Netzach
>semiotics?
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2003
- Posts
- 21,732
TLDR almost.
The only thing I disagree with with satin on, well two things, slightly. She's positively right, in the abstract.
I get into many an argument with M about how "things SHOULD work" versus how things actually work. People SHOULD be able to run around with no clothes in 80 degree weather, IMO. There's nothing wrong with this.
Except we have these kind of fucked up cultural contracts and baggage that say it's not OK, it's sexual, it's - whatever. It is legal for me to sun myself sans top in Central Park.
It is not a good idea. It would be nice to live in a world where it was, but we don't. I think as women, as people, we're charged with some awareness of reality as it stands. It's never that victim's FAULT, but it IS never a bad idea to play out the chain of probability in your head for your own safety.
And I also mean mental small-stuff safety - like when I put on the low cut, it's a day where I feel awesome about myself and I don't think that micro-harassment about the girls is going to fuck with me. I can also cover up more on days I can't handle that, because I know that it's less likely to happen. Right wrong or neither, it's just accepting reality as it stands.
Also, I actually agree with the idea that "once is an ask."
ONE comment, even a hamhanded gross ass one, is a less suave dude's "ask"
If I don't outwardly transmit "yes!" then it stops, or it's harassment.
I believe *not a lawyer, maybe a real one can chime in* that even from a legal standpoint, "persistent" is a criteria in the case of ambiguous stuff.
"Wow, that (low cut top) is awesome on you! (wink)"
"That actually makes me uncomfortable"
"Oh, sorry" *never happens again* = not harassment.
The only thing I disagree with with satin on, well two things, slightly. She's positively right, in the abstract.
I get into many an argument with M about how "things SHOULD work" versus how things actually work. People SHOULD be able to run around with no clothes in 80 degree weather, IMO. There's nothing wrong with this.
Except we have these kind of fucked up cultural contracts and baggage that say it's not OK, it's sexual, it's - whatever. It is legal for me to sun myself sans top in Central Park.
It is not a good idea. It would be nice to live in a world where it was, but we don't. I think as women, as people, we're charged with some awareness of reality as it stands. It's never that victim's FAULT, but it IS never a bad idea to play out the chain of probability in your head for your own safety.
And I also mean mental small-stuff safety - like when I put on the low cut, it's a day where I feel awesome about myself and I don't think that micro-harassment about the girls is going to fuck with me. I can also cover up more on days I can't handle that, because I know that it's less likely to happen. Right wrong or neither, it's just accepting reality as it stands.
Also, I actually agree with the idea that "once is an ask."
ONE comment, even a hamhanded gross ass one, is a less suave dude's "ask"
If I don't outwardly transmit "yes!" then it stops, or it's harassment.
I believe *not a lawyer, maybe a real one can chime in* that even from a legal standpoint, "persistent" is a criteria in the case of ambiguous stuff.
"Wow, that (low cut top) is awesome on you! (wink)"
"That actually makes me uncomfortable"
"Oh, sorry" *never happens again* = not harassment.
Last edited:
