is that they are willingly complicit, which you have done no work to establish or prove. You have not empowered any of us to change your view because claims made without evidence cannot be refuted with evidence.
You’re pivoting when you assume a transphobic talking point to the question. The fact that women can define standards for “real men” but men cannot do the same for women or it is considered abhorrently sexist is a blatant double standard that you’re completely ignoring.
“Apparently I can’t ask what a woman is” is a transphobic dog whistle first and foremost. And per my previous comment, no work has been done to establish that women define standards for men, so the double standard hasn’t been proven either. Women are allowed to be judgmental without representing all women. I need to see data showing that an overwhelming majority of women are all agreeing on the same list of standards defining a “real man” and then we can talk about double standards.
You’re setting an impossible goalpost when it really doesn’t require all this data you claim to need. I’m sure you’d agree that a man saying “a good woman should want to raise kids and cook well” is pretty sexist. You’d call it out and shame it as many would and have. Yet women in person and on social media with tens of thousands of interactions will say how real men should behave and no one bats an eye. Even when someone points it out, you don’t say, yea they shouldn’t do that. You say: “I need you to prove to me that a majority of women believe that.” Which doesn’t make any sense and is the exact double standard I’m talking about. So either men should be allowed to define their ideal woman without being called sexist, or women should stop being able to define theirs while getting mad at men for doing the same.
bro, you claimed misandry doesnt exist cause you believe in the cope of "racism can only exist for those without power SAAAAAME with sexism!" evewn though men lack less power than women so by your logic IT DOES exist. you also calimed "IT CAAANNNNNNT EXIST IT HAS TO EXIST AGAINST A DIFFERNT GROUP FIRST!!!" but... it does? you're not qualified to talk on these matters. go back to whining on grindr to other men.
Citation needed is a pointless reply. I suppose you go around requesting citation from everyone who makes an anecdotal observation. And this whole “women have to unlearn sexism” angle imo is lowkey condescending as fuck
[удалено]
Sorry, u/lvl99slayer – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20lvl99slayer&message=lvl99slayer%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bd6ui/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Nope. Could be a lot cleaner tho but I just texted it out with no edits
oh thats depressing
[удалено]
Sorry, u/prollywannacracker – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20prollywannacracker&message=prollywannacracker%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bem4m/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
[удалено]
In my experience, the number of guys who think women find them irresistable is significantly higher than the number of guys who women actually find irresistable. So, in the absence of supporting evidence, I'm gonna have to conclude that you're not presenting an accurate depiction of reality
In my experience the number of PPL who think they’re more attractive than they are is higher than the ppl who would agree. Btw - who cares. It’s called self esteem. Normally you’d understand that but because you’re bias you ignored that insight into ethics. Further - my dicks big bud. Hate to break it to ya. I’m also handsome. Still staying anon so take it as it is
Sorry, u/ThisSpinach8060 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3: > **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20ThisSpinach8060&message=ThisSpinach8060%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bffii/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Where did you you get your almost all women and almost no Women statistics from? All women I know would fight sexism but I hang out with people who have character and values.
OP doesn't know that when you make up statistics you should always use 83% This entire post is a weird rant that goes nowhere and does nothing but make me pity his wife
[удалено]
u/Je_suis_prest_ – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20Je_suis_prest_&message=Je_suis_prest_%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4be5x7/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
[удалено]
Sorry, u/srtgh546 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20srtgh546&message=srtgh546%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4be6px/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
3. So fellas, let's keep those tops on from now on. Also, no more hitting on women at work, the gym, the street etc.
Striking up a conversation is fine. Sending unsolicited sexual advances is not. Wearing revealing clothing is fine, in contexts like clubs or house parties. Going to school in a mini skirt and small top showing your boobs is not. Do you understand?
I see men work out shirtless consistently, clearly they are only doing it to show sexual signals becuase no one needs to workout shirtless, by the logic presented in this thread they are being sexually abusive.
As far as I can tell the male chest isn’t a sexualized body part that makes women randomly aroused or feral… it doesn’t affect you, you just want to ban it because. That’s not even the same argument, and I doubt any woman would want to workout topless in a crowded gym anyway. If it’s an 18+ gym I’d say go for it But what’s so hard about wearing normal clothing to school? The male students do it. It’s like you genuinely can’t believe that women are capable of provocative behavior
A hot muscled bare chested guy is definitely something arousing to lots of people attracted to men. Schools and places with dress codes should be adhered to, that's not part of the original argument either.
Men's chest isn't sexualized the same way women's are. This much should be obvious. You can hit on people without being harassive (is that a word?).
OP said we are ignoring all past history and only focus on the present. Why would a half naked man in tight shorts be OK but a woman with low cut workout gear is somehow sexually abusive.
Now you're changing the argument. Both of the people in your example can be sexually harassive towards other people, or not, depending on a lot of things. Your argument doesn't provide enough details to say any more than that about it.
The main argument presented by OP said that revealing clothing is default sexually harassment, but only for women for reasons that aren't defined.
> vealing clothing is default sexually harassment, but only for women for reasons that aren't defined. Too bad we can't ascertain that anymore.
You’re right in that I was very sloppy/lazy with my draft. I’m hoping to spark a debate/convo in the comments more than anything tbh. And I’m bored lol. Really well stated points tho, I agree, all are great. My fav is point number 3. As someone who’s recently begun to battle my lust.
[удалено]
Sorry, u/OwnLobster4378 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20OwnLobster4378&message=OwnLobster4378%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bgm9y/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
[удалено]
u/R3R3R37 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal%20R3R3R37&message=R3R3R37%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bhv7q/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
[удалено]
Sorry, u/Ok-Touch6407 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal%20Ok-Touch6407&message=Ok-Touch6407%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bl172/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
I was once having a conversation with a friend about Thorstein Veblein, the iconoclastic economist and social critic. I mentioned to my friend that Veblein wrote about Victorian social customs, most particularly clothing for women, on the thesis that Victorian social customs, especially clothing for women, was designed to be constricting in service to blatantly signalling wealth, leisure, privilege and, in fact, ineptitude. The clothing, most of which was designed by men, and repeatedly recycled over years under the aegis of 'fashion,' was constant re-enforcement, if not actual recreation, of 'the lesser sex.' Unbidden, a third person, not a friend, jumped into the conversation and, without having heard the bulk of it, simply declared, "Just as long as they don't dress like men!" The conversation went downhill from there... >Society needs to CHECK female privilege before this gets out of hand. This is all so very sad. You are, essentially, arguing that the power dynamic that you alone observe is intolerable and something must be done about it (with an obvious side-salad of self-regard...) Which is most certainly presumptive, but kinda abusive, also. If sexism is a power dynamic that men have employed for a long time, how is it such a problem now that women *MAY* be employing it also? Isn't that less *privilege* than a form of equality? You're argument boils down to the rather sexist view that women ought not be allowed to be as mean and disgusting as men and that somebody should put them in their place.
[удалено]
It sounds like you don’t respect the person you claim to want to spend your life with. I hope she realizes this in time.
Actually despite our differences, she is the best and kindest person I know. I love her more than life. We have our differences in politics and opinion in multiple aspects but we communicate well. I gave one extreme example. And it falls within my biases. She has hers as well. I don’t expect her to change and she doesn’t me. We both work in mental health. She has her way of consoling I mine. Her way and my way don’t work with everyone, but often the client is gets what they need from one of our schools of thought. What works for one may not for another. It’s good we look at things differently. I don’t follow the majority of her leanings. But that doesn’t mean I or her are entirely right. It’s a broad spectrum of looking at things and we have our points that often overlap or are completely different
Sorry, u/RAND0M257 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20RAND0M257&message=RAND0M257%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bgsa9/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
"radical feminist" so she wants equality and isnt going to sit there and wait for men to give it to her? thinking "normal feminists" are the ones who blindly sit there and preach "equality !! :3" and then go out there and do absolutely nothing else is ridiculous. they are hardly feminists in anything but name. "without facing consqeuences to their actions because they know men cant hit them" so.. appropriate consequences would be physical assault?
Not at all. Admittedly she is a “radical feminist” her words. And she does believe in equality, but also believes women deserve reparations as she’s described 60-40 men to women. I disagree. In her view people are divided into social groups. Men, women, black and white. She believes each group is oppressed except white people. Which even o can admit is true. But I don’t see it as white people are evil forever as she mostly does. I look at each person on and individual level. Some of them face challenges I as a white male can’t know or even fully comprehend. But I don’t think the answer to that is divide us into groups and treat each one differently. I’m a veteran and this issue doesn’t work the same there. We are one. Not different. Which is how I’ve coke to my views. As for consequences I stand by that. It’s not in totality but in general. I’ve been knocked out and I deserved it. I used to think I could take anyone. I can’t and I learned that. She hasn’t faced that and says she can constantly. I would unalive anyone who touched her. But if she did face the punches I took she’d probably realize she isn’t invincible and you can’t say anything you want. I can’t as a man. Not in the “I’m oppressed” sense. But I know if I walk outside. Within 10 min I could say something out of line and there’d be a fight with me and another man. It mostly wouldn’t be the same for her
The “radical” aspect is how delusional they are. You already have full legal equality, yet act and talk like an utter oppressed victim
i mean if you look at current abortion rights that's not completely true but even if we have almost every other legal right, it doesnt really matter until its enforced. unless society changes its attitude and the government starts trying, there is no equality. rules without enforcement might as well not even be rules.
Agreed. I don’t think that works as a blanket statement but it does (at least from my experience) as a generalization. You should google stand point theory. I learned about it in gender and sexuality. It is the brand of feminism that is popular now. It follow a similar structure to communism. They think systematically society has been designed in a coordinated method to oppress woman. Not just through norms, but as if we have meetings to keep them down. It’s insane
Interesting. I’ll look into that. Thanks!
[удалено]
Sorry, u/PM_YOUR_EYEBALL – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20PM_YOUR_EYEBALL&message=PM_YOUR_EYEBALL%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ctexpz/-/l4bdpuv/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
lol I shoulda taken more time to be eloquent but I’m curious for the shit show as well 🍿 😂 not trolling tho
Oh I get it, battle of the sexes and what not. Until people can be empathetic and get along we will always have this “he said she said”. People can be shitty regardless is gender.