Cat-calling is harmless flattery...

Post Reply New Topic

Well, in the case of the catcalling video, when men who state "good morning" to a woman, that is considered harassment. Do you think punching someone in the face and saying "good morning" are similar behaviors? If not, then your analogy is not apt.

I agree with this, however it seems that some people have extended the definition of catcalling. For instance when in the catcalling video people say "how are you doing", the people who made the video consider that harassment, which is confusing to me.

The examples you provide I would also consider harassment and are wrong. But it appears that simply greeting someone is also considered harassment, and it is the grey area I would like to explore so I have a better understanding of the subject.

Don't worry I hardly ever communicate with anybody. In fact I would never approach and talk to a woman I don't know. But apparently this is how a lot men meet women and begin relationships with them.

This is a ridiculous strawman argument and you know it. CynicalWaffle did not blame the victims of harassment in any way whatsoever. He simply stated that those dense enough to behave like this are more likely to pick on people who stand out. This in no way shifts responsibility onto the victims for what happened to them, it's simply an empirical fact. Humans tend to pick on those different to themselves because this way, they'll be more likely to garner support from similarly insecure people around them.

In the past, I've been publicly harassed (verbally and physically) in public because of my unusual appearance and body language as a result of being Autistic. I was treated badly because I am different. Does this mean that what I had to deal with was my fault? Of course not. It simply means that people who are different are often perceived to be easy targets by bullies, and if you demand specific reference for that common knowledge, I don't think I can take you seriously in this conversation.
Acknowledging this fact is NOT synonymous with excusing the behaviour in question.

Catcalling can still look different.

Ok .

Are you seriously denying that people who differ from the norm are more likely to be harassed and bullied?

So, yeah. Agree. [truncated for clarity not distortion, which I hope is evident]

I am doing no such thing, so don't attribute to me things I do not say.
I wrote "ok". That means if you can't take me seriously then, well, "ok". I don't have to be bothered by it.

It's strange that you're unable to show me the same courtesy you just showed ahogaday; you appear to have truncated my first post specifically for the purpose of distortion because you don't want to respond to any of my points. I specifically said that IF you are denying that those who are different are more likely to be seen as easy targets, I cannot take you seriously. You appear to be denying that this is your opinion, therefore the sentence you quoted shouldn't apply.

I do hope that this was a mere misunderstanding...

For almost all that time, and almost everywhere, when women were not “taken”, they were considered their fathers’ property. The women closest to being considered public property were prostitutes, but they usually had pimps.

Laci Green, look her up on Youtube.

The Vagina Monologues...watch a few.

I have a few feminist friends, and they tend to gravitate toward that material.

As for my own opinion on the OP...I know better than to have one.

In my 45 years of living, I don't think I have ever heard a man catcall a women. I didn't realize that stuff actually happened. I guess I do live rather isolated.

Ok.. no problem.. thanks... :)

I don't know who Laci Green is. If you are lumping me in with feminists, I'm not sure why. If you aren't, I have no idea why you mention you have feminist friends as no feminists have been brought up in this thread.

If the OP refers to me, you clearly have an opinion. If the OP refers to Laci Green on youtube, you clearly have an opinion.
If you want to say something, you should actually say it- since you already have. Rather than "say it but not say it"- which is completely ridiculous. That whole nonsense "I have something to say but I know better than to say it" is not a way out of having responsibility for saying something, because you actually did say something.

Given that you had to go through several steps for that to actually end up on the internet, it didn't exactly slip out, either.

No. I did not truncate your first post SPECIFICALLY for misunderstanding.
Yes I absolutely did it because there are specific reasons I do not want to respond to what you put your first post, and I am fine with you not taking me seriously.

This is your first post:




-You said that *I KNOW* that I was making a strawman argument [nope. I know/knew no such thing].

Since you claimed to know what I knew, and are telling me that I am not showing you courtesy that I showed someone else- who did not interact with me in the same way- I have no reason to want to engage in debate with you. Why do I care if you take me seriously if you make a statement telling me what I am doing, or informing me of what I "know"?

I don't know if this is a small thing for you or not. But it is not for me, and I am under no obligation to continue to debate or discuss something if I feel the other person is going to make declarations about what they presume I understand or don't, know or don't know.

And if, for example, CynicalWaffle felt I made that misstep with them? If they thought I was telling them that's what they were doing [is it? you tell me]. They have every right to challenge me on that, to choose to cease discourse, to tell me I am wrong, all of the above. But you are not CynicalWaffle and I was under the impression they could speak for themselves. I could be mistaken.

I am explaining myself here, but neither of us is necessarily obligated to do so.
Hope that clarifies the misunderstanding.