# Men who stare: What's your deal?



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Ryan said:


> Faulty reasoning skills?
> 
> I dare you to actually challenge me on this, I will go on facebook and browse the PUBLIC pictures and find you 100 examples. Better yet I will go to the mall (to which I haven't been in years) with my camera phone and supply you with 200 pictures. (zomg moar raping!)
> 
> ...


Everyone can see what you are talking about but it's a limited scope. Men can dress provocatively, yeah so what....but women are just asking for it? Some men can't help themselves? Mind their manners? It's a bit of a cop out and passing of the buck. Women can dress for their own pleasure, for other women to admire their clothes, for men. Since there are men that can't seem to discriminate they pass the buck and say look at what she's wearing.....I couldn't help myself your honour, she was asking for surprise sex. Most of the time it really does not matter what a woman is wearing she will still get the stares and cat calls....poor her if she does fall victim to rape if her dress was too short that day.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

Honestly, I wanna pull out the eyes of the men who stare at my girl friends - especially the ones that get uncomfortable by it and have trouble confronting the situation themselves. I have a strong urge to just pull out a baseball bat or something and give them the beat down of their life.


----------



## the3rdpower (Jun 23, 2010)

Why do men stare at women and fantasize? Because we are sexual beings. 
Why do women dress provocatively? Because they are competing against other women (sorry dudes... I know you think it's for us but it's not.)

I stare at things that look beautiful. When I go to a gallary for a viewing I don't just glance and go. I look deep into the art. I analyze how it makes me feel on both an emotional and thought level. A woman to me is like a work of art. Every inch of her being sends off a sexual response... "must mate now." It's natural. Do I look at other women when I am with a woman? Sometimes but it has to be someone equally as sexy as the woman I am with and that... in my mind with the emotional connection does not happen very often... when it does it's done with stealth like capabilities that would put a master ninja to shame.


----------



## miffle92 (Jul 29, 2011)

Maybe they don't realise that they are staring. I've been told I stare during conversation sometimes, but I don't mean to, sometimes I get caught in someone's eyes. 

I personally don't understand men who stare at girls from across a room and don't get up the guts to go and talk to her. I sort of look down upon them.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

I have _never_ met a woman who said she likes it. A lot of them find it scary, though that depends on the neighbourhood.


----------



## White River (Feb 13, 2011)

miffle92 said:


> I personally don't understand men who stare at girls from across a room and don't get up the guts to go and talk to her. I sort of look down upon them.


So you're saying you look down on shy people?


----------



## Coonsy (Dec 22, 2010)

I'm wondering why this is in the INTJ forum since it has nothing to do with INTJs other than the OP being one?


----------



## Runvardh (May 17, 2011)

I wonder, am I really staring at you, or am I staring at the funny looking guy behind you who is picking his nose? Seriously, I get on the fucking train and have to make sure I am next to a fucking window and stare dead out of it to avoid getting glared at. ><*

Edit: it very well might be smart of them, in Japan, to run trains for only women.


----------



## Nomenclature (Aug 9, 2009)

My eyes linger slightly longer on what I find attractive, but that doesn't mean I'll shout out, "NICE ASS/PACKAGE/[whatever]!" and disregard the person's space. A sexy person is still a person.

Granted, if a guy cat calls, that's a convenient cue for me to stay away; I don't want to associate with a group of men competing to find the most physically attractive "catch". There's a difference between just finding someone attractive; and outwardly declaring it, going after her to raise his status within his own group. This goes both ways.


----------



## Ormazd (Jan 26, 2010)

Pam said:


> But why the open, obvious staring? Whatever happened to subtlety?


I remember reading one article on the subject that mentioned women have better peripheral vision (and so dont "stare"), but look at men (or other women) just as long as men look at women (or other men). I wouldn't be able to find the article though, so I have no way of determining if this is true or not.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> Everyone can see what you are talking about but it's a limited scope. Men can dress provocatively, yeah so what....but women are just asking for it? Some men can't help themselves? Mind their manners? It's a bit of a cop out and passing of the buck. Women can dress for their own pleasure, for other women to admire their clothes, for men. Since there are men that can't seem to discriminate they pass the buck and say look at what she's wearing.....I couldn't help myself your honour, she was asking for surprise sex. Most of the time it really does not matter what a woman is wearing she will still get the stares and cat calls....poor her if she does fall victim to rape if her dress was too short that day.


You're totally missing my point, but before I explain, let me point out that men have farr less options for dressing provocatively than woman do, in fact, I would love to hear your opinion of a 'provocatively dressed man'. 

There are bad men in this world. There are rapists, murderers, thieves, etc. There are men with no respect; there are men who view woman as objects of sex only. Then again there are honest men, respectful men, men who still open doors for woman, men who will have the decency to not look at or see a woman as simply a sex object. There are all kinds. 

With that being said, it is indisputable that the majority of woman with decent bodies (dare I say woman in general) dress provocatively. Woman who dress for other woman to admire is a cheap cop out, IMO. The fact remains that if you dress provocatively you're going to get looked at. There are a million designers out there who make plenty of appealing clothes that don't draw unwanted sexual attention to yourself. As I explained earlier, when you're searching for something to buy and you notice the top is really low, or the skirt is really short--and if you do NOT want unwanted attention drawn to you--pick a different style! You can't walk around with your boobs popping out of your shirt complaining people are looking at your boobs! And as a general rule of thumb (Not the golden rule, because there are exceptions; read above) if you wear clothes that adequately cover your body, you will greatly reduce the unwanted stares.

How in the world did we jump to "surprise sex" or "rape"?


----------



## Crystall (Mar 30, 2010)

Stop being self-conscious and enjoy it! They're only looking at you, and there's nothing wrong with that. Give them a smile. :happy:


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

Ryan said:


> if you wear clothes that adequately cover your body, you will greatly reduce the unwanted stares.


----------



## LadyJava (Oct 26, 2008)

Crystall said:


> Stop being self-conscious and enjoy it! They're only looking at you, and there's nothing wrong with that. Give them a smile. :happy:


Don't try this in NYC.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Ryan said:


> You're totally missing my point, but before I explain, let me point out that men have farr less options for dressing provocatively than woman do, in fact, I would love to hear your opinion of a 'provocatively dressed man'.
> 
> There are bad men in this world. There are rapists, murderers, thieves, etc. There are men with no respect; there are men who view woman as objects of sex only. Then again there are honest men, respectful men, men who still open doors for woman, men who will have the decency to not look at or see a woman as simply a sex object. There are all kinds.
> 
> ...


I didn't miss your point.....but something is indeed missing here.

Making value judgements on people for what they choose does not negate the fact that there is no assumption in the OP on what women are wearing. Blaming women for being stared at because they "must have" dressed like sluts in the first place isn't helpful. The natural progression of the argument is to say that what women wear gets them in trouble...so if they are raped it's not really the man's fault, it's hers. 

I did have a lengthy reply but I'm getting a little bored now.


----------



## DustyDrill (May 20, 2011)

Pretend you don't notice and pick your nose or do the leg lift fart motion. That should deter him.

Edit: Unless his stare is very intense and he has an index finger placed on each temple. A nose pick or fart won't deter him from trying to explode your brain. Be forewarned!


----------



## Manhattan (Jul 13, 2011)

I think it's important to realize the thread is directed towards men who *stare*, not all men. There's no need to get defensive. As children we were all taught not to stare. The idea that staring is rude doesn't seem up for debate. We all know it is. 

I look at everybody by reflex. Though as someone who is attracted to women, I look at attractive women more. I have rules. If someone is looking at me, I will not look at their body. Staring at someone's body in a way that they or others will notice is disrespectful and immature. If I glance at a pretty woman and she's looking back at me, I smile at her and look away after a second. If I glance at a pretty woman and she is NOT looking at me, I'll look down and up her body quickly. If it makes me feel good with no consequences, logically I should do it.


----------



## bigtex1989 (Feb 7, 2011)

My subtlety is indirectly correlated to my sobriety, but I stare all the time. Here is why. So I have an idea of the a perfect 10 in my head. Whenever I see one walking down the street, or wherever, I get really excited (not necessarily sexually) at the fact that my model of a 10 exists. Obviously then, the closer to a 10 a woman is, the longer I will stare because the more amazed I am. I stare the same at a mathematical model I have done that works out how I think it should.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> I didn't miss your point.....but something is indeed missing here.
> 
> Making value judgements on people for what they choose does not negate the fact that there is no assumption in the OP on what women are wearing. Blaming women for being stared at because they "must have" dressed like sluts in the first place isn't helpful. The natural progression of the argument is to say that what women wear gets them in trouble...so if they are raped it's not really the man's fault, it's hers.
> 
> I did have a lengthy reply but I'm getting a little bored now.


I'm not advocating staring at women, i'm simply stating the facts. And the facts still remain the facts, nobody has to like them. The girl I work with just gave me an ear full on this exact topic about how sick men are... she's dressed nicely, but she's in a short dress with a low-ish top... DERP.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Ryan said:


> I'm not advocating staring at women, i'm simply stating the facts. And the facts still remain the facts, nobody has to like them. The girl I work with just gave me an ear full on this exact topic about how sick men are... she's dressed nicely, but she's in a short dress with a low-ish top... DERP.


Indeed. 

There are no facts there. Her choice to wear clothes that are to her taste (not to your sense of morals and values) doesn't give anyone the right to slobber and stand agape looking at her. It's rude of them and not because of her choices in clothing. If she was wearing a string up her whatsie and a couple of bandaids on her nipples then perhaps it might be a little inappropriate to expect otherwise....ha....but what you are saying follows through to the victim blaming mentality...she isn't supposed to look nice (to her standards) and not expect ogling?


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

bethdeth said:


> Indeed.
> 
> There are no facts there. Her choice to wear clothes that are to her taste (not to your sense of morals and values) doesn't give anyone the right to slobber and stand agape looking at her. It's rude of them and not because of her choices in clothing. If she was wearing a string up her whatsie and a couple of bandaids on her nipples then perhaps it might be a little inappropriate to expect otherwise....ha....but what you are saying follows through to the victim blaming mentality...she isn't supposed to look nice (to her standards) and not expect ogling?


I get your point, but you're using extremes and still missing mine. Let's define the line; the line that says this is OK and this is provocative. The fact of the matter is right now she is on the side of the line that is drawing unwanted attention. Where is the line? The OP (and/or anyone else in her shoes) either needs to decide A) I will wear less revealing clothes or B) I will not get upset with people looking inappropriately or whistling at me if I continue to _choose_ to wear these types of clothes. The *fact* remains that what she's doing isn't working and that the clothes she is currently *choosing* to wear is drawing unwanted attention. The *fact* remains that evil exists in this world and guys _will_ look if they're given something to look at. 

Again, none of the above advocates or excuses said behavior.


----------



## Manhattan (Jul 13, 2011)

You're assuming the OP is wearing revealing clothes. There comes a point when you can't cover yourself up any further without wearing a burka. (even then, maybe she has pretty eyes!)


----------



## Mendi the ISFJ (Jul 28, 2011)

they are fantasizing about banging u. just take it as a compliment and ignore them.


----------



## Cheveyo (Nov 19, 2010)

ManhattanINTP said:


> You're assuming the OP is wearing revealing clothes. There comes a point when you can't cover yourself up any further without wearing a burka. (even then, maybe she has pretty eyes!)



You can't exactly say that she isn't without knowing what she dresses like.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Ryan said:


> I get your point, but you're using extremes and still missing mine. Let's define the line; the line that says this is OK and this is provocative. The fact of the matter is right now she is on the side of the line that is drawing unwanted attention. Where is the line? The OP (and/or anyone else in her shoes) either needs to decide A) I will wear less revealing clothes or B) I will not get upset with people looking inappropriately or whistling at me if I continue to _choose_ to wear these types of clothes. The *fact* remains that what she's doing isn't working and that the clothes she is currently *choosing* to wear is drawing unwanted attention. The *fact* remains that evil exists in this world and guys _will_ look if they're given something to look at.
> 
> Again, none of the above advocates or excuses said behavior.


 I understand what you are saying but I have to keep repeating the fact that they are values that are your values. Not hers. She doesn't have to decide anything. A short skirt and a low-ish top doesn't scream "treat me like I'm a piece of meat" it's just that she likes to look good by her standards. Not yours. If you aren't condoning the bad behaviour then why are you mentioning that women should restrict their way of dressing by giving a "code" of what not to wear? The unwanted attention is simply unwanted attention. It's not her fault the men (you don't condone) are being cavemen.
and this:



ManhattanINTP said:


> You're assuming the OP is wearing revealing clothes. There comes a point when you can't cover yourself up any further without wearing a burka. (even then, maybe she has pretty eyes!)


Oh please don't quote me any more....this is repetitive...LOL


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

Cheveyo said:


> You can't exactly say that she isn't without knowing what she dresses like.


I presume that is why he _didn't _say she isn't.


----------



## Manhattan (Jul 13, 2011)

Cheveyo said:


> You can't exactly say that she isn't without knowing what she dresses like.


I didn't say that she wasn't. The point is, I know an Orthodox Jew that's still smoking hot under her layers of fabric. There comes a point where you can't cover yourself up any further without dying of heat stroke. 

I will say that when you enter a public area, you accept that people have the right to stare at you, rude or not. That doesn't stop it from being irritating, I'm sure.


----------



## TheCrucible (Jul 23, 2011)

In general I only stare into eyes..staring elsewhere is rude. I avoid doing so at all costs, no matter how attractive the female is! That's the simple truth.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

@bethdeth


*I understand what you are saying but I have to keep repeating the fact that they are values that are your values. Not hers. *

This has nothing to do with values or what is right or wrong or what should or shouldn't happen, this is reality. We are faced with what IS happening and we have to find ways to combat that. In this situation you combat all the evil dirty eye'd men buy wearing less fitting and less revealing clothes. 

*She doesn't have to decide anything.*

If you mean she _*shouldn't*_ have to decide anything, you're correct. If you meant she _*doesn't*_ have to, you're incorrect. So long as this is a problem for her, she must change herself. Changing the mind of every other guy in the world isn't going to happen, so the only thing she can do is change the way she dresses. 

*A short skirt and a low-ish top doesn't scream "treat me like I'm a piece of meat" it's just that she likes to look good by her standards. *

If you mean "shouldn't" instead of "doesn't", you're correct. However, this isn't always the case in reality and often times it is perceived as such. Refer to the OP.

*Not yours.*

This has nothing to do with standards or morals or values, this is dealing with reality. 

*If you aren't condoning the bad behavior then why are you mentioning that women should restrict their way of dressing by giving a "code" of what not to wear? *

Because I live in realville and I understand that most men don't share my views. She should also understand this an act accordingly. 

*The unwanted attention is simply unwanted attention. It's not her fault the men (you don't condone) are being cavemen.*

This is true, but if she wants to change it she's going to have to alter herself. She can not alter the minds of men.


----------



## Erudis (Jan 23, 2011)

I usually stare at a woman's face when I think she's beautiful. There's nothing sexual to it, it's just pleasant to my eyes. But I try to avoid staring for too long because she may feel uncomfortable.

But something I dislike and see as offensive is when a man is walking on the street, and as soon as a woman passes by, he turns around to look at her ass. These guys are usually the same that, when walking in group, harass every girl that passes by and make sexual comments with their buddies.

And unfortunately, at least where I live, these guys make up about 70% of the male population.



lirulin said:


>


Just don't run into someone with a foot fetish.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

The men who stare either are...

1.) Shy individuals who are attracted to you but are afraid to approach
2.) Predatory individuals who are eyeing you as a target

Most men fit the first profile.


----------



## Arclight (Feb 10, 2010)

Physiological differences between the genders can explain this.. (From TLC Television series "The Science of Sex" )

Women actually look more than men do.. Women are much less obvious because they generally have a much wider field of vision.
They see better and more at close distances.. Men have a much more narrow field of vision but see details better at a greater distance. 
Men see better in the dark than women do. 
Thus Women should drive in the day and men should drive at night.

But back on topic. 

So men end up turning their heads and staring as they take in the details. 
Women are physically more subtle when doing so.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Ryan said:


> @bethdeth
> 
> 
> *I understand what you are saying but I have to keep repeating the fact that they are values that are your values. Not hers. *
> ...


Geezuz wept.

If something is true then why are there so many caveats?

It isn't about shouldn't, reality or anything any more....this is all a little waffly.

*ignores*


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

I always thought we starred because our biological selves are programmed to reproduce. I could be wrong, but you have the animals that are asexual, so they don't need to stare, then you have the animals that need the opposite sex to mate-which is I think pretty much Reptiles,Mammals,Mollusks . It's really necessary to find an attractive mate. It's just that humans evolved to do other things besides mate, but we still keep that universal trait. And there's nothing wrong with it. And, for the record, cause I need experiences, and this is an E.O. post, I was down in Georgetown, and there were these two extremely muscular men showing off their stuff walking just slightly ahead of me without their shirts, and this SUV passes by, and this woman sticks out her half of her whole body, out of the window, and cat calls these men,-really noticeable. 

One of the more interesting times I've been at Georgetown.


----------



## Rhee (Aug 15, 2010)

Ryan said:


> The OP (and/or anyone else in her shoes) either needs to decide A) I will wear less revealing clothes or B) I will not get upset with people looking inappropriately or whistling at me if I continue to _choose_ to wear these types of clothes.


I'm not sure if it's that simple. Blaming it on the dress will only invoke general outrage and take you to that proverbial impasse. Sure women could 'choose to' dress modestly, but men could 'choose to' refrain from looking in the first place. 

I wouldn't reproach women for picking out low-cut tops and short skirts. It's human nature to want to be admired. Heck *I* care about how my ass looks in a pair of jeans, and pick out the ones that make me look good. Women going for outfits that accentuate their assets are basically doing the same thing. We're genetically wired to show off our stuff, to strut and preen. 

But while women want to be admired, I don't think they want to be threatened. Due to physical differences it'd be harder for women to ward off unwanted sexual advances or voice their objections. IMO, their desire to appear attractive is valid, and their concern against unwanted attention is also valid. "Don't complain about being ogled at if you went for that skirt" is an oversimplified response that misses these points. 

Not to mention that men will still stare at a hot girl even if she happens to be wearing a potato sack. Oglers will ogle, and it's their lack of tact that should be called out on before anything else.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

@Rhee

Why do you pick out pants that make your ass look good? If no ones going to see it, or not ones suppose to look at it, why do you do it? 

This is simple math. 

Tight clothes + ass = added & anticipated attraction.

Loose clothes + ass = some attraction.

Low shirt + boobs = added & anticipated attraction. 

High shirt + boobs = some attraction.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong for men to stare. *I'm simply saying if you're wearing clothing that attracts stares, you have no right to complain. *

I'm leaving it simple and refraining from tearing your thread to shreds, it's full of oxymoron's, one noted above.


----------



## freeagen (Apr 29, 2011)

I was looking and waiting for your mental response to manifest physically to see if you had an aversive reaction to my curiosity on the assumption that I was perving on you.
Whilst you might be offended and flattering yourself I'm really just thinking what a big head you have there.
Or maybe I was staring at your boyfriend.

Imagining penetrating a persons mind can feel so much better than imagining pentrating the actual person...


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

Ryan said:


> This new era in the world is completely surrounded by sex, that's just a fact.
> 
> Most girls like to be stared at, look at the clothes they wear! Are you wearing clothes that draw attention to you? Given the fact that 80% of girls like to "flaunt their stuff" and enjoy the attention, how does a guy recognize the other 20% if they dress alike?
> 
> Guys can be very simple and one-minded when it comes to sex, some cultures are much worse than others. You just gotta accept it for what it is. Go buy new clothes that cover up more skin, toss the "cute" outfits that leave little to the imagination if you can't handle the looks.



Let's get out of here for a second, but keep your logic. McDonald's started in America. As did Kentucky Fried Chicken, Five Guys, Taco Bell, and Wendy's,personally I like Wendy's and Five Guys. America is populated by fast food restaurants the world over, then populated the world over with them. If we follow your argument, that means people are 100% the victim, for being fat, obese, and having clogged arteries, by going to these places. And that's just not true as a lot of these places offer salads, nor is it true obese people eat food food, they could just have a medical condition. Some people can be fat, and still choose to go to grocery stores to by fruit and vegetables and other healthy stuff. It can be argued, and I think some have said, women wear clothes that are comfortable. I work outside, it's summer right now, it get's extremely hot, I wear shorts and short sleeve shirt so I don't sweat up a storm, therefore, women don't want to get sick, none of us do, if they choose to just wear a top and some shorts, in a convertible, there's a reason for that,it's 90 degrees out. Or then there's the argument you don't want to wear clothes that are too tight they leave a rash,nor too loose that they fall down, and you have to keep holding them up. You want clothes that are just right. 

Can you prove,not just make a claim on this board with nothing to back it up, that the rate of rapes in any country, goes down because women are bundled up? I think they look sexy bundled up in winter clothes, as much as I like how they they look with barely anything on. Though I do know if my dad gets angry for me having a cigar, I'd be a marked man for death if I raped someone, cause my parents have a way of finding stuff out. And I know other bad things will happen, like I would be ostracized by my family, the community, I might go to jail. It's all about what a person chooses. But most of all I'm scared of my parents reaction. As a guy I'm also quite offended that you say guys are simple minded. You're simple minded, I'm not. 

That said, I do think there's a conspiracy between the fast food industry, the antacid industry, and the diet industry to work together for profits. And I do think our government puts way to much faith in corn syrup, just because of Big Agriculture. And milk and juice drinks should be given as much priority in location accessibility as soft drinks and energy drinks.


----------



## Manhattan (Jul 13, 2011)

Brian1 said:


> As a guy I'm also quite offended that you say guys are simple minded. You're simple minded, I'm not.


Well maybe he is, maybe he isn't, but his posts have mostly been about men staring at women where as your post was about...fast food conspiracies, rape rates, and cigars? If that's complex, I don't want to be.


----------



## Cover3 (Feb 2, 2011)

always love it when the term 'predators' gets generalized to where it becomes 'men', rofl.


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

I don't stare. A quick glance at most. I guess some guys just have no tact..


----------



## Rhee (Aug 15, 2010)

Ryan said:


> [MENTION=12310]Why do you pick out pants that make your ass look good? If no ones going to see it, or not ones suppose to look at it, why do you do it?


I do want people to notice and admire me. I also did say that I believe a lot of women want to be noticed and admired, too. The difference is that I'm a dude. Receiving sexual attention is rarely uncomfortable. Knowing that I can easily deal with unwanted attention from women and other men may have something to do with that ease. Things could be different for women. 




Ryan said:


> I'm not saying it's right or wrong for men to stare. *I'm simply saying if you're wearing clothing that attracts stares, you have no right to complain. *


I know you're not saying it's right for men to stare. What I disagree with is the notion that a woman's choice of outfit can somehow justify overt ogling from just about any guy on the street.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

I try not to be creepy, but if I look a lot, it is because you are very beautiful, but I am too timid to try my luck with you because I'm far too unattractive and boring to stand a chance.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

Rhee said:


> I do want people to notice and admire me. I also did say that I believe a lot of women want to be noticed and admired, too. The difference is that I'm a dude. Receiving sexual attention is rarely uncomfortable. Knowing that I can easily deal with unwanted attention from women and other men may have something to do with that ease. Things could be different for women.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No one is justifying anything here... that's been the huge misconception all along. I'm not saying it's right or moral, *I'm saying the problem exists; here is how you deal with it.* You deal with it by changing YOU, the only variable in this equation.


----------



## ILoveVampDiarys (Feb 22, 2011)

try staring at them back i had once this really old guy staring at my chest *shudders* see if they would like it i did it once to these police officer he must've thought i was a psycho...


----------



## daydr3am (Oct 20, 2010)

Ryan said:


> Why do you pick out pants that make your ass look good? If no ones going to see it, or not ones suppose to look at it, why do you do it?
> 
> I'm not saying it's right or wrong for men to stare. *I'm simply saying if you're wearing clothing that attracts stares, you have no right to complain. *


Maybe women like to wear nice clothes so they FEEL good when they wear it, not to attract stares from men. Like someone else pointed out, maybe women are showing skin because it's hot outside and who'd want to wear long sleeves and pants in this kind of weather?

It doesn't matter whether a female is covered up or not, if there's even a HINT of something attractive, men WILL stare. 

Yes, it is totally the woman's fault for wearing clothes she feels comfortable in and being rudely stared at for it.


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

Rhee said:


> I know you're not saying it's right for men to stare. What I disagree with is the notion that a woman's choice of outfit can somehow justify overt ogling from just about any guy on the street.


It doesn't justify anything. But it does explain things. As I said above, some men just have no tact and will stare. It's inevitable, in every public space in the world, some men will stare. Logically I think it's fair to say that the less revealing a woman's clothes, the less they'll be stared at. If it's such a huge problem for a woman, can you think of any better ways to deal with it aside from never going out?

I don't understand women who find ways to complain about being attractive. Find something useful to worry about, or better yet, make yourself look ugly. Complaining does nothing but make you look vain.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

I'd also like to add that I don't necessarily stare at one gender specifically, or for one reason alone. I'm a curious person by nature and always have various thoughts running through my head, many non-sexual. It's not abnormal for me to observe my surroundings, and this includes other humans. Sometimes, I'll get that, "What are you looking at?" face, and stop it, but it generally doesn't get that far. In the rare case that someone I find sexually attractive crosses my path in public, my first reaction is to quickly avert my gaze and ignore them.

... And of course I'm an INTJ, so shouting my thoughts in public is out of the question.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

@Brian1


This is fun. 

First off, your correlation between fast food restraints and people who dress provocatively is obscure to say the least. But I will address each accordingly. 

Fat people are fat because of the amount of food they intake. Period. There are medical conditions known that will make it incredibly hard to keep weight off, but for the most part fat people are a perfect example of laws of physics. If you're consuming more calories than you're burning, your're going to retain some of that weight, that's just how we were made. I haven't been to any of the restaurants you've mentioned in over 4 years, that is a choice I make. I also make daily choices with how much my food consumption will be... this has NOTHING to do with restaurants. 

Temperature is relative. Let's talk about swimming pools; do girls have a right to complain about guys checking them out in a bikini? Well, I mean, It's hot! And they're swimming! They should be able to swim without being hit on! Ahhh... "Should" being the key word here. Life is not fair, people don't act according to what someone else deems as fair or unfair, they act according to their own desires. 

Once again, how is rape making its way into this conversation? The OP said nothing about rape. I have said nothing about rape. 

And if you think a woman looks just as sexy bundled up in winter close as she does with barely anything on... more power to you, brother! Rock on!

There is no merit or sustainable evidence that points anywhere near in the direction that corporations conspire amongst each other to get people fat and then offer them weight loss programs. Poeple decide for themselves how they're going to live their life, not someone sitting behind a desk somewhere. 

Ohh, and I almost left out the best part. I did not say that all guys are simple minded, I said guys CAN BE simple and one-minded when it comes to sex. Bigg difference.


----------



## freeagen (Apr 29, 2011)

Scopophobia!
Anyone?


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

daydr3am said:


> ...if there's even a HINT of something attractive, men WILL stare.


So now what? We just continue to talk in circles acknowledging nothing can be done about it? You admit that men will stare at a hint of attraction (This attraction amplified by tight fitting or revealing clothing), so now what? 

Is it not true that by choosing less revealing clothes you can minimize those unwanted looks? 

If a woman is wearing a low cut shirt or shorts that show her ass, or obnoxiously tight pants then yes, it is her fault for attracting unwanted stares and she has absolutely no right to complain.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

Rhee said:


> I know you're not saying it's right for men to stare. What I disagree with is the notion that a woman's choice of outfit can somehow justify overt ogling from just about any guy on the street.


We may have different opinions on what is determined as "revealing" or "provocative". My argument only stands when a woman is dressing provocatively, as I sited many times.


----------



## LinaLove (Jul 19, 2011)

People who like to stare should just wear sunnies.
Problem solved.


----------



## Harley (Jul 5, 2009)

SuburbanLurker said:


> If it's such a huge problem for a woman, can you think of any better ways to deal with it aside from never going out?


Confront them. That's what I always do, and I think if more women weren't afraid to confront men who make them feel uncomfortable this would be less of a problem. Whenever I feel like someone is staring or gawking at me I politely tell them (I don't ask for comfort in my own personal space I demand it) that is is rude and to stop it immediately. If they are being more obnoxious though and start cat-calling me and yelling at me I go straight into public shaming mode, calling them out and have no qualms about using expletives and swear words. Because they are so unused to being confronted like that, they usually get angry at me and swear back at me but I always get the last laugh because I'm the one who established my boundaries and defended them. I'm not a very hot-headed person, and I usually let a lot of things slide that most people wouldn't, but when it comes to my personal space and boundaries nobody is allowed to cross them and make me feel uncomfortable. No-fucking-body. I don't care if I'm wearing a string bikini or a burqua if you're going to stand there and gawking at me with drool coming down to your feet be prepared the raise hell from me. I have the right to feel safe and comfortable regardless of what I wear and I will defend my personal boundaries and will personally go after anybody who dares tries to cross that line. 



> I don't understand women who find ways to complain about being attractive. Find something useful to worry about, or better yet, make yourself look ugly. Complaining does nothing but make you look vain.


It's annoying constantly being praised for your looks when you have so much else to offer. Yes every once and a while it's nice to hear how gorgeous or how pretty you are, but once people start treating you as if your physical attractiveness is all you have to offer it gets really tiresome, and soon all your other positive qualities get looked over and even ignored to the point where it seems all you have to offer is your physical attractiveness. Physical attractiveness is overreated and shallow anyways, not to mention looks fade, so why would you want to be constantly praised for something so fleeting? The people who ooh and aah at your looks won't be there to admire you anymore once you're all old and wrinkly.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

^ That's one way to do it!


----------



## Sanskrit (Feb 6, 2011)

I generally do not stare at people, and never openly. But I am an artist, and when I do look at people it is primarily, if not solely for the reason that I find something about their features characteristic and interesting and am wondering how to draw it in line art or how to paint it. Where the shadows are and what kind of brush strokes to use. In general sense I do not "perv" over anyone's appearance or catcall anyone, I do not understand those who do either, being an introvert and a thinker I keep my thoughts and feelings on the inside.

If I want to approach someone, It is usually over more cerebral matters, like something they've said, or have expressed interest at, physical appearance to me is no reason to approach anyone. What can I say even in such scenario? "Nice genes"? To praise someone for their self evident beauty is both redundant and absolutely pointless. Appearance is no merit, and women who wear nice stuff, may get a compliment from me on colour coordination or choice in clothing design, but even that is rare since they did not create those pieces of clothes themselves. It takes actual effort and thought put into the clothing overall elements and design to get me to compliment people for being able to dress themselves.

Witnessing other males to behave like horny apes only irritates me so I do not subscribe to any generalizations OP has drawn here. First and foremost I am logical person, and concern over matters that serve productive purpose, more carpal factors are weeded out before they even have a chance to manifest as an impulse.



Ryan said:


> So now what? We just continue to talk in circles acknowledging nothing can be done about it? You admit that men will stare at a hint of attraction (This attraction amplified by tight fitting or revealing clothing), so now what?
> 
> Is it not true that by choosing less revealing clothes you can minimize those unwanted looks?
> 
> If a woman is wearing a low cut shirt or shorts that show her ass, or obnoxiously tight pants then yes, it is her fault for attracting unwanted stares and she has absolutely no right to complain.


You sound like a sleazy Muslim fundie telling women to wear Burqas for their own protection. They have just as much of a freedom to wear what they want and still not be objectified just because it is currently socially more acceptable for men to do so. If they want to wear form fitting clothing and look good doing so, it is their right, it is not an invitation to catcall them and be obnoxious just because you may feel entitled to do so. 

Blaming the victim for others lack of manners is low, and repulsive. No matter how hard you think that their bodies are your property to criticise it does not make it the reality, and no matter how many jackasses might agree with you it either does not make it any more "right" thing to do. Learn some manners, and enforce some etiquette to other men too, and maybe one day women can wear what they want and do not have to feel like they are constantly judged on their appearance.

To do otherwise is same as to be one of the lowlifes who would just watch a rape happen and not try to stop it just because no-one around them would. A cowards way out.


----------



## killerB (Jan 14, 2010)

I don't mind the stare, the whistle, or an occasional cat call. Homage to me looking good is nice to have once in a while. It's the crotch grab that I hate, it's just nasty. I don't need you pointing out your junk. I am not impressed. 

Besides that, I'm a lesbian.


----------



## killerB (Jan 14, 2010)

Mutatio NOmenis said:


> I try not to be creepy, but if I look a lot, it is because you are very beautiful, but I am too timid to try my luck with you because I'm far too unattractive and boring to stand a chance.


 

Awwww, that's sweet. Did you know most girls are looking for sweet, shy guys(read nerdy)? You should try your luck. You never know. Women really do know the difference between a nasty stare and an awe filled one.


----------



## 480 (Jan 22, 2009)

Ryan said:


> Faulty reasoning skills?
> 
> I dare you to actually challenge me on this, I will go on facebook and browse the PUBLIC pictures and find you 100 examples. Better yet I will go to the mall (to which I haven't been in years) with my camera phone and supply you with 200 pictures. (zomg moar raping!)
> 
> ...


No, antiant is correct. That bolded part in their quote is very much rape mentality. It's on the exact same lines of "she wanted it, she shouldn't have been dressed like that walking alone, she knew what this was". 

Does it make you a rapist? No. Does it make you a bad person? Only if you don't address it and allow it to get out of hand.


----------



## Ryan (Sep 6, 2010)

Grim said:


> No, antiant is correct. That bolded part in their quote is very much rape mentality. It's on the exact same lines of "she wanted it, she shouldn't have been dressed like that walking alone, she knew what this was".
> 
> Does it make you a rapist? No. Does it make you a bad person? Only if you don't address it and allow it to get out of hand.


I don't understand where the disconnect is here. I am not advocating cat-calls; I am not advocating that men should gawk at woman, but what I *am* saying is that if a woman dresses provocatively, she'd better expect some looks. It's been noted that it's 'human nature' to dress to impress... well don't complain!

Look, if I see a pair of boobs walking around on the street you're damn right i'm going to look at them. Cover them up if you don't want me to see them. I am not, however, going to touch them OR rape them. How is any of this related to rape? 

I'm not saying a rapist hasn't tried to use this excuse in the past, but I am saying that I personally do not see the correlation. 

What do I need to address?


----------



## Chrysantheist (Jul 1, 2011)

SuburbanLurker said:


> Wow really? How do people keep connecting things like staring and cat calls to rape? There are unbelievable amounts of stupidity in this thread.


Did you just call me stupid? Don't make me pull out the statistics for this shit.


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

Chrysantheist said:


> Did you just call me stupid? Don't make me pull out the statistics for this shit.


 I implied that your post was stupid. Whether or not you're stupid I cannot judge as I do not know you.

Please, show me statistics that support your position of shifting responsibility of rapists to their cat-calling friends. Maybe we should let those poor rapists free and imprison their friends for making them do it.

Two things: 1. Rapists rape because that is what _they want_; they will use any excuse to rationalize their behaviour. That doesn't make those rationalizations correct and it doesn't in any way shift responsibility to anyone else. Your argument is no better than those who blame rape victims for wearing revealing clothes.

2. The type of person who would rape someone is probably much more likely to have those sorts of disrespectful alpha-male friends to begin with. Correlation =/= causation.


----------



## MissJordan (Dec 21, 2010)

Skimming through this thread, while the topic may be a problem facing many, it would seem that over-reaction is a much larger problem affecting society.


As, if I stare at someone, it generally means I think they're an idiot.

Girls get a passing glance.
If they're attractive, then they might get a second glance to confirm.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

Pam said:


> Men, please explain, why do you stare at every woman on the street? Even when you are taken. Why do you cat-call? Do you think a woman will fall all over you if you jeer at her? What would happen if a woman confronted you? Please tell me you don't actually think women like it.


Can we just make clear once and for all, that only perverts and jerks act this way?! Why can't you just ignore the perverts and jerks like the rest of us?


----------



## Chrysantheist (Jul 1, 2011)

SuburbanLurker said:


> I implied that your post was stupid. Whether or not you're stupid I cannot judge as I do not know you.
> 
> Please, show me statistics that support your position of shifting responsibility of rapists to their cat-calling friends. Maybe we should let those poor rapists free and imprison their friends for making them do it.


Alright. But I'm not going to make this one easy. If you're genuinely interested, you'll do the work. 

Here are a couple articles to get you started: 

"One of the factors that may inﬂuence whether bystanders intervene in situations involving sexual assault relates to their beliefs about rape and rape victims. Previous yet limited research suggests that an individual’s willingness to intervene may be impacted by their perception of rape victims’ “worthiness,” responsibility for their own assault, and beliefs in other rape myths."

Rape Myth Beliefs and Bystander Attitudes Among Incoming College Students

..._n a seminal study of undetected, self-reported acquaintance rapists, found that an individual's propensity to rape (to engage in sexually assaultive, abusive, or coercive behavior in order to procure sexual intercourse) was significantly related to the degree to which they subscribed to several rape-supportive attitudes (e.g., acceptance of rape myths, adherence to traditional views of female/male sexuality, *perception of sexual aggression as normal*..." (emphasis mine)

"Muehlenhard & Linton (1987) found that 79% of the college males in her study replied that raping a woman is justifiable if the woman was perceived as being a tease or 'loose.'"

Rape Myth Acceptance in College Students: How Far Have We Come

"Research into the factors which motivate perpetrators of rape against women frequently reveals patterns of hatred of women and pleasure in inflicting psychological and/or physical trauma, rather than sexual interest. Researchers have argued that rape is not the result of pathological individuals, but rather of systems of male dominance and from cultural practices and beliefs that objectify and degrade women."

The Relationship Between Rape and Misogyny


Significant research has been done that demonstrates correlation between negative or hostile attitudes towards women ("catcalling" for instance) and those having committed acquaintance rape. 

Those who believe rape myths, including the ones that say she "deserved it" for things like dressing provocatively (the same justification used for ogling and catcalling), are often rapists or bystanders as rape occurs. 

I have to get back to work now, but let me know if you'd like more._


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

Those are some good links and everything, but they don't contradict anything I've said, nor do they support your position. In case you missed my edit, re-read my last post.

The only relevance I can see is in cases like South Africa or the middle-east where rape is part of the culture. In western societies, rape is completely stigmatized, and any such acceptance thereof would exist only in small circles of like-minded individuals who are drawn to each other for this very reason.


----------



## Chrysantheist (Jul 1, 2011)

SuburbanLurker said:


> Please, show me statistics that support your position of shifting responsibility of rapists to their cat-calling friends. Maybe we should let those poor rapists free and imprison their friends for making them do it.


LOL. Now you're just being ridiculous. I never said anything to that effect. I said that if you sit around and let your friends abuse women, you give off the impression to that friend that you condone their bad behavior. They see is socially acceptable. You tell a rape joke to friends and everyone laughs and you think it's just a joke, but that one bad apple hears you say "It's cool to rape." 



> Two things: 1. Rapists rape because that is what _they want_; they will use any excuse to rationalize their behaviour. That doesn't make those rationalizations correct and it doesn't in any way shift responsibility to anyone else. Your argument is no better than those who blame rape victims for wearing revealing clothes.


I completely agree. Except for the fact that sometimes people actually do know rape and other acts of violence are going on and don't do anything about it. And yes, I do think they should take some responsibility for that.



> 2. The type of person who would rape someone is probably much more likely to have those sorts of disrespectful alpha-male friends to begin with. Correlation =/= causation.


Sure. But never doubt the positive social influence a good guy can have on other dudes.  I like men, I really adore them, especially the ones who treat their women right. Because their whole social circle is filled with that positivity. And those who don't respect the social contract don't get to stay.


----------



## Chrysantheist (Jul 1, 2011)

SuburbanLurker said:


> Those are some good links and everything, but they don't contradict anything I've said, nor do they support your position. In case you missed my edit, re-read my last post.


What are you looking for, exactly? 

My positions are simple: 

1. Men who demean women (catcalling, offensive ogling, etc.) are more likely to rape and/or condone rape. (See above studies)
2. Men who don't speak up when their friends demean women are giving their friends implied approval for bad behavior. (See any bystander/groupthink studies)
3. Believing that a woman deserves to be treated a certain way based on the way she dresses is a rather obvious and old rape myth. One that seems to be perpetrated in this thread, albeit in a milder form.


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

Chrysantheist said:


> 1. Men who demean women (catcalling, offensive ogling, etc.) are more likely to rape and/or condone rape. (See above studies)


Again, correlation =/= causation. Also see my second point.



Chrysantheist said:


> 2. Men who don't speak up when their friends demean women are giving their friends implied approval for bad behavior. (See any bystander/groupthink studies)


Certain personalities attract one another. The sort of person who condones rape is going to make friends with other people who condone rape, or at least don't speak out against his attitude. He's not going to be surrounded by a bunch of Ghandis. If, as in your example, a man is alienated from his social circle for these behaviours, is he more likely to change his ways, or find new friends who better understand his "worldview"? And why would he have been a part of this circle to begin with?

Sure, it would be nice if all the good guys would hang out with all the bad guys and positively influence them. But that's just not going to happen. And worse yet, it's usually the good guys who become corrupted in such situations, since the aggressive rapist personality is much more dominant than the average guy. In fact that dominance could be a reason why some people do put up with their behaviour. No one wants to confront the alpha and risk being cast out. Can you really blame them for being cowardly and weak? Sheep mentality is a sad reality.



Chrysantheist said:


> 3. Believing that a woman deserves to be treated a certain way based on the way she dresses is a rather obvious and old rape myth. One that seems to be perpetrated in this thread, albeit in a milder form.


I may have overlooked something, but I haven't seen a single person in this thread state or imply that women *deserve* to be treated a certain way because of how they dress. I've only seen people state that they should _expect_ it. And still it's not comparable to that particular rape myth, since it's quite normal for a man to look at a woman wearing revealing clothes; the amount of time spent staring is just a matter of manners.

This has been way too much writing to get across the simple point that no one is responsible for anyone else's exercise of free will. You stated that the _reason_ a rapist commits rape is because his friends condone it. Regardless of whether or not this is an influential factor, that is simply absurd beyond words.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Ryan said:


> You, along with most everyone else here is completely missing what I'm saying. I'm saying don't complain if you wear provocative clothing. Similarly, don't complain about being fat if you eat 5 cheeseburgers a day. I am not condoning or advocating cat-calling or sexual assaults in any way, but I'm saying if you dress provocatively you should EXPECT, without complaining, that there are people in this world who ARE GOING to stare. It's a fact of life. I did not write the rules, I am simply pointing them out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



OK, so the underlying _*premise*_ of a woman not being able to wear what she wants equals a woman's body not being her own was missed. This alone is a factor that opens up the can of worms. 

If a woman's body is revealed then the woman is responsible for what happens to her, cat calling, ogling etc. It is the same premise of the argument about men not being responsible if a woman is raped...she must have asked for it. This is why it was said that the reasoning was faulty.

The detail (small aspect) which you call a point which everyone seems to be missing is where a woman is wearing provocative clothing can expect this. There are some cases where women actually do wear provocative clothing to garner male attention. Yes, this happens but it does not mean that a man is not responsible for his actions. You don't once say that a male is not responsible for his actions but you _*defy the original premise*_ when you state this. 

The original premise again in case you missed it: *a woman not being able to wear what she wants equals a woman's body not being her own*.

It was stated many times before hand that there really doesn't have to be any form of provocative dressing to garner this unwanted attention. I resisted saying that when I was walking down the street, minding my own business and a group of yobbos drove past I was wearing simply jeans and a top. I was always a "modest" dresser by anyone's standards (except for full Burka wearing societies). 

The fact alone that I have stated what I was wearing implies that I have to justify myself for someone else's bad behaviour to prove their behaviour was bad. It was bad behaviour regardless of what I was wearing. This is why you think your point is missed. It isn't missed. It's an irrelevant point which defies the basic premise of the argument. Therefore making it a fallacious argument. 

.....and pretty much like this:


----------



## Slider (Nov 17, 2009)

I don't fucking "stare" at women.


----------



## Jazzlee (Aug 28, 2010)

Lol. I love it when guys stare; even more when they don't. The ENTJ quirk-an-eyebrow-I'm-checking-you-out-discreetly stare is my fave  (Yes, I'm a real ENTJ-pedobear...)

For the record, body language says so much more than actual clothing. I could be wearing the same top two days in a row - but get two completely different reactions. If I'm being my usual confident and friendly self, I don't even need to talk in order to have the guys' eyes on me. When tired and grumpy, they ward off like mosquitoes from mosquito spray. 

I've had this theory confirmed by observing other friends: one of my ISFP friends has neither changed her appearance or clothing style since last year, but ever since she got an ego boost from realizing she _can_ get guys after all, they've all been coming after her. Choice of clothing might speak volumes about a person, but your body is the language.

And also, this whole "demeaning women by catcalling them" thing... I have several guy friends who are like that. Not because they are potential rapists, but because they seriously get women that way. One of them has almost nil in IQ, but is pretty damn good-looking. If the women he hits on are of the same kind, it's a 50/50 chance they actually go along with his flirting. And quoting him, "...if I'll be getting that ass in bed tonight, I'd rather take the chance getting death-glared at than missing out on some _fine_ pussy."


----------



## Ormazd (Jan 26, 2010)

Arclight said:


> OK The beauty industry generally targets women. Some women spend a lot of time and money on "Looking Good"
> The problem seems to be that some women want to pick and choose who notices the effort they put in.
> I am not a "creep" for finding someone attractive just because they I think am too old, too bald or too fat or too whatever.


I'd just like to point out that beauty images also effect men.

BBC - Newsbeat - Rise in men suffering from eating disorders, say GPs
National Eating Disorders Association

(from a quick google search)




Chrysantheist said:


> Whoa. This thread.
> 
> Some things I'm thinking:
> 
> Dressing provocatively (in my experience, as a female, who has lived in the world) makes little to no difference as to whether I will be catcalled or stared at. What DOES make a difference is how often I am in public, walking or biking, or on public transit. For instance, I will be wearing a full length coat mid-winter in Chicago, walking down the street, and have 2-3 instances within an hour of being ogled and/or catcalled. Compare that to driving around in my car in a tank top and a skirt in Los Angeles and no one says anything. I'm not saying anything about the nature of people in either city, but to simply look at this issue as a clothing dilemma is vastly oversimplifying.


In my experience, walking down the street can get people to say to me, or to call me a: "fucking ******" "fuck you" "***" (even one "fuck you you fucking ******" they are clearly a creative bunch). Wordless yelling, honking their horn as they pass by, just general harrassment. Most often by people in vehicles, but on occasion by other pedestrians. I feel I should also point out that it's as often a women as a man. I think people are just jackasses. *shrugs*




WamphyriThrall said:


> I'd also like to add that I don't necessarily stare at one gender specifically, or for one reason alone. I'm a curious person by nature and always have various thoughts running through my head, many non-sexual. It's not abnormal for me to observe my surroundings, and this includes other humans. Sometimes, I'll get that, "What are you looking at?" face, and stop it, but it generally doesn't get that far. In the rare case that someone I find sexually attractive crosses my path in public, my first reaction is to quickly avert my gaze and ignore them.


*nods* I like looking at things, women, men, dogs, birds, trees, bla bla bla. Sometimes I stare, sometimes I don't. I am getting a hang of not staring at people though, they seem to not like it. *shrugs*


I hate it when people have necklaces that sit right in their cleavage. I love shiny things, and I tend to stare at them, and want to touch them. Get your boobs out of the way damn it! I'm looking at shinies here! :crazy:


----------



## yaintj (Dec 17, 2010)

INTJs does not like to be seen, I think. But me zooming is sometimes considered for staring. Sometimes I really stare I want to suck everything into my mind and keep it there for ever. From me it is a friendly action or even I am trying to communicate. Of course I do my best to avoid frightening people.


----------



## Donkey D Kong (Feb 14, 2011)

People say I stare at them, but honestly I'm just staring wherever I fucking want because I'm trying to think.

But, if I do stare at a woman, it's either because of her stunning beauty, I'm profiling them, or they're doing something stupid.


----------



## freeagen (Apr 29, 2011)

Even if I'm staring at someone why should that be considered rude automatically?
It's usually complimented with a smile.
If they asked me not to I would probably apologize and gravitate away from them.
Or if anyone ever gave me lip about it I'd just act like I was daydreaming because that's actually true half the time. 
And not apologize.
If they're right near me and stare back at me I might just say a friendly 'Hello' or 'How are you?'

What ever happened to randomly striking up a conversation with a stranger?


----------



## TJSeabury (Nov 23, 2010)

Ahh... I've had women cat-call at me so I know how annoying it is but I just give them a nice smile and continue on my merry way. I can't help it if I make you randy.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

lirulin said:


>


This is not directed at your view [because I don't get it from the simple pic you posted] but you'd be surprised at the exploitative stories of Fully clothed Muslim women ... My experience living for extended periods in Eastern and Western cultures has revealed to me that Clothing is absolutely irrelevant to an eye-rapist .. in fact, some rapists actively seek out the conservative ones to rape with their eyes. 

From personal experience with thousands of Muslim women [and through reading their accounts of their own lives] I've concluded that just because a woman is fully clothed does not "protect" her from being stared at or eye-raped.


----------



## Zster (Mar 7, 2011)

Pardon if I missed - no way can I read 14 pages prior to work...

1. The stares and calls come REGARDLESS of attire. I think they would come if I wore a large paper sack. I never dress even remotely provocatively and get stares and whistle a lot. Half of those guys would likely be aghast to know my age, I think, but I digress.

2. I do NOT like or feel flattered to be cat called at or ogled like a piece of trashy meat. However, a tasteful glance once or twice might actually be considered flattering.

Which begs the question: when IS such attention ok, and when is it harrassment?

(crap - don't know how to insert vid links, but would have done this one: Sexual Harassment and You Video)

I concur with those who say both sexes acknowledge attractiveness. I now I enjoy a handsome man every bit as much as guys seem to like looking at attractive women. It's all in how tastefully it's handled. Most guys my age are married or taken. I can acknowledge their beauty, but do not have to make them feel like I am coming on to them in doing so. Anymore than they should make me uncomfortable.


----------



## TJSeabury (Nov 23, 2010)

SuburbanLurker said:


> Again, correlation =/= causation. Also see my second point.
> 
> 
> Certain personalities attract one another. The sort of person who condones rape is going to make friends with other people who condone rape, or at least don't speak out against his attitude. He's not going to be surrounded by a bunch of Ghandis. If, as in your example, a man is alienated from his social circle for these behaviours, is he more likely to change his ways, or find new friends who better understand his "worldview"? And why would he have been a part of this circle to begin with?
> ...


So your circle of friends are all like minded? Did you all meet because you got alienated from a group that didn't approve of your views?



SuburbanLurker said:


> I may have overlooked something, but _I haven't seen a single person in this thread state or imply that women *deserve* to be treated a certain way because of how they dress. I've only seen people state that they should expect it._ And still it's not comparable to that particular rape myth, since it's quite normal for a man to look at a woman wearing revealing clothes; the amount of time spent staring is just a matter of manners.
> 
> This has been way too much writing to get across the simple point that no one is responsible for anyone else's exercise of free will. You stated that the _reason_ a rapist commits rape is because his friends condone it. Regardless of whether or not this is an influential factor, that is simply absurd beyond words.


YOUR absurd beyond words!
That's the same as saying they deserved it... why the hell should ANYONE "_expect_" to get raped because of how they dress?! How on earth does that seem right to you? Your mentality disgusts me.

@Chrysantheist Is he trolling this thread?


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

TJSeabury said:


> why the hell should ANYONE "expect" to get raped because of how they dress?! How on earth does that seem right to you?


 That's not what I said* at all*. 

Tip for the future: Don't blindly dive into the middle of debates when you haven't read them from the beginning and have no idea what's actually being discussed. If something sounds so astoundingly absurd like that, it probably is, and it's probably because you didn't read it properly.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

RobynC said:


> The men who stare either are...
> 
> 1.) Shy individuals who are attracted to you but are afraid to approach
> 2.) Predatory individuals who are eyeing you as a target
> ...


This is a damn good point. So why do most women assume that so many men fit the second profile? I got to thinking about this thread on my way home in the bus. I thought I saw a girl from my class, and I must have looked a whole two minutes while trying to remember her name, before I saw that it wasn't her. The thing is, if she did that to me - I'd probably assume that she's just bored or nosy. But looking back on it, it's very likely that she felt uncomfortable and intimidated by me looking, because a lot of women really do tend to assume the worst!


----------



## TJSeabury (Nov 23, 2010)

SuburbanLurker said:


> I may have overlooked something, but I haven't seen a single person in this thread state or imply that women *deserve* to be treated a certain way because of how they dress. I've only seen people state that they should _expect_ it.


...You didn't say that and then argue for those people? Oh my apologies.


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

Jawz said:


> This is not directed at your view [because I don't get it from the simple pic you posted] but you'd be surprised at the exploitative stories of Fully clothed Muslim women ... My experience living for extended periods in Eastern and Western cultures has revealed to me that Clothing is absolutely irrelevant to an eye-rapist .. in fact, some rapists actively seek out the conservative ones to rape with their eyes.
> 
> From personal experience with thousands of Muslim women [and through reading their accounts of their own lives] I've concluded that just because a woman is fully clothed does not "protect" her from being stared at or eye-raped.


My view is that the post I was responding to, and the institutionalised sexism behind the burka, niqab, etc., all result from the same ignorant mindset: that of making women responsible for men's actions, men's sexuality. Different points on the spectrum - same essential idea.

I know full well that clothing has nothing to do with the likelihood of being raped. That's just part of the culture of victim-blaming and trying to let rapists off the hook whilst criminalising women's sexuality.


----------



## Agelaius (Apr 3, 2010)

Well, for myself I try not to be rude about it. It's like I have some natural tendency to watch people, particularly if they have some noticeable features (...ladies). However, I won't do some incredibly awkward stare. Maybe just a glance here and there as I go from one person to the next. I like people watching in general, but if there's only 1 or 2 people... :blushed:


----------



## lirulin (Apr 16, 2010)

dalsgaard said:


> This is a damn good point. So why do most women assume that so many men fit the second profile? I got to thinking about this thread on my way home in the bus. I thought I saw a girl from my class, and I must have looked a whole two minutes while trying to remember her name, before I saw that it wasn't her. The thing is, if she did that to me - I'd probably assume that she's just bored or nosy. But looking back on it, it's very likely that she felt uncomfortable and intimidated by me looking, because a lot of women really do tend to assume the worst!


Probabilistically, it is efficient. If there is a threat, it is safest to assume the worst. Those who don't have to deal with the threat on a regular basis are free to be more trusting. But to live with the expectation that rape could easily happen (what is it, 75% of women of college age have had to deal with some form of sexual assault? (It was for the States, I think, though they told us that here too in the welcome to university speech (though I find the number rather high - not that proper stats on this are easy to get as it is one of the most unreported crimes))) and that you will be blamed if it does - which is what most cultures seem to do, more or less obviously - is going to have an effect on someone's behaviour. There isn't a perfect way of determining who is dangerous - so that can be generalised to everyone, just to be safe. Or it can be generalised to those who stare openly, as there is some correlation between those who do so and think it's their behaviour is the women's problem, and those who have a little trouble understanding what boundaries are, and the end of that spectrum is the rapist. Staring is an obvious red flag. Looking - whatever, people can look at each other, check each other out briefly, and all, it's the open creepy staring and the sexual harassment that are the real issue. As much as people can stare for other reasons too, again, if you can't tell the difference, it is safest to assume the worst.

It may be that most starers will not do anything, that some, even many, are not staring in a sexual way, or even aware of what they look at. I myself an attracted to shiny things, and necklaces can be a bitch. I am short sighted and days I forget my contacts I stare too much at people trying to see if I recognise them. I know it isn't easy to avoid looking at and occasionally even staring at people entirely (though it *is* easy to avoid obvious leering and catcalls). However, I have more sympathy with those who have to live in this suspicion and, often, fear (though I myself try to let the atmosphere&c. affect me as little as possible) and add in extra security measures to their lives than those who are a little aggrieved they are treated with suspicion after creeping someone out. Perhaps in cultures more open to the idea that women deserve to be protected from this, rather than blamed for their clothing or told to control others' responses to them, women won't feel they are under threat so consistently and won't have this reaction so strongly.

It's a bit of a mess. Because then you get men pissed off they are all 'lumped in' with the pervs, though that is not the intention, and start defending the actions they share with the pervs too many times in a vaguely misogynistic way, which then escalates things...this doesn't need to be a gender war. Men get raped too, homosexuals/lesbians and ethnic minorities get harassed also, cultural groups, age groups...teenage boys can get treated as potential vandals by some...almost everyone will fit into one group or another that deals with shit. There is room for commonality and sympathy. There is a difference between 'men are all pigs' and being creeped out by stares - the former position I do not defend, no one who generalises so negatively about a gender is someone I defend - but an instinctive fear/discomfort reaction is not a generalisation and doesn't need to lead to the kind of hostility shown in this thread (I don't mean specifically by you; this is a general point).


----------



## tuna (Jun 10, 2010)

dalsgaard said:


> This is a damn good point. So why do most women assume that so many men fit the second profile?


Because physical and sexual violence from men is something that women grow up expecting. We are wary of men because we are taught from childhood that if we do anything wrong -- dress the wrong way, walk down the wrong street, talk to the wrong person, be rude to a man who's interested in us, be nice to a man who's interested in us, don't flirt back, flirt back, be polite to a stranger, be rude to a stranger -- we invite sexual violence.

When a man stares at me, I feel uncomfortable because that man is showing interest in me in an inappropriate and unsettling way. Men showing interest in me is unsettling enough as it is, but when a man stares at me for an extended period of time I feel threatened because he is disregarding normal social boundaries (making it more likely that he will disregard my personal boundaries).

As lirulin said, it is significantly safer and more efficient to assume that all men are a potential threat.

This is an excellent read for anyone who questions this attitude (it's an excellent read for everyone, actually). Schrödinger's Rapist: Or a Guy's Guide to Approaching Strange Women Without Being Maced


----------



## Arclight (Feb 10, 2010)

Ormazd said:


> I'd just like to point out that beauty images also effect men.
> 
> BBC - Newsbeat - Rise in men suffering from eating disorders, say GPs
> National Eating Disorders Association
> ...


Yes!!... I am aware of this. But _this_ thread is not about men and them being stared at. Plus.. That is why I qualified my statement with the word "_generally_".


----------



## Arclight (Feb 10, 2010)

@tuna



> As XXXX said, it is significantly safer and more efficient to assume that all men are a potential threat.


I see.. Well I was taught growing up to _assume_ that all Blacks are criminals, All Muslims are terrorists and that gay people are sexual deviants with a disease.

Good thing I can think critically and judge people individually, eh? 

What XXXX said is pure prejudice in it's finest form.


----------



## Ormazd (Jan 26, 2010)

tuna said:


> Because physical and sexual violence from men is something that women grow up expecting. We are wary of men because we are taught from childhood that if we do anything wrong -- dress the wrong way, walk down the wrong street, talk to the wrong person, be rude to a man who's interested in us, be nice to a man who's interested in us, don't flirt back, flirt back, be polite to a stranger, be rude to a stranger -- we invite sexual violence.
> 
> When a man stares at me, I feel uncomfortable because that man is showing interest in me in an inappropriate and unsettling way. Men showing interest in me is unsettling enough as it is, but when a man stares at me for an extended period of time I feel threatened because he is disregarding normal social boundaries (making it more likely that he will disregard my personal boundaries).
> 
> ...


That's one of the more offensive articles I've read in a while. Apparently people assume I'm a rapist when I walk outside, if that's not oppressive than I don't know what is.


Researching the "Rape Culture" of America
One-in-One-Thousand-Eight-Hundred-Seventy-Seven

(relevant to @lirulins mention of the college rape statistics)


I'd also like to point out that it's much more likely for a man to be attacked by a stranger than it is for a woman.

http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection-R/Statcan/85-002-XIE/0099885-002-XIE.pdf (pages 9 and ten have the relevant stats)


tl;dr be safe of course and take precautions, but there isn't a very good chance of being attacked in public, *especially* if you're a woman.


----------



## tuna (Jun 10, 2010)

Ormazd said:


> That's one of the more offensive articles I've read in a while. Apparently people assume I'm a rapist when I walk outside, if that's not oppressive than I don't know what is.


The fact that women evaluate how much of a risk you pose to them is not oppressive. 

The fact that every woman I know has been sexually harassed and/or assaulted at least once in her life, the fact that rape victims are treated as "accusers," the fact that in at least one state a woman cannot abort a fetus even if she was impregnated by a rapist, the fact that if a women is raped and she didn't behave in _exactly_ the right way before, during and after her rape she's blamed for being raped, the fact that rape is treated so cavalierly by the media and the law, the fact that a thirteen-year-old girl can be told by a judge that she "seduced" her rapist, the fact that nearly all rapists go free? These are oppressive. These are direct results of rape culture. 

These are things that prevent women from living freely.

Someone being concerned that you, a complete stranger, could potentially assault her is not oppressive. You deciding that a woman's safety is less important than your desire to not be considered a potential rapist -- and the fact that our society agrees with you -- _is oppressive_, because it ranks a man's desire to feel good about himself over a woman's desire to protect herself from the very real threat of physical assault.

And the fact that you have the luxury of brushing all of this off is something that you should examine a little more closely -- why is this not a big deal to you? Why aren't you shaken up and infuriated by this? Why do you not have to watch your movements, your clothing, your words around strangers out of a fear of being sexually assaulted? Why don't you take the long way home after a strange man catcalls you outside of a store, just to make sure you aren't followed? Why don't you avoid taking public transportation because you're sick of men on the bus ogling you and "complimenting" you and and touching you and reminding you at every turn that people think that they have the right to treat your body as though they own it?

Because you're a man. Because you have the privilege of not living with the constant, real threat of sexual harassment and assault that women do.

Think about that, please.


----------



## NekoNinja (Apr 18, 2010)

dalsgaard said:


> This is a damn good point. So why do most women assume that so many men fit the second profile? I got to thinking about this thread on my way home in the bus. I thought I saw a girl from my class, and I must have looked a whole two minutes while trying to remember her name, before I saw that it wasn't her. The thing is, if she did that to me - I'd probably assume that she's just bored or nosy. But looking back on it, it's very likely that she felt uncomfortable and intimidated by me looking, because a lot of women really do tend to assume the worst!


Others have gone over this, however I wish to contribute from my perspective. 

There is nothing wrong with women assuming the worst. I have a saying that is "Assume the worst, hope for the best" because it is almost always best to assume the worst in a given situation. That way there are no surprises when things don't turn out like you want them to, or they turn out just horribly wrong. Maybe this is a morbid way of going about the world, but I can be a very cautious individual at times. I would rather assume that its possible that an individual wants to rape or kill me, than to blindly assume the best of him and blindly fall into a trap. Rape is a very real threat, and quite a rational fear to have. While it could be said that it is unlikely that it would happen to you, many things in life that happen are quite unlikely. Schizophrenia is an unlikely disorder to have, as it's only in about 1 percent of the population, however it _does_ happen to people, and it may happen to _you._ Point being that bad things happen to everyone, so maybe its not all that strange to expect them. 

I myself don't like to walk alone, and _especially_ not at night. I am a very skinny 19 year old who probably couldn't fight his way out of a paper bag, and boys _do_ get kidnapped. The location doesn't matter, as I tend to be consumed with fear whether walking down a city street, or along the woods. Even when walking with friends at night I still tend to be quite uneasy, and on edge. Fear is not something that can really be controlled. I will even go as far as to switch sides of the street if someone is walking towards me.

So when a girl is being stared at on the bus and the first thing that comes into her mind is that this "creep" might try to follow her home, I see absolutely nothing wrong with it and personally find it to be a very normal thought for someone to have. 

It is not a woman's fault that she is being stared at, as people have said, clothes don't have all that much to do with it. It could be _argued_ that it is natural male tendencies to stare at women, this doesn't mean that they are not at fault and that women are. Staring may often be caused by the natural tendency to recognize and look at faces. Human beings are so attuned to find faces that we will form the pattern of a face where none really exists. Our eyes are drawn to faces from the moment we first open them. So while the fault cannot really be put on the women, it also can't necessarily be put on men either. 

The above does not apply to all cases, as it has been proven on this very thread that some men stare because of what I will call "beauty" to sum it up or sexual desire is another. I personally have never really felt the need to deliberately stare at someone for such a reason, however at the same time, I don't consider myself to be a "typical" male. Thus I don't make a very good example to go off of, but I personally don't really approve of the behavior, and find it to be a bit.... crude (I won't be too rude =P.) However, if you do happen upon the behavior yourself, I think it would be polite to apologize, or at the least look away. 

I know how uncomfortable it is to be stared at, considering that I used to color my hair a lot, and thus a_ lot_ of people stared. I never really liked all the attention, but it seemed like the price I had to pay to have the hair that I wanted. You can try to argue that maybe I shouldn't have dyed my hair, and that I should have expected it (which I did expect it) but it still doesn't change the fact that_* I *_wasn't the one staring. Thankfully though, I'm not the type of person to notice that everyone was staring at me, and only when people were right in front of me, or someone else pointed it out (which happened a lot), did I really notice.


----------



## pretty.Odd (Oct 7, 2010)

Staring"≠ Gawking, oogling, and catcalling.

I'm okay if anybody wants to look or stare at me, but anything beyond that is just rude. You can show someone that you think they're attractive without resorting to Philistine actions.


----------



## nádej (Feb 27, 2011)

pretty.Odd said:


> Staring"≠ Gawking, oogling, and catcalling.
> 
> I'm okay if anybody wants to look or stare at me, but anything beyond that is just rude. You can show someone that you think they're attractive without resorting to Philistine actions.


Definitely.

I think there is a difference too depending on the length of the stare. If someone stares at me for a minute or two, big deal. Maybe they thought they recognized me from somewhere. I don't know. If someone stares at me for, for instance, the entire length of time I am at a restaurant for dinner or the entire length of time I am on the train (it happens)...I am incredibly uncomfortable. _That_ is more the kind of staring I'm talking about, and the kind I'm guessing the OP was referring to.

I think there might be some unintended miscommunication in this thread as to what is being referred to. Words are so vague sometimes. If you treat people with respect, chances are the complaints are not referring to you. Not only that, but also chances are that put in our shoes in a situation of what we _are_ complaining about, you would agree with the legitimacy of our feeling uncomfortable, creeped-out, nervous, etc. Because the situations we are talking about occur with a pretty apparent lack of respect.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

There is nothing healthy about living in a constant state of fear. Fear and panic inhibits logic, rational reasoning, sympathy, and overall awareness. I understand that the conditions that some women endure are completely unacceptable, but promoting the stance of being afraid of every man is simply destructive. There are many men who would do everything in there power, even through self-sacrifice, in order to protect women from predators. women should recognize this distinction, but sadly they can't if they've already decided that every man will assult them. Seriously, that's no way to live.


----------



## NekoNinja (Apr 18, 2010)

pretty.Odd said:


> Staring"≠ Gawking, oogling, and catcalling.
> 
> I'm okay if anybody wants to look or stare at me, but anything beyond that is just rude. You can show someone that you think they're attractive without resorting to Philistine actions.


XD I just realized this was directed at me. My last post was just my personal opinion on the matter, which was based on the fact that I don't like to be stared at. So I consider pretty much staring in general to be a bit rude, and I don't consciously ever stare at anyone....

Im sure there are a variety of different opinions on the subject, everything from enjoying it, to absolutely hating it. 



marked174 said:


> There is nothing healthy about living in a constant state of fear. Fear and panic inhibits logic, rational reasoning, sympathy, and overall awareness. I understand that the conditions that some women endure are completely unacceptable, but promoting the stance of being afraid of every man is simply destructive. There are many men who would do everything in there power, even through self-sacrifice, in order to protect women from predators. women should recognize this distinction, but sadly they can't if they've already decided that every man will assult them. Seriously, that's no way to live.


I never said anything about a constant state of fear. In most cases its probably circumstantial, such as when I described how I don't like to walk at night. I seriously doubt people go into panic mode every time they see someone staring at them. But on Saturday evening, seeing a creepy guy on a bus staring at you who "happens" to get off at your stop, is another story.


----------



## tuna (Jun 10, 2010)

marked174 said:


> There is nothing healthy about living in a constant state of fear. Fear and panic inhibits logic, rational reasoning, sympathy, and overall awareness.


Exactly. This is why men should not rape, assault, harass, and otherwise make life difficult, dangerous, and frightening for women.



> I understand that the conditions that some women endure are completely unacceptable, but promoting the stance of being afraid of every man is simply destructive.


There is a distinct difference between _evaluating the risk each man you meet poses to you_ and _being afraid of every man_.



> There are many men who would do everything in there power, even through self-sacrifice, in order to protect women from predators.


...and it is impossible to determine whether the man who is staring you down on the bus is a sweet, kind, self-sacrificing white knight or a man who will assault you._ Every man is a potential risk to a woman_, and telling women to ignore this risk is not only naive, it's dangerous.



> women should recognize this distinction, but sadly they can't if they've already decided that every man will assult them.


It's impossible to for a woman to determine whether or not a man will assault her. Men themselves don't necessarily know whether or not they will (or have) assaulted someone -- some rapists don't even understand that they're rapists, because, for example, they don't understand that "having sex with" someone who is too drunk to consent is rape, or that when someone says "no" they are supposed to stop whatever they are doing, or that they do not have the right to their significant other's body. Some men genuinely think that they are being flattering by shouting sexual comments at women they see on the street. Some men think that groping a women is an acceptable way of flirting with her. Some men do not understand that there is a clear line between "expressing interest in a polite and non-threatening way" and "being a creepy, intrusive asshole."

By saying that women should not be wary of strange men, you are exhibiting a distinct lack of awareness and empathy, and you are showing that you are less concerned with the safety of women than you are with your personal ideal view of how women should act.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

lirulin said:


> Probabilistically, it is efficient. If there is a threat, it is safest to assume the worst. Those who don't have to deal with the threat on a regular basis are free to be more trusting. But to live with the expectation that rape could easily happen (what is it, 75% of women of college age have had to deal with some form of sexual assault? (It was for the States, I think, though they told us that here too in the welcome to university speech (though I find the number rather high - not that proper stats on this are easy to get as it is one of the most unreported crimes)))


Let me just say that I agree with a lot of your post, so I will just comment on it and try to put my views out there. So it's not directed specifically at you, it's just me rambling.

I think that figure is highly problematic. It simply can't be true.
One of the problems concerning rape statistics is that it's so hard to define rape. The fact that I have been coerced into sexual acts against my own will, qualifies me as a rape victim as well by some of these definitions. It completely skewers the results -and to be honest- spits on the poor people who actually have gone through the real deal. There is no doubt in my mind, that a lot of people don't report being raped for a variety of reasons. And that is extremely problematic, whether they are refusing to report because of shame or threats. It's clear that this happens more often in some countries than others (Third world countries tend to be far worse), but by comparison, uncritically propagating statistics like these (I'm happy to see you're critical) in the western world hardly calls for what some radical feminists call a rape culture. I steer clear of all statistics in this particular area, and try to retain a common sense world-view. I don't have any female friends who have been raped, but it certainly is true that that a lot of them have been the object of sexual advances that they didn't condone. Only it wasn't forceful, they just told the person to stop. It happened to my girlfriend a couple of days ago. Some old classmate put his hand on her thigh, and she said no, which made him stop. Some say this makes my girlfriend a victim of rape, and I find this a definition that is way too loose. There are definitions on the other end of the scale, however, that are even worse. There are definitions of rape that don't qualify date-rape as proper rape, and there are even definitions out there that don't even view drug-rape as sexual assault. Statistics have always been hell to sort through, but on this topic it's a particularly touchy type of hell that burns your ass if you're down with it for just a short while.



> and that you will be blamed if it does - which is what most cultures seem to do, more or less obviously - is going to have an effect on someone's behaviour. There isn't a perfect way of determining who is dangerous - so that can be generalised to everyone, just to be safe. Or it can be generalised to those who stare openly, as there is some correlation between those who do so and think it's their behaviour is the women's problem, and those who have a little trouble understanding what boundaries are, and the end of that spectrum is the rapist. Staring is an obvious red flag. Looking - whatever, people can look at each other, check each other out briefly, and all, it's the open creepy staring and the sexual harassment that are the real issue. As much as people can stare for other reasons too, again, if you can't tell the difference, it is safest to assume the worst.


Safe, yes. But if I'm right, and rape statistics are blown way out of proportion, then it can be highly detrimental. It breeds paranoia. Statements by some third-wave feminists labeled 'every man a potential rapist', which is the kind of rhetoric that is not only completely wrong, but also an unnecessary scare-tactic that pushes people into being fearful of everyone around them. When sexual assault is believed to be so common in college, it's no wonder that suicide is one of the leading causes of death among teenagers. It perpetrates resentment and fear across genders, and directly affects and open up even more the cultural divide between man and woman. In any case, overrepresentation of the amount of sexual assaults is far better then underrepresentation. But at this point in time, I can't properly distinguish between them. All we have to go by that is at least partly certain is the amount of reported cases, but that clearly qualifies as an underrepresentation, and therefore accentuates the whole problem.



> It may be that most starers will not do anything, that some, even many, are not staring in a sexual way, or even aware of what they look at. I myself an attracted to shiny things, and necklaces can be a bitch. I am short sighted and days I forget my contacts I stare too much at people trying to see if I recognise them. I know it isn't easy to avoid looking at and occasionally even staring at people entirely (though it *is* easy to avoid obvious leering and catcalls). However, I have more sympathy with those who have to live in this suspicion and, often, fear (though I myself try to let the atmosphere&c. affect me as little as possible) and add in extra security measures to their lives than those who are a little aggrieved they are treated with suspicion after creeping someone out. Perhaps in cultures more open to the idea that women deserve to be protected from this, rather than blamed for their clothing or told to control others' responses to them, women won't feel they are under threat so consistently and won't have this reaction so strongly.


I think you have a good point here. It doesn't help at all, that women are constantly told that they have to cover up so they don't get raped. There is a lot of emphasis on rape in general within the criminal justice system, especially in the US. There should be, but we need to balance these so-called 'preventive measures' (Aka: Telling women not to dress provocatively, or they might get raped), with a little common sense. If you tell someone from early childhood that they should protect their money from thieves, then it's a perfectly healthy mindset to condone, but only so long as you give conditions. Life is risk-assesment. We know there is a higher risk of being robbed when turning down a dark alley, but how much of this is hyperbole and drama we've seen on TV, and how much of it is reality? Fear is hopelessly irrational, and we constantly have to reevaluate the reasons for it. A certain amount of fear of rapists is acceptable under the right conditions, but when does it turn into paranoia? I say it does when women start carrying pepper-sprays in their bags, because while there is a risk of rape, I'm almost 99% sure that they have overestimated it. No thanks to the propagated statistics.



> It's a bit of a mess. Because then you get men pissed off they are all 'lumped in' with the pervs, though that is not the intention, and start defending the actions they share with the pervs too many times in a vaguely misogynistic way, which then escalates things...this doesn't need to be a gender war. Men get raped too, homosexuals/lesbians and ethnic minorities get harassed also, cultural groups, age groups...teenage boys can get treated as potential vandals by some...almost everyone will fit into one group or another that deals with shit. There is room for commonality and sympathy. There is a difference between 'men are all pigs' and being creeped out by stares - the former position I do not defend, no one who generalises so negatively about a gender is someone I defend - but an instinctive fear/discomfort reaction is not a generalisation and doesn't need to lead to the kind of hostility shown in this thread (I don't mean specifically by you; this is a general point).


Absoltely. Let me just point out really quick that I'm not hostile, but I am irritated and I do feel a bit hurt by things like this. A personal pet peeve of mine, is people who are judgmental. I know it's a gut-reaction honed by either years of indoctrination or instinct - but I still feel like a piece of shit whenever I'm slotted into this category of vile beasts who wants to spread their seed like testosterone was an aphrodisiac (And I'm beginning to feel like a broken record for saying it). I deplore people who judge other peoples characters by superficial measures. I believe a lot of this fear of men is largely unfounded, and I want to convince people that while they do have something to be wary of, they don't have anything to fear. Fear clouds rational judgement, it forces people to make irrational decisions based on little evidence. Fear in the form of being careful is good, but on this topic, carefulness is often blown completely out of proportion. We can't live out our lives ever distrustful of half of the worlds population, nor do we have reason to.


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

tuna said:


> Exactly. This is why men should not rape, assault, harass, and otherwise make life difficult, dangerous, and frightening for women.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


1. Agreed.
2. The difference between evaluating risk and living in fear is called objective reasoning. It's like defensive driving. Every vehicle on the road poses a potential threat, but I know that most drivers are not intent on harming me. I will admit though that I am more intimidated by the big trucks than the tiny cars, but I probably shouldn't be.
3. You're just plain wrong. Every man is not a potential risk to a woman's safety. period. You might not be able to discern the difference, but that does not mean that the difference does not exist. It also doesn't mean that the difference is impossible to discern. Discernment is not only possible, but it is the only way to accurately navigate through life. I have never suggested that anyone ignore the risks present here; I am simply stating that there is more to this life (and the people in it) than the risks they pose. I am also stating that to ignore either is not only naive, but also dangerous.
4. This is absurd. Men know when they are assaulting someone, and if they don't then they are legaly and clinically insane and should be seen as such. To lump every man into this group is completely irrational. Again, I'm not saying that women shouldn't be wary of strange men; I'm saying that every man should not be treated as though they are.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

tuna said:


> Because physical and sexual violence from men is something that women grow up expecting. We are wary of men because we are taught from childhood that if we do anything wrong -- dress the wrong way, walk down the wrong street, talk to the wrong person, be rude to a man who's interested in us, be nice to a man who's interested in us, don't flirt back, flirt back, be polite to a stranger, be rude to a stranger -- we invite sexual violence.


I know, and that is a huge part of the problem.



> When a man stares at me, I feel uncomfortable because that man is showing interest in me in an inappropriate and unsettling way. Men showing interest in me is unsettling enough as it is, but when a man stares at me for an extended period of time I feel threatened because he is disregarding normal social boundaries (making it more likely that he will disregard my personal boundaries).


In and of itself, this is a good point. I feel uncomfortable by this too.



> As lirulin said, it is significantly safer and more efficient to assume that all men are a potential threat.


It may be, but the number of recorded cases of rape in the US in 2009 were 89,000.
That same year, 135,952 people died because of a stroke. Stroke is easily defined, and there are a lot of measures you can take in order to prevent it. With rape it's a lot more problematic. 250,000 people in the US are injured by lightning each year. What should we do about it? Distrust the weather? My point is, that life is full of risks. The amount of actual rapes per year in the US are definitely higher than 89,000 - but it's not like other statistics. It's entirely dependent on how you approach your sample group, and what questions you ask. You can't just go in there with a scalpel, or smell the ozone, you have to draw the line somewhere. And in the end, you're going to have to live with it. Because it's also significantly safer to wear plate armor that conducts electricity in case of a lightning-strike - but you may have trouble with the checking in at your local airport. In the same vein, some may argue it's safer to wear a niqab or burka (Which I don't believe), but as every reasonable person knows, rape is hardly dependent on what kind of clothes the victim is wearing.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

killerB said:


> It's a slap in the face to men to assume that they are potential rapists.
> 
> It is like assuming that when women dress in sexy clothes, they are trolling for sex.


It's not entirely comparable, because clothes is something you put on every morning. As men, we're stuck with this prejudice for life regardless of choice. I've been thinking about a corollary, but I don't think there is one. Women in general are not seen as potential criminals the same way that men are. I think it comes down to faulty rationale: "More men than women are rapists, therefore we should be fearful of men".


----------



## bengalcat (Dec 8, 2010)

NekoNinja said:


> Well its not really that strange. *Its about men staring at women, which suggests that they are staring due to attraction, likely sexual attraction.* It most certainly didn't belong to the INTJ forum, considering that it had basically nothing to do with personality.
> 
> Many threads that are here are not directly related to "Sex" or "Relationships," but rather they contain somewhat sexually explicit topics, or topics related to gender. Also you must consider that "men staring at women" could be said to be related to both sex and relationships, considering that it could be said to show interest from a male, in respect to one or both of these things.
> 
> This forum is not something solely for things that have specifically to do with sex or relationships, but rather like most other forums on this site, it is more of a catch-all for things related to it (I'm sure that if I went to the INTJ forum I would find plenty of threads that don't have much to do with INTJs specifically.) A better way to describe it would be anything having to do with attraction to another person. It just makes more since to do it like that, as related topics should stick together, and not everything can exactly fit in a certain specific place.


Except that means by putting it in this thread someone has already decided to make the conclusion about what's going on. Some men have said that it's about attraction - some sexual, some aesthetic rather than sexual, some both. And some have said that they may be caught staring for other reasons, that they're deep in thought or someone happens to be in their line of vision at the wrong moment. 

I am saying there is something of a problem by putting anything to do about relations and understanding between men and women under a heading "sex and relationships". It perpetuates the sense that this is all there is to look at when one is discussing issues of gender. Sure, staring may be about attraction some of the time. But there are also times when it's about dominance or one person trying to make another feel uncomfortable, or someone being socially clueless. And no, I don't think that aggression/dominance acted out by a man towards a woman basically comes down to sex or attraction.

I think putting a topic like this in sex and relationships is part of a subtle, taken-for-granted conditioning. We just work it out simplistically - "Oh yeah, guys staring. Guys are visual. Guys are all about sex. Staring, intense and unrelenting, is about attraction and wanting sex, the end." 

I'm assuming the OP didn't put it in the INTJ thread because she assumed it was only INTJs who did this. Perhaps she was looking primarily for responses from INTJ members, because she liked the way they respond? I don't know. 
*
Its about men staring at women, which suggests that they are staring due to attraction, likely sexual attraction.*

So just to have a look at that again, at the italicised part. What is the "which"? The men ~ women ? The men staring? The woman being stared at? Why does "men staring at women" automatically mean they are staring due to attraction? Another reason I can think of as to why people staring intensely at someone is when they're trying to figure out something about them or when they're judging them for something. But all that flies out the window if the starer is a guy and the staree a girl right. Whoop! He wants her. He always wants her.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

Grim said:


> People are missing the point. It was never that "catcalls and staring" = potential rapist.
> 
> It was if women do x, wear y, or hang out in z they; deserve, or should expect, and should not complain if they are treated in a certain fashion.
> 
> ...


It would be foolish not to expect it, but that doesn't mean that they deserve it or shouldn't complain.



> Somewhere some statistics were brought up... male sex offenders are about 1-2% of the population. I saw 6 victims cited. This is much too low. The typical sex offender goes through a bit over 100 victims before they are caught/stopped.


There are around 400,000 registered sex offenders in the US. Even if we concede that everyone of them are male, then it still only makes for 0,27% of the male population. As for the typical sex offender to have 100 victims before they are caught, that would mean that the registered sexual offenders have molested 40 million people in the US before they were put behind bars. That's 13% of the population having been molested by a registered sex offender, regardless of gender. I have an extremely hard time believing your statistics.


----------



## Sali (Feb 9, 2011)

dalsgaard said:


> There are around 400,000 registered sex offenders in the US. Even if we concede that everyone of them are male, then it still only makes for 0,27% of the male population. As for the typical sex offender to have 100 victims before they are caught, that would mean that the registered sexual offenders have molested 40 million people in the US before they were put behind bars. That's 13% of the population having been molested by a registered sex offender, regardless of gender. I have an extremely hard time believing your statistics.


Actually I would imagine those statistics are probably close to correct for "Violent sex offenders" as most general "sex offenders" are things like statutory rape. Or someone doing horrible things to a family member. Not good but certainly those going around raping strangers are in the strong minority even among sex offenders.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

Sali said:


> Actually I would imagine those statistics are probably close to correct for "Violent sex offenders" as most general "sex offenders" are things like statutory rape. Or someone doing horrible things to a family member. Not good but certainly those going around raping strangers are in the strong minority even among sex offenders.


Maybe, I'm not in the mood for looking up the numbers at the moment. But if this is true, it would mean that more than 1 in 8 people have been sexually exploited. That is an enormous amount by any standards.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

dalsgaard said:


> Maybe, I'm not in the mood for looking up the numbers at the moment. But if this is true, it would mean that more than 1 in 8 people have been sexually exploited. That is an enormous amount by any standards.


That sounds close enough to IRL related stories from women I have met. It may even be a little higher. It's sad.

Back to what was mentioned earlier: 


The mentality is still out there enough to ask the question about whether, generally speaking, a mainstream thinking is the old double dipping idea (double standard) of the first instance of it being the women's attire (or fault somehow) that garners the negative attention...that it's simply natural for men to behave in a sexually predatory fashion. It's problematic for people say that a person is free then treat them as if they aren't and that is the very same problem that is faced here with the amount of people who reinforce the idea as if it were a logical idea.

In Australia there is talk of the "rape culture" among the heavily protected sports stars, in particular the AFL (Australian Football League) and the different codes of rugby, Even cricketers have been named for their "love rat" incidents. Incidents have involve the consensual sex with one player and several others will join in against the woman's will. It's a shitty act to pull then to use the first consensual act against them as if to say they were already a slut with one, why not take many. Other acts have involved a typical date rape scenario. One footballer justifies it as consensual sex as "she wasn't there for Milo (beverages) at 3 am in the morning". Women are bought out, threatened and shamed into keeping their silence about what happens. If these people are being look up to by kids who want to emulate stars who will jeer, leer and generally treat women as if they are no more than semen vessels and party fodder then it's really no wonder that this pack mentality still prevails it feeds of itself every time someone gets away with it, and goes largely ignored for the other "services" these stars perform. It's all just icky and muddy.


----------



## catnap222 (Jul 9, 2011)

In some cultures staring and smiling is considered to be aggressive and threatening, like you're bearing your teeth and getting ready to attack like a lion. Just remember that. You can stare briefly or smile and look away, but not both. I'm just sayin'...


----------



## eQGatsby (Jun 17, 2011)

i2ush said:


> (I'm probably a bit hard on women for this.)


 Yeah you are.
What uuuuuuuuup?


Before we begin, I must issue a warning. I am not saying that by dressing a certain way, women are asking for stares, I am saying that by dressing a certain way, they should expect it whether they like it or not. 

Anyway, with the logic of most people here, women should be able to walk around naked without eliciting the fabled Batman Sound Effect Datass Salute which is absolutely not going to happen. If you want to avoid stares, wear less provocative clothing, end of story, and don't dare come back with some quip about it being the man's problem. It isn't. End of story. With everyone and everything else in the world, you have to take the good and bad into account. Let's say, 'side effects'. Why the hell should you be excluded from the universal law of taking the good and bad into account? Because you're part of the 51% of the world with genitalia that don't dangle? That's a pretty harsh double standard for the danglers right there. I personally don't appreciate it. 



daydr3am said:


> Maybe women like to wear nice clothes so they FEEL good when they wear it, not to attract stares from men.


Well, heroin addicts take heroin because it makes them FEEL good when they take heroin, _but the side effects are addiction, itching, slurred speech, vomiting_... and so on.
So women wear provocative clothing because it makes them *FEEL* good, but they also get the appreciation and stares of men. 

Deal with it or don't 'take the drug', so to speak. It is your choice, not ours. Nobody has to accommodate you, this is simply not how the world works. It is not how it ever worked. You are not that entitled, or entitled at all. 



daydr3am said:


> Yes, it is totally the woman's fault for wearing clothes she feels comfortable in and being rudely stared at for it.


Damn straight it is. 






Finally, I'm sure many men will agree, if you dress anything remotely like this, I'm going to stare all. I. Want:












Harley said:


> Because they are so unused to being confronted like that, they usually get angry at me and swear back at me


More power to you, but honestly, rather than swear back at you, I'd just get a little closer and stare straight down at your chest. It's more powerful than 'fuck you' and more ballsy than backing down. You can even ruin my best suits with your drink if you like but dammit I'll fight for my right to look.



bethdeth said:


> [ . . . ]sexual harassment[ . . .]


I DARE YOU to call the police on the next person who stares at you in a bar. I bet the receptionist hangs up on you.



bethdeth said:


> The cold hard reality is that a woman can dress however she wants and expect not to be ogled at.....because it's rude.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA NO. In some backwards 'perfect' world, yes, but here... HA! Nope! Dress in short shorts and a low V-neck and get those stares.

*


Bethdeth said:



a woman not being able to wear what she wants equals a woman's body not being her own

Click to expand...

*


Bethdeth said:


> .


I'm not allowed to wear a white coat inside a hospital. I can't wear suits every day. I went to a school with uniforms once. 
Do these three reasons mean that my body isn't mine?
Pleeeeeeease. 
------------------------------
This thread is a hilarious thrill ride for me... Oh God, as if one single _stare_ is bad. Do you people think that men are Medusa or something? All they're doing is looking, Jesus. Pipe down and thank whatever deity you pray to that a slap on the ass means "Sue me" now instead of "Good job".


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

eQGatsby said:


> I DARE YOU to call the police on the next person who stares at you in a bar. I bet the receptionist hangs up on you.



Interesting that from a post about rape and failed logic you quoted this:
[ . . . ]sexual harassment[ . . .]

Nice attempt at a flame but seriously....that's all you have?


----------



## eQGatsby (Jun 17, 2011)

I don't know if it's the best I had. Somehow, while being shorter than my post, your post was even tl;dr-ier than mine.


----------



## 480 (Jan 22, 2009)

dalsgaard said:


> It would be foolish not to expect it, but that doesn't mean that they deserve it or shouldn't complain.
> 
> 
> There are around 400,000 registered sex offenders in the US. Even if we concede that everyone of them are male, then it still only makes for 0,27% of the male population. As for the typical sex offender to have 100 victims before they are caught, that would mean that the registered sexual offenders have molested 40 million people in the US before they were put behind bars. That's 13% of the population having been molested by a registered sex offender, regardless of gender. I have an extremely hard time believing your statistics.


I think any reasonable person knows that some men are going to behave a certain way, and would not be surprised by it. The central issue here is when the mindset crosses a line and steps into: "the victim is to blame". In some of the posts in this thread that line was crossed. That is rape mentality. 

As for my statistics there is nothing wrong with them, and I stand by their validity. There may be 400,000 registered sex offenders. But this overlooks one very important demographic:

The ones that haven't been caught.

The percentage of people who have been victims of sexual assault is quite a bit more than 13%

It's 1 in 4 women (25%) and an estimated 1 in 5 men (20%). Demographics on men are harder to obtain because as unlikely as it is for a woman to step forward and admit to being sexually assaulted, men are even less likely.

This is eyeopening:

The Movie That's Changing Lives

This woman was molested as a child by her own parents and brother. Her name is Angela Shelton. One day she jumps into an RV with a friend and a camera and sets off to find the other Angela Sheltons in America. She films the experience and records phone calls, and makes a documentary out of it. Before it's over, she finds that out of the 40 Angela Sheltons she made contact with that agreed to be filmed, or even recorded that 28 out of 40 of them are survivors of rape, childhood sexual abuse and/or domestic violence.

I have an extremely hard time believing 13%, too.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

Grim said:


> As for my statistics there is nothing wrong with them, and I stand by their validity. There may be 400,000 registered sex offenders. But this overlooks one very important demographic:
> 
> The ones that haven't been caught.


Yes, but that's not what you said in your post. You mentioned the sex offenders activity before they got stopped/arrested.



> The percentage of people who have been victims of sexual assault is quite a bit more than 13%
> 
> It's 1 in 4 women (25%) and an estimated 1 in 5 men (20%). Demographics on men are harder to obtain because as unlikely as it is for a woman to step forward and admit to being sexually assaulted, men are even less likely.


There is little reason to believe the validity of this 1 in 4 statistic:
Researching the "Rape Culture" of America



> This is eyeopening:
> 
> The Movie That's Changing Lives
> 
> ...


I may have to watch that documentary at some point, but again, I find it very hard to believe that this is in any way indicative of what goes on out there. Besides, from the description, this seems to include people who experienced violence as children, which, of course, would make the statistics go way up because back in the day, slapping your kid was a more accepted norm among parental figures. In any case, this is a sample size of 40 people with, i assume, very little control and objectivity. I don't doubt that the documentary is inspirational, but I'm also a hundred percent sure it doesn't adequately represent society.


----------



## 480 (Jan 22, 2009)

dalsgaard said:


> Yes, but that's not what you said in your post. You mentioned the sex offenders activity before they got stopped/arrested.
> 
> 
> There is little reason to believe the validity of this 1 in 4 statistic:
> ...



Looking at your link this is what stood out to me:

The Bureau of Justice Statistics estimates that 130,000 women were victims of rape in 1990.[2] A Harris poll sets the figure at 380,000 rapes or sexual assaults for 1993.[3] According to a study by the National Victims Center, there were 683,000 completed forcible rapes in 1990.

The figures are off a mere half a million between estimates and studies. Go figure that a government bureau is behind the power curve.

The national victims center says 683,000 "completed forcible rapes". How many attempts? How many didn't get reported?

Those are still sexual assault.

You can be as certain as you like, and find whatever you wish hard to believe. My mind isn't going to change and I'm not at all interested in changing yours. 

I still stand by my figures.


----------



## 480 (Jan 22, 2009)

Debating the decimal point of statistics isn't the issue here.

Victim blaming is wrong. Period.


----------



## Angel (Jun 18, 2011)

I don't care if guys stare at me - hey, I stare at guys and girl alike - but I wish they'd just be more subtle about it.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

Grim said:


> You can be as certain as you like, and find whatever you wish hard to believe. My mind isn't going to change and I'm not at all interested in changing yours.


So, you mention statistics and enter a debate forum in order not to change anyones opinion, or be enlightened yourself? Oh, ok. Thank you for letting me know that I'm wasting my time.



> I still stand by my figures.


 Yes, it's pretty easy to stay convinced of faulty ideas when you ignore counter-arguments.


----------



## 480 (Jan 22, 2009)

dalsgaard said:


> So, you mention statistics and enter a debate forum in order not to change anyones opinion, or be enlightened yourself? Oh, ok. Thank you for letting me know that I'm wasting my time.
> 
> 
> Yes, it's pretty easy to stay convinced of faulty ideas when you ignore counter-arguments.


I didnt ignore them. I pointed out a huge flaw in your argument. I said YOU are not going to change my mind and I'm not interested in changing YOURS.

Yes you are wasting your time... but your reasoning is overreactive.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

Grim said:


> I didnt ignore them. I pointed out a huge flaw in your argument. I said YOU are not going to change my mind and I'm not interested in changing YOURS.


Did you even read past the second paragraph? That whole article is _about_ the estimations.

Meh...


----------



## 480 (Jan 22, 2009)

dalsgaard said:


> Meh... You're a waste of time.


Now you're just trying to provoke me. That doesn't belong here.


----------



## dalsgaard (Aug 14, 2010)

dalsgaard said:


> Thank you for letting me know that I'm wasting my time.





Grim said:


> Yes you are wasting your time...





dalsgaard said:


> Meh... You're a waste of time.





Grim said:


> Now you're just trying to provoke me.


How about: We're both wasting our time?


----------



## 480 (Jan 22, 2009)

dalsgaard said:


> How about: We're both wasting our time?


I sent you a PM. It's not that I find your effort without merit. I just think it belongs in a thread all its own. This thread is pretty horribly derailed as it is, and it's obviously a hot issue for many people. I'll claim a massive amount of the credit (read blame) for the derailment. I'm just trying to mitigate the damages.

If you make a new thread and want to continue on with this I'll happily debate it with you. Just not here, please.


----------



## Harley (Jul 5, 2009)

eQGatsby said:


> More power to you, but honestly, rather than swear back at you, I'd just get a little closer and stare straight down at your chest. It's more powerful than 'fuck you' and more ballsy than backing down. You can even ruin my best suits with your drink if you like but dammit I'll fight for my right to look.


And I'm not afraid to get physical :wink:. Trust me when I say I know how to fight.


----------



## daydr3am (Oct 20, 2010)

eQGatsby said:


> Yeah you are.
> What uuuuuuuuup?
> 
> 
> ...


*

Thanks for cutting out my posts where I say that women NOT dressed like hookers still get stared at, RUDELY. The fact that you're being defensive about your right to openly stare at women's bodies makes me wonder if you're trying to tell everyone that you're one of those creeps who don't know when to stop looking (or don't care to stop)? Women don't need to have their boobs or butts hanging out of their clothing in order to be harassed in any shape or form. I agree that women who DO have boobs and butts hanging out tend to draw attention to those body parts (I look too, though I DON'T stare) but I think every female who has posted in this thread gets stared at without dressing like that. Regardless of how a person it dressed, no one should be treated any differently than the average person. They do not need to conform to YOUR ideals on how a person should be dressed, or be harassed or assaulted because they look a certain way.

And your argument about drugs... Drugs and clothing are two completely different subjects.. Clothing doesn't have side effects. Men who stare either don't know better or don't care about being disrespectful.*


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

eQGatsby said:


> Yeah you are.
> What uuuuuuuuup?
> 
> 
> ...


Whoa Whoa Whoa, hit the breaks on that one. I thought you were this rather devout holy person with your Islam post. Doesn't the Qu'ran forbid looking after lustful objects of desire, kind of like the Bible, or is this just another well I'm saved I can do whatever the hell I want story? How do you know all this? I'm also a tv junkie. I've seen Batman and Superfriends a million times over, I don't recall Robin or Batman checking out women, last I heard they were gay, though there should be an argument for Batman and Catwoman, two people,-lovers, just on the opposite sides of the law.



eQGatsby said:


> If you want to avoid stares, wear less provocative clothing, end of story, and don't dare come back with some quip about it being the man's problem. It isn't. End of story. With everyone and everything else in the world, you have to take the good and bad into account. Let's say, 'side effects'. Why the hell should you be excluded from the universal law of taking the good and bad into account? Because you're part of the 51% of the world with genitalia that don't dangle? That's a pretty harsh double standard for the danglers right there. I personally don't appreciate it.


Typical response from a holy man that can do anything they want against women in Arab countries. Each person has will what we do with it up to each one of us. Also There are two sexes men and women. so that would 50% 50% 100% and therefore women would be 50% that have genitalia that don't dangle. Again. I think the double standard applies more to women's breasts. Guys it's sort of part of the package as is women's genitalia. The Clothing industry make clothes that cover up the vagina . The Clothing industry makes clothes that cover up the penis. We call it a zipper. I don't see double standard. 




eQGatsby said:


> Well, heroin addicts take heroin because it makes them FEEL good when they take heroin, _but the side effects are addiction, itching, slurred speech, vomiting_... and so on.


I drink diet coke because it makes me feel good because I get my addiction. People who use Heroin also need their heroin, because it's made, as are cigarettes or anything of that nature, with an addictive chemical. All that nasty stuff like the vomiting are the side affects-for heroin.



eQGatsby said:


> So women wear provocative clothing because it makes them *FEEL* good, but they also get the appreciation and stares of men.
> 
> Deal with it or don't 'take the drug', so to speak. It is your choice, not ours. Nobody has to accommodate you, this is simply not how the world works. It is not how it ever worked. You are not that entitled, or entitled at all.


Again, we all have free will, and we're all sexual animals. When I was at Home Depot, friends of mine told me that women have looked me over once or twice. 







eQGatsby said:


> More power to you, but honestly, rather than swear back at you, I'd just get a little closer and stare straight down at your chest. It's more powerful than 'fuck you' and more ballsy than backing down. You can even ruin my best suits with your drink if you like but dammit I'll fight for my right to look.


That's just down right creepy. I accept men need to look at the chest because it's right in front of it, but now you just come across like John Edwards with that statement, or any cad for that matter.



eQGatsby said:


> I DARE YOU to call the police on the next person who stares at you in a bar. I bet the receptionist hangs up on you.


You want to put some money on it and make it interesting?



eQGatsby said:


> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA NO. In some backwards 'perfect' world, yes, but here... HA! Nope! Dress in short shorts and a low V-neck and get those stares.
> 
> *
> I'm not allowed to wear a white coat inside a hospital. I can't wear suits every day. I went to a school with uniforms once.
> ...


*


I bet you're the guy who gives all the women "tablets of love", "slap on that ass", I think the person who started this thread-a female, I can see her point, women are scared to do what men take for granted, be able to walk freely without anyone jumping them, cause honestly you don't take people's rights that seriously. They're afraid of people like you. Do you really believe, honestly that the world isn't, or could be made up of atoms, strings, oxygen, photosynthesis, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, sulfur, or do you honestly believe a hermit created this world in seven days? I've never read the Qu'ran, by I have read Genesis, and Eve a woman, became the embodiment of evil when the serpent tempted her with giving Adam an apple, thus giving them the power to be on an even playing field with God and God was angry with this, even though he made them in his image-a contradiction right there about his anger? Other guys I just see it as typical horny pattern, that they go through and women have to deal with it, because at the end of the day they're curious too, but anyone with a religious background,and I'm not saying everyone is like this, runs the risk of it being more than that. And you posted your beliefs of Islamic tenets on the Post "Your potentially unpopular opinions thread," and I backed you up. But that may also be your Achilles Heel too, cause you don't seem to have a clue about addictions, and you're buying into the tenet about God created both men and women equal, but gave them specific gender roles. Roles like oh what, women having no rights and men can go hog wild over them? That's not how it works. I learned this the hard way. Why don't you stop issuing a warning and take a leap of faith that people will understand where you're coming from even if they disagree with you?*


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

*killerB*



> It's a slap in the face to men to assume that they are potential rapists.


I didn't say the thought process was morally right or wrong, I'm just saying that it's how people think. This isn't just confined to women. Most people don't like being stared at too much...


----------



## eQGatsby (Jun 17, 2011)

Harley said:


> And I'm not afraid to get physical.


>Women winning in a fight. 
Pffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft. With Mace?



daydr3am said:


> Er... whatever she said. tl;dr


Why so internet hurt?











Brian1 said:


> Whoa Whoa Whoa, hit the breaks on that one. I thought you were this rather devout holy person with your Islam post.


YOU SIR are well on your way to becoming a God-tier troll, and I nearly fell for it except for



eQGatsby said:


> As an atheist I'm inclined to agree with you, but...


Check the 'Ask Me About Islam' thread.

Also, I didn't endorse or state belief in Islam. I told religious people to leave each other alone because nobody cares.

And I'm flat out too lazy to quote you on the other fuck up, but in 2007 there were 97 males to every 100 females on the planet, bringing it to somewhere around 49% and 51%. My percentage stands.


----------



## Harley (Jul 5, 2009)

eQGatsby said:


> >Women winning in a fight.
> Pffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft. With Mace?


I find it quite hilarious that you have no qualms about rudely staring at women when you yourself started this thread: http://personalitycafe.com/intj-for...ople-look-over-your-shoulder.html#post1521289 and made this post,



> It sends me into a rage pretty much no matter what I'm doing. I hate being in the same room with people, with them doing nothing, just standing there, watching me. I wouldn't mind if we had ANY interaction going on, but please.. Don't just stand there and watch me like some animal.
> I've offended plenty of people including my parents just to get them to go away.
> You guys?


So let me get this straight. You hate it when people stare at you making you feel uncomfortable, invading your personal space and making you feel like an animal yet you have no qualms about doing the same to other people? Respect is a two-way street buddy, you've got to give some to get some. The finesse of of your cognitive dissonance amuses me.


----------



## eQGatsby (Jun 17, 2011)

Why are you so internet hurt? 

Perhaps I didn't specify that I meant situations among roommates, with two people? Even if specification weren't the case, if I can make the choice to leave wherever I am, why can't you?

Also, I'M NOT YOUR BUDDY, FRIEND.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

Lots of troll food in this thread. Stop feeding em. : P


----------



## NekoNinja (Apr 18, 2010)

bengalcat said:


> Except that means by putting it in this thread someone has already decided to make the conclusion about what's going on. Some men have said that it's about attraction - some sexual, some aesthetic rather than sexual, some both. And some have said that they may be caught staring for other reasons, that they're deep in thought or someone happens to be in their line of vision at the wrong moment.
> 
> I am saying there is something of a problem by putting anything to do about relations and understanding between men and women under a heading "sex and relationships". It perpetuates the sense that this is all there is to look at when one is discussing issues of gender. Sure, staring may be about attraction some of the time. But there are also times when it's about dominance or one person trying to make another feel uncomfortable, or someone being socially clueless. And no, I don't think that aggression/dominance acted out by a man towards a woman basically comes down to sex or attraction.
> 
> ...


Firstly I just wanted to emphasize this -



NekoNinja said:


> *This forum is not something solely for things that have specifically to do with sex or relationships*, but rather like most other forums on this site, it is more of a catch-all for things related to it..... It just makes more since to do it like that, as related topics should stick together, and not everything can exactly fit in a certain specific place.


The topic was _men_ staring at _women_. It was not about men staring at people in general. So while not all men are going to be staring at a woman due to sexual attraction, when a man is specifically staring at a woman, and not who happens to be in front of him, then it may likely be due to sexual attraction (as people have confessed to.) Thus if the topic is talking about men staring at women specifically, you can assume that what is being referred to is sexual attraction, or attraction of some sort. If that was not the case, then more than likely the title would have been about men staring at people in general.

[/thread derail]


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

@eQGatsby. First impressions make a difference. You had posts very backward ideas about the world,clearly from an Islamic view, just because God says it's so. And you created a backlash on the "Post Your Potentially Unpopular Opinions" in the "Critical Thinking & Philosophy" section. Now you're saying you're an atheist? I don't buy that. I am an atheist. atheists don't believe there's an supernatural God playing puppet master. Atheists are likely to be influenced by social movements like the Civil Rights Movement,Anti-Apartheid, Indian Independence, and in this case, feminism of the late Women's Rights Movement of the 1970s, since we're on a sex and relationships thread. I'm be more than happy to go back check the notes, but you don't seem to be able to take responsibility here, or in other posts, because you're evading your own post and quoting another. Then the question comes down to are you just try to stir up a hornet's nest if you're an atheist, with a post from an Islamic view?


----------



## eQGatsby (Jun 17, 2011)

Brian1 said:


> @_eQGatsby_ . First impressions make a difference. You had posts very backward ideas about the world,clearly from an Islamic view, just because God says it's so. And you created a backlash on the "Post Your Potentially Unpopular Opinions" in the "Critical Thinking & Philosophy" section. Now you're saying you're an atheist? I don't buy that. I am an atheist. atheists don't believe there's an supernatural God playing puppet master. Atheists are likely to be influenced by social movements like the Civil Rights Movement,Anti-Apartheid, Indian Independence, and in this case, feminism of the late Women's Rights Movement of the 1970s, since we're on a sex and relationships thread. I'm be more than happy to go back check the notes, but you don't seem to be able to take responsibility here, or in other posts, because you're evading your own post and quoting another. Then the question comes down to are you just try to stir up a hornet's nest if you're an atheist, with a post from an Islamic view?


I take it back, you are good at trolling, but try harder in the future. Run along now.


----------



## PseudoSenator (Mar 7, 2010)

Men stare. Women stare. People stare. I stare! You stare! Staring is an epidemic! 

Dress how you want. Don't let anyone do anything like cat-calling (overboard) which makes you uncomfortable.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

eQGatsby Don't call me a troll. I'll admit I haven't had the experience in relationships as most other people have in this forum but I'm here to learn, and sometimes learning means getting out of your comfort zone and falling on your face in new arenas, but picking yourself up afterwards and staying awhile in that new arena, that's what I'm doing.

In Internet slang, a *troll* is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4] The noun _troll_ may refer to the provocative message itself, as in: "That was an excellent troll you posted". While the word _troll_ and its associated verb *trolling* are associated with Internet discourse, media attention in recent years has made such labels subjective, with trolling describing intentionally provocative actions outside of an online context. For example, mass media uses _troll_ to describe "a person who defaces Internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families."[5][6]

Troll (Internet) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Also why do you call me a troll when you picture is the same as the wikipedia article?

File:Trollface.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I'd think about that one for awhile.


----------



## eQGatsby (Jun 17, 2011)

Brian1 said:


> eQGatsby Don't call me a troll. I'll admit I haven't had the experience in relationships as most other people have in this forum but I'm here to learn, and sometimes learning means getting out of your comfort zone and falling on your face in new arenas, but picking yourself up afterwards and staying awhile in that new arena, that's what I'm doing.
> 
> In Internet slang, a *troll* is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4] The noun _troll_ may refer to the provocative message itself, as in: "That was an excellent troll you posted". While the word _troll_ and its associated verb *trolling* are associated with Internet discourse, media attention in recent years has made such labels subjective, with trolling describing intentionally provocative actions outside of an online context. For example, mass media uses _troll_ to describe "a person who defaces Internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families."[5][6]
> 
> ...


Yes. Ten characters.


----------



## Vaan (Dec 19, 2010)

Pam said:


> I know you are visual creatures, but what is with the open, creepy staring all the time? Speaking from personal experience, strangers are always STARING at me, no matter what expression I am wearing. Be it this:angry: or this :bored:. I am an INTJ who does not pick up on social cues often, so I am not being uber-self-conscious here. This is not a vanity question, just want to understand this particular male behavior. Every woman has faced this, I am sure.
> 
> Men, please explain, why do you stare at every woman on the street? Even when you are taken. Why do you cat-call? Do you think a woman will fall all over you if you jeer at her? What would happen if a woman confronted you? Please tell me you don't actually think women like it.
> 
> Must add, I like respectful men, so this is not a man-hating post.


The only stare a female would get from me would be my INFJ analytical/studying look rather than an average "Damn i want a piece of that ass" kind of look -_-. staring at people and doing the whole turn around look think as they walk past is irritatingly shallow and pointless. ^^


----------



## Jwing24 (Aug 2, 2010)

Why do women stare at me all the time? How rude!

Is it my dashing good looks?

Is it my charming smile?

My cute haircut? 

My bulging muscles?

Ah one will never know these things right?.....Must be my scantily clad outfit...



Lol.
Staring has been around as long as people have been around, I bet you on that. Unless people didn't have eyes back in the day, maybe we read each others' thoughts instead.


----------



## Jwing24 (Aug 2, 2010)

People stare at people. The creepy ones are the ones with the sunglasses, should watch out for those guys or gals! Never know what they're looking at!! Ha.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

eQGatsby said:


> I take it back, you are good at *trolling*, but try harder in the future. Run along now.


Pot; kettle.


----------

