When is banter actually intimidation?

[Darandio]

A sexual advance is when a 442 pulls out of a station isn’t it...?

It's actually an HST power car with the coupling rod extended. Apparently.

 

[baz962]

Although this thread is about what someone said as opposed to touching/harassing someone, on the radio yesterday it was commented that on dancing on ice, Cherly Baker was asked what is the best thing about your dance partner. The said lady responded by saying his bum and patted it. Imagine if a man did that in this climate, especially with hollywood starlet's making much noise about it.

 

[Raul_Duke]

It's actually an HST power car with the coupling rod extended. Apparently.

Long bar or short bar?

 

[Bantamzen]

Context, context, context. Its all about the context, and I think DarloRich sums it up nicely:

such right on, overblown nonsense.

IF the guard was checking tickets, asked for a railcard and remarked that's a nice picture and moved on there is nothing to comment on.

If he went PHWOAR you have a cracking set of baps love we might have something to complain about.

BTW - I have chatted up loads of women and usually failed. I haven't sexually molested anyone though. The simple action of talking to a woman you don't know appears to be prohibited these days.

If it was delivered as a compliment then I see no problem, but if the woman concerned felt it inappropriate she might want to just say to the guard that she would prefer for him not to comment on it. The trouble is that people then start as the norm to take offence to any well meaning gesture and before long you have a society that dare not speak to each other save a few grunts, pops and whistles.

I can remember not too long ago holding open a door for a lady (I do the same for everyone BTW) only to be shouted at for being sexist, so I let the door go and got shouted at for not continuing to hold the door open. I never could work that one out.....

 

[Darandio]

Long bar or short bar?

I've no idea, I guess it depends on what you do with the short one and how much it counts?

 

[cuccir]

such right on, overblown nonsense.

IF the guard was checking tickets, asked for a railcard and remarked that's a nice picture and moved on there is nothing to comment on.

If he went PHWOAR you have a cracking set of baps love we might have something to complain about.

BTW - I have chatted up loads of women and usually failed. I haven't sexually molested anyone though. The simple action of talking to a woman you don't know appears to be prohibited these days.

Well it's really your call. If you've decided that you're suitably qualified to decree what is and isn't an appropriate interaction with people, ignoring the testimony of others, then good for you, and I'm clearly not going to persuade you otherwise.

But I'll chose to believe the opinions given by countless women - and indeed some men too - rather than follow your view, if that's OK.

 

[cuccir]

If it was delivered as a compliment then I see no problem,

I suppose this is what it comes down to. I disagree with the assertion that if no harm was intended, none can be felt. While I sympathize with the view, I think people have a greater responsibility before acting than simply deciding that they mean no harm.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can remember not too long ago holding open a door for a lady (I do the same for everyone BTW) only to be shouted at for being sexist, so I let the door go and got shouted at for not continuing to hold the door open. I never could work that one out.....

I too hold doors for anyone who is close enough to need to pass through shortly after me, or in some cases open them and let the other person go first. Her action would have been met with a very sarcastic response along the lines of "well, would you rather I slammed it in your face instead?"

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suppose this is what it comes down to. I disagree with the assertion that if no harm was intended, none can be felt. While I sympathize with the view, I think people have a greater responsibility before acting than simply deciding that they mean no harm.

I have a feeling there is a north-south divide on this to some extent. The not dissimilar act of calling people "love" or "duck" is still going on up north, whereas many Southerners would be offended by it.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

such right on, overblown nonsense.

IF the guard was checking tickets, asked for a railcard and remarked that's a nice picture and moved on there is nothing to comment on.

If he went PHWOAR you have a cracking set of baps love we might have something to complain about.

BTW - I have chatted up loads of women and usually failed. I haven't sexually molested anyone though. The simple action of talking to a woman you don't know appears to be prohibited these days.

As a matter of fact I happen to agree with you on this point. Who are you and what have you done with DarloRich?!

Although this thread is about what someone said as opposed to touching/harassing someone, on the radio yesterday it was commented that on dancing on ice, Cherly Baker was asked what is the best thing about your dance partner. The said lady responded by saying his bum and patted it. Imagine if a man did that in this climate, especially with hollywood starlet's making much noise about it.

If a man did it, I am lead to believe that there would be huge outcry about it. For the most part at least.

Well it's really your call. If you've decided that you're suitably qualified to decree what is and isn't an appropriate interaction with people

I don’t think he actually claimed to be suitably qualified to decree what is and what isn’t appropriate interaction. He gave his views plain and simply.

ignoring the testimony of others, then good for you, and I'm clearly not going to persuade you otherwise.

But I'll chose to believe the opinions given by countless women - and indeed some men too - rather than follow your view, if that's OK.

What are you even on about here? I don’t know what you’re referring to with these “countless women” and “testimony of others”.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

I suppose this is what it comes down to. I disagree with the assertion that if no harm was intended, none can be felt. While I sympathize with the view, I think people have a greater responsibility before acting than simply deciding that they mean no harm.

What "harm" can be done by someone complimenting somebody on a nice picture on a railcard which as we all know generally come out bloody awful looking no matter how good looking you may be in real life.

Purely ridiculous that anyone could take offence and certainly there was no harm possible from this.

I normally just laugh in amazement at some of the views on these forums, today I feel myself actually getting a bit angry with the ridiculous over reaction by some.

How are friends made? Relationships started? Good customer relations formed if nobody can even give a compliment with a smile whilst doing their job. People have to interact.

Pubs people used to go and drink at by themselves and would start up conversations with bar staff or customers. Public house, social places for socialising.

Public transport is not for socialising but certainly there is no harm in striking up conversation. If someone doesn't want to interact or feels uncomfortable they can smile, not answer and continue reading a book etc , get up and go to the "toilet" but move seats if it really is uncomfortable (99% I guarantee it wouldn't be)

People shouldn't walk around in silence in case of upsetting the 1% of people who don't have any social skills to take a compliment or have a chat about the weather!!!

Rant over

 

[MichaelAMW]

I can remember not too long ago holding open a door for a lady (I do the same for everyone BTW) only to be shouted at for being sexist, so I let the door go and got shouted at for not continuing to hold the door open. I never could work that one out.....

The woman in that case was being sexist because she grossly gender stereotyped you as a man by assuming your motivation for opening the door on the basis of your sex alone. Similarly, the woman referred to in the OP was being sexist if she would have been happy to hear the compliment from a woman - or, indeed, even a different man whom she herself found interesting.

I realise that men need to be aware of how their behaviour might be perceived but, nonetheless, there is an appalling level of sexism against men these days, by some women, that is gobsmackingly hypocritical and two faced.

 

[Bromley boy]

The other day I got a telling off for offering a lady a seat on the tube.

Saying “I’m terribly sorry but I thought you were pregnant” will work wonders, in this stuation.

 

[baz962]

Saying “I’m terribly sorry but I thought you were pregnant” will work wonders, in this stuation.

Unless she is obese, you could get a punch.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

Unless she is obese, you could get a punch.

I don't think an obese woman will say no to sitting down when offered if I'm honest . Even so, you can just dodge or hit them back, and then just run away. They won't be able to chase you very far. In fact any obese person would probably get too winded just swinging their arms to slap them.

 

[AlterEgo]

Well it's really your call. If you've decided that you're suitably qualified to decree what is and isn't an appropriate interaction with people, ignoring the testimony of others, then good for you, and I'm clearly not going to persuade you otherwise.

But I'll chose to believe the opinions given by countless women - and indeed some men too - rather than follow your view, if that's OK.

There are also countless women who think a man paying a woman an innocent compliment is okay, too. As I said - confusing landscape.

 

[DarloRich]

Well it's really your call. If you've decided that you're suitably qualified to decree what is and isn't an appropriate interaction with people, ignoring the testimony of others, then good for you, and I'm clearly not going to persuade you otherwise.

But I'll chose to believe the opinions given by countless women - and indeed some men too - rather than follow your view, if that's OK.

Another poster unable to deal with direct citricism.

I am qualified to decide thanks. Consider these actions:

• commenting on a nice picture
• commenting on a nice bottom
• touching a nice bottom without permission
• touching other areas without permission.
• continuing to behave badly after being asked to stop

Now, where do you think the line is. I reckon the first is OK followed by a rapid descent downhill thereafter. The first is a harmless compliment. The second might be offered as a compliment but edges towards being unacceptable . The rest are not. Surely that is obvious to anyone but the professionally insulted/upset?

 

[3141]

Different people react in different ways. Some prefer not to engage in any kind of conversation with anyone when they are travelling. Some may be sensitive about any remark made about them, even if was purely factual and intended as a compliment. Some of the males to whom this guard commented that their photo was better than the real thing might actually be concerned about their appearance and would find the comment worrying. "Jolly" people don't generally appeal to me. But there are guards who check my ticket who have other ways of speaking to passengers which enables them to come across (in my view, at least) as friendly and approachable without making personal remarks. I think that in any case someone whose job includes dealing with people should be aware that there are many sensitivities and so they should think what remarks will be generally acceptable and exercise tact about others. It's also necessary to take account of the current climate, and while I'm not impressed by some of the "me too" contributions in the media, I don't think one can act as if they'd never happened.

 

[DarloRich]

Different people react in different ways. Some prefer not to engage in any kind of conversation with anyone when they are travelling. Some may be sensitive about any remark made about them, even if was purely factual and intended as a compliment. Some of the males to whom this guard commented that their photo was better than the real thing might actually be concerned about their appearance and would find the comment worrying. "Jolly" people don't generally appeal to me. But there are guards who check my ticket who have other ways of speaking to passengers which enables them to come across (in my view, at least) as friendly and approachable without making personal remarks. I think that in any case someone whose job includes dealing with people should be aware that there are many sensitivities and so they should think what remarks will be generally acceptable and exercise tact about others.

aka - employ a mute.

It's also necessary to take account of the current climate, and while I'm not impressed by some of the "me too" contributions in the media, I don't think one can act as if they'd never happened.

No one suggests we act as if "they'd never happened" - I simply suggest perspective might help direct focus on areas of truly abhorrent behaviour & that lack of focus means that those truly abhorrent behaviours are not the ones tackled. Instead we focus on meaningless fluff and get upset about, and waste energy on, unimportant things.

 

[3141]

aka - employ a mute.

No one suggests we act as if "they'd never happened" - I simply suggest perspective might help direct focus on areas of truly abhorrent behaviour & that lack of focus means that those truly abhorrent behaviours are not the ones tackled. Instead we focus on meaningless fluff and get upset about, and waste energy on, unimportant things.

Actually my post #48 wasn't written in response to your #47, because when I started writing mine yours wasn't there. Your comment about "employ a mute" is particularly wide of the point after my complimentary remarks about the way some guards speak to passengers.

 

[cuccir]

Another poster unable to deal with direct citricism.

I'm not sure what gave you that view?

You're not qualified to decide; neither, of course, am I. See below...

What are you even on about here? I don’t know what you’re referring to with these “countless women” and “testimony of others”.

Well the posts at the Everyday Sexism project for a start. I'd assert that those people are the ones who are qualified to decide what counts as appropriate.

People shouldn't walk around in silence in case of upsetting the 1% of people who don't have any social skills to take a compliment or have a chat about the weather!!

There seems to be a lot of whatabouterry in this and many other of the posts. No-one, I think, criticizing the train guard - and by the way, I'd emphasize that it's the mildest of criticisms, which is a further point that seems to have been lost - has said you can't interact. It's perfectly easy to make small talk, interact in a chatty way with people, without going straight to appearance first. The only people who seem to be claiming that this even might be the case are those who take umbrage at the criticism.

...Now, where do you think the line is. I reckon the first is OK followed by a rapid descent downhill thereafter. The first is a harmless compliment. The second might be offered as a compliment but edges towards being unacceptable . The rest are not. Surely that is obvious to anyone but the professionally insulted/upset?

Again, it's the harmless compliment thing. I've already outlined in post 12 quite a few reasons why I don't think we can dismiss things as harmless compliments.

Look back at the posts: no-one is saying that this is some sort of crime, completely inappropriate, out of order, etc. I'd argue that if anyone is the professionally upset, it's those who see a small criticism of someone's behaviour as evidence of some sort of end of social interaction.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

How times change. Being nice and friendly, complimenting a woman on their appeareace, or being a gentleman, is now offensive and insulting ....

Everything is such a minefield now, particularly for young men.

What #metoo has laid bare is that a lot of women do get unwanted attention which can amount to harassment and even assault. This is an indisputable fact and is not a good reflection on our society. In real life, a lot of the women I know personally don’t really identify with that movement. They aren’t feminists in the modern sense, and there’s a lack of agreement about what constitutes harassment. In short, they think #metoo is a lot of old cobblers.

Trump made disgusting comments about “grabbing women by the p***y”, which were unacceptable for anyone to make. Yet, in real life, I’ve had some women tell me they actually like that. A lot of women find domineering and controlling men attractive. They’re not sick in the head. I don’t recall the same issues being a problem when I was a teenager. I don’t know what the solution is, but I thought I’d throw a little life experience into the mix. I’m not going to elaborate too much as this is a forum with universal appeal, but it certainly makes for an interesting debate down the pub.

I point the finger firmly at the feminists who find everything insulting and offensive - their sick and twisted views is what is offensive, insulting and degrading. No wonder the males of today seem scared of trying to attract or even say anything nice incase some feminists says that they're not allow to. No wonder the country has gone down the crapper.

This is my view though as I don't think it'll be long before we see a uprising of single white males reacting because of what the feminists are doing to society.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

Well the posts at the Everyday Sexism project for a start. I'd assert that those people are the ones who are qualified to decide what counts as appropriate.

So they are qualified to decide what counts as appropriate for everyone because they posted on a website? Does that mean I get to decide what’s appropriate if I say right here that I’ve been a victim of sexism?

 

[Bletchleyite]

So they are qualified to decide what counts as appropriate for everyone because they posted on a website? Does that mean I get to decide what’s appropriate if I say right here that I’ve been a victim of sexism?

The only person qualified to decide if they are offended by something is the person at which it was directed. Not any other person nor organisation on their behalf.

 

[cuccir]

So they are qualified to decide what counts as appropriate because they posted on a website? Does that mean I get to decide what’s appropriate if I say right here that I’ve been a victim of sexism?

I'm hoping that people are capable of differentiating between a body of evidence of over 1000 pages and an individual post, but in the round yes. But I think it's appropriate (for example) that men have a greater say in areas where men suffer from patriarchy: the criminal justice system, for example, or in suicide prevention measures. So I'm not saying that only women can have a say on gendered issues.

 

[Raul_Duke]

The only person qualified to decide if they are offended by something is the person at which it was directed. Not any other person nor organisation on their behalf.

And even that wouldn’t necessarily make it reasonable.

 

[AlterEgo]

Well the posts at the Everyday Sexism project for a start. I'd assert that those people are the ones who are qualified to decide what counts as appropriate.

They are only qualified to decide in their own individual cases, not on a broad brush basis.

Likewise, only the woman in the OP’s example is entitled to decide if she feels harassed by a traincrew member saying she looks nice in her photo.

It isn’t for any of us to decide.

One for the big problems we have at the moment is that sexism against women is seen as a marquee issue, whereas sexism against men is not equally noted. In my old job, I was discriminated against because of my sex, in being denied flexible working against company policy for no good reason. They granted flexible working to another colleague, who was a woman, in the same circumstances.

Next time it’s Fathers’ Day, have a look at the greetings cards on offer. Often, they portray men as basically on the autism spectrum, obsessed with hobbies, or sex, or toilet humour. Then, have a look at Mothers’ Day cards and observe the difference.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

The only person qualified to decide if they are offended by something is the person at which it was directed. Not any other person nor organisation on their behalf.

Unfortunately too many people fail to realise this nowadays. That act like people being offended have been targeted by a malicious invidiual seeking to make their lives a misery.

I'm hoping that people are capable of differentiating between a body of evidence of over 1000 pages and an individual post, but in the round yes. In particular, I think it's appropriate (for example) that men have a greater say in areas where men suffer from patriarchy: the criminal justice system, for example, or in suicide prevention measures.

What is the over 1000 pages of evidence you speak of? Also, to ask again, would I get to decide what is appropriate by just saying on here that I’ve been the victim of everyday sexism? Also, if men suffer from the criminal justice system more than women, how on earth is that even patriarchy?

 

[Bletchleyite]

And even that wouldn’t necessarily make it reasonable.

Agreed...Stephen Fry might have something to say to that

 

[Temple Meads]

Different people react in different ways. Some prefer not to engage in any kind of conversation with anyone when they are travelling. Some may be sensitive about any remark made about them, even if was purely factual and intended as a compliment. Some of the males to whom this guard commented that their photo was better than the real thing might actually be concerned about their appearance and would find the comment worrying. "Jolly" people don't generally appeal to me. But there are guards who check my ticket who have other ways of speaking to passengers which enables them to come across (in my view, at least) as friendly and approachable without making personal remarks. I think that in any case someone whose job includes dealing with people should be aware that there are many sensitivities and so they should think what remarks will be generally acceptable and exercise tact about others. It's also necessary to take account of the current climate, and while I'm not impressed by some of the "me too" contributions in the media, I don't think one can act as if they'd never happened.

Excellent post, my thoughts exactly, but worded much better!