So now flirting or asking a girl out is sexual harassment

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
a reply to: HeathenJessie

I would want to be rid of her as well. But here is the thing...if you fire her for complaining she has a retaliation lawsuit to file against the company in addition to the one for harassment.

All I said was "Powerball". It shouldn't matter that I was grabbing my crotch when I said it...

I know, dude, it just isn't right.

We need to get rid of them in the workplace - they ruin everything. It's all upside down and back to front, I've actually discussed this with my immediate manager, I told him they should fire all fo the feamle employees thinking he'd understand but instead he threatened me.

What happened to our powers?

I'm a particularly attractive man, and had a homosexual boss come on to me a little bit. I think it kind of gave me an idea what attractive women go through. (Just an idea. Their version of it must be 10 times worse.)

I also am very close friends with a woman who gets hit on a lot, because she's very pretty. I get to see that side of it too. I've done the whole "wing man" thing to help get rid of a guy who was creeping her out at a bar once, in a polite way without creating conflict (he didn't make it easy for me, though). At another time there was a customer who started stalking her, but someone from corporate came and put an end to that. If you ever see this woman's breasts, and behind, you would understand.


The problem with being in this position is that people invest their own personal ego in the question of whether she will (and/or would) date them. They may be asking her out merely as a test, to see if they are as cool as they hope they are, totally ignoring any question of personal compatibility. (Indeed, if she were to accept and date them, they would probably break up with her soon after having confirmed their ego for themselves.)

A person who's ego is threatened in this way sometimes become very dangerous. There is no visible limit to the stupidity some people engage in once their self image is perceived to be in danger. Men have been known to murder women in cold blood over stuff like that. "Emotionally insecure" people sometimes equate a threat to their ego as being a threat on their life, and respond accordingly.


The trouble for the pretty lady is she doesn't know who is who. It only takes one psycho, and you're dead. Game over. No continues.

For a pretty lady who has to deal with hundreds of potential psychos in her life, that's like playing Russian Roulette again and again and again, with one bullet in the cylinder. It seems like a small risk if you only look at one specific case, but the totality of all the shots taken together would amount to a virtual guarantee of death if nothing were done to mitigate the risk.

In the 1920's this woman's best bet would be to shack up with the strongest, meanest, most intimidating guy in the tri-state area. He might beat her, or mooch off of her, or cheat on her with other women, but at least she knows the creepy guy at the bar will have to think twice before glaring at her and stuff.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

I see what you mean, you're right - Rocky Balboa was a particularly big and brutish guy. There was never any footage of domestic violence taking place but I'm pretty sure it probably happened. She certainly suffered at the hands of her brother, Paulie.

I don't think she was particularly good looking, though. I didn't find her very attractive in the Godfather, either.

But it does make sense, someone so frail, vulnerable and sheltered wanting to shack up with a neanderthal like Balboa.

Anyway, I've had enough of this thread, it's crap.

I'm away.

originally posted by: HeathenJessie
Anyway, I've had enough of this thread, it's crap..

What??? This thread you pwned and personally won bigtime bad a few pages ago?

It's crap? Shooooot.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I didn't say I owned it.

I said I'd won it, dude. Chill out, man.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

That was a pretty lewd comment I must say.

You probably offended a lot of people, I'm not one of them, This thread's over, don't get pi$$y with me because you got beat.

a reply to: HeathenJessie

*wicked cackle*

Move along, lil missy.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Can we just stick to the topic at hand, please? You already lost.

I've been doing threads since before you were born...so don't come round here giving it the big 'un or I'll grass you up to the mods.

a reply to: HeathenJessie

You mean "tell on me for being mean?"

Oh, I think we are completely on-topic. But go ahead if I hurt your feels. It's worth a warning to me.

Sod it, then...I'm away.

This thread's rubbish, anyway.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

I don't think anyone in this thread is advocating that men should have an inherent right to verbally harass (in a sexual manner or not) any woman at any time. I don't want to be harassed at anytime myself, so I don't ever intentionally harass others, even when I lose my temper. Men should definitely not have a right to allow the sting they feel to their ego as being an excuse to start harassing, mistreating or insulting any woman simply for denying his advances. I am in agreement this is an area that men in general need to work on a lot harder. More men should speak up if they see a friend or relative showing signs of being aggressive or creepy after a rejection, and state strongly at the time that their behaviour is wrong and unacceptable. It won't prevent psychos from still trying their luck, but it will significantly decrease the number of people who think they can engage in psychopathic behaviour in response to what really is a trivial issue (rejection from the opposite sex) without first being forced to consider whether any further action is in their best interest to proceed with. I don't know what more I can do personally to help this occurrence because I don't see these things happening around the people I know and associate with at the moment.

Now for my criticisms of your reply. I do feel the need to ask you why you had to emphasise at the beginning that "Their [attractive women in the workplace] version of it must be 10 times worse" than your own experience was? Do you feel the need to feel guilty or embarrassed that you found your experience so unsettling at the time it happened? How else can you jump so quickly from describing your own experience to defending what you just said by emphasising that women must have it even worse than you could have imagined? It doesn't quite add up for people who notice these types of things.

The trouble for the pretty lady is she doesn't know who is who. It only takes one psycho, and you're dead. Game over. No continues.

As a man, I do realise I am far less likely to be put in such a situation. So I can sympathise with this female friend of yours. Do you think think she herself is as aware of the issue as you are? If not, then explain to her your concerns. IF she then asks for advice, tell her one way she can help herself is to suggest she TRY dressing more modestly. (You did mention "the totality of all the shots taken together would amount to a virtual guarantee of death if nothing were done to mitigate the risk." Which indicates you realise her being so attractive puts her at an extra risk compared to most average or ugly women, even though she never chose to be attractive in the first place.) Reality is reality whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, so if you DO care for her as you say, it's probably best to use your position as a man to inform her of this knowledge you have picked up.

In regard to the rest of your "male guilt" identity stuff, it's unfortunate you need to highlight the worst in male behaviour from almost 100 years ago as if it has not — at all — improved in terms of the the male collective behaviour as a whole today in the year 2017, while disregarding women's progress in the Western world, and all the accomplishment that has been made in that time.

Again, I am not judging you because I have never met you before or even interacted with you on this forum (unless I have forgotten), but I do pick up some signs that you might be overcompensating for the guilt you feel as a man seeing these other men do these things and feeling so powerless to stop them from hurting women like your friend, that you choose to instead believe that most men have this problem, most men are potential psychos so therefore it is acceptable to treat all men as potential psychos to avoid any risk.

If you do believe that last sentence above might be truthful, you should re-examine your own views because you are entering dangerous territory. For example, my sarcastic comment earlier that maybe it's a good idea for men to consider not hiring females to avoid the risk of drama such as sexual harassment suits, accusations you are paying her less, accusations you promote misogyny by not catering to her needs etc. Do ANY of us benefit from that kind of mindset?

a reply to: Dark Ghost

Why don't you crawl back into your playpen.

The discussion is about work place ethics with those in the workplace being taken advantage of... that is what the OP was speaking of in their comments of the topic.

Now if you want to go off of the title? Then maybe you can have some say; as to what I say... but even then? Step off.

I am full aware of "rape" culture... and how it is supposed to be cool of popular it never has been cool or popular, if you like taking advantage of people in some idea of positions? Get on all fours bark like a dog and see how it feels.

That's the nicest way I could put without typing it out

originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
Why don't you crawl back into your playpen.

TRIGGER alert, TRIGGER alert!

Beware: this person has just had a deep nerve touched or has been so personally offended that they needed to resort to an ad-hominem in their first engagement with another member in this thread.

I'm confused. Should I feel compassion for you or embarrassment on your behalf?

The discussion is about work place ethics with those in the workplace being taken advantage of... that is what the OP was speaking of in their comments of the topic.

Most of the discussion has been on topic in regard to the broader issue addressed in the opening post. Maybe you should read over it again to ensure you didn't miss anything that might be inconvenient to your current rambling.

Now if you want to go off of the title? Then maybe you can have some say; as to what I say... but even then? Step off.

Sorry, I didn't realise you were a moderator, or the author of this thread...oh wait, you aren't!

What arrogance to assume you are in the position to make such demands. But keep them coming if you feel it's necessary to stamp your lack of authority.

I am full aware of "rape" culture... and how it is supposed to be cool of popular it never has been cool or popular, if you like taking advantage of people in some idea of positions? Get on all fours bark like a dog and see how it feels.

*FACEPALM/CRINGE*

Who asked your opinion again on a term that has not been mentioned by myself or anybody I have directly communicated with so far in this thread? If you want to dig yourself in a hole that will be to your disadvantage, please do go on and for anybody not aware of the term, explain it so that everyone can be on equal footing. You just brought it up out of nowhere, might as well explain it.

That's the nicest way I could put

without typing it out

Who said you had to be nice? You didn't actually think grown adult strangers on the internet cared about your sensibilities did you?

Do you wish to engage in what has been written and add to the thread, or are you going to attempt to derail it with further displays of petulant behaviour?

Edit: careful with those stars, MotherMayEye, they are not infinite. I did mention that to another member earlier in the thread who does seem to be absent at present. Perhaps she is looking for more of them before she returns?

a reply to: IAMTAT

Well that sure changes things.

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Taggart

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Taggart

originally posted by: xstealth

School and work are the next-most common meeting locations (15-20%). Parties and bars are good for short-term (less than one month) sexual relationships (17-25%) and not bad for marriages (8-10%). Churches are good for meeting marriage partners (11%),

It quite obviously says "School and work are the next most"
So, that would in fact mean it isn't the most.

edit on 25/4/2017 by Taggart because: (no reason given)

a reply to: HeathenJessie

You are missing my point entirely.

The point is this: As a man, all I have any control over, or should have any control over, is my personal conduct. If my standards of behaviour, comportment and conduct are high, then it does not matter what the people around me are doing. I can rest easy knowing that I did my part. I do not need for everyone around me to operate to my standards, I only need to make sure that I do.

Are you becoming aware of the picture I am trying to paint for you here?

The whole reason to grow up into a gentleman rather than anything else, is because as a gentleman, all you ever need to worry about is your own conduct. If someone elses conduct is less well managed and produces bad form, thats just too bad, but it is not your problem. If anything, while you maintain some minimum standards of decency and respect, others around you can only make you look ten times better than you are, by continuing to behave like animals, thats men and women included. So, should the woman who has the objectifying image on her computer have it? No. Does it matter? No. Your conduct should matter to you, because it is all you have control over, or should have any control over. You can use your example to try and lift the people around you up a bit, that is absolutely noble. But if you are looking at other people and how they behave, and asking "Well, if they can, why can't I" then you are not in the right mindset at all.

There is a difference between double standards, and simply having some of your own. If you have them, what other people are doing ceases to become in any way important. To be honest, if you are paying the correct amount of mind to your conduct, you probably will not have time to consider the failings of others nearly so much.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Sir.
Well put.

a reply to: TrueBrit

TrueBrit,

I really respect your attempts to make everyone happy, I really do. I also understand your tendency to remain as consistent as possible so you can keep making the claim that your views are concrete and rigid when it comes to the expectation of presenting yourself as a gentlemen no matter what (and have that claim endorsed by feminists without even needing to ask them).

But seriously man, some of the stuff you have written in this very thread...it is concerning you are refusing to re-examine your concrete, never-changing compulsion to play the role of the gentleman. I know you are not a stupid person. I know you have said on other topics you don't mind admitting when you are wrong and that you are willing to change your mind if better evidence or reasoning becomes available to you.

How, TrueBrit, how can you go against those very principles when it comes to the discussion of topics relating to gender issues? Can you seriously suspend the role of gentleman for the moment and THINK, think DEEPLY about some of the revelations you have been presented with in this thread. Please read through this thread in full, you can ignore EVERY one of my posts if you wish, but for the love of God reconsider your position on continually playing the gentleman.