Posts by Angus Robertson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Clothing has jack-all to do with it.
I agree.
-
Is it pleasant to exist in an early-1960s mindset? I imagine so.
Prude is a word I used, because I do not have the Craig-ist gift for enunciating sentiment. Does evoke the 60s sitcom, for sure.
I have the mindset of a liberal. The right to offend is vastly more important than the right to not be offended. If someone feels harrassed they might be the victim of unambiguous mean spirited harrassment, they might have taken uncalled for offense at someones innocent endeavour to engage them or some mix of the two.
-
I'm thinking more late Victorian - fits better with the Charge-of-the-Light-Brigade-esque stupidity/bravery wire-crossing going on.
Actually I find it very bravest of commetators to be those who would like to assume a lady's virtue to be unquestionable. How Victorian-era stupid is that?
All it takes for rape is a rapist, but for harrasment a harrasser is only half the equation*. Harrasment requires someone to engage in an activity and someone to be harrassed by it.
Lucy, there is no scale, i can find no chart and there are almost certainly no telepaths. So how exactly is the harrasser meant to be exclusively at fault when it is a subjective decision going on in the mind of the harrassed?
* On that TV tropes thing i linked to earlier there is a standard joke to use when charactising a 'feminist' on TV for laughs - she will equate all sex with rape. Classed as a bad cliche of feminism.
-
You see how fucking stupid your argument is, right? If every woman acted demurely and never showed a single ankle, they would still be raped and harassed. It's not 'brave' to say what you're saying. It's not 'common sense'. It's the same tired old shit we've heard for centuries: putting responsibility for crime on women, because you think we're somehow in charge of policing people with penises.
Crime? Harrasment in a bar at 3 am is a hard crime to prove. Chances are high sexually explicit interaction will occur in a public space where adults purposefully meet each other and do so whilst self medicating to lower inhibitions. In a workplace that stuff would be sexual harrasment, but in a bar there is no power dynamic and not much of an intimidation factor so its most times just sexual.
If the lady in the article were a prude and upset by male attention to her tits then she is probably going to believe she is harrassed. But she hasn't been harrassed, she is just a prude.
(Also, team, I have bingo - the centre square was 'what feminists need to do is... [without actually knowing diddly about feminism]'.
Heh. I learned my feminism from TV.
-
disproportionate thread assessment
Walking is a much riskier activity than car travel per km, especially at night when there are drunk drivers on the road.
-
Megan,
The problem is in well lit bars from people who should be expected to behave with decorum and respect, but apparently can't. It comes from old men in ferry terminals and in churches and on the street in daylight.
Nope, people should not be expected to conform with somepersons ideals of decorum and respect. People should be expected not to harm or hinder other people, but that is as far as it goes.
-
Darn, she's onto us guys. Go to plan... what is it now? K?
No worries mate, for any given subject if we wait a week chances are that someone will call it feminism.
-
Same. I'm imagining something more like the Not OK ads, that taps into male honour and loyalty.
Honour and loyalty are not big determining factors in the target audiance. Perhaps something themed on - "Sex is more fun when she isn't comatose".
-
The fault of unwanted attention is soley on the person giving it.
However as the attention is only unwanted as determined by the contrary value judgements of the recipient, the giver is quite possibly blamelessly at fault.
-
The weakest advocates for the student voice across New Zealand are the voluntary ones.
Yes, the weakest student voice emanates from those students who must volunteer to speak it.
There are no practical benefits to VSM, only philosophical ones.
It provides an enhanced degree of honesty as to what the students might actually be saying.
Student politics is the politics of apathy, hardly anybody votes. The actual voice of any majority of students is best heard by pressing a mute button. VSM turns the sound down, CSM amplifies it 10 fold - but neither truly reflect the opinions of students.