Flirtation or sexual harassment? Here's how to tell the difference

[Quail]

"Equality means never paying a woman a compliment" … said no feminist ever.

Amid the exciting recent surge of feminist activism and energy in the UK, a slight confusion seems to have crept in around the idea of battling sexual harassment. Summarised by a recent Comment is Free piece by David Foster, the general concern seems to be that by condemning sexual harassment and discriminatory behaviour, we will somehow accidentally sweep up well-meaning compliments and flirting in the melee and inadvertently do away with all sexual interaction.

Well, there's no need to panic! Feminism simply means wanting everybody to be treated equally regardless of their sex. It's as simple as that. And no part of that definition maligns or "bans" flirting, telling somebody they look nice, or going at it like joyfully consenting rabbits in whatever style, location, position or combination of partners your heart desires.

What it does mean is that women shouldn't be scared to walk down the street; shouldn't be faced with intimidating and aggressive sexual shouts from cars and vans; shouldn't be treated as dehumanised sex objects; shouldn't be made to feel that men have an inherent entitlement to their bodies in public spaces.

Strange though it seems to have to keep reiterating it, the difference between sexual harassment and flirting is really fairly clear. It's actually quite insulting to the vast majority of men to suggest that they aren't perfectly capable of knowing the difference between complimenting someone, starting a flirty conversation, and harassing them. The clue is in the name: harassment. And if you're hoping to end up in bed with someone, of whatever gender, it's really in your interests to steer clear of harassing them, as it's likely to be fairly unhelpful to proceedings.

I think very few men would be concerned, upon reading through the page after page of stories we have collected from women screamed at, pursued, groped, licked, touched, appraised, scared and frustrated by street harassers, that combating these things might somehow interfere with their personal pickup style.

But for those still in doubt, you could always run through this handy checklist of questions:
• Is the way in which I'm making this advance likely to scare or alarm the person?
• Has the person already made it clear to me that they are uninterested in my advances?
• Does the speed at which my vehicle is moving rule out any likelihood of a response to this advance?
• Is this "advance" actually just a shouted and uninvited assessment on my part of this person's attractiveness/body/genitals?
• Does the context of this situation (a job interview, for example) make a direct sexual advance offensive or inappropriate?
• Am I actually, all things considered, just being a bit of a dick?

If the answer to any of the above is "yes", then perhaps what's happened here is that you have accidentally confused sexual harassment with a respectful sexual advance. In this case I refer you to the advice of a lady on Twitter, who rather eloquently summed things up:


More seriously, though, to make the wounded assertion that everybody, men and women, must retain their vital libertarian right to make direct propositions for sex is to display rather a major ignorance of the circumstances in which many women experience such propositions, on a near daily basis. When you've had "Get your tits out love" or "All right darlin', fancy a shag?" shouted at you across a busy street; when you've been angrily pursued with shouts of "Slag … slut … whore" simply for politely declining such advances; when you've been lecherously harassed in the workplace, or confronted with somebody who simply won't take no for an answer until the alternative "ownership" of a boyfriend finally convinces them – when you've experienced all this and more, it can have a bit of an impact on how you respond to unsolicited sexual advances.

Yes, sometimes just a tad of caution might creep in. Is it too much to ask that you respect that context? Is it really all just too wearisome to have to go that extra mile in your approach to reassure the person you're flirting with that you're not harassing them?

And if your answer is yes – if you are so frustrated by the atmosphere created by our gender imbalanced society in which such a large proportion of women experience harassment, and by the annoying caution that this engenders in some of your female flirting targets, guess what? The people you need to blame for that, the people you should be getting angry with, are the harassers. They are the ones ruining your fun and cramping your style – not feminist women and men who call out such behaviour when it happens.

Telling us that not all men are sexist or perpetrate harassment is preaching to the choir – the Everyday Sexism Project has received the most overwhelming support from men all over the world. We actually celebrate their awesomeness pretty regularly too.

But if you want to carry on making the point that many men are absolutely on the side of gender equality, you need to put your money where your mouth is. And in this case, that means stepping back, seeing the bigger picture and throwing your weight behind those battling sexual harassment, not moaning about the comparatively miniscule impact the widespread oppression of women might be having on your own personal sex life.

Source. (http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/womens-blog/2014/apr/10/sexual-harassment-flirting-six-differences)

[M-L-C-F]

In other words: "You can't harass the willing.". :wub:

[Quail]

In other words: "You can't harass the willing.". :wub:

Sorry, what is that supposed to mean?

[Sinister Intents]

In other words: "You can't harass the willing.". :wub:

Yes you can.....

[M-L-C-F]

Sorry, what is that supposed to mean?


Yes you can.....

I mean that it's not harassment if it's mutual or wanted attention. :p

At least that's how I feel. Like when I grabbed my then soon-to-be girlfriend's (now ex-girlfriend's) ass at my old job. When we were working together. She liked it, and wanted attention. She returned the affection back. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that if it goes both ways, that it isn't harassment. Otherwise, I've been a victim of sexual harassment, and never realized it before. :laugh:

[Red Banana]

I mean that it's not harassment if it's mutual or wanted attention. :p

At least that's how I feel. Like when I grabbed my then soon-to-be girlfriend's (now ex-girlfriend's) ass at my old job. When we were working together. She liked it, and wanted attention. She returned the affection back. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that if it goes both ways, that it isn't harassment. Otherwise, I've been a victim of sexual harassment, and never realized it before. :laugh:

And what if she hadn't wanted you to grab her ass? How would you know before doing it? Did she just say "hey, go ahead and grab my ass, I'll be ok with it"?

[M-L-C-F]

And what if she hadn't wanted you to grab her ass? How would you know before doing it? Did she just say "hey, go ahead and grab my ass, I'll be ok with it"?

We had already been mega flirting with each other to begin with, and she came on to me before hand. I already knew it was alright to do so. I'm not just gonna go up to some hot chick at work, and grab their ass, not knowing if it's appropriate or not. Otherwise that would be harassment, and that wouldn't be cool at all.

[Red Banana]

We had already been mega flirting with each other to begin with, and she came on to me before hand. I already knew it was alright to do so. I'm not just gonna go up to some hot chick at work, and grab their ass, not knowing if it's appropriate or not. Otherwise that would be harassment, and that wouldn't be cool at all.

And what comprises "mega flirting", may I ask?

[#FF0000]

And what comprises "mega flirting", may I ask?

Gonna go ahead and guess it's stuff like a lot of suggestive/sexual comments n jokes and slightly more innocent physical contact and things like that.

The whole interrogation angle you're going for here is kind of strange tbh, red banana.

[M-L-C-F]

And what comprises "mega flirting", may I ask?


Gonna go ahead and guess it's stuff like a lot of suggestive/sexual comments n jokes and slightly more innocent physical contact and things like that.

The whole interrogation angle you're going for here is kind of strange tbh, red banana.

It's pretty fucking creepy, tbqh. But pretty much that #FF0000. I'm an adult, it's what adults do.

[Loony Le Fist]

I say it's pretty easy. When in doubt, just don't do it or say it.

[Red Banana]

Gonna go ahead and guess it's stuff like a lot of suggestive/sexual comments n jokes and slightly more innocent physical contact and things like that.

The whole interrogation angle you're going for here is kind of strange tbh, red banana.

I'd just like to know, because "mega flirting" to one person could be lots of giggles and blushing, to another it could be "let's go in the back later, hon". That's why I asked. If they meant the former, I don't think MCLF's advance was justified, if the latter, it probably was.

Every time, "she was coming on to me" is used as a justification for a sexual advance, it makes sense to know what exactly is meant by "coming on to", and whether or not that comprises consent to the advance.

[PhoenixAsh]

Wow. This thread, which could have been really good, got really fucked up really quickly.

@M-L-C-F
I am going to assume you were merely inappropriately and awkward in your phrasing and actually meant to say: make sure your advances are welcomed. Because what you wrote there is both inappropriate and creepy...it sounds eerily like a "but she liked it" defense. I hope you understand this.

@Red Banana
Might want to explain why you got riled up first and why what he said was inappropriate. We are still trying to teach each other and learn from each other. Not starting a witch hunt before we know the facts.

[Red Banana]

@Red Banana
Might want to explain why you got riled up first and why what he said was inappropriate. We are still trying to teach each other and learn from each other. Not starting a witch hunt before we know the facts.

Exactly, which is precisely why I was asking questions. I wasn't going to go out and accuse anyone of sexual harassment without knowing the context of the situation, so I asked MCLF to clarify.

[M-L-C-F]

I'd just like to know, because "mega flirting" to one person could be lots of giggles and blushing, to another it could be "let's go in the back later, hon". That's why I asked. If they meant the former, I don't think MCLF's advance was justified, if the latter, it probably was.

Every time, "she was coming on to me" is used as a justification for a sexual advance, it makes sense to know what exactly is meant by "coming on to", and whether or not that comprises consent to the advance.

I can tell the difference between when it is and isn't appropriate.


Wow. This thread, which could have been really good, got really fucked up really quickly.

@M-L-C-F
I am going to assume you were merely inappropriately and awkward in your phrasing and actually meant to say: make sure your advances are welcomed. Because what you wrote there is both inappropriate and creepy...it sounds eerily like a "but she liked it" defense. I hope you understand this.

@Red Banana
Might want to explain why you got riled up first and why what he said was inappropriate. We are still trying to teach each other and learn from each other. Not starting a witch hunt before we know the facts.

Yeah I do. It was more in a joking sorta way, in the first post. I knew where we were at in forming a relationship, and whether or not it was appropriate. My whole point was that if it's going both ways, it isn't harassment. I didn't expect a shitstorm, but I should really know better about this place.

[tallguy]

Sorry, what is that supposed to mean?I'm guessing, but I suspect it means that most (though not all) of that article you linked to refers to behaviour which may be variously deemed to be harassment or flirtation depending on the receptiveness of the recipient of it. If the recipient fancies the person behaving in that way, then it will likely be deemed flirtation. If not then it will likely be deemed harassment. Apart from the more blatantly obvious examples of harassment involving intimidation or crass comments such as "get your tits out love" or similar, most of the rest of the examples in that piece are not so easy to identify (though, even, "get your tits out love" might conceivably be deemed "flirtatious" behaviour on a club 19-30 holiday - who knows). The thing that makes it easy to identity such behaviour as harassment, is more to do with persistence in the face of obvious rejection than the behaviour itself. That is to say, even an otherwise innocuous "compliment" on someone's appearance may be legitimately deemed to be harassment if the recipient has made it unambiguously clear several times over that they do not welcome the attention and yet the perpetrator of it persists.

Trying to acontextually categorise the behaviour itself (apart from the more blatantly obvious examples) as either harassment or not harassment is pretty stupid. It's all about context.

[M-L-C-F]

I'm guessing, but I suspect it means that most (though not all) of that article you linked to refers to behaviour which may be variously deemed to be harassment or flirtation depending on the receptiveness of the recipient of it. If the recipient fancies the person behaving in that way, then it will likely be deemed flirtation. If not then it will likely be deemed harassment. Apart from the more blatantly obvious examples of harassment involving intimidation or crass comments such as "get your tits out love" or similar, most of the rest of the examples in that piece are not so easy to identify (though, even, "get your tits out love" might conceivably be deemed "flirtatious" behaviour on a club 19-30 holiday - who knows). The thing that makes it easy to identity such behaviour as harassment, is more to do with persistence in the face of obvious rejection than the behaviour itself. That is to say, even an otherwise innocuous "compliment" on someone's appearance may be legitimately deemed to be harassment if the recipient has made it unambiguously clear several times over that they do not welcome the attention and yet the perpetrator of it persists.

Trying to acontextually categorise the behaviour itself (apart from the more blatantly obvious examples) as either harassment or not harassment is pretty stupid. It's all about context.

Pretty much this. That's basically what I meant. But made as what was supposed to be a more humour oriented post. :p

[PhoenixAsh]

It failed.

Sexism and sexual harassment aren't really the appropriate subjects to attempt humour.

Either way; something should not be forgotten. The fact that somebody doesn't say the attention isn't wanted doesn't mean it is wanted. Do not discount the atmosphere of fear of consequences, especially in power dynamics such as the work place or schools....which might lead to some people not speaking up.

[tallguy]

It failed.

Sexism and sexual harassment aren't really the appropriate subjects to attempt humour.

Either way; something should not be forgotten. The fact that somebody doesn't say the attention isn't wanted doesn't mean it is wanted. Do not discount the atmosphere of fear of consequences, especially in power dynamics such as the work place or schools....which might lead to some people not speaking up.
Everything is amenable to humour

Everything

It's all about context

[PhoenixAsh]

The context here is that we are on a revolutionary leftwing site where there have been and are people who have suffered sexual abuse, harassment, violence etc. and that realizes that we live in a society which puts an unfair burden on victims of these situations...

[tallguy]

The context here is that we are on a revolutionary leftwing site where there have been and are people who have suffered sexual abuse, harassment, violence etc. and that realizes that we live in a society which puts an unfair burden on victims of these situations...
Enough with the holier than thou bollocks. Who the fuck do you think you are to assume you have the market cornered on suffering. I know what sexual exploitation is up close and personal mate. And even that is amenable to humour. It has to be. Humour is one of the ways we survive.

Get off your high horse and try getting a fucking grip why don’t you.

[#FF0000]

try getting a fucking grip why don’t you.

you're the one who's mad tho

maybe a mod should split the off-topic posts so we can try again without the trainwreck.

[M-L-C-F]

It failed.

Sexism and sexual harassment aren't really the appropriate subjects to attempt humour.

Either way; something should not be forgotten. The fact that somebody doesn't say the attention isn't wanted doesn't mean it is wanted. Do not discount the atmosphere of fear of consequences, especially in power dynamics such as the work place or schools....which might lead to some people not speaking up.

Well obviously, but anyways, you make a good point in that last part.


Everything is amenable to humour

Everything

It's all about context

Exactly, it's always about context.


The context here is that we are on a revolutionary leftwing site where there have been and are people who have suffered sexual abuse, harassment, violence etc. and that realizes that we live in a society which puts an unfair burden on victims of these situations...

That doesn't change the fact that you can joke about things in a non-serious manner.


Enough with the holier than thou bollocks. Who the fuck do you think you are to assume you have the market cornered on suffering. I know what sexual exploitation is up close and personal mate. And even that is amenable to humour. It has to be. Humour is one of the ways we survive.

Get off your high horse and try getting a fucking grip why don’t you.

I completely agree. But this is how this place is, how it's been, and how it'll always end up being.

[Sinister Intents]

Exactly, it's always about context.



That doesn't change the fact that you can joke about things in a non-serious manner.

Would you joke about racism in this manner or say racist jokes?

[M-L-C-F]

Would you joke about racism in this manner or say racist jokes?

I like loads of black comedians, who joke about racism. It's laughing inwards, at African-American culture. Making fun of the stupidity of racism. Just like how you make fun of how stupid sexual harassment or sexism is. Making fun of it, is a legitimate means of comedy. It highlights how dumb it is. Fuck, my black co-workers at my old job said some of the most racist jokes I've ever heard. Same goes with the half-black and half Native American guy there. We had no issue with it, cause we knew we were joking. We always would joke about shit. It made the day better.

[Sinister Intents]

I like loads of black comedians, who joke about racism. It's laughing inwards, at African-American culture. Making fun of the stupidity of racism. Just like how you make fun of how stupid sexual harassment or sexism is. Making fun of it, is a legitimate means of comedy. It highlights how dumb it is. Fuck, my black co-workers at my old job said some of the most racist jokes I've ever heard. Same goes with the half-black and half Native American guy there. I had no issue with it, cause I knew they were joking. We always would joke about shit. It made the day better.

Oddly this makes me think of when someone says "I'm not racist, I have a black friend." Do you believe race to be more than a social and economic construction? I still truly believe some things should never be joked about, not ever. I'm get to meet people who make racist jokes and sexist jokes all day and exclaim that its all in good fun, and I think it's not fun or funny to joke about such things.

[Bostana]

That doesn't change the fact that you can joke about things in a non-serious manner..

Does this include rape jokes?

[Sinister Intents]

Does this include rape jokes?

He'll probably say it's okay to make light of rape too.

[M-L-C-F]

Oddly this makes me think of when someone says "I'm not racist, I have a black friend." Do you believe race to be more than a social and economic construction? I still truly believe some things should never be joked about, not ever. I'm get to meet people who make racist jokes and sexist jokes all day and exclaim that its all in good fun, and I think it's not fun or funny to joke about such things.

The thing is, they knew where I was coming from, as a supporter of the Black Panthers. Knowing fully well about how anti-racist I am. Knowing we were all kidding. Humans are humans in the end.


Does this include rape jokes?


He'll probably say it's okay to make light of rape too.

Would I joke about rape? No, but I know there are rape jokes. I wouldn't choose to listen to them. But I'm not gonna say that a person can't joke about it. Although I've heard my fair share of prison jokes. You can always choose to not listen to it. No one is forcing anything on you.

[Hermes]

Would I joke about rape? No, but I know there are rape jokes. I wouldn't choose to listen to them. But I'm not gonna say that a person can't joke about it. Although I've heard my fair share of prison jokes. You can always choose to not listen to it. No one is forcing anything on you.

..how exactly can you 'choose to not listen to it'? Do you cover your ears and shout loudly?

They aren't just something that exist completely outside of everything else, rape jokes perpetuate the culture that makes them acceptable (as well as rape/sexual harassment).

I think #FF0000 is right in suggesting that this be split into a different thread, though

[Loony Le Fist]

The only irony one can find in rape jokes is in demonstrating the absurdity of rape culture itself. Take this gem:



Why are girls so scared of rape? Y'all should feel pride that a guy risked his life in jail just to f--k you.


If you think this joke is funny because of it's trivialization of rape, then you're a douchebag. But if you use it as a description of the underlying attitudes of rape culture, then I don't think it's inappropriate. Indeed, I think it is a rather accurate description of the attitudes of certain individuals. I think it very clearly demonstrates the attitude of privilege implicit to rape culture.

[PhoenixAsh]

Enough with the holier than thou bollocks. Who the fuck do you think you are to assume you have the market cornered on suffering. I know what sexual exploitation is up close and personal mate. And even that is amenable to humour. It has to be. Humour is one of the ways we survive.

Get off your high horse and try getting a fucking grip why don’t you.

Aha. Well I like how you entirely equate your own suffering with that of others and dismiss theirs as entirely similar to your own. Naturally being a considerate human being to others can be totally dismissed just as long as you can claim it as Humour.

Because that is exactly the point I am trying to make. Thank you for illustrating it.

Don't assume your humor works for others or isn't insulting to others...just always assume when you want to make a (bad) joke about these issues in the presence of others you don't know....it is a bad idea.



O...and by the way. I am not your mate. And right now I think I am a mod who is assuming you might need a friendly reminder so I am going to politely suggest that you pipe down. I wasn't swearing at you are calling anybody names. So your first attempt at flight of the handle...was seriously unwarranted.

[M-L-C-F]

..how exactly can you 'choose to not listen to it'? Do you cover your ears and shout loudly?

They aren't just something that exist completely outside of everything else, rape jokes perpetuate the culture that makes them acceptable (as well as rape/sexual harassment).

I think #FF0000 is right in suggesting that this be split into a different thread, though

You can easily walk away, if it's a real life situation. If it's on TV or the internet, just change it. As for society, that's a problem with society. Not with comedy or comedians.


The only irony one can find in rape jokes is in demonstrating the absurdity of rape culture itself. Take this gem:



If you think this joke is funny because of it's trivialization of rape, then you're a douchebag. But if you use it as a description of the underlying attitudes of rape culture, then I don't think it's inappropriate. Indeed, I think it is a rather accurate description of the attitudes of certain individuals. I think it very clearly demonstrates the attitude of privilege implicit to rape culture.

That's a good point.


O...and by the way. I am not your mate. And right now I think I am a mod who is assuming you might need a friendly reminder so I am going to politely suggest that you pipe down. I wasn't swearing at you are calling anybody names. So your first attempt at flight of the handle...was seriously unwarranted.

:rolleyes:

[Sinister Intents]

You can easily walk away, if it's a real life situation. If it's on TV or the internet, just change it. As for society, that's a problem with society. Not with comedy or comedians.

Do you like Daniel Tosh and his homophobic, racist, sexist, and transphobic comedy? Also you can't just walk away on a damn jobsite when someone is saying disturbing things about what he'd do to women, and he's trying to be funny about it. This shit makes me furious. I've had trans jokes made in front of me, how do you think that made me feel? I was in a car and couldn't cover my ears, and I'm a closeted transwoman btw so I can't just say to this individual, "hey I'm trans, your jokes fucking bother me."

[Hermes]

You can easily walk away, if it's a real life situation. If it's on TV or the internet, just change it. As for society, that's a problem with society. Not with comedy or comedians.

I'm not understanding how you're completely separating comedy/comedians from society. I mean, clowns are pretty weird, but that doesn't mean they aren't a part of, and don't help to reproduce, culture/society.

As for walking away/changing it/etc, once you know enough to realize it's something you should want to leave/switch off (and as sinister points out, leaving isn't always an option), the harm is already done. It's not like someone can hear half of a rape joke, realize what it is, and then mentally block all of that out and waltz out of the room having no idea what's going on.

[#FF0000]

jesus christ this thread

[PhoenixAsh]

:rolleyes:


You can roll your eyes at me but you don't know my history. Thank you for being completely dismissive. Are you, and some others here, aware how rape, abuse, harassment and threats there of are used to regulate women's behavior and tell them what to do and not to do and how joking about these issues perpetuates a culture of rape.

You can talk all you want on humor is a way of surviving. Sure. For you it is. For others your humor is actually quite a heavy trigger.


I suggest we all urgently return to the original topic of the thread.

[M-L-C-F]

Do you like Daniel Tosh and his homophobic, racist, sexist, and transphobic comedy? Also you can't just walk away on a damn jobsite when someone is saying disturbing things about what he'd do to women, and he's trying to be funny about it. This shit makes me furious. I've had trans jokes made in front of me, how do you think that made me feel? I was in a car and couldn't cover my ears, and I'm a closeted transwoman btw so I can't just say to this individual, "hey I'm trans, your jokes fucking bother me."

Yes, I do like Daniel Tosh actually. I find him funny. Daniel Tosh Is Helping Straight Males Support Gay Rights; And They Don't Even Realize It. (http://www.glueamerica.org/2011/06/daniel-tosh-is-helping-straight-males.html) & Daniel Tosh gets it right about gay marriage. (http://www.paulduane.net/2013/03/daniel-tosh-gets-it-right-about-gay-marriage/)

As for the other stuff. Complain to a supervisor, or another higher up. You can always explain to them why it isn't funny. You don't have to come out, to defend LGBT people. You can always just ignore it too. I ignore stupid shit all the time. If I fretted over all the stupid shit I hear. I'd go nuts so damn fast.


I'm not understanding how you're completely separating comedy/comedians from society. I mean, clowns are pretty weird, but that doesn't mean they aren't a part of, and don't help to reproduce, culture/society.

As for walking away/changing it/etc, once you know enough to realize it's something you should want to leave/switch off (and as sinister points out, leaving isn't always an option), the harm is already done. It's not like someone can hear half of a rape joke, realize what it is, and then mentally block all of that out and waltz out of the room having no idea what's going on.

I'm sorry, but I get over things pretty quick. If I change it or leave, it's over to me. Like I said, I can ignore stupidity. It's easy for me to move on. It isn't worth arguing about most of the time.


You can roll your eyes at me but you don't know my history. Thank you for being completely dismissive.

Are you, and some others here, aware how rape, abuse, harassment and threats there of are used to regulate women's behavior and tell them what to do and not to do and how joking about these issues perpetuates a culture of rape.

You can talk all you want on humor is a way of surviving. Sure. For you it is. For others your humor is actually quite a heavy trigger.

I only rolled my eyes at the last part, not the other stuff. Hence why I only quoted that one part. I wasn't being dismissive about the other points.

[Sinister Intents]

Yes, I do like Daniel Tosh actually. I find him funny. Daniel Tosh Is Helping Straight Males Support Gay Rights; And They Don't Even Realize It. (http://www.glueamerica.org/2011/06/daniel-tosh-is-helping-straight-males.html) & Daniel Tosh gets it right about gay marriage. (http://www.paulduane.net/2013/03/daniel-tosh-gets-it-right-about-gay-marriage/)

As for the other stuff. Complain to a supervisor, or another higher up. You can always explain to them why it isn't funny. You don't have to come out, to defend LGBT people. You can always just ignore it too. I ignore stupid shit all the time. If I fretted over all the stupid shit I hear. I'd go nuts so damn fast.

I can't stand Daniel Tosh and that show is bullshit and perpetuates stereotypes and the culture that creates this bullshit.
How often do you think I ignore the 'stupid shit'? I hear it all the time and it's driving me insane, it drives you fucking insane to keep hearing the same trash over and over again. Go complain to a supervisor or another higher up? This thread makes me want to smash my face into the keyboard.

[Ceallach_the_Witch]

ah yes i forgot the rich cultural tradition of racist/sexist jokes oh how will we ever bear to lose it if only we'd invented countless different forms of humour which were also much funnier anyway because they don't rely on lazy gags about cheap stereotypes and/or 'irony' oh woe oh lore we are doomed we are.


there is a grip somewhere and some of you should probably be searching for it.

[PhoenixAsh]

Today we were reallocating work spaces. Some desks needed to be relocated. One of the desks was going to face a wall and one next to it would have a window. We discussed this with the people who needed to work there because it isn't fun to stare at a wall.

Unfortunately during this discussion one of my colleagues, who is their supervisor, said to the girl (he fancies her by the way) jokingly: "I think it would be appropriate for you to sit in the window."

Some of the guys laughed. She was insulted.

Why?

Because in Holland...that sentence may seem innocent and it may even be seen as considerate in some weird way. But it is actually loaded. Because he was indicating window prostitution.

It was meant as a joke. All in good fun.

He then proceeded to put one of our desk lamps (which is glass with a red leave pattern) in the window in front of her desk. Which got more laughs from the guys. While she was moving uncomfortably in her chair. She laughed begrudgingly.

The setting including lamp:
http://oi59.tinypic.com/jjpldz.jpg

Why?

Because he was in a position of power. So she didn't dare say anything.

None of the other women present laughed. He said he was just kidding around and using this as a "I am really coarse and uninterested but..." kind of flirting.

[Psycho P and the Freight Train]

Today we were reallocating work spaces. Some desks needed to be relocated. One of the desks was going to face a wall and one next to it would have a window. We discussed this with the people who needed to work there because it isn't fun to stare at a wall.

Unfortunately during this discussion one of my colleagues, who is their supervisor, said to the girl (he fancies her by the way) jokingly: "I think it would be appropriate for you to sit in the window."

Some of the guys laughed. She was insulted.

Why?

Because in Holland...that sentence may seem innocent and it may even be seen as considerate in some weird way. But it is actually loaded. Because he was indicating window prostitution.

It was meant as a joke. All in good fun.

He then proceeded to put one of our desk lamps (which is glass with a red leave pattern) in the window in front of her desk. Which got more laughs from the guys. While she was moving uncomfortably in her chair. She laughed begrudgingly.

Why?

Because he was in a position of power. So she didn't dare say anything.

None of the other women present laughed. He said he was just kidding around and using this as a "I am really coarse and uninterested but..." kind of flirting.

That is extremely fucked up. Very tasteless indeed.

But I think what M-L-C-F and others are arguing is that just because a joke pokes fun at race and such doesn't make it automatically offensive. Sexist jokes are pretty much always offensive, because women don't really make sexist jokes degrading themselves. But I think the opposing argument is focusing more on race, not sexism.

For instance, I'm gay, I think Daniel Tosh is funny as hell. And should black comedians stop making jokes about black culture? Really?

I think that the joke you mentioned is awful, unfunny, and sexist. But that doesn't mean any joke of any nature that pokes fun of stereotypes is offensive. Not that you were arguing that. I just sort of wanted to throw in my two cents, and I used your quote because that's a good example of a joke that truly is offensive compared to other comedy that deals with race and such things.

EDIT: Sorry this seems pretty fucking unclear of what my point is after re-reading it. This wasn't necessarily directed towards you specifically, I just used the quote to demonstrate the difference between an offensive joke about race/sex/etc and one that truly isn't offensive. I hope people at least get what I'm trying to say.

[Loony Le Fist]

ah yes i forgot the rich cultural tradition of racist/sexist jokes oh how will we ever bear to lose it if only we'd invented countless different forms of humour which were also much funnier anyway because they don't rely on lazy gags about cheap stereotypes and/or 'irony' oh woe oh lore we are doomed we are.


there is a grip somewhere and some of you should probably be searching for it.

Absolutely. It reminds me of those jokes that right-wingers often make about left-wingers being moochers or whatever. Only more stupid and bigoted.


...
Unfortunately during this discussion one of my colleagues, who is their supervisor, said to the girl (he fancies her by the way) jokingly: "I think it would be appropriate for you to sit in the window."
...
in Holland...that sentence may seem innocent and it may even be seen as considerate in some weird way. But it is actually loaded. Because he was indicating window prostitution.


Well thanks for that. I had no idea. It would be pretty terrible to make an inadvertent reference to that accidentally. That would go down really bad. :(



He then proceeded to put one of our desk lamps (which is glass with a red leave pattern) in the window in front of her desk. Which got more laughs from the guys. While she was moving uncomfortably in her chair. She laughed begrudgingly.

Why?

Because he was in a position of power. So she didn't dare say anything.

None of the other women present laughed. He said he was just kidding around and using this as a "I am really coarse and uninterested but..." kind of flirting.

That's really despicable. I'm surprised to hear about that going on in Holland.


...
How often do you think I ignore the 'stupid shit'? I hear it all the time and it's driving me insane, it drives you fucking insane to keep hearing the same trash over and over again ... This thread makes me want to smash my face into the keyboard.

I hear you. I live in the deep south, and it does get really frustrating not being able to be completely honest about how I feel about things. Sexism, racism--all that good stuff. Going along to get along. It sucks to be a leftist atheist in this part of the world. Of course, I'm sure there are places where it probably sucks even more. Like Saudi Arabia. But at least I'm part of the local OWS group. Sadly, even they suffer from an infiltration of non-leftists.

[PhoenixAsh]

I added a picture of the setting.

Anyways. The supervisor spend his Friday afternoon reading blogs on harassment, making notes and a power point presentation of why what he did wasn't funny....which he is going to present at the Team Leadership meeting next Monday.

[slum]

wow this went so quickly to 'feminists have no sense of humor and are oversensitive' what a surprise that sentiment has never before been uttered thank you i feel so intellectually energized now with this new perspective i should bring you a fruit basket you all have really opened a new horizon of thought to me

[Decolonize The Left]

If I was a global I'd split this thread up good - someone should get on that because there's possibility here. To return to the OP and subsequent on-topic discussion:


Yes you can.....

No, you can't.

Just like you can't "abuse" someone who explicitly wants to be "abused" (think BDSM), you can't "harass" someone who wants you to. See, for example, the definition of harassment:
"the act or an instance of harassing, or disturbing, pestering, or troubling repeatedly; persecution." (dictionary.com)

You can see quite clearly that the definition involves putting someone in a position they do not wish to be in (implied by "disturbing" "pestering" "troubling" as this implies that one is not in that position and does not wish to be). So you cannot harass someone who wants to be harassed as this negates the context of harassment in the first place.

I'll give you that MLCF was a bit vague in their post and the follow up really gets to the root of Quail's OP:

And what if she hadn't wanted you to grab her ass? How would you know before doing it? Did she just say "hey, go ahead and grab my ass, I'll be ok with it"?

This is really what the OP was addressing - the seemingly difficult context of determining another's opinions/feelings about oneself and learning how to assess a situation and one's own actions within it.

[Loony Le Fist]

jesus christ this thread

Why not try improving the thread like everyone else has, instead of trying to stamp out discussion?

[PhoenixAsh]

If I was a global I'd split this thread up good - someone should get on that because there's possibility here. To return to the OP and subsequent on-topic discussion:



I PM-ed Left Solidarity and Tagayuki.

[Hermes]

As for the other stuff. Complain to a supervisor, or another higher up. You can always explain to them why it isn't funny. You don't have to come out, to defend LGBT people. You can always just ignore it too. I ignore stupid shit all the time. If I fretted over all the stupid shit I hear. I'd go nuts so damn fast.



I'm sorry, but I get over things pretty quick. If I change it or leave, it's over to me. Like I said, I can ignore stupidity. It's easy for me to move on. It isn't worth arguing about most of the time.

I don't know much about you, so I'm not sure whether this applies here. That said, you should keep in mind that it's fairly easy to ignore things/be unaffected by things that... don't really effect you.

that is, if you aren't a woman, or haven't been a victim of sexual abuse, it's not really unsurprising that you don't have a lot of difficulty shrugging off rape jokes. that doesn't mean that every person has that luxury, though

[M-L-C-F]

How often do you think I ignore the 'stupid shit'? I hear it all the time and it's driving me insane, it drives you fucking insane to keep hearing the same trash over and over again. Go complain to a supervisor or another higher up? This thread makes me want to smash my face into the keyboard.

I'm sorry that you got that upset.


Today we were reallocating work spaces. Some desks needed to be relocated. One of the desks was going to face a wall and one next to it would have a window. We discussed this with the people who needed to work there because it isn't fun to stare at a wall.

Unfortunately during this discussion one of my colleagues, who is their supervisor, said to the girl (he fancies her by the way) jokingly: "I think it would be appropriate for you to sit in the window."

Some of the guys laughed. She was insulted.

Why?

Because in Holland...that sentence may seem innocent and it may even be seen as considerate in some weird way. But it is actually loaded. Because he was indicating window prostitution.

It was meant as a joke. All in good fun.

He then proceeded to put one of our desk lamps (which is glass with a red leave pattern) in the window in front of her desk. Which got more laughs from the guys. While she was moving uncomfortably in her chair. She laughed begrudgingly.

The setting including lamp:
http://oi59.tinypic.com/jjpldz.jpg

Why?

Because he was in a position of power. So she didn't dare say anything.

None of the other women present laughed. He said he was just kidding around and using this as a "I am really coarse and uninterested but..." kind of flirting.

That's pretty fucked up, and incredibly stupid.


It sucks to be a leftist atheist in this part of the world. Of course, I'm sure there are places where it probably sucks even more. Like Saudi Arabia. But at least I'm part of the local OWS group. Sadly, even they suffer from an infiltration of non-leftists.

It's like that in most of the US. I'm fortunate to have worked with some fairly tolerant people. Detroit has got a great leftist history too.


Anyways. The supervisor spend his Friday afternoon reading blogs on harassment, making notes and a power point presentation of why what he did wasn't funny....which he is going to present at the Team Leadership meeting next Monday.

Good, he should have his ass kicked. The whole thing echos the point of context.


No, you can't.

Just like you can't "abuse" someone who explicitly wants to be "abused" (think BDSM), you can't "harass" someone who wants you to. See, for example, the definition of harassment:
"the act or an instance of harassing, or disturbing, pestering, or troubling repeatedly; persecution." (dictionary.com)

You can see quite clearly that the definition involves putting someone in a position they do not wish to be in (implied by "disturbing" "pestering" "troubling" as this implies that one is not in that position and does not wish to be). So you cannot harass someone who wants to be harassed as this negates the context of harassment in the first place.

I'll give you that MLCF was a bit vague in their post...

Exactly, and I'm sorry for being vague about it.


I don't know much about you, so I'm not sure whether this applies here. That said, you should keep in mind that it's fairly easy to ignore things/be unaffected by things that... don't really effect you.

that is, if you aren't a woman, or haven't been a victim of sexual abuse, it's not really unsurprising that you don't have a lot of difficulty shrugging off rape jokes. that doesn't mean that every person has that luxury, though

Not that it's anyone's business here. But I was abused at a babysitter's, as a young child. I've been a victim in the past. I deal with racists and homophobes at my family get-togethers. I let the ignorant be ignorant, cause it just isn't worth arguing with them. Those are people that I would never joke with. Again, it's all about context.

[#FF0000]

Why not try improving the thread like everyone else has, instead of trying to stamp out discussion?

when some people's idea of improving the thread is "let me post this rape joke i think is good" then idk what I can be expected to do other than watch as the thread burns

[Loony Le Fist]

when some people's idea of improving the thread is "let me post this rape joke i think is good" then idk what I can be expected to do other than watch as the thread burns

Being passive aggressive is bad for your health. It's much better to be a straight talker. :laugh:

Here's a helpful suggestion. Try actually reading the content of posts and what is actually being said, instead of trying to be offended by them all the time. That's just a proactive suggestion on improving the content of threads, instead of vapid complaining. Then you can respond to the actual claims being made, instead of responding to the claims you think are being made. See how that works? :rolleyes:

I think there's a very big difference between saying something in the context of trying to criticize or mock a position v. supporting that position. If you had read my original post, you would have figured that out.

[Hermes]

Being passive aggressive is bad for your health. It's much better to be a straight talker. :laugh:

Here's a helpful suggestion. Try actually reading the content of posts and what is actually being said, instead of trying to be offended by them all the time. That's just a proactive suggestion on improving the content of threads, instead of vapid complaining. Then you can respond to the actual claims being made, instead of responding to the claims you think are being made. See how that works? :rolleyes:

I think there's a very big difference between saying something in the context of trying to criticize or mock a position v. supporting that position. If you had read my original post, you would have figured that out.

totally not a passive aggressive post at all

I'm pretty sure he read your posts, and probably all the posts in the thread. the whole thread isn't very constructive right now, though, until it can get back on track

[Loony Le Fist]

totally not a passive aggressive post at all

I'm pretty sure he read your posts, and probably all the posts in the thread. the whole thread isn't very constructive right now, though, until it can get back on track

Don't know if there is much more to say on the topic. I mean the basic gist here seems to be: don't be a douche.

[tallguy]

ah yes i forgot the rich cultural tradition of racist/sexist jokes oh how will we ever bear to lose it if only we'd invented countless different forms of humour which were also much funnier anyway because they don't rely on lazy gags about cheap stereotypes and/or 'irony' oh woe oh lore we are doomed we are.


there is a grip somewhere and some of you should probably be searching for it.
"The secret source of humor is not joy, but sorrow" - Mark Twain

fwMukKqx-Os

[M-L-C-F]

I mean the basic gist here seems to be: don't be a douche.

Pretty much.


"The secret source of humor is not joy, but sorrow" - Mark Twain

fwMukKqx-Os

Now stuff like that is hilarious. George Carlin was awesome. :laugh:

[PhoenixAsh]

in this thread:

men arguing that rape jokes are funny depending on perspective because that is how to deal with trauma...posting men making rape jokes as supportive evidence....and blaming feminism that they can't

1 in 3 women are raped. 1 in 71 men are raped.

Of course it is totally legit for the oppressors to lessen the trauma of structurally oppression of women by making fun of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture

[Loony Le Fist]

Pretty much.



Now stuff like that is hilarious. George Carlin was awesome. :laugh:

You know, that Carlin clip sort of had me at first--but then near the end he lost me again.

[M-L-C-F]

in this thread:

men arguing that rape jokes are funny depending on perspective because that is how to deal with trauma...posting men making rape jokes as supportive evidence....and blaming feminism that they can't

1 in 3 women are raped. 1 in 71 men are raped.

Of course it is totally legit for the oppressors to lessen the trauma of structurally oppression of women by making fun of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture

I never blamed feminism. I never criticised feminism either. If I was gonna criticise anything, it would be womynists. The extremists that hate men, and want to "turn the tides", and oppress men.

I'm not oppressing anyone. I'm actually an advocate of feminism. I like many feminists: Evelyn Reed, Assata Shakur, Helen Keller, and even Rosa Luxemburg (despite my feelings on her, on other things), among others. I'm well aware about rape culture. But I'm not for the limiting of comedy, that's in proper context. I find it funny how I'm being more libertarian than Anarchists on this.

Also, it's fucking stupid as hell, that this site censors the word *****!

[Psycho P and the Freight Train]

I never blamed feminism. I never criticised feminism either. If I was gonna criticise anything, it would be womynists. The extremists that hate men, and want to "turn the tides", and oppress men.

I'm not oppressing anyone. I'm actually an advocate of feminism. I like many feminists: Evelyn Reed, Assata Shakur, Helen Keller, and even Rosa Luxemburg (despite my feelings on her, on other things), among others. I'm well aware about rape culture. But I'm not for the limiting of comedy, that's in proper context. I find it funny how I'm being more libertarian than Anarchists on this.

I wish I could thank this post twice.

Seriously, people think that if you appreciate comedy that some might find offensive, you must be against feminism. Nobody is even advocating making rape jokes anyway, that would be absolutely bizarre.

[Quail]

This thread has turned into a predictable trainwreck that I don't feel like dealing with at the moment sorry.

Just one thing though: the word that is censored is obviously a sexist/homophobic slur and you shouldn't be using it anyway.

[Quail]

This thread has turned into a predictable trainwreck that I don't feel like dealing with at the moment sorry.

Just one thing though: the word that is censored is obviously a sexist/homophobic slur and you shouldn't be using it anyway.

[PhoenixAsh]

I am not familiar with the movement of womynists so I had to google it.

The only definition I came up with came from the urban dictionary: A super cool feminist chick who's not afraid to give her opinions. She doesn't like to spell the word "woman" using the word "man". Hence the significance of the Y. Very confident. She's well educated, sexy, and most likely named Jessica. Probably smokes weed too.

Which is riddled with overt and subtle sexism.

You might be referring to a specific movement within feminism which among others uses language to actively combat the definition of a woman by referring to a male. Like everything a woman does in patriarchal society is depending on what her status is in relation to a man or men as a group...they...understandably do not like that.

What you seem to be referring to is separatist feminism from the 60's and 90's . I am not even sure if they are still a "thing" a they have been widely denounced by both the radical and revolutionary feminists and second and third wave feminists.

I am currently not aware of any mass movement of feminists that argue men should be structurally oppressed....outside of course of the imagery created by misogynist MRA's, anti-feminists and fora like /b.

[Decolonize The Left]

I never blamed feminism. I never criticised feminism either. If I was gonna criticise anything, it would be womynists. The extremists that hate men, and want to "turn the tides", and oppress men.

I'm not oppressing anyone. I'm actually an advocate of feminism. I like many feminists: Evelyn Reed, Assata Shakur, Helen Keller, and even Rosa Luxemburg (despite my feelings on her, on other things), among others. I'm well aware about rape culture. But I'm not for the limiting of comedy, that's in proper context. I find it funny how I'm being more libertarian than Anarchists on this.

Also, it's fucking stupid as hell, that this site censors the word *****!

Ok, but you totally missed PA's point. Their point wasn't that just because you made insensitive posts in this thread that you are against feminist (or blamed feminism, or even criticized feminism). The point was that the attitudes displayed by yourself and others in this thread are characteristic of rape culture in general and only serve to amplify the point made in the OP: that it's difficult to tell what the line is between flirting and sexual harassment - or, in regards to your posts, that's it's difficult to tell what the line is between normal humor and sexist humor.

It's not acceptable to joke about rape as a man because, on the whole, men don't get raped and occupy a position of privilege under patriarchy - privilege which is often abused in the form of... rape.

[Decolonize The Left]

I wish I could thank this post twice.

Seriously, people think that if you appreciate comedy that some might find offensive, you must be against feminism. Nobody is even advocating making rape jokes anyway, that would be absolutely bizarre.

Nobody said what you are claiming here. No one says that if you appreciate offensive comedy you are against feminism. You are - just like is noted in the opening of the OP - getting on the defensive as your privilege is challenged.

[Loony Le Fist]

This thread has turned into a predictable trainwreck that I don't feel like dealing with at the moment sorry...

I hear you, but if you want to bake a cake, you gotta break a few eggs. These issues have to be hashed out, and we can't just run from them. They must be tackled head-on. It is the only way progress is ever made. We've got to have the courage to allow people to express their views, even when we disagree, so we can point out why they are wrong. Making real breakthroughs have never been easy.

[PhoenixAsh]

I am perplexed that when told there is a time and place for humor people get so riled up.

It also occurs to me that this mostly happens in the discrimination/women's struggles forum by men. Makes me wonder.

[slum]

I hear you, but if you want to bake a cake, you gotta break a few eggs. These issues have to be hashed out, and we can't just run from them. They must be tackled head-on. It is the only way progress is ever made. We've got to have the courage to allow people to express their views, even when we disagree, so we can point out why they are wrong. Making real breakthroughs have never been easy.

are you even serious right now

this exact argument has been had PLENTY of times, on this forum and outside of it. this thread runs like every single iteration of it ever.

are you seriously surprised that people are tired of fucking dealing with it when they can say the same things over and over to explain how this kind of offensive humor perpetuates rape culture only to get back the same tired old 'arguments' from men who don't want to do any self-reflection on how they behave in a deeply patriarchal and sexually violent society?

[Loony Le Fist]

are you even serious right now

this exact argument has been had PLENTY of times, on this forum and outside of it. this thread runs like every single iteration of it ever.

are you seriously surprised that people are tired of fucking dealing with it when they can say the same things over and over to explain how this kind of offensive humor perpetuates rape culture only to get back the same tired old 'arguments' from men who don't want to do any self-reflection on how they behave in a deeply patriarchal and sexually violent society?

And we must continue having it, apparently. Obviously there is a communications breakdown occurring. I don't see anyone here claiming that rape jokes have any humor in the context of trivializing rape. Would you care to point out where in this thread where anyone has made such a suggestion?

I get tired of engaging right-wingers too. But it's something that must be done to topple the arguments. I have had to topple the same arguments over and over again. It is tiring, but it must be done. And we must have the fortitude to do it.

[Psycho P and the Freight Train]

Nobody said what you are claiming here. No one says that if you appreciate offensive comedy you are against feminism. You are - just like is noted in the opening of the OP - getting on the defensive as your privilege is challenged.

Lol, I'm not getting defensive because my privilege is being challenged. I'm getting defensive because I don't like being lumped in with people who perpetuate rape culture. Not everything is about hurt feelings. Plus, I have not seen a single post advocating rape jokes. Not a single one. It's almost like you think I want people to go up to someone and say "tell your grandma I said thanks for last night lololol" when their grandma died or something. No, of course that's not what anyone here is suggesting. We're just simply asking if we can laugh at Louis CK in peace without being berated for being sexist, when we support feminism! I get infuriated as sexist language and actions I see everyday and have called people out on it. But I am not about to tell someone how to enjoy humor. If I see someone make a joke such as the grandma example I gave above, I will call them out on it. There is a difference between humor and simply being an asshole.

[synthesis]

One problem I see is that the difference between "a rape joke" and "a joke that involves rape" often depends on whether or not the person receiving the joke finds it funny. We generally only find humor in things that appeal to our view of the world, or at least do not directly contradict it.

So you have something like this, which I'm not sure whether or not is trigger warning-worthy, but I'll include that just in case:

http://www.snapcanon.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/rapist-revenge-funny-flammable-clothing-set-fire-revenge.jpgI doubt there are many people here who would call that a "rape joke," although I am perfectly willing to recognize that it is if someone does find it problematic in the context of this thread. But there are also people who would not be able to distinguish it categorically from other jokes that do, in fact, trivialize rape.

So I think it would help to be able to dissect, case-by-case, the sort of worldview that finds humor in genuinely offensive rape jokes. Of course, I'm not saying that hasn't been done in this thread already. It has. My only point is that I think it helps to be able to explain to a specific person the reasons that a specific joke is problematic and/or offensive.

But then again, this does place the burden on the feminist, and it's completely understandable to tell a particularly obnoxious and intransigent offender to fuck off after dealing with the same subject a hundred times. This only applies to instances where productive dialogue is even possible. I think what I'm getting at is that when one side perceives the joke as subjectively funny, and the other side sees objective consequences in that joke, it can help to tailor the objective rebuke of the joke to the subjective perspective of the person who finds it funny.

[Loony Le Fist]

I am perplexed that when told there is a time and place for humor people get so riled up...

All it means is there is a lot more progress that has to be made.

[Ele'ill]

why would you think such jokes are funny

[PhoenixAsh]

A lot of people have missed this Carlin video apparently.

Which is a 9 minute video consisting of 5 minutes of making rape jokes and 4 minutes of blaming feminists for not being allowed to make them and how to use sexism to piss them off.

Carlin never really puts forth an argument why he should be allowed to make rape jokes and basically argues that rape jokes are fun depending on the how the joke is constructed and the exaggeration

1). Rape is funny
2). Rape is weird if you rape an old person
3). Rape is the result of women not allowing men to have enough sex.

But I guess it is ok because he said it in a joking manner. And he also said he agrees with feminists that men are assholes who fucked up the planet (not really what feminists are arguing at all) so that is ok too apparently. :rolleyes:

The people who claim this is all about rape jokes miss the point.

Sexual harassment, violence and rape are constructs that keep women in line and are confronted with every single day.

Joking about it, by members of the oppressing group, and dismissing it, making light of it is not appropriate on a revolutionary forum....especially not in a thread dealing with the subject itself.

[M-L-C-F]

This thread has turned into a predictable trainwreck that I don't feel like dealing with at the moment sorry.

Just one thing though: the word that is censored is obviously a sexist/homophobic slur and you shouldn't be using it anyway.

The literal meaning of the word is female dog. I'm sure you guys would be offended on how many times my black friends call me a certain slang word they use amongst each other.


What you seem to be referring to is separatist feminism from the 60's and 90's . I am not even sure if they are still a "thing" a they have been widely denounced by both the radical and revolutionary feminists and second and third wave feminists.

Pretty much that, for the most part.


Ok, but you totally missed PA's point. Their point wasn't that just because you made insensitive posts in this thread that you are against feminist (or blamed feminism, or even criticized feminism). The point was that the attitudes displayed by yourself and others in this thread are characteristic of rape culture in general and only serve to amplify the point made in the OP: that it's difficult to tell what the line is between flirting and sexual harassment - or, in regards to your posts, that's it's difficult to tell what the line is between normal humor and sexist humor.

It's not acceptable to joke about rape as a man because, on the whole, men don't get raped and occupy a position of privilege under patriarchy - privilege which is often abused in the form of... rape.

So is it alright if I joke about prison rape? That happens to men more than women. Therefor, it's not appropriate for a woman to joke about prison rape. Unless they are talking about broomsticks and women's prison. At least say it's inappropriate for everyone to say it, not just men. Seriously though, comedy isn't meant to be taken seriously. No one is advocating harm on anyone else.


I am perplexed that when told there is a time and place for humor people get so riled up.

It also occurs to me that this mostly happens in the discrimination/women's struggles forum by men. Makes me wonder.

:rolleyes:


Lol, I'm not getting defensive because my privilege is being challenged. I'm getting defensive because I don't like being lumped in with people who perpetuate rape culture. Not everything is about hurt feelings. Plus, I have not seen a single post advocating rape jokes. Not a single one. It's almost like you think I want people to go up to someone and say "tell your grandma I said thanks for last night lololol" when their grandma died or something. No, of course that's not what anyone here is suggesting. We're just simply asking if we can laugh at Louis CK in peace without being berated for being sexist, when we support feminism! I get infuriated as sexist language and actions I see everyday and have called people out on it. But I am not about to tell someone how to enjoy humor. If I see someone make a joke such as the grandma example I gave above, I will call them out on it. There is a difference between humor and simply being an asshole.

I completely agree.


One problem I see is that the difference between "a rape joke" and "a joke that involves rape" often depends on whether or not the person receiving the joke finds it funny. We generally only find humor in things that appeal to our view of the world, or at least do not directly contradict it.

So you have something like this, which I'm not sure whether or not is trigger warning-worthy, but I'll include that just in case:

http://www.snapcanon.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/rapist-revenge-funny-flammable-clothing-set-fire-revenge.jpgI doubt there are many people here who would call that a "rape joke," although I am perfectly willing to recognize that it is if someone does find it problematic in the context of this thread. But there are also people who would not be able to distinguish it categorically from other jokes that do, in fact, trivialize rape.

So I think it would help to be able to dissect, case-by-case, the sort of worldview that finds humor in genuinely offensive rape jokes. Of course, I'm not saying that hasn't been done in this thread already. It has. My only point is that I think it helps to be able to explain to a specific person the reasons that a specific joke is problematic and/or offensive.

But then again, this does place the burden on the feminist, and it's completely understandable to tell a particularly obnoxious and intransigent offender to fuck off after dealing with the same subject a hundred times. This only applies to instances where productive dialogue is even possible. I think what I'm getting at is that when one side perceives the joke as subjectively funny, and the other side sees objective consequences in that joke, it can help to tailor the objective rebuke of the joke to the subjective perspective of the person who finds it funny.

That's a good analysis, I think.


Sexual harassment, violence and rape are constructs that keep women in line and are confronted with every single day.

Joking about it, by members of the oppressing group, and dismissing it, making light of it is not appropriate on a revolutionary forum....especially not in a thread dealing with the subject itself.

Nobody is denying that. None of us are part of that oppressive group. You people need to stop lumping all men together. As if we are all pigs. We aren't dismissing anything either. You can joke about things, and not be advocating what you joke about. People are people, men and women both can be assholes.

This topic was fun, now it's just getting old. People need to stop assuming things. You know what assume means? It makes an ass outta you and me. I didn't assume anything about anyone here.

[PhoenixAsh]

Thinking the issue was fun is exactly why people don't get it. The issue was not meant to be fun. The issue is very, very serious.


...all men are part of the oppressive group. This doesn't mean all men are oppressors or that men are not themselves oppressed but it does mean we are all part of a social structure of patriarchy which instills us with a certain amount of privilege women will not have simply because they are women and it affects our behavior consciously and unconsciously.

Woman are culturally, socially and economically defined depending on their relative position to that of men. In such a society men joking about, making light of situations which mostly and predominantly affect women as part of the social structure which oppresses them is in fact reinforcing these structures.


This discussion evolved from one simple statement:

Sexism and sexual harassment aren't really the appropriate subjects to attempt humour.

People took issue with that statement. Those are the people you should be focusing your annoyance on.

[synthesis]

That's a good analysis, I think.

Now you've got me worried.

[Thirsty Crow]

...all men are part of the oppressive group. This doesn't mean all men are oppressors or that men are not themselves oppressed but it does mean we are all part of a social structure of patriarchy which instills us with a certain amount of privilege women will not have simply because they are women and it affects our behavior consciously and unconsciously.

I never could get behind that use of the word "privilege" which basically makes it out tobe not being subject to diffuse forms of domination. I would be interested in the historical overview of how that word came to be used in such a way, since I believe there was a historical precedent to it in that it was used to refer to aristocratic heredity. And it's a long way from very specific relations of domination to a simple fact of not being a candidate for it.

In relation to other points you raise, I agree.

[M-L-C-F]

Thinking the issue was fun is exactly why people don't get it. The issue was not meant to be fun. The issue is very, very serious.


...all men are part of the oppressive group. This doesn't mean all men are oppressors or that men are not themselves oppressed but it does mean we are all part of a social structure of patriarchy which instills us with a certain amount of privilege women will not have simply because they are women and it affects our behavior consciously and unconsciously.

Woman are culturally, socially and economically defined depending on their relative position to that of men. In such a society men joking about, making light of situations which mostly and predominantly affect women as part of the social structure which oppresses them is in fact reinforcing these structures.


This discussion evolved from one simple statement:

Sexism and sexual harassment aren't really the appropriate subjects to attempt humour.

People took issue with that statement. Those are the people you should be focusing your annoyance on.

A lot of the time, it highlights how dumb the structures are. So I guess all whites or Europeans are part of that oppressive group? All Germans were part of the oppressive group during Nazism in Germany? All Americans are in the same oppressive group as the exceptionalists? That's idiotic, and condescending, tbqh.


Now you've got me worried.

I must've interpreted your post wrong, sorry.

[PhoenixAsh]

The literal meaning of the word is female dog. I'm sure you guys would be offended on how many times my black friends call me a certain slang word they use amongst each other.


You ever notice how human women have a profound lack of resemblance to female dogs or ducks...let alone rabid ones? So then why is it we are always equating them with animals?

Ever really think about it?


Either way...I know what you are thinking. Yessss but it is also used against men. And you are right. It is. Think about it.

When it is it is done so to show superior status over that man....by equating him with a female dog. Basically saying any resemblance to woman would make you less than a man or a lesser man. Again reenforcing the lesser social status of women even if it is used against a man.

There you go.

Now you know why that word is not allowed here.

[Psycho P and the Freight Train]

You ever notice how human women have a profound lack of resemblance to female dogs or ducks...let alone rabid ones? So then why is it we are always equating them with animals?

Ever really think about it?


Either way...I know what you are thinking. Yessss but it is also used against men. And you are right. It is. Think about it.

When it is it is done so to show superior status over that man....by equating him with a female dog. Basically saying any resemblance to woman would make you less than a man or a lesser man. Again reenforcing the lesser social status of women even if it is used against a man.

There you go.

Now you know why that word is not allowed here.

I agree that word is usually sexist, but I don't think it is inherently.

If a woman uses the word, is she sexist?

If a gay person refers to themselves as it, is it sexist? Example: "this ***** needs to go to bed soon".

If a male to a group of male friends casually says "sup *****es?" should they be labelled as sexist?

Don't get me wrong, it is usually used in a sexist way, I'm not trying to argue that we should use it on these forums or anything.

EDIT: I'm gay and I see that in the gay community a lot, I wasn't trying to poke fun of gay people.

[synthesis]

It's censored for a very specific reason. I forget what it is. We usually don't block words here unless it's related to someone spamming the forum or whatever.

[M-L-C-F]

You ever notice how human women have a profound lack of resemblance to female dogs or ducks...let alone rabid ones? So then why is it we are always equating them with animals?

Ever really think about it?


Either way...I know what you are thinking. Yessss but it is also used against men. And you are right. It is. Think about it.

When it is it is done so to show superior status over that man....by equating him with a female dog. Basically saying any resemblance to woman would make you less than a man or a lesser man. Again reenforcing the lesser social status of women even if it is used against a man.

There you go.

Now you know why that word is not allowed here.

I'm not denying that it can be sexist, but I don't think that it always is meant that way.


I agree that word is usually sexist, but I don't think it is inherently.

If a woman uses the word, is she sexist?

If a gay person refers to themselves as it, is it sexist? Example: "this ***** needs to go to bed soon".

If a male to a group of male friends casually says "sup *****es?" should they be labelled as sexist?

Don't get me wrong, it is usually used in a sexist way, I'm not trying to argue that we should use it on these forums or anything.

EDIT: I'm gay and I see that in the gay community a lot, I wasn't trying to poke fun of gay people.

That's a good point.


It's censored for a very specific reason. I forget what it is. We usually don't block words here unless it's related to someone spamming the forum or whatever.

That's all I wanted to know. I knew that something had to have happened. Cause it wasn't always blocked here.

[Sinister Intents]

This thread has vastly pissed me off and I'll be getting back into it shortly

[PhoenixAsh]

I agree that word is usually sexist, but I don't think it is inherently.

If a woman uses the word, is she sexist?

If a gay person refers to themselves as it, is it sexist? Example: "this ***** needs to go to bed soon".

If a male to a group of male friends casually says "sup *****es?" should they be labelled as sexist?

Don't get me wrong, it is usually used in a sexist way, I'm not trying to argue that we should use it on these forums or anything.

EDIT: I'm gay and I see that in the gay community a lot, I wasn't trying to poke fun of gay people.

You are talking about the re-appropriation of language. Which is a more complex issue than the original use of the language. This doesn't mean the word isn't inherently sexist when not used in respect to Kynology. It is re-appropriated for exactly that reason.

The argument surrounding re-appropriation is contested. And some argue that the terms will still hold their derogatory meaning outside of specific communities. Personally I think the term is still sexist and the re-appropriation argument is unsound.

But the subject is complex. Just how complex is illustrated by this article on the ***** Media Magazine website. I have outlined the most remarkable passage:



On the word *****
***** on Wheels post by Debbie Rasmussen on August 12, 2008 - 9:52am; tagged *****, inclusive language, language, language reclamation, offensive language, radical lesbianism, reappropriation of language, the word *****.
Over on the post that asks folks to vote for which PETA is most offensive, someone says that by criticizing PETA, we at ***** are just calling the kettle black.

Of course I'm offended by the PETA ad campaigns. As a long-time radical lesbian feminist, I abhor the explotation of the female body and the objectification of women as nothing more than sexual beings.

I would never give a dime to PETA even though I am also strongly in favor of the humane treatment of animals

However, how does its strategy of using "shock" to draw attention differ from your magazine? After all, isn't calling yourself "*****" simply a way to show how chic and clever and modern you are, how 'in your face' you can be, and how you like to flaunt convensional standards of language and cultural acceptance

The word ***** (unless applied to certain animals) has always been and is still a derogatory and borderline vulgar term for women. Old fashioned ideas? Sure. But so is not displaying naked women in suggestive poses just to sell products or ideas.

For "*****" to complain about PETA is disingenuous and hypocritical.

I want to make clear up front that this post (as all of my posts) represents my own thinking, not necessarily the perspective of the organization...

The b-word is something I think about a lot in my work here at *****. All the time, actually. It's mighty strange to be the director of an organization whose title I'd long felt conflicted about (to clarify, I wasn't around when Lisa and Andi founded *****). (To clarify futher, because I'm obsessive like that, I've never been conflicted about the work we do; only whether it's best to continue doing it under the name *****.)

It's not that I didn't understand why Lisa and Andi decided to call it *****. As Andi explained recently in the Washington Post:

***** is a word we use culturally to describe any woman who is strong, angry, uncompromising and, often, uninterested in pleasing men. We use the term for a woman on the street who doesn't respond to men's catcalls or smile when they say, "Cheer up, baby, it can't be thatbad." We use it for the woman who has a better job than a man and doesn't apologize for it. We use it for the woman who doesn't back down from a confrontation.

So let's not be disingenuous. Is it a bad word? Of course it is. As a culture, we've done everything possible to make sure of that, starting with a constantly perpetuated mindset that deems powerful women to be scary, angry and, of course, unfeminine -- and sees uncompromising speech by women as anathema to a tidy, well-run world.

It's for just these reasons that when Lisa Jervis and I started the magazine in 1996, no other title was even up for consideration. As young women who had been bombarded with the word for, say, daring to walk down the street in tank tops, we knew what kinds of insults would be hurled when we started publishing articles on sexism
in consumer and popular culture.

How can anyone argue with that?

My major hang up has been that I know many women who have visceral reactions to the word, sometimes because they've had it hurled at them in abusive relationships. Several months ago, for instance, a feminist therapist friend told me some of the people she works with said they felt assaulted in what was supposed to be a "safe" space when she left some issues of ***** in the lobby. My heart sank when I heard this.

My other main hang up has been concern that, despite what I think is huge potential to work with youth around issues of media literacy and media criticism, our title will continue to be an obstacle in these efforts.

But the thing is, whenever I ask people if we should consider changing our name, almost without exception, I heard a loud, NO! Even people who work with youth, or who have children of their own, felt that our title is an essential component to our work.

It's not that we're trying to be clever, modern, or even necessarily 'in your face.' It's that we're trying to claim the word ***** as something smart, powerful, strong. And yes, show that being uncompromising and angry is not just necessary sometimes, but that it can lead to positive change.

In all honesty, it was only recently that the scales tipped for me, affirming in my own mind/heart the fight for the word *****. I was waiting to cross a busy street. On the other side of the street a boy chased another boy and yelled, "*****!" when he couldn't catch up.

They were probably 8 years old. The way he yelled ***** was... I don't know how to explain it... ugly... aggressive... mean... he was clearly trying to yell the most hateful thing he could think of at the other boy.

And I don't know how to explain this either, except to say that I had my first visceral reaction to the word. Even though it wasn't directed at me, I totally understood what the fight was about. That the only way to de-charge a loaded word is to use it, reclaim it, (re)appropriate it.

I'm not saying it's not complicated, or that we shouldn't listen to the people who feel assaulted by the word, or give up on trying to work with youth when schools tell us that they won't allow the magazine on their grounds, but that I think this work -- including using the word ***** -- remains just as critical now as it did back when ***** was founded 12 years ago.

I'd love to know what others think.

[M-L-C-F]

You are talking about the re-appropriation of language. Which is a more complex issue than the original use of the language. This doesn't mean the word isn't inherently sexist when not used in respect to Kynology. It is re-appropriated for exactly that reason.

The argument surrounding re-appropriation is contested. And some argue that the terms will still hold their derogatory meaning outside of specific communities. Personally I think the term is still sexist and the re-appropriation argument is unsound.

But the subject is complex. Just how complex is illustrated by this article on the ***** Media Magazine website. I have outlined the most remarkable passage:




The re-appropriation of language is an interesting subject in itself.


This thread has vastly pissed me off and I'll be getting back into it shortly

You shouldn't get so worked up. Debate doesn't have to make people mad. It's not like we are debating Capitalists, Fascists, or something like that. We're all allies in the end.

I'm done with this for the night though. I have to go get cleaned up and ready. Cause I'm going out tonight, to watch the Pacquiao-Bradley fight. So I'll reply to whatever tomorrow.

[Thanatos]

why would you think such jokes are funny

For the same reason that non-Muslims may think 'raghead' jokes are funny - it doesn't affect them in any way, so they can't see why it is offensive. This is why one should always think: what if someone makes a joke about my mom, will I take kindly to it? Will I adopt a similar casual approach to jokes?

Sometimes, we have to walk in other people's shoes for a while.......

[ArisVelouxiotis]

Yes, I do like Daniel Tosh actually. I find him funny. Daniel Tosh Is Helping Straight Males Support Gay Rights; And They Don't Even Realize It. (http://www.glueamerica.org/2011/06/daniel-tosh-is-helping-straight-males.html) & Daniel Tosh gets it right about gay marriage. (http://www.paulduane.net/2013/03/daniel-tosh-gets-it-right-about-gay-marriage/)

As for the other stuff. Complain to a supervisor, or another higher up. You can always explain to them why it isn't funny. You don't have to come out, to defend LGBT people. You can always just ignore it too. I ignore stupid shit all the time. If I fretted over all the stupid shit I hear. I'd go nuts so damn fast.



I'm sorry, but I get over things pretty quick. If I change it or leave, it's over to me. Like I said, I can ignore stupidity. It's easy for me to move on. It isn't worth arguing about most of the time.



I only rolled my eyes at the last part, not the other stuff. Hence why I only quoted that one part. I wasn't being dismissive about the other points.

Complain to your supervisor?Have you ever worked?Do you think the supervisor is your buddy and we'll say ok stop making jokes?He/she probably say you can quit if you don't like it.(there are exceptions of sensitive supervisors ofc)

[Ele'ill]

For the same reason that non-Muslims may think 'raghead' jokes are funny - it doesn't affect them in any way, so they can't see why it is offensive. This is why one should always think: what if someone makes a joke about my mom, will I take kindly to it? Will I adopt a similar casual approach to jokes?

Sometimes, we have to walk in other people's shoes for a while.......

the question was rhetorical although I really don't understand or agree with your reply here and think it's quite off

[M-L-C-F]

Complain to your supervisor?Have you ever worked?Do you think the supervisor is your buddy and we'll say ok stop making jokes?He/she probably say you can quit if you don't like it.(there are exceptions of sensitive supervisors ofc)

Yeah, I've worked... Union and non-union. However, most of the time a company has rules set forth, to cover their own asses from discrimination or harassment lawsuits. I wasn't saying they're your friend or anything at all. But most places have more than one supervisor or boss. Therefor, there are multiple people to go to, to raise a concern that has arisen. I also just gave a suggestion that might only work in certain situations. At my old grocery job, we got the asshole 3rd shift boss fired, by using the union and going directly to the store head. But that was my situation, not all of them are like that. It also took forever too, unfortunately...