RE: Don't be a creeper (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

LadyPact -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 4:11:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ManOeuvre
Even though much of this behaviour doesn't cross the line into criminality, there are real life consequences of people getting labelled as creeps or creepy, and so long as such sanctions, be they social, civil or criminal are encouraged, they ought to be applied, if there is any attempt being made to right some injustice, as responses to actions that someone has taken. I have read a lot of posts on here that specifically reference the feeling of being creeped out.

I had to dig back a few pages for this, so I hope you don't mind if I don't repeat what some others have said in the interim.

Of the three types of sanctions that you mention, (social, civil, or criminal) being creepy as a singular issue doesn't meet two of those criteria. If you are hitting criminal, you're talking about a specific violation of law (i.e., stalking, harassment, indecent exposure, etc) so *just* creepy doesn't hit that level without additional behavior. Civil doesn't work either because then you are hitting areas like sexual harassment that is job related, which you also have to base on a) reporting incidents and b) non response to correct the problem.

Social is the area where I would say you are correct. Then again, this fits the same as any other social behavior that dictates our preferences with whom we choose to spend our time. If you know the guy who makes several of your female guests uncomfortable when you throw a party, that might not be the guy you want to invite.

quote:

I certainly cannot argue that someone has experienced some feeling or other, but to establish any sort of rules for society that is dependant on someone's feelings does feel a touch like a descent into madness. Of course nobody here has recommended that "creeps" be crucified, castrated, or straight up culled, but the OP did essentially title this post with something of an injunction.

Had the OP titled the thread "don't be an asshole," I highly doubt there would have been pages of responses with the underlying message of 'person X wore this, so I was entitled to be an asshole'. There also wouldn't have been a lot of posts from people trying to quantify just exactly what an asshole is or trying to pin down exactly what they have to do to be an asshole. It would mean person X did A last week that made them a jerk but someone two months ago did something different but that still put them in asshole territory.

quote:

I don't disagree with the notion implied by Ladies Pact and Constanze, and stated by Greta that well north of abductors, batterers and rapists on the behaviour charte there are legions of men who suffer a serious vitamin Etiquette deficiency.

Thank you. I don't think anybody on this thread is trying to say being creepy is the same level as criminal activity. At the same time, it is a form of behavior that can be improved on by some individuals. Just because it's not the biggest social issue that we face doesn't mean it's not an issue at all.

quote:

I react much as you'd hope when some fool behaves in that way towards a woman of mine, or who's otherwise close to me. I tell imperfect strangers to smarten up if I judge them to be out of line towards women in public. I'm even arrogant enough to impose my western style chivalry-ish etiquette expectations on men within an umbrella's reach when I'm far from home, and can barely bahasa. I seriously do not defend the actions of a single one of the "creeps" brought up in the anecdotes posted by the women on this thread, and I'll never recommend similar actions to my sons. Of course, every instance brought up in the examples is something the world could have done without.

By this time, I think some of that has been displayed numerous times on this thread. When other men step up and basically say don't lump me into the category of the way you act, that's also saying that some men don't approve of creepy behavior. There's really nothing wrong with a man who is seeing the woman in his company being repeatedly bothered by the guy who is trying to pick her up telling him to leave her alone. And, yes, teaching our sons that certain behaviors are not socially acceptable is our job. I actually got a kick out of the video of what happens when the guys were catcalling their mothers. I didn't feel a bit bad for the males in that video.

quote:

My argument is simply that the word creep, along with its many inflections, being so prone to arbitrary application, used for such a wide spectrum of cases, and carrying a stigma so scarlet in hue, is not a terribly useful term.

Are you under the impression that the word creep is being used as a synonym for stalkers, rapists, etc? If so, we have a difference of view. I think people know the categories are different. At the same time, we can't just say, well, they haven't broken a law, so the fact that the behavior puts women at a higher sense of alert should be discarded completely. Telling people to listen to their instincts about their interactions is usually a good idea.

quote:

I also think that using it to describe a person who has harmed no one, rather than specific deeds, is disingenuous, especially when describing a man whose overall aesthetic, before he opens his mouth or lets wander his wonky eye, just exudes and aura of birth control.

I'm not sure I agree with you that harm has to necessarily come into it. The guy who is a jerk to you for whatever various reasons doesn't have to *harm* you for you not to want to be around him. Maybe you just think he's crude, so you'd prefer him not to be in your company. Does he have a bad habit of making inappropriate remarks to the women that you and your other friends are dating? Not exactly the guy you want when you're inviting people over, is it? Disrespectful to you, yes. Were you harmed?

quote:

*EDIT* Oops. Had this sitting on my desk for awhile. Didn't realize we were onto cars, women's fashions, and boring, boring insults. I'll try to be quicker next time.

Yeah, this one took a very strange turn, didn't it?



LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 4:51:55 AM)

What really really came through in this thread is that as women we really do not know how some men think and tick, and quite a few men don't seem to understand how women tick, but the same guys seem to expect that women are some sort of mind readers and always worry how a guy might perceive their actions or way of dressing.

What really floored me was that if you make a wrong choice once when you dress, you are always a "slut" and that showing too much boobage seems to be the same as having embezzled money or being a convicted rapist.

As I said before, when living and working in Munich, on occasion I wore the "traditional slut dress" also known as Dirndl, because it's pretty much an outfit that is socially acceptable as upscale office wear to fine dining to theater visits. Sometimes if you are working in an environment where a day can combine all three, you do not have time to rush home and change, and I think it's my job to adapt to the culture I'm in and not to expect the culture to adapt to me.

Well, I'm glad to know that wearing those dresses branded me forever, as for the the way they are cut, in every culture there is a traditional dress and the female version of traditional clothing will emphasize the female shape, because people picked their wives also with the aim that they would provide them with children.

Oddly enough the Italian version of the traditional dress isn't all that different to the Bavarian or Austrian dirndl and if you go to any traditional Italian event (almost every city has them about once a year) people will wear those dresses...

Here's the Italian version

[image]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/f8/1f/75/f81f754ef6bb1139cd0daa4e7d042972.jpg[/image]

They have the same thing in France with slight variations, they have it in Wales... They are all slightly Gothic as the roots go back to the middle ages. Personally I think it's a nice nod to tradition and heritage, just like restoring old buildings.

I some tribes women still will go topless, they aren't doing it because they are flaunting their breasts for men and are sluts asking for it, they're doing it because it's simply normal and socially acceptable, just like it is for men.



LadyPact -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 6:29:42 AM)

I don't know. I'm still trying to figure out which one of my outfits tags me forever. If it can be any of the Halloween costumes I've ever worn, maybe I'll pick Rocky the squirrel. Wait. I've dressed like a doctor before. Can I have the pay? I wore a kilt to work that vendor fair on Sunday. I must be Scottish!

I wonder how many males have dressed as a hobo, a ghost, a convict, an ax murderer, Freddie Kruger, Jason, or anything else that they really are. I don't think I'll ever look at the attendees of a Halloween party the same way again.



Lucylastic -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 6:41:42 AM)

I dont think calling women sluts and whores for something they wore once is at all creepy.



LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 6:48:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

I don't know. I'm still trying to figure out which one of my outfits tags me forever. If it can be any of the Halloween costumes I've ever worn, maybe I'll pick Rocky the squirrel. Wait. I've dressed like a doctor before. Can I have the pay? I wore a kilt to work that vendor fair on Sunday. I must be Scottish!

I wonder how many males have dressed as a hobo, a ghost, a convict, an ax murderer, Freddie Kruger, Jason, or anything else that they really are. I don't think I'll ever look at the attendees of a Halloween party the same way again.




I'm sure in 20 or 30 years I'll be delighted to be tagged CatWoman forever, ha ha ha

And yes, that is exactly the point of fancy dress, to do something completely different, the socially accepted form of a bit of BDSM role play...



Lucylastic -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 7:26:55 AM)

my last foray into costume was as the queen of hearts...The crinoline skirt made a nice hiding place for my pet, when I wasnt vet wrapping him to a sitting cross.



crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 9:04:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
Crumpets, there are sooooo many things the average man just doesn't realize about women's clothing. I think we have covered that a few women are dressing tarty but actually most don't, you just notice the ones more.

This is a fair assessment, that we men tend to remember the women dressed sexily.

It would be interesting to run a social experiment where a volunteer male is told to walk down a street (or whatever) when a precise number of female controls are walking alongside him or against his direction of motion, where, for the purpose of the experiment, we vary the dress of the women from frumpy to tarty in well calculated proportions.

Then we ask a slew of basic questions (Such as "How many women passed you by do you think?" or "Which women would you like to get to know better?", etc.) specifically designed to test which women were NOTICED by the men when they didn't know that was the purpose of the experiment.

I'd wager in the direction that you seem to lean, that the men would almost certainly notice the women sexily dressed far more so than the frumpy ones, which was my point all along.

My point is that women use that "notice" as a tool, and, some women don't even realize they're doing that (however, it's pretty obvious at Mardi Gras though, so, most women can't possibly be as clueless about the tit-for-tat transaction as some may feign).

If we REVERSE that experiment, in subtle ways, it's my hypothesis that we'd find that the women are purposefully PROVOKING these responses from the men, simply by the way they dress.

My main point is that provocation always has ramifications.
And, ramifications can't be (fully and completely) controlled.

Something like 1 out of every 10 men is going to be a creeper.



crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 9:29:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
If you are an average woman who doesn't get all her outfits tailored and especially made for her (about 99% of all of us) you do have to rely what you find in the shops, what you can actually buy, most women work, so you also have to dress in a way that isn't totally out of fashion, female fashions change a lot more than men's fashions and it costs us a lot more.

I don't doubt your clothes cost far more than ours.

I can buy perfectly reasonable jeans at Costco, and they fit me just fine simply by choosing three specifications, namely (#1) inseam and (#2) waist and (#3) the overall cut (which the Kirkland brand does fine by me).

That costs something like $15 and one pair of jeans lasts me a season or so before they're worn out, so, that's about 4 pair of jeans per year. Add some $50 sneakers (at a couple pairs a year), and socks (two or three dozen sets from Costco last a few years), and t-shirts (most are freebies from clubs and organizations and events), and my total informal wardrobe is something like a couple hundred dollars per year.

My business wardrobe is similar, since 5 suits and 10 white shirts, a couple pairs of dress shoes, and a half-dozen ties suits me just fine, where all but the suits and shoes also come from Costco, at a total cost of something like a thousand bucks initially (the suits are never cheap).

I'm sure your clothes are far more expensive for a variety of reasons, most of which I probably don't even realize.

Let me think about why:

1. They charge women more for dry cleaning than they do men (even though that's probably illegal, they charge what people are willing to pay and women are willing to pay more than men to have a shirt/blouse dry cleaned).

2. Women tend to have a LOT of shoes (and they're probably far more expensive than my $150 Bostonians).

3. Women tend to wear more "things" even when informal (informally I wear shirt, pants, socks, shoes, and not even a belt whereas women have additional matching purses, jewelry, scarves, sashes, ties, rings, necklaces, etc.)

4. Women's stuff tends to match, which means a perfectly good shirt that is plaid is terrible with a similarly perfectly good pair of striped pants (believe it or not, a girlfriend had to TELL me this rule when I was in college... she went through my closet and threw more than half of it out). For me, my Kirkland jeans match every t-shirt and sneakers I own!

5. Women are more tuned to style then men (in general), so, for example a perfectly good blouse that is last-year's style is no good this year.

6. Women's clothes are flimsy! If I showed you my extremely well worn Raichle hiking boots, and compared them to the rubber on the bottom of anything you own, you'd notice that your stuff is downright flimsy compared to mine, so, your amortization curves are far steeper than mine are.

7. Fit for women is a big deal. For me, Kirkland jeans do fine, but for women, they can go down a rack of pants and only some will fit, which is always a supply:demand dilemma since you have to pay the price for the specific clothes that fit your specific form. (I have a specific form also, by the way; but my form is covered by looser clothing - so - a LOT more stuff fits me just fine.)

8. Women dress for the occasion better than men tend to (e.g., I don't dress any differently in the summer than in the winter than in the spring or fall, unless it's raining, which it almost never does here in California). Yet, women have spring dresses and summer outfits and the like.

9. Women's clothing changes as they age, whereas men's clothing pretty much stays the same over decades (I wore jeans and a t-shirt in college, and I still wear jeans and a t-shirt informally).

10. Because women are so delectable, we men tend to rip women's clothes off far more often than women tear (and ruin) men's clothing!

I'm sure there are more reasons that those above, but that's just to say that I agree with you and I gave you ten reasons why.
[image]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/6d/82/d0/6d82d030025f49c3da3f879756a29d42.jpg[/image]



crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 9:41:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
Sometimes having a larger wardrobe than the average male is not a choice but a necessity.

This is a quite fair assessment.
I don't think anyone would disagree.
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
When was the last time that you had to worry if your suit jacket might shape your breasts a bit too provocatively and somebody might see it as an invitation?

The direct answer to your question = never.

I only dress one way, and I've dressed that way since my first job out of college.
1. Wool suit (here in California, I've had to get thinner and thinner wool since it's not the east coast)
2. White 100% cotton shirt with button-down collar
3. Stupid tie (I hate that we have to wear ties - but it's part of the uniform)
4. Black socks (I buy them in batches of a dozen so that I don't have to buy them for years and there's no sorting)
5. Black shoes (I gave up on brown shoes long ago)
6. Black belt

That's it for variety.

Five suits.
Ten white shirts.
A half-dozen ties (most of which are gifts)
A few dozen black socks.
A couple of pairs of black shoes.
And one belt.

That's just business attire though.

For informal attire, I have something like a dozen pair of jeans (all the same) since I wear holes in them within a couple of months.
I also wear out sneakers like you can't believe - so I tend to wear heavy Raichle hiking boots lately.
T-shirts last, essentially forever, as do belts, and socks last years because I have so many of the same type as I only have a black sock drawer, and a white sock drawer. I have a huge closet which is 99% empty. One drawer each for the two types of socks, and another drawer for underwear and the rest of the drawers are empty.

There are many shelves, but only two pairs of shoes in all, and what takes up the most space are my Aerostitch suits and leather gloves, helmet, and riding boots!
[image]https://cdn.rideapart.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Enter-To-Win-Roadcrafter-Light-One-Piece-Suit_1.jpg[/image]



crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 9:49:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
I think making guys live as a woman in a woman's body just for a few weeks would change their perception of how we dress dramatically.

No thanks!
You women need to pay far more attention to your clothes than I do.
I like it just fine with pulling any old t-shirt off the hanger, shoving on a pair of loose-fitting pants and white calf-length socks, and then running shoes, and that's it for my dress decisions for the day. I don't even bother with a belt. And certainly jewelry isn't my schtick. Nor makeup. Nor hair stuff. I wear glasses and a watch. That's it.

It's easy for men.
But not so easy for women.

I agree.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
The woman walking down the street in the skirt and a gust of wind lifts her skirt and flashes her undies, she might actually not have intended the wardrobe malfunction, she might just have forgotten about it briefly while she was getting dressed, she might have thought it's a hot day and there won't be winds...

Seriously, we don't really worry every day when we get dressed if our clothes will appeal to a random guy we have no interaction with, strange men are just not that important to us.


Here's the thing.

I don't wear clothes that malfunction like that.
Women do.

We have to think deeply as to why.
It's not just chance.

Let's take an egregious example just to get the point across.
Janet Jackson.

Now I realize that's an infamous example, but, my point is that she tried to make it seem like an accident, didn't she?
It's NEVER an accident.

The only ones it's an accident for is young per-pubescent kids, who don't know any better.
My example was already stated that I can play football and wrestle someone and my "skirt" never shows my panties.

If I can do that, women can keep their panties hidden also, if they really wanted to.
Matronly old ladies seem to do a good job of it (and they were young women once too).

[image]http://www.eurweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/wardrobe-malfunction-janet-jackson.jpg[/image]



LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 9:50:06 AM)

Look, what you might consider me dressing sexy might just me dressing comfortable and because it's hot (as in temperature, not looking hot)

Seriously, what strange men notice and what they don't notice is none of my concerns, it kinda ranges along my points of interest about as much as the colour of their boxers or what they are having for lunch.



crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 10:02:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
Seriously, we don't really worry every day when we get dressed if our clothes will appeal to a random guy we have no interaction with, strange men are just not that important to us.


Actually, you do.

You just don't realize what you're actually doing.

Let's do a thought experiment with a question and my take on the answer:
Q: Why don't men dress like women do?
A: Because it wouldn't work, that's why.

Huh?
Q: Why don't men dress like women do?
A: Because women aren't attracted to some random guy's ass cheeks sticking out of his pants.

Let's try again...
Q: Why don't men dress more like women do?
A: Because the mere sight of a random man's nipple has no effect on a woman.

Oh, I get it!
Q: Why don't men dress much more like women do?
A: Because men seek and obtain attention totally differently than women do.

BTW, here's how I dress for a hike (yes, those are my feet again - I must have a secret foot fetish!)
Q: Am I dressed in that picture to be sexy or to be functional?
A: Decidedly not sexy, that's for sure, with those well-worn boots and nondescript Kirkland jeans

[image]http://cdn.collarspace.com/attachments/120315/1A530DB1-5EB1-4B9A-9BAA-20709F53834F1.jpg[/image]



crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 10:37:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes
Since when does a person's dress make them less deserving of basic human decency?
Since when does a person's sexual life (whether chaste or promiscuous) make them less deserving of basic human decency?
This is what I'm not understanding. As far as I know, it does not.


The problem is that the issue is (far) DEEPER than you make it out to be.
It's still SIMPLE. It's just not as simple as you would like to make it out to be.

We have to explicitly define what you consider "basic human decency" since we're talking about the phase difference between (1) noticing, (2) looking, and (3) leering - and - we're talking about that under various conditions (e.g., city streets, business offices, wedding receptions, etc.).

Bearing in mind that probably only 1 out of 10 guys actually noticeably leers at women, there is a reason I brought up the phase curves in previous posts.

Some people might think that H2O goes linearly from a solid phase (ice) to a liquid phase (water) and then to a gaseous phase (steam). While it's not that simple, it's not that much more complex because there are OTHER FACTORS in play other than sheer temperature.

Those (slightly complicating) actors are simultaneously in play (remember that "triple point" example?).
So, it's not as simple as just going from solid to liquid to gas with temperature.

There's more to it that you have to think about to understand what is really going on.

Likewise with the ramifications of why (some) women dress the way they do, and why (some) men react the way they do.
It's simple. But I believe it's not as simple as you portray it to be.

Plus, we have to assume people INTERPRET things differently, depending on their point of view (and how much they've actually thought about the problem set).

For example, back to the phase curves, how many of you would say you've seen steam (which is water in the gaseous phase)?

Scientists have to stay out of that question (because they know the answer ahead of time).
Have you ever seen steam?

What you called steam, might not actually be steam.

Same here.
What you called "leering" might not actually "be" leering.
It might be. It might not be.

But, just like we need to have the same definition of "steam" to understand each other, we need to be working valid definitions of:
a) What the women are dressed like on the day they are leered at?
b) What the women are dressed like on the other 364.25 days of the year?
c) Why they dressed that way?
d) How many men actually leered anyway (was it 1 out of 10,000? 1 out of 1,000? 1 out of 100? 1 out of 2?)
e) Why they leered at them?
f) How do you differentiate leering from looking anyway?
g) Do we all agree on that definition?
h) What other factors are in play here?
[image]http://quatr.us/chemistry/atoms/pictures/boilingkettle.jpg[/image]



LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 10:45:16 AM)

If I'm out with the dogs, I tend to wear combat trousers or cargo pants (need the pockets for the dog treats) baggy sweaters and most likely pretty sturdy boots...

The only woman with a ridiculous dress and high heeled suede boots I've seen was one with a barking rat (one of those toy breeds), said barking rat and in a pink coat tried to eat my dogs (suicidal rat) and the girl dog picked up barking rat, went to the muddy end of the pond and dumped it, owner grabbed it and hugged it and then complained that her expensive cashmere coat is now muddy and I should replace it. My reply was "You're a special kind of idiot, small wonder you don't have your dog under control, that required an IQ with 2 digits"

Apart from that, most of the people I see do dress for the occasion, yeah I see the occasional bad dresser or somebody flashing too much, but I always think that nobody stops me from looking away.



crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 10:59:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes
So? Does being a slut mean I should be treated with less respect?


I have always said the devil is in the details.

If I was a convicted pedophile, would you treat me with less respect than if I was a Catholic priest? Oh wait. That's a bad example. They're the same thing. Let's try again...

If I was a convicted pedophile, would you treat me with less respect than if I was an upstanding member of the community?

What if I was just a pedophile only on Halloween and Mardi Gras, whereas the rest of the year I was an upstanding citizen of the community? Would you still treat me with less respect?

Now, let's get to another detail. Numbers. And, I'll go back to the way you (plural you) dress.

  • What if you dressed as an "X" (you define it as it doesn't matter for this example).
  • Now, what if you then walked down the street, dressed as an "X".
  • And, what if I followed you with a camera, and we taped you for 10 hours (say).

    For the next step, we have to agree on a definition of "leering", which I'll assume we do (for arguments' sake - but - we actually don't yet agree for the sake of this thread since it hasn't been defined.)

  • Let's say, after reviewing the 10-hour tape, we found 100 instances of "leering".
  • We have to see what percentage that is, out of the overall population
  • Let's say that was 1 out of 1,000 men who "leered" at you.

    If it was 1 out of 1000 men who leered at you, what do you think the percentage of 'crazy' people is in a population of 1,000 men? Do you think it might be similarly at 1/10th of 1 percent? More? Less?

    If so, then how do we differentiate your issue of "leering" with just the overall issue that there are some pretty crazy men out there on the street?

    But wait, the percentage has to be greater than 1/10th of 1%, doesn't it?
    Otherwise, the women here wouldn't be complaining.

    So, what is the percentage anyway?
  • Is it 1 out of 1,000?
  • Is it 1 out of 100?
  • Is it 1 out of 10?
  • Is is 1 out of 1?

    The devil is in the details (not the least of which is how looking differs from leering):
    Q: What's the percentage of men that you think "leer" at women?
    A: ?
    [image]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/17/ee/34/17ee34bea1f562dd64a3d112eb0997bd.jpg[/image]



    • crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 11:18:00 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
    Look, what you might consider me dressing sexy might just me dressing comfortable and because it's hot (as in temperature, not looking hot)

    I agree with you.
    In fact, we are in total agreement on the problem.
    What we don't agree on are the conditions of the model (as in a scientific model such as that phase diagram type of interrelated set of interactions).

    Our model has multiple parameters.

    For example, there are two people involved in this leering-at-women interaction.
    And they both might not be working off the same definitions.

    1. The person who is (unilaterally?) complaining that men leer, and,
    2. The person who is (unilaterally?) being accused of leering.

    In addition, for slightly complex reasons, your experiences will be different than mine, even if we're wearing the same type of clothes.
    In fact, having seen dozens of pictures of you, I realized early on that often, you and I dress similarly, it turns out.

    And, I never get anyone leering at me.

    For example, as you know, I sent you a picture of me earlier today (as promised) where I am half nekked and another one of me wearing almost skin-tight clothes (both shirts and pants).

    Given those two pictures, which only you have seen:
    Would you consider that I was dressing sexy or that I was just dressing comfortably for the occasion of the picture (as in temperature, weather, whatever)?
    PS: Fair warning: This may be a trick question.

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
    Seriously, what strange men notice and what they don't notice is none of my concerns


    Actually, it is one of your concerns.
    You just don't realize that it is.

    That's why we (the plural we) have difficulty agreeing.
    I see a slightly more complex overall picture than you do.

    I completely understand your argument.
    And I (almost completely) feel it's perfectly valid.

    I just add more details (just as I did with the phase diagram and octane and steam metaphors).
    The devil is in the details.

    My premise is:
    The interaction is not complicated; but the more correct model is not as simple as just saying "men shouldn't leer" no matter what women do or say they do.

    BTW, here's one "study" ...
    https://www.upworthy.com/they-finally-did-it-some-women-had-enough-of-creepy-mens-crap-and-documented-their-experiences
    [image]http://cdn.collarspace.com/attachments/120315/DCF17CFE-2C01-4B5E-84EB-717E96A61C061.jpg[/image]
    [image]https://upw-prod-images.global.ssl.fastly.net/nugget/5436d97d2520d4f7a0000004/attachments/3-4aacc0a7b0d984798613058c9a25cdbd.png[/image]
    [image]https://upw-prod-images.global.ssl.fastly.net/nugget/5436ddf4d737ae7325000005/attachments/9-14ef7e1621aaa344f6d98c1e5df53f52.png[/image]






    LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 11:24:11 AM)

    I think you were trying to be comfy and posed a bit...

    I have to take into account that me wearing something very very inappropriate like a say a swastika would offend people and rightly so, I really do not nor can I think about how each and every item of my clothing might affect every guy individually who happens to cross my path that day... If I would start thinking along those lines, I just wouldn't ever leave the house because I would still be pondering



    crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 11:30:18 AM)


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
    I think you were trying to be comfy and posed a bit...


    Damn. You figured me out!
    (I didn't think you would, so, I have to give you credit for being more tuned than I would have been had you sent me similar pictures.)

    I was posing half nekked in that one picture, and with a too-tight shirt and pants in the second (there was a reason, but we'll leave that out of the story for now).

    I had wanted to have my muscles show like they do in PeonForHer's profile picture.
    Did I at least come close?

    I was trying to get attention!

    If you were there at the time, would I have gotten your attention had I walked by you wearing exactly what I was wearing in those two pictures?

    Why or why not?
    (The answer is VERY IMPORTANT because it's germane to this discussion!)



    LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 11:41:31 AM)

    LOL, you and Peon have different body types, that's like comparing Selma Hayek and Gwyneth Paltrow

    In all honesty, the sadist in me was wondering how much you would scream if I would wax your chest. Bet you're glad that you asked [:)]



    crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 11:58:05 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
    LOL, you and Peon have different body types, that's like comparing Selma Hayek and Gwyneth Paltrow

    Blaming my Aspiness, I don't know either of them, so I hope one of them is not a big fat ugly turd!
    Google ... google.... click click ... whew. OK. They're not all that much different in reality (if these aren't fakes).

    This is reputed to be Selma Hayek's body:
    [image]http://celebrity.adulttrade.net/pictures/buster/531vy/name11.jpg[/image]
    This is reputed to be Gwyneth Paltrow's body:
    [image]http://i1.nuttit.com//celeboobies/toplessbeachcelebs___Gwyneth_Paltrow__Actress__nude_on_vacation_in_the_French_West_Islands__1997___78734.jpg[/image]
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze
    In all honesty, the sadist in me was wondering how much you would scream if I would wax your chest. Bet you're glad that you asked [:)]

    Ouch!
    I'd only do it if you really enjoyed my pain (and if you weren't just faking that you were pleased by my helpless squirming and muffled groans).

    Besides, my nipples are extremely sensitive to pain, so, you'd have to bind me very tightly with strong rope and gag me so that I could only whimper in response.
    I'd appreciate it if you'd also wipe away my tears.... ... ...

    Hey! Wait a minute!
    You're trying to change the subject!
    Aren't you!

    You're tricky!
    I gotta watch out for you!
    You didn't answer my question!

    You used my sexuality against me, to change the focus, and specifically to change the subject to something YOU wanted to talk about.
    Sneaky. I have to watch out for your tricks. Yessiree. You're a tricky one, you ar'... I waddn't born yest'aday, nosireeee!

    So, I'm a gonna' ask yer that question a'gin!

    My question is is germane, because I was trying to garner attention from the opposite sex in those two pictures.

    Repeat Question:
    Q: If you were there at the time, would I have gotten your attention had I walked by you wearing exactly what I was wearing in those two pictures?
    A: ?
    That is, would you even have (1) noticed me, and, if so, would you have (2) looked for a moment or two, and, worse, would you have (3) leered at me?
    [image]http://cdn.collarspace.com/attachments/120315/C243849F-D5CA-41C5-8D46-D2B158695B8A1.jpg[/image]



    Page: <<   < prev  13 14 [15] 16 17   next >   >>

    Valid CSS!




    Collarchat.com © 2025
    Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
    0.0625