Sexual Harassment in Cosplay

Started by Inari, October 20, 2012, 12:27:18 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Inari

For those here who do not know what cosplay is, well... in a nutshell; you play dress up as your favorite comic, film, video game, anime or manga character/s. It's for fun and a life long passion. Here are some examples:

Batman, Bane and Commissioner Gordon
Duke Nukem
Naruto
Mass Effect 2 - Jack
Okami - Amaterasu
Fullmetal Alchemist - Lust

Now; more and more I am seeing stories like this pop up:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2220586/Comic-Con-Mandy-Caruso-dressed-racy-costume-recalls-sexual-harassment-fans.html

Sadly, as you see from the comments, people are arguing "She dressed like that so she deserves to be sexually harassed!" or "How else does she expect to be treated, dressed like that?!?" To me this is insulting and an outright idiotic way of behaving. It's also really just mind boggling how people can justify this sort of attitude.

Now as much as I reaaaally hate making this compassion. To me it is true: They are pretty much using the same argument/logic as lawyers and perpetrators do in real life rape court cases. "She dressed in a provocative outfit, so how else did she expect to be treated?" or "Dressed like that? She was asking for it!" It is this one of the very reason victims have a hard time coming forward.

It may seem over dramatic making that comparison but when you take a step back, it is true. Sure some girls cosplay that way for the attention, because attention is good and makes one feel good about the amount of work they put into their costume. Not to mention all the time they spent dieting to fit into it. But what isn't acceptable is when male geeks proceed to take it as an invite to sexually harass them and just make them feel uncomfortable. As I say - the defense being "She dressed in a revealing outfit so how can she not expect such things to happen?" I am sorry but that is no excuse.

To me, I don't think there would be such a problem if there were more tact. Instead of making it obvious that they like what they see, they should just keep it to themselves. Not every female cosplayer wants a guy to whisper their deepest sexual fantasy while they are having a picture taken. Or to have a random person walk up to them and comment on what a nice ass or rack they have. It is humiliating and disgusting behavior.

But this is just my personal opinion on the matter. It might be that my "inner feminist" is rearing it's head and that I could just be over reacting and all that jazz. Or I could be right, since if this happened in a 'normal' situation there would be law suits everywhere. However, a lot of female cosplayers suffer in silence and some get a little put off at cosplaying again. To me that just isn't right.

So your thoughts?
Are female cosplayers just begging to be sexually harassed?
Do the rules on sexual harassment suddenly change when a girl gets into a revealing outfit?
Do you think it's acceptable for this to happen?
Am I just an idiot for even bringing this up? :P

Cyrano Johnson

#1
It's been known for a long time now that geek culture contains vast, undrained swamps of unreconstructed misogyny (along with bigotry, ignorance, racism and various other unpleasant things). Stories like this are just another example of the widespread ignorance and lack of self-reflection that feeds those phenomena in much of the male geek community. It's exactly why many girls prefer to avoid cons where there are booth girls: the spectacle the fanboisie tend to make of themselves, and the resultant atmosphere for women generally, is horrific.

Of course it's very obviously unacceptable, on account of sexual harassment being criminal. But until a much larger share of the geek community faces up to the need for some self-criticism -- which many socially-isolated members tend to hide from behind an ironclad sense of their own victimhood -- and some basic social ground rules, it's not going to change.

(As a side note: some of those cosplays you've linked are incredible. The Duke Nukem one in particular... now that's not something you see every day...)
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

DarklingAlice

I don't think that it is overly-dramatic or even stretching things to make the link to the type of character attacks you sometimes still see in rape cases. There is really no set of circumstances that makes uncouth, unwanted, sexual advancement okay. None. Period.
For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong.


Callie Del Noire

I've told a few tools to give the ladies space when I come across them giving them grief, typically though I try to send the Con Staff to do it if I see it (and they aren't already doing it)

Trieste

I don't think I can think of a single instance wherein it is acceptable to go up to a strange woman and ask her cup size. Not one.

In addition, these aren't just random things women are wearing. They are costumes emanating the heroes of the comic world, at a comic-inspired convention. At no point does clothing give free license for harassment, but especially not when they are actually wearing thematically appropriate clothing.

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Trieste on October 21, 2012, 01:01:03 AM
I don't think I can think of a single instance wherein it is acceptable to go up to a strange woman and ask her cup size. Not one.

In addition, these aren't just random things women are wearing. They are costumes emanating the heroes of the comic world, at a comic-inspired convention. At no point does clothing give free license for harassment, but especially not when they are actually wearing thematically appropriate clothing.

I agree Trieste.. but that doesn't mean you won't have some ignorant Yutz DO IT. And I've seen it happen. Or assume because they are dressed up as Black Cat, Cat Woman, Scarlett Witch, Mantra, (the list goes ON) that it's OKAY. That is usually why the Con folks watch the female cosplayers closer so they can lend a hand if needed.

Trieste

I know it's widely assumed among geek culture that it's okay to ignore social mores.

The people who make that assumption should be repeatedly kicked in the gonads until they understand that it is not okay. I hear that electrical aversion therapy can also be quite effective.

Vekseid

Quote from: Starcry on October 20, 2012, 12:27:18 PM
Sadly, as you see from the comments, people are arguing "She dressed like that so she deserves to be sexually harassed!" or "How else does she expect to be treated, dressed like that?!?" To me this is insulting and an outright idiotic way of behaving. It's also really just mind boggling how people can justify this sort of attitude.

Now as much as I reaaaally hate making this compassion. To me it is true: They are pretty much using the same argument/logic as lawyers and perpetrators do in real life rape court cases. "She dressed in a provocative outfit, so how else did she expect to be treated?" or "Dressed like that? She was asking for it!" It is this one of the very reason victims have a hard time coming forward.

It's fine as a comparison, in my opinion. The fundamental lack of respect is the same. She made a clear acknowledgement of the difference between pure social ineptitude like inability to divert attention from her breasts, and this incident. She's not complaining about guys staring at her breasts, she's complaining about a pretend-alpha and his posse who were downright predatory.

Demanding that she spank him and discussing her cup size in front of her and debating over it gives me a vibe somewhat like discussing the qualities of a piece of meat. Sure, it didn't end in gang rape. It's the same sort of dehumanization that leads to it, and there's no reason to tolerate it.

Quote from: Cyrano Johnson on October 20, 2012, 06:34:56 PM
It's been known for a long time now that geek culture contains vast, undrained swamps of unreconstructed misogyny (along with bigotry, ignorance, racism and various other unpleasant things). Stories like this are just another example of the widespread ignorance and lack of self-reflection that feeds those phenomena in much of the male geek community. It's exactly why many girls prefer to avoid cons where there are booth girls: the spectacle the fanboisie tend to make of themselves, and the resultant atmosphere for women generally, is horrific.

Of course it's very obviously unacceptable, on account of sexual harassment being criminal. But until a much larger share of the geek community faces up to the need for some self-criticism -- which many socially-isolated members tend to hide from behind an ironclad sense of their own victimhood -- and some basic social ground rules, it's not going to change.

Most people who engage in active harassment don't know what they're doing is unacceptable. They can't comprehend the concept. It's even worse when they've already made a number of friends - many bans led to harassment campaigns of their own. "Did you tell on me/him? Did you!?"

I think many social groups are wary about 'losing support' or membership, not really comprehending how many people quietly or publicly leave over getting harassed. There's also the issue of where to draw the line, or making sure accusations are legitimate.

Unfortunately, dealing with creeps is a two-step process.
1) The person being harassed has to make the issue known to the authority figures in the given community, and
2) Said authority figures need to be willing to do something about it.

Those can both be a hurdle. Often the first is "It must just be me." or "I can take care of myself." ...what about those who can't?

TaintedAndDelish

Well, they offended her, what do they expect?

If your first words to a woman who you don't know(or more specifically, to one who doesn't know YOU) are, "You have nice tits" or "My dick is hard", you're gonna get ignored if not slapped. I think that's one of those unwritten rules that you learn somewhere around puberty. Perhaps that should be taught in high school as its not obvious to everyone.

What makes this tricky for guys, is if a woman approached a guy and said, "You are making my cunt wet" or "I like the bulge in your pants(for those who don't understand the wet comment)", the guy would take that as a cue that he's gonna get lucky. He would not take offense.(generalizing, obviously). So when an inexperienced guy uses reverse logic and tells a woman something that he sincerely things is flattering only to get slapped or dissed, it causes a little initial confusion. If he is social enough to have more experienced friends, they will likely clue him in at this point, otherwise he may be bound to repeat his mistakes.



Inari

Quote from: Cyrano Johnson on October 20, 2012, 06:34:56 PM
It's been known for a long time now that geek culture contains vast, undrained swamps of unreconstructed misogyny (along with bigotry, ignorance, racism and various other unpleasant things). Stories like this are just another example of the widespread ignorance and lack of self-reflection that feeds those phenomena in much of the male geek community. It's exactly why many girls prefer to avoid cons where there are booth girls: the spectacle the fanboisie tend to make of themselves, and the resultant atmosphere for women generally, is horrific.

Of course it's very obviously unacceptable, on account of sexual harassment being criminal. But until a much larger share of the geek community faces up to the need for some self-criticism -- which many socially-isolated members tend to hide from behind an ironclad sense of their own victimhood -- and some basic social ground rules, it's not going to change.

(As a side note: some of those cosplays you've linked are incredible. The Duke Nukem one in particular... now that's not something you see every day...)
Sadly, what you have said is true. But because of the attitude of "She dressed like that so what do you expect." a lot of them suffer in silence and don't bother reporting it to the organisers. So unless they speak up this will continue.

That being said; I noticed in the anime community the problem isn't so bad for girls and if anything guys are a worse target. Fangirls can be dangerous things as a friend of mine found out when he jokingly asked Johnny Botch (Famous anime and video game voice actor, and was a power ranger.) for a sparing match. (Johnny is a black belt in karate and my friend at that point was a a green belt.) Johnny agreed and said he needed to get changed. When he walked away my friend was confronted by some fangirls, who had over heard the request. After a small few exchanges they proceeded to gang up on him and literally kicked the crap out of him. It took for Johnny to intervene for them to stop. My friend ended up with a broken rib or two, and it has left him weary of fangirls. Can't say I blame him really.

Some people have pointed out to me that unfortunately what doesn't help matters is the small minatory of girls who love the attention and encourage it. So this throws another spanner into the works. Crossed messages.

And yeah I made a point to look for some good examples of cosplay, since people who generally aren't aware of what it is tend to prejudge and see such people and the community as a joke. To me I don't care if it is well done or not. If a person has put a lot of thought into it that is all that matters.

Like this version of a moogle (Final Fantasy series)
Moogle
I love the outfit and you could tell she put a lot of thought into it.

And Bato from Ghost in The Shell:
Bato
Once again, the thought was there but this one isn't so good.

When I saw the Duke one I instantly thought "I totally have to use that!" it is the most awesome cosplay of him that I have seen.

Quote from: DarklingAlice on October 20, 2012, 11:33:41 PM
I don't think that it is overly-dramatic or even stretching things to make the link to the type of character attacks you sometimes still see in rape cases. There is really no set of circumstances that makes uncouth, unwanted, sexual advancement okay. None. Period.
Thanks for the assurance. I was worried I was going over the top, since some idiots like to throw around the rape card these days. Penn and Teller's Bullshit has shown that. The episode on "War on Porn" or "Abstinence" shows as much.

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on October 21, 2012, 12:18:36 AM
I've told a few tools to give the ladies space when I come across them giving them grief, typically though I try to send the Con Staff to do it if I see it (and they aren't already doing it)
My other half does that as well. Although he has come across one case where a girl was actually enjoying it. Made him confused as hell.

Quote from: Trieste on October 21, 2012, 01:01:03 AM
I don't think I can think of a single instance wherein it is acceptable to go up to a strange woman and ask her cup size. Not one.

In addition, these aren't just random things women are wearing. They are costumes emanating the heroes of the comic world, at a comic-inspired convention. At no point does clothing give free license for harassment, but especially not when they are actually wearing thematically appropriate clothing.
I totally agree. Unfortunately some women give the geek community a little too much credit and don't think such things would happen, and when they do they don't know how to handle it. Although this woman did. XD

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on October 21, 2012, 01:04:45 AM
I agree Trieste.. but that doesn't mean you won't have some ignorant Yutz DO IT. And I've seen it happen. Or assume because they are dressed up as Black Cat, Cat Woman, Scarlett Witch, Mantra, (the list goes ON) that it's OKAY. That is usually why the Con folks watch the female cosplayers closer so they can lend a hand if needed.
It really is sad that that has to be the case. Also makes you wonder where the hell security was to not catch some of these people in the act.

Quote from: Trieste on October 21, 2012, 01:07:25 AM
I know it's widely assumed among geek culture that it's okay to ignore social mores.

The people who make that assumption should be repeatedly kicked in the gonads until they understand that it is not okay. I hear that electrical aversion therapy can also be quite effective.
I have noticed at the anime cons, that I go to, that social morals seem to fly out the window. However, some still keep some and know self control while others totally let loose. Yet for some reasons anime cons, despite all the perversity that goes on, are more civilised and know that when someone says to leave them alone they do, compared to scfi/comic cons. Also you don't get randoms asking about boobs. Then again people also seem more comfortable with their sexuality and let that be known at anime cons. (We have a guy who does Steampunk talks and is proudly gay. He crossplays and even sells t-shirts that show your gay pride.)

At gaming cons I see males feeling either happy they aren't alone or are slightly awkward, and hostile towards females if anything. Only reason I can think that this happens is because of two reasons:

1) For a long time video games have been seen as something for boys. Now the internet, online gaming and voice chat, girl gamers have emerged from the shadows. So while the once lonely ones are happy for us some are in the mindset that we are invading their terrory.

2) Now the media has caught onto the girl gamer "phenomenon" and their appeal to males they are exploited, and we are known as idiots who talk the talk but don't walk the walk. All because "OMG I PLAY CoD AND GoW SO I AM A TOTALLY AWESOME GIRL GAMER LOL!!!" While some guys lap this up and fap soon as they find out the voice isn't a 12 year old boy they are talking to on XBL/PSN, others see most girl gamers as attention whores until we beat their asses into the ground. Even then they get more angry because "HE GOT BEATEN BY A GIRL! LOLOLOL!!!"

So it's a lose, lose situation. Although I have met a few who are nice. Some are shocked when I shake their hand after me beating them or the other way around. (Blazblue is so insane...) But that being said, you do get the odd one who are actually happy to have girl gamers coming into their pack and are very welcoming. (On ME3 a few guys stood up for me when I kept being told to get in the kitchen and make them a sammich or to stop playing with boys toys and being told I am shit.) I have had endless conversations with guys over different games and all without being hit on.

But while that happens it is quite rare for stories of sexual harassment to happen in either communities. Which is quite interesting when you think about it. It makes you wonder why there is such a big difference in behavior among the different communities. Why are anime fans more accepting than your average person? Why are gamers so testosterone filled yet welcoming? Why are Scifi/Comic fans so uncivilised? 

I am not meaning to paint all with the same brush. But I think you get what I mean. There is a dramatic difference in behavior and it is confusing.

Quote from: Vekseid on October 21, 2012, 01:08:28 AM
It's fine as a comparison, in my opinion. The fundamental lack of respect is the same. She made a clear acknowledgement of the difference between pure social ineptitude like inability to divert attention from her breasts, and this incident. She's not complaining about guys staring at her breasts, she's complaining about a pretend-alpha and his posse who were downright predatory.

Demanding that she spank him and discussing her cup size in front of her and debating over it gives me a vibe somewhat like discussing the qualities of a piece of meat. Sure, it didn't end in gang rape. It's the same sort of dehumanization that leads to it, and there's no reason to tolerate it.
I am glad you see where I am coming from.

I have heard horror stories in which some do end up being date raped.

Quote from: Vekseid on October 21, 2012, 01:08:28 AMMost people who engage in active harassment don't know what they're doing is unacceptable. They can't comprehend the concept. It's even worse when they've already made a number of friends - many bans led to harassment campaigns of their own. "Did you tell on me/him? Did you!?"

I think many social groups are wary about 'losing support' or membership, not really comprehending how many people quietly or publicly leave over getting harassed. There's also the issue of where to draw the line, or making sure accusations are legitimate.

Unfortunately, dealing with creeps is a two-step process.
1) The person being harassed has to make the issue known to the authority figures in the given community, and
2) Said authority figures need to be willing to do something about it.

Those can both be a hurdle. Often the first is "It must just be me." or "I can take care of myself." ...what about those who can't?
I have seen poor guys who didn't do anything or there was a big misunderstanding. This lead to a massive hate campaign against him lead by a community she was part of. They pretty much ruined his life and as a result he almost killed himself over it. It was only when it reached that point did the girl bother talking to him about it and realised she made a big mistake. Sadly, at this point the damage was done. So this wasn't something a simple "Sorry" could fix.

The whole situation is a big mess. It is a damned if you do, damned if you don't mess.

The community I am part of have a zero tolerance policy on such behavior and stress before the con in emails about what to do if something happens, and even print it in the con book. (Long with general ground rules and phone numbers of the orginisers.) They also have strict rules on the cosplay blind date and the charity auctions since there have been problems of sexual harassment in the past. The rules have been put in place to protect both parties. Although these funny demotivators and peoples' comments are what made them put the rules in place:

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide





Sadly, not all cons do this, so I think that might also be one of the problems. It happens and no one knows what to do about it. what doesn't help is attitude they see. That alone makes afraid they will be painted the same way. "Dressed as FFX-2 Rikku? They won't listen to me because I look like a slut/attention whore..."
Quote from: TaintedAndDelish on October 21, 2012, 01:44:17 AM
Well, they offended her, what do they expect?

If your first words to a woman who you don't know(or more specifically, to one who doesn't know YOU) are, "You have nice tits" or "My dick is hard", you're gonna get ignored if not slapped. I think that's one of those unwritten rules that you learn somewhere around puberty. Perhaps that should be taught in high school as its not obvious to everyone.

What makes this tricky for guys, is if a woman approached a guy and said, "You are making my cunt wet" or "I like the bulge in your pants(for those who don't understand the wet comment)", the guy would take that as a cue that he's gonna get lucky. He would not take offense.(generalizing, obviously). So when an inexperienced guy uses reverse logic and tells a woman something that he sincerely things is flattering only to get slapped or dissed, it causes a little initial confusion. If he is social enough to have more experienced friends, they will likely clue him in at this point, otherwise he may be bound to repeat his mistakes.
Maybe a "morally" acceptable thing should be taught in schools. Seems some parents can't really be arsed to do so these days. ¬_¬

Sadly it is those women that lead guys on that don't help the situation, nor does their attitude of "Well I do dress like it for the attention! Why else would you?" and "It's a general rule of thumb for guys to do this so don't cry over it when we all know it happens!" I find that just amazing. 

That is another odd thing. At anime cons girls tend to laugh at guys that hit on them because of the terrible chat up lines they come up with. I have a friend who told me that this line was used on her when she cosplayed a Gundam character. "Hey, did you want to check out my cockpit?" She said it made her laugh so hard. Another one of my friends told me one he uses on girl gamers is "I'm not one of Lucifer's men, but I have been told I that even devils may cry with what I can do in the bedroom~" That made me laugh harder than I should have. He also admitted that he just shows off his Pikachu tattoo just to get girls to "Awww that's cute!" XD

Such a messy subject area indeed. =/

ManyMindsManyVoices

#10
EDIT/Disclaimer: I feel it's important to note, that I'm not pointing fingers at anyone here. I'm not calling anyone out. If you're offended, then you've made an assumption that you are (or are defending) the kind of person I'm talking about. I'm discussing an issue which exacerbates the described problem, I'm not specifically targeting, rebutting, or discussing any individual. You can disagree with my position, fine, but don't treat this like I'm attacking some victims or something. This is a general statement being made about the whole social issue at hand.

"I'm always in the middle on these topics, because I think both sides are usually pretty asinine. I am always disappointed at the way people act in regards to sexuality. I find very few people who aren't borderline sexual predators or completely uptight and repressed, and I think the latter only pisses me off slightly less than the former."

"I've seen plenty of girls who spit bile at guys who would deign to think they can talk to an attractive girl, much less be attracted to her. It's usually less like that in the geek community, but there's often still a strong hint of passive-aggressive snubbing. That kind of behavior is just as degrading as treating a person like a sex object."

"Then there are those who would essentially cry rape at every little advance. If you instantly treat someone like a criminal, you shouldn't expect them to behave better. Should they be the bigger person? Yes, of course, but so should everyone. Eventually, it becomes this 'war' where one side is being totally disgusting and the other treats everyone like trash because a few people are disgusting, and treating people like trash is a good way to encourage them to act like trash."

"I'm not saying it's okay to be a total creep, but if a guy hits on a girl or shows a reasonable sign of attraction, it's equally not okay to assume they are a total creep. It's also okay to be sexually attracted to someone, but our society makes it out to be so criminal that eventually, there is no outlet that doesn't make them a criminal or a creep."

"Of course, I'm always the creep or the asshole, because usually my position (on almost everything) is 'pretty much everyone sucks at this, all of you stop being dicks'. In the end, I'm proud to slap the shit out of someone who grabs a stranger's ass, and someone who makes every interested party feel like a stalker/rapist."
My O/Os * Everyone should read 1/0

This is the Oath of the Drake. You should take it.

Silk

I would like to mention that the Daily mail is a sensationis newspaper that is well known for lieing and misocmmunicating news to serve its own ends, upto and including have maintanence on a swimming pool, to be a outcry by muslim women to either shut down the swimming pool unless it was changed to suit the way they desired.

Take everything in the article with a pinch of salt.

Vekseid


Silk

Pretty detailed reccolection of a convosation and is likely in no way biased. :)

Vekseid

Regardless of what you think of it being true or false, it's not a Daily Mail story, it's her claim directly. They probably found it on Reddit.

Moraline

I'm going to say something against the grain here.

When I dress in slutty or provocative costumes/clothing. I do expect to be ogled and most likely receive sexually charged comments. I also like it. I wear those things because they are what they are. Those types of clothing are definitely not worn because of their comfort - although there are some exceptions to that.

There is however a BIG difference between having people check me out and enjoy the look of something that I'm wearing and getting creepy about it or trying to touch.

You can look, I even don't mind a comment or two.

... but when they start going on and on it's getting creepy.

... or if they try to touch then all bets are off - I'm going to hurt you. Uninvited touching is always against the rules.

Trieste

The thing is that just because someone hasn't advanced to the point of trying to paw at you, doesn't mean that they haven't crossed a line already.

Presenting your butt to someone and asking them to spank you is over a line, unless you know that person. I might make an exception for something like a play party or a BDSM demo, where the atmosphere is already sensual and somewhat sexually charged. Maybe. Probably not, though; doing that to a stranger is discouraged at the play parties and demos near here.

It's about respect. You can appreciate someone's form and you can even make comments without crossing a line. *shrug*

gaggedLouise

#17
Quote from: Trieste on October 21, 2012, 01:01:03 AM
I don't think I can think of a single instance wherein it is acceptable to go up to a strange woman and ask her cup size. Not one.

In addition, these aren't just random things women are wearing. They are costumes emanating the heroes of the comic world, at a comic-inspired convention. At no point does clothing give free license for harassment, but especially not when they are actually wearing thematically appropriate clothing.

Agree.


By the way, at a lingerie shop near here, the sales staff, all female, had it as part of their job description to have their personal cup sizes listed in bold lettering on the "staff card" pinned on their shirts, tops or whatever. The card would be strategically close to their tits, of course...The shop explained their move with a wish to "help new customers gauge what kind of bra size they should be looking for". :-X

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

RedEve

I would expect a certain level of gawking if I went to a con dressed as the black cat.
That interview was totally out of line though, provided it went remotely as she claims it did.

But I would also say she was a bit naive to agree to do the interview if she already had serious doubts about their character and professionalism prior to it.
If I see a group of dudes with a camera looking for a girl in a sexy costume to interview, I would get out of there ASAP. I certainly wouldn't agree to any interview.
"I don't have a dirty mind, I have a sexy imagination."
My ons and offs- My F-list

Cyrano Johnson

#19
Quote from: Vekseid on October 21, 2012, 01:08:28 AMMost people who engage in active harassment don't know what they're doing is unacceptable. They can't comprehend the concept. It's even worse when they've already made a number of friends - many bans led to harassment campaigns of their own. "Did you tell on me/him? Did you!?"

I think many social groups are wary about 'losing support' or membership, not really comprehending how many people quietly or publicly leave over getting harassed. There's also the issue of where to draw the line, or making sure accusations are legitimate.

Exactly this. And when you further combine these issues with the type of community whose members have an -- often misplaced -- sense of solidarity with the socially-maladjusted, and pride themselves on being more anarchic than the social norm, and feel like it would be piling-on to expect their already supposedly-oppressed membership to develop some basic social skills, then... well, we see what all too often happens.

Quote from: StarcrySome people have pointed out to me that unfortunately what doesn't help matters is the small minatory of girls who love the attention and encourage it. So this throws another spanner into the works. Crossed messages.

In the vast majority of cases where girls will seem to "love" or "encourage" the kind of attention that most girls would not tolerate, what's happening is that they are getting paid to be there and make nice with the punters*. Sometimes the punters don't realize this, but that isn't the girls' fault; recognizing when someone is being paid to put up with you is a pretty basic life skill, too. And even in those circumstances some guys will find a way to push it too far.

(*EDIT: Notice for instance in Mandy's blog post the atmosphere of general shock she describes around her when she actually stood up for herself? It's most likely because the interviewers, and most people in the crowd, were expecting her to behave like a professional booth girl... many of whom would have plastered on a smile and soldiered through that interview no matter how moronic it got. They didn't realize that she wasn't being paid to put up with that kind of treatment.)

Quote from: Ryuka TanaI'm not saying it's okay to be a total creep, but if a guy hits on a girl or shows a reasonable sign of attraction, it's equally not okay to assume they are a total creep. It's also okay to be sexually attracted to someone, but our society makes it out to be so criminal that eventually, there is no outlet that doesn't make them a criminal or a creep.

I disagree. Key word in your first sentence is "reasonable." It's perfectly possible to hit on people without being, or being assumed by most reasonable people to be, a creep. It's just creepy to be unreasonable about it, to have no sense of boundaries or respect. The girl who "cries rape" at "any little advance" is for the most part a figure of myth, invented by the minds of inept and clueless dudes who weren't willing to face up to the possibility that they might actually be the problem. The notion that "our society" makes it out to be "criminal" to be attracted to someone is risible. It's criminal to harass someone; someone who genuinely cannot tell the difference needs help, and a serious reality check.
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

ManyMindsManyVoices

Quote from: Moraline on October 21, 2012, 09:49:45 AM
I'm going to say something against the grain here.

When I dress in slutty or provocative costumes/clothing. I do expect to be ogled and most likely receive sexually charged comments. I also like it. I wear those things because they are what they are. Those types of clothing are definitely not worn because of their comfort - although there are some exceptions to that.

There is however a BIG difference between having people check me out and enjoy the look of something that I'm wearing and getting creepy about it or trying to touch.

You can look, I even don't mind a comment or two.

... but when they start going on and on it's getting creepy.

... or if they try to touch then all bets are off - I'm going to hurt you. Uninvited touching is always against the rules.

"Agreed, at least for the most part."

Quote from: Cyrano Johnson on October 21, 2012, 01:04:26 PM
I disagree. Key word in your first sentence is "reasonable." It's perfectly possible to hit on people without being, or being assumed by most reasonable people to be, a creep. It's just creepy to be unreasonable about it, to have no sense of boundaries or respect. The girl who "cries rape" at "any little advance" is for the most part a figure of myth, invented by the minds of inept and clueless dudes who weren't willing to face up to the possibility that they might actually be the problem. The notion that "our society" makes it out to be "criminal" to be attracted to someone is risible. It's criminal to harass someone; someone who genuinely cannot tell the difference needs help, and a serious reality check.

"No... That girl is not a 'figure of myth', it might not literally be crying rape, but that's hyperbole to make a point. That's why I put it in quotes, that's why YOU put it in quotes. There are absolutely girls out there who will shoot down (aggressively and insultingly) any guy who shows interest. There are girls out there who look to make men out to be sexual predators, who will do everything they can to encourage harassment so that they can then call foul. The problem is, we don't call them out or criminalize them, because they are the 'victims'."

"The problem here, is you read what you want, because men usually are the offenders. However, treating someone like a criminal is a fast way to make someone a criminal. We don't deal with it by degrees a lot of the time, lots of girls will treat every guy like he's a creep. If just talking to a girl gets you treated like crap, may as well act on your worst instincts, because you'll get treated like crap either way. Again, this isn't an excuse, but there's no excuse to treat reasonable human beings like crap (which girls do, even with the reasonable ones). It's learned behavior, on both sides."

"Anyway, as usual, I'm done because I can't say exactly what I feel should be said without people being insulted. Note, though, that I am not at all arguing for creeps, or against any point here (except the one I specifically argued against above). In a lot of the cases mentioned, I'd beat the tar out of some asshole treating a girl that way. My point is, this isn't a one-sided issue."
My O/Os * Everyone should read 1/0

This is the Oath of the Drake. You should take it.

Cyrano Johnson

#21
Quote from: Ryuka Tana on October 21, 2012, 06:05:39 PM"No... That girl is not a 'figure of myth' . . . There are absolutely girls out there who will shoot down (aggressively and insultingly) any guy who shows interest. There are girls out there who look to make men out to be sexual predators, who will do everything they can to encourage harassment so that they can then call foul.

I said this is for the most part myth and I stand by that. There are, to be sure, girls who will overreact to any approach, or girls who will deliberately encourage advances so as to provoke conflict. They're out there and there are occasions when they're able to manipulate others into acting on their behalf.

However, they're just not out there in anything like the numbers that inept creeps imagine them to be out there. That's where "for the most part" comes in. To the inept creep (the kinds of guys seen in Mandy's blog post would qualify), every other girl looks like this, because they can't process or accept that the girl may not be shooting down "any" guy that shows interest, she may just happen to be shooting them down -- because (another idea the creep typically cannot process) she actually has the right to prefer someone else's company to theirs. And she isn't "encouraging harassment," she just is actually out of their league, and is calling foul because the inept creep is in fact foul. It's all a matter of perspective, and male creeps are notoriously susceptible to warped and self-serving perspectives.

Of course, I'm sure Mandy's embarrassed interviewers recited rhetoric aplenty about her being a tease and provocateur to themselves in the wake of her confrontation with them -- it's a lot easier to believe you were being "unjustly treated like a criminal" than that you actually did something wrong -- but of course she wasn't "treating them like criminals," she was treating them the creeps they were, and they deserved it. I personally think a great way to create criminals is to place people in settings with no standards and no accountability for lowlife behaviours, and then subsequently making them out to be the wronged party when somebody calls them out.

It all boils down to a question of emphasis. You think our society over-emphasizes male harassment and under-emphasizes female agency. I don't think it's anywhere close to doing so. You're entitled to your perspective but I don't think it's remotely in accord with the larger part of actual reality.

(EDIT: To stave off any possible misunderstanding here, let me cite from your earlier disclaimer: "I feel it's important to note, that I'm not pointing fingers at anyone here. I'm not calling anyone out. If you're offended, then you've made an assumption that you are (or are defending) the kind of person I'm talking about.")
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

ManyMindsManyVoices

Quote from: Cyrano Johnson on October 21, 2012, 06:29:38 PM
You think our society over-emphasizes male harassment and under-emphasizes female agency.

"Did I say that? This part alone insists that my quote that you cited, is definitively not true. Not only are you pointing fingers, you're putting words in my mouth."

"I keep insisting I'm not defending creeps, yet you think I am... I'm not... That's not what's happening. I'm adding another group of idiots to the pile, not saying that one group of idiots doesn't exist and its someone else's fault. I'm note even trying to balance it out."

"Again, that's where I stop, and effectively stop discussing the point. I just hate having people tell me what I think. You can believe what you want, but don't tell me what I believe."
My O/Os * Everyone should read 1/0

This is the Oath of the Drake. You should take it.

Cyrano Johnson

#23
Quote from: Ryuka Tana on October 21, 2012, 07:00:14 PMDid I say that?

It's the basic implication of what you've said so far in the thread, yes: when you say, "There are girls out there who look to make men out to be sexual predators, who will do everything they can to encourage harassment so that they can then call foul. The problem is, we don't call them out or criminalize them, because they are the 'victims'" and then say "there's no excuse to treat reasonable human beings like crap (which girls do, even with the reasonable ones). It's learned behavior, on both sides." What this boils down to is an implication that society over-emphasizes male harassment and under-emphasizes female agency. That's actually the more neutral way to put what you're saying; I was careful to paraphrase it to try to head off a resort to defensiveness, which obviously didn't work but hey, I tried.

And though the rhetoric is similar, I don't think it amounts to defending the creeps per se -- that you insist on reading me this way means you need to go back and re-read your own disclaimer, I cited it for a reason -- I just think that you're just wrong, as in descriptively wrong about most of what happens in "our society."
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

ManyMindsManyVoices

"The problem is you used the words 'You think' which is not your place to say. You can say that my words imply something, you can say that my words can be misconstrued, or that my intention seems to be, but you don't know what I think. Doesn't matter what I said, language is flawed, and without body language and intonation, it's even more flawed."

"'You think...' automatically bypasses my disclaimer, because it insists upon things you have no business insisting upon."

"As for the rest of it, I also made it clear my argument was about the social implications of this issue, not any individuals point or the article linked."

Quote from: Cyrano Johnson on October 21, 2012, 06:29:38 PM
However, they're just not out there in anything like the numbers that inept creeps imagine them to be out there. That's where "for the most part" comes in. To the inept creep (the kinds of guys seen in Mandy's blog post would qualify), every other girl looks like this, because they can't process or accept that the girl may not be shooting down "any" guy that shows interest, she may just happen to be shooting them down -- because (another idea the creep typically cannot process) she actually has the right to prefer someone else's company to theirs. And she isn't "encouraging harassment," she just is actually out of their league, and is calling foul because the inept creep is in fact foul. It's all a matter of perspective, and male creeps are notoriously susceptible to warped and self-serving perspectives.

"Using this to argue my point, implies that I'm defending the creeps in her article, or people like them. Either that, or it implies I'm placing this attack on the victim in that blog, which is also not happening. I'm not talking about that circumstance, the topic is 'Sexual Harassment in Cosplay'. I'm discussing the broader topic, I don't honestly care about one isolated incident. It sucks she had to go through that, but I'm saying that the real issue is that people on all sides of it are idiots."

"If you're arguing against my point, then this anecdote doesn't apply, because I'm not at all discussing that. If you'd prefer, I can simply deem this part your argument irrelevant, rather than insistent; but it doesn't change the fact that telling me what I think is bad form."

"In the end, I'm now just debating about the method of debate, which is not the point. I don't honestly care to continue the actual debate. If you seriously want to continue, PM me, but I'm willing to accept the basic premise that you didn't intend to make any sort of implication, and agree to disagree on the rest; and then leave it at that."
My O/Os * Everyone should read 1/0

This is the Oath of the Drake. You should take it.

Cyrano Johnson

#25
Quote from: Ryuka Tana on October 21, 2012, 08:19:43 PM
The problem is you used the words 'You think' which is not your place to say.

If you like, feel free to consider the phrase "[as far as I can tell from what you've said, it seems that] you think" automatically implied anytime I employ this usage. I would think it's obvious from the basic context of conducting a discussion that I am not literally claiming to read your mind.

QuoteI'm discussing the broader topic

Yes, so am I -- would have thought this obvious as well, what with my explicitly phrasing summaries as being about general society -- but it is possible to use specifics as a taking-off point to discuss broader phenomena, you know.

Quotebut I'm willing to accept the basic premise that you didn't intend to make any sort of implication, and agree to disagree on the rest; and then leave it at that.

Sure, works for me.
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

Shjade

#26
Quote from: Trieste on October 21, 2012, 10:50:40 AM
The thing is that just because someone hasn't advanced to the point of trying to paw at you, doesn't mean that they haven't crossed a line already.

Presenting your butt to someone and asking them to spank you is over a line, unless you know that person. I might make an exception for something like a play party or a BDSM demo, where the atmosphere is already sensual and somewhat sexually charged. Maybe. Probably not, though; doing that to a stranger is discouraged at the play parties and demos near here.

It's about respect. You can appreciate someone's form and you can even make comments without crossing a line. *shrug*

I have to admit I'm a little confused by your example there.

Asking to (or simply acting as if you are going to) spank someone else that you don't know seems pretty clearly over the line, sure. Asking them to spank you, particularly doing so in that way? That seems more comedic than harassment. Unless you keep going on about it.
Theme: Make Me Feel - Janelle Monáe
◕/◕'s
Conversation is more useful than conversion.

Trieste

Quote from: Shjade on October 21, 2012, 10:41:13 PM
Unless you keep going on about it.

Which... he did, according to the blog post. :P

DarklingAlice

You do not get to make assumptions about what strangers are and aren't okay with re: sex. There isn't even a list of common things that it is safe to make assumptions about. There is no 'reasonable person' standard here, there is only what that particular individual finds harassing. And if you offend someone you don't get to act hurt or entitled about it. Even if you can't understand the other person's thought process on the matter, have the emotional maturity to apologize and move on.

It's simple: my body, my psyche, and my personal space is mine. You don't get to play around in it. In exchange you get to say the same thing about yourself. It's a mutually beneficial system. Consent is important. Context is important. Ignore them at your peril.
For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong.


ManyMindsManyVoices

Quote from: DarklingAlice on October 22, 2012, 12:21:36 AM
There isn't even a list of common things that it is safe to make assumptions about. There is no 'reasonable person' standard here...

"And there's the fundamental problem."

"Given this you should NEVER talk to anyone, ever... because everyone's a stranger whom you know nothing about until you approach them. Even approaching people isn't okay with some people... So, no talking to people... None... Seriously, you can't do it."

"Or is this only regarding sex? That's arbitrary, argue it all you want, it's arbitrary. Should we leave it up to common sense then? No, because there is no common sense, that's essentially what you said, because common sense boils down to a 'list of common things it is safe to make assumption about'. If I had to define it, that's probably the most accurate description of common sense (at least in this circumstance) you can possibly give."

"The argument always becomes two sides: one side that, given freedom, will just choose to be a dick; and the other side, who decides that someone being a dick justifies them telling other people what they can and cannot do. It doesn't, but people don't differentiate between having 'the right' and being 'in the right'."
My O/Os * Everyone should read 1/0

This is the Oath of the Drake. You should take it.

Cyrano Johnson

Quote from: Ryuka Tana on October 22, 2012, 12:45:15 AMGiven this you should NEVER talk to anyone, ever...

No, what she said was that if the person doesn't want to interact with you, you should be mature and let it go. The circumstances in which this would translate into never, ever talking to anyone would have to be way more specific.
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

ManyMindsManyVoices

"Except in the part I quoted, where you can make no common assumptions, including whether or not it's okay to even speak to a person. Again, I'm arguing against the argument, not the specific point. Saying we can make no common assumptions means that we cannot assume it's okay to do anything ever, regarding other people. This is the argument I was making before, that some people will just try to make everything seem like sexual harassment."

"Now, though, I'm just cycling back to where I was before."
My O/Os * Everyone should read 1/0

This is the Oath of the Drake. You should take it.

Cyrano Johnson

Quote from: Ryuka Tana on October 22, 2012, 01:57:25 AMExcept in the part I quoted, where you can make no common assumptions, including whether or not it's okay to even speak to a person.

No, even taking that into account, it does not necessarily follow that this translates into never, ever talking to anyone. It means there are risks in interacting with others. That's not the same thing. Circumstances would have to be much more specific for those risks to necessitate never interacting with other people.
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

TaintedAndDelish


ManyMindsManyVoices

My O/Os * Everyone should read 1/0

This is the Oath of the Drake. You should take it.

Trieste

Quote from: Ryuka Tana on October 22, 2012, 12:45:15 AM
"And there's the fundamental problem."

"Given this you should NEVER talk to anyone, ever... because everyone's a stranger whom you know nothing about until you approach them. Even approaching people isn't okay with some people... So, no talking to people... None... Seriously, you can't do it."

"Or is this only regarding sex? That's arbitrary, argue it all you want, it's arbitrary. Should we leave it up to common sense then? No, because there is no common sense, that's essentially what you said, because common sense boils down to a 'list of common things it is safe to make assumption about'. If I had to define it, that's probably the most accurate description of common sense (at least in this circumstance) you can possibly give."

"The argument always becomes two sides: one side that, given freedom, will just choose to be a dick; and the other side, who decides that someone being a dick justifies them telling other people what they can and cannot do. It doesn't, but people don't differentiate between having 'the right' and being 'in the right'."

Not sure where you get that. Since you quoted Alice's post here, it stands to reason that you're talking about what she said, and what she said was not "I get to tell you what you can and cannot do" fullstop... it was, "I get to tell you what you can and cannot do as it relates to my personal space". And saying that it's with regard to sex is not arbitrary - sexual innuendo and sexual advances have everything to do with personal space.

If everything you say to another person has to do with sex, then yes, that post can be construed to mean that you should never talk to anyone ever. However, if you are able to approach someone as a person, without bringing sex into it, then that post doesn't really apply.

Further, the post seems to be saying: And if you do approach someone sexually and they get offended, don't get offended that they got offended. Just ... apologize that you offended the person and move on. It's pretty much the same thing as "shit happens". It's just the difference in reaction between "Shit happens but it SHOULDN'T and why do I have to deal with it?!" and "Shit happens... oops, sorry, guess I won't do that again."

It's not as extreme as you think.

Sabre

I've never been to a subculture convention, especially not ones where people dress up as fictional characters, but I've heard plenty about them from people I know who regularly attend them.

Reading Mandy's blog about her experience, I think I can see what was happening.  Maybe I'm wrong since I'm not personally experienced with the world, but here it is all the same.

In the past, comic book conventions (or consumer culture conventions in general) hired professional models to dress up in alluring outfits as nothing more than eye candy for a male audience or potential customers.  Video games, cars, comics and anime, etc.  Even as more and more women began to appear as customers and fans themselves this certain attitude about professional models acting as if they were communal escorts seems to linger.  Maybe it lingers because companies still hire models for that very purpose to help promote and sell their product.

The interviewer (and his followers) seemed too socially awkward to understand the difference between a normal cosplayer and a professional model who came to the convention for money.  Most likely professional models were exactly expected 'to play nice' with otherwise onerous fans.

It seems he was simply an interviewer because of his eccentric personality, which sometimes (barely) hides a rather obtuse and awkward individual, reminding me of some online 'journalists' and personalities that make up for a lack of professionalism and manners for exaggerated and 'outrageous' antics, which may be fine if they were making a fool of themselves but in this case it was at the cosplayer's expense.

Serephino

My opinion certainly won't be a popular one, but....

First of all, I don't agree with blaming the victim in cases of sexual assault and rape.  Regardless of how a person dresses, no one has the right to touch them, and when it comes to sex everyone always has the right to say no. 

However, going to a convention dressed in skimpy outfits where there are going to be a bunch of men, yeah, what do they expect?  Some of them may be dressing just like the character, but can't they make it at least slightly more conservative?  I don't think any woman should have a reasonable expectation of walking around with her cleavage hanging out and not having any man ogle her ever.  Men are going to look, and they're probably going to comment.  If you're the type to be offended by it, rethink your costume choice.

Let me come at this from another angle...  I'm a heavy person, and I'm well aware of it.  Let's say one day I decide to walk around in a tube top, showing off my fat rolls in all their glory.  Even when I dress reasonably people stare and make comments, so I can only imagine how well that would go over.  My feelings are hurt.  I'd be willing to bet pretty much anything that most of you would believe it was my own stupid fault for going out like that knowing I'm fat and unattractive. 

Should the rules be different for an attractive woman who wants to walk around like a two-cent slut?  I think not.  Even when I show cleavage and get stared at I know I don't have the right to complain when people stare.  The obvious solution to that is to buy higher cut shirts.  Touching them is crossing the line, cat calls...  if you don't like it, cover up a little.  It's common sense.   

Avis habilis

Quote from: Serephino on October 22, 2012, 12:56:58 PM
Should the rules be different for an attractive woman who wants to walk around like a two-cent slut?  I think not.

You're right, they shouldn't. Anyone with enough higher brain function to control what comes out of their mouth - including drool - should know better than to launch verbal assaults at anyone for any reason, no matter what they look like, how they dress, or anything else. With consideration for context, anyone should be free to wear anything they like without having to put up with that kind of bullshit.

Serephino

Quote from: Avis habilis on October 22, 2012, 01:09:07 PM
You're right, they shouldn't. Anyone with enough higher brain function to control what comes out of their mouth - including drool - should know better than to launch verbal assaults at anyone for any reason, no matter what they look like, how they dress, or anything else. With consideration for context, anyone should be free to wear anything they like without having to put up with that kind of bullshit.

In a perfect world, yes, I agree.  I have a crotchety old neighbor who will hit on me if I'm wearing baggy pants and a turtle neck.  It's annoying, sure...

Trieste

Okay, nobody makes a guy go up to a woman and say "Hey bitch, nice tits". And because sexual harassment is not just heteronormative, nothing makes a girl go up to another girl and say "Woo, I want to lick you 'till you scream". Nothing compels them to do that. And no matter how many cries of "But look what she was wearing!" will convince me that her bosom leapt out at the person and begged to be ogled, fondled, commented on, or anything else. They're just there. How you react to them is your own deal.

So when you (whoever you might be) end up offending someone by ogling, commenting on, or attempting to fondle a pair of breasts that doesn't belong to you, and you end up offending someone and being told that the behavior is not welcome, take some responsibility for YOUR actions and own up to YOUR fuck-up.

Because it has nothing to do with what SHE was wearing.

Avis habilis

Quote from: Serephino on October 22, 2012, 01:44:11 PM
In a perfect world, yes, I agree.  I have a crotchety old neighbor who will hit on me if I'm wearing baggy pants and a turtle neck.  It's annoying, sure...

Which to my mind puts the whole onus on him to stop being a gross old fool.

RedEve

#42
Quote from: Serephino on October 22, 2012, 12:56:58 PM
My opinion certainly won't be a popular one, but....

First of all, I don't agree with blaming the victim in cases of sexual assault and rape.  Regardless of how a person dresses, no one has the right to touch them, and when it comes to sex everyone always has the right to say no. 

However, going to a convention dressed in skimpy outfits where there are going to be a bunch of men, yeah, what do they expect?  Some of them may be dressing just like the character, but can't they make it at least slightly more conservative?  I don't think any woman should have a reasonable expectation of walking around with her cleavage hanging out and not having any man ogle her ever.  Men are going to look, and they're probably going to comment.  If you're the type to be offended by it, rethink your costume choice.

Let me come at this from another angle...  I'm a heavy person, and I'm well aware of it.  Let's say one day I decide to walk around in a tube top, showing off my fat rolls in all their glory.  Even when I dress reasonably people stare and make comments, so I can only imagine how well that would go over.  My feelings are hurt.  I'd be willing to bet pretty much anything that most of you would believe it was my own stupid fault for going out like that knowing I'm fat and unattractive. 

Should the rules be different for an attractive woman who wants to walk around like a two-cent slut?  I think not.  Even when I show cleavage and get stared at I know I don't have the right to complain when people stare.  The obvious solution to that is to buy higher cut shirts.  Touching them is crossing the line, cat calls...  if you don't like it, cover up a little.  It's common sense.   


A few things.
Firstly, dressing as the Black Cat and then making the outfit more "conservative" would sort of ruin the point of it all. It'd be like dressing up like Santa without the beard and the red suit. ;)

Secondly, she did not complain about the staring men, she admitted that she had expected some men to ogle her chest. She did have problems with the tone and nature of that interview, which was very derogatory and lacked all respect for her as a person. Just because you wear a costume that reveals a bit of skin doesn't mean you are asking to be treated without a shred of respect.

BTW, one thing you guys might not be aware of, but most of us girls are used to guys of all ages staring at us. I got stares from men of all ages when it was really still very inappropriate (meaning when I was still a high schooler myself). This is not the issue she's complaining about here.
"I don't have a dirty mind, I have a sexy imagination."
My ons and offs- My F-list

DarklingAlice

Quote from: Serephino on October 22, 2012, 12:56:58 PM
My opinion certainly won't be a popular one, but....

First of all, I don't agree with blaming the victim in cases of sexual assault and rape.  Regardless of how a person dresses, no one has the right to touch them, and when it comes to sex everyone always has the right to say no. 

However, going to a convention dressed in skimpy outfits where there are going to be a bunch of men, yeah, what do they expect?  Some of them may be dressing just like the character, but can't they make it at least slightly more conservative?  I don't think any woman should have a reasonable expectation of walking around with her cleavage hanging out and not having any man ogle her ever.  Men are going to look, and they're probably going to comment.  If you're the type to be offended by it, rethink your costume choice.

Let me come at this from another angle...  I'm a heavy person, and I'm well aware of it.  Let's say one day I decide to walk around in a tube top, showing off my fat rolls in all their glory.  Even when I dress reasonably people stare and make comments, so I can only imagine how well that would go over.  My feelings are hurt.  I'd be willing to bet pretty much anything that most of you would believe it was my own stupid fault for going out like that knowing I'm fat and unattractive. 

Should the rules be different for an attractive woman who wants to walk around like a two-cent slut?  I think not.  Even when I show cleavage and get stared at I know I don't have the right to complain when people stare.  The obvious solution to that is to buy higher cut shirts.  Touching them is crossing the line, cat calls...  if you don't like it, cover up a little.  It's common sense.   


This makes me sad. You shouldn't for a second blame yourself because other people are insensitive jerks. Offensive, unwelcome comments are violations of your person. And the fault for that lays itself on the people who think that just because you are in a public space your body must be theirs to critique. This goes whether its a woman to a man or a man to a woman (and there is a pervasive myth here that men can't help themselves because they would be appreciative if the tables were turned, which is multiple kinds of bullshit), whether it is about how 'attractive' or 'unattractive' you are. Please don't blame yourself for the stupidity of others. People have eyes and will look, that's kind of what eyes do. However, the same people can have the brains and self control to keep their comments and hands to themselves.

Personally, I get looks a lot. These looks range from desirous to hateful. Dressing and acting as I sometimes do can be very polarizing. But, if a stranger approaches me to tell me that I am so hot it's just as disturbing as when one tosses out some hateful comment about how I don't conform to gender norms. It's unwelcome and there is no sense in which "Oh you deserve it for not conforming to society" or "It's just common sense that you can't dress the way you want and not have people lose control and spout hate speech or squicky pickup lines". If you have a cynical view of mankind, it might be 'common sense' to say it will happen (much like it is just 'common sense' that women who dress that way are asking to be raped), but there is no rubric by which it should happen. Behaviors and biases like these are not changed by sighing, putting up with them, and wearing what society says good people wear.
For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong.


Moraline

I think we have 2 conversations on the go here.

1) is what happened to that woman.

I think her situation was extreme and uncalled for. The men that approached her went to far.

2) The core subject of the post - Women cosplayers being harassed in general.

This subject breaks down into what is and what is not harassment.

It seems to mean different things to different people. Clearly everyone agrees that hands off/don't touch is the main policy here.

... so the next question is, at what point is looking and/or commenting considered harassment?




Personally, like I said in my previous post.

If I dress like Wonder Woman or in some other tight revealing costume, I expect to get hit on and flirted with as well as get some probably lewd comments.

I expect and I desire it. I know I'm showing off my body. I'm not an idiot. I do it on purpose.

I personally don't draw the line until it becomes incessant from the same person or they continue on and on with comments. A friendly good natured comment on how "HOT" or "SEXY" I am, is a compliment.  If you start following me around and continue to make comments then it's harassment to me.

I dress sexy all the time in every day life and I get comments all the time. I welcome them. I choose to dress this way to feel sexy and to look it. If men didn't notice then it would defeat the purpose of me wearing it in the first place.


As a comment on Serephino's post - I think no one should ever make fun of someone for being overweight, that's hurtful and not meant to be a compliment. Which makes it much different then someone making a sexually suggestive comment towards another. 

However, I understand what Serephino meant (I think), they just simply meant that if you dress to get noticed then your going to get noticed. It's a conscious choice and a person shouldn't cry foul every time someone notices them.

It would be a sad dull world the day a I couldn't be told that I am "hot" because we tell every man that it's harassment to say it.

Trieste

In my opinion, it's the difference between, "Hey cutie" or "Damn you're hot" and "I wanna lick your nipples".

One of those statements is not like the other. >.>

Moraline

Quote from: Trieste on October 23, 2012, 10:12:01 AM
In my opinion, it's the difference between, "Hey cutie" or "Damn you're hot" and "I wanna lick your nipples".

One of those statements is not like the other. >.>

I agree with that.

Although If I'm out at a bar and everyone is intoxicated and I'm dressed slutty then the last line doesn't bother me at all. It only becomes harassment to me when they start following me around and saying it.

Context can change it. Just like being at work and a fellow employee says number 2 then they are starting to cross a line.

Social Context is important.

Inari

#47
At cons most women know they are gonna get oogled at. It's when people make it TOO obvious that it becomes a problem.

At the cons I have been to people seem easy enough to read. Also in my personal experience; starting the conversation with either guessing who they are cosplaying, commenting on how good the costume is and asking how long it took for them to make is usually the appropriate way to go. What a nice ass or fabulous pair of knockers they have don't really come into it.

Avis habilis

There's a difference between looking & leering, too. Giving a passerby a once-over because you're thinking "wha-hey, she looks fine in that" is one thing, but standing there bug-eyed & locked on her cleavage is something else entirely.

Inari

#49
I had that when I walked into the RPG room at Alcon. I was friends with the guy in charge of the RPG area and lead me to where they were playing "Maid", since he knows how pervertedly awesome I am and the fact I wanted to play it. Soon as I sat at the table everyone was all O_____O for a good few minutes.

I don't think they'd ever had a big boobed girl want to RP the game before. (I was wearing a black "RPG Villian 'No Morals, No Heart, Slight Rage issues...'" t-shirt. You could see NO cleavage.) My friend had to vouch that I was perverted enough for it. (He told them I did the previous years hentai panel and cosplayed a futa while doing so.) The GM tried explaining the rules but everyone talked over him. Then soon as I started playing everyone suddenly had to leave. T'was quite disappointing to say the least. :(

It didn't bother me too much, because being the size I kinda expect guys and gals to stare at them. (Can't exactly miss them...) It doesn't stop it being annoying when it happens though. I guess I am just too polite to tell them my face is a little higher. >.>

Serephino

What is ideal, and what is are different things.  I guess I'm just a realist when it comes to such things.  I was talking to my boyfriend about this.  He used to volunteer for a womens' self defense class.  The instructor told these women to be aware of how they dress to help protect themselves.  Not that it makes it okay, but if a horny drunk guy that doesn't care if the girl is willing or not sees two women; one in a nice pair of jeans, and another in a mini skirt and thong, he's going to go for the one in the mini skirt.  She's easier to undress, and he can justify it to himself that she wouldn't show that much skin if she didn't want it.  Is it fair?  No.  Will being more self aware help keep you safe?  Yes.

Personal responsibility is a two-way street.  Ideally, these men shouldn't do stuff like that, but they do.  Why encourage it?  I saw a batgirl costume the other day that was nothing but a corset and leather panties.  I'm not positive, but I don't think batgirl looked like that in the comic books, so if you want to your costume to be authentic there are better costumes out there.

Some of those sexy female characters, I'm pretty sure they were made to be eye candy.  If you dress up like that you are making yourself a sex object.  If you make yourself a sex object, odds are you are going to get treated like one.  Women, and men, being able to dress however they want with no consequence works great in the land of unicorns and bugbears, but doesn't work out well on earth.  Again, is it fair?  No, but it is something for you to think about before you put on that costume.

All that said, yes, there is a difference between cat calls, and stalkerish behavior.  That guy with the camera just sounds creepy to me, and I don't know why that girl even bothered talking to him.

Pumpkin Seeds

I agree that the ideal and reality often don’t ever match.  Ideally people would like women to have control over whether they are raped or not.  In an ideal world a woman would have the power to avoid sexual harassment and assault, but the reality is far from that truth.  The words of that self-defense instructor surprise me since the classes I have taken involved being aware of surroundings, not being aware of how I must look to everyone else.  Not going down a dark alley is a long way from don’t wear that outfit in terms of personal responsibility for my safety. Also the words are extremely ineffective as a Federal Commission on Violence discovered 4.4% of rape victims were considered to be involved in “provocative” behavior.  Keep in mind that rape occurred even in times where clothing was a lot more restrictive and conservative than today.   

Serephino

Obviously that wasn't all the instructor taught them.  The idea was basically to try and not make yourself a target.  Not walking down dark alleys, checking under your car, and using the buddy system are also part of it.  Skimpy clothing is meant to make you attractive to men and arouse them, and it works.  I can't speak for the rest of the world, but around here most rapes that occur involve a woman in provocative clothing leaving a bar alone.  I don't know about you, but if not showing a lot of cleavage and taking a friend with me will keep me safe, then that's what I'll do.   

consortium11

As far as I'm aware there's been no correlation (let alone causation) found between the manner of someone's dress and the likelihood of them being raped (and there's been many attempts to find one). Matters become more murky when "simple" physical sexual assaults (and I don't intend that word to be disparaging but simply to indicate the difference between something that is essentially rape by another name and acts more akin to groping) and verbal sexual harassment; I believe from the studies I've seen that dress can affect the likelihood to be essentially groped and to be the target of often crude sexual comments made. Moreover, as Pumpkin Seeds states very few reported rapes or sexual assaults actually involve "provocative" clothing or behaviour.

That said one of the aspects I dislike about the way that the theory of rape culture has been presented to me is that it throws all advice relating to how to minimise the chances of rape and/or sexual assault together as part of the enabling rape culture. I understand the logic; it shouldn't be up to the potential victim (male or female) to change what they do to avoid rape/sexual assault it should be up to the person doing it to simply not. I understand why it's an issue with regards to clothing; there's no evidence that covering up makes you any safer (or to put it better, dressing in a more risqué manner makes you more vulnerable). But is suggesting that people don't get so drunk they cannot control themselves, don't got off with people they don't know, don't go into strange areas of town etc etc really continuing to maintain the "rape culture" or is it sensible advice that everyone should take to avoid any manner of ills befalling them?

On-topic I've never been to a convention of that sort and so really can't comment on expected etiquette. There will always be issues where what one person considers light-hearted conversation/"banter"/flirting will either be misconstrued or simply cause offence in and of itself. However in general I think simply experiencing human interaction means that most people should have rough ideas of what's acceptable. I doubt too many people would take offence at "You look amazing"" or "I love that outfit!" and even more crude approaches "God you look sexy!" will probably be OK. However if you're talking to a stranger and an early part of the conversation goes along the lines of "Damn you have great tits! How big are they?" or even worse "God you look sexy... I want to wear your thighs for earmuffs" I think the best you could ever reasonably expect is a chilling glance and the conversation ending quickly.

Dressed as she was, should this lady have reasonably expected attention... and a fair amount of it? Yes. It would be simply bizarre for her not to. Should she have expected comments? Again yes... if nothing else because it looks to be a very good costume even without the inherent sexual nature of it. Should she have expected... and more importantly have to put up with... crude, banal comments like the one from the so called interviewer and her posse? No, clearly not... and she was right to expose it.

Trieste

Self defense has more to do with body language and area awareness than personal dress. Every self defense lecture and/or class I have been in on has included mention of how a stiletto heel makes a fantastic weapon if you happen to be wearing one.

The idea that sexual assault has to do with arousal is bullshit - it has long been about power, and arousal often has little-to-nothing to do with it. That pretty much belongs in the realm of rape fantasies. And possibly also unicorns and bugbears.

Moraline

Trieste is correct.

Rape is a control act.

The assaulter will attack anyone that looks meek and helpless because they are the easiest to control. Which is why often elderly women, children, and demure ladies are the victims of these crimes. This is the only fact on sexual assault and victim choice.

The other type of victim from the most common form of rape (date rape,) is someone that is known and the assaulter has assaulted them as a means of controlling something in the social dynamic that they cannot otherwise control.

Rape is not a sex act accept in fantasy play.

Inari

#56
What I was taught in self-defense is that my body is a weapon as was my attacker's. I was never to use my own body as a weapon unless my life was in serious danger. Until then I was to use my attacker's body against them and cause pain enough that they will lose the will to fight me. But before it even got to that I was to warn them three times and yell "Fire" because "Help" no longer works, when you need to draw attention. We were told nothing about how we dressed, just that our bodies were weapons that we were not to use unless we had to.

When I did a little bit of wrestling I was taught you can turn any position into one of taking down your attacker. So if you are on the floor use your legs to take out their's. Since a normal person wouldn't know how to counter turn-about moves.

Also I never where skimpy clothing and someone tried to attack me. Luckily, for me I managed to disable them and get away. Sadly, some woman, no matter how much self-defense they are taught, aren't always quick to think on their feet. Sparing and heat of the minute improv is awkward for some to adjust to. A real attack is faster than sparing... unless you reach the higher ranks. x.x

So to be told "To help stop it dress in non skimpy stuff" is just stupid. Also checking under one's car will put you in more danger simply because your attack could take that as very dangerous opening. I was taught to NEVER have your back to your attacker and to keep yourself closed. The walking down ally ways is pretty much common sense. Unfortunately, it is amazing now much some people lack common sense. :(

But Moraline is right. Rape is about control over another and in some cases, total humiliation. (Another reason victims can't come forward is because their bodies react against their will and they feel ashamed.)

RedEve

Quote from: Serephino on October 23, 2012, 05:50:10 PM
Obviously that wasn't all the instructor taught them.  The idea was basically to try and not make yourself a target.  Not walking down dark alleys, checking under your car, and using the buddy system are also part of it.  Skimpy clothing is meant to make you attractive to men and arouse them, and it works.  I can't speak for the rest of the world, but around here most rapes that occur involve a woman in provocative clothing leaving a bar alone.  I don't know about you, but if not showing a lot of cleavage and taking a friend with me will keep me safe, then that's what I'll do.   


The theory that rapists target women who dress provocatively has been disproven decades ago. People need to realize that the psychological make-up of a real rapist is different from that of a sexually healthy male.
"I don't have a dirty mind, I have a sexy imagination."
My ons and offs- My F-list

Inari

As far as I am concerned it more about the self control. Much like an addict; rapists have a problem with self control/restraint.

RedEve

Quote from: Starcry on October 24, 2012, 01:46:37 AM
As far as I am concerned it more about the self control. Much like an addict; rapists have a problem with self control/restraint.

The real rapist, who has a high percentage chance of relapse when returned to society, will actively look for his victims, there will be very little "opportunity" or "lack of restraint" about his crimes.

We're not talking about douchebags who get girls drunk to then take advantage of their inebriated state, I'm talking about the "drag into the bushes and threaten with violence" type predators.
"I don't have a dirty mind, I have a sexy imagination."
My ons and offs- My F-list

TaintedAndDelish

#60
Quote from: Moraline on October 23, 2012, 10:17:53 PM
Trieste is correct.

Rape is a control act.

...

Rape is not a sex act accept in fantasy play.

I have a hard time accepting this. For one thing, people are not that black and white, for another, I have a hard time believing that a person would be able to get a boner and rape someone if there was absolutely no sexual element to the act at all. Yes, they could jerk off to get hard, but its hard to get hard and stay hard if your mind is preoccupied, if not flooded with nonsexual things.  If the rapist is not sexually aroused by aspects of the rape, then what is occupying his mind when he gets aroused? Is he blocking the whole rape thing out so he can focus on memories of naked women so he can get off? I doubt it, but I'm not a rapist, so I really don't know.

The article below discusses some of the murkiness about control vs sexual motivation regarding various kinds of rape.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201104/is-rape-about-control-or-sex

Tying this back into the topic, who's to say that sex isn't one of the rapist's motivations even if only a secondary motivation? For clarity, I'm not in any way trying to suggest that provocative dress or behavior is causation, but rather, exceptionally provocative dress/attire might put one at a slightly higher risk of being targeted for various unwanted behavior - comments, actions, whatever IF the aggressor is at least partially motivated by sex.


Trieste

I can probably buy arousal as a secondary effect of the power thing - someone getting off on control. Or it could be something as simple as thinking "I'm going to fuck this woman" and getting a boner. I have intimate knowledge of boners from an outside perspective but none from an inside perspective.  ::) But if the primary impetus is power, control, intimidation, whatever, it does stand to reason that body language matters a whole hell of a lot more than actual appearance - and the data supports this.

I'm not a psychologist. I honestly don't know the mind-workings of it or how sex plays into it (and I admit to not clicking that article, Tainted, although I intend to come back and read it later) but it's possible that someone else has more insight into it around here.

Quote from: RedEve on October 24, 2012, 01:49:29 AM
The real rapist, who has a high percentage chance of relapse when returned to society, will actively look for his victims, there will be very little "opportunity" or "lack of restraint" about his crimes.

We're not talking about douchebags who get girls drunk to then take advantage of their inebriated state, I'm talking about the "drag into the bushes and threaten with violence" type predators.

Not sure if you're addressing what I said about opportunistic rapes, but, erm, they are. 90% of rapes are acquaintance rapes (USDOJ) and between 60% and 70% of acquaintance rapes are opportunistic, not planned (ADFS, sourcing from the FBI I think). The majority of rapes are opportunistic assaults. Recidivism in rapists (specifically for rape; the percentage is higher for crime in general) has been repeatedly proved in several countries since the 70s to hover between 6% and 10%. So essentially the data says that roughly 9 out of 10 rapists rape when given the chance and then won't do it again... the remaining 1 guy out of 10 is a serial rapist and plans it out.

The idea that rapists have a problem with impulse control is quite possible - rapists released from incarceration are likely to be rearrested within about 3-5 years for other crimes. About 50% of those will be violent crimes (battery, domestic violence, whatever). It's just the idea that rapists have a problem with sexual impulse control that's bullshit. It's more likely that they are more generally impulsive, doing things without thinking when the opportunity presents itself.

Pumpkin Seeds

Well an erection is not necessarily an indicator of sexual arousal just as the lack of an erection is not an indicator for being sexually disinterested.  An erection is part of a bodily process whereby blood engorges the penis.  Men may show an erection during periods of excitement, fear, confusion and any other variety of emotions.  One situation that both male and female nurses are told to expect is of a man gaining an erection during any physical examination, not just one of the genitals.  Explicitly nursing students are told this is not an indicator of arousal but simply a bodily reaction.  Men that suffer from erectile dysfunction can certainly attest to being aroused without an erection due to a problem with the blood flow to the genitals.  At the core an erection is simply a biomechanical act in response to the body’s alterations of blood flow.

The article linked is in reference to date rape and even the article points toward the unusual nature of date rape when applied to the evolutionary theory of rape.  A date rapist does not fit what was once thought to be the standard profile of a rapist.  Someone who commits date rape has shown an ability to get a date, typically possesses enough education and monetary status to attend college and is of a higher social class as the article points out.  So these people are able to acquire dates that could potentially lead toward sexual intimacy, but instead make the choice to push for rape.  This shows a desire to remove power from the other person for self-gratification, not simply a desire to have sex.

Also, a look at modern techniques for rape prevention shows an emphasis toward engaging in power play with the rapist.  Previous methods encouraged a woman to simply accept the rape, not to fight back for fear of harm and to quietly take the assault before retreating.  Current methods encourage a woman to look her attacker in the face thereby putting forth a display of power, physically fighting back against the attacker with nails and teeth if need be and making as much noise as possible by screaming Fire (Fire being one of the few words that passersby will actually respond to hearing.  Bomb is another one).  These techniques have shown to reduce female mortality and even rape pointing toward the rapist being an attacker of opportunity and someone wanting their power accepted, not challenged.

Cyrano Johnson

#63
The fact that power, dominance and submission plays a role in sex generally has complicated things for the proposal that rape is a "crime of power" rather than sex. But dominance and submission are not equally important in sexuality as a whole. It's a spectrum, and the distinction that the original proposer of the "power vs. sex" formula had in mind is easy enough to capture by thinking of rape as a set of behaviours clustered toward the end of that spectrum where dominance and control has crossed the line into assuming more importance than consent of the partner.

In part of this spectrum, rape can remain very much a "sexual" act perpetrated on an object of desire -- but is then far more likely to be perpetrated between people who know each other, which in fact is the case with most sexual assault. At the extreme end of the spectrum, dominance and control assume such exaggerated importance as to be indistinguishable from arousal; this is closer to the "pure" power-play, crime-of-violence model that feminists originally had in mind. The reason the "skimpy clothing will get you raped" meme is held (correctly) to be a myth is that where someone actually works up the nerve to take the extreme risk of raping a stranger, they are a lot likelier in most situations to be the second form of rapist (or the situation itself is a fucked-up and generally violent one: a warzone or a prison or the 1994 Woodstock concert). Moreover, even where this isn't strictly the case, there are actually few forms of clothing that are conservative enough to totally nullify a woman's body as an object of desire -- unless one is actually willing to tell women to go about in robes or burqas -- so telling women they can avoid rape by "not dressing like [whatever the speaker defines as] a slut" is both offering a completely false confidence and putting the onus on the wrong people. Not to mention reinforcing the invidious, rapist-mentality notion that somone's access to human rights should be inversely proportional to the amount of skin they're showing.
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

Cyrano Johnson

Quote from: Pumpkin Seeds on October 24, 2012, 05:49:33 AMCurrent methods encourage a woman to look her attacker in the face thereby putting forth a display of power, physically fighting back against the attacker with nails and teeth if need be and making as much noise as possible by screaming Fire (Fire being one of the few words that passersby will actually respond to hearing.  Bomb is another one).

Wait, what.

Passersby will actually not respond to the word Rape?

Ye gods, how depressing.
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

Avis habilis

They'll actively move away from any sort of cry for help. Nobody wants to get involved. Fire, on the other hand, everybody wants to come see.

consortium11

Quote from: RedEve on October 24, 2012, 01:49:29 AM
The real rapist, who has a high percentage chance of relapse when returned to society, will actively look for his victims, there will be very little "opportunity" or "lack of restraint" about his crimes.

We're not talking about douchebags who get girls drunk to then take advantage of their inebriated state, I'm talking about the "drag into the bushes and threaten with violence" type predators.

I'm not sure I like this term. Put simply the vast majority of rapes don't include being dragged into the bushes by a stranger and threatened by violence; the vast majority are done by an acquaintance of the victim.

In addition if there are "real rapists" then there are must be rapists who are not "real"... which indicates they don't commit "real" rape. Intentionally on your part or not that seems quite callous towards those who are victims of date rape, a situation where a man simply doesn't respect the word "no", rapes by someone in a position of authority or any host of other situations which don't correspond with your "real rape" example as well as minimising the acts of those sorts of rapists.

RedEve

I think a better categorization would be the likelihood of recidivism.

The "real" rapist is the one who is psychological compelled to commit the act regardless of context or circumstance.

"I don't have a dirty mind, I have a sexy imagination."
My ons and offs- My F-list

Avis habilis

Quote from: RedEve on October 24, 2012, 09:06:42 AM
I think a better categorization would be the likelihood of recidivism.

The "real" rapist is the one who is psychological compelled to commit the act regardless of context or circumstance.

So consortium's right - you don't consider a guy who refuses to take no for an answer because "I bought you dinner didn't I" a rapist?

He's not compelled. Nothing is controlling his mind. No alien parasite has taken control of his body. He just thinks he's entitled to make use of a woman's body to get off whether she likes it or not.

He's still a rapist sack of shit.

RedEve

Quote from: Avis habilis on October 24, 2012, 09:13:21 AM
So consortium's right - you don't consider a guy who refuses to take no for an answer because "I bought you dinner didn't I" a rapist?

He's not compelled. Nothing is controlling his mind. No alien parasite has taken control of his body. He just thinks he's entitled to make use of a woman's body to get off whether she likes it or not.

He's still a rapist sack of shit.

I do consider him a rapist, just not in the same category as the aforementioned serial offender. The difference is that I believe there is still a chance to rehabilitate and re-educate the so called date rapist. The pathological rapist is unlikely to be changed.
"I don't have a dirty mind, I have a sexy imagination."
My ons and offs- My F-list

Oniya

Quote from: Avis habilis on October 24, 2012, 07:15:22 AM
They'll actively move away from any sort of cry for help. Nobody wants to get involved. Fire, on the other hand, everybody wants to come see.

A fire or a bomb is something that threatens their well-being.  A cry for help, and it's almost certain that they will assume that 'someone else will step up'.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Inari

#71
The only time categorization should come into rape is when sexual intercourse with a minor is involved. Any other time it should not because that would just trivialize rape. In the UK a boy of 16 got convicted of rape when his girlfriend's parents found out they had been having sex. Now, because she was 15 he got put on the sexual offenders list (The one pedophiles get placed on.) and had to serve 5 years in prison. To me that isn't right and I think the laws should change so they go something like you see in Canada.

Quote from: Oniya on October 24, 2012, 09:19:49 AM
A fire or a bomb is something that threatens their well-being.  A cry for help, and it's almost certain that they will assume that 'someone else will step up'.
Plus you get so many children yelling and screaming help and teens yelling rape that no one really pays attention any more.

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Starcry on October 24, 2012, 09:24:17 AM
The only time categorization should come into rape is when sexual intercourse with a minor is involved. Any other time it should not because that would just trivialize rape. In the UK a boy of 16 got convicted of rape when his girlfriend's parents found out they had been having sex. Now, because she was 15 he got put on the sexual offenders list (The one pedophiles get placed on.) and had to serve 5 years in prison. To me that isn't right and I think the laws should change so they go something like you see in Canada.
Plus you get so many children yelling and screaming help and teens yelling rape that no one really pays attention any more.

Yeah..there are a few cases of this sort of thing in the media here in the US. Guys who were a few months/year older than their girls. As soon as he aged above the limit the parents report him.

There was one article I read where the guy got 4 YEARS in prison because of it.. and the girl stayed loyal. After they were 21, they moved in ..then he spent YEARS in fear while his child was growing up that he'd get into trouble with his parole officer because of being on the offender list. Then having to muddle through life as a menial laborer because he couldn't work everywhere.

I think the article writer mentioned the girl hadn't talked to her parents in two decades.. and he STILL can't go to any events like soccer that his girls play in. All because he and his girl friend were doing the SAME thing kids had done forever before the list. He was lucky that the girl stood by him..becasue.. otherwise his life has been ruined. Lost a scholarship, has been crapped on for two decades.. had to live in a trailer on the other side of his yard for a while (like 2 years) while his parole period ran out during his 2nd child's early years.

The offender's list IS a useful thing..but it needs review and reassement in some cases. Giving your guy/girl sex shouldn't be a reason to put it on there.


Trieste

Quote from: RedEve on October 24, 2012, 01:49:29 AM
The real rapist, who has a high percentage chance of relapse when returned to society, will actively look for his victims, there will be very little "opportunity" or "lack of restraint" about his crimes.

We're not talking about douchebags who get girls drunk to then take advantage of their inebriated state, I'm talking about the "drag into the bushes and threaten with violence" type predators.
Quote from: RedEve on October 24, 2012, 09:06:42 AM
I think a better categorization would be the likelihood of recidivism.

The "real" rapist is the one who is psychological compelled to commit the act regardless of context or circumstance.
Quote from: RedEve on October 24, 2012, 09:15:33 AM
I do consider him a rapist, just not in the same category as the aforementioned serial offender. The difference is that I believe there is still a chance to rehabilitate and re-educate the so called date rapist. The pathological rapist is unlikely to be changed.

I've been trying to figure out where you're going with this series of statements. It's depressing to see 'real rapist' brought up, but I'm moving past it with the assumption that you didn't mean it that way. We all put our feet in our mouths from time to time. :)

However, I think you've put your finger on a perception that feeds into some of the misconceptions about rape and sexual assault. If there is to be considered a so-called real rapist, the numbers show that he is overwhelmingly someone the victim knows. Alcohol, not Rohypnol or GHB, is the most common date rape drug. I think that a lot of women don't want to believe that their rapist is:

Someone they know, and possibly are attracted to.
Someone they would date.
Someone who might share mutual friends, or move in the same social circles.
Someone they will have to face again.
Someone who might defend themselves, not only to the authorities but to friends and family.
Someone they might have trusted.
Someone they might have liked.
Someone they might have loved.

That guy is the common rapist. That guy, right there in that list, is the man that women need to protect themselves most against. The one who drags people into the bushes is very nearly nonexistent. The multitude of women that are raped every year will have to worry about their friend, their boyfriend, a classmate, a coworker, a boss. Not only does focusing on Mister Bushes as a 'real' rapist defy the numbers, it does a disservice to women who are seeking to educate and protect themselves. Focusing on a phantom guy who has a miniscule chance of being one's attacker is not only wrong because it is incorrect, but it is also wrong because it teaches women to look out for the wrong kind of rapist.

gaggedLouise

#74
Quote from: Pumpkin SeedsCurrent methods encourage a woman to look her attacker in the face thereby putting forth a display of power, physically fighting back against the attacker with nails and teeth if need be and making as much noise as possible by screaming Fire (Fire being one of the few words that passersby will actually respond to hearing.  Bomb is another one).

Yelling "Fire!" if one is actively being assaulted and rape seems around the corner sounds like a dubious idea to me. I agree the word's been so overused in pranks that people would either not get what it was about or even respond in a very cross way when it turned out that there was no such thing as a fire going on. I don't think someone who was being attacked in the street or at a party would call out "RAPE! RAPE!" either - more likely she* would be kicking, saying "get off me you scum!" and the like. "Help!" would be kind of more likely than "Rape!"

Just adding that, as Trie is implying, it would be useless if the rape occurs at home or (probably also) on the job.

If I (as a non-op transwoman) was forced down myself by a gang of guys and made to suck them off or otherwise used, I would shout "HELP!!" or "Lay off you bastards!" - definitely not "FIRE!"

*yes, men can be raped but outsiode of jails it almost never happens in an assault way, by direct overpowering.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: gaggedLouise on October 24, 2012, 09:45:43 AM
Yelling "Fire!" if one is actively being assaulted and rape seems around the corner sounds like a dubious idea to me. I agree the word's been so overused in pranks that people would either not get what it was about or even respond in a very cross way when it turned out that there was no such thing as a fire going on. I don't think someone who was being attacked in the street or at a party would call out "RAPE! RAPE!" either - more likely she* would be kicking, saying "get off me you scum!" and the like. "Help!" would be kind of more likely than "Rape!"

Just adding that, as Trie is implying, it would be useless if the rape occurs at home or (probably also) on the job.

If I (as a non-op transwoman) was forced down myself by a gang of guys and made to suck them off or otherwise used, I would shout "HELP!!" or "Lay off you bastards!" - definitely not "FIRE!"

*yes, men can be raped but outside of jails it almost never happens in an assault way, by direct overpowering.

Beg to differ. Men CAN and HAVE been assaulted outside of prisons. I know of at least 5 guys in the Navy who were. Wrong time.. wrong place, berthing full of psychos. The psychology of men tends to keep them from stepping up.

Moraline

Quote from: Trieste on October 24, 2012, 09:41:05 AM
I've been trying to figure out where you're going with this series of statements. It's depressing to see 'real rapist' brought up, but I'm moving past it with the assumption that you didn't mean it that way. We all put our feet in our mouths from time to time. :)

However, I think you've put your finger on a perception that feeds into some of the misconceptions about rape and sexual assault. If there is to be considered a so-called real rapist, the numbers show that he is overwhelmingly someone the victim knows. Alcohol, not Rohypnol or GHB, is the most common date rape drug. I think that a lot of women don't want to believe that their rapist is:

Someone they know, and possibly are attracted to.
Someone they would date.
Someone who might share mutual friends, or move in the same social circles.
Someone they will have to face again.
Someone who might defend themselves, not only to the authorities but to friends and family.
Someone they might have trusted.
Someone they might have liked.
Someone they might have loved.

That guy is the common rapist. That guy, right there in that list, is the man that women need to protect themselves most against. The one who drags people into the bushes is very nearly nonexistent. The multitude of women that are raped every year will have to worry about their friend, their boyfriend, a classmate, a coworker, a boss. Not only does focusing on Mister Bushes as a 'real' rapist defy the numbers, it does a disservice to women who are seeking to educate and protect themselves. Focusing on a phantom guy who has a miniscule chance of being one's attacker is not only wrong because it is incorrect, but it is also wrong because it teaches women to look out for the wrong kind of rapist.

Again, I agree with Trieste. Those concepts are the ones that have been proven over and over again.

Further to my earlier point, the "date rape" or assault by a known assailant is done as a means to exercise control over an uncontrollable circumstance for the attacker.

You will find that in nearly all cases the attacker has been someone that exhibits a need to control the people in their lives. These are also more often the same ones that will commit other violent physical assaults on people they know. Again, it's all about trying to control the world around them and the people in it.

People will most often lash out with violence or express extreme psychological swings in personality and behavior when they are experiencing a loss of control in their lives. (Depression, job loss, loss of relationships, physical illness, and of course mental illnesses.)

Those things will lead people to seek ways to try and gain control over their lives. For some that extreme means taking physical control over another person in the form of violence or sexual assault. (Prison life is a prime controlled example of this.)

@Taint - The sexual excitement is a symptom and not the cause of the sexual assault. The cause of the sexual assault is control. The only time that sex is the cause is when there is a chemical imbalance in the brain that leads to a psychological loss of control.

gaggedLouise

Quote from: Callie Del Noire on October 24, 2012, 10:00:59 AM
Beg to differ. Men CAN and HAVE been assaulted outside of prisons. I know of at least 5 guys in the Navy who were. Wrong time.. wrong place, berthing full of psychos. The psychology of men tends to keep them from stepping up.

Okay, very occasionally, but men getting raped in something like the typical assault style (with open violence or just flexing of muscles and intimidating gazes) doesn't happen anywhere *near* as often as with females - or transpersons of any variety except post-op FtM sex changers, who are men - being the victims. Agree?

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: gaggedLouise on October 24, 2012, 10:07:35 AM
Okay, very occasionally, but men getting raped in something like the typical assault style (with open violence or just flexing of muscles and intimidating gazes) doesn't happen anywhere *near* as often as with females - or transpersons of any variety except post-op FtM sex changers, who are men - being the victims. Agree?

Of course.. but speaking as a child victim.. it DOES happen. It has taken me DECADES to even mention it. That and the realization that the little prick that took advantage of me died of a very nasty hormonal issue of his own.

I've heard a LOT of sea stories about the 'bad old days' in the Navy (I got in as the broom of 'Tailhook' brought a lot of awareness to the chain of command. I know of at least five or six 'suicides' that might have been male victims who couldn't handle things anymore even after. And one of my early mentors has a nasty fourteen inch scar across his chest from a 'prison rapist' in his berthing trying to 'get frisky'. Apparently the psycho thought No meant 'I like you cutting me as foreplay'. The earned my mentor a rating change and transfer out of the spaces..and the knifer a trip to Kanas (as Ft. Leavenworth)

Cyrano Johnson

Quote from: gaggedLouise on October 24, 2012, 09:45:43 AMYelling "Fire!" if one is actively being assaulted and rape seems around the corner sounds like a dubious idea to me.

This makes sense. Added to which, while I get what Avis and Oniya are saying... my instinct when reacting to "Fire!" would not necessarily be to go charging in. A thousand times moreso for the word "Bomb!" A bomb is something you run from, I should think.
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

Avis habilis

I've also heard "Don't jump!" suggested. You know somebody's gonna want to see who's jumping from what.

gaggedLouise

#81
Actually if someone did shout "Help! - Rape!" in a sufficiently sharp, scared or loud kind of voice. on the street, in my neck of the woods, I think it's likely people *would* come to the rescue. And I bet the same is true of, let's say, most parts of Manhattan in the daytime and well into the evening. People are not that extremely jaded.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Avis habilis


Pumpkin Seeds

The theory and phenomenon has actually very little to do with “pranksters” or with any sort of crying wolf syndrome.  Studies have indicated and shown repeatedly that when a victim screams for help, the people that can hear the victim do not respond.  On interviewing the people they all remark that they did not want to get involved, were afraid of retaliation (even when their identitiy would have been anonymous by simply calling 911), and “thought someone else would do it.”  This is called the notion of Diffused Responsibility or the bystander effect.  The most famous case being Catherine Genovese who was killed in her apartment complex in 1964 while screaming, “he stabbed me, he stabbed me.”  While largely considered to be inaccurate reporting, the bystander effect still stands.  Another example involves a woman being raped on the street of New York multiple times while people walked past.  The Bystander Effect is also thought to be seen in the creation of the Holocaust, the torture and murder of Ilan Halimi, and the gang rape of a 15 year old girl on the floor of her Homecoming Dance at Richmond Highschool.

Screaming “Fire” or “Bomb” while not a foolproof way to do so, grabs the attention of another passerby to alert them to danger that might be happening to them.  Merely someone running around the corner to ask “why the hell are you screaming fire when there’s no fire?” would be enough to stop a rape.  If I had to choose between being raped and someone being angry at me for calling fire when there wasn’t one, well someone else is getting their panties in a bunch.  Not me.

Also, people might flee from Fire or Bomb but they will call the police or fire department.  "Some crazy woman is screaming about a fire or bomb," will get them there pretty quick.

Callie Del Noire

Quote from: Avis habilis on October 24, 2012, 10:57:51 AM
Kitty Genovese would disagree.

Sigh.. true.. sadly true.. such a lovely name for such a tragic end.

Oniya

Regarding the Richmond High School incident, from the words of someone who was there:

QuoteABC7 spoke to another witness to the rape. He was summoned over by another bystander watching the attack.

"She was pretty quiet; I thought she was like dead for a minute but then I saw her moving around, I was like, 'Oh,'" the 16-year-old witness said.

He says he never called police because he did not have a cell phone, and he was scared.

"I really wanted to help her but I don't know, I just didn't," he said.

He watched for 15-20 minutes. Not even his family knows he was there.

"I feel like I could have done something but I don't feel like I have any responsibility for anything that happened," he said.
(Source)
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

gaggedLouise

#86
I think part of the problem is that most of us don't want to cry out prematurely, so that means many won't cry whatever it is or call attention until they really see themselves eggting overpowered - and by then it can be too late, if a lot ofg violence is used. Nobody wants to be seen as using a shout disproportionate to what they can point to seemed to be happening.

I also think discussing for a long time about exactly what  word to use is a bit of a sidetrack.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Pumpkin Seeds

Male rape victims are certainly one of the most forgotten groups of victims in criminal statistics and reporting.  Even the FBI Uniform Crime Report lists rape as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.”  Note the language as knowledge of a female and not simply of a person.  Men are technically excluded from being able to report being raped under that definition.  I do think the FBI has changed or is changing the definition though and awareness for male rape is growing.  Rape of a man is just as much about power and control as any other rape, not to be classified as just another assault.  Men can also be raped by women as the act of rape is about consent, not arousal.  Also, as has already been previously stated, an erection does not necessitate arousal or desire for the act. 

Men are the least likely to report being raped and so true numbers are near impossible to determine. 

consortium11

Quote from: Pumpkin Seeds on October 24, 2012, 11:22:12 AM
Men can also be raped by women as the act of rape is about consent, not arousal.  Also, as has already been previously stated, an erection does not necessitate arousal or desire for the act. 

Men are the least likely to report being raped and so true numbers are near impossible to determine.

Possibly off-topic but legally speaking it's not that simple. In the UK for example rape is defined as (emphasis mine):

Quote1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

    (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
    (b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
    (c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

As you can see for a legal rape to occur there must be penetration by the rapists penis. As such a female can only legally rape anyone in unusual circumstances; for example being part of a group that rapes someone.

It's all somewhat of a technicality; colloquially we would still consider them a rapist and the possible punishment for a serious sexual assault are identical as to a rape but legally it would not be rape.

Just to give an example that arousal also has nothing to do with it, there was the infamous case of the "Black Widow" in Russia, who used to drug men, tie them up and then use ropes to get and keep them erect while she had sex with them.

Although that story did give an example of how rape on males is minimised; on many of the forums I post on responses were along the lines of "Well if she was attractive it wasn't rape was it?" or "What sort of man turns down sex?".

Trieste

Quote from: Avis habilis on October 24, 2012, 10:57:51 AM
Kitty Genovese would disagree.

* Trieste heaves a giant sigh.

How many times does the legend of Kitty Genovese have to be challenged before that urban legend breaks?

If women are taught to yell "fire" or "bomb", it's not because of the so-called bystander effect.

Quote from: Oniya on October 24, 2012, 11:01:24 AM
Regarding the Richmond High School incident, from the words of someone who was there:
(Source)

I don't know a lot of adults that wouldn't freeze up ... let alone teens. Hard to say what untrained people will do in situations like that - that's why intervention training exists, not because people don't want to help but because often they freeze up and don't know how.




I'm not saying that yelling "help" will in fact bring help, but I am saying that human psychology and social behavior is not as simple as pop psychology makes it out to be.

Callie Del Noire

While Kity Genovese isn't as cut and dried as the old story says the fact is that apathy does come into play still. 

The bystander effect does happen, though in the Genovese case it was way over hyped.

watch the video in the right side

Pumpkin Seeds

Well, you’re partly right Trieste.  The Bystander Effect is part of the reason along with another aspect of social conditioning called Pluralistic Ignorance whereby people around look to others for cues regarding the situation.  This article provides some framework for the situation and reasons behind screaming “Fire” instead of “Help.”

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-social-thinker/200911/why-don-t-we-help-less-is-more-least-when-it-comes-bystanders

Trieste

Thanks for the blog post. I appreciate the effort, but I'm kind of frustrated with the post itself. It's just reeeeeaaaaalllly oversimplified, and 'diffusion of responsibility' is kind of another term for the bystander effect. Social cues are more believable than diffusion of responsibility. For example, why would anyone ever stop to help someone else collect their dropped books/parcels in a crowded hallway if nobody felt any kind of responsibility?

It seems too pat to me. I'm not a psychologist; I know the crime statistics above because I work in law enforcement but I am in no way qualified as a shrink. So it's my opinion, please understand that. I am skeptical.

Avis habilis

Quote from: Trieste on October 24, 2012, 03:04:22 PM
For example, why would anyone ever stop to help someone else collect their dropped books/parcels in a crowded hallway if nobody felt any kind of responsibility?

I'm gonna go with "picking up books doesn't carry any personal risk or involvement with anything icky".

Trieste

Sure it does. You could easily get kicked, trampled, etc if you kneel down in a busy hallway to help someone out. Soooo... why would anyone do it if there is a diffusion of responsibility among the entire crowd?

gaggedLouise

#95
Trieste, are you saying contemporary society and the habits and attitudes of its people just ignores rape, turns a shared blind eye to the whole issue, to the victims and to the question why rape occurs? I don't know but that seems to be it, if you mean that we as a society (in the U.S. or in the West generally) wouldn't feel any moral responsibility to help someone who is pushed down and raped.

Not just a dropping around of responsibility, but no responsibility: "why should I lift my hand to take care of somebody who falls on their butt and is kicked, what's in it for me? I don't get paid for it, then it's a no-go."

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Trieste

What I'm trying to say is that I'm skeptical of the explanation given for the "bystander effect", which is essentially diffusion of responsibility. The theory says, people don't help someone else in trouble in part because the more people are witnessing it, the less each individual feels responsible for helping. If you have 100 people standing in a crowd while someone gets attacked or robbed, the theory of diffusion of responsibility says that each person will be thinking they don't need to do anything because there are 99 other people to help, right?

Well, if that were true, you wouldn't get things like one person stopping to help another one in a crowded hall to pick up dropped items. (That's the example I've been using.)

That's what I've been trying to say. I hope that's more clear.

gaggedLouise

Okay, it sounded to me before like you were hinting it was a social fact that most people these days *do* not really give a cat's ass about someone getting raped or robbed, accidentally dropping their bag etc in front of them in a public space of some kind - and that since you didn't believe in the bystander effect as a key explanation (I don't either) then the reason would be that people really have been ingrained with a bastard attitude and won't stop to help someone who is shouting for help.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Inari

#98
I was shown this in Critical Thinking a few weeks ago:

THE BYSTANDER EFFECT

It was proved right the following week with this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-19885252

The human mind really is a strange thing. Lots of things we think would be common sense to us, aren't always to other people.

Moraline


Pumpkin Seeds

The blog post was written by a woman holding a PhD in psychology.  Melissa Burkley is an Associate Professor of Social Psychology at North Carolina University and has published various articles in the field of social psychology.  The blog post she wrote was for Psychology Today and her “oversimplification” was made because she is writing to an audience composed primarily of amateur psychology readers at best.  She explained the dynamics involved along with two key theories in the field of social psychology.  Her words carry a bit more weight than an opinion, despite them being done in a none peer reviewed article.

http://www.wadsworth.com/psychology_d/templates/student_resources/0155060678_rathus/ps/ps19.html

This is a detailed experiment conducted so that group size can be tested as the lone variable.  The charts and evidence show that the larger the group size, the longer a participant took to respond and participants responded less frequently depending on the amount of people perceived to be bystanders. 

Trieste

Quote from: Starcry on October 24, 2012, 03:51:40 PM
I was shown this in Critical Thinking a few weeks ago:

THE BYSTANDER EFFECT

It was proved right the following week with this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-19885252

The human mind really is a strange thing. Lots of things we think would be common sense to us, aren't always to other people.

Quote from: Pumpkin Seeds on October 24, 2012, 09:17:33 PM
The blog post was written by a woman holding a PhD in psychology.  Melissa Burkley is an Associate Professor of Social Psychology at North Carolina University and has published various articles in the field of social psychology.  The blog post she wrote was for Psychology Today and her “oversimplification” was made because she is writing to an audience composed primarily of amateur psychology readers at best.  She explained the dynamics involved along with two key theories in the field of social psychology.  Her words carry a bit more weight than an opinion, despite them being done in a none peer reviewed article.

http://www.wadsworth.com/psychology_d/templates/student_resources/0155060678_rathus/ps/ps19.html

This is a detailed experiment conducted so that group size can be tested as the lone variable.  The charts and evidence show that the larger the group size, the longer a participant took to respond and participants responded less frequently depending on the amount of people perceived to be bystanders. 


So the larger the group, the longer it takes - except one man in the video linked above took all of six seconds to get help on a busy London street.

... ummmmmm...

The fact that someone holds a PhD or a professorship doesn't automagically make them impressive. Sorry, too jaded by school at this point - I've been instructed by too many PhDs who don't know an enol from their asshole.

TaintedAndDelish

For what its worth, I found this article to be rather interesting. Its based on research done by the FBI on a number of serial rapists. While it doesn't directly answer the question as to whether or not provocative dress is a factor, they said that this profile was typical of other rapists that they interviewed. The description of this rapist's first rape suggested that dress was not really a factor. In this criminal's case it was more that they were there at the moment.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=107091

I did some more looking around for information on rape prevention and saw no mention of being careful about one's attire.

Pumpkin Seeds

One man in the video helped out of a multitude of people.  Only when a new variable was manipulated, manner of dress, did others offer to help within six seconds.  Simply because a variable was manipulated does not disprove the phenomenon of the Bystander Effect, simply brings into sight another part of the effect.  Group unity and solidarity have an effect on the intervention of a bystander, which can be shown through similar dress.  The original reaction and experiment still stand.

A person with credentials that are openly presented and valid speaking on a subject pertaining to their credentials still carries more weight and meaning than someone who is not involved in the field.  Dismissing such statements offhand is poor judgment, especially with no evidence to counter the claims.  Thus far a video presenting the Bystander Effect, the words of an credentialed expert in the field of psychology and one of the founding experiments of the Bystander Effect have been presented.  Not sure how much more is required to satisfy that the Bystander Effect plays a role in people ignoring the cries of a person for help.

DarklingAlice

Quote from: Pumpkin Seeds on October 24, 2012, 09:17:33 PM
Her words carry a bit more weight than an opinion, despite them being done in a none peer reviewed article.

This is pedantic. However, speaking as someone who makes a living in this academic stuff, I have a non-peer-reviewed publication coming out next year and a peer-reviewed one pending acceptance (fingers crossed for this last set of revisions): the non-peer-reviewed one is just an opinion. It's a very good opinion and I personally know I am right, but it is not in the same order of magnitude as the peer-reviewed one and should not be treated as such. Appeals to authority are a terrible form of rhetoric, this is why peer-review exists. Now, I'm not expressing an opinion about whether the bystander effect is at play, but let's be clear on how science works: no points for just going "but I'm smart and have credentials"; it's peer-review and P values or bust.
For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong.


Sabre

Quote from: Pumpkin Seeds on October 24, 2012, 05:49:33 AMThe article linked is in reference to date rape and even the article points toward the unusual nature of date rape when applied to the evolutionary theory of rape.  A date rapist does not fit what was once thought to be the standard profile of a rapist.  Someone who commits date rape has shown an ability to get a date, typically possesses enough education and monetary status to attend college and is of a higher social class as the article points out.  So these people are able to acquire dates that could potentially lead toward sexual intimacy, but instead make the choice to push for rape.  This shows a desire to remove power from the other person for self-gratification, not simply a desire to have sex.

For date rape, I would argue that the removal of power is not what is ultimately self-gratifying, and not why date rape occurs.  It's related to a desire to have sex, but not entirely.  It's more likely related to the date rapist's desire to have ego-friendly sex.  As you say, these individuals are usually able to have sexual intimacy in a normal manner, yet choose to drug a woman and rape her.  Obviously it's a sign that sex itself isn't the main driving concern so much as having the right kind of sex (in the rapist's mind).  Whether based on how well they handle rejection or how confident they are in their sexual prowess, the ultimate goal is the protection of the ego, with thought processes and self-justifications usually following:

"I want to have sex with this person."
"I am capable of wooing her, or have already done so."
"I do not want her to judge my performance poorly."
"Can I live with rejection?"

Ultimately what is required to achieve self-gratification for the date rapist is to remove the victim's power of judgment, with restriction of all other powers being secondary to it.  He's shooting a porno in his head, and it wouldn't do to have the actress talk back to the director.


In some ways this issue is related to sexual harassment of cosplayers.  What some men normally assume to be off-limits to them in everyday, public life - overt ogling, cat calls, and someone being receptive to their attention - is suddenly available to them.  An attractive woman who, if she walked by on a busy public street in a power suit, would be instantly offended or even violently react to being complimented for the way her dress compliments her bust by strangers, is now poured into a catsuit and posing for everyone to see.  They suddenly feel they needn't fear rejection any longer when it comes to showering their attention on a woman regardless of their ability to attract or seduce a woman normally to make such comments acceptable.  Some go too far simply because they believe the cosplayer, by her costume and posing, has been stripped of her power to judge their attention as unwanted.

Trieste

I think I've already said that the so-called Bystander Effect oversimplifies human behavior. The video made this clear. There is a wide range of behavior that doesn't support the diffusion of responsibility. The first guy had to wait over twenty minutes, and the video does not make it clear if anyone stopped. The second actor was helped in less than five minutes. The first actor when he dressed up, six seconds. There is no evidence that the surrounding amount of people diminished or increased significantly (countering the article that states that the amount of help is inversely proportional to the number of people around), and the second scenario clearly demonstrates someone looking at someone else for social cues. This demonstrates the aforementioned Pluralistic Ignorance more than it does the Bystander Effect. Clothing is a kind of social cue.

As for the PhD comment, PhDs are obtained by specializing, not generalizing. According to her biography in Psychology Today, she specializes in social prejudices and stereotyping. That's only marginally connected to the effects discussed in that blog post. If she were an expert specifically researching the so-called Bystander Effect, I would still wonder what her biases are, where her funding comes from, whether she has a particular theory that she supports, and how vehemently she supports it. Just because you have a PhD does not make you an expert in everything remotely related to whatever field your PhD falls under - it just means that you've spent a lot of time paying your dues to the academic system. Her credentials, on this subject, are no more meaningful than a B.S. in psych - her focus is in a different area entirely.

Cyrano Johnson

#107
I should just like to note, by the way -- in a gratuitous moment of newbie euphoria -- that however the contentious points resolve or don't resolve themselves* here, I'm quite impressed at how fascinating and educational this thread has turned out to be, and thankful to everyone who's weighed in. Well-played, Elliquiy.

(* Trieste has been largely right thus far, I think -- but do carry on!)
Artichoke the gorilla halibut! Freedom! Remember Bubba the Love Sponge!

Cyrano Johnson's ONs & OFFs
Cyrano Johnson's Apologies & Absences

Pumpkin Seeds

The Bystander Effect has been shown to be very accurate in judging human behavior.  Human beings though are not grown in a petri dish and the variables of an experiment regarding humans are not ones that can be controlled perfectly.  This statement is especially true of one being conducted on the street, though the video probably does not have all the elements of a proper experiment.  Forces outside of the experimenter’s control are always at work particularly in public places.  An experiment that focused more so on the size of the group being proportional to the time elapsed for help was done and presented.  The numbers are pretty consistent.  A change in clothing is not an example of pluralistic ignorance that was done when the man assisted the woman and then the indecisive woman came to help as well.  She was taking her cue from another person.  By changing to clothing that fit more with some of the people walking past, business like, the actor played on group solidarity.  I would also argue that the construction worker who stopped might well have been from a similar social class as the dress the actress was portraying.

A social psychologist is not holding up Bystander Effect as the sole reason to explain human behavior and neither am I.  Bystander Effect is certainly dependent on other variables because human beings do not live in a perfectly controlled environment.  Group cohesiveness, cost-reward theory, pluralistic ignorance and other variables do play a part in these situations.  Understanding the Bystander Effect will help develop methods to overcome this part of human reaction and group dynamic.  Also note, as the researchers in the published experiment concluded that an individual’s lack of assistance is not due to apathy.  The researchers concluded that those who did not act were under a great deal of stress, were greatly concerned about the individual in distress and exhibited all the signs of a person under duress.  The people were still in decision mode.  As you pointed at Trieste, the people around the rape victim froze.  Despite knowing what they should do, the people did nothing because they were locked into indecision.  Then they looked around to take their cues from other bystanders and continued in their state of indecision. Since nobody was doing anything, they didn’t want to be the odd one that did something.

Here is the Abstract of a paper documenting a change in Bystander Effect when group cohesiveness is worked into the equation.  http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/44/3/545/.  If you want to purchase the full article be my guest. 

My remarks could be considered an appeal to authority and pedantic if they were not followed with an actual experiment and a listing of other incidents where the Bystander Effect plays a role.  The issue I have is that the words of a PhD should not be so easily dismissed as, “oh that’s a blog post.”  Even if the specialty is not perfect in line with the topic of conversation there are still years of additional work and theory behind a PhD.  I am not saying that only truth falls from the woman’s lips in regard to social psychology, only that being so dismissive with her words is showing disrespect for the field.

The problem with your statement Sabre is that the comment still comes back to power.  Protection of the ego is certainly an aspect of power play because the victim threatens the perceived power of the attacker.  The attacker then removes the victim’s power to reject him, to insult him, to resist his wants and desires.  Were sex the ultimate goal of the act then, as we both agree, the attacker could just move on to another woman in a string of serial dates until one had sex with him.  Cost-reward simply works out to the low output of effort of serial dates to raping a victim.  Sex may have been a factor in asking the person out on a date, but power became a more important reason as the date progressed into rape.  Either, as you said, because the ego was threatened or the attacker felt some threat from the person taken out on the date.

Trieste

It wasn't "that's just a blog post". It was: Holding a PhD doesn't automatically make her an expert in the topic at hand. If that's disrespectful of the field, take comfort in the fact that I apparently disrespect every scientific field out there and don't only discriminate against psychologists.

This is your opinion:
Quote from: Pumpkin Seeds on October 25, 2012, 11:37:19 AM
The Bystander Effect has been shown to be very accurate in judging human behavior.

This is my opinion:
Quote from: Trieste on October 25, 2012, 01:20:24 AM
I think I've already said that the so-called Bystander Effect oversimplifies human behavior.

Both have been pretty well supported. It's been nice comparing notes with you.




Quote from: Cyrano Johnson on October 25, 2012, 01:33:13 AM
I should just like to note, by the way -- in a gratuitous moment of newbie euphoria -- that however the contentious points resolve or don't resolve themselves* here, I'm quite impressed at how fascinating and educational this thread has turned out to be, and thankful to everyone who's weighed in. Well-played, Elliquiy.

(* Trieste has been largely right thus far, I think -- but do carry on!)


Regardless of right or wrong, I'm glad it's been interesting for you. There are some pretty interesting perspectives in P&R and it gets kind of crazy around election time. So it's good that we haven't scared everyone off. :P




The cosplayer's experience hasn't deterred me from wearing a catsuit or something for Halloween costumes. ::)

Pumpkin Seeds

Trieste...you didn't have any notes.  You just stated your opinion.  I'm sorry, but you presented nothing to back up your opinion other than..your opinion. 

gaggedLouise

For the record I feel rather immune to the bystander effect myself, sizing it up as a "spectator situation". I've been known to walk out of my way and help people and to confront those who were just standing around and poking fun, even when that took a bit of resolve.

Obviously different if you're the one being knocked over or tricked into a vulnerable situation, or if it's at home and nobody can see it, but if it's in the street people are actually not that cool with open violence against someone who appears defenceless.

*steps off soapbox*

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

Trieste

Sure, it's not like there was a lengthy discussion of the evidence presented or anything. ::)

Quote from: gaggedLouise on October 25, 2012, 11:56:46 AM
For the record I feel rather immune to the bystander effect myself, sizing it up as a "spectator situation". I've been known to walk out of my way and help people and to confront those who were just standing around and poking fun, even when that took a bit of resolve.

Obviously different if you're the one being knocked over or tricked into a vulnerable situation, or if it's at home and nobody can see it, but if it's in the street people are actually not that cool with open violence against someone who appears defenceless.

*steps off soapbox*

I wonder if the people who accompanied the interviewer in the original blog post were part of the interviewer's 'crew' or if they were people who just stopped to watch. Is it considered acceptable at a convention to step in on an 'interview' that has so clearly gone awry? I'm not familiar with etiquette there.

Pumpkin Seeds

Trieste, we can discuss the evidence presented supporting my opinion at length.  Your opinion is not supported in any way by anything you presented, because all you presented was your opinion.  Claiming to have a supported opinion is false when that opinion comes with no supporting evidence or even presented fact.

Mithlomwen

I think it's fair to say that there is a difference of opinions here.  Probably best to leave it at that and move on. 

Baby, it's all I know,
that your half of the flesh and blood that makes me whole...

gaggedLouise

#115
Pumpkin Seeds, arguing a valid point of view or against somebody else's ideas of how things are set up, or of what we're supposed to know, doesn't have to mean you're always supporting every bit of what you say on peer-reviewed studies or articles. Far as I can see, Trie is arguing that the bystander hypothesis and some other stuff are poorly sourced, are illogical and/or  don't match many people's everyday experience. That's totally valid grounds.

Good girl but bad  -- Proud sister of the amazing, blackberry-sweet Violet Girl

Sometimes bound and cuntrolled, sometimes free and easy 

"I'm a pretty good cook, I'm sitting on my groceries.
Come up to my kitchen, I'll show you my best recipes"

LunarSage

I don't know.  As often as I've heard people ask "source linked please" in order to validate any sort of opinion on this or any other forum...

  ▫  A.A  ▫  O.O  ▫  Find & Seek   ▫ 

Trieste

Quote from: LunarSage on October 25, 2012, 01:21:58 PM
I don't know.  As often as I've heard people ask "source linked please" in order to validate any sort of opinion on this or any other forum...

Definitely. Which is why I sourced the statistics I gave about acquaintance rape. And which is why I pointed out examples of my opinion from evidence being presented - videos, articles. I even sourced where I got the biography of the psychologist who was being discussed.

The opinion I have presented has been well-supported. If you read back through the thread, you'll see that. You may not agree with my conclusions, but the opinion I present does not come from ignorance.

And despite several attempts to move the conversation past this particular ridiculousness, I'm starting to feel a bit like Sisyphus, so that's about all I have to say about that.

Beguile's Mistress

Quote from: Mithlomwen on October 25, 2012, 12:54:00 PM
I think it's fair to say that there is a difference of opinions here.  Probably best to leave it at that and move on. 



I think the request has been made to agree to disagree so perhaps any other pertinent remarks can now be made on the topic under discussion.

*glances at the signature below*