Let that sink in: in a reportedly progressive society with assertive women who have no qualms about reporting this sort of thing to the police, 75% and 45% are huge numbers. — Benkei

I agree, but the problem is the underlying sexual culture of Western society. On the one hand, this culture has made sex into a matter of self-esteem. That is why comments such as these:

As a man, I don't have those fears to speak up about unwanted sexual advances because first off, I'm butt ugly so the chance of this happening is 0.0001% of that of an ugly woman. — Benkei

and I have a micropenis — Benkei

even make sense. That is why we - as a culture - speak with great admiration for the Don Juans of our society. If you can get in bed with lots of women you are respected and admired. So why is it a mystery that most of the uneducated (the majority of the population) men will do whatever it takes to attain to that position? And similarly, if you are a woman, and you can attract a lot of men, you are given high status - suddenly you are someone to look up to, someone whom other women should emulate.

So why should I be surprised that sexual relations are some of the most abusive relations there are? It is entirely to be expected in this cultural environment. If you went on to speak with some of those men who grab women, etc. - which is a large majority of them - they would laugh at you. They would say, "you go do that, we will keep doing what we've been doing". They will say "you have a micropenis, so you want to stop people like us, with bigger tools, because you cannot compete with us". That is how they will approach this subject. They will say that you are a woman's slave, etc. So that's how the rhetoric will go. It will be impossible to change their minds. Even if you make a law against it, and enforce it, all that you will do is make them afraid, but inside, they will be the same, completely unchanged. So how will you ever get to such people?

That doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. The point of the #MeToo movement is that this shouldn't be accepted as the norm. Yes, there are times where people might be receptive to it, but given how often people aren't receptive to it and the fact that it's worse to be harassed than to be left waiting for someone else to make the first move, it's proper to err on the side of caution. — Michael

Wise words.

A feature of the #me2 movement is that they are unwilling to distinguish between a pat on a woman's derriere and rape — Bitter Crank

Really? BC, you have known me for over a decade and do you honestly think that I cannot tell the difference between a pat on the ass and rape?
Such an insult to the #MeToo movement.

I don't know what world you live in, but I remember in your country I was at a club, and a fellow collegue came to me, and he said: "Wanna see what I do?" and I said "sure". So he went through the club, and every girl on the dancing floor he started grabbing, and trying to kiss, even when they physically resisted in fact, he did not stop. And what happened to him? Nothing. And he did that not once, but every time he was in the club - which was at least once every week. So good luck convincing your fellow Brits - more like they'll laugh in your face. There is no convincing these brutes. — Agustino

If your "fellow colleague" had done such a thing with my group of friends, he wouldn't have made it past one friend without a verbal confrontation, two friends before he was confronted PHYSICALLY, a firm grab on the forearm along with the same verbal confrontation. We are choosing not to be quiet, not because we can't hold our own but because there are people out here, in the club scene that respect another enough to find out what is going on.

Two thoughts:
@Agustino I can understand your not getting into the middle of customs in another country on the first night but why would YOU condone that behavior by returning to the club with him time after time? Do you remove some cloak of morality when you leave your home country?

The second thought is that if "your colleague" had behaved that way in the states on the first night he might not have been tossed out by the establishments' management but by the second night and women were NOT receptive to his behavior, he would be escorted out. Any establishment worth their salt are not going to facilitate this unwanted behavior for fear that at some point they might be held legally accountable.

You seem to be taking a very overreaching and pedantic interpretation of my claim.

First, it was in response to jamalrob saying "even if you're good at reading signals, still sometimes it is hard to know if your advance will be welcome or not. Sometimes you do have to take risks". If you're in a situation where it isn't clear, you shouldn't take the risk and be proactive with sexual touching. I may have been too rash in specifying verbal confirmation, but the general point is that I don't think it right to risk inappropriateness on the chance that it might be wanted and seen as romantic.

Second, clearly it isn't "hardly ever the case", given that there's a pretty big movement out there right now that's trying to shine light on such inappropriate behaviour (and, just so we're clear again, I'm commenting on the types of behaviour that are being condemned by the #MeToo movement, not some hypothetical example where the welcomeness of further sexuality is obvious). Whatever you say, it's wrong for men to be patting their waitress on the ass as they're walking away from the table.

I'm referring to the sort of situation where a woman hugs you and you think it's OK to have a feel of her breasts. — Michael

Yeah, but that's hardly ever the case, and I can't imagine a "hey, now that we've hugged, can I grab your breasts?" would be in order. I suppose it's better than just reaching out and seeing what happens, but the question itself is fairly rude and inappropriate in itself. And from there I'd go on to say that if you are of the 99% of the population that understands when a sexual advance has become appropriate, you don't need all this instruction and you don't need rules imposed upon you that were motivated by the behavior of the socially retarded or criminally inclined.

The truth is that all this asking "can I kiss you" or "can I touch you now" is in itself socially inappropriate behavior from a romantic perspective, and it tends not to show respect as much as it does inexperience, uncertainty, insecurity, and awkwardness. It's also a standard I seriously doubt you ever adhered to, probably considering yourself sophisticated enough not to be burdened with it, which is sort of the reaction you're getting from others when you say that standard ought be standardized.

What you're describing is a very prescriptive language system where communication is dictated by political considerations without allowing the communication to occur naturally, as would be the case if you allowed gestures, behaviors, and non-verbal cues to determine meaning. Although I like the idea of giving more work to lawyers, I can't accompany people on dates to make certain proper legal consent has been obtained, although I could be swayed given the right compensation.

Your comments express a wish to impose a regime of flirtation that you believe is the only permissible one. I was pointing out that it's not always easy, and in some of those cases it is worth trying (for both parties, obviously). — jamalrob

Currently, there are two regimes for flirtation. One invented by men that women are expected to acquiesce to and another that women also like that is readily available for anyone to understand by paying attention. I've never had problem navigating the second one. Did I try to slip my hand under a girl's bra when we were kissing? Yes. And then she stopped me and I didn't try again. I've been fully undressed together with a girl and she changed her mind as it would've been her first time and she wasn't really in love with me (and I have a micropenis, sue me). Men and women both make mistakes and even may regret things (especially when alcohol is involved). There is still room for error and mistakes here. So I don't think your fear is founded and I'm sincerely not being obtuse. I really don't understand what sort of situations you're thinking of that become problematic all of a sudden.

Again, I think it's the underlying norms that are at issue here. A female colleague is afraid to complain about an unwanted sexual advance as it might damage her career. Outside banking relationships are uncomfortably chummy with my female colleagues. The women are expected, as part of their job, to accept the hugs and continuous hands on shoulders, backs and arms from people they might see once a year. I'm sure there are women out there that think "protecting" these women is an infantilisation as they imagine they would stand up to that shit. They might. The reality is that the three female colleagues I've discussed this with haven't and won't despite #metoo.

As a man, I don't have those fears to speak up about unwanted sexual advances because first off, I'm butt ugly so the chance of this happening is 0.0001% of that of an ugly woman. For her it's about 20% a year. Second, I can be assertive, because I'm a guy. Setting a boundary is fucking manly you know but if a woman does it she's just being bitchy.

I live in a country where 75% of women have been confronted with sexual harassment, 45% of women have been confronted with sexual or physical assault (2014). Higher than most other European countries due to the fact Dutch women are much more likely to report to the police. Let that sink in: in a reportedly progressive society with assertive women who have no qualms about reporting this sort of thing to the police, 75% and 45% are huge numbers.

Thanks.

Done.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/139778 this post doesn't belong here, please move it back to Shoutbox.

I think the difficulty with your contextuality argument - although I basically agree with it - is that if enough twits overstep a certain sort of mark, then a rule starts being introduced. Like driving on one side of the road or the other, for instance. Pedestrians manage without such a rule but drivers can't. So it's worth thinking about what 'a certain sort of mark' is constituted by. 'Using power for sexual ends' might be one aspect of a description. — mcdoodle

Yes, I see what you mean. But this is where I want to stand up for the ability of people to negotiate these difficulties themselves. I'm not the only one who believes that some of the attitudes of MeToo represent an increasing infantilization of women.

Quite agree. And it is philosophically interesting. How we are with each other is not explored that much, esp analytically. The atomising of talk into speech acts, for instance, means that the to and fro of social interaction doesn't get properly explored. And there aren't that many variables involved in social exchange: say, previous mutual presuppositions between the parties, and their relative power/status, and their emotional states at the outset. I think the difficulty with your contextuality argument - although I basically agree with it - is that if enough twits overstep a certain sort of mark, then a rule starts being introduced. Like driving on one side of the road or the other, for instance. Pedestrians manage without such a rule but drivers can't. So it's worth thinking about what 'a certain sort of mark' is constituted by. 'Using power for sexual ends' might be one aspect of a description. (copied from Shoutbox)

This discussion was created with comments split from The Shoutbox

(e.g. Weinstein)? — Michael

So 90% of the male population in jail? I don't think we have enough space.

They can't be much clearer about that than they have been recently. — Benkei

Yes they can. How about they stop going to clubs, they stop dressing almost naked, etc. Then they will really make a point. Can you imagine it? Only men in the clubs? Then even the clubs will go out of business! What will the men grab? Each other's bottoms? Grabbing keeps happening precisely because of complicity in sharing in a morally corrupt culture.

So, what? It's not worth trying? That we shouldn't at least hold the guilty accountable (e.g. Weinstein)? — Michael

No, it's not worth trying to stop it in a stupid & hypocritical way. It's a systematic problem that emerges out of the cultural understanding and lack of moral values that Western man (and woman) have about sex.

Maybe so. But I will say that some of the fiercest debates I've seen about this, both in real life and online, have been between women.

So, what? It's not worth trying? That we shouldn't at least hold the guilty accountable (e.g. Weinstein)?

One excellent thing the #metoo movement has done is to have men debate things like this in this way. Worth the occasional remark going #offpiste

See my edit.

I don't know what world you live in, but I remember in your country I was at a club, and a fellow collegue came to me, and he said: "Wanna see what I do?" and I said "sure". So he went through the club, and every girl on the dancing floor he started grabbing, and trying to kiss, even when they physically resisted in fact, he did not stop. And what happened to him? Nothing. And he did that not once, but every time he was in the club - which was at least once every week. So good luck convincing your fellow Brits - more like they'll laugh in your face. There is no convincing these brutes.

It depends on what kind of interaction you've had with him up to that point, and on the qualities of that interaction. In my scenario--I possibly didn't describe it in enough detail--I had in mind coming up behind a man in the street and reaching around. I'm not sure why that came to mind, but hey. — jamalrob

Is that sort of interaction the sort that the #MeToo movement is condemning? Because it seems to me that they're condemning the sort that I'm describing.

I was just saying that the #MeToo movement is "trying to convince your average guy in the Western world not to pat a woman's bottom in what they take to be the 'right' social settings." — Michael

If my way, and the way of these #MeToo people are the same, then let them follow me and my rules. If a woman goes scantily dressed and is grabbed, 3 months in jail for both the woman and the man who grabbed her. If you, and the #MeToo movement disagree with that, then you're not trying to do the same thing as I am. — Agustino

Well this came out of nowhere. I was just saying that the #MeToo movement is "trying to convince your average guy in the Western world not to pat a woman's bottom in what they take to be the 'right' social settings."

It depends on what kind of interaction you've had with him up to that point, and on the qualities of that interaction. In my scenario--I possibly didn't describe it in enough detail--I had in mind coming up behind a man in the street and reaching around. I'm not sure why that came to mind, but hey.

EDIT: But I imagine the response to this might be to ask if I think the only unacceptable sexual advance is a sexual assault, and this shows why I don't want to get bogged down in details and definitions.

Sure, and there are people out there who like BDSM. But you don't use that to try to justify acting on the assumption that maybe the person you're with likes that sort of thing. — Michael

No, it doesn't justify making random assumptions about people. But maybe the assumption isn't random - maybe I've seen them watching BDSM, maybe they told me they tried it and liked it in the past, etc.

That's what the #MeToo movement is drawing attention to. — Michael

That's what the #MeToo movement is trying to do. It might be futile (or it might not), but it's an admirable effort all the same. — Michael

If my way, and the way of these #MeToo people are the same, then let them follow me and my rules. If a woman goes scantily dressed and is grabbed, 3 months in jail for both the woman and the man who grabbed her. If you, and the #MeToo movement disagree with that, then you're not trying to do the same thing as I am.

It's unacceptable to pounce on a stranger, put your hand down his trousers and feel his balls, and it shouldn't be acceptable. That doesn't go against my point. Not all sexual advances are like that. — jamalrob

What kind of advances are you talking about then? Feeling them from outside his trousers? Feeling his arse? Kissing him?

Sure, it might be pushing the language to call it harassment, but if it's "totally unacceptable" then surely it shouldn't be accepted as the norm? — Michael

It's unacceptable to pounce on a stranger, put your hand down his trousers and feel his balls, and it shouldn't be acceptable. That doesn't go against my point. Not all sexual advances are like that.

Does it matter what you call it? — Michael

It matters here because my point was that what you call it is revealing.

I think it should be accepted as the norm, and I don't believe a single unrepeated unwanted advance amounts to harassment, although certainly it might sometimes be totally unacceptable. — jamalrob

Sure, it might be pushing the language to call it harassment, but if it's "totally unacceptable" then surely it shouldn't be accepted as the norm?

It's revealing that you describe sexual advances with sordid expressions such as "cop a feel", and "grab an arse". What I think it reveals is the prudishness and regressiveness of the movement. Sexual advances do not always have the character of a grab, a grope or a lunge. — jamalrob

Does it matter what you call it? If I'm having my photo taken with someone, it would be wrong of them to take the opportunity to sensually caress my genitals with one of their hands.

Yes, this is where we differ. I think it should be accepted as the norm, and I don't believe a single unrepeated unwanted advance amounts to harassment, although certainly it might sometimes be totally unacceptable.

It's revealing that you describe sexual advances with sordid expressions such as "cop a feel", and "grab an arse". What I think it reveals is the prudishness and regressiveness of the movement. Sexual advances do not always have the character of a grab, a grope or a lunge.

When did verbal communication become more reliable than any other form? — Hanover

Since so many people seem to think that being smiled at is an invitation to grab a woman's arse?

As in "can we now has sex?" as If that's how it ever happens. When did verbal communication become more reliable than any other form? A robotic "yes, have sex with me" response is less convincing than her physical expressions may be. I'd find it more troubling if she signed a consent form than if she didn't.

I wasn't exactly referring to the situation where you might be in bed with a woman, kissing, and rubbing against each other. I'm referring to the sort of situation where a woman hugs you and you think it's OK to have a feel of her breasts.