Sexism - It's a Real Thing

[BigRedBuster]

21 minutes ago, funhusker said:

I'm I wrong in thinking this way?

 

No, but, it's a hell of a risk for the man.  In a perfect world, that should be able to happen.  But, once that cat is out of the bag that I like you and want to date you......you say no.......now it's awkward.  

 

That awkwardness can cause a complaint that really goes south fast.

[BigRedBuster]

The other day on NPR they were interviewing a woman who supposedly was some form of expert in all of this.  I had a real problem with one little part she said at the end.

 

She made some comment at the end acting like men who feel they can't compliment a woman in the work place are just over reacting.  I was with her on what she was saying till that point.....then I went...hell the F*** no!!!!

 

There is absolutely no reason for me to compliment a woman's looks, clothing, hair...etc.  It just takes one woman taking the comment wrong and BAM.......

 

Me.....hey....those are cool pants.

Woman......Great, he's looking at my ass.

 

Me...Hey....nice shirt.

Woman.....Great, he's looking at my boobs.

 

Me...Hey.....nice necklace.

Woman...Great, he's looking at my cleavage.

 

Nope....commenting on a woman's looks in the work place if off limits to me.  I was actually shocked this woman said what she said.

[Landlord]

3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

The other day on NPR they were interviewing a woman who supposedly was some form of expert in all of this.  I had a real problem with one little part she said at the end.

 

She made some comment at the end acting like men who feel they can't compliment a woman in the work place are just over reacting.  I was with her on what she was saying till that point.....then I went...hell the F*** no!!!!

 

There is absolutely no reason for me to compliment a woman's looks, clothing, hair...etc.  It just takes one woman taking the comment wrong and BAM.......

 

Me.....hey....those are cool pants.

Woman......Great, he's looking at my ass.

 

Me...Hey....nice shirt.

Woman.....Great, he's looking at my boobs.

 

Me...Hey.....nice necklace.

Woman...Great, he's looking at my cleavage.

 

Nope....commenting on a woman's looks in the work place if off limits to me.  I was actually shocked this woman said what she said.

 

 

That is overreacting.

[funhusker]

3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

The other day on NPR they were interviewing a woman who supposedly was some form of expert in all of this.  I had a real problem with one little part she said at the end.

 

She made some comment at the end acting like men who feel they can't compliment a woman in the work place are just over reacting.  I was with her on what she was saying till that point.....then I went...hell the F*** no!!!!

 

There is absolutely no reason for me to compliment a woman's looks, clothing, hair...etc.  It just takes one woman taking the comment wrong and BAM.......

 

Me.....hey....those are cool pants.

Woman......Great, he's looking at my ass.

 

Me...Hey....nice shirt.

Woman.....Great, he's looking at my boobs.

 

Me...Hey.....nice necklace.

Woman...Great, he's looking at my cleavage.

 

Nope....commenting on a woman's looks in the work place if off limits to me.  I was actually shocked this woman said what she said.

I agree that there is no need to complement "physical" things.  But I don't see an issue in complimenting demeanor with customers, a professional success, or other things.

 

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, funhusker said:

But I don't see an issue in complimenting demeanor with customers, a professional success, or other things.

I'm talking about commenting on physical appearance.  That was what the woman on the radio was talking about too.

[teachercd]

7 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

The other day on NPR they were interviewing a woman who supposedly was some form of expert in all of this.  I had a real problem with one little part she said at the end.

 

She made some comment at the end acting like men who feel they can't compliment a woman in the work place are just over reacting.  I was with her on what she was saying till that point.....then I went...hell the F*** no!!!!

 

There is absolutely no reason for me to compliment a woman's looks, clothing, hair...etc.  It just takes one woman taking the comment wrong and BAM.......

 

Me.....hey....those are cool pants.

Woman......Great, he's looking at my ass.

 

Me...Hey....nice shirt.

Woman.....Great, he's looking at my boobs.

 

Me...Hey.....nice necklace.

Woman...Great, he's looking at my cleavage.

 

Nope....commenting on a woman's looks in the work place if off limits to me.  I was actually shocked this woman said what she said.

I had a boss of mine, years ago, basically say the same exact thing.  He said "If I give one person a compliment I feel like I have to give everyone the same exact compliment so that it doesn't seem like I am doing something wrong...so I just don't say anything"

 

By the way...this was at a Service Merchandise...remember that store?  I was like 17

Edited November 21, 2017 by teachercd

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

That is overreacting.

no.

 

It just takes one person to take something wrong.  You might work with 1,000 women who take it as a compliment.  Then, the 1,001st woman doesn't.

 

Now, if a woman came up to me and asks..."Hey, what do you think of my shirt?"  I'll politely just say..."looks nice" and move on.

 

Other than something like that, there is absolutely no reason for me to make any comment on a woman's appearance.

[Landlord]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

no.

 

It just takes one person to take something wrong.  You might work with 1,000 women who take it as a compliment.  Then, the 1,001st woman doesn't.

 

Now, if a woman came up to me and asks..."Hey, what do you think of my shirt?"  I'll politely just say..."looks nice" and move on.

 

Other than something like that, there is absolutely no reason for me to make any comment on a woman's appearance.

 

 

There being no reason for you to do it personally is fine. Nobody is asking you to. But you also seem to be saying that it's not possible to do, or that we should all be terrified of doing it, or something?

 

To think that it's off-limits, collectively, for men, isn't true. Sorry if that's not what you're implying. 

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

There being no reason for you to do it personally is fine. Nobody is asking you to. But you also seem to be saying that it's not possible to do, or that we should all be terrified of doing it, or something?

 

To think that it's off-limits, collectively, for men, isn't true. Sorry if that's not what you're implying. 

 

 

I have specifically talked about me and have said so multiple times.  What you do is your own choices.  I would suggest you not.....but.....that's your choice.

Edited November 21, 2017 by BigRedBuster

[zoogs]

I do not know how you can read Podhoretz's complaint as anything other than pining for the days when "bosses making passes" -- hell of a euphemism -- was acceptable again. Have to retain an ability to recognize that sort of stuff for what it is when it comes out. Charlie Rose's apology is little more than an attempt to save what face he can. This is a moment for reflection about things we are learning as a society but people such as he are among the least reputable teachers. The narrative he (and countless others, recently, in similar situations) are trying to craft around themselves is narrowly self-serving. I say this in full agreement about addiction to outrage. On this, we're not outraged enough. It is a desire to hold onto some anchor that will keep us tethered to a status quo that has never deserved defending. 

 

To some of the other stuff, I think that piece by Rebecca Traister warrants posting again: https://www.thecut.com/2017/11/rebecca-traister-on-the-post-weinstein-reckoning.html?utm_campaign=thecut&utm_source=tw&utm_medium=s1 Very long, but also very thoughtful and comprehensive. It touches on a lot of different aspects of the issue.

 

These "I can't comment on looks in the workplace" comments are not new, they've been uttered here and elsewhere for years; incidentally, often with a side of "man oh man, some of the things these women say about men though". There's a passage towards the end of Rebecca's piece that ties into this (beginning with 'Yet you can feel the backlash brewing'), and I share those concerns deeply. 

 

Many men will absorb the lessons of late 2017 to be not about the threat they’ve posed to women but about the threat that women pose to them. So there will be more — perhaps unconscious — hesitancy about hiring women, less eagerness to invite them to lunch, or send them on work trips with men; men will be warier of mentoring women.

 

Think about the Mike Pence rule, unironically endorsed and promoted as part of this grand national reckoning. Sometimes the right lesson is the obvious one. Podhoretz's views are expressed over and over, not regurgitated, yet the same fundamental message. 

 

[Landlord]

7 hours ago, zoogs said:

The narrative he (and countless others, recently, in similar situations) are trying to craft around themselves is narrowly self-serving.

 

 

Good post zoogs. I agree with most of that. This line is interesting to me, though. Reason being that, at least in terms of social media and general culture rhetoric, these sorts of things confuse me.

 

I mean... of course those narratives are self-serving. Our narratives, are, in general, self-serving. That is to be human. I guess that's the point I'm getting at. I am absolutely eager for us to be proportionately outraged about things we should be, but I will also absolutely stand against us collectively creating monsters out of "normal" underlying behavior. I'm not talking about assault, rape, etc., obviously, but human beings are self-serving. Can we recognize that in ourselves as we recognize horrific elements in offenders? 

 

It's like Law & Order: SVU. Most people watch that show to, even if subconsciously, feel good about the condemnation of monsters. Which is the wrong way to watch, I think. A better way to engage with it is to watch and see yourself and see humanity in all characters involved. We won't actually do anything towards making the world better for women/minorities/anyone if we're fighting external demons with faces rather than our shared, collective internal ones. Which is something I really appreciate about Rebecca Traister's piece.

 

Anyways, sorry for the side tangent everybody. 

[zoogs]

It's not an outrage that it's self-serving, it's just a message that needs to be taken with a giant grain of salt -- whether it's the "I respect women so much, actually" part of the message or the context-establishing (one could call this gaslighting) "the thing is, we are all learning these things for the first time right now and it's such a changing world". 

 

I do agree that we need to recognize that in ourselves, too. And while I also agree that we should acknowledge people who commit the most heinous offenses as humans not so different than us (rather than some alien, outlier, monster species that absolves ourselves and the other "99.99% of society" completely)...I think the reason we talk about this topic in these terms is the trend. Even when this comes out, we have a highly charitable tendency to worry about these men's careers, want to see them get second chances, reflect about all the bright sides of their humanity and accomplishments...while simultaneously scrutinizing the women as possible liars, or just seeing them as one-dimensional victims.

 

No worries, by the way. All side tangents are still somewhat relevant  

[BigRedBuster]

8 minutes ago, zoogs said:

Even when this comes out, we have a highly charitable tendency to worry about these men's careers, want to see them get second chances, reflect about all the bright sides of their humanity and accomplishments...while simultaneously scrutinizing the women as possible liars, or just seeing them as one-dimensional victims.

 

 

Ok....so reading this, I'm taking it as that you will always believe the woman and always condemn the man to a life ruined simply on an accusation.  Did I read that correct?

[zoogs]

I think you read that the way I expected you to read it.

 

To be clear, I didn't write that intending you to interpret it this way, but the reaction is unsurprising. 

 

2nd addendum: however, "Believe Women" is not a bad place to start.

Edited November 22, 2017 by zoogs

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, zoogs said:

I think you read that the way I expected you to read it.

 

To be clear, I didn't write that intending you to interpret it this way, but the reaction is unsurprising. 

 

2nd addendum: however, "Believe Women" is not a bad place to start.

 

How was I supposed to take it?