where do these sexual assault people come from?

[Bromontana]

The animal angle is key in managing expectations. Cat calls are tacky, but it's not a right to live free of them. The further you go out on the fringes of sexist activity, the more reciprocal the issues seem to be.

Reforming campus life could be a good way to make a difference in future generations' experiences both in the formative college days but also professionally. Expanding the scope too wide in this big moment will dilute the impact where it's needed most.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

As much misogyny, sexism, and objectification of women as there is on this forum I don't understand how anyone could be surprised about the Weinsteins, etc, etc, etc, etc of the world. (I don't claim to be 100% innocent.) Just "locker room talk"? Locker room talk is what creates an atmosphere where some people feel ok acting it out. The only thing that keeps more men from acting it out is lack of status to get away with it.
With Trump, Weinstein, etc, it's the modern version of primae noctis (which apparently is a myth btw, the feudal version, that is, not the modern version.)

Well said.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

I've always thought the phrase "objectification of women" was not that useful. We all function as sex objects. This isn't inherently bad. The problem is that the act of objectification is often a diminishment of other aspects women, or even downright violent.

I met an anti-porn activists once a few years back. Her examples of how porn actresses are abused, or even enslaved were truly horrific. Nonetheless, I think banning porn is as bad an idea as banning all the drugs that people are going to abuse anyway. Banning a masturbation aid will only result in a more abusive black market. I think there should minimal abuse/exploitation standard for sex workers- certified free trade organic porn.

[that dude who did that thing]

- certified free trade organic porn.

Sounds a bit. . . furry.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Sounds a bit. . . furry.

I'm also in favor of bringing back the bush. That would be a welcome side effect

[TahoeJ]

Banning a masturbation aid will only result in a more abusive black market. I think there should minimal abuse/exploitation standard for sex workers- certified free trade organic porn.

My friend’s wife is a pretty prominent figure in the international fight against the child sex trade (she has told me stories I wish I could forget) and she fully agrees with the first part and strongly disagrees with the second part, assuming you don’t just mean performers. She’s overseen comprehensive studies on both.

Btw- the studies that correlate porn use to increased sexual aggression are deeply, deeply flawed. They make nice headlines but don’t hold up at all to closer scrutiny.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

assuming you don’t just mean performers.

I was referring to porn workers.

[TahoeJ]

I was referring to porn workers.

Ok, so, yes, agreed.

[MakersTeleMark]

Tits or GTFO is harassment.

[Kinnikinnick]

Does seem kind of antiquated when you think about, the whole, tits or gtfo thing.
Jesus Christ, I think I'm evolving.

I think that we need a new more modern and politically correct way of de rigueur Jong initiation /abuse( cause that’s mainly what I see the “T’s or GTFO” used for).

How about:
“Please share your intimate photos of your mammaries with us and if for some reason you consider it an objectification of women or otherwise don’t wish to consent to the sexualization of your glands for the feeding of infants kindly consider leaving this particular forum”


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[iceman]

The world's gonna be a better place when VR and robotics gets rid of actual sex.

[Dexter Rutecki]

Thanks, but I think I'll stick with what we've currently got.

A joke is only funny when there is a thread of truth to it.

That's what's so hard. Jokes matter. Stereotypes, no matter how funny or real seeming matter.

Oh, I don't disagree that there is an element of truth that the joke played on. Your mistake is in assuming for some reason that the joke reveals the truth about this particular photo. By reading into it what you wanted to be there you made an unwarranted conclusion. The joke relies on the fact that obviously sometimes people do take photos without consent--for this one the guy clearly said it was with consent, but played along with the joke made by someone else. If you do this regularly (take jokes literally) you will often end up believe that the opposite of what is true happened.

And I will concede that I could be wrong, but based on what was posted I don't think so. If you really want to get to the bottom of it, why not just ask him?

In any event, I'm beginning to see why you started this thread in the first place.

And I'm beginning to see why people treat you like an asshole. Seriously dick move to imply that I approve of exactly what I just stated is completely wrong. Apparently just because I disagreed with your assessment of that photo.

[mtngirl79]

Thanks, but I think I'll stick with what we've currently got.



Oh, I don't disagree that there is an element of truth that the joke played on. Your mistake is in assuming for some reason that the joke reveals the truth about this particular photo. By reading into it what you wanted to be there you made an unwarranted conclusion. The joke relies on the fact that obviously sometimes people do take photos without consent--for this one the guy clearly said it was with consent, but played along with the joke made by someone else. If you do this regularly (take jokes literally) you will often end up believe that the opposite of what is true happened.

And I will concede that I could be wrong, but based on what was posted I don't think so. If you really want to get to the bottom of it, why not just ask him?

And I'm beginning to see why people treat you like an asshole. Seriously dick move to imply that I approve of exactly what I just stated is completely wrong. Apparently just because I disagreed with your assessment of that photo.

It's a matter of how bad you think the act is.

What if booners photo looked like a 12 year old and he posted barely legal! And someone responded, man that girl looks 12, and he "played along" with haha yeah, dude, what's 6 years?

The same basic conversation, one completely not socially accepted, the other? Well, you like the pictures, right? You wouldn't want tgem to go away, would you?

Of course, if someone accused another of posting under age girls, they'd be pissed, and not play along with the "joke" because underage girls are taboo.

Sneaky photos on the other hand...

[Dexter Rutecki]

It's a matter of how bad you think the act is.

No, it's not. You're changing the terms now--this isn't what we discussed, and what you responded to. IMO there is nothing inherently wrong with posting a nude shot of someone who is happy to have the photo posted. So there is no issue of this being 'bad.'

What if booners photo looked like a 12 year old and he posted barely legal! And someone responded, man that girl looks 12, and he "played along" with haha yeah, dude, what's 6 years?

I don't see that this is similar, or relevant. I have no interest in seeing photos of nude 12 YO girls, and if it appeared someone posted something like that I think you would see a pretty different reaction--people would, I think, ask that it be addressed (BTW, I would guess that the girl in the photo is 30-ish).

The same basic conversation, one completely not socially accepted, the other? Well, you like the pictures, right? You wouldn't want tgem to go away, would you?

I have no idea what you're talking about. I think you're projecting something onto me.

re-read it, and if I understand you then you're wrong on this as well--I would very much like photos taken of people who didn't know they were being photographed to go away. And the people taking those photos should figure out that it's not cool--but the photos simply reflect something in those people that made them think that something like that is OK.

Of course, if someone accused another of posting under age girls, they'd be pissed, and not play along with the "joke" because underage girls are taboo.

Sneaky photos on the other hand...

I agree the level of condemnation is probably different, but again, that fact has little bearing on what we were actually talking about.

[mtngirl79]

No, it's not. You're changing the terms now--this isn't what we discussed, and what you responded to. IMO there is nothing inherently wrong with posting a nude shot of someone who is happy to have the photo posted. So there is no issue of this being 'bad.'

I don't see that this is similar, or relevant. I have no interest in seeing photos of nude 12 YO girls, and if it appeared someone posted something like that I think you would see a pretty different reaction (BTW, I would guess that the girl in the photo is 30-ish).

I have no idea what you're talking about. I think you're projecting something onto me.

I agree the level of condemnation is probably different, but again, that fact has little bearing on what we were actually talking about.

All I did was replace one "looks like" with another looks like.

One, completely taboo. You can find 18 year olds that look 12 and 12 year olds that look 18.

The other... nude pictures of women posted online without their permission.... sure, you will say it's not ok if pressed, but will you take a stand?

Both hard to tell for sure..

[ill-advised strategy]

paging nwskier

lol, paging greg at alpinezone

[wyeaster]

it should be astonishing anybody would defend the obvious overall treatment of women on this board but it's not.

[ill-advised strategy]

The world's gonna be a better place when VR and robotics gets rid of actual sex.

Probably...
It seems like there are some hard truths in need of collective reckoning....one of which is that evolution kind of favors some forms of barbarism, one of which is a rapey/molesty kind of barbarism. Some of the popular cliffs notes discourse of evolution does this no favor: "survival of the fittest"...ok...but it's also "who makes the most offspring". It's only been a tiny amount of time since molesty-rapey predatory guys haven't been able to just rampantly impregnate women with relative impunity. To the extent that rapey/molesty is a trait, or series of traits, and those traits are coded...evolution has probably favored it. Which means fighting with it is a lot like fighting with the genes that make us like fat and sugar and salt, it's a fight against our very nature....which is a bummer.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

.evolution, culture and law have favored it.

fixed.

[mtngirl79]

I'm not so sure it's nature over nurture

[ill-advised strategy]

there's absolutely no question both are significant...

genetics load the gun, environment pulls the trigger

[ill-advised strategy]

My wife and I talked about this a bunch the other week...

I think your (women who are sick of this shit) biggest issue should be with the women who encourage it. As a mellow, nice guy raised by women, and traumatized by having to see my mom threatened by awful men at times in my childhood, I've always been the opposite of predatory. I wish I could tell you all the times I had huge crushes on girls and women in my life and they turned me down so they could date barbarians...the exciting barbarians who then treat them like shit.
Half of your gender behaves like they need a man to be mean and sketchy to be attractive, then the other half laments why so many men are mean and sketchy. Ski towns are full of single men, prisons are full of men with women visiting them every week. Go make sense of that.

[spindrift]

Thanks, but I think I'll stick with what we've currently got.

Oh, I don't disagree that there is an element of truth that the joke played on. Your mistake is in assuming for some reason that the joke reveals the truth about this particular photo. By reading into it what you wanted to be there you made an unwarranted conclusion. The joke relies on the fact that obviously sometimes people do take photos without consent--for this one the guy clearly said it was with consent, but played along with the joke made by someone else. If you do this regularly (take jokes literally) you will often end up believe that the opposite of what is true happened.

And I will concede that I could be wrong, but based on what was posted I don't think so. If you really want to get to the bottom of it, why not just ask him?

And I'm beginning to see why people treat you like an asshole. Seriously dick move to imply that I approve of exactly what I just stated is completely wrong. Apparently just because I disagreed with your assessment of that photo.

So...

The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist

Looping back to the beginning of the thread...this kind of "humor" is often camouflage for those who do the deeds you were scratching your head about. Don't be sucked into their game. And don't be suckered into a wrestling match with mtngirl. Whether you agree with her 100% or not, she is talking about substantive issues. Issues where she has a view into things that you and I do not. Getting into a personal tussle just takes attention off the big picture. I can just about guarantee that the stuff you started the thread about about has been going on all around you.

Once upon a time, I thought I was paying attention - and would have said much of what you are saying. Having had the "benefit" in recent years of time to pay more attention and to be educated - I've found out I'd only skimmed the thinnest surface of what was going on. It is kind of a bummer.

Interestingly...

At the time, I said to myself that what I did was okay because I never showed a woman my dick without asking first, which is also true. But what I learned later in life, too late, is that when you have power over another person, asking them to look at your dick isn’t a question.

I'm not gonna be all Louis C.K. supporter, but this is worth contemplating in light of the general case of power asymmetries. Especially gender ones. And their likely impact on the threads in question.

[Viva]

there's absolutely no question both are significant...
genetics load the gun, environment pulls the trigger

No, not really. Genetics can can actually be modulated by environments factors- i.e., experience. Changing the caliber, so to speak using your firearms analogy.

[ill-advised strategy]

fine.

a million years of the rapiest animal passing the most genes to the next generation has no impact whatsoever on our current incarnation. Go with that.