FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Sexualising women's bodies
Sexualising women's bodies
Jump to: Newest in thread
Mr | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The girl who was sent home for wearing a "short" skirt was wearing the school approved skirt. It was just above the knee. She was told it was "distracting" to male teachers. The mind boggles. " There's been several stories. In America students have had their yearbook photos doctored to remove cleavage and school skirts make a routine appearance in news stories along with women being asked to cover up on aircraft and all sorts. I'm sure that many of these cases are totally wrong and degrading. I suppose my question is, should there be a limit? Mr | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power." I don't disagree, my question is do others agree that *some* women and girls deliberately dress in a provocative way and if so, is this not as much a case of sexualising the female body as a man claiming to be unable to resist the distraction of a woman's body? Mr | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such?" I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such? I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to." This, totally agree x couldn’t have put it in a better way actually x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society" Lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look, lesbians manage to not complain about women's clothing and tend not to attack us either, so our clothing isn't really the problem, is it?" I'm not sure I follow the argument? Domestic violence is more common in same sex relationships than heterosexual ones though in not sure if anyone has correlated the number of female on female sexual assault by lesbians with the number of women who identify as lesbian to see if it is in fact more or less common. Again, please believe me I'm not attacking clothing, I'm asking questions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hum, Yes Men and Women can both dress provocatively, we should be able to dress how we want. But regardless of that the real question should be. Why can't men behave themselves?" I definitely agree with this...  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such? I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to. This, totally agree x couldn’t have put it in a better way actually x " But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look, lesbians manage to not complain about women's clothing and tend not to attack us either, so our clothing isn't really the problem, is it? I'm not sure I follow the argument? Domestic violence is more common in same sex relationships than heterosexual ones though in not sure if anyone has correlated the number of female on female sexual assault by lesbians with the number of women who identify as lesbian to see if it is in fact more or less common. Again, please believe me I'm not attacking clothing, I'm asking questions. " Yes they have correlated those statistics. There is a much higher level of domestic violence in relationships that contain men than in lesbian relationships. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such? I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to. This, totally agree x couldn’t have put it in a better way actually x But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. " So for example I got harassed by guy in work as I had a top that came up to my neck not tight fitting a royal blue pencil skirt and some red heels. Apparently I was dressed as a prostitute as I had red shoes on 
So sexiliy dressed means different things to different people. I don't see why I should alter how I dress to make sure I'm not perceived as dressing too proclivity. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If it's the same story I read then you left out the part where the skirt was rolled up around the waist to make the skirt shorter." And did she do this to arouse random men or to not look fat Knee-length skirts make me look short and huge. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look, lesbians manage to not complain about women's clothing and tend not to attack us either, so our clothing isn't really the problem, is it? I'm not sure I follow the argument? Domestic violence is more common in same sex relationships than heterosexual ones though in not sure if anyone has correlated the number of female on female sexual assault by lesbians with the number of women who identify as lesbian to see if it is in fact more or less common. Again, please believe me I'm not attacking clothing, I'm asking questions. " The vast majority of all abusers are men, the vast majority of all victims are women. I.dont think there has been enough research into domestic abuse within same sex couples but there is a some evidence to show that any additional "stress factor", such as being part of a minority group does increase the incident rate. You were asking about clothing and being out on public etc. Women are not usually attacked, cat called or otherwise by other women, it is mostly men who do that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look, lesbians manage to not complain about women's clothing and tend not to attack us either, so our clothing isn't really the problem, is it? I'm not sure I follow the argument? Domestic violence is more common in same sex relationships than heterosexual ones though in not sure if anyone has correlated the number of female on female sexual assault by lesbians with the number of women who identify as lesbian to see if it is in fact more or less common. Again, please believe me I'm not attacking clothing, I'm asking questions. Yes they have correlated those statistics. There is a much higher level of domestic violence in relationships that contain men than in lesbian relationships. " Domestic violence is more common in LGBTQ relationships that heterosexual one's. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If it's the same story I read then you left out the part where the skirt was rolled up around the waist to make the skirt shorter. The skirt may of been school approved but the manner of how they was wearing it isn't! Girls, teens, Women all know exactly what they are doing when they pick what they want to wear & how they choose to wear it. It doesn't help that everyone including kids have smartphones & the crap they look at encourages them to try & dress more adult like." I used to roll up my skirt as well as pull threads out of my tie and wear it back to front. Not at all to be sexual as you think, because I was trying to be a rebellious teenager. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. " It's ok to notice it but then you should mind your own business. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such? I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to. This, totally agree x couldn’t have put it in a better way actually x But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. So for example I got harassed by guy in work as I had a top that came up to my neck not tight fitting a royal blue pencil skirt and some red heels. Apparently I was dressed as a prostitute as I had red shoes on
So sexiliy dressed means different things to different people. I don't see why I should alter how I dress to make sure I'm not perceived as dressing too proclivity. "With the best will in the world, that was not my point. My understanding was that the previous poster said that when she dressed sexily it was only for who she chose to sexualise her (paraphrasing). My point was that if you are dressing intentionally sexily, it will be perceived that way by all, not just the select few. For the record, I'm saying one should feel free to dress as one pleases. But if you walk down the street wearing something you know is provocative, be sure you will provoke. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such? I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to. This, totally agree x couldn’t have put it in a better way actually x But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. So for example I got harassed by guy in work as I had a top that came up to my neck not tight fitting a royal blue pencil skirt and some red heels. Apparently I was dressed as a prostitute as I had red shoes on
So sexiliy dressed means different things to different people. I don't see why I should alter how I dress to make sure I'm not perceived as dressing too proclivity. "I think that's a big part of the problem. It uses an argument of reductio ad absurdum. Should a woman be given hassle for wearing red shoes? If course not. Is it reasonable for either a man or a woman to go to work dressed in a thong and nipple tassles? Odours argue that is equally inappropriate? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look, lesbians manage to not complain about women's clothing and tend not to attack us either, so our clothing isn't really the problem, is it? I'm not sure I follow the argument? Domestic violence is more common in same sex relationships than heterosexual ones though in not sure if anyone has correlated the number of female on female sexual assault by lesbians with the number of women who identify as lesbian to see if it is in fact more or less common. Again, please believe me I'm not attacking clothing, I'm asking questions. Yes they have correlated those statistics. There is a much higher level of domestic violence in relationships that contain men than in lesbian relationships. Domestic violence is more common in LGBTQ relationships that heterosexual one's. " There is a lot of it in gay male relationships, yes. Infidelity too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. It's ok to notice it but then you should mind your own business. " I absolutely agree. But it WILL be noticed. And you can't control what others may think. I'm not discussing their actions, that goes without saying. Or it should. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look, lesbians manage to not complain about women's clothing and tend not to attack us either, so our clothing isn't really the problem, is it?" Exactly this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such? I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to. This, totally agree x couldn’t have put it in a better way actually x But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. So for example I got harassed by guy in work as I had a top that came up to my neck not tight fitting a royal blue pencil skirt and some red heels. Apparently I was dressed as a prostitute as I had red shoes on
So sexiliy dressed means different things to different people. I don't see why I should alter how I dress to make sure I'm not perceived as dressing too proclivity.
With the best will in the world, that was not my point. My understanding was that the previous poster said that when she dressed sexily it was only for who she chose to sexualise her (paraphrasing). My point was that if you are dressing intentionally sexily, it will be perceived that way by all, not just the select few.
For the record, I'm saying one should feel free to dress as one pleases. But if you walk down the street wearing something you know is provocative, be sure you will provoke. "I misread I appologise. Is dressing sexily really that provocative these days though? And what does dressed sexiliy actually entail? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was an article I read today. Where a primary schools solution to boys lifting girls skirts was that the girls should wear modesty shorts. This to me is totally unacceptable. And teaches boys from an early age that how she dresses determines how she is treated. In school we had to kneel to make sure our skirts were long enough as not to distract the boys. Which again is just bs and if anything made the rebellious girl roll up their skirts. I've never understood in school or work. How what I wear is distracting to anyone when I'm sat at a desk or under a lab coat. " I agree with you, Frida. There should be a much greater emphasis on educating boys on respectful behaviour and the importance of consent. I don't know if that happened in the situation you are referring to, but that's really what should have happened. It might be OK to advise girls and women doing things to reduce the risk of men taking the way somebody dresses as a green light to act badly. I see that as similar to somebody telling me not to walk through dangerous areas alone at night. It wouldn't be my fault if I was attacked but I could do things to prevent myself from being in that situation. But what you are describing does sound like an acceptance of the way boys are going to act and putting the responsibility for boys behaviour on girls. That's really wrong. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look, lesbians manage to not complain about women's clothing and tend not to attack us either, so our clothing isn't really the problem, is it?" This.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such? I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to. This, totally agree x couldn’t have put it in a better way actually x But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. So for example I got harassed by guy in work as I had a top that came up to my neck not tight fitting a royal blue pencil skirt and some red heels. Apparently I was dressed as a prostitute as I had red shoes on
So sexiliy dressed means different things to different people. I don't see why I should alter how I dress to make sure I'm not perceived as dressing too proclivity.
I think that's a big part of the problem. It uses an argument of reductio ad absurdum. Should a woman be given hassle for wearing red shoes? If course not. Is it reasonable for either a man or a woman to go to work dressed in a thong and nipple tassles? Odours argue that is equally inappropriate? "Agreed I should be appropriately dressed for work. I mean I doubt health and safety would allow me in the lab in a thong and nipple tassels. That is accident waiting to happen with the Bunsen burner. But I think most of us dress appropriately to the situation. It's not like most of us are going to dress like we do in our pictures here to our nans funeral. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was an article I read today. Where a primary schools solution to boys lifting girls skirts was that the girls should wear modesty shorts. This to me is totally unacceptable. And teaches boys from an early age that how she dresses determines how she is treated. In school we had to kneel to make sure our skirts were long enough as not to distract the boys. Which again is just bs and if anything made the rebellious girl roll up their skirts. I've never understood in school or work. How what I wear is distracting to anyone when I'm sat at a desk or under a lab coat. I agree with you, Frida. There should be a much greater emphasis on educating boys on respectful behaviour and the importance of consent. I don't know if that happened in the situation you are referring to, but that's really what should have happened. It might be OK to advise girls and women doing things to reduce the risk of men taking the way somebody dresses as a green light to act badly. I see that as similar to somebody telling me not to walk through dangerous areas alone at night. It wouldn't be my fault if I was attacked but I could do things to prevent myself from being in that situation. But what you are describing does sound like an acceptance of the way boys are going to act and putting the responsibility for boys behaviour on girls. That's really wrong. " The article and my own experiences has been boys will be boys kind of attitude. I personally feel consent should be taught in schools. I mean my young sons understand the concept, they now ask for constent to pull down each others trousers in the house. I think in schools there should be more openness about how hormones etc can impact each other but that it's the individuals responsibility to not act out on their thoughts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. It's ok to notice it but then you should mind your own business. I absolutely agree. But it WILL be noticed. And you can't control what others may think. I'm not discussing their actions, that goes without saying. Or it should. " But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. It's ok to notice it but then you should mind your own business. I absolutely agree. But it WILL be noticed. And you can't control what others may think. I'm not discussing their actions, that goes without saying. Or it should. But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. " Totally agree | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. It's ok to notice it but then you should mind your own business. I absolutely agree. But it WILL be noticed. And you can't control what others may think. I'm not discussing their actions, that goes without saying. Or it should. But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. " Men yes. Pubescent and pre-pubescent boys possibly not. It will distract them, much the same as 2 dogs shagging in the playground will have them all at the classroom windows. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. It's ok to notice it but then you should mind your own business. I absolutely agree. But it WILL be noticed. And you can't control what others may think. I'm not discussing their actions, that goes without saying. Or it should. But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. Men yes. Pubescent and pre-pubescent boys possibly not. It will distract them, much the same as 2 dogs shagging in the playground will have them all at the classroom windows. " A short skirt with legs on display is not comparable to dogs shagging. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. Men yes. Pubescent and pre-pubescent boys possibly not. It will distract them, much the same as 2 dogs shagging in the playground will have them all at the classroom windows. " And isn't this the right time to teach consent and respect rather than telling girls that they are "wrong" (again)? Maybe once the dogs have finished. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such? I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to. This, totally agree x couldn’t have put it in a better way actually x But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. So for example I got harassed by guy in work as I had a top that came up to my neck not tight fitting a royal blue pencil skirt and some red heels. Apparently I was dressed as a prostitute as I had red shoes on
So sexiliy dressed means different things to different people. I don't see why I should alter how I dress to make sure I'm not perceived as dressing too proclivity.
I think that's a big part of the problem. It uses an argument of reductio ad absurdum. Should a woman be given hassle for wearing red shoes? If course not. Is it reasonable for either a man or a woman to go to work dressed in a thong and nipple tassles? Odours argue that is equally inappropriate?
Agreed I should be appropriately dressed for work. I mean I doubt health and safety would allow me in the lab in a thong and nipple tassels. That is accident waiting to happen with the Bunsen burner.
But I think most of us dress appropriately to the situation. It's not like most of us are going to dress like we do in our pictures here to our nans funeral. "No - I was just saying that using an example such as yours with the red shoes that's patently out of order doesn't answer the question. We all have different opinions on what is and isn't appropriate, sometimes this can be a safety issue though as you say what you wear under a lab coat shouldn't matter. Somewhere along the line we all have a personal idea of what is decent in a given environment. I would be happy in tight swimming shorts at a pool doing lengths, not on a beach. I'd be happy top off in baggy shorts on a beach, not a dentist etc. So as there is a wide range of what is considered acceptable, is it not then reasonable for organisations to create rules stipulating what they deem acceptable? I agree that arguing a school girls skirt is too short because it is a distraction to male teachers is wrong but they should be able to stipulate a length? I went to an all boys school but we were not allowed to take our blazers off in the corridor or too and from school except in the last half of the summer term or if announced in assembly on hot days. Being seen by a teacher on the way home without your blazer could get you a detention. That was all about upholding an image for the school not about sexualisation. It is problematic because that example is about being "smart" and often the justification for girls clothing is about removing the sexuality which I think is the wrong tone. However, posters above have said that they will dress in a sexually provocative way so there is acknowledgement that such a dress style exists and yes I agree this doesn't mean men can r@pe or school boys lift classmates skirts. If we acknowledge it is possible to dress provocatively is it not reasonable to ask school children and employess not to dress that way - male and female? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If we are saying men shouldn't view women as sex objects, is it not equally true that we should say that women shouldn't present themselves as such? I think the issue with this is that it suggests that men can't control themselves which is obviously wrong. Dressing in a sexy way does not invite everyone to objectify me, only those I choose and consent to. This, totally agree x couldn’t have put it in a better way actually x But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. So for example I got harassed by guy in work as I had a top that came up to my neck not tight fitting a royal blue pencil skirt and some red heels. Apparently I was dressed as a prostitute as I had red shoes on
So sexiliy dressed means different things to different people. I don't see why I should alter how I dress to make sure I'm not perceived as dressing too proclivity.
I think that's a big part of the problem. It uses an argument of reductio ad absurdum. Should a woman be given hassle for wearing red shoes? If course not. Is it reasonable for either a man or a woman to go to work dressed in a thong and nipple tassles? Odours argue that is equally inappropriate?
Agreed I should be appropriately dressed for work. I mean I doubt health and safety would allow me in the lab in a thong and nipple tassels. That is accident waiting to happen with the Bunsen burner.
But I think most of us dress appropriately to the situation. It's not like most of us are going to dress like we do in our pictures here to our nans funeral.
No - I was just saying that using an example such as yours with the red shoes that's patently out of order doesn't answer the question. We all have different opinions on what is and isn't appropriate, sometimes this can be a safety issue though as you say what you wear under a lab coat shouldn't matter. Somewhere along the line we all have a personal idea of what is decent in a given environment. I would be happy in tight swimming shorts at a pool doing lengths, not on a beach. I'd be happy top off in baggy shorts on a beach, not a dentist etc. So as there is a wide range of what is considered acceptable, is it not then reasonable for organisations to create rules stipulating what they deem acceptable?
I agree that arguing a school girls skirt is too short because it is a distraction to male teachers is wrong but they should be able to stipulate a length?
I went to an all boys school but we were not allowed to take our blazers off in the corridor or too and from school except in the last half of the summer term or if announced in assembly on hot days. Being seen by a teacher on the way home without your blazer could get you a detention. That was all about upholding an image for the school not about sexualisation.
It is problematic because that example is about being "smart" and often the justification for girls clothing is about removing the sexuality which I think is the wrong tone.
However, posters above have said that they will dress in a sexually provocative way so there is acknowledgement that such a dress style exists and yes I agree this doesn't mean men can r@pe or school boys lift classmates skirts. If we acknowledge it is possible to dress provocatively is it not reasonable to ask school children and employess not to dress that way - male and female?"I think a school uniform is a good thing and things can be stipulated. Same as if the work place has a uniform then they can dictate what it is you wear. It's more problematic when there isn't one like in my workplace. Pre covid I often wore pencil skirts and heels I like the 50's look. Some men would find it provocative others not. I think it would be difficult to stipulate what someone could or couldn't wear to work. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The girl who was sent home for wearing a "short" skirt was wearing the school approved skirt. It was just above the knee. She was told it was "distracting" to male teachers. The mind boggles. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A male walking around in shorts with no top... No one bats an eyelid. But a woman with bare legs in shorts/skirt or a top that shows a bit of cleavage is seen as dressing in a provocative way. It's weird. "This
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. It's ok to notice it but then you should mind your own business. I absolutely agree. But it WILL be noticed. And you can't control what others may think. I'm not discussing their actions, that goes without saying. Or it should. But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. " So your dress style should be noticeable but not distracting? Surely they amount to the same thing? Our brains work by ignoring 99% of what our senses tell them and only focusing on what our genetics have programmed them is important. Top of this list is survival and reproduction. You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power." How does private citizens owning trading businesses as opposed to the state, have even the slightest to do with how womans bodies are viewed? And partiarchal society? You mean like our head of state, the Queen? Or the previous prime minister theresa may? First minister of scotland nicola sturgeon? The just resigned first minister of NI arleene foster? You left-wingers really need to sort out your horseshit before you spout it. My god. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A male walking around in shorts with no top... No one bats an eyelid. But a woman with bare legs in shorts/skirt or a top that shows a bit of cleavage is seen as dressing in a provocative way. It's weird.
This
"That reminds of this video I saw a few years ago.... https://youtu.be/V4UWxlVvT1A | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. Men yes. Pubescent and pre-pubescent boys possibly not. It will distract them, much the same as 2 dogs shagging in the playground will have them all at the classroom windows. And isn't this the right time to teach consent and respect rather than telling girls that they are "wrong" (again)? Maybe once the dogs have finished." Or get the caretaker out with a bucket of cold water.. It absolutely is the time to reach them all about consent, respect and responsibility. No whataboutary here, but little girls can be as bad. I recall girls trying to pull boys trunks down at the swimming pool so education is required, and where better than in school, with reinforcement at home. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power. How does private citizens owning trading businesses as opposed to the state, have even the slightest to do with how womans bodies are viewed? And partiarchal society? You mean like our head of state, the Queen? Or the previous prime minister theresa may? First minister of scotland nicola sturgeon? The just resigned first minister of NI arleene foster? You left-wingers really need to sort out your horseshit before you spout it. My god." If something has a monetary value, it will be exploited. Lots of businesses use pretty women as bait to boost their profits. Sex sells. Women's insecurities about their bodies are exploited for privaten private profit - such as feminine hygiene projects that go against all medical advice. And just because a few token women have high profile roles (some of them inherited, not earned) that doesn't mean it isn't a patriarchal society that's largely rub by men for men. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr" That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A male walking around in shorts with no top... No one bats an eyelid. But a woman with bare legs in shorts/skirt or a top that shows a bit of cleavage is seen as dressing in a provocative way. It's weird.
This
"Is this really that weird? Do you think it's weird that no one would look twice at a peahen (many people probably wouldn't even know what one is) yet who doesn't think a peacock in full display an eye catching sight? I absolutely am not saying that men can behave how they like and that a woman's clothing dictates how she should be treated but as a species we have evolved (like many other mammals) to have a certain type of sexual selection. We are totally capable of controlling our desires but our brains are wired by millions of years of evolution and women are equally aware of the effect they have as men are and perfectly happy to exploit that fact. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm." Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? " You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too." That's a fair point. Thank you. Brings me to another question though, is it solely men who are responsible for undoing the conditioning or do women contribute to it by deliberately appealing to this conditioned response? Can we undo the conditioning simply by drumming into boys that certain dress styles are not provocative? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too." Perfectly put. It can be done but it takes time to change social norms. Men are no longer titilated by ankles (usually) and haven't been for a long time. It's going to take a long time and requires that women are not judged on their looks. As long as the media still write stories about a female leaders about her clothes... it doesn't help change perception. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too." Which culture is that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? " Amazonian rain forest off the top of my head. Parts of Africa.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? Amazonian rain forest off the top of my head. Parts of Africa.... " Any specifics or links you could point me towards, would like to read up more on it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? " The Hamer tribe of Ethiopia, the Dani tribe of Indonesia, Yanomami tribe, Venezuela, to name just a few. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? Amazonian rain forest off the top of my head. Parts of Africa.... Any specifics or links you could point me towards, would like to read up more on it " Although not addressing this subject in detail. Tribe by Bruce Parry demonstrates how different cultures dress etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? Amazonian rain forest off the top of my head. Parts of Africa.... Any specifics or links you could point me towards, would like to read up more on it Although not addressing this subject in detail. Tribe by Bruce Parry demonstrates how different cultures dress etc. " That was a great series. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? The Hamer tribe of Ethiopia, the Dani tribe of Indonesia, Yanomami tribe, Venezuela, to name just a few." Anywhere I can read up more on it, I’ve googled a few but can’t find any specific info on the topic | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? Amazonian rain forest off the top of my head. Parts of Africa.... Any specifics or links you could point me towards, would like to read up more on it Although not addressing this subject in detail. Tribe by Bruce Parry demonstrates how different cultures dress etc. " Added to my list! Sounds great thanks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? Amazonian rain forest off the top of my head. Parts of Africa.... Any specifics or links you could point me towards, would like to read up more on it Although not addressing this subject in detail. Tribe by Bruce Parry demonstrates how different cultures dress etc. That was a great series. " It was flipping amazing, and has properly made an impact on me. Wish they would do more series | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power. How does private citizens owning trading businesses as opposed to the state, have even the slightest to do with how womans bodies are viewed? And partiarchal society? You mean like our head of state, the Queen? Or the previous prime minister theresa may? First minister of scotland nicola sturgeon? The just resigned first minister of NI arleene foster? You left-wingers really need to sort out your horseshit before you spout it. My god. If something has a monetary value, it will be exploited. Lots of businesses use pretty women as bait to boost their profits. Sex sells. Women's insecurities about their bodies are exploited for privaten private profit - such as feminine hygiene projects that go against all medical advice. And just because a few token women have high profile roles (some of them inherited, not earned) that doesn't mean it isn't a patriarchal society that's largely rub by men for men." All that horseshit has gone to your head. Changing ownership from private citizens like you and I and transfering it to the state like the failed socialism experiment does not remove the monetary value. I teach undergrads who have a significantly greater grasp on these matters.... Also to call powerful woman "tokens" is both demeaning to woman and that kind of self-serving attitude does more to hinder the supposed "cause" than help it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? Amazonian rain forest off the top of my head. Parts of Africa.... Any specifics or links you could point me towards, would like to read up more on it Although not addressing this subject in detail. Tribe by Bruce Parry demonstrates how different cultures dress etc. That was a great series. It was flipping amazing, and has properly made an impact on me. Wish they would do more series " His programmes are all brilliant. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The reason the girl gave for rolling her skirt up was the heatwave at the time but I didn't believe it to be true because it looked more like a belt then a skirt. The girls in the school I went to did it solely for the attention & only complained if the attention was from someone they didn't like." I did it in the 60’s and 70’s when I was a teenager. It wasn’t for attention but because I liked to wear very fashionable clothes and Twiggy was our role model. I went to a very strict girls grammar and was always getting detention for rolling up my skirt. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. Men yes. Pubescent and pre-pubescent boys possibly not. It will distract them, much the same as 2 dogs shagging in the playground will have them all at the classroom windows. And isn't this the right time to teach consent and respect rather than telling girls that they are "wrong" (again)? Maybe once the dogs have finished. Or get the caretaker out with a bucket of cold water.. It absolutely is the time to reach them all about consent, respect and responsibility. No whataboutary here, but little girls can be as bad. I recall girls trying to pull boys trunks down at the swimming pool so education is required, and where better than in school, with reinforcement at home. " I agree but think it should be taught at home and expected and re-inforced at school. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A male walking around in shorts with no top... No one bats an eyelid. But a woman with bare legs in shorts/skirt or a top that shows a bit of cleavage is seen as dressing in a provocative way. It's weird. "Don't bat an eyelid but I do roll my eyes. I don't want to see you with your top off mate, and if I ran a shop or a pub that guy with no top wouldn't be coming in. Same way I don't want to see some girls undercarriage. Just dress for the occasional, school is not a fashion show. Wear the skirt as it's designed, not rolled and synched up to a mini skirt. Wear your tie as it designed to be worn, not a skinny tie, not a tiny 2 inch tie. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You'll not walk past a restaurant without the lovely smell of food catching your attention, movement in the corner of your eye immediately gets a reaction, sexual attraction is the same. Obviously men should be able to control their reaction but to pretend you can dress in a way to get noticed but it not be a distraction (whether to a male or female) is I believe a bit naive. Mr That distracting smell from the restaurant better be stopped before someone has an accident. Or perhaps it's not necessary because we are capable of not letting it affect us to a degree that would cause anyone harm. Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point. Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point. What I said is our brains are designed to notice certain things and sexual attraction is one of them. Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places. Men control themselves and treat women as people not objects and women don't deliberately dress in a provocative way? There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? You're buying into the notion that women's bodies equal sex. There are still cultures in the world that do not sexualise women, where they wear very little and go about their day without being viewed as provocative. Westernisation means such cultures are vanishing and women are expected to cover up. In the UK in the past women's ankles, calves and hair were highly eroticised because they were rarely seen in public. It's not hard-wired into our brains to view cleavage and thighs as arousing, we're conditioned to view them as such. We can be unconditioned too. Which culture is that? Amazonian rain forest off the top of my head. Parts of Africa.... Any specifics or links you could point me towards, would like to read up more on it Although not addressing this subject in detail. Tribe by Bruce Parry demonstrates how different cultures dress etc. Added to my list! Sounds great thanks " Bruce Parry has fantastic tv programmes as well - I always watch him. He has one at the moment on the Northern Hemisphere. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition... " It's bloody ridiculous that my sons at a young age had t-shirts that say future astronaut whereas my daughter has to have future princess. It's mad that the only camo shirt we could find for her was pink camo. Yeah, we can buy her shirts from the boys section, and we do, but if little girls aren't held with enough respect as little bits they're effed from the start. You can buy a pink baby grow with "do my thighs look big in this" whereas you can buy a blue on saying something about loving boobs. If you're gonna start kids off like that, it's no wonder, is it? Sorry for the rant, I've had a drink. Mr. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power. How does private citizens owning trading businesses as opposed to the state, have even the slightest to do with how womans bodies are viewed? And partiarchal society? You mean like our head of state, the Queen? Or the previous prime minister theresa may? First minister of scotland nicola sturgeon? The just resigned first minister of NI arleene foster? You left-wingers really need to sort out your horseshit before you spout it. My god." I always find irony amusing. So thanks for the laugh. Naming a few ( recent ) female leaders does not a matriarchy make. Your last sentence lacks grace. Nothing more than an insult. You don't know a posters politics and their opinion isn't diminished because you hurl foul tirades at them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition... It's bloody ridiculous that my sons at a young age had t-shirts that say future astronaut whereas my daughter has to have future princess. It's mad that the only camo shirt we could find for her was pink camo. Yeah, we can buy her shirts from the boys section, and we do, but if little girls aren't held with enough respect as little bits they're effed from the start. You can buy a pink baby grow with "do my thighs look big in this" whereas you can buy a blue on saying something about loving boobs. If you're gonna start kids off like that, it's no wonder, is it? Sorry for the rant, I've had a drink. Mr." Works both ways with that stuff I guess | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition... It's bloody ridiculous that my sons at a young age had t-shirts that say future astronaut whereas my daughter has to have future princess. It's mad that the only camo shirt we could find for her was pink camo. Yeah, we can buy her shirts from the boys section, and we do, but if little girls aren't held with enough respect as little bits they're effed from the start. You can buy a pink baby grow with "do my thighs look big in this" whereas you can buy a blue on saying something about loving boobs. If you're gonna start kids off like that, it's no wonder, is it? Sorry for the rant, I've had a drink. Mr. Works both ways with that stuff I guess " With a simple solution...don't buy if you don't want. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If it's the same story I read then you left out the part where the skirt was rolled up around the waist to make the skirt shorter. The skirt may of been school approved but the manner of how they was wearing it isn't! Girls, teens, Women all know exactly what they are doing when they pick what they want to wear & how they choose to wear it. It doesn't help that everyone including kids have smartphones & the crap they look at encourages them to try & dress more adult like." I agree with this guy...sad but it is true, when I was at school loads of girls rolled up their skirts to make them shorter to attract male attention...and I see that this still goes on sadly in teenagers and also in adults. Women's breasts where never seen as a sex object until that first women all them years ago allowed hers to be shown and used as exactly that...other females followed!!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition... It's bloody ridiculous that my sons at a young age had t-shirts that say future astronaut whereas my daughter has to have future princess. It's mad that the only camo shirt we could find for her was pink camo. Yeah, we can buy her shirts from the boys section, and we do, but if little girls aren't held with enough respect as little bits they're effed from the start. You can buy a pink baby grow with "do my thighs look big in this" whereas you can buy a blue on saying something about loving boobs. If you're gonna start kids off like that, it's no wonder, is it? Sorry for the rant, I've had a drink. Mr. Works both ways with that stuff I guess With a simple solution...don't buy if you don't want. " No absolutely, genuinely agree with you, and we don't buy em. We've got the lads old camo and star wars shirts for her. It's just that it's insinuated. Automatically. Why tho? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On a day when the news has highlighted the appalling support that R ape victims receive and the horrendous lack of prosecutions I am dismayed that there this thread which discusses women's clothing takes itself seriously. Each and every poster here misses the point, that if clothes hadn't been invented what excuse for R ape then ? I should be able to walk naked down the street and not be held responsible for any attack that happens to me. Do people on naturist beaches attack each other ? The men on this thread that are choosing to hold a woman responsible for her own attack simply because he saw her body ..... simply highlight the extent of their cultural conditioning. " Granny, the nail is yet again struck firmly on the head by you. Absolutely bob on! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power." I disagree....I was not brought up in that way and working in an early years environment I haven't seen that either from colleagues or parents, teachers certainly don't.....where on earth do you get the idea from that freedom and ambition are inhibited, women have never had so much scope and opportunity, we're not living in the 60's anymore....Women/girls have more autonomy over themselves and their choices they make It is actually boys who are at a disadvantage and classed as 'in need' as Teachers are concerned about the lack of language and literacy skills in boys across the demograph... I have to fill in forms which determine how much funding the children I care for get on a points scoring system, the boys will automatically score more points just for being boys.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power. I disagree....I was not brought up in that way and working in an early years environment I haven't seen that either from colleagues or parents, teachers certainly don't.....where on earth do you get the idea from that freedom and ambition are inhibited, women have never had so much scope and opportunity, we're not living in the 60's anymore....Women/girls have more autonomy over themselves and their choices they make It is actually boys who are at a disadvantage and classed as 'in need' as Teachers are concerned about the lack of language and literacy skills in boys across the demograph... I have to fill in forms which determine how much funding the children I care for get on a points scoring system, the boys will automatically score more points just for being boys.... " I’ve read articles about how boys are falling way behind in education, is that what you’ve seen? Why do you think that’s happening? And why does no one seem to care? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power. I disagree....I was not brought up in that way and working in an early years environment I haven't seen that either from colleagues or parents, teachers certainly don't.....where on earth do you get the idea from that freedom and ambition are inhibited, women have never had so much scope and opportunity, we're not living in the 60's anymore....Women/girls have more autonomy over themselves and their choices they make It is actually boys who are at a disadvantage and classed as 'in need' as Teachers are concerned about the lack of language and literacy skills in boys across the demograph... I have to fill in forms which determine how much funding the children I care for get on a points scoring system, the boys will automatically score more points just for being boys.... I’ve read articles about how boys are falling way behind in education, is that what you’ve seen? Why do you think that’s happening? And why does no one seem to care?" Well this was happening prior to lockdown and I think there are a few factors at play...I can only say what I have observed over time and the boys do tend to have shorter attention spans and limited concentration.... I work with 4 year olds all starting School in September, out of a group of 14 keychildren 3 have autism traits and waiting for assessment, by the time they get assessment they will already have started in mainstream school. I suspect I have autistic girls as well in that group but girls mask the traits better (will give eye contact, have a high level of communication and language) ...knowing the girls and their quirks I can see the traits not being within the normal parameters of development Too early to assess the impact lockdown will have had on childrens holistic learning....This will be highlighted in the formative assessment due later in the year And yes, Ofsted want to know how we are supporting boys in the setting with language and literacy so it is something which is being monitored, the new EYFS due September is more child centred so I am sure there will be more on the supporting of boys | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On a day when the news has highlighted the appalling support that R ape victims receive and the horrendous lack of prosecutions I am dismayed that there this thread which discusses women's clothing takes itself seriously. Each and every poster here misses the point, that if clothes hadn't been invented what excuse for R ape then ? I should be able to walk naked down the street and not be held responsible for any attack that happens to me. Do people on naturist beaches attack each other ? The men on this thread that are choosing to hold a woman responsible for her own attack simply because he saw her body ..... simply highlight the extent of their cultural conditioning. " With due respect Granny, that's bollocks. I haven't seen the news report you quote and if I had I would perhaps have not posted - it also has no bearing on this thread. Nowhere have I (or anyone else) suggested that women's clothing choices excuse men's behavoir. My OP merely questions whether women are equally responsible as men for sexualising their bodies. On this thread we have women saying that they dress to be provocative to men of their choosing. So it is accepted that there is such a thing as dressing provocatively- that is to provoke a reaction. We then had a woman who says she rolled up her skirt at school because a longer skirt made her look fat - that is she adjusted the uniform code because she was wanted a more attractive look. Whether that was done to make herself feel better or to be more attractive to the boys wasn't stated but at a minimum it is an admission of tweaking school uniform to appear more attractive Nell raised a very good point that we have been conditioned to see female legs and cleavage as sexual and that we need to break that conditioning, a point I really liked and thanked her for. My following question on how we break that conditioning and whether it is possible to do so without women choosing to sexualise their bodies has been missed and remains unanswered. This thread is not about men's behavoir, whether a man should be distracted by a woman, whether a man has the right to tell a woman what to wear or whether he should be free to r@pe based on clothing choices. I simply ask are both sexes to blame for sexualising women's bodies. Mr | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The girl who was sent home for wearing a "short" skirt was wearing the school approved skirt. It was just above the knee. She was told it was "distracting" to male teachers. The mind boggles. " I've worked somewhere where HER eyes were distracting1  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On a day when the news has highlighted the appalling support that R ape victims receive and the horrendous lack of prosecutions I am dismayed that there this thread which discusses women's clothing takes itself seriously. Each and every poster here misses the point, that if clothes hadn't been invented what excuse for R ape then ? I should be able to walk naked down the street and not be held responsible for any attack that happens to me. Do people on naturist beaches attack each other ? The men on this thread that are choosing to hold a woman responsible for her own attack simply because he saw her body ..... simply highlight the extent of their cultural conditioning. With due respect Granny, that's bollocks. I haven't seen the news report you quote and if I had I would perhaps have not posted - it also has no bearing on this thread. Nowhere have I (or anyone else) suggested that women's clothing choices excuse men's behavoir. My OP merely questions whether women are equally responsible as men for sexualising their bodies. On this thread we have women saying that they dress to be provocative to men of their choosing. So it is accepted that there is such a thing as dressing provocatively- that is to provoke a reaction. We then had a woman who says she rolled up her skirt at school because a longer skirt made her look fat - that is she adjusted the uniform code because she was wanted a more attractive look. Whether that was done to make herself feel better or to be more attractive to the boys wasn't stated but at a minimum it is an admission of tweaking school uniform to appear more attractive Nell raised a very good point that we have been conditioned to see female legs and cleavage as sexual and that we need to break that conditioning, a point I really liked and thanked her for. My following question on how we break that conditioning and whether it is possible to do so without women choosing to sexualise their bodies has been missed and remains unanswered. This thread is not about men's behavoir, whether a man should be distracted by a woman, whether a man has the right to tell a woman what to wear or whether he should be free to r@pe based on clothing choices. I simply ask are both sexes to blame for sexualising women's bodies. Mr" With any respect due, I can read. I fully understood others contributions. I read your O.P. I discerned the point you were making. I didn't disagree with it. I made my points. They weren't about you or your O.P. they were in response to the several comments I read in responses regarding 'attack' and 'women knowingly being provocative.' Calling someone's contribution bollocks simply because you don't hold that opinion doesn't make it bollocks. I have no idea why you repeated other people's points for me to read. I understood them the first time and didn't quote them or disagree with them. Maybe I shrouded my points. To make it clear. It does not matter what anyone wears or if they are naked. It doesn't matter if someone likes what they see. It doesn't matter what they think. What matters if that they think they are entitled to A) comment or B) Act upon those thoughts and C) Accuse the 'naked' person of making them do it. Yes women and men make great efforts to appeal to each other. It gives no one any rights to do anything to them. And whilst we don't have 'thought police' yet ( we are almost there in that regard ) sane adults should be able to have thoughts and still act appropriately. It's a FACT that R ape is not taken seriously and the victims are blamed in those instances too e.g. their phones are taken and scrutinised and so are their life styles and in the midst of all that are the prejudices of an overworked police force who consider that life-style and make judgements based on how 'pure' the victim is. Just as anyone of any gender claim that 'she had it coming' ... To suggest that women are GUILTY of dressing to accentuate their sexuality doesn't sit well with me. There is nothing to be guilty about. That is what women are. They have ankles and things. Why people mock the type of man who wants his wife covered head to toe or won't let her out have the gall to call themselves part of a progressive and forward thinking culture is beyond me. What I have to say has every relation to the content of this thread. The covering of bodies and the ownership of sexuality has led to human prudery and should anybody transgress societal codes of dress they are to be taken and stoned in the city square..... So fucking biblical. In ever sense. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power." Ok so explain why some women are using their bodies and sexualisation to make their own money on places like Onlyfans, chaturbate etc? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There was an article I read today. Where a primary schools solution to boys lifting girls skirts was that the girls should wear modesty shorts. This to me is totally unacceptable. And teaches boys from an early age that how she dresses determines how she is treated. In school we had to kneel to make sure our skirts were long enough as not to distract the boys. Which again is just bs and if anything made the rebellious girl roll up their skirts. I've never understood in school or work. How what I wear is distracting to anyone when I'm sat at a desk or under a lab coat. " That is genuinely disturbing that the school actually thinks that's the appropriate solution. Though part of me is sad remembering that most of us used to wear our PE shorts under our skirts in my school for precisely this reason. I once had my skirt lifted while on my period in school. I still remember it vividly all these years later. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Women's bodies are sexualised from a very young age. As children, our clothes our pretty rather than practical, that encourages us to be self conscious about our physical movements and inhibits freedom and ambition. We are routinely cat-called from puberty onwards. Even the most natural and instinctive act of breastfeeding is now being criticised die to Women's breasts being viewed as sexual objects rather than their biological function. Hence the "free the nipple" campaign. While we continue to live in a patriarchal and capitalist society, Women's bodies will continue to be sexualised and exploited for money and power. Ok so explain why some women are using their bodies and sexualisation to make their own money on places like Onlyfans, chaturbate etc? " Because they can and they choose to. But if you were to see a lady off OnlyFans doing her shopping in ASDA, you should not assume she is doing anything other than trying to find the Cheddar cheese. Woman can choose to present themselves in a sexually appealing manner, but that doesn't apply all the time. If we're minding our own business in gym kit, we don't want or need our arses touching or commenting on, for example. Some of the examples on this thread of the things some women have had to put up with as children are simply disgusting. I read an article online about modesty shorts being mandated at some schools for infants, because of the risk infant males (aged under 7, by definition) might see the knickers of infant girls. Knickers are a piece of clothing, a collection of cotton fibres with pictures on. Why would infant boys be disturbed or in any way affected if a girl does a cartwheel and her underwear flashes for a second??? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"After everything I've written, I think I could really have just shortened it down to this: Why is it important that women take shared responsibility for men's feelings? " I tend to agree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm coming back to this after a night's kip and reading more about what the OP was about. I already modify what I wear just in case a man decides I'm dressing provocatively on a daily basis. If I wear a blouse to work should I do an extra button up just in case I show too much cleavage. It's warm as in work, is the dress I want to wear too short so if I reach for something on the top shelf am I showing too my thigh. I'm on a night out but I cardigan in case a man makes me feel uncomfortable so I can cover up more. Same as what Lacy said above, t shirts as a nightmare if you have boobs, because you can't win. And yes I could cover up in baggy clothes but then I'd get called fat and that I should be grateful for any attention sent my way. We can't win in general and that flippin sucks. How much effort do men make not to appear like a slut? Because they don't want to get told they were asking for it. Solution is going to be a long process. As I mentioned previously bodies should be seen as exactly that. My kids see me naked regularly and I hope that when they're older they won't see it as titillating when they a female body. I'm teaching them about consent (in an age appropriate manner) even though they are primary school age. Men in general need to learn that women don't dress for them more often than not it's for themselves. " I think you've hot the nail on the head. We're so uptight about nudity in our culture that when any flesh is seen it's immediately sexualised. Women are required to cover up more than men so our bodies equal sex and the poor men can't possibly help themselves  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm coming back to this after a night's kip and reading more about what the OP was about. I already modify what I wear just in case a man decides I'm dressing provocatively on a daily basis. If I wear a blouse to work should I do an extra button up just in case I show too much cleavage. It's warm as in work, is the dress I want to wear too short so if I reach for something on the top shelf am I showing too my thigh. I'm on a night out but I cardigan in case a man makes me feel uncomfortable so I can cover up more. Same as what Lacy said above, t shirts as a nightmare if you have boobs, because you can't win. And yes I could cover up in baggy clothes but then I'd get called fat and that I should be grateful for any attention sent my way. We can't win in general and that flippin sucks. How much effort do men make not to appear like a slut? Because they don't want to get told they were asking for it. Solution is going to be a long process. As I mentioned previously bodies should be seen as exactly that. My kids see me naked regularly and I hope that when they're older they won't see it as titillating when they a female body. I'm teaching them about consent (in an age appropriate manner) even though they are primary school age. Men in general need to learn that women don't dress for them more often than not it's for themselves. I think you've hot the nail on the head. We're so uptight about nudity in our culture that when any flesh is seen it's immediately sexualised. Women are required to cover up more than men so our bodies equal sex and the poor men can't possibly help themselves "I hate that insinuation; that men are animals that need blinkers and to be tied down, lest we leap on any available flesh. Frankly it’s degrading and insulting. We’re not animals, we left that behind an evolutionary step behind or so. If the urge to spread your seed is that strong, then maybe they should get checked into a clinic! It’s societies influences that teach that men can loudly express their sexual desire and they can be untaught or simply ignored | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Putting aside awful cases of sexual exploitation/abuse in children and young women - which is another subject in itself, even if related - I’d like to raise a question around who you think is responsible for perpetuating the sexualisation and objectification of women in the media and society generally. Is it 100% the patriarchal and sex-obsessed Society we live in as some suggest? Or is it also partly the responsibility of those females - not all females - who “willingly” put themselves on show, in what is often (and deliberately) a clearly overtly Sexualised (objectified) manner? You only have to look at the music industry and videos that reek with the stench of twerking. were these women forced into doing these Obscene acts? was it the only way they could “get on” on in their career? Probably - but Is it tacit approval from females who perpetuate it by agreeing to do it? Self-objectification is a thing, along with patriarchal objectification. I think it’s grossly unfair to land all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men. The responsibility to end objectification sits with all genders. I happen to think that a woman should be free to dress exactly how she pleases, and not expect to be objectified in doing so. But ultimately, whatever her aim (which for most would certainly not include being sexually-provocative) , you have to consider the waters you’re swimming in. If I dressed as a terrorist at a fancy dress party, I wouldn’t expect my friends to think me a terrorist. If I dressed as a terrorist while walking through the centre of Baghdad, I might expect people to think me a terrorist , because that’s the context and water we swim in. Sadly, we live in a society that is now fixated and obsessed with sexualisation and imagery and they’re linked deep in both make and female psyches - it’ll be a long road to recovery. I’m not saying it’s right. It’s gross. But that’s how it is. Facts: I detest both cat-calling and female sexual objectification. I also never dressed as a terrorist. " An interesting view but you are basing it in modesty and others (yours, in this case) opinions on what a person can or can’t do with their body. If a person can do what they want and are truly equal doesn’t that mean expressing themselves how they want to? Being strong and independent, also means independence of expression. If that means gyrating in a music video, that’s fine. You don’t have to like it and they don’t have to care! Your point about dressing as a terrorist is still based in the concept of ‘how others view them’ and in the belief that sex is shameful, which is a patriarchal construct. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Putting aside awful cases of sexual exploitation/abuse in children and young women - which is another subject in itself, even if related - I’d like to raise a question around who you think is responsible for perpetuating the sexualisation and objectification of women in the media and society generally. Is it 100% the patriarchal and sex-obsessed Society we live in as some suggest? Or is it also partly the responsibility of those females - not all females - who “willingly” put themselves on show, in what is often (and deliberately) a clearly overtly Sexualised (objectified) manner? You only have to look at the music industry and videos that reek with the stench of twerking. were these women forced into doing these Obscene acts? was it the only way they could “get on” on in their career? Probably - but Is it tacit approval from females who perpetuate it by agreeing to do it? Self-objectification is a thing, along with patriarchal objectification. I think it’s grossly unfair to land all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men. The responsibility to end objectification sits with all genders. I happen to think that a woman should be free to dress exactly how she pleases, and not expect to be objectified in doing so. But ultimately, whatever her aim (which for most would certainly not include being sexually-provocative) , you have to consider the waters you’re swimming in. If I dressed as a terrorist at a fancy dress party, I wouldn’t expect my friends to think me a terrorist. If I dressed as a terrorist while walking through the centre of Baghdad, I might expect people to think me a terrorist , because that’s the context and water we swim in. Sadly, we live in a society that is now fixated and obsessed with sexualisation and imagery and they’re linked deep in both make and female psyches - it’ll be a long road to recovery. I’m not saying it’s right. It’s gross. But that’s how it is. Facts: I detest both cat-calling and female sexual objectification. I also never dressed as a terrorist. " Why do women dress sexily? Dunno? Is it due to the society around them, that tells them that's what is required to attract a "mate"? You don't see women dressed in skimpy outfits in Saudi Arabia, for example. Saudi women are not inherently different from a biological standpoint, so there's no biological mechanism driving British women to dress provocatively and Saudi women to cover up. I wonder why each of these female demographics dresses they way they do? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Putting aside awful cases of sexual exploitation/abuse in children and young women - which is another subject in itself, even if related - I’d like to raise a question around who you think is responsible for perpetuating the sexualisation and objectification of women in the media and society generally. Is it 100% the patriarchal and sex-obsessed Society we live in as some suggest? Or is it also partly the responsibility of those females - not all females - who “willingly” put themselves on show, in what is often (and deliberately) a clearly overtly Sexualised (objectified) manner? You only have to look at the music industry and videos that reek with the stench of twerking. were these women forced into doing these Obscene acts? was it the only way they could “get on” on in their career? Probably - but Is it tacit approval from females who perpetuate it by agreeing to do it? Self-objectification is a thing, along with patriarchal objectification. I think it’s grossly unfair to land all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men. The responsibility to end objectification sits with all genders. I happen to think that a woman should be free to dress exactly how she pleases, and not expect to be objectified in doing so. But ultimately, whatever her aim (which for most would certainly not include being sexually-provocative) , you have to consider the waters you’re swimming in. If I dressed as a terrorist at a fancy dress party, I wouldn’t expect my friends to think me a terrorist. If I dressed as a terrorist while walking through the centre of Baghdad, I might expect people to think me a terrorist , because that’s the context and water we swim in. Sadly, we live in a society that is now fixated and obsessed with sexualisation and imagery and they’re linked deep in both make and female psyches - it’ll be a long road to recovery. I’m not saying it’s right. It’s gross. But that’s how it is. Facts: I detest both cat-calling and female sexual objectification. I also never dressed as a terrorist. Why do women dress sexily? Dunno? Is it due to the society around them, that tells them that's what is required to attract a "mate"? You don't see women dressed in skimpy outfits in Saudi Arabia, for example. Saudi women are not inherently different from a biological standpoint, so there's no biological mechanism driving British women to dress provocatively and Saudi women to cover up. I wonder why each of these female demographics dresses they way they do?" If a woman dressed like that in Saudi, she’d be hung like a goat, or stoned. The horrible irony being that it’s also a very highly Patriarchal society in Saudi, that controls women and their actions, but in an entirely different direction (away from Sexualisation). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Putting aside awful cases of sexual exploitation/abuse in children and young women - which is another subject in itself, even if related - I’d like to raise a question around who you think is responsible for perpetuating the sexualisation and objectification of women in the media and society generally. Is it 100% the patriarchal and sex-obsessed Society we live in as some suggest? Or is it also partly the responsibility of those females - not all females - who “willingly” put themselves on show, in what is often (and deliberately) a clearly overtly Sexualised (objectified) manner? You only have to look at the music industry and videos that reek with the stench of twerking. were these women forced into doing these Obscene acts? was it the only way they could “get on” on in their career? Probably - but Is it tacit approval from females who perpetuate it by agreeing to do it? Self-objectification is a thing, along with patriarchal objectification. I think it’s grossly unfair to land all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men. The responsibility to end objectification sits with all genders. I happen to think that a woman should be free to dress exactly how she pleases, and not expect to be objectified in doing so. But ultimately, whatever her aim (which for most would certainly not include being sexually-provocative) , you have to consider the waters you’re swimming in. If I dressed as a terrorist at a fancy dress party, I wouldn’t expect my friends to think me a terrorist. If I dressed as a terrorist while walking through the centre of Baghdad, I might expect people to think me a terrorist , because that’s the context and water we swim in. Sadly, we live in a society that is now fixated and obsessed with sexualisation and imagery and they’re linked deep in both make and female psyches - it’ll be a long road to recovery. I’m not saying it’s right. It’s gross. But that’s how it is. Facts: I detest both cat-calling and female sexual objectification. I also never dressed as a terrorist. " How does a terrorist dress? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Putting aside awful cases of sexual exploitation/abuse in children and young women - which is another subject in itself, even if related - I’d like to raise a question around who you think is responsible for perpetuating the sexualisation and objectification of women in the media and society generally. Is it 100% the patriarchal and sex-obsessed Society we live in as some suggest? Or is it also partly the responsibility of those females - not all females - who “willingly” put themselves on show, in what is often (and deliberately) a clearly overtly Sexualised (objectified) manner? You only have to look at the music industry and videos that reek with the stench of twerking. were these women forced into doing these Obscene acts? was it the only way they could “get on” on in their career? Probably - but Is it tacit approval from females who perpetuate it by agreeing to do it? Self-objectification is a thing, along with patriarchal objectification. I think it’s grossly unfair to land all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men. The responsibility to end objectification sits with all genders. I happen to think that a woman should be free to dress exactly how she pleases, and not expect to be objectified in doing so. But ultimately, whatever her aim (which for most would certainly not include being sexually-provocative) , you have to consider the waters you’re swimming in. If I dressed as a terrorist at a fancy dress party, I wouldn’t expect my friends to think me a terrorist. If I dressed as a terrorist while walking through the centre of Baghdad, I might expect people to think me a terrorist , because that’s the context and water we swim in. Sadly, we live in a society that is now fixated and obsessed with sexualisation and imagery and they’re linked deep in both make and female psyches - it’ll be a long road to recovery. I’m not saying it’s right. It’s gross. But that’s how it is. Facts: I detest both cat-calling and female sexual objectification. I also never dressed as a terrorist. How does a terrorist dress? " I hoped you’d understand I was trying to illustrate a point. But with a padded vest and a worried look on their face normally, since you ask… | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Putting aside awful cases of sexual exploitation/abuse in children and young women - which is another subject in itself, even if related - I’d like to raise a question around who you think is responsible for perpetuating the sexualisation and objectification of women in the media and society generally. Is it 100% the patriarchal and sex-obsessed Society we live in as some suggest? Or is it also partly the responsibility of those females - not all females - who “willingly” put themselves on show, in what is often (and deliberately) a clearly overtly Sexualised (objectified) manner? You only have to look at the music industry and videos that reek with the stench of twerking. were these women forced into doing these Obscene acts? was it the only way they could “get on” on in their career? Probably - but Is it tacit approval from females who perpetuate it by agreeing to do it? Self-objectification is a thing, along with patriarchal objectification. I think it’s grossly unfair to land all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men. The responsibility to end objectification sits with all genders. I happen to think that a woman should be free to dress exactly how she pleases, and not expect to be objectified in doing so. But ultimately, whatever her aim (which for most would certainly not include being sexually-provocative) , you have to consider the waters you’re swimming in. If I dressed as a terrorist at a fancy dress party, I wouldn’t expect my friends to think me a terrorist. If I dressed as a terrorist while walking through the centre of Baghdad, I might expect people to think me a terrorist , because that’s the context and water we swim in. Sadly, we live in a society that is now fixated and obsessed with sexualisation and imagery and they’re linked deep in both make and female psyches - it’ll be a long road to recovery. I’m not saying it’s right. It’s gross. But that’s how it is. Facts: I detest both cat-calling and female sexual objectification. I also never dressed as a terrorist. An interesting view but you are basing it in modesty and others (yours, in this case) opinions on what a person can or can’t do with their body. If a person can do what they want and are truly equal doesn’t that mean expressing themselves how they want to? Being strong and independent, also means independence of expression. If that means gyrating in a music video, that’s fine. You don’t have to like it and they don’t have to care! Your point about dressing as a terrorist is still based in the concept of ‘how others view them’ and in the belief that sex is shameful, which is a patriarchal construct. " The issue I raised is with the sexuslisation of women's bodies. While I appreciate all the comments about men's behavoir, that wasn't what I asked. My question is are men solely responsible for the fact that women's bodies are viewed as sexual objects or do some women contribute to that by sometimes presenting themselves as such. It seems the answer is no, it's only men causing the problem, a woman selling photos of her foof on only fans is in no way promoting the view of women's bodies as commodities. Mr | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Again, it feels like you're deliberately misrepresenting my point." This is the second time you're going personal. I'm sorry if you feel frustrated. This topic is very close to my heart, too, because all my life I've been told that my body is wrong and I've been made to feel guilty about it. "Of course we can walk past a restaurant without smashing in and stealing food just the same as a man can walk past a scantily class woman without attacking her. That wasn't my point." The analogy was useful nonetheless because no one says that something has to be done about the restaurant. "Is it not reasonable to expect both sexes to shoulder an equal responsibility to remove sexual distraction from school and work places." The concern is that the distraction causes problems but that is what is so disagreeable. I think that your question of responsibility only comes into it because of the alleged problems. The restaurant analogy shows this clearly. So presumably with distraction they mean arousal. Adult by child, this is obviously wrong and the child does not bear responsibility. Never. Child to child, they both need to learn to understand their feelings and adults should be there to help them. Adult to adult, if feelings are reciprocated, good on them. If not, stick to fantasising. Feeling aroused seems a nice thing to me and not a problem. Someone else also already made the point that we are all different so deciding on what is sexually arousing is very personal. Even if we all wore Star Trek uniforms there will be people who are into this. And you could argue that what is hidden and forbidden is more desirable. "There is no need to be sexually provoctive in work or school so why do we defend it? " A lot of people would see it as inappropriate or unprofessional, that is true. I would prefer if we could let people be themselves. There may be a "need" for an adult who wants to feel good about themselves or who wants to attract a partner. A child may play with it because it's part of growing up to imitate adults and to learn about sexuality. They should be able to do this in a safe environment. Limiting our individuality, the body shaming and punishments that come with rules around this are often over the top, unjust and harmful. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Putting aside awful cases of sexual exploitation/abuse in children and young women - which is another subject in itself, even if related - I’d like to raise a question around who you think is responsible for perpetuating the sexualisation and objectification of women in the media and society generally. Is it 100% the patriarchal and sex-obsessed Society we live in as some suggest? Or is it also partly the responsibility of those females - not all females - who “willingly” put themselves on show, in what is often (and deliberately) a clearly overtly Sexualised (objectified) manner? You only have to look at the music industry and videos that reek with the stench of twerking. were these women forced into doing these Obscene acts? was it the only way they could “get on” on in their career? Probably - but Is it tacit approval from females who perpetuate it by agreeing to do it? Self-objectification is a thing, along with patriarchal objectification. I think it’s grossly unfair to land all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men. The responsibility to end objectification sits with all genders. I happen to think that a woman should be free to dress exactly how she pleases, and not expect to be objectified in doing so. But ultimately, whatever her aim (which for most would certainly not include being sexually-provocative) , you have to consider the waters you’re swimming in. If I dressed as a terrorist at a fancy dress party, I wouldn’t expect my friends to think me a terrorist. If I dressed as a terrorist while walking through the centre of Baghdad, I might expect people to think me a terrorist , because that’s the context and water we swim in. Sadly, we live in a society that is now fixated and obsessed with sexualisation and imagery and they’re linked deep in both make and female psyches - it’ll be a long road to recovery. I’m not saying it’s right. It’s gross. But that’s how it is. Facts: I detest both cat-calling and female sexual objectification. I also never dressed as a terrorist. An interesting view but you are basing it in modesty and others (yours, in this case) opinions on what a person can or can’t do with their body. If a person can do what they want and are truly equal doesn’t that mean expressing themselves how they want to? Being strong and independent, also means independence of expression. If that means gyrating in a music video, that’s fine. You don’t have to like it and they don’t have to care! Your point about dressing as a terrorist is still based in the concept of ‘how others view them’ and in the belief that sex is shameful, which is a patriarchal construct. The issue I raised is with the sexuslisation of women's bodies. While I appreciate all the comments about men's behavoir, that wasn't what I asked. My question is are men solely responsible for the fact that women's bodies are viewed as sexual objects or do some women contribute to that by sometimes presenting themselves as such. It seems the answer is no, it's only men causing the problem, a woman selling photos of her foof on only fans is in no way promoting the view of women's bodies as commodities. Mr" I’ve read all this with interest and if I was having a face to face conversation I’d have a lot to say on it but to try and think how to put it into words on here is too time consuming so I will simply answer the question and say no in my opinion generally men aren’t solely responsible. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Putting aside awful cases of sexual exploitation/abuse in children and young women - which is another subject in itself, even if related - I’d like to raise a question around who you think is responsible for perpetuating the sexualisation and objectification of women in the media and society generally. Is it 100% the patriarchal and sex-obsessed Society we live in as some suggest? Or is it also partly the responsibility of those females - not all females - who “willingly” put themselves on show, in what is often (and deliberately) a clearly overtly Sexualised (objectified) manner? You only have to look at the music industry and videos that reek with the stench of twerking. were these women forced into doing these Obscene acts? was it the only way they could “get on” on in their career? Probably - but Is it tacit approval from females who perpetuate it by agreeing to do it? Self-objectification is a thing, along with patriarchal objectification. I think it’s grossly unfair to land all the blame squarely on the shoulders of men. The responsibility to end objectification sits with all genders. I happen to think that a woman should be free to dress exactly how she pleases, and not expect to be objectified in doing so. But ultimately, whatever her aim (which for most would certainly not include being sexually-provocative) , you have to consider the waters you’re swimming in. If I dressed as a terrorist at a fancy dress party, I wouldn’t expect my friends to think me a terrorist. If I dressed as a terrorist while walking through the centre of Baghdad, I might expect people to think me a terrorist , because that’s the context and water we swim in. Sadly, we live in a society that is now fixated and obsessed with sexualisation and imagery and they’re linked deep in both make and female psyches - it’ll be a long road to recovery. I’m not saying it’s right. It’s gross. But that’s how it is. Facts: I detest both cat-calling and female sexual objectification. I also never dressed as a terrorist. An interesting view but you are basing it in modesty and others (yours, in this case) opinions on what a person can or can’t do with their body. If a person can do what they want and are truly equal doesn’t that mean expressing themselves how they want to? Being strong and independent, also means independence of expression. If that means gyrating in a music video, that’s fine. You don’t have to like it and they don’t have to care! Your point about dressing as a terrorist is still based in the concept of ‘how others view them’ and in the belief that sex is shameful, which is a patriarchal construct. " You’ve clearly completely misunderstood and are misrepresenting my point, or I didn’t make it clearly enough. My view is very clearly that people should be able to dress how they please, without expecting to be sexualised. I didn’t state - ever - that someone shouldn’t be free to dress exactly how they please. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If lesbians can keep their hands and thoughts to themselves... why can't men?? " Is that men as a whole? Lesbians as a whole? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If lesbians can keep their hands and thoughts to themselves... why can't men?? Is that men as a whole? Lesbians as a whole? " It's a generalisation, of course... but for the most part you don't hear about women harassing other women or touching them because of what they're wearing... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If lesbians can keep their hands and thoughts to themselves... why can't men?? Is that men as a whole? Lesbians as a whole? It's a generalisation, of course... but for the most part you don't hear about women harassing other women or touching them because of what they're wearing... " . I can honestly say that I have never felt sexually objectified or randomly been inappropriately touched in my 50 years. How far are you taking it here though? I pop to the garage in my trackies, hair piled on top of my head, no make up and I’m in and out no glances. I pop in on my way out dressed up etc and probably get a glance from every man in the vicinity. Do you class that as sexually objectifying? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I can honestly say that I have never felt sexually objectified or randomly been inappropriately touched in my 50 years. How far are you taking it here though? I pop to the garage in my trackies, hair piled on top of my head, no make up and I’m in and out no glances. I pop in on my way out dressed up etc and probably get a glance from every man in the vicinity. Do you class that as sexually objectifying?" If its just a look, then certainly not. But it's the comments made about it, or the way people think they can touch you because you're dressed a certain way. If I'm on a night out with my friends and I'm dressed up, I'm dressed up so I feel good, not to attract people. I don't want people coming upto me and touching me... I want to enjoy my night and feel good. That's the sort of thing I'm referring to. Even if I'm wearing something skimpy, that isn't an invitation to come and touch me or tell me what you'd like to do to me. The invitation would be if I'm talking to you and say I'd like to take things further. Clothing is not a green light for sex or anything in that arena. Words are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I can honestly say that I have never felt sexually objectified or randomly been inappropriately touched in my 50 years. How far are you taking it here though? I pop to the garage in my trackies, hair piled on top of my head, no make up and I’m in and out no glances. I pop in on my way out dressed up etc and probably get a glance from every man in the vicinity. Do you class that as sexually objectifying? If its just a look, then certainly not. But it's the comments made about it, or the way people think they can touch you because you're dressed a certain way. If I'm on a night out with my friends and I'm dressed up, I'm dressed up so I feel good, not to attract people. I don't want people coming upto me and touching me... I want to enjoy my night and feel good. That's the sort of thing I'm referring to. Even if I'm wearing something skimpy, that isn't an invitation to come and touch me or tell me what you'd like to do to me. The invitation would be if I'm talking to you and say I'd like to take things further. Clothing is not a green light for sex or anything in that arena. Words are. " Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? " Yes haha me and a lot of my friends have. They come upto you touching your bum, touching your hips. They deliberately brush past you rubbing themselves on you. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, it's inappropriate. When I was in my late teens, I had a guy come upto me in the krazy house in Liverpool and put both of his hands on my tits... I didn't know him. It really upset me! I don't mind if it's somebody I know and they're just being silly, but men I don't know can honestly go and swivel. Do not touch me or my friends... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? Yes haha me and a lot of my friends have. They come upto you touching your bum, touching your hips. They deliberately brush past you rubbing themselves on you. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, it's inappropriate. When I was in my late teens, I had a guy come upto me in the krazy house in Liverpool and put both of his hands on my tits... I didn't know him. It really upset me! I don't mind if it's somebody I know and they're just being silly, but men I don't know can honestly go and swivel. Do not touch me or my friends... " Wow ok. Maybe it’s my age then. Makes me glad I grew up when I did. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? Yes haha me and a lot of my friends have. They come upto you touching your bum, touching your hips. They deliberately brush past you rubbing themselves on you. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, it's inappropriate. When I was in my late teens, I had a guy come upto me in the krazy house in Liverpool and put both of his hands on my tits... I didn't know him. It really upset me! I don't mind if it's somebody I know and they're just being silly, but men I don't know can honestly go and swivel. Do not touch me or my friends... " Yep have had all the above too when I used to go out into city pubs and clubs. The worst one was some guy groped my arse on the dance floor so I moved. He then did it again, and I regretfully now turned around and decked him. I've also had a man come from behind me and jiggle my boobs in a club that was mortifying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Wow ok. Maybe it’s my age then. Makes me glad I grew up when I did. " I was genuinely under the impression that it was the same in the 70s and 80s tbh... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? Yes haha me and a lot of my friends have. They come upto you touching your bum, touching your hips. They deliberately brush past you rubbing themselves on you. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, it's inappropriate. When I was in my late teens, I had a guy come upto me in the krazy house in Liverpool and put both of his hands on my tits... I didn't know him. It really upset me! I don't mind if it's somebody I know and they're just being silly, but men I don't know can honestly go and swivel. Do not touch me or my friends... Yep have had all the above too when I used to go out into city pubs and clubs. The worst one was some guy groped my arse on the dance floor so I moved. He then did it again, and I regretfully now turned around and decked him. I've also had a man come from behind me and jiggle my boobs in a club that was mortifying. " Oh my god... why do they think this is OK?? I'm so sorry that happened to you!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? Yes haha me and a lot of my friends have. They come upto you touching your bum, touching your hips. They deliberately brush past you rubbing themselves on you. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, it's inappropriate. When I was in my late teens, I had a guy come upto me in the krazy house in Liverpool and put both of his hands on my tits... I didn't know him. It really upset me! I don't mind if it's somebody I know and they're just being silly, but men I don't know can honestly go and swivel. Do not touch me or my friends... Yep have had all the above too when I used to go out into city pubs and clubs. The worst one was some guy groped my arse on the dance floor so I moved. He then did it again, and I regretfully now turned around and decked him. I've also had a man come from behind me and jiggle my boobs in a club that was mortifying. Oh my god... why do they think this is OK?? I'm so sorry that happened to you!! " Why does “he” think it’s ok. Who’s they? Men in general? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? Yes haha me and a lot of my friends have. They come upto you touching your bum, touching your hips. They deliberately brush past you rubbing themselves on you. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, it's inappropriate. When I was in my late teens, I had a guy come upto me in the krazy house in Liverpool and put both of his hands on my tits... I didn't know him. It really upset me! I don't mind if it's somebody I know and they're just being silly, but men I don't know can honestly go and swivel. Do not touch me or my friends... Yep have had all the above too when I used to go out into city pubs and clubs. The worst one was some guy groped my arse on the dance floor so I moved. He then did it again, and I regretfully now turned around and decked him. I've also had a man come from behind me and jiggle my boobs in a club that was mortifying. " well done you ...I bet the arse grabber didn't do it again...the boob jiggler deserved a decking as well | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? Yes haha me and a lot of my friends have. They come upto you touching your bum, touching your hips. They deliberately brush past you rubbing themselves on you. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, it's inappropriate. When I was in my late teens, I had a guy come upto me in the krazy house in Liverpool and put both of his hands on my tits... I didn't know him. It really upset me! I don't mind if it's somebody I know and they're just being silly, but men I don't know can honestly go and swivel. Do not touch me or my friends... Yep have had all the above too when I used to go out into city pubs and clubs. The worst one was some guy groped my arse on the dance floor so I moved. He then did it again, and I regretfully now turned around and decked him. I've also had a man come from behind me and jiggle my boobs in a club that was mortifying. Oh my god... why do they think this is OK?? I'm so sorry that happened to you!! " Apparently it was because I had big tits, this happened in the 90's. I think he was showing off with to his mates. Again I was on the dance floor dancing in a circle as you do with my mates. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why does “he” think it’s ok. Who’s they? Men in general? " The person who did it... and yes, the general "men". Because it isn't just one person doing it. It's many. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm 41 and have been leered at, shouted at an touched MANY MANY times. Could be something more subtle such as a guy who at first seems warm and tactile but that hand on your shoulder stays there longer than necessary and starts to squeeze, to a.full on groping. I've had.men press themselves up against me, drop things on the floor near me and look uo my skirt, gram my boobs and squeeze hips/touch my arse when navigating their way around me in a bar, rather than just say excuse me. I've been on work Zoom meetings and had male colleagues private message to say I'm looking good and worth turning up for. It's everywhere. I've also had.men and women make nice, respectful comments such as "I love your dress" or "Gorgoeus shoes" - that's fine, I'm not precious but FFS, the entitlement to invade my personal space is unreal. I see it starting with my teen. In school uniform. The very fact that we keep having these comments about women's bodies shows how much of a patriarchal issue it is as women have sexual desires too and don't do this on the scale it happens to women. Words such as "responsibility" for our own sexualistion shows the real tone of it. We're just asking for it, aren't we " Yes!!! Exactly!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why does “he” think it’s ok. Who’s they? Men in general? The person who did it... and yes, the general "men". Because it isn't just one person doing it. It's many. " Ok the men who were there then. That’s fine. Thought you were referring to men as a whole | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why does “he” think it’s ok. Who’s they? Men in general? The person who did it... and yes, the general "men". Because it isn't just one person doing it. It's many. Ok the men who were there then. That’s fine. Thought you were referring to men as a whole "Haha well yeah. I think older generations seem to think us "millenials" are just too sensitive about everything... but we just don't want stuff like this to be happening to us. So we're vocal about it! If that makes us sensitive, then so be it... I'd rather be called that than have anyone think they're free to touch me when I don't know them! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Why does “he” think it’s ok. Who’s they? Men in general? The person who did it... and yes, the general "men". Because it isn't just one person doing it. It's many. Ok the men who were there then. That’s fine. Thought you were referring to men as a whole
Haha well yeah.
I think older generations seem to think us "millenials" are just too sensitive about everything... but we just don't want stuff like this to be happening to us. So we're vocal about it!
If that makes us sensitive, then so be it... I'd rather be called that than have anyone think they're free to touch me when I don't know them! "Perhaps. Although I have millennials living here right now and they, like me, must have been awfully lucky (although not sure if that’s the correct word to use) to avoid all this too and they spend their lives in pubs and clubs and are both stunning. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""The issue I raised is with the sexuslisation of women's bodies. While I appreciate all the comments about men's behavoir, that wasn't what I asked. My question is are men solely responsible for the fact that women's bodies are viewed as sexual objects or do some women contribute to that by sometimes presenting themselves as such. It seems the answer is no, it's only men causing the problem, a woman selling photos of her foof on only fans is in no way promoting the view of women's bodies as commodities. Mr" No I don't think it is all down to men. Hence why I think it's important that my boys see my body so the female form isn't always viewed as a sexual thing. I already modify what I wear in order not to be seen as a sexual object and to be taken seriously in work. Only a small % of women sell their pictures on said sites, however, the vast majority of women have stories about being harassed, so I don't think that is the actual issue. " I think that a portion of the issue is that some legitimise their overt sexualisation of women through the actions of those selling pictures or video content. The spectre of “they do it, so it must be ok to treat all women like that” as an attitude and apply it to every situation, is a real concept. The ‘they must enjoy it on some level’ justification is flimsy but pervasive. Treating people as a homogeneous group and using that as an excuse for objectification really needs to stop. It’s a radical approach but can we move past the thought process that anything that a person chooses to wear is in any way permitting or inviting sexualisation without tacit consent within context? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? Yes haha me and a lot of my friends have. They come upto you touching your bum, touching your hips. They deliberately brush past you rubbing themselves on you. If it makes you feel uncomfortable, it's inappropriate. When I was in my late teens, I had a guy come upto me in the krazy house in Liverpool and put both of his hands on my tits... I didn't know him. It really upset me! I don't mind if it's somebody I know and they're just being silly, but men I don't know can honestly go and swivel. Do not touch me or my friends... Wow ok. Maybe it’s my age then. Makes me glad I grew up when I did. " Had similar when I was able bodied, stood on two feet in a club. I get grabbed in the wheelchair too, but that's a different conversation. Guys used to touch your bum or boobs deliberately in clubs etc all the time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
So it's not always men who do it. It is mostly, wont deny that but woman can as well. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. It's ok to notice it but then you should mind your own business. I absolutely agree. But it WILL be noticed. And you can't control what others may think. I'm not discussing their actions, that goes without saying. Or it should. But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. Men yes. Pubescent and pre-pubescent boys possibly not. It will distract them, much the same as 2 dogs shagging in the playground will have them all at the classroom windows. " You don't think is pubescent girls at school didn't get distracted but boys tight trousers and the odd hard in school | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely if one is openly saying they're dressing in a "sexy" way for a select audience, everyone who views it will identify it as such - a sexy outfit. I'm not saying for a second that this gives everyone carte Blanche but I'm kind of thinking you can't have it both ways here. It's ok to notice it but then you should mind your own business. I absolutely agree. But it WILL be noticed. And you can't control what others may think. I'm not discussing their actions, that goes without saying. Or it should. But then it shouldn't be a problem, right? The accusation is that it is distracting and must therefore be stopped. Men are not animals. It is demeaning to men to make these arguments. Men yes. Pubescent and pre-pubescent boys possibly not. It will distract them, much the same as 2 dogs shagging in the playground will have them all at the classroom windows. You don't think is pubescent girls at school didn't get distracted but boys tight trousers and the odd hard in school " Don’t be silly! Of course not. It’s only men who sexually objectify. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? " I think the vast majority women have. I reached pubity at 11 and physically looked much older than my years from my early teens. As a result I attracted male attention. The biggest problem with wandering hands was in crowded pubs and clubs in my teens and early 20s. Especially when stood at the bar, I would occasionally get men grabbing or slapping my bum (not ideal) or reaching round to get at my boobs. Any bloke who dared go for my boobs got a stiletto heel in their foot 
A friend once had a chap put his hand up her skirt...she grabbed his balls and squeezed hard, whilst telling him that if she ever came across him behaving badly again, his sex life was in jeopardy
Strangely non of us thought to report any of this as sexual assault. I think everyone is generally more aware of what is inappropriate but it still happens far too frequently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Personally speaking I try not to objectify anyone for any reason and never have. I dont care much to see a female singer writhing around half naked in a video, I care little for sex scenes in main stream movies, strippers and lap dancers are a huge turn off for me etc etc etc. Yes I can and do appreciate if a woman is attractive but if they're not showing me some direct clear interest, I wouldnt dream of bothering or sexualising them. We are all people and that how I treat everyone. I might throw out a few compliments on fab but thata as far as I go. My wife on the other hand has no problem telling me how she would ride either Caity Lotz or Tom Ellis into the ground.
So it's not always men who do it. It is mostly, wont deny that but woman can as well."Ha, yes, but it's one thing telling your partner the things you'd like to do to somebody and it's another grabbing that persons face and shoving it in your groin haha. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? I think the vast majority women have. I reached pubity at 11 and physically looked much older than my years from my early teens. As a result I attracted male attention. The biggest problem with wandering hands was in crowded pubs and clubs in my teens and early 20s. Especially when stood at the bar, I would occasionally get men grabbing or slapping my bum (not ideal) or reaching round to get at my boobs. Any bloke who dared go for my boobs got a stiletto heel in their foot
A friend once had a chap put his hand up her skirt...she grabbed his balls and squeezed hard, whilst telling him that if she ever came across him behaving badly again, his sex life was in jeopardy
Strangely non of us thought to report any of this as sexual assault. I think everyone is generally more aware of what is inappropriate but it still happens far too frequently. "And do you not think a bunch of pissed women would never grab a mans arse or his package? I’ve seen that in my time more than I’ve seen the other. Do you think every man would like that? Or do you think maybe he’s embarrassed but unlikely to do anything about it either? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Personally speaking I try not to objectify anyone for any reason and never have. I dont care much to see a female singer writhing around half naked in a video, I care little for sex scenes in main stream movies, strippers and lap dancers are a huge turn off for me etc etc etc. Yes I can and do appreciate if a woman is attractive but if they're not showing me some direct clear interest, I wouldnt dream of bothering or sexualising them. We are all people and that how I treat everyone. I might throw out a few compliments on fab but thata as far as I go. My wife on the other hand has no problem telling me how she would ride either Caity Lotz or Tom Ellis into the ground.
So it's not always men who do it. It is mostly, wont deny that but woman can as well.
Ha, yes, but it's one thing telling your partner the things you'd like to do to somebody and it's another grabbing that persons face and shoving it in your groin haha. "Wouldnt do that personally unless I knew I had the go ahead. Firm believer in consent. I had plenty of strange women grope me when I was a young man in night clubs. Cant say I was fan of being touched by strangers so I dont do it myself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? I think the vast majority women have. I reached pubity at 11 and physically looked much older than my years from my early teens. As a result I attracted male attention. The biggest problem with wandering hands was in crowded pubs and clubs in my teens and early 20s. Especially when stood at the bar, I would occasionally get men grabbing or slapping my bum (not ideal) or reaching round to get at my boobs. Any bloke who dared go for my boobs got a stiletto heel in their foot
A friend once had a chap put his hand up her skirt...she grabbed his balls and squeezed hard, whilst telling him that if she ever came across him behaving badly again, his sex life was in jeopardy
Strangely non of us thought to report any of this as sexual assault. I think everyone is generally more aware of what is inappropriate but it still happens far too frequently.
And do you not think a bunch of pissed women would never grab a mans arse or his package? I’ve seen that in my time more than I’ve seen the other. Do you think every man would like that? Or do you think maybe he’s embarrassed but unlikely to do anything about it either?"I agree the same happens the other way around and is equally unacceptable. Nobody should be subjected to unwanted touching or sexualised behaviour. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Have you all really had men just come up and inappropriately touch you randomly? Touch you where? I think the vast majority women have. I reached pubity at 11 and physically looked much older than my years from my early teens. As a result I attracted male attention. The biggest problem with wandering hands was in crowded pubs and clubs in my teens and early 20s. Especially when stood at the bar, I would occasionally get men grabbing or slapping my bum (not ideal) or reaching round to get at my boobs. Any bloke who dared go for my boobs got a stiletto heel in their foot
A friend once had a chap put his hand up her skirt...she grabbed his balls and squeezed hard, whilst telling him that if she ever came across him behaving badly again, his sex life was in jeopardy
Strangely non of us thought to report any of this as sexual assault. I think everyone is generally more aware of what is inappropriate but it still happens far too frequently.
And do you not think a bunch of pissed women would never grab a mans arse or his package? I’ve seen that in my time more than I’ve seen the other. Do you think every man would like that? Or do you think maybe he’s embarrassed but unlikely to do anything about it either?
I agree the same happens the other way around and is equally unacceptable.
Nobody should be subjected to unwanted touching or sexualised behaviour. "Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It seems a lot of people on here are quite defensive. There's a lot of "not all men" and "it happens to men too". Which no one is denying... but the frequency it happens to men is minimal compared to women, which is why the fuss has been made. I think we can all agree that misogyny certainly is real though... and until we shame those people for it, how is it going to change? " As is misandry also real. I’m sure we can also all agree on that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) " Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And if the defensive comment was referring to me, I’m not defending anyone. I’m merely pointing things out that have been missed. I’m speaking the truth how I see it. " Thank you Nora 
Mr | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass " Ah ok. So men should accept the touching and grabbing etc because they’re physically stronger and it’s unlikely a woman may get aggressive towards them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass Ah ok. So men should accept the touching and grabbing etc because they’re physically stronger and it’s unlikely a woman may get aggressive towards them. " I also wonder, if we’re talking about grabbing and touching men or women in clubs if those barely compatible statistics would be truly correct. I somehow think not. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass " Round of applause!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course not, I clearly said it was unacceptable. I'm trying to demonstrate the power play involved." This is difficult for some people to grasp as it's never happened to them, so they can't believe it's a thing. A lot of men have never feared an incident like this turning sour... which it does on occasion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass Round of applause!!! " Could that last paragraph be explained. I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at and the relevance of the comment. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass Round of applause!!! Could that last paragraph be explained. I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at and the relevance of the comment. " This thread is about sexualising women's bodies and there are men on here saying it happens to men too. She is saying that when there's a subject about men's issues, she doesn't go on the thread and say it happens to women too. It would be inappropriate to do so and that isn't what the conversation is about. Its viewed as completely derailing the subject. Much like when somebody turns somebody else's issues into a "me too" moment and makes the conversation all about them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass Round of applause!!! Could that last paragraph be explained. I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at and the relevance of the comment. This thread is about sexualising women's bodies and there are men on here saying it happens to men too. She is saying that when there's a subject about men's issues, she doesn't go on the thread and say it happens to women too. It would be inappropriate to do so and that isn't what the conversation is about. Its viewed as completely derailing the subject. Much like when somebody turns somebody else's issues into a "me too" moment and makes the conversation all about them. " Ah I thought so. I too wouldn’t go on a men’s or women’s mental health site and do that. However, this is a free for all lounge forum on a sex/swingers site. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass Round of applause!!! Could that last paragraph be explained. I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at and the relevance of the comment. This thread is about sexualising women's bodies and there are men on here saying it happens to men too. She is saying that when there's a subject about men's issues, she doesn't go on the thread and say it happens to women too. It would be inappropriate to do so and that isn't what the conversation is about. Its viewed as completely derailing the subject. Much like when somebody turns somebody else's issues into a "me too" moment and makes the conversation all about them. Ah I thought so. I too wouldn’t go on a men’s or women’s mental health site and do that. However, this is a free for all lounge forum on a sex/swingers site. " Although I apologise if I hit a few nerves. I’ve had enough though now. Hopefully they might do a round two. I won’t get involved. I think I’ve said what I wanted to say. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass Round of applause!!! Could that last paragraph be explained. I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at and the relevance of the comment. This thread is about sexualising women's bodies and there are men on here saying it happens to men too. She is saying that when there's a subject about men's issues, she doesn't go on the thread and say it happens to women too. It would be inappropriate to do so and that isn't what the conversation is about. Its viewed as completely derailing the subject. Much like when somebody turns somebody else's issues into a "me too" moment and makes the conversation all about them. Ah I thought so. I too wouldn’t go on a men’s or women’s mental health site and do that. However, this is a free for all lounge forum on a sex/swingers site. " Well she isn't specifically saying going on a site about men's health... it could even be on a Facebook comment section, or a place like this. That's what she means. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm saying that we need to be honest about what is happening to people in order to understand the situation and hopefully improve the situation. We need to understand the data of who, what, where, when and why. I used the men's mental health as an example of sex and age specific circumstances that we know through careful scrutiny of data. Mow we know this we need to understand why men of this age group are killing themselves in such high numbers when it's mot even a top 10 cause of death in men over 70. We learn this through honest discussion, not being defensive and saying women too etc. We know women too but women aren't the ones most at risk here so we should treat the situation with the honesty and respect it deserves. And we mostly do. I don't see women piling on to posts about men's mental health on order to make it all about them or defensive in a way I see it happening to discussions about matters that disproportionately affect women." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Wow ok. Maybe it’s my age then. Makes me glad I grew up when I did. I was genuinely under the impression that it was the same in the 70s and 80s tbh... " and the 60's ........ It's less these days , contrary to popular belief. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The girl who was sent home for wearing a "short" skirt was wearing the school approved skirt. It was just above the knee. She was told it was "distracting" to male teachers. The mind boggles. " If this is true it really worries me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass Round of applause!!! Could that last paragraph be explained. I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at and the relevance of the comment. This thread is about sexualising women's bodies and there are men on here saying it happens to men too. She is saying that when there's a subject about men's issues, she doesn't go on the thread and say it happens to women too. It would be inappropriate to do so and that isn't what the conversation is about. Its viewed as completely derailing the subject. Much like when somebody turns somebody else's issues into a "me too" moment and makes the conversation all about them. " Tbf, this thread was about the sexualisation of women - the way they are perceived and not at all about the way they are treated. Everytime I try to discuss my original question I'm basically told men have to be the problem because they sexually abuse women therefore any and all problems in society around the sexualisation of women are mens fault. We have even been told we live in a patriarchal society designed by men because girls clothing is pink. Now I happen to agree that the way young girls are treated is a massive part of the patriarchy problem, but I also believe that it is a part that is largely down to other women. You won't often see a bloke go up to a strangers baby girl and say "isn't she pretty" then a baby boy and say, "my, he's so strong" I believe there are massive problems with the way society at large sees and portrays women, I just don't believe this is all caused by men in some deliberate plot to seize control. We've been reminded that female nakedness isn't a sexual thing in all cultures but whilst that is true, I've not seen anything that shows female sexualisation in one form or another doesn't exist in all cultures. Either men are somehow so much more powerful, devious, cleverer or whatever description you prefer than women that they have managed to always come out on top or there has to be an element of female collusion in the problem. The only other alternative is women have had nothing to do with creating the patriarchy, they've just been utterly ineffectual at stopping it for thousands of years which seems to me to be a pretty shit view of women. Mr | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Absolutely. Which is exactly my point. It happens both ways and is equally unacceptable. Yet this thread just seems to come across as another man bashing thread in my opinion (I know that wasn’t the ops intention) Of course it is equally unacceptable, no matter who is the perpetrator or recipient but the rate at which it happens to women by men is far far higher, barely compatible statistics. Also, there isn't the history of misogyny and patriarchy underpinning it when it occasionally happens to men. For example, women may fear that things could turn nasty if a man doesn't like her response to his behaviour or just decides to step it up. Women may well leer and all that, which is wrong but very few men will be scared that the woman will force herself on him and if she did try, men are generally physical stronger so would have a "fighting chance". The #notallmen and #mentoo arguments are wearing pretty thin. We cannot possibly begin to tackle this culture unless we are open and honest about the nature of it. I don't go on men's mental health social media posts and crt #womentoo, because I know that suicide is the biggest cause of death for men aged 20-49 in the UK and actually, I'm not that crass Round of applause!!! Could that last paragraph be explained. I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at and the relevance of the comment. This thread is about sexualising women's bodies and there are men on here saying it happens to men too. She is saying that when there's a subject about men's issues, she doesn't go on the thread and say it happens to women too. It would be inappropriate to do so and that isn't what the conversation is about. Its viewed as completely derailing the subject. Much like when somebody turns somebody else's issues into a "me too" moment and makes the conversation all about them. Tbf, this thread was about the sexualisation of women - the way they are perceived and not at all about the way they are treated. Everytime I try to discuss my original question I'm basically told men have to be the problem because they sexually abuse women therefore any and all problems in society around the sexualisation of women are mens fault. We have even been told we live in a patriarchal society designed by men because girls clothing is pink. Now I happen to agree that the way young girls are treated is a massive part of the patriarchy problem, but I also believe that it is a part that is largely down to other women. You won't often see a bloke go up to a strangers baby girl and say "isn't she pretty" then a baby boy and say, "my, he's so strong" I believe there are massive problems with the way society at large sees and portrays women, I just don't believe this is all caused by men in some deliberate plot to seize control. We've been reminded that female nakedness isn't a sexual thing in all cultures but whilst that is true, I've not seen anything that shows female sexualisation in one form or another doesn't exist in all cultures. Either men are somehow so much more powerful, devious, cleverer or whatever description you prefer than women that they have managed to always come out on top or there has to be an element of female collusion in the problem. The only other alternative is women have had nothing to do with creating the patriarchy, they've just been utterly ineffectual at stopping it for thousands of years which seems to me to be a pretty shit view of women. Mr" You seem to have missed the fact that for much of history women have been little more than brood mares. It's very difficult to take control of your life if you're pregnant or looking after children. Good contraception was the best start for women to start to take control of their lives and bodies. However, it takes a long time to change centuries of misogyny. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hum, Yes Men and Women can both dress provocatively, we should be able to dress how we want. But regardless of that the real question should be. Why can't men behave themselves?" Some men. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
