quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

And you are probably right that "aggressor" was likely a poor chose of words but when I was typing it, it didn't seem that offensive.

Well yeah, "aggressor" is the kinda thing Police wanna establish when sorting through the aftermath of a punch-up. Not desirable in a relationship sense....

Focus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

Thank you, thank you, thank you, for a well written responce to the actual OP.

It's a shame that such conversational reasponces seem so rare.

And you are probably right that "aggressor" was likely a poor chose of words but when I was typing it, it didn't seem that offensive. Oh well live and learn.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloverodella

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

Thank you, thank you, thank you, for a well written responce to the actual OP.

It's a shame that such conversational reasponces seem so rare.

And you are probably right that "aggressor" was likely a poor chose of words but when I was typing it, it didn't seem that offensive. Oh well live and learn.

This is hilarious and typical of so many men - ignore what a woman says, but when a man says it later, exult him for making a good point. I said the exact same thing about using "aggressor," in a post strictly replying to the OP where I didn't attack you at all. But instead of agreeing, you got pissy, twisted things in your own mind, and pulled the vilest of allegations out of the depths of your ass

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloverodella
I haven't bothered denying your allegation of pedophilia apologist because it was so uncalled for, so base, so insulting on its face. It had nothing to do with the topic, or me. You keep insisting it does, but that does not make it so. But now that the thread seems to be about me and pedophiles, I'm fucking pissed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloverodella
Your actions show me, and all of us, all I/we need to know about your idiocy. You should be ashamed of yourself for applying adult concepts of sexual consent between adults and minors. You should be ashamed to think any "concept" of any kind could ever trump the sacrosanct morals and laws of an age of consent. You should be ashamed to be so desperate to discredit me that you resort to calling me a pedophile apologist. Shame on you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloverodella
You owe me an apology and admission that your allegation was wholly unfounded. You turned me into a topic of discussion and that pisses me off. I find it especially ironic of a person who prattles on about "stick to the OP" and "don't you have anything to say about the OP?" as you try to dictate the direction of the "discussion" you claim to be interested in.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloverodella
I'll end by saying this: even toddlers understand what yes and no mean. That you can't help but make think the terms are confusing is a problem of your own intellect.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NoirMetal

I'm waiting to see how long till this becomes about ant eaters or kangaroos.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
Completely irrelevant, yes: I just found purple girl's attempt to mount a high horse over that mid flounce questionable.

Unless you're old enough to be my Dad, it's probably not cool to be calling me "girl".

I can tell you a couple of things. I do get rather squicked about folks who are quick to start talking about comparing adult situations to those who want to (sorry, but there's no other way to put it) screw children. If that's the go-to answer, (aka, what happens when a pedophile grooms the underage person into saying yes) I prefer not to be a part of it. If that's the standard now about adult conversations, I'd rather find the ten foot pole that distances me from it.

If you've ever worked in a profession, where I've only volunteered, my hat's off to you. I don't have the stomach for that kind of thing.

It's not a flounce. It's my position that, as a kinky person, I am not comfortable with anybody who wants to drag underage people into the equation when it comes to discussions about kink or sex. It's a disgusting standard that we're setting when we start talking about those who seek a "yes" from a child.

So, before I puke, let's recount.

The original post:

quote:


When I was raised men were to be the aggressor and women were to be passive.

Evidently, it took another guy of a certain age group to be accepted as pointing out the incorrect word choice.

quote:

The old “men chase and women choose” concept.

Are we sticking with theories from the fifties?

Instead, here's an idea:

Let women have their own autonomy. Some of us, at least, don't want to be "chased" by men who happen to be our co-workers. We are there to earn a paycheck, just like anybody else.

quote:

But now it seems that if the “chase” is more than a onetime offer of dinner, it is sexual harassment. (In the work place asking twice can legally be considered sexual harassment)

While the OP wants to drag this into things that people really aren't saying, I'm still going with "no really does mean no."

If you (generic you) have heard the word no from a co-worker in response to your proposition, just consider it the final answer.

If you choose not to accept no, be "aggressive" in pursuing that co-worker, yeah, that's a pattern.

quote:

So I guess my question is; are men to stop being the aggressor, stop chasing and just let women chase and choose?

When a person is at work, YES.

Further:

quote:

I am pretty much of the same mind. I took a lady for a motorcycle ride, which she requested and later I called her to see if she would like to go again, I called once more and she indicated she was "busy", so I have not called again. I work with her and she still likes to talk to me but for me that is the end of the matter and I figure the ball is in her court.

In other words, she didn't want to "ride" with the OP again.

In her way, she said 'no'.

It's the 'once more' after she said no that takes it into sexual harassment by a co-worker.

Contrary to (what seems to be) popular opinion, it's not the single occurrence of asking somebody on a date or other type of social occasion (when there is no power imbalance structure present) that constitutes sexual harassment. It's the asking AGAIN after the person has said no is probably where the violation of company policy is happening.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
defend her if need be

Most folks aren't 'defending' the same person they are sexually harassing at work.

The FR part:

For those confused, I don't consider this area to be that difficult. If a co-worker ever tells you "NO", they don't want to spend social time with you, go on a date with you, accept the offer of a ride home, get a cup of coffee, or anything else, just don't ask again. For those of you with swinging Richards who feel you are compelled by your DNA to create a hostile work environment for your co-workers, I Promise there are at least seven billion other people on this spinning rock to date.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

...is shit. What is not shit is that some women are crazy enough to feel threatened when no threat is intended.

No usually the threat is very direct.

I'm very sure they feel it is direct. But before we go further, define "direct threat" in this context, if you will please. Then let's consider what would happen, if all the women some here think are subjected to direct threats during their lives, were to be approached by men who not trying to threaten them. Why, I believe they would "run" from them after being directly threatened in the past because of a complete lack of trust in males. Additionally, I believe if what is being said on this thread is true, we would be in a state where the marriage rate is in decline because women are no longer receptive to men because they were subjected to direct threats by men during their lifetime. Do you believe the marriage rate is in decline because women are afraid of men?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

I already agreed with you, what's the point? Or am I being too aggressive?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
Completely irrelevant, yes: I just found purple girl's attempt to mount a high horse over that mid flounce questionable.

Unless you're old enough to be my Dad, it's probably not cool to be calling me "girl".

I can tell you a couple of things. I do get rather squicked about folks who are quick to start talking about comparing adult situations to those who want to (sorry, but there's no other way to put it) screw children. If that's the go-to answer, (aka, what happens when a pedophile grooms the underage person into saying yes) I prefer not to be a part of it. If that's the standard now about adult conversations, I'd rather find the ten foot pole that distances me from it.

If you've ever worked in a profession, where I've only volunteered, my hat's off to you. I don't have the stomach for that kind of thing.

It's not a flounce. It's my position that, as a kinky person, I am not comfortable with anybody who wants to drag underage people into the equation when it comes to discussions about kink or sex. It's a disgusting standard that we're setting when we start talking about those who seek a "yes" from a child.

So, before I puke, let's recount.

The original post:

quote:


When I was raised men were to be the aggressor and women were to be passive.

Evidently, it took another guy of a certain age group to be accepted as pointing out the incorrect word choice.

quote:

The old “men chase and women choose” concept.

Are we sticking with theories from the fifties?

Instead, here's an idea:

Let women have their own autonomy. Some of us, at least, don't want to be "chased" by men who happen to be our co-workers. We are there to earn a paycheck, just like anybody else.

quote:

But now it seems that if the “chase” is more than a onetime offer of dinner, it is sexual harassment. (In the work place asking twice can legally be considered sexual harassment)

While the OP wants to drag this into things that people really aren't saying, I'm still going with "no really does mean no."

If you (generic you) have heard the word no from a co-worker in response to your proposition, just consider it the final answer.

If you choose not to accept no, be "aggressive" in pursuing that co-worker, yeah, that's a pattern.

quote:

So I guess my question is; are men to stop being the aggressor, stop chasing and just let women chase and choose?

When a person is at work, YES.

Further:

quote:

I am pretty much of the same mind. I took a lady for a motorcycle ride, which she requested and later I called her to see if she would like to go again, I called once more and she indicated she was "busy", so I have not called again. I work with her and she still likes to talk to me but for me that is the end of the matter and I figure the ball is in her court.

In other words, she didn't want to "ride" with the OP again.

In her way, she said 'no'.

It's the 'once more' after she said no that takes it into sexual harassment by a co-worker.

Contrary to (what seems to be) popular opinion, it's not the single occurrence of asking somebody on a date or other type of social occasion (when there is no power imbalance structure present) that constitutes sexual harassment. It's the asking AGAIN after the person has said no is probably where the violation of company policy is happening.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
defend her if need be

Most folks aren't 'defending' the same person they are sexually harassing at work.

The FR part:

For those confused, I don't consider this area to be that difficult. If a co-worker ever tells you "NO", they don't want to spend social time with you, go on a date with you, accept the offer of a ride home, get a cup of coffee, or anything else, just don't ask again. For those of you with swinging Richards who feel you are compelled by your DNA to create a hostile work environment for your co-workers, I Promise there are at least seven billion other people on this spinning rock to date.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
Completely irrelevant, yes: I just found purple girl's attempt to mount a high horse over that mid flounce questionable.

Unless you're old enough to be my Dad, it's probably not cool to be calling me "girl".

I can tell you a couple of things. I do get rather squicked about folks who are quick to start talking about comparing adult situations to those who want to (sorry, but there's no other way to put it) screw children. If that's the go-to answer, (aka, what happens when a pedophile grooms the underage person into saying yes) I prefer not to be a part of it. If that's the standard now about adult conversations, I'd rather find the ten foot pole that distances me from it.

If you've ever worked in a profession, where I've only volunteered, my hat's off to you. I don't have the stomach for that kind of thing.

It's not a flounce. It's my position that, as a kinky person, I am not comfortable with anybody who wants to drag underage people into the equation when it comes to discussions about kink or sex. It's a disgusting standard that we're setting when we start talking about those who seek a "yes" from a child.

So, before I puke, let's recount.

The original post:

quote:


When I was raised men were to be the aggressor and women were to be passive.

Evidently, it took another guy of a certain age group to be accepted as pointing out the incorrect word choice.

quote:

The old “men chase and women choose” concept.

quote:

Are we sticking with theories from the fifties?

quote:


Instead, here's an idea:

Let women have their own autonomy. Some of us, at least, don't want to be "chased" by men who happen to be our co-workers. We are there to earn a paycheck, just like anybody else.

quote:

But now it seems that if the “chase” is more than a onetime offer of dinner, it is sexual harassment. (In the work place asking twice can legally be considered sexual harassment)

While the OP wants to drag this into things that people really aren't saying, I'm still going with "no really does mean no."

If you (generic you) have heard the word no from a co-worker in response to your proposition, just consider it the final answer.

If you choose not to accept no, be "aggressive" in pursuing that co-worker, yeah, that's a pattern.

quote:

So I guess my question is; are men to stop being the aggressor, stop chasing and just let women chase and choose?

When a person is at work, YES.

Further:

quote:

I am pretty much of the same mind. I took a lady for a motorcycle ride, which she requested and later I called her to see if she would like to go again, I called once more and she indicated she was "busy", so I have not called again. I work with her and she still likes to talk to me but for me that is the end of the matter and I figure the ball is in her court.

In other words, she didn't want to "ride" with the OP again.

In her way, she said 'no'.

It's the 'once more' after she said no that takes it into sexual harassment by a co-worker.

Contrary to (what seems to be) popular opinion, it's not the single occurrence of asking somebody on a date or other type of social occasion (when there is no power imbalance structure present) that constitutes sexual harassment. It's the asking AGAIN after the person has said no is probably where the violation of company policy is happening.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
defend her if need be

Most folks aren't 'defending' the same person they are sexually harassing at work.

The FR part:

For those confused, I don't consider this area to be that difficult. If a co-worker ever tells you "NO", they don't want to spend social time with you, go on a date with you, accept the offer of a ride home, get a cup of coffee, or anything else, just don't ask again. For those of you with swinging Richards who feel you are compelled by your DNA to create a hostile work environment for your co-workers, I Promise there are at least seven billion other people on this spinning rock to date.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

I already agreed with you, what's the point? Or am I being too aggressive?

Wellll..., I spose you are if you think you are, coz I'm not feeling particularly threatened.

Since you ask, there was no actual or final "point" beyond that this is called a *discussion* board for a reason. It's the kinda thing grownups do. But a quick glance over some of your recent responses suggests that that's not what your here for, now. So pretty much what Peon said....

Reckon you're a "gotta have the last word" kinda fella, so knock yourself out. I'll stipulate up front that yours is bigger than mine but I'll still be about if any sort of topic discussion breaks out again.

Focus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
All fair enough. The comparison of adult games to pedophilia is unhelpful and ridiculous, for sure, but 'tache boy's conviction that women don't have enough of a clue about how stuff works to be competent to deny consent to a man who demands it, does raise the question of workplace grooming, which seems to have dragged that particular comparison into the discussion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods
All fair enough. The comparison of adult games to pedophilia is unhelpful and ridiculous, for sure, but 'tache boy's conviction that women don't have enough of a clue about how stuff works to be competent to deny consent to a man who demands it, does raise the question of workplace grooming, which seems to have dragged that particular comparison into the discussion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloverodella

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles

When I was raised men were to be the aggressor and women were to be passive.

The old “men chase and women choose” concept.

But now it seems that if the “chase” is more than a onetime offer of dinner, it is sexual harassment. (In the work place asking twice can legally be considered sexual harassment)

So I guess my question is; are men to stop being the aggressor, stop chasing and just let women chase and choose?

Simply, YES, men are to stop being the aggressor stop chasing and just let women chase and choose.

The whole premise is wrong from the start -- you're conflating "pursuer" with "aggressor". They are two very different things.

Pursuing a women is asking her out and if she declines or acts wishy-washy, stop pursuing. There is no chasing her, just accepting rejection. After she says no, continuing after her is aggressive.

Being an aggressor is to get rejected, but then keep asking until she finally relents. It doesn't have to be in a "mean" manner, just unwanted. Aggressive acts in this sense may include gift-giving, dinner offers, flowers, etc.; acts that would be otherwise be considered nice or romantic.

Think Pepé le Pew. My instinct was to call him an extreme example, but with all the women coming out with stories of unwelcome or forced kissing, groping, hugging, etc. some men in power have taken his behavior as normal.

The answer here is simple. It's the same as the 2 consent threads you started.

If you're worried about being a harasser, just stop assuming there are mind games going on and (here's a totally! new! concept!) take no for no. If she is the kind to play mind games, she'll either miss out or let you know she actually is interested by saying so. Who wants to be with someone who plays mind games and doesn't just tell you what they want, anyway?

As far as the workplace goes, there's an old saying: don't shit where you eat.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

in so much as I said "I wasn't sure what you were saying", I have "no point" other than to share what I understand the rules to be. and im not picking sides in the discussion as to who's right or wrong.

and no, the TOS rule I quoted clearly is written from the perspective of the website, not the users. if moderators are indeed removing posts that have kids in them, that's a function of their own sensitivity and not something explicitly stated. those actions cannot be directly tied to that TOS section.

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloverodella

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
When I was raised men were to be the aggressor and women were to be passive.
The old “men chase and women choose” concept.
But now it seems that if the “chase” is more than a onetime offer of dinner, it is sexual harassment. (In the work place asking twice can legally be considered sexual harassment)
So I guess my question is; are men to stop being the aggressor, stop chasing and just let women chase and choose?

Simply, YES, men are to stop being the aggressor stop chasing and just let women chase and choose.

The whole premise is wrong from the start -- you're conflating "pursuer" with "aggressor". They are two very different things.

Pursuing a women is asking her out and if she declines or acts wishy-washy, stop pursuing. There is no chasing her, just accepting rejection. After she says no, continuing after her is aggressive.

Being an aggressor is to get rejected, but then keep asking until she finally relents. It doesn't have to be in a "mean" manner, just unwanted. Aggressive acts in this sense may include gift-giving, dinner offers, flowers, etc.; acts that would be otherwise be considered nice or romantic.

Think Pepé le Pew. My instinct was to call him an extreme example, but with all the women coming out with stories of unwelcome or forced kissing, groping, hugging, etc. some men in power have taken his behavior as normal.

The answer here is simple. It's the same as the 2 consent threads you started.

If you're worried about being a harasser, just stop assuming there are mind games going on and (here's a totally! new! concept!) take no for no. If she is the kind to play mind games, she'll either miss out or let you know she actually is interested by saying so. Who wants to be with someone who plays mind games and doesn't just tell you what they want, anyway?

As far as the workplace goes, there's an old saying: don't shit where you eat.

So this is Clover's very first post to you, where she says exactly the same as Focus, that you said we could all go back and read to see where she was so insulting towards you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins
Now, as you refuse to back up your lies with me, come on, highlight the insults in this for me, because I'm calling bullshit on you yet again. There is absolutely nothing insulting about this post at all that you had to ignore what Clover said.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
I opened my comment to you about your post this way; "I actually was kind enjoying your post", will you look at that a man actually saying he was actually enjoying your post but let's not stop there, how about checking out your; "where I didn't attack you at all", hmmm it seems you made this non-insult in that non-offensive post; "(here's a totally! new! concept!) take no for no", nope, no insult there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins
You then throw a hideous insult at her, because your mind went to a place that non of the rest of us needed to. You won't apologise, because you're simply not man enough to do it. You then throw insults at me for pointing this out to you, you accuse me of other things I ask you to back up, but you can't, because you're full of crap. I don't need you to back any of it up BTW, I just asked you to because I know you can't

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins
One of your accusations is that I keep bringing up the subject, well no, YOU keep doing that with accusations, I'm just replying to your posts and defending myself against your nonsense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins
Funny how you're allowed to answer every post directed at you, but what ... I'm not supposed to defend myself against the crap you keep spouting.

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins
Focus is right, you do think you have to have the last word.

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins
You really do think you are right on this, but you are not. I'm not saying you're wrong about Paedophiles, but you are wrong about there being any extension to 'No means no' in the context that Clover said it in that post.

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins
She's not the one that needs to do anything. We are not the ones that need to alter our way of thinking.

quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins
Throw at me the arm chair therapist thing like it's an insult, here's the deal though- I know enough about cars to know when the damn thing is broken and needs a mechanic. I don't hold any qualifications in mechanics. I am not a plumber, but I also know when my boiler is on the blink. I hold qualifications in dementia, Schizophrenia, and Mental health, so yeah sweetie, I can sit here and tell you you need therapy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

in so much as I said "I wasn't sure what you were saying", I have "no point" other than to share what I understand the rules to be.

im not picking sides in the discussion as to who's right or wrong either.

and no, the TOS rule I quoted clearly is written from the perspective of the website, not the users. if moderators are indeed removing posts that have kid photos in them, that's a function of their own sensitivity and not something explicitly stated. those actions cannot be directly tied to the language from that TOS section.

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

You do however continue to attack other people's positions in a more or less strident way whilst claiming that you don't actually hold a position yourself.

You then try to create some kind of moral high ground for yourself by claiming that you didn't actually say what you implied or almost said.

It's a great mechanism for creating accusation and counter-accusation which could be entertaining if you like that sort of thing.

My position on these subjects is clear and unequivocal.

No means no. Pursuing someone after they say no is tantamount to harassment. Women are harassed by men they say no to. Men are in a position to avoid such harassment merely by behaving properly and not assuming that pursuing is some kind of game women really like deep down but wont say out loud. Men are not in a difficult position here but many repeatedly put themselves in a difficult position.

You question these things over and over but try to side step criticism by claiming that you do not really hold the contrary position and are only asking questions. It is an interesting rhetorical technique which attracts a very predictable response from people.

Your outrage at the responses you get is clearly some kind of psychological pay off for you, but you are the only one who is actually surprised at it.