Hey Feministing! I am a college student in NYC, and I am subjected to street harassment every single day. I am sure many of you (and not just women can be affected by this) are familiar with how enraging and degrading this feels. If I am on a safe street (where it is busy and not dark and lots of people), I call them out or flick them off. They get flustered and don't know what to say (because they don't expect a woman to speak up or defend herself, I suppose). My thinking is if they can call me out, I can call them on their bullshit. However, I NEVER do it when I don't feel safe and I watch what I say (because there are some crazy people in this world).
Anyway, Jessica mentioned this website in her books, and it is truly awesome: http://hollabacknyc.blogspot.com/
It's a place where women can take pictures of the street harassers and share the stories.
Now, the reason I am writing this post...
I want to write and editorial piece for my university newspaper on street harassers. I feel that many people who are harassed on the street don't do anything because they think "there's nothing they can do" or that "men can get away with those comments." That's the kind of mindset that this rape culture wants people, especially women, to have and it needs to stop.
I want to write an informative piece about how young women should handle these situations and the facts they should know, like the laws (or perhaps the lack there of) that pertain to this situation.
If you have any resources or ideas I could use, that would be much appreciated, too. =]
After I write the article I will probably post it as well.
Thanks everyone!
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Street Harassment!.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/10449
I conducted a social experiment last year to see how men would react to different styles of clothing and hair on the same person.
I got the most cat-calls with bouncy, flowing brunette curls, wearing a little bit of makeup, a white dress and ballet slippers.
As my clothing style shifted from the uber-little-girl in 'feminine' dress end of the spectrum to the almost but not quite passing as male end of the spectrum, it was interesting to see how peoples' perceptions of me changed. I never actually wore mens' clothing - only womens' clothing that fit me.
I'm most comfortable dressing in a way that
1) involves not having to spend more than 2 minutes getting ready in the morning
2) has the most pockets
3) was at the end of the day the most comfortable and climate appropriate.
Incidentally, this is also the style that receives little to no harassment on the street. Even though I'm not trying to pass, I occasionally get mistaken for a young man)
I am not suggesting that anyone here change how they dress as a permanent function unless they want to.
However, when I dress to please myself, I get no remarks from others.
Mind, it doesn't please me to get cat calls. It pleases me to have people remember what I said, and not what I wore.
HOWEVER:::: Please do not say that I am blaming the victim.
It is COMPLETELY and TOTALLY unacceptable that men on the street do not know how to control themselves. It is NEVER appropriate, in any setting (imo) for a man or woman to give unsolicited sexual advancement, verbal or physical, to someone of any gender. It's creepy, it's gross.
Not in the classroom, not on the street.
The question I want to ask is, though,
Does dressing in a way that primarily looks 'attractive' support the idea that women exist for others' pleasure?
I had a conversation with a muslim friend of mine, who wears a hijab. She and her mother consider wearing the hijab a feminist act. Much in the same way that I consider dressing to please only myself a feminist act. We both want to achieve the same goal - to be taken seriously by men, and to not be looked at sexually without having specifically asked for it.
Oh, and I don't need specific clothing in order to feel sexual. Sitting through class with a ragingly hard clit is enough to remind me that I'm a sexual being.
I don't know what you can do about verbal harassment, but if someone touches you I recommend bending the pinkie back till it snaps. Anyone can do it and it works.
I'm in the midst of research for a book on street harassment. I also have a website with resources based on the master's thesis I wrote on street harassment in 2007. http://www.stopstreetharassment.com Be sure to check out the strategies, tactics, and resources pages. I have contact info on the site if you want more info or want to know more about my research (i've surveyed over 1000 people about their experiences with and thoughts about street harassment).
Some legal info: http://pages.nyu.edu/~stc215/BowmanHLR.pdf
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-41507647676601465
Good luck - I think talking about street harassment is one of the best ways to eventually end it - raise people's awareness of the problem.
Hi, I'm new here, and am actually male. I registered to give a slightly contrasting view, although I do consider myself a feminist. Excuse the rambling.
Anyways, so far, there's several responses of things along the line of fuck off or violence in the case of touching (I'm imagining an overly friendly back rub type touching, I'd agree with the violence if someone went straight for naughty bits), but I get the feeling that if a guy did that to me, I'd be a homophobe, or at least gay-hostile if I told a guy to fuck off based on unsolicited sexual advancement.
I mean, yes, there are lines that can't be crossed, like unsolicited sexual touching, but someone has to make an unsolicited advance. Otherwise, no one is getting anywhere.
I suppose I'm not defending the worst of it, but do you feel that NO unsolicited comments are acceptable?
Are all of these bad? (we guys haven't exactly been given a clear roadmap by the feminist movement):
Hi, you look great.
Hey cutie!
Hey sexy!
*whistle*
and I think that's about the line of "Worth considering." I'm skipping stuff like "I'd like to take you home with me" and anything more offensive.
Oh, look, a actual male! Us girls better sit up and listen to his unique perspective, since they're so Rare around here. Pfft.
Yes, all of those comments would unacceptable. Just because a woman is out in public doesn't mean you get to comment on her body. She is not a piece of art on display that you get to critique. It doesn't matter if it's supposed to be a "compliment."
Hi! Maybe I was unintentionally rude, because that was a really shitty response. I didn't say you should pay attention because I'm male, (it is relevant to my questions, so I posted it) or rare (the name was intended as a bit of humor. You don't think it was funny, I got it.)
However, I'm going to defend my comment anyways. If I am walking down the street, and I decide to talk to a specific woman, I'll be honest, it was based off her looks. I'm not going to act like she's too stupid to know that, and that I could sense her beautiful personality. That might be why the conversation continues, but it's not why it started. I try to express it with tact, but there's only so much I can do.
Anyways, I asked about those as a legitimate question. Are we not allowed to do that, now? No offense was meant, I promise you that.
But since I set the bar WAY too high, apparently, I'll go ahead and try less offensive openers (sorry, "Hi." is boring, and will get me nowhere. I gotta open with something, if I'd like more than a hello in response.):
You have spectacular eyes.
I like your hair.
That's a nice shirt.
I don't THINK these are offensive, but if so, why? Again, asking honest questions here, not looking for hostility or a fight.
Why is it that when women want space to talk about harassment, it has to turn into pickup 101 lesson?
OK. I'll humor you. It may come as as surprise, but you actually don't need to say anything about someone's appearance to express interest in her. Really. Your so-called boring "Hi" is as good as anything to make a connection. If beyond that the woman doesn't reciprocate interest, you risk becoming an annoyance.
Contrary to what people say, most women are not sending mixed signals, either. Girls with the privilege of growing up in relatively safe and neutral environments are generally taught to be polite and friendly in social spaces, and it's actually difficult to unlearn that. Many women struggle to find a balance between not being rude but getting her point across when she's not interested.
Please also note that many women have learned by experience that even the smallest gestures of friendliness to random strangers often results in either an unwanted invitation or escalation of a bad situation.
And if by chance you happen to offend any person (man or woman) why not apologize and simply move on?
Lastly for the record, I have been the initiator in expressing interest toward men, and have met responses ranging from getting "the finger", to him being flattered. I would never think to solicit the opinion about men as a whole, on something that is so varied from individual to individual. Think about that.
Love the post spikecat (1+). The reason that most sexual harassment discussions turn into a "pickup lesson" is for a simple reason.
Education has been successful. More and more men are trying to find out what is "appropriate". They should be applauded for trying to get educated.
We can't just organize campaigns telling men what they "can't" do. If you tell men what they can't do, you by default draw the instant question "ok then, what can I do?"
They don't say "Don't sexually objectify women, or keep talking to women who've expressed clear disinterest"...
They say "Don't you know a woman in public is not your property! - End to harrasment" -> Which just leaves good men confused. Macho men ignore the campaign. Good men, who never even did harass in the first place are left confused (what does that mean!?). Because the campaign says "You men". Not "you people who do the following". So the good guy reads a message that wasn't even intended to him, and it confuses him.
--------------------------------
""Contrary to what people say, most women are not sending mixed signals, either. ""
This is at the same time true, and a lie.
Why?
Because from *her* perspective, she's sending clear signals. From his perspective, they are mixed.
Patriarchy shames women into not looking easy. What tends to happen is that:
- women who are interested vary between a very interested look, to a neutral (almost cold) look when the guilt/shame hits them and they try to not look "like a slut"
-women who are not interested vary between a neutral look (trying to show disinterest), and a positive look, trying to be polite.
Here's the most confusing part. Every woman is raised with and has different values. Every woman has a different ratio and way of showing disinterest or interest. In one upbringing a smile is "too much interest, too easy"... The man waits for a smile to approach, but the woman doesn't give one, but stands near.
In another a smile is "basic non-sexual politeness". In a third upbringing, you touch people you're not interested in on the shoulder. In a fourth, you touch people on the shoulder only when you ARE interested. This is especially true in multicultural societies like the USA.
Women are consistent onto themselves. Jane always shows interest the same way. However, Jane shows it differently than helen, or linda or jennifer.
Here's the best proof. 93% of all men on this planet, are completely uncapable of reading women's signals clearly. And by "signals", the studies defined communication where the woman was SURE she was sending clear signals.
It also proved that women are completely unaware of the mixed nature of their signals.
Leil Lowndes has done a lot of work on the subject (she popularized the 93% percentage). Her studies and references are amazing.
I agree. I can't read signals at all. Seriously. I absolutely fail at it. I'd really appreciate a "no thank you."
While I have people helpful enough to actually answer stupid questions, I'm going to push my luck.
Reading all the comments, it seems that objectifying women is bad. I would define that as "Looking at only the sexual aspect of the person." But... sometimes, that is actually all men want. I assume that occasionally, women get like that as well. Would you be offended if a man came up to you and said so? Entirely sincere, not trying to talk you into bed, not trying to waste anyone's time pretending, just stating what he's interested in, and letting you make you decide whether this is someone you might like to talk to more? (Granted, I'm not about to use this information, since my fiance would be pretty angry about that, but I'm curious.)
On the one hand, yes, he would be basically only interested in sex. But he is giving credit that you are perfectly in control of your own sexuality, and capable of making a decision.
Again, just curiosity. Don't tear my head off.
Why are you worrying about someone ripping your head off? Not that I don't see why, there's plenty of that on feminist online communities.
But those are not real feminists. Real feminists are mature and can make a point and answer.
Those that use blaming, guilting, projection, reading into your posts just because you are a man... They are not someone you want to take advice from anyway.
You will notice there are plenty of feminists who are helpful, understanding and objective.
Even though I don't agree with all their theories. I respect that they can make their points with a reasonable, rational tone.
The ones who accuse you of sexism, misoginy, and act as if you had burned down their house? They are a minority. But they seem like they are a majority, because they are the loudest. So when someone like xnx attacks you and acts rude for no good reason other than you being a man. Scroll down the page.
While I understand that you can't give opinions for women everywhere, more input is never a bad thing. And that's all I asked for. Your opinions. Which I am grateful for.
But I don't think it's quite fair to compare your attempts at picking up men, and a man's attempt to picking up you. I don't believe you can actually be so forward as to get slapped. I bet I could without even trying. I can't imagine what you said to get the finger, but I'm betting that's about your limit.
And while we are on the topic of the boring "hi" I followed the link to the street harassment blog. Where I read a story about a woman who felt dirty about all the guys saying hi. No women said hi, and she felt like it was only because of how she looked. COME ON! Seriously, how are we supposed to start a conversation if some women are going to get offended at HI!? Yes, it's because of how you look. We aren't even going to pretend otherwise. But what are we supposed to do when THAT offends!?
Sorry, disregard that last paragraph. I reread it, and while I still want to know, it should not have been directed at you. Unfortunately, there's no edit. Instead, it gets me replying to it, and sounding stupid.
Welcome to the world of USA 3-rd-Wave feminism :)
There's a lot of contradictions inside it. The problem is that they do so many campaigns, so fast, without actually studying what has what effect, that they just end up confusing the end population intended to.
If you point out that effect, you will not be listened to, because of the instant defensiveness. They assume any inquiry to whether and how something works is an anti-feminist ploy.
This seems to be characteristic of usa feminism (3rd wave) for some reason. Over here, our feminism is a lot more steady and focused.
------------
The hello example was very illustrative. A boy will be flooded with messages on how any comment to girl with sexual wording is offensive. And told in a surprised tone "Don't you get that its just about going there and saying hello? Why don't get it? Just go and say hello".
But then the boy reads the next information, and it says "tired of men telling me hello!"... And there is a rant on why saying "good day" and "hello" is sexual harrasment.
At this point, boy's head explodes ;)
Nah, just kidding.
Here's where it comes from. The mixed message is not on purpose. I, having been involved with feminism for years, when I read the hello's - sexual harrasment post... I understand the difference and see no contradiction.
But that's because there are subtleties.
The problem is that when the campaigns/sites are made... They forget and assume the subtleties. Forgetting they have specialized knowledge. They forget to insert the subtleties simply because they assume them.
A campaign/site with a message of "let's stop sexual harrasment", actually becomes read by men as "let's stop men from ever talking to women".
"I can't imagine what you said to get the finger, but I'm betting that's about your limit."
Well since you asked...I smiled at a young man and was trying to get his attention. I guess I wasn't his type, lol.
I would love it if instead of using the forums about harassment to vent frustrations about social politeness or rudeness and the dating approach, if maybe we can have a community posting on it?? Fellas, any takers?
RareMale: Do take in point that feminism is an activist movement, and does not speak for all women. It speaks for feminists.
The reason you got a shitty rude response was unwarranted. You asked a sincere question. Again, remember, anyone can comment on an online blog (so not every commenter speaks for feminism in general, though some pretend to hold the ultimate authority).
And then feminism doesn't speak for all women in the world.
Now, do have the following in mind. Movements that are borne out of frustration with a problem, tend to overcompensate. The frustration comes from actual *sexual harrassment*, i.e. a macho guy who's shouting "yo mama, nice shirt heheh", in front of his buddies while he high-fives them.
That's the actual problem. The movement will actually overcompensate and "throw the baby out with the bathwater" and generalize over a lot of things. One example is that sexual harassment tends to involve comments on body/looks. So... sometimes, some activists can generalize out that any time a man notices a woman's body/looks it's harassment.
I met my best friend at a traffic light when I noticed her unique dressing style. I commented on how unique her style was and then we got to talking about fashion and other things. Today we're best friends.
Do have in mind that different women have differing tastes. If it was xmx at that light, and I actually did genuinelly and sincerly ask the same thing... Xmx probably would have given me a blind-stare and scowl, because she has decided in advance that any man noticing her is a harasser, so she wouldn't even see the sincere friendliness, because she has decided to group all men in one basket.
=========
I'll go ahead and try less offensive openers (sorry, "Hi." is boring, and will get me nowhere. I gotta open with something, if I'd like more than a hello in response.):
You have spectacular eyes.
I like your hair.
That's a nice shirt.
=========
You're asking the wrong question. It's not the words but the attitude. You're asking for "non-offensive words".
Sincere and genuine interest = good
Said to impress your buddies or "get lucky" = bad
Unfortunately, women have been so bombarded with sexual harassment, that some can lose the will to make the difference.
Fortunately, most women can still tell the difference.
----------------------
Good point on the "but someone has to make an unsolicited advance. Otherwise, no one is getting anywhere.".
There has been no relationship in history that hasn't started with a "non-solicited advance".
By definition, whoever makes the first move, does so unsolicited. The actual act of giving someone consent is in itself a "move". How does one give consent? Looking at someone, touching someone, giving a compliment, saying something first.
BUT...
Get this... US 3-rd wave feminists (most commenters here belong to that school of thought) believe that sexual harrasment has nothing to do with sex and dating. No I'm not kidding. They actually believe that harassers do catcalls to "impose power" on women, and to "control women" etc...
No, I am dead serious. No joke, they actually believe this. They have spent so much time studying how society works on installing insecurities in girls, that they can't even possibly imagine that boys might have insecurities installed as well.
Other schools of feminism disagree, and have actually studied this. Sexual harassment is usually a "macho" ego-defense mechanism.
He could approach a woman in a polite, respectful manner, but then be harassed by his buddies when she rejects him as well as feel the pain from the rejection.
Rejection = "Not going further with the woman. Not actual negative response". Men are brought up by the media to take rejection personally. They actually believe that a "real man" should be able to get every single woman he attempts to... Even though 9 out of 10 are not interested for reasons that have nothing to do with you. So even though a man will have a pleasant, friendly conversation with a new woman, and make a new friend. He takes it as a rejection if he doesn't "get" something from her, because the media has raised him that to be a man, you have to get every woman, otherwise you're a failure.
The macho persona develops as a rejection shield then. When you're being macho, the rejection is "not personal", because you're just being an ass and "fooling around" (that's the rationalization). The extreme form of machoism develops into sexual harassment.
- The harasser wants to meet a woman
- He doesn't want to appear weak in front of his buddies by being himself
- He knows she will mostly likely get annoyed by the machoism, but if she does, he can say he was just kidding and high-five his buddies. He and his buddies laugh it off, ego is intact.
The perfect introduction that every woman appreciates is a sincere, vulnerable one. Where you put your real self on the line (be yourself). And are sincere in your interest in the person (not just the body).
Be ok with just gaining a new friend.
"Are all of these bad? (we guys haven't exactly been given a clear roadmap by the feminist movement): Hi, you look great. Hey cutie! Hey sexy! *whistle*"
Wouldn't all of those seem pretty weird to you coming from someone who just sees you?
Lately the best way to meet women has been to compliment her Obama shirt, but I don't know how much longer they'll be ubiquitous. Hopefully it'll work for the next 8 years.
"Anyways, so far, there's several responses of things along the line of fuck off or violence in the case of touching (I'm imagining an overly friendly back rub type touching,"
Why would you be giving an "overly friendly back rub" or any kind of rub to a girl you just met? I don't know if you're saying you do this or just theorizing, but you're describing a real creep.
"I'd agree with the violence if someone went straight for naughty bits), but I get the feeling that if a guy did that to me, I'd be a homophobe, or at least gay-hostile if I told a guy to fuck off based on unsolicited sexual advancement."
I was at a gay bar, on Halloween, with lesbian friends. Some jerk grabbed my ass and I snapped his fingers back. No one thought I was homophobic, they thought he was an asshole for grabbing my hip.
====
Why would you be giving an "overly friendly back rub" or any kind of rub to a girl you just met? I don't know if you're saying you do this or just theorizing, but you're describing a real creep.
====
I don't think he meant as a conversation starter. He didn't even mention that its "someone you just met".
As you know, most sexual harassment cases are with people who've known or worked with one another for years (army, workplace etc...)
He pointed out that it has to happen eventually on the progression to a relationship. Every step from stranger to husband/wife involves an unsolicited advance.
Example:
1)
-Jerks go around bars groping random women and grabbing them by the shoulders
-In order to say how much of it is going on, and to be taken seriously, a campaign will say "why can't men just stop rubbing women's shoulders!"
2) Any relationship going from friend to lover has to pass the "shoulder rub", "holding waist" etc... stages. And guess what, these steps will always be done unsolicited when they are done for the first time. Every first kiss is a precedent for example.
So its not a problem of "rubbing shoulders", nor is it a problem of being unsolicited. Its a problem of when/how.
=====================
"Are all of these bad? (we guys haven't exactly been given a clear roadmap by the feminist movement): Hi, you look great. Hey cutie! Hey sexy! *whistle*"
Wouldn't all of those seem pretty weird to you coming from someone who just sees you?
=====================
As you failed to notice, he included 3 levels/examples. From neutral to bad, to really bad. Its a good testament to that they are usually grouped together with no sensitivity to subtleties.
Hi, you look great. - Neutral
Hey cutie! - Bad
Hey sexy! *whistle*" - Really Bad
The first one is neutral (you look great), because it depends on the attitude and context. This is how I met my best friend at a traffic light, after which we got into a discussion on fashion. *Here's the clue, I would have made the same comment if it was man standing next to me, and I regularily do. I am not attracted to men however.
There is absolutely nothing "inherently" wrong with it. It can be done wrongly.
In trying to get rid of sexist remarks, we can end up removing any possibility for sincere compliments.
Most sexual harrasment I've suffered has seemed to stem from power. I refuse to believe that a man who follows me and my friends around a bar after we've made it clear we are not interested many times, is just interested in 'being nice'. I refuse to believe the guy I had to physically PUSH away from me as he didn't believe me when i said I wasn't interested was simply interested in 'dating' me.
It's not rocket science, men should not be worried about talking to women, if they talk to women as human being. It's when they see us as pieces of meat and when the wont take no for an answer that's harassment.
The situation needs to be taken into account too;
If it's a bar, club , party etc where people expect to meet new people, a polite hello is fine. But a hello please stop and have a conversation with me in the middle of the street is a bit weird.
Any form of unwarranted touching is bad, if you've been talking a while the odd touch of the arm is k but to introduce yourself to someone but grabbing their behind or poking them; this is just RUDE and yes it is harassment. If you do get the knock-back, just take it politely. Not everyone in the world wants to talk to you, don't take it as a personal affront on your manhood or whatever. And for gods sake if a woman has made it clear she's not interested, she's not interested and don't keep annoying her.
It's quite simple and I'm amazed some people find it seemingly so hard to differentiate between harassment and normal social interaction; it's just called social skills.
I find it incredulous to believe that someone on feminist community, doesn't understand culture and is culture-centric.
==========================
"I refuse to believe that"
==========================
Do you not see a problem her? You have decided to see everything through a certain filter, and you even say that you refuse not to look through that filter.
Our brains are designed to prove what we believe and erase info that doesn't suit the belief. As an educated feminist you should know (or atleast need to know). Its called critical thinking.
=======================
It's not rocket science, men should not be worried about talking to women, if they talk to women as human being.
=======================
Do you not understand how vague "human being" is? You are oversimplifying an issue.
In certain asian countries you would be deemed dehumanizing because you shake hands with people when you meet them. They will actually be offended that you do not hug them, and speak from a 3 feet distance of their face.
In their eyes, to not hug someone you are meeting for the first time (a business meeting for example), means that you do not see them as human.
==================
If it's a bar, club , party etc where people expect to meet new people, a polite hello is fine. But a hello please stop and have a conversation with me in the middle of the street is a bit weird.
==================
Do you think you're superior to latino-americans? What makes you special? Who made you the ultimate, universal authority on which culture is right? You even conflicted others who think its ok and perfectly fine if the man is respectful.
Do you think my cousin who just got married to the guy she met at the bus stop is wrong? Who are you to judge her? Who made you the ultimate authority on what context is right, and which is wrong? Funny, my cousin calls it "when we met", not "when he harassed me".
=====
Here's the problem: You have a personal taste. And then you present your personal taste as a universal value, such that any man who doesn't follow your own taste is an idiot.
That's where problems come in. Men get SO MANY mixed and confused messages from women (do approach in public, don't approach, say hello, don't say hello, shake her hand first to show respect, don't shake it until she does first... etc... etc..
====
I made the above statement to remind you of a point. CONTEXT IS CULTURE SPECIFIC. In certain cultures, upbringings its considered rude to NOT talk to someone on the street.
In eastern europe its not expected for people to talk at a party, but expected that they talk in public.
As a feminist you should know about this and the very first anthropological studies actually proved why we need feminism...
==================
It's when they see us as pieces of meat and when the wont take no for an answer that's harassment.
==================
Here's the problem. Women don't actually SAY "no" to guys. Did you see the above wish by rare, he said "I wish if they could just say -no thanks, not interested"
Do you understand how rare that is for a man? Women don't actually communicate to men.
Here's a typical situation:
men: hi
woman: hi [polite]
men: talk
woman: talk [sees that he is flirting, but since she's not interested... she uses a body-language cue that's specific to HER upbringing and means "i am just being polite]
men: keeps talking
woman: talks [annoyed that the man didn't get it, inserts another specific only to her cue]
man: talks
woman: Gives him the middle finger and shouts "leave me the F ALONE!"
Man's confused what happened.
Here's what happens very rarely:
Men: Hi,
Woman: Hi,
Man: talk
Woman: [noticing that he's flirting, but she's not interested, so she says]. Hey, are you flirting with me? I appreciate this, but I have to say no thanks. :)
===================
but to introduce yourself to someone but grabbing their behind or poking them; this is just RUDE and yes it is harassment
===================
You're using an example that is so off-the-charts obviously wrong... to prove that subtleties don't exist.
This is not where the issue is. The issue is that "grey zone". Its that zone where 90% of interactions lie.
You're giving an example of the worst 5%.
============
I'm amazed some people find it seemingly so hard to differentiate between harassment and normal social interaction; it's just called social skills.
============
If it were so simple, then why does every sexual harassment campaign contradict every other?
If its so simple, wouldn't all sexual harassment campaigns agree?
You just gave an awesome example yourself. You actually define all interactions in public as inappropriate.
You just said it right here. Proving that its not so simple. You proved that to you, something that is perfectly normal and desired for one woman, you will define as sexual harassment.
I pity the poor Russian woman who dares say "Good Day" to you on the bus stop. How dare she not telepathically read your brains to assess your own personal definition of "social skills".
Let's work towards a solution. What would be a list of things that constitute "sexual harassment". If its a simple, idiot-proof list, you can write it down here.
Creating campaigns where we tell men "treat women like a human being" is meaningless and vague. And no one has a clear list of what that means. If its simple, please write it down.
Please try to write down a list of what "treat like a human being, not meat" means, without contradicting other women, or other feminists.
Good luck.
p.s.
So you agree with the kazakhstanis that it means men should run up to people and hug them and kiss them on the cheek? Because that's what it means "treat like a human being, not an object" over there.
Get real. A guy yells 'hey babe' or whistles can be annoying but as long as he doesn't attack me or follow me, whatever. We don't need to make some stupid law that can land him in court. WTF?
When you're an unattractive 40 or 50 yr old (and you can still look good at this age but with THAT I'm a victim attitude I doubt it)you'll be remembering those days.
Dress really doesn't have much to do with it. I was pretty and got whistles even while I wore sweats. I had a guy follow me in my heavy bulky winter wear.
Concentrate on bigger issues. If you nitpick on the trivial, that trivial can grow into something bigger and worse and it would be fair to blame yourself.
Hey, raremale. Most women aren't going to be offended if you come up to them and say hi and that you think they are pretty. Just don't be creepy.
And if you're getting slapped, you're trying to pick up the wrong kind've women.
Interesting topic! Too bad the comments got totally sidetracked.
I can honestly say that I've never had to deal with street harassment, and I went to a Big 10 school. Maybe I'm not the type to draw the attention of frat boys, because I can't imagine MSU guys are any more polite or respectful than NYC guys... in any case, I think it would be interesting to talk to men about it. Ask them IF they do it, WHY they do it, WHAT exactly they would say, etc. You could also ask what the results were: whether they were given the finger, or approached by a smiling and flattered woman, or anything else. It would also be interesting to find out what these men would do if a woman were to call them out on their behavior-- if the cat-called woman came over and yelled at/interrogated the cat-caller.
Good luck with your research, and be sure to post your finished article!
US 3-rd wave feminists (most commenters here belong to that school of thought) believe that sexual harrasment has nothing to do with sex and dating. No I'm not kidding. They actually believe that harassers do catcalls to "impose power" on women, and to "control women" etc...
Why is this such a ridiculous belief? What does hissing "hey baby, how much?" (probably the least vulgar comment I've gotten) have to do with dating? It is a comment designed, simply, to make me uncomfortable. Do men who yell sexual remarks out their car windows as they drive by really expect to get a sex or date out of it? Realistically, it's pretty much impossible.
Women don't actually SAY "no" to guys...Women don't actually communicate to men.
Now, a man approaching me to flirt on the street is certainly a different situation than what I've mentioned above. And it is true that women have been socialized to not say "no" directly. But why must it be entirely the woman's responsibility to change her behavior? I agree that women should be clearer about saying no, but shouldn't men also learn to be more sensitive to the cues women give out?
Huh. That was supposed to be a reply to Aleksa, I'm not sure why it didn't appear up there.
About this:
==========
I agree that women should be clearer about saying no, but shouldn't men also learn to be more sensitive to the cues women give out?
==========
Then we officially agree :) I think that is the solution to "subtle-harassment" (ofcourse, assuming that we also get rid of objectification overall, which is a must anyway).
Because subtle harassment involves two things:
1) Objectification
2) Mismatch in communication
Most of the "power-centered" theories offer solutions to only number 1, but forget number 2.
They assume that getting rid of objectification is some sort of a magical bullet that solves everything.
Trust me, if you got approached by a 100 sensitive guys who are interested in you as a person, and have 0% objectification (who are not your type, or when you're not single, its not the right time)... And keep flirting with you even if/when you're not interested. You're going to be just as annoyed, and its still going to be harassment.
That's my entire point. The issue has two levels.
-Subtle harassment (A woman approached when she's not interested and where/when she thinks is inappropriate)
-Obvious harrasment (being called names, pushed, physically grabbed etc...)... A real tough issue. An issue, that in trying to solve, we've grouped together with subtle harassment.
========================
The above post has this part mangled, so its here again, fixed:
a) Machoism "works" from its own context, which is why it still exists. Macho men do get dates. A good man would of course be much more succesful. But the macho man doesn't know of that option. He just knows that he gets more dates when being macho, then when being a "nice guy". He also never gets hurt as a macho. (machoism: "Hey, sweetie pie" [with a macho attide] works about 1 in 10 times)
b) Sexual harassment is an extreme side-effect of machoism. (Yelling at a woman on the street ""hey, sweetiepie, nice legs!"" which works about 1 in a 100 times. And yes these jerks do get a date once in a while this way when the random vulnerable woman happens by)
c) Extreme Sexual Harassment - Yelling things at a woman from the car, grabbing women physically, trying to push himself onto a woman who said no, throwing insults at a woman
You're using examples of C, to prove that B has nothing to do with sex or dating, and completely disregarding A as if were a completely separate social phenomena.
Jerks ARE sexual harassers.
You can't understand sexual harassment, without understanding jerks (macho persona). Phenomena in society never exist in a vacuum
Very Simple Questions:
1) Are all men jerks? As in a 100% of the heterosexual male population?
The answer is obviously no.
2) Has there ever been a case in history where a sexual harassment was done by someone who wasn't a jerk?
In other words, aren't all sexual harassment cases done by Jerks?
The problem is that we're using a wider model to explain a narrower problem. We're using the wider "how patriarchy tries to control women through men" model to explain one phenomena that is performed by just ONE isolated group of men. We're using the model of a 3000 million group, to explain the actions of 30 million of them.
You can't stop someone from doing something, if you don't completely understand why they do it. The power theory explains just the most obvious layer, but not all the layers.
Anabella...
Whenever we make it an issue of Us. Vs. Them, we are a victim of patriarchy.
================
"But why must it be entirely the woman's responsibility to change her behavior?"
================
Did I ever suggest this? Ever?
**I'm suggesting:** We should attack the problem on all fronts.
You read as if I said: Harassers shouldn't change.
I DID NOT SAY THAT :)
We are working on the problem from both sides. The male side is being handled by other activists who work with men and teach them to stop trying to solve their insecurities by acting out macho.
The women's side is handled by movements that deal with empowering women to say NO.
The statement "I don't need to change anything, its all THEIR fault", is not very constructive - Why? Because it stops us from EMPOWERING WOMEN!
Since when is teaching women to say "no" a bad thing? It does not take away from stopping sexual harassment. It adds to solving it.
========================
Why is this such a ridiculous belief? What does hissing "hey baby, how much?" (probably the least vulgar comment I've gotten) have to do with dating?
========================
Honestly. I have to call out "lie" on it.
I know you did it to prove a point, but really?
""hey baby, how much?""
Is the LEAST vulgar comment you have received?
Really?
I know it wasn't on purpose, and you did it to prove a point by pointing out an extreme example, but let's not go that way.
===================
It is a comment designed, simply, to make me uncomfortable. Do men who yell sexual remarks out their car windows as they drive by really expect to get a sex or date out of it? Realistically, it's pretty much impossible.
========================
I already answered this, but you completely missed it, which is obvious, since you don't see that we agree.
I AGREE WITH YOU :)
To suggest that the harassers (not "men", but harassers) in the above example realistically expect to get a friendship out of that action is ludicrous. And I never suggest that.
**Be careful, you're missing the subtleties, due to subscribing to simplified, black and white, theories and using extreme examples**
Either men ONLY do it for power, or men ONLY do it for sex.
It's not EITHER OR.
The man from your example with the car, will not get a date from shouting from the car (that's only there to maintain the power and the macho-persona). But he DOES get plenty of sex and dates by acting out the same macho persona in other situations. Maybe 9 out 10 will reject him when he goes "hey sweetie" with a macho smirk, but one won't. And that's enough for him, because the macho persona protects him from the hurt and powerlessness cause in the other 9.
---Let me put it another way:---
1) Men and Women are sexually shamed, frustrated and made insecure by the patriarchy (in different ways, women are shamed to be asexual, men are shamed to be supersexual)
2a) Men deal with their broken egos by acting out macho personas (instead of solving the insecurity)
2b) Women are shamed into not being able to communicate to men, and not being able to say no
Now:
a) Machoism "works" from its own context, which is why it still exists. Macho men do get dates. A good man would of course be much more succesful. But the macho man doesn't know of that option. He just knows that he gets more dates when being macho, then when being a "nice guy". He also never gets hurt as a macho. (machoism: "Hey, sweetie pie" [with a macho attide] works about 1 in 10 times)
b) Sexual harassment is an extreme side-effect of machoism. (Yelling at a woman on the street "hey, sweetiepie, nice legs, which works about 1 in a 100 times.)
c)
You're using examples of C, to prove that B has nothing to do with sex or dating, and completely disregarding A as if were a completely separate social phenomena.
Jerks ARE sexual harassers.
You can't understand sexual harassment, without understanding jerks (macho persona). Phenomena in society never exist in a vacuum.
There are 3 levels of men:
1) The insecure man --- (which the patriarchy brings up most men into being) This man can not get a date due to his immense insecurity. He takes everything personally, and is unable to talk to women without stammering or creeping them out. He is super polite and respectful, but gets hurt by every rejection and becomes super-hurt by women
These are those victim-like men who like to refer to themselves as "nice guys" and blame women for all their problems.
[[she has the power, i am powerless]]
2) The macho man jerk. --- This man tries to solve the hurt of rejection and feeling powerless by trying to bring the power back and shielding himself from rejection. [[I have the power, she has no power to hurt me]]
3) The good man --- This man has both confidence and respect. [She has Power, I have Power, We are powerful together]
What a lot of sexual harassment campaigns do is repel away any good people from joining their cause. Instead of creating allies, they create a world of critics.
Imagine that there is a broken pipe which floods the bathroom (society creating insecure idiots). And imagine that we keep trying to solve the problem by cleaning out the bathroom (dealing with the idiots)... But we never actually FIX the actual broken pipe.
Hey Aleksa, where do I sign up to your fan club? *screeches, throws panties, etc, etc* hehe seriously, I think you just about covered what I would have said on the topic, and I didn't have to lift a finger to type, lol. Didn't miss anything, and I don't think there's a single thing, in aaaall the stuff you wrote, that I would object to, nothing serious anyway :-) Pretty cool!
And I think ava is also totally, entirely on the money ;-) Especially the bit about the self-victimizing (aka feeling sorry for oneself)
Hey mona :)
I'm with gender-critics. We are discussing how to remove the social construct of gender, and how to defeat patriarchy from a "non-partisan" standpoint.
The trouble we see with a lot of "gender" movements is that they try to eliminate the problems caused by gender, through the same frame that created the problem in the first place!
This creates a lot of "us vs them" dynamics. Instead of solving problems, it creates a lot of "who's to blame" scenarios.
Blind, Dogmatic Extremists in both male and female movements are what keeps the gender construct in tact. Its time to unite the good men and the good women on the planet where they defeat patriarchy together.
It should be "good people against patriarchy and gender constructs", not "good women against bad men" and vice versa.
http://gendercritics.blogspot.com/
We need more feminist and female contributors to the blog. Let me know if you're interested.
Sexual Harassment and Female Sexual Passivity (not being able to say yes or say no) are flip sides of the same coin. They feed into each other. Its a vicious cycle.
Trying to solve one without solving the other just creates frustration.
P.S.
Here's a very mature anti-sexual-harassment campaign and contributor:
http://www.stopstreetharassment.com/
Notice how she tries find a solution to the problem from a unified, mature, 3-dimensional standpoint. She's more interested in understanding and solving the problem, than she is "proving the theory right".
http://streetharassment.wordpress.com/2008/11/08/hellos-can-feel-like-harassment-too/
I really like this quote:
"""two of my biggest supporters of anti-street harassment activities are my father and my male partner. They had no idea women got regularly harassed until I told them and had other women we know (including my mom and sister) tell them. Now they get upset whenever they hear about or see harassment occurring and they give me hope that informing the good guys