We were wrong • Hacker News Board

Re: We were wrong

#311

Post by scarmig » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:10 PM UTC

Helianthus wrote: post #276

scarmig wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”5) Get CLOSE to her, damn it! To quote Rob Judge, “Personal space is for pussies.” I already told you that the most successful seducers are those who can’t keep their hands off of women. Well you’re not gonna be able to do that if you aren’t in close! ” “All the greatest seducers in history could not keep their hands off of women. They aggressively escalated physically with every woman they were flirting with. They…

>You boys need a lesson in basic empathy. Don't talk down to me. >Now, don't skip that scenario: I want you to stop and think about it in detail. How would it make you feel? Do you feel turned on? Do you feel violated? I take control of the situation by removing myself from the situation or making a scene. And I get over it. Look, I'm queer and I'm actually pretty sympathetic to the anti-seddit et al crowd. But the n…

There is obviously a world of difference between verbal aggressing and physical aggressing. Verbally, different situations call for different things: when people need to know that what they're arguing for is unacceptable in a very bad way, you speak to them with contempt. The hardcore PUA crowd will shake it off, but people at its periphery better understand that it's a bad thing. But physically, aggressing against someone's physical boundaries is wrong, and it's always wrong.

Nearly that exact scenario has happened to me. Multiple times: in bars, people hounding me playing a non-consensual game of grabass. In a crowded bus, a guy continually rubbed his hand against my hand despite my trying to move away and escape him.

That's bad, and you're a bad person if you think it's acceptable. Comparing "being mean to people online" to sexual assault is ridiculous and offensive.

Re: We were wrong

#312

Post by gregd » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:10 PM UTC

ebbv wrote: post #107

Dear fellow HN dwellers, If you read the writings of the Guide's author and do not recognize that it is misogynistic and advocating sexual assault, you have a problem. That problem is that you are mistaking sexual assault for "taking the first step." You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that…

And since nobody is mentioning this, women should be very afraid of the 800 or so individuals who purchased this vile piece of crap.

Re: We were wrong

#313

Post by aeorgnoieang » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:11 PM UTC

mkr-hn wrote: post #220

I see the same quote about stopping if there's any rejection being repeated endlessly in this thread. Treating consent as a simple yes/no ignores the reality of a culture where women are taught to be quiet and compliant, and where they're punished when they don't go along. In a culture where half the population is treated as subservient objects, it's a good idea to seek explicit consent every time.

There is no monolithic "culture" of which all humans are members and of which all women are treated as subservient objects. There are in fact many overlapping cultures throughout humankind and there is a staggering array of diversity among them in all kinds of dimensions.

Re: We were wrong

#314

Post by angersock » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:11 PM UTC

Cushman wrote: post #279

tomp wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about you, but I would prefer if things happened "naturally", without talking about it explicitly. Us sitting closer, slowly drawing our heads closer, lips touch, mouths open, kiss. It is, of course, somewhat sad that our culture taught us it's inappropriate and shameful to talk about sex, and that we're more comfortable having sex with someone than we are talking about sex. That's also why the most comm…

> I don't know about you, but I would prefer if things happened "naturally", without talking about it explicitly. Us sitting closer, slowly drawing our heads closer, lips touch, mouths open, kiss. I used to think that, too, as a teenager. Then I had sex with a bunch of people and realized, who gives a fuck? Sex is fun. It's fun when it happens spontaneously, with mutual passion. It's fun when it's discussed and sched…

"It's fun when it happens spontaneously"

You do, of course, realize the absurdity of your statement here, given this:

"Without a clear verbal confirmation of consent, or an explicit proactive action, you cannot know if your partner is participating willingly."

How does that work, exactly?

Re: We were wrong

#315

Post by angersock » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:13 PM UTC

300bps wrote: post #296

Cushman wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "defense" misses the point. The gist of the controversial advice is "Don't wait for signs before you make your move. Let her be the one who rejects your advances. If she says no, stop immediately and tell her you don't want to do anything that would make her uncomfortable. Try again at a later time if appropriate or cease entirely if she is absolutely not interested." This is not a defense. This advice leads to…

>And for what? To avoid the embarrassment of saying, "So do you wanna fuck?" How old are you? I'm not the person you wrote this to, but I can answer that I am 41 years old, have been married for 11 years and have three children (including a daughter). When I think of the little scene you've played out there occurring, I see the biggest nerd in the world getting his first chance at making out with a girl when he awkwa…

"I see the biggest nerd in the world getting his first chance at making out with a girl when he awkwardly stops and says, "Do you consent to fornication at this time?""

Been there, done--basically--that. Damnedest thing; wouldn't you know that it didn't have the intended effect?

Re: We were wrong

#316

Post by aeorgnoieang » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:13 PM UTC

ebbv wrote: post #107

Dear fellow HN dwellers, If you read the writings of the Guide's author and do not recognize that it is misogynistic and advocating sexual assault, you have a problem. That problem is that you are mistaking sexual assault for "taking the first step." You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that…

There is no obvious fact of the matter about "exactly what consent is, and what women (as a whole, obviously it varies from individual to individual) see as acceptable, expected behavior". Your own words contradict themselves; should we research what women "as a whole" think or judge or should we research individual women? Should we consult you personally if there is any disagreement or conflict among the results of these two lines of research?

Re: We were wrong

#317

Post by xtrumanx » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:13 PM UTC

Cushman wrote: post #279

tomp wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about you, but I would prefer if things happened "naturally", without talking about it explicitly. Us sitting closer, slowly drawing our heads closer, lips touch, mouths open, kiss. It is, of course, somewhat sad that our culture taught us it's inappropriate and shameful to talk about sex, and that we're more comfortable having sex with someone than we are talking about sex. That's also why the most comm…

> I don't know about you, but I would prefer if things happened "naturally", without talking about it explicitly. Us sitting closer, slowly drawing our heads closer, lips touch, mouths open, kiss. I used to think that, too, as a teenager. Then I had sex with a bunch of people and realized, who gives a fuck? Sex is fun. It's fun when it happens spontaneously, with mutual passion. It's fun when it's discussed and sched…

> Without a clear verbal confirmation of consent, or an explicit proactive action, you cannot know if your partner is participating willingly.

> Did you expect me to disagree with this?

I don't understand. Why did you bring it up if you didn't think it was okay for your partner to make an explicit proactive action without clear verbal confirmation of consent?

Re: We were wrong

#318

Post by theorique » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:13 PM UTC

Cushman wrote: post #287

Samuel_Michon wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you’ve gone out on several dates, you’ve kissed, she’s invited you to her home, and you’re now sitting on the couch with her, more often than not, the girl will expect the guy to take the initiative. By that time, asking her if you can touch her is a major downer for her. You’re expected to try something. If she didn’t want to fool around, you wouldn’t be there. That’s the context of the quotes, and in the book,…

That's great. So all you've gotta do is replace, "Try to have sex with her, and stop if she says no" with, "Find out if she wants to have sex with you, and do so if she does." The difference that makes to whether or not she consents -- the "downer" -- is precisely the point.

Does this consent have to be verbal, or does active participation count? (e.g. Kissing back, tugging at or removing your clothing, unzipping your fly, etc)

To me, those are clear evidence of a desire to progress toward sex. (Obviously, if she says stop, do so.)

Re: We were wrong

#319

Post by papsosouid » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:14 PM UTC

Cushman wrote: post #190

pizza234 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very naive thought Do you think that women in the meanwhile, has been just poor victims? Don't forget that women are generally way ahead of men in human skills. Men and women have, their own forms of dominance. I agree that physical dominance is despicable, but don't think that the forms of dominance were going only in a single direction.

No. This is ludicrous revisionism, and you should be ashamed for saying it. You do not get to treat a group of people as property for thousands of years, and then when they finally claw a measure of autonomy back from you say, "Well, that about evens the score."

>You do not get to treat a group of people as property for thousands of years

Ignoring the fact that your scenario is absurd hyperbole, and men had things just as shit as women did, the you in question wasn't involved. Nobody in this discussion ever owned a woman. Pretending they committed some horrible crime to justify your prejudice is pathetic.

Re: We were wrong

#320

Post by tomp » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 5:14 PM UTC

Cushman wrote: post #279

tomp wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about you, but I would prefer if things happened "naturally", without talking about it explicitly. Us sitting closer, slowly drawing our heads closer, lips touch, mouths open, kiss. It is, of course, somewhat sad that our culture taught us it's inappropriate and shameful to talk about sex, and that we're more comfortable having sex with someone than we are talking about sex. That's also why the most comm…

> I don't know about you, but I would prefer if things happened "naturally", without talking about it explicitly. Us sitting closer, slowly drawing our heads closer, lips touch, mouths open, kiss. I used to think that, too, as a teenager. Then I had sex with a bunch of people and realized, who gives a fuck? Sex is fun. It's fun when it happens spontaneously, with mutual passion. It's fun when it's discussed and sched…

> Yes. It goes both ways, regardless of gender. Did you expect me to disagree with this?

Well, the only thing I can say is that I'm glad I live in Europe, where people are still normal and not yet so frigid/distrustful that they need to talk about everything before they do it.