sexual misconduct

Should you squeeze the toothpaste tube in the middle or from the end?
jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 9233
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73
Contact:

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by jacob » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:04 pm

@EMJ/sl-owl-orris Sure, ... I actually "tested" sl-owl-orris's response on DW and she went along the same lines as I was frantically waving my arms and going "but respect is a cultural code, not a biological quantity ... it's like gravity, if you let go of a suspended object, it will fall ...so you can't demand that gravity goes away to make objects stay in mid air even if that's more respectful to the person who put it there". Not really my best pedagogical effort, but the situation is complex...

My point with my original post was to describe how the system works. The physics, the biology, the signals, the potential violence. I think I did a fairly good job of it too.

I definitely did not want to get into a discussion of the particulars of cleavage with my example (which wasn't about cleavage per se but all possible signals... see shampoo comment above) and I was actually hesitant to add my original example because I know from experience that there's a high risk of turning examples into a debate about particular details while missing the larger insight. FWIW, my original model example was to be considered completely stereotypical for clarity.

DW's point was that eye-contact vs ogling was about respect. However, "respect" is a cultural term. It's therefore not innate to the functional behavior of biologically driven and resource constrained systems. For example, field mice, chipmunks, or elephants don't have a concept called respect. Different human cultures and even different humans have different understandings of what respect is insofar they have one. Therefore one must never assume respect to be universal or even exist in a given person. I refer back to various Overton windows in my original post.

Since their response was mostly about the world as it should be, I want to emphasize https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_M._Cipolla#Essays (referred to in my original post for a good reason) to help explain why "should be" is not a practical life-strategy when dealing with other humans.

First, if the cultural system is in a flux, then it requires individual human effort to deal with it. We have 4 different types of individual males: (I'm not really going to get into arguing the details with what is what in the four quadrants. These descriptions need to be refined.)
  • Intelligent: An intelligent male will realize that it's in his best interest and in her best interest (and also the common good) if he expends significant frontal lobe energy to override his primal instincts and adhere to "eyes up here" protocol. This will benefit both parties. An intelligent male will grasp the usefulness of a human construct such as "respect".
  • Helpless: A helpless male will consider protocol to be too difficult (might not have the lobe energy to override instinct or whatever) or have other issues/challenges that makes talking to females too difficult, e.g. lack of precision wrt being considerate or assertive. This will hurt this male.
  • Bandit: A bandit male will have realized that banditry is sufficiently rewarded to keep going at it. Note that there are intelligent bandits and stupid bandits (refer to Cipolla for details). Someone commented above that if it 19/20 of females hate ogling but 1/20 like it AND bandit-attempts have almost no costs and almost no risk, then continued success is ensured by approaching 20 different females. Important to note that an intelligent bandit will make a deliberate cost-benefit analysis. The bandit can therefore be deterred by changing the prices and probabilities. (I have no idea whether the actual ratio is 1/20. I just know that it's >0.)
  • Stupid: A stupid male will not realize that it's in his best interest to stop ogling. This both kills his chances and annoys the female. The stupid person can not be deterred. You can not regulate. You can only avoid (see law 4,5 --- this also applies to enforcement).
One can insist that there should be respect. And I'm sure that if the world was composed strictly of intelligent males and females, then quick convergence on 100% respect would be no problem (however, see law 2). Yet, like gravity, that's just not the case and so I think (and that's my opinion) framing one's approach to reality in terms of what it ought to be or what should be is ineffectual.

Similarly, (and this was also done above by slowtraveler), I could argue that people should respect private property enough so I can wave an expensive smartphone around near a bus stop in a crime-ridden neighborhood. Now that would be really nice for me, but reality is such that by doing so, I'm communicating to any delinquent stupid/bandit within 50 yards that here's a crime of opportunity for them to take (IOW, I'm putting up a sell signal for my smartphone asset). I could argue that my smartphone waving shouldn't be construed as a signal. But the economical/sociological fact is that it is a signal whether I like it or not. And it's not about smartphones either. If I stand around in a sketchy part of town while dressed expensively (another signal), chances are higher that I will be robbed.

Insofar other men should step in ... again, realize that the knight might be/play the role as either intelligent, helpless, stupid, or a bandit. And in particular realize that knight can't know for sure whether he's dealing with a jackass who's stupid or a bandit; or even intelligent or helpless insofar he's misinterpreting the situation (a helpless knight, see slowtravelers example).

Females can, of course, be similarly categorized in terms of how they deal with the underlying physics of the situation. Just realizing that whoever you run into will have either a helpless, stupid, intelligent or banditly (what's the word?) framework is super practical and helpful. See other posters above for examples of various classes of females.

Personally I consider the "should be"/"shouldn't have to" way of looking at the world fall in the helpless(*) category because it ultimately hurts yourself. It's a little bit like driving through a green traffic light w/o checking for cars left and right because "there shouldn't be any cars when I got the green light"(**). Sure ... but that's failing to account for the stupid/bandit drivers that are bound to be out there.

(*) Don't get hung up on words. We're looking at the functionality of the category. Feel free to call it what you want. Wishful? Hopeful? Optimistic? Naive?

(**) There are some humans who seriously believe so much in regulations that their framework becomes the regulations themselves. They are thus incapable of imagining the existence of behavior outside regulations. All booksmarts. No streetsmarts.

It's a general rule that "You can't fix stupid" but ultimately, cultural codes may impose some sanctions or constraints on its effects. However, keep in mind that making theft illegal hasn't eliminated theft. You can't regulate stupid away; and since regulation is not 100% effective, you can't eliminate bandits either. More importantly, though, since the US is currently transitioning, I think it's pertinent to develop a real appreciation of Chesterton's Fence. Lots of fences are currently being torn down w/o understanding why they were there in the first place. Because many of these decisions don't seem to be guided by any systemic insight, the side-effects will come out of unexpected places. So maybe consider why some of the rules that have been eliminated were put in in the first place before worrying about fixing the unintended consequences with new fences. It's a worthwhile exercise if trying to understand why a complex system is breaking.

PS: If there's any interest in clothing based solutions ... just go check out what people came up with in other countries. You'll probably not like it ... but they're human-solutions nevertheless. Compare the Pygmy dress code (I use Pygmies because I saw a documentary on netflix some month ago---but it holds for almost all tropical tribes) with the Iranian dress code. Both are physiologically working hot climate solutions at the opposite ends of the spectrum.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 3016
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:21 pm

Now I am fretting about what qualifies as intelligent bandit? Was Tom Sawyer an intelligent bandit? Was B'rer Rabbit an intelligent bandit?

Also, it is pretty easy to tell the clueless oogler from the bandit oogler, because the bandit oogler has hard eyes, and will often be man-spreading, or exuding some other clear signal of dominance/predation. The 1/20 female who might sometimes choose to either hard-stare back at bandit oogler OR purposefully signal submission to bandit oogler likely has some self-interest in mind, but maybe just keeping herself amused.
Last edited by 7Wannabe5 on Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 9233
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73
Contact:

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by jacob » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:25 pm

@7 - An intelligent bandit is someone who gains more than he hurts others. A stupid bandit is someone who hurts others more than he gains himself. In the essay, they're referred to as B1 and B2. See http://cantrip.org/stupidity.html for an illustration There's also H1 and H2. Same idea.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 3016
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:37 pm

X-post. Again. Sorry will read essay. Tom Sawyer gained more than he hurt others _Intelligent Bandit. B'rer Rabbit re-directed the energy of bandits towards his gain, more like a permaculturist or double con-artist?. The individual who stole my garden shovel is a stupid bandit. The individual who set the Little Free Library on fire is a stupid bandit.

User avatar
C40
Posts: 1936
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am
Location: Western U.S.
Contact:

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by C40 » Mon Nov 13, 2017 5:17 pm

jacob wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:04 pm
Someone commented above that if it 19/20 of females hate ogling but 1/20 likes it AND bandit-attempts have almost no costs and almost no risk, then continued success is ensured by approaching 20 different females. Important to note that an intelligent bandit will make a deliberate cost-benefit analysis. The bandit can therefore be deterred by changing the prices and probabilities. (I have no idea whether the actual ratio is 1/20. I just know that it's >0.)
If the bandit has just a very basic level of intelligence, the actual can be surprisingly high. I did an experiment 15 years ago of bandit behavior that would cause a riot if done today where TopHatFox studied. My friends and I were out at the bars and someone asked "if you just went up to that woman and asked if you could play with her breasts, what would happen? What percentage of women would say yes to that?". We all made our guesses and then I tested it out by asking maybe 20 women.

I think I guessed that 0-10% would say yes and that I may get some very angry responses. After one or two attempts, I had a phrasing worked out well enough (plus a disarming tone and smile) that 50% of women said yes. 50%!!!!! :o I'd walk up and say "Hi. My friends and I have a debate about what percentage of women will say yes if I just go up to them and ask to touch their breasts. Can I touch yours?". I never thought the yes rate would be so high. I was totally surprised.

edit - this kind of behavior was and is totally out of the norm for me and I haven't ever done anything else like this.
Last edited by C40 on Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Mon Nov 13, 2017 5:48 pm

The correct response to an unwelcome hand at the range, is with the weapon pointed downrange, announcing to nobody in particular, "the next hand that touches my ass will receive a (insert caliber here) hole in it."

The correct way of convincing a man that is too close to give you more space is a bit more involved.
Step 1, look him in the eye
Step 2 smile (this step can be omitted, but really, it helps.)
Step.3 place your open hand on his chest.
Step 4 increase pressure until desired distance is achieved. Adding "I'm going to need more personal space." Seals the deal. Nobody mistakes being placed at full arm's length.

Do you see what I described here? These are nonthreatening, direct responses that require no interpretation, and make your feelings absolutely clear.

Now, to some folks, suggesting you would shoot someone would not be nonthreatening. In the context of a gun range, though, it absolutely is. Because the gun is pointed conspicuously at the target, and the statement of intent was general. The same statement, uttered behind someone while their gun is pointed downrange, would be considerably less nonthreatening.

Placing you hand on his chest and slowly increasing pressure is equally clear. Leaving your face free to communicate any other signals. Be aware that alcohol will delay response from your suitor. No need to shove him off his stool. But there is no more need to moderate the signal than you feel.

As for catcalling, that video was 2 minutes edited out of 10 hours, in NYC. If that's too much attention, perhaps NYC is not for you. I can say that in my entire adult life, including 4 years in the army, and over 10 years in construction, I have never been in a group of men catcalling a stranger. I have whistled appreciatively to women I knew, usually as they were going out with others, or on a date with someone else, as a general note of approval. If they didn't like it, they never did more than smile, or smile and roll their eyes.

Past cultures had more structured signalling, and formal rituals of courtship. We threw that out. What is left is what the majority will deal with. Not ideal, but nothing is. The majority likes ambiguity, the rest of us just have to deal with that.

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2714
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by BRUTE » Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:33 pm

C40 wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 5:17 pm
I'd walk up and say "Hi. My friends and I have a debate about what percentage of women will say yes if I just go up to them and ask to touch their breasts. Can I touch yours?"
holy Overton window christ. it's so fascinating to see this window, or see the different ones.

brute is quite certain that for certain humans, what C40 did 15 years ago is literally sexual harassment, or even rape. yet brute has seen human males be even more aggressive (basically subtract the question part) - and have stunning success, some women absolutely loved those males.

on the other hand, there is an Overton window where a man sitting with spread legs is threatening rape, and asking a woman anything in reply to "I was harassed" is victim blaming.

brute's point isn't about one is right and one is wrong, it's just that the Overton windows are crazy far apart. if C40 from 15 years ago (or brute's buddies) met one of those other humans, the only way out would probably be a lawsuit or jail time.

in a way, brute thinks this is bad. too much unpredictable change in context (and it's not always easy to tell what Overton window a human has) leads to basically random consequences. it's a bit like driving with a legal AR-15 in New Hampshire, and accidentally crossing into Mass, where that comes with a 15 year felony charge.

when consequences for human behavior become random or random-seeming, humans stop paying attention to consequences. very few humans would profit from that happening, and they're probably all bandits.

saving-10-years
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:37 am
Location: Warwickshire, UK

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by saving-10-years » Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:20 am

@Jacob Thanks for the systems thinking approach and bringing up bandits. That answers my question about 'why'. But I am noting that @Jacob says
...AND bandit-attempts have almost no costs and almost no risk,


There are costs (see what @jp says about ass grabbing and how that makes her feel a long while afterwards or how @slo-owl-orris orders her life and what she wears to lower risk of bandits approaching her). The Bandit is not paying those costs (so does not care). There may be no risks to the bandit if no-one (the person ogled or onlookers to the ogling) say nothing and appear to approve or disregard that behaviour. I hope that there are few contexts where that indifference happens. Becoming fewer.

Bars are a special case - some of the women that @c40 approached may even be there to meet 'cute guys' like @c40 and his friends and thus see his question as an unusual but not out-of-the-window query that they are happy to go along with. Remember that some of the chat up lines that women have been subjected to in bars are equally if not more gross than this one. Alcohol may have played a part in removing inhibitions on both sides.

In a workplace, on the street, between strangers, when there is no attempt to gain consent or assumption that consent would be granted is not the same. I suggest that the probability of success for bandits in this context is more like 1000:1. Maybe less. The same as the SPAM stuff gets online maybe. So worth it for the bandit who does it a lot and does not care about discomfort of others.

I take the point that the video is edited and over 10 hours these unpleasant attentions may have been spaced out, but they are not no/low cost for the person on the receiving end. Would she normally not make eye contact with someone talking to her? Had she done so what would the escalation have been? The bandit reduces the chance that this woman would respond positively to a well-meaning hello on the street from an intelligent or other person later. She is blanking everyone. This is one of the costs of bandit activity.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 3016
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:27 am

@C40:

Social norms have changed rapidly. 30 years ago when I lived in a large co-op in a liberal university center, we threw a Summer Solstice party and my girl-gang made a sign to put on the main drag front lawn indicating that we were looking for male virgins to "sacrifice." Even the A.P science girls I ate lunch with in rural Midwest high school in the early 80s were constantly talking about some burn-out boy who had a cute ass or going to a college party and getting spanked by a young Dom. We thought we were on the cutting edge of being free to claim sexuality in the same way men always had. We weren't like the "bipsies" who plotted to get friendship rings (kind of like a junior engagement ring) from the "nice" boys. We could do whatever we wanted to do, because we were smart enough to make our own money. We didn't need to choose the bland boy-next-door who was willing to throw in security to seal the deal. We could hop on the back of a motorcycle. We could put on a little white dress and dance to Reggae and talk about chaos theory with some muscular young man and then f*ck until the sun came up while "Tangled Up in Blue" played on his stereo. And nobody struck us dead from the sky or put us in stocks in the public square.

That's why I really hate this trend that is making everybody behave like an asexual stick or blob in the interest of gender equality. You can't make yourself free by limiting the freedom of others. Control is not power, and while you are wasting your energy squawking to authority about minor injustice, the true brokers in power just laugh and carry on as usual.

That said:

@Riggerjack:

Please realize that some females who are choosing to relate minor incidents, may have suffered other incidents perhaps not so easy to handle in retrospect. For instance, you have a very pleasant conversation over lunch with a man on a first date; he indicates some interest in your rare book inventory; in the parking lot after lunch, he notices that the muffler on your car is problematic and offers to provide help with solution; you offer to show him a book stored in your office/warehouse a couple miles away; in your office, you are babbling away in absent-minded manner as usual, then turn and notice that he is just standing there; you think "Give him a kiss goodbye."; next thing you know your head is being slammed against the floor; next thing you know he finishes putting his clothes back on, walks to the door, points to the deadbolt and says "You really ought to keep this locked." and then leaves.

The worst problem isn't the buffoon who openly oogles a breast. It is the intelligent predator who uses respectful behavior as a cover to engage trust. This is true at all levels. That is why I think it is a waste of enforcement resources to go after minor disrespect. It makes all females seem like the boy who cried wolf.

Luckily, I am a rational-minded person whose prior sexual experience was largely positive, so I didn't adopt pessimistic perspective that all or even most men will likely behave in such a manner, but I was actively fearful for about 6 months. But, then I eventually went back to liking it when a muscular man throws me up on a counter-top while maintaining eye contact, engaging in dialogue, watching for signals of discomfort, or otherwise maintaining active flow/interchange of desire and consent.

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2714
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by BRUTE » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:23 am

saving-10-years wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:20 am
Bars are a special case [..]
In a workplace, on the street, between strangers, when there is no attempt to gain consent or assumption that consent would be granted is not the same.
brute thinks this growing separation is actually part of the problem. what percentage of humans have met at work, as strangers, or in other non-mating contexts? brute doesn't have numbers, but would be surprised if the majority of all (happy) relationships hadn't started out in non-mating contexts.

if the same action has very different consequences depending on its context, that can be very confusing for humans. if those contexts then start to change rapidly, or fragment even further (maybe a lady in accounting loves flirty attention, but a lady in shipping considers it sexual misconduct), the strategy depends on potential cost of the randomness. if the cost is high (jail), the result is complete abstinence and removing any chance of being misinterpreted in any way. this produces tons of false positives, and turns society in a collection of "asexual blobs", as 7Wannabe5 calls it.

so the cost of reducing the amount of unwanted sexual attention in the workplace or other non-mating places this way is a complete breakdown of potentially wanted attempts, and probably a great confusion or even collapse in the dating market. brute would argue that this collapse is already in progress.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:06 pm

Yeah. You don't need to explain rape to me. I was pretty familiar with the subject as a kid.

But, I am old enough that I remember the women's rights movement being brutally clear that rape is a crime of violence, not a sex crime. They did this to clear away the margins. To make rape clear of the "she was asking for it", "look at how she dressed" and "where she was, what did she think was going to happen" nonsense.

I grew up raised by a woman who had been raped, with boyhood friends who had been raped, with family in and out of prison, and all the entanglement that implies. I am not insensitive to this issue.

Which is all preface to the stories I'll try to tell over the next few posts. It won't be pleasant, and if this is a trigger for you, I recommend skipping this. I'll start with some stories, then talk about practical remedies, then get into signalling theory and how ridiculous is the white knight fantasy that seems to be failing so well for some folks here.

First, let's compare and contrast definitions of rape as they were and as they are.

When I was a kid, in the 70's the women's rights movement was pushing hard to tie rape and violence together in the minds of the public. For good reason. Sex crimes are always going to have issues with the overton Windows of jurors, and cops, and everyone in between. Drawing a clear, bright line around rape, to set it apart from lesser crimes was good strategy, and a solid move forward for "women's libbers" as they were still called back then. Making it a crime of violence makes it a societal problem, not a woman's problem. It appeals to masculine pride to then prevent rapes from happening.

I haven't been on a college campus since the last time I cabled one, about 13 years ago. At that time, the construction site was fenced off from the general campus. Early in the project, several guys had been kicked off site for complaints from female students. The charges were... Creative. Sexual harassment, sexual abuse, etc. I don't know how someone gets sexually abused through a fence, but by the time I hit site, things had gotten so bad that they had lined the fence with connexes, and anyone talking to anyone on the other side of the fence was kicked off site, no exceptions (not the same thing as fired, but for practical purposes very similar). You know, freedom of speech, American Style. I was a bit put out by the bureaucratic overreach, but it was certainly not the worst I had seen. I kept the crew focused on the job, and ignored the GC's headaches.

Things relaxed as the work progressed, and some of the work I do comes at the very end of a construction project. So I come back to campus, and go to the little campus deli grab a sandwich and the campus paper, and head back to my van for lunch. Typical campus rag, nothing important, until I come to the woman's issues section, where what I read caught me by surprise.

It turns out that there have been a rash of incidents on campus. Dozens of rapes. Nobody is safe. Then I get to the quotes, and piece together that some if these rapes were unwelcomed touching in public. Some involved using hateful speech, still others involved the feelings of previous victims, having to relive their horrors because they saw other people displaying affection insensitively in public. I wish I was making this up. Those we're all rapes, as far as the campus rag were concerned. There wasn't even any uncertainty in the wording.

Well, things change, and while my experience and definitions may not match theirs, I can see the advantage of linking my cause to this other cause, so people will take my issue as seriously as they take that other issue. So from an activist's viewpoint, she was doing good work. By making inappropriate touching synonymous with rape, people will take inappropriate touching more seriously, and as an activist, that's a good thing, right?

But of course the problem is now you are diluting the charge of rape. In today's campuses, the issue is so broad and poorly defined, that the scenes described by Fox come up. And some of those kids will get older, and eventually sit on juries, or in other ways get involved in a rape case. Some of those former kids will be as outraged as I am. And some will think of that friend who was accused of rape for kissing his girlfriend in the park, or worse, be that guy..

As anyone who answers to a bureaucracy knows, if everything is a priority, nothing is. When everything is synonymous with rape, rape will be no more seriously taken than kissing in a park.

This is just a damned shame, and I don't know what to do about it, other than occasionally bring it up.

Jason
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Jason » Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:15 pm

When I grew up, sex was still one of two things: an act(s) or a box to check off that said either (M) or (F) (of course we would joke that it was a yes or no question). So it was essentially thus: sexuality is a mere descriptor or sub-category to one's personhood, a particularity of their basic humanity and the act was an expression of that particularity. We determined (M) or (F) by looking down and what (M) or (F) we wanted to "Act with" by looking around and trying to figure shit out until we got lucky or got our feelings squashed.

However, In the 1960's, women picked up the mantle of the civil rights movement. The inchoate LBGT community soon followed. Without getting into an idealogical or political discussion, or issues of rightness or wrongness, one outgrowth of this is irrefutable and has manifested recently in its full maturity: Sexuality has become not just a gender, or an act, but an "identity." It's now a personal and social construct that it was not previously. Helen Reddy sang a song "I Am Woman". Not "I Am "A" Woman". That missing article is huge. Now we have moved even further, where one can determine one's sexual identity. It is a choice. One can choose to be man or woman or decide how they will be identified.

The good and the bad of this is discernible and debatable and subject to endless discussion. I'm not going near it. But IMHO, its this added dimension of identity has everyone on fucking edge and has made the most casual interaction a landmine. Yes, there is sexual harassment and its ugly and real and it needs to be dealt with in a seriously manner. But sexual harassment has been conflated with "identity" harassment.

I mean, in all due respect, I'm sorry I stared too long. Really. Please, please, forgive me. But damn, we both know you look good. And I'm just a stupid (M) and neither of us would be here if our stupid dads (M) hadn't stared too long at our mothers (F).

saving-10-years
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:37 am
Location: Warwickshire, UK

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by saving-10-years » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:28 pm

@BRUTE
if the same action has very different consequences depending on its context, that can be very confusing for humans.
Yes. Agreed. Sorry if I've been adding to that.

I am not talking about inappropriate looking, banter, catcalling or wearing/displaying offensive images as automatically equating with sexual MIS-conduct although all these can be unwelcome bullying/harassment. Agreed that depending on the people involved and the context these activities could be welcomed as part of sexual conduct. I was suggesting that [my quote]
when there is no attempt to gain consent or assumption that consent would be granted
, that these behaviours are not likely to proceed to mating. The motive then seems (to me) to be simply about annoying the other person and exercising power by intimidation.

I equate rape with penetrative sex when the other party is saying no, or is in no position to do so. I don't equate ogling, catcalling or such with rape. I grew up at a time when women could be legally raped in marriage and was very glad when that exemption to (excuse for) rape was removed (1991). Thinking rape within marriage was okay grew from seeing women as property of men without legal status in their own right (pre- Married Women's Property Act times). Men would in those days defend women as 'white knights' because this was a possession that was being threatened. Like a horse or house. I agree women need to take responsibility for their own protection but also see (and have seen) women protect others, including men. 'White knights' can be either gender.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:48 pm

When I was in AIT, advanced training in the army, I trained with women. I was older than most, I was 20. Men out numbered women by about 10 to 1, available men to available women more like 50 to 1. This was during operation desert shield and desert Storm. It was fairly common practice to get a motel room, and a bottle, sometimes rent a VCR and tapes, and just be free for a few hours. Sometimes lots of people, sometimes just 2.

After Saturday training, Diane invited me to go with her and Vikki to the mall. I've described this in other threads talking about clothes. If you have no sense of style, let girls take you to the mall, and play life-sized Ken Doll. They picked the clothes, I bought them. It worked well.

At lunch, we got to talking about school, and at some point, I pulled out my notebook to draw something out as I was explaining. Conversation moved on, food gets eaten, and suddenly Diane is laughing out loud. I look over, and she's reading a letter I had written to a friend.

This was January of 1991, the shooting hadn't started yet, but everyone back home wants to know when I'll be there, and I still have 6 months of training to go before graduation. So, since 6 months is akin to forever in the mind of 20 year old me, I told him that the only danger I was facing was a possible death by TSB. Terminal Sperm Buildup. This is what caused Diane to laugh.

AIT is 6 days a week, and 65-70 hrs per week, plus charge of quarters duty, and anything else that requires a warm body and few skills. Not enough free time to get a life off post, too much time to dwell on not getting any action. For the guys.

Obviously, it was not the same story for the few available women. I knew who Vikki and Diane had been with the night before, and the weekend before, and before that, and before that. Not that I was stalking, but small towns have nothing on a military barracks for rumormilling. Plus, it's not like either Diane or Vikki considered secrecy important, or even possible.

After the mall, the three of us got a room, and there were many jokes about saving me from TSB. But, at that time, I was 6 foot, and scrawny at only 185. I didn't compare well with Diane's last night, or any of Vikki's toys. I thought I was in for a good night, but nothing would come of it.

About half way through the first movie, Vikki calls someone and takes off for the night, winking, and making more TSB jokes.

Well, this is more like it! Alone in a motel room with an (available?) single woman, surely I can make something good happen here, right?

Turns out, I could. With plenty of fumbling, and taking far longer than it should have, let's just fast forward an hour or two. I'm nude, Diane is down to panties, and she's stopping me. She wants to see what TSB looks like. She says there will be no orgasms tonight, the panties stay on.

This goes on for literally hours. Her eyes say yes, her body says yes, but her mouth says no, and when she says no, I pull away, and she pulls me back, rinse, repeat, and repeat, and repeat. Somewhere, deep into the morning, I give up and go to sleep.

The next morning, we get everything together, and check out, go back on post and resume military life. Diane was a bit miffed, but nothing serious, she went back to Dave, the guy she'd been with Friday night. Later, Vikki tells me Diane told her all about the night before, and described me as neutered. I told her I was up for anything, but no means no. Vikki tried explaining, like I was retarded, that it was a game, Diane wanted me to not take no for an answer. And I said yeah, I got that, but again, no means no, and I just won't play that game. The stakes are too high, and I like my games with well defined rules.

If I acted as I wanted to, as I believe she wanted me to, I would have had a better night, but then she would probably still go back to Dave on Sunday, or worse, she wouldn't. But if my always sketchy social skills had failed me, the consequences would be far more dire. In wartime, the UCMJ still calls for the death penalty for rape. More likely I would have spent my enlisted years in Leavenworth, stripped of security clearance, rank, self respect, etc. Even if there were never any societal punishments, the damage to my self image would be far more than getting laid was worth, even in my youth, when there was a premium on those few experiences I did have.

I'm not writing soft core porn here. I'm describing an outlaying case. Later, I will write more, and refer back to this.

Papers of Indenture
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:40 am
Location: Baltimore, Maryland

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Papers of Indenture » Tue Nov 14, 2017 3:04 pm

rigger,
That happened to me in college approximately five times and i'm only 31. I was a late bloomer who didn't become attractive to women until I was 20 so I was a little naive. I'd spend long amounts of time in foreplay, receiving "no" to anything further, and would wind up with a very difficult, frustrated woman on my hands in the morning. Each time I eventually came to find out that the "no" was really "yes" through backhanded gossip that painted me as some kind of limp dick rube. I had hurt their feelings by unintentionally rejecting them. Even after I understood the ruse I didn't change my behavior. Too risky and there were other, less gamified, fish in the sea.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Tue Nov 14, 2017 3:24 pm

Fast forward a few months, I go to Texas, stationed at ft bliss, still under age, partying in Mexico. I was accused.of sexual assault by Mexican cops in a shake down. Just as much fun as it sounds like, and I think I have described it elsewhere on ERE.

And finally, my 21st birthday. My buddy B and his buddy take me out to celebrate. I had never been in a bar in Texas, and I drink... exuberantly. At the 3rd bar, as we work our way thru another of many pitchers, we hear "you're in the army!?!" And we duck down, hide behind our hands, like 3 GIs drinking in a bar aren't obviously 3 GIs. But it was a guy hitting on someone on the other side of the bar. The place isn't full, but not empty either. At some point, someone sends me a drink, I send one back, and the lady who inspired the "you're in the army?" outburst earlier comes over to meet the birthday boy who just sent her a drink.

Boy is the right word. I was easily half her age. I was drunk, she was less so, but clearly interested in me. It wasn't a shared interest. But B is interested. He is all over her. At the end of the night, we all agree that we should keep the party going at her place, just a few blocks away.

I'm a good sport, always willing to help a friend, and besides, who wants to go back to the barracks? B works on hawk missiles, I work on Vulcan cannons. Lots of bad, drunken jokes about this being a hawk target, out of Vulcan range...

We get to her place, meet her roommate, she goes to mix more drinks, her roommate and B's buddy take the couch, B is on the loveseat, I take the recliner. When she comes back, the only available seat is next to B on the loveseat, cuz we are all subtle like that. Strategic. Tactical. Checkmate.

She came back with a tray full of drinks, handed them out, then seeing that the only seat is next to B, promptly sits in my lap.

Most of my memory stops there. I have 3 flashes between then, and a very awkward breakfast in the morning. I wasn't objecting in any of them, but I wasn't functional enough to be cooperative, either. Unless her thing was non-functional drunk guys, I doubt she had a good time either. I didn't stick around to find out.

There was much bitter recrimination on our way back on post. Apparently, I got more cooperative after my memory stops, and she lead me upstairs, nobody had to carry me. Both witnesses agree I seemed to have changed my mind.

My 3 flashes don't match that. In none of them did I want to be where I was, doing what I was doing.

Oddly, it wasn't until I was writing this out that it occurred to me that I may have been drugged. Not that it was necessary.

Now I would rate this as unpleasant. Not traumatic, and certainly not rape. When you consider all the ways this could have gone very sideways, I think I got off lightly. No diseases, no pregnancy, no charges. No damage done, just not something I would like to repeat.

But I never got into a similar situation again.

Ok, no more creepy stories, I promise. I just wanted to give a few examples, with details, so we had something less theoretical to talk about, here. Next I'll talk about the misadventures of picking up women before the internet changed everything.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:48 pm

Next, I want to look at conversational norms. Specifically, I want to talk about definitions, how we make them, and how we break them.

Please read
http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/06/26/co ... nsibility/

For a quick, 2 page primer. Yes, this is relevant.

User avatar
C40
Posts: 1936
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am
Location: Western U.S.
Contact:

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by C40 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:17 pm

I'm reading along, Riggerjack, and I appreciate you sharing.

I have a favor to ask. Can you update your avatar? I have some strange kind of annoyance about Photobucket.

Here, I've went to the trouble of finding the picture you had been using, and cropping it into, as well as I can recall, the same framing you had before, and uploading them somewhere else. And, I found one in color incase you'd like that.

You just need to go:
- Go into your control panel (by clicking your username near the top right corner of any page when you're logged in)
- Click "Profile" near the top of the page
- Click "Edit Avatar" on the left side of the page
- Paste one of the picture addresses below into the "link off site" box

Black and white, like you had:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4536/2455 ... d867_o.png

Color:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4567/2664 ... 24b4_o.jpg

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:29 pm

Now there has been some displeasure expressed here by ladies offput by badly delivered attempts to engage them.

First, let me apologize. If you were in the el paso area from 1991-94, I or one of my friends probably feature strongly in your horror stories when this topic comes up.

This was not unintentional.

But let me step back a bit. Start at the beginning and all that.

When I turned 21, and started going to clubs, I was not the overconfident blowhard you see before you. I was the booksmart geek long before "geek" carried any kind of power. And while I could easily run several 8 minute miles, and do push-ups all day, I was still not proud of my body, or my strength. This comes from being on a fort with 10000 other men, who as I did, considered this the barest minimum of fitness. At my best, I was never competitive for best, fastest, or strongest, and when I was young, I was either the best, or it didn't matter.

But, if you want to meet girls, basic math made it clear that off post was where they were, and where I needed to be to meet them.

As I said, geek. So friend networks were out. And just random approaches to random women on the street we're out. Nasal tone of voice from a lifetime of allergies and a nose that never worked right after the first time I had it broken. No gift of gab, too earnest, missing obvious social cues, and most importantly, I was fully aware of all of these shortcomings.

So, when the guys get to talking, and really, in the military that is most of what we do, eventually I start to put together a plan.

Go out with the guys, do what they do. Mimic success. This worked better in my head.

Turns out, going out, getting beers, and looking at the ladies from our table, is a horrible way to pick up women.

Turns out, the guys were mostly almost as bad at this as I was. The exception was Love. Not true love, but PFC Love. He wasn't stronger than me, he was shorter, and if he were the prettier man, it wasn't by much. But he was an inspiration. The man had no fear of rejection. None.

And over many a game of spades I did my damnedest to figure out how. It turns out to have been pretty much a combination of experience, (rejection loses its sting if you don't nurse the wound), confidence, and cocaine, but I didn't know about that third ingredient until much later. (It turned out, in the bars in the 90's, the best pick up lines were chopped on a mirror, but that's a different story.)

Eventually, we decided we needed to go out the next Saturday night, and pool $100 each, to be awarded to the guy who got shot down the hardest, as judged by everyone at the table, when we each approached our target of choice.

Having a bunch of guys critique your approach, and a pitcher of beer back at the table, and the excuse that you were trying for the pool money, was a great crutch, to help give the false impression of confidence. Plus, after a few beers, rejection stings a lot less.

And rejection is a constant. You ladies know this. There are times when you are waiting for someone, when you just wanted a drink, or you just wanted the attention from that other guy at the same table, not this guy with the crooked nose and mismatched eyes. I'm sure coming up with gentle ways to shoot me down took as much effort and discomfort as I had in making up and delivering introductions.

I give you ladies full credit. Most of the ladies I approached we're... polite in refusal. But if you think it's awkward getting hit on by a guy you aren't interested in, trust me, the other side of that experience is no more pleasant.

And I ran the full gamut. From the guy trying to talk over music so loud I couldn't hear myself, to the guy asking you to dance at the end of the night, who can barely walk himself.

So this is my apology, ladies. For my sins, for other's sins. In person, face to face, trying to catch your attention long enough to make a good impression, if one were available, or at least an impression, if a good one was out of reach.

You can't win if you don't play. And nobody starts out as a competitive player. Every guy you ever thought was awesome and cool, at one point had to work out his game. And he left a trail of confusion and rejection on his way to the place he is now. Some of us left a longer and wider trail than others, and I more than most.

I hope this tale of woe inspires a bit of compassion the next time a man puts you in the awkward position of rejecting him. Not for his sake but for yours. Yes, it's awkward. Yes, it's a hassle. But we are all getting better at what we are doing, and maybe, next time, he'll get it right with someone else. Maybe, next time, it'll be the right guy, with the rights moves. But he didn't start out as that guy.

But before you consider granting an exception to whatever rule you made up that precludes this guy in front of you, consider, when I look back, at the hundreds of rejections, the ones that make me smile today, are not the kind, gentle ones. No, the ones I remember best are the ladies who put no effort into lessening the impact. The ones looking to go back to work tomorrow with a story about how she put down that guy at the club. This isn't something I would recommend across the board, but sometimes, with the right backup, the spectacular drinks in his face rejection is exactly the right move. He may not appreciate it that night, but it may be in a post he writes in his 40's. :twisted:

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5390
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by jennypenny » Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:30 pm

Let me see if I’ve got this straight. In <100 posts, you guys managed to go from I don’t see it happening ... to it’s just part of the system, bandits, etc ... to what’s in it for me if I help women out ... to women started it with that equality nonsense ... to you should feel sorry for the guys who do this because they’re just socially awkward.

You guys should be on Weinstein’s defense team.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 3016
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:31 pm

Riggerjack wrote:As anyone who answers to a bureaucracy knows, if everything is a priority, nothing is. When everything is synonymous with rape, rape will be no more seriously taken than kissing in a park.
I agree. Even if I believed that the world of adults should be run on the same uniform code of conduct as used to be promoted in Montessori Nursery Schools in affluent suburb, there simply are NOT enough resources to do this. I mean if every squabble between two humans requires an appeal to authority for enforcement or adjudication, that's like a playground with a 3-1 child to adult ratio. IOW, in order to have a society in which behavior at the level of man-spreading is made criminal, every 4th citizen will have to be a lawyer or a cop.

That said, I actually am already seeing some turn-around on this issue at the cutting edge in the affluent schools for our youngest citizens. The notion that all sorts of children have differing natural needs is being respected. The children have 3 long recesses, rough-housing is somewhat tolerated, and it is even okay to laugh about the fact that the boys were exhibiting more testosterone (yet not competence ;) ) during a competitive activity. It's not okay to shame anybody for being born with certain tendencies, EVEN a greater tendency towards aggression and/or boob oogling. The reason why the war between the sexes will never truly flare out is that most women have fathers, brothers, sons, spouses, lovers or friends that they care about and do not wish to see harmed and, of course, vice-versa.

User avatar
distracted_at_work
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 11:51 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by distracted_at_work » Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:02 pm

Edit: Slept on it. Regret venturing back into this section. Going to focus on how high I should pull up my socks to optimize lifetime.
Last edited by distracted_at_work on Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:31 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
C40
Posts: 1936
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am
Location: Western U.S.
Contact:

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by C40 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:33 pm

@Jenny


I'm still at "I don't see it happening" (depending on what "it" we're actually talking about) so IMO the white-knight discussion in this thread is nearly all theoretical.

Now that I've been giving the subject some more thought, other than the two examples I described of my friends, I have recalled a bunch of times that I've stepped in, but that were not cases of misbehavior by men - but women not assertively rejecting men's advances and me doing it for them. (in numerous cases, because the woman specifically asking me to).

One example of this: I was out on a dance floor with a woman and her female friend. I was dancing with the woman, so the friend was in a highly approachable situation - one woman dancing that's not in a inner-facing circle of women. A guy was trying to dance with her, and she didn't want to. She basically just tried to act like she didn't see him. I can't recall if she looked to me or asked me to help or was just looking at the floor. She was clearly very uncomfortable. I reached around her and slowly/gently pushed the guy back from her. He was way too drunk and got mad and wanted to fight me. Good thing, he had a sober friend nearby that I had talk him down.

Most of the times I've said no for a woman went easy and I've been able to do in a way of "hey, dude, sorry, and it's not my fault, but nothing's going to happen with her. You might as well move on". I think in a lot of cases, the guys appreciate getting an actual response rather than an awkward avoidance - even if it's awkward coming form me rather than the woman. The riskier ones were on dancefloors where spoken words aren't audible and sometimes various bodies are in the way of seeing hand signals and facial expressions. Now that I don't go out to bars/clubs much, these things don't happen to my anymore.



So, When I think back to your ~"if you guys would take the cosbys of the world out to the woodshed" request, I have:

A - Two cases of hearing about my friends' misbehavior. (One where I talked to him about it, and the other where I now would if I had another chance to)

B - Numerous cases where women weren't telling the guy no (and wanted me to do it for them)

C - Zero times that I recognized a woman needing help in the moment.


So I'm curious - what did you mean, in practical terms, by "take the cosbys of the world to the woodshed"?

Were you referring to situations that would fall under C above, and that I'm missing? Or a different category, like maybe hearing that last weekend Billy came on way too strong to Suzy, and confronting Billy about it the next time I see him? Or something like "my neighbor down the street got arrested for rape last weekend and is out on bail, let's go beat his head in"?

7Wannabe5
Posts: 3016
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:15 pm

I must admit I was guilty of persecuting my ex-husband with unwanted sexual advances. Mostly not unlike those for which Louis C.K. admitted guilt. That's why I assumed he was a frustrated submissive. Also like other bandits, I only did it because it sometimes worked. I suppose under the new gender-neutral stricter guidelines I might have been charged with non-penetrative marital rape. Also 1st degree pouting. And one time I was so grouchy about it, I almost didn't take the plastic wrap off the icky cheese slices he liked on the sandwiches I packed in his lunch.

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2714
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by BRUTE » Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:25 am

<desire to make sandwich-related joke suppressed by pc sense tingling>

Post Reply