Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>You boys need a lesson in basic empathy.

Don't talk down to me.

>Now, don't skip that scenario: I want you to stop and think about it in detail. How would it make you feel? Do you feel turned on? Do you feel violated?

I take control of the situation by removing myself from the situation or making a scene. And I get over it.

Look, I'm queer and I'm actually pretty sympathetic to the anti-seddit et al crowd.

But the notion that I'm supposed to care about every person's feelings around me is nonsensical. It's exactly the kind of sentiment that you're violating by lecturing your audience. You're _deliberately_ provoking an uncomfortable reaction and prioritizing your own emotions above those of others.

And I'm going to tell you to shove off, and get over it.

This isn't about rape, the violent action and definable crime. It's about communication in a social space. And you can't communicate if you can't aggress, as you have _just demonstrated_.



There is obviously a world of difference between verbal aggressing and physical aggressing. Verbally, different situations call for different things: when people need to know that what they're arguing for is unacceptable in a very bad way, you speak to them with contempt. The hardcore PUA crowd will shake it off, but people at its periphery better understand that it's a bad thing. But physically, aggressing against someone's physical boundaries is wrong, and it's always wrong.

Nearly that exact scenario has happened to me. Multiple times: in bars, people hounding me playing a non-consensual game of grabass. In a crowded bus, a guy continually rubbed his hand against my hand despite my trying to move away and escape him.

That's bad, and you're a bad person if you think it's acceptable. Comparing "being mean to people online" to sexual assault is ridiculous and offensive.


>There is obviously a world of difference between verbal aggressing and physical aggressing.

That's cute, honey. Why don't you leave the real talk to us men?

I hope you see my point, but to make it more clear: boundaries are boundaries, and disrespect is disrespect.

You are making an argument about magnitude, and I am making an argument about conflict.

Now I'm going to break a rule about respecting victims, and I hope you respect that it's for the purposes of argument:

>In a crowded bus, a guy continually rubbed his hand against my hand despite my trying to move away and escape him.

So shout at him. Lay into him like you're laying into me ("you're a bad person if you think it's acceptable"--as if I even said such a thing!) and make it devastatingly clear that you won't stand for it.

You don't owe anything to the status quo, the peace of mind of other people on the bus, the rules of decorum, _anything._

It's not a solution because it's unrealistic due to inherited gender roles blah blah (and don't lay into me about _that_, Ms. "you boys"), but I really wish more women were just _loud_ about things like this.

I _like_ loud women.


Borderline victim blaming. It is the aggressor's fault that they rubbed up against your hand. That you didn't stand up to them by being loud or whatever doesn't come into it. If you did and scared them off, so much the better – but it shouldn't have happened in the first place and that's what we should focus on, not giving excuses ("they should have said no!") to the perpetrators.

Just because you like loud women doesn't mean they should be so. Quiet women exist and are totally cool. They shouldn't be assaulted either.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: