sexual misconduct

Should you squeeze the toothpaste tube in the middle or from the end?
CS
Posts: 206
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:24 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by CS » Fri Dec 01, 2017 12:30 pm

BRUTE wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:44 am
in other news, older humans in society force human children to do things against their will all the time. this applies to human male children just as much.

the scene is a household. the human female grandmother is visiting. the little boy doesn't like her. she's old, she smells bad, she likes to give him kisses with her bad teeth. he does not want to be kissed and hugged for minutes at a time by the disgusting grandma, and vocally and physically protests. yet through physical force and the bullying of the female human mother, what would nowadays be called sexual assault or rape continues day after day, and the little boys grows up in this toxic environment, learning that his desires and wants are nothing, compared to the feelings of the (female) grandmother and (female) mother.

anything to the contrary will be interpreted as nullification of brute's experience and a silencing of brute, a sign of his continued oppression.
Yes, exactly. That is correct and shouldn't be allowed either. Speaking up for one injustice is not tacit approval of other injustices. This is not a zero sum game.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1988
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:21 pm

o_O
:D
I was thinking that a good deal of "everyday sexual harassment" could be addressed and ameliorated through the same mechanism by which roadside littering has been much improved since the 1970s. However, even when humans are successfully taught the behavior of holding on to trash until proper receptacle can be found, the trash still needs to be processed. Therefore, "Not In My Back Yard" rule of thumb which causes trash created by the affluent to be processed in more impoverished regions would likely apply. Affluent men will be more likely to take "sex holidays" to realms where social manners and legislation are more lax.
Well, littering is a left over from pretty much all of human history. Most older (pre great depression) houses have a midden heap buried in the back yard somewhere. So maybe that is a good model for dealing with some of this sexual assault/abuse/harassment. But unlike littering, witch is mainly caused by short term thinking, casual disrespect, and convenience, there is a strong sex drive tied up in this. A drive that is poorly understood, and often poorly directed. So while I think a similar approach to littering could be useful to curb mild harassment, I think it's very unlikely to end even the most mild forms of misconduct.

And JP's question of the mechanism for not hitting girls being applied was never really addressed.

For me, the don't hit girls shaming started young. Like I don't remember the first time I heard that, but it was commonly understood by grade school. Mainly, this was boys on boys pressure. Maybe in families with more male adult role models, some adult pressure is applied to teach these rules. In a world where fights are mainly about status, fighting a girl is generally understood to be a status losing event. All the schoolyard rules I understood as a child we're about standing tall, being assertive, and minimizing damage. Don't kick. Don't hit girls. One on one. Some places where I was still thought a fight stopped when someone gave up. But this was more of a city/sticks divide, and this was in flux. It was how alphas separated themselves from betas, and how pecking order is established.

We seem to have completely screwed all of that up with zero tolerance and anti bullying policies. I don't know how to rebuild what we had, let alone try to create a system where boys shame boys for being creeps. And, as I said above, sex drive us poorly understood and poorly directed, so one thing we do know is shaming can have unexpected results on sex drive. Think of all the guys who have a thing for women's shoes. I don't think anyone intentionally tried to tie their desires to shoes, I can't think of an evolutionary reason for this, but there it is. If we don't know how to tie or release a man's desire to or from shoes, I doubt we could do the same to creepy or aggressive desires.

And that concerns me. Going back to the video example, of the guys on the street, saying "look at the tits on that!" We know we can, as a society, shame undesirable behavior, to the point that they wouldn't feel comfortable saying such things where they could be overheard. What we don't know us how that shame will manifest in such a society. And while I'm all for experimenting to make the world we live in a better place, and there is very clearly room and need for improvement here, we should go into such experiments with eyes wide open, and the knowledge that improving this metric is not the only measure of success. For instance, I'm not comfortable increasing polite public behavior, if that also makes nonpublic behavior more dangerous.

But my comfort isn't the issue here. I just want to address this like a real problem, not just click "like" and send memes.
Increasingly, as in the case of the two women I knew who were girlfriend-experience-escorts, the internet is blurring the line between pornography and dating, and making prostitution de facto legal with no intermediary pimp necessary. I asked my friend how she kept herself physically safe, and she told me that the not-USA-based internet site she used to find clients had a rating system like ebay and the escorts cooperatively shared information (and clients) otherwise, the traffic was heavy enough that she felt free to simply reject anybody who gave off whiff of psycho, and all her appointments were booked by her at large hotels with good security.
Good. I had heard of these things improving, but it's not an area of interest for me, other than in the most general terms. I should point out the the story I told has some caveats. At that time, to my knowledge, my uncle Kevin was not a pimp. His story was specific to prison, I don't know that it applies outside. He was an ex navy drug dealer, giving a full afternoon's safety briefing to his little brother who was about to go inside the first time, at 14. He was explaining the dangerous areas, and behaviors of the juvenile hall. It was as close a thing to a Hallmark moment as I ever saw in that family. Oh, and I'm not related to either of them. They are my former step father's younger brothers, but uncle is easier to type.

So, I don't know how prostitutes are recruited nowadays, but it's nice that tech seems to be making it better for independent operators.
Speaking up for one injustice is not tacit approval of other injustices. This is not a zero sum game.
It would be nice to think so, but I don't think this is true. There is only so much public attention and motivation. Today, we are talking about sexual misconduct, a few weeks back, nazi wannabes, a few weeks before that the Cheeto in Chief. We will be talking about something else in a few more weeks. How we frame our concerns when they are at the back of the public mind is how we frame them for the short time they are at the front. It is a short window, and we can be deep into the particulars of one subject, or wide in tieing varied subjects together. But we can't do both. So, while this is at the front, should we be deeply concerned about powerful men leveraging that for sex, or men being creeps on buses, or men being casually rude to strangers, or should we just click like on memes concerning all of these things? Because if there were enough resources to address all of these properly, we wouldn't have to talk about this at all, it would have been addressed before now. It's not like anyone other than the bandits who like this sort of stuff benefits from it.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1988
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:36 pm

I mean, instead of paying for privatized prison system, why don't we just sell violent criminals to space-tech-start-ups that need crash-test-dummies for budget Mars landings?
https://youtu.be/WXNl4swZOB0
I guess sometimes, there just aren't enough rockets.

User avatar
7Wannabe5
Posts: 3067
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:07 pm

Riggerjack wrote: But unlike littering, witch is mainly caused by short term thinking, casual disrespect, and convenience, there is a strong sex drive tied up in this. A drive that is poorly understood, and often poorly directed. So while I think a similar approach to littering could be useful to curb mild harassment, I think it's very unlikely to end even the most mild forms of misconduct.
Oh, I agree, but the analogy still holds up to some extent, if you think about a corporate dumping fines being treated as just another cost of doing business. Of course, sexual desire/drive and trash are always "eyes of the beholder", I only used this analogy because I am used to thinking about closing loops on wasted sources of energy.
We seem to have completely screwed all of that up with zero tolerance and anti bullying policies. I don't know how to rebuild what we had, let alone try to create a system where boys shame boys for being creeps. And, as I said above, sex drive us poorly understood and poorly directed, so one thing we do know is shaming can have unexpected results on sex drive. Think of all the guys who have a thing for women's shoes. I don't think anyone intentionally tried to tie their desires to shoes, I can't think of an evolutionary reason for this, but there it is. If we don't know how to tie or release a man's desire to or from shoes, I doubt we could do the same to creepy or aggressive desires.
My recollection of schoolyard rules was that it was okay to fight with a boy who was one grade younger than you :lol:

Human sexuality is poorly understood. It's pretty obvious that individual humans have both hard and soft tendencies and triggers, and some of this is culturally mediated. For instance, whether or not you find tattoos sexually attractive on a woman could be a "soft" generational divide between Boomer and Gen-X men. OTOH, it has been suggested that dominant sexual or social functioning in adult men may be influenced by whether the individual was frequently held above hip level by his mother as an infant. If true, that would be "hard" conditioning.

The core problem with trying to separate aggressive tendencies from sexuality is that they're snuggled right up next to each other down in the crocodile part of the brain. Anybody who has ever kept their eyes open while having sex in missionary position with a male should recognize the truth of this. I mean even if your lover is madly in love with you, it's still like 5 seconds of soft-eyes-I-tender-love-you followed by 10 seconds of hard-eyes-I-am-f8cking-your-brains-out, in cycling loop until total-testosterone-hard-face conclusion. In fact, one of the suggested exercises in couples sexual therapy is to attempt to achieve mutual eyes-open-and-locked orgasm, and one of the more amusing suggestions for interacting with a man who gets too locked-out-into-crocodile is to smack him hard on the ass in order to get him to give you some eye contact.

Looking another human in the eyes is universal mutual respect and recognition behavior. Bowing or ducking your head and looking down is submissive gesture. Staring down at another human, or not bothering to make eye contact while maintaining upright posture is dominant gesture. But signals can become confused because, for instance, maybe a woman is attempting to signal "I am invisible.", but her behavior is readily confused for 'I am submissive and willing to be approached." Maybe a man is just feeling something like 'I kicked ass on the soccer field this morning, and it is a beautiful sunny day.", but his behavior signals "I am taking up all the space in this room and conversation, and thereby making you feel relatively diminished." And an individual woman's own sexual experience might create tendency to hear differing signals when a man is overheard saying something like " And when you're a star, they let you do it, you can do anything... grab them by the pussy." For instance, what I "heard" in this sentence was that Trump is a childish buffoon who couldn't self-aware sexually dominate his way out of a paper bag. I am probably a better top than him :lol:

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by BRUTE » Sat Dec 02, 2017 4:07 am

CS wrote:
Fri Dec 01, 2017 12:30 pm
Yes, exactly. That is correct and shouldn't be allowed either. Speaking up for one injustice is not tacit approval of other injustices. This is not a zero sum game.
but it isn't sexism. this idea that if something bad happens to a woman there must exist sexism is absurd to brute.

in CS' original post in this thread, she describes a man as a "predator" for the crime of sitting too close and talking. there isn't any mention of touching or the talk being sexual. this is not sexual assault or harassment, it's simply being a jerk. it is also not sexist.

CS has equated men sitting with their legs apart to a literal threat of rape.

prominent feminists say proudly and publicly that they don't care if innocent men suffer, as long as some number of women get revenge.

this sounds very much like a zero-sum game to brute.

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by BRUTE » Sat Dec 02, 2017 4:14 am

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:07 pm
" And when you're a star, they let you do it, you can do anything... grab them by the pussy." For instance, what I "heard" in this sentence was that Trump is a childish buffoon who couldn't self-aware sexually dominate his way out of a paper bag.
this so much!

brute has no idea why humans were so angry at his comments. from the way Trump talks about human females, he's had sex about three times in his life. Mitt Romney seems like a womanizer in comparison.

the idea that this comment somehow made Trump a sexual predator was also complete bullshit to brute. the quote literally implies consent ("they let you do it"). sure, it could be construed in some way to imply that the consent was enforced, but it could equally be interpreted as the mentioned human females simply giving consent out of her own free will. that certainly seems the naive, obvious meaning of the sentence. the idea is pretty obviously true, too: who is really surprised by the claim that human females are open to sexual contact with stars?

insisting on these absurd, partisan, obviously politically biased, and reality-eschewing views drives all the reasonable humans away.

User avatar
7Wannabe5
Posts: 3067
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:59 am

Arrogance is a dysfunction of the adult masculine quadrant because it blocks the ability to learn and improve. To give Trump some credit, it is pretty obvious that he isn't repressed, so highly unlikely that he ever sought to cover up his trail with threats.

Maybe I am being partisan, but I find the accusations against Garrison Keillor rather confusing and unlikely. I mean somebody who would write the humorous line "where the women are strong, the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average" does not vibe predator to me. Sounds more like somebody who has a confident, relaxed ambient sexuality. Mark Halperin, OTOH, does sound like a nasty piece of work secretive-repressed egotistical prick.

Anyways, a skilled self-aware dominant is going to sound more like "direction, direction, direction...praise" or sometimes "critical/humorous remark, direction, direction, direction...praise" or "direction, direction, state of being inquiry, direction..." Being strong in the submissive requires the ability to hear and respond appropriately to direction when you judge it is in your self-interest to do so. Sometimes it is more important to be wary of from whom you are accepting/seeking praise than some idiot bandit attempting intimidation as short-circuit to earning respect.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1988
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:56 pm

Well, bill Cosby was funny, too.

I'm going to go off topic for a moment. 7w5, you are very descriptive, and precise when you write of sexuality, and in particular, dominance and submission. When I first heard your views, they were so far removed from my own desires and proclivities that I simply dismissed you as a fetishist, talking about her fetish.

However, I have been reading what you have been writing for years, and every once in a while, what you say matches up with something else that happened in my past, with previous girlfriends. This has happened enough that I think you are about 99% right.

You see, I'm just not wired that way. I have a pretty open mind, and I have played BDSM games, in all the roles. But it didn't do anything for me. Some roles were more uncomfortable than others, but none of them worked for me. I don't have anything against them, I just played along because we all want our partners to have a good time. So whatever works for her is worth giving a try. Your description of what a top sounds like is a nice summation of how I sound in a leadership role, I can do it well enough that I don't have to think about it, but it is just a role. I play the role for a purpose, not because it appeals.

What I'm trying to say is that I agree with you, but what you state with unconditional confidence, I would describe as one end of a spectrum, and I occupy the extreme other end. The far less popular end. I wanted to say this for the people like me. The ones who read what you write and dismiss it as fetishist, a minority view, because it clashes so hard against what they feel, and what they are often told.

I think almost all the women I have been with wanted me to play a role, and I was looking for an equal partner. When I found her, I married her, and now I compare what you write with how we are, and just smile. You and I are hardwired completely differently, but niether is wrong. It's just that while you enjoy a dominance differential, my wife and I just find it distracting.

This isn't particularly germain to this thread, but to your writing in general. I would like to disagree in support. :lol:

User avatar
7Wannabe5
Posts: 3067
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 6:00 pm

@Riggerjack:

Thanks for the props, but I'm actually the opposite of a fetishist (individual who is very specific in triggering, like ONLY aroused by red stiletto heels.) I'm hypersexual and very ambient/flexible in my sexuality. I was only actively engaged in BDSM community for around a year around 8 years ago. So, I am kind of like a gluttonous omnivorous foodie who spent a year at some exquisite cuisine culinary arts school, and then got bored always having to wait around for the food to be perfectly plated, but I held on to the vocabulary and concepts because rather universally applicable. Prior to that experience, I also belonged to a forum for intelligent people who were trying to save their sexually challenged marriages, and I learned about the theory of increasing sexual dichotomy feminine/masculine in order to combat what is very politically incorrectly described to as the lesbian bed death of the egalitarian heterosexual relationship. This theory is very relevant to this discussion because it suggests that developing the habit of exhibiting sexually neutered behavior throughout the course of the work day results in individuals who are weak in sexual dynamic.

So, hetero/homosexual, submissive/Dominant, masculine/feminine are 3 different spectrum, and there are certainly many more. People certainly are wired differently, but I would say that anybody who has ever experienced runner's high or hot yoga high or found it a bit exciting to watch a scary movie with a lover could probably find some enjoyment engaging in some aspects of BDSM. It's also rather scientifically interesting to experiment with your own wiring. For instance, erotic acupuncture can make your erogenous zones multiply and expand and jump all over your body. My Dom was actually early retired because he made a lot of money designing very expensive connoisseur stereo systems, so that was one of his areas of expertise, along with shibari. He was super meticulous, not like any of these idiots in the news, but not very cuddly. Anyways, most overt submissives are dark sad erotic catharsis seekers, and I am more about fun and curiosity. Super serious overt Dom types don't really like it so much when you try to make them laugh in the middle of a scene, and I am way too absent-minded and dorky to be successful as a Domme for more than about 5 minutes, but I do think that would be a good way to quickly achieve FI for someone who had the skillz.

ZAFCorrection
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:49 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by ZAFCorrection » Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:34 pm

Stanford swimmer Brock Turner is appealing his conviction. Apparently the prosecutor was prejudicial in indicating Turner was behind a dumpster when in reality he was next to a three-sided garbage can, i.e. not trying to hide what he was doing.

I guess running your reputation through the gutter a second time and risking a worse sentence is worth the slim chance of not having to register as a sex offender. :roll:

JamesR
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2013 9:08 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by JamesR » Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:07 am

Riggerjack wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:43 pm
Prostitution is also common and affordable. Significantly more so than US.

Harsh penalties to kill off the stupid bandits, and cheaper access to sex to satisfy the intelligent bandits?
Just how do you think prostitutes are chosen/trained/offered for sale/rent? I'm no expert, but I was there as a kid when my oldest uncle described it to his little brother who was facing trial soon.

As he described it, the prairie is full of wild ponies, but that doesn't mean anything. First you need to pen one off, and ride it until it stops fighting. Then each time you go back, it will fight less, until you break it in. Then you can add it to the stable for sale or rent.

Yeah, he wasn't a pimp, he was a cowboy. The rationalizations people use to reinforce their self image as a good guy despite all evidence to the contrary, are mind boggling. I haven't heard anything from him since the 90's, when he went inside on his third strike, I assume he is still alive, not that anyone cares.

But that afternoon comes to mind whenever someone suggests that somehow prostitution reduces rape.
Very good point. Thanks for this

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1988
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:24 pm

@7w5, first, you can't clarify a disagreement in support. Do not make me invoke the double dog dare ruling of 1947. :lol:
People certainly are wired differently, but I would say that anybody who has ever experienced runner's high or hot yoga high or found it a bit exciting to watch a scary movie with a lover could probably find some enjoyment engaging in some aspects of BDSM.
And that's my point. I have literally run thousands of miles with nothing vaguely like a high, never done yoga, and am turned off by horror movies.

So, when people reference a runner's high, my first thought is delusional flake. Or maybe just highly vulnerable to the power of suggestion.

But, as I hear more and more people talking about a runner's high, I have to reassess my initial thoughts on the matter. When the experience seems nearly universal, but just excludes me, I have to come to the conclusion that a runner's high is likely real, just not for me.

Your description of sex and sex drive, and all the way it's tangled up in the lizard brain (not just BDSM, but all of it) is like the runner's high above. I don't experience anything like that, and initially dismissed it. However, I have come to the conclusion over the years of reading your posts, that what you are saying is right, for the majority of people.

So my disagreement in support, was to help the people who have experiences more like mine (surely such people exist, right?) accept the validity of yours.

User avatar
7Wannabe5
Posts: 3067
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:04 pm

@Riggerjack:

lol- I didn't mean that YOU would enjoy it. I get that INTJs are probably mostly what I would call locked Dominants, whereas I am an open/ambient/switchy-sub. A locked Dominant is like somebody who has a pile of firewood, but doesn't own a lighter. Kind of like the opposite of somebody who tends towards premature ejaculation. Solid frame performers, but not the highest drive. Born old beyond years. Slow talkers. etc.etc.etc.

Peanut
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2015 2:18 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Peanut » Sun Dec 03, 2017 10:02 pm

CS wrote:
Fri Dec 01, 2017 12:30 pm
BRUTE wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:44 am
in other news, older humans in society force human children to do things against their will all the time. this applies to human male children just as much.

the scene is a household. the human female grandmother is visiting. the little boy doesn't like her. she's old, she smells bad, she likes to give him kisses with her bad teeth. he does not want to be kissed and hugged for minutes at a time by the disgusting grandma, and vocally and physically protests. yet through physical force and the bullying of the female human mother, what would nowadays be called sexual assault or rape continues day after day, and the little boys grows up in this toxic environment, learning that his desires and wants are nothing, compared to the feelings of the (female) grandmother and (female) mother.

anything to the contrary will be interpreted as nullification of brute's experience and a silencing of brute, a sign of his continued oppression.
Yes, exactly. That is correct and shouldn't be allowed either. Speaking up for one injustice is not tacit approval of other injustices. This is not a zero sum game.
I learned that this is called 'forced hugging' from a moms Fb group I'm a part of. Not a joke. And many moms these days are against it. I had never thought about it but it was a good lesson bc I have encouraged my son to hug his grandparents goodbye from time to time. Luckily he was always happy to. But now I leave it up to him.

Peanut
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2015 2:18 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Peanut » Sun Dec 03, 2017 10:07 pm

@7w5: I read that people covered for Keillor for years. I took a look at his personal bio and it is sketchy.

Frankly I think the fact that the line from a lot of these guys like Lauer that they were just married having multiple 'consensual' affairs with underlings (creating a hostile work environment in the process) already serves as an admission that they lack integrity. From there to harassment and misconduct is not a big step.

User avatar
7Wannabe5
Posts: 3067
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Mon Dec 04, 2017 7:42 am

@Peanut:

I agree that lack of integrity is a good part of what is causing these problems, but I think this is reflective of the fact that as a culture we lack integrity in the realm of sexuality. We are all guilty of perpetuating "Wink, wink...", "Don't ask. Don't tell", and confusing innocence with ignorance.

I think there is a good deal of truth to Jacob's theory that the odd mix of rational and romantic tendency of females to hide the "price" of sexual access on the market is partially to blame. I mean, I found myself nodding "Yes" with a good deal of the Everyday Sexism Tedtalk, and I noted that Laura Bates expressed frustration with the notion that complaining about harassment might correlate with something like "She's frigid." I think we need to greatly elaborate on that point before we are going to get any traction. Instead of a constant litany of "No means no!", "Pervert", "I don't like...", females need to step away from the archaic role of always being the passive negative filter, and talk more openly about what we do like. And not just in terms of what we find socially validating, but what actually contributes to OUR own sexual arousal and what WE find attractive.

There are fewer books on the topic of "female sexuality" available for sale on Amazon than there are books on the topic of "pancakes", and on the very first page of the search it degrades into books on the topic written for intended audience of male players. Rule of thumb in life and economics is that if you don't clearly value and cherish something that you own on your own terms, somebody else will try to snatch it up on their terms. I think it is just maybe kind-of-sort-of important that we start having this discussion in a political environment where one of the major advisors to the POTUS was a man who finds support from young men who follow leaders who have seriously misread books on the topic of sexuality from the 1950s based on books from the 1920s based on voodoo sex charms of the 19th century. It's like there is this kernel of truth that is being terribly distorted.

I wish more young women would give some mid-20th century feminist-backlash titles, such as "Fascinating Womanhood" by Helen Andelin an open-minded critical read. This book suggests that you can win back your husband's affection, maybe even if he is currently beating you, if you start exhibiting feminine behaviors such as putting bows in your hair. The frightening thing is that some of her suggestions actually do work. I know this to be true, because I am the sort of lunatic who will read something in a book, and then flip from Introvert to Extrovert, and have to go try it in the real world to settle my curiosity. So, I actually met a man for a first date at a giant camping store that has a cafe where they serve buffalo, and at some point in our conversation, I batted my eyes and uttered the phrase, cached from the book "I need a man, because I don't want to always have to kill my own snakes, if you know what I mean..." (smile), and he went down like a buffalo, completely goo-goo eyes for me, kissed me on the forehead in the parking lot, and romantically pursued me for a month even though I almost immediately recanted.(I know. I know. I am a terrible, trifling person. Menace to decent society, etc. etc.) THIS book is based on the same philosophy that the alt-right frog meme people are reading in mish-mashed boy version! And the problem is that until/unless the kernel of functionality is acknowledged, the garbage can not be effectively kicked or hauled to the curb. What helped me was to examine how these kinds of dynamics play out in gay male relationships. For instance, just recently I read an interesting Dan Savage column where he replied to a young gay man who was frustrated because his boyfriends always wanted him to bottom just because of certain factors of his appearance and personality which he couldn't easily alter.

I hope this makes some kind of sense.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1988
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:28 pm

So where are we? We wrote 10 pages, and if there was a solution, I missed it.

So let's take a different tack. We know the problem, and we don't seem to have a solution to go to. What about the rest of the world? We have like 4000 members, from all over the world. Is anyone doing a better job of this? Is there anywhere in the world where this is considerably better, and how did they do it?

We have lots of travelers here, is anyplace better? I assume there are places that are worse, but how about places that are neither better or worse but just different? Different how, and maybe a combination approach could moderate this?

I've told some stories I would prefer not to even think about, others have too. I feel like it's wasted if we can't even get to suggestions for improvement.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5447
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by jennypenny » Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:39 pm

We couldn't even agree on the nature or parameters of the problem. :(

nestbuilder
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 10:22 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by nestbuilder » Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:09 pm

Apparently Iceland has been a leader in gender equity for many years now and gender pay equity is now the law for larger companies. Pay equity and other measures are relatively new, so it may take a generation or three for the shift in power dynamics to play out in terms of sexual "misconduct"/abuse/violence.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/02/worl ... aders.html

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... -maternity

http://fortune.com/2017/03/09/women-ice ... ty-gender/

rref
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 12:24 pm

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by rref » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:58 am

@nestbuilder: The solution is to be a small, homogeneous population with a social democratic bend on a remote island (easy to control immigration) with a climate that isn't attractive?

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1988
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:34 pm

@jp:
We couldn't even agree on the nature or parameters of the problem. :(
Yeah. Sorry about that. I jacked your thread. It was with the best intentions, but rude none the less.

I'm going to copy a post from another thread to explain my reasoning, because I am lazy.
@RJ. You sound just like the guys in my office!
That was intentional. As I clarified later, I am relatively bike friendly, for a cager. But some topics here have a tendency to get general support, having as much to do with signaling as agreement. This causes me to have an urge to play devil's advocate. Because if there is no dissenting opinion, we get an echo chamber, and nobody considers the problem from a different perspective, and the subject is not developed.

We can all agree that we SHOULD ride bikes, and that SUVs are killing the planet, but agreement with each other doesn't address the interests of those who have other priorities, nor does it lead to alternative solutions. Both of those are NECESSARY for an actual, working solution.

I am not so self centered as to believe that we are really solving the world's problems here. But we are participating in solving the world's problems in the sense that the world is constantly changing, and how that change happens is related to the conversations about the problem. Better conversations lead to better solutions. Better solutions infect interested parties, as people here come up with a different solution, and then members here talk about the interesting idea they heard about in their other forums.

For instance, above, I suggested a bikelanes utility. Not because I think someone here would start such a thing. But because a bike rider here, may share the idea on their bike rider's forum, where it may reach a bike friendly silicone valley aggressive CEO wannabe, who may look at running with it.

Or not. Maybe it dies on the vine, and we just have to go through life with a better understanding of the people who disagree with us. That would suck, I guess.

The things I said here weren't to make folks uncomfortable, though I'm sure they did. Nor to change the subject. I wrote what I wrote because this is a serious issue, worthy of serious discussion, and I have been trying to keep the conversation going, because I REALLY want this fixed.

To that end, I dredged up some stories, so we had specific things to talk about. This is a subject that is both uncomfortable and deeply subjective. By sharing my stories, I was at least hoping to limit the subjective part of the conversation.

And I will admit to being a bit manipulative, in that I tried to engage a few specific forum members beyond the general membership. Specifically, I targeted:

CS, because I usually disagree with her, and she is very vocal on gender issues, so if we get a solution, she is an excellent conduit to people most likely to be able to get action or traction on it.

You, for your media and conservative connections.

Jacob, for a great high level view of the systemic problems/potential solutions.

Saving 10 years and nest builder for just well thought out posts. I am most hopeful for a solution to come from this quarter.

And of course 7w5, for reasons outlined in earlier posts.

As always, my intentions are clear to me, but my methods resemble madness to others. My only excuse is that I consider "disagreement in support" to be primarily support, and forget that many people only see disagreement. :oops:

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5447
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by jennypenny » Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:08 pm

@RJ — I wasn’t aiming that at you at all. I was referring to the spectrum of responses from the women. Some feel only direct action (and only if the woman hasn't acted stupidly) is out of bounds. At the other end, some feel any microaggression that is unique to the male on female dynamic can be deemed sexual misconduct. If we (women) can’t agree on what constitutes a foul, how can we decide what the penalty should be or who is qualified to be the referee?

I was glad you shared. I want to understand this from a male perspective. I think it’s hard for women to grasp how 'good' men can ignore this behavior. It's also hard for men to understand the kind of vulnerability women feel in these situations. Even strong, gun-toting women. ;)

The closest male equivalent we’ve discussed on the forum might be in the thread about pre-nups. Many men seem to have strong feelings about divorce, women taking their money, and the legal preference still given to women in court. I sensed a particularly strong vulnerability when it came to relationships and money. I assume that’s from our traditional roles of men being valued for their earning potential and women being valued for their child bearing potential, but I’ll leave that to 7W5 to decipher since she’s much understanding those motives than I am.

I stopped posting in this thread because I have mixed feelings about the current climate. I'm very happy to see victims come forward and to see a shift in cultural attitudes towards this kind of thing. I really hope it sticks. That said, I'm uneasy about the way people's lives can be demolished in a matter of hours on social media. While I don't think any of the victims in this particular round have been innocent, the power of social media to 'richard jewell' someone almost instantaneously petrifies me.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1988
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:25 pm

That said, I'm uneasy about the way people's lives can be demolished in a matter of hours on social media.
Scott Alexander wrote a nice post on this.
http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/05/02/be ... -meanness/

He has banned folks for misusing gendered pronouns in reference to transgender, and this seemed extreme to me at first, but I have come around on this issue. His rules are different from Jacob's, but are similarly well thought out.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1988
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by Riggerjack » Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:39 pm

@ nest builder,
Thank you. That is exactly what I was looking for. I don't think we can depend on a top down, legislation approach to get us a working solution, but that could be my own inclinations.

I prefer to keep the distance between decisions and feedback as little as possible for the most accurate adjustments

Kind of like the drunk driving car they came up with in the 90's, where they put a small, variable delay into the steering and brakes, then put sober drivers in the car, on a controlled track. Driving is easy. Driving a coned off course, easier still. Driving with a delay between command and response is almost impossible.

The same principal applies when talking about making societal change with the sledge hammer of government. Overcorrection is not an unusual problem, it is the norm.

But I have high hopes that a more gender equal balance of power and money may help a lot.
@nestbuilder: The solution is to be a small, homogeneous population with a social democratic bend on a remote island (easy to control immigration) with a climate that isn't attractive?
All fair critiques of Iceland, but not of her suggestions.

saving-10-years
Posts: 472
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:37 am
Location: Warwickshire, UK

Re: sexual misconduct

Post by saving-10-years » Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:37 pm

@RiggerJack Now I feel under pressure to say something well thought out! Well its been THE thread for me for deleting messages and deciding not to send. Often because by the time I get there I can see that what I have written won't be helpful.

I have found your personal disclosures really interesting. They, and some of @7w5's posts, have had me pause and reflect on things I did in my youth which could be construed as a mild type of sexual misconduct (although there was no intention there on my part).

I don't have quite such a colourful past as either of you do, but I do have some interesting skeletons rattling about. I worked at one time at a national level in sex education so I am aware of the prevalence of sexual misconduct affecting young people, especially those with learning difficulties. Exposure to such real life tales possibly desensitise me from complaints about sexual misconduct where the parties are operating as equals and have the option of speaking out or leaving. Many people don't have either of those options.

@CS's responses have taken me back in time. Made me recall the strong differences in opinion between branches of feminism that caused me such frustration in my youth. Perhaps its inevitable that for each generation there may be a sense of complacency and a certain battle-weariness around issues where we have fought hard and feel we have made significant progress. Younger people arriving at the scene need new challenges and to make their own progress and discoveries, raise their own questions. (I once was that younger person).

@jp reading your recent comments - after having written this post - I feel that there is plenty that the women here can and do agree on. But we've been trying to test what we each understand by this term and what we should do. If anything I have posted gives the impression that I am impatient with women (or indeed anyone) who does not stick up for themselves. Take action. Stop abuse in its tracks. Then I apologise. I do get impatient with anyone who bitches about things and does nothing (or worse bitches about things on social media and then think they _have_ done something), but I am all too aware that different women have different personalities and backgrounds, varying levels/types of sexual history, tolerance and aspirations.

I was interested in a comment that @ffj made when we were in the 'white knight' discussion phase. I understood that comment as 'I am a good guy I hang around with good guys and so I don't have the opportunity to spar verbally on this issue with others, or fight them physically if they get out of line'. It brought back to me forcefully that when I was 20 I was disgusted with a friend's husband G (she was much older than me). G saw no problem with spending time socially with someone who physically abused their wife - G knew they did this or at least knew his own wife believed they did this. G described this friend as a 'good guy'. This was c.1975. I don't think G would think this way now. But I also worry that if the good guys only stick with the good guys then how are the bandits ever going to be called to account, or even see a different model up close?

Post Reply