So I have to add an addendum.
Reading that last post, I sound pretty high and mighty, scorning the poor fools who check out my apparently irresistible backside. This isn't quite how I meant it (though I was pretty mad).
People being attracted to each other is one thing. I have no problem, for example, with flirting. A guy or girl who goes out on a limb to engage another in lighthearted talk is not only taking a risk, they're also showing a willingness to interact (on some level) with the other as an individual, a person. Flirting can be flattering.
What is not flattering is the wordless staring from a distance that is nothing more than cold appraisal. There is a difference. Men don't flirt with mannequins and images, which is what they make you feel like when craning around to evaluate anything vaguely female.
I'm also aware that an alternative is simply to be overtly ugly. One scornful response to my griping could be, "Well, imagine if nobody looked!" But really, that's not a solution, either. "Get used to being disrespected and objectified, because hey, your other option is to be hideous!"
How about we just teach our men better manners, instead?
9 comments:
Wow... we have quite a gaping chasm in feelings on this subject. I don't mind at all when guys look at me. Mostly, I don't even notice, because I'm too damned oblivious. But when I do notice, I'm flattered, just like you described your hypothetical generic male to be. And no, I don't think all the guys looking at you were looking just because you're female. It's a shame that being so attractive has made you not like being looked at.
I don't mean to be mean about this, but... appreciate what you've got. I complained once to Maria about guys at work flirting too insistently with me (that tech field problem), and she said not too - one day, it wouldn't happen so much. Her grandmother had been thrilled not long before to have a guy flirting with her. Now, really, attention gets to be inconvenient, and maybe it can make people see the wrong things about you, but really... aren't people giving you a compliment? (For whatever it might be, whether it's something you like or not - it's something they find positive.) I mind people who waste my time, who want too much attention, whose goals in life are simply orthogonal to mine, but... mostly I can't see attention from others as being too bad.
And yes, maybe it's not fair we have so much emphasis on age and certain physical characteristics, but... some natural urges are good to get past, and others... well, they're wired in, and there's no harm (and maybe enjoyment) unless you take it that way. Enjoy sweets? Salty? Rich? Maybe those are worth trying to get over. Enjoy a nice sunset? Even a Puritan wouldn't tell you not to. Enjoy looking at attractive human beings? Well... why not? It's, um, enjoyable. And if they just want sex? Well, sex is very enjoyable too. Not even all women insist on having an emotional connection before getting it on. Does that mean I don't mind any advance? No, even if I weren't in the group that does want emotional connection - if somebody's just thinking of themselves, or debasing someone else who doesn't consent, that's not cool. But that's not the same as just expressing interest in a fling.
Seriously, dude, I don't mind at all when guys check me out. What's the problem? :oP
Steve: :)
So, very long comment follows....
I understand that people have different reactions to this. But I think it's hard to argue that because some people enjoy it, the feelings of everyone who don't are invalid (or at least can/should be changed). I imagine it's like hating broccoli, but having your complaints dismissed by those who don't: how can you hate broccoli? We would love to have some broccoli. In fact, sooner or later the broccoli will stop coming. Would you rather not have anything to eat at all?
I admit my bias that I feel the same way as Nik here. Maybe I can't justify it, and it's just something programmed in my personality, but I don't find it flattering. Just invasive.
Perhaps it's also because I don't like any attention from strangers that isn't invited. Being completely ignored on the way to/from work is EXTREMELY enjoyable; it gives some illusion of privacy after a long day of interacting with people. It doesn't matter if attention in public can be interpreted as positive or negative, I would just rather not have it at all. The idea that it would be further based on something I have no control over (ie, it's solely because of my gender), and so is no way praise to myself as a person, is unwelcome to the point of offensiveness.
The problem here isn't sex, but invasion of space. I enjoy petting dogs, but I have better manners than to reach into someone's lap on the bus and pet their dog without permission. I could argue that it's because I *like* their dog, so it's a positive invasion, but I'm still taking pleasure at the expense of their comfort. Sure petting dogs is enjoyable, but I have better manners than to take it without regard for who I'm taking from.
Some people may not mind my dog-petting and in fact be pleased that they have such an appealing pet; but others may not appreciate strangers forcing an interaction and mauling their animal without asking (they didn't take their dog on the bus as an invitation to pet it). I don't think the solution is to not own dogs, either (analogous to Nik's option of "being hideous"). Just manners. I'd rather err on the side of politeness, and prefer that others do, too, until they know either me or the circumstances better.
Quick followup: I think "circumstances" really is the operative word, here. Different behaviors are polite/impolite in different contexts. If you initiate an interaction by grabbing the karaoke mike and singing, attention is expected and in no way rude; if you're just trying to get home from work, it may be rude.
I guess this explains the cognitive dissonance btw the idea of finding the naked spa relaxing, but ogling on the street stressful. :-P
This is turning into quite an interesting discussion...
No, I don't mean to invalidate feeling invaded; but, however nasty you find broccoli to taste (which, if you do, is inarguable), it's still edible, and the taste is just the taste. Maybe it's not a metaphor to carry too far, though...
I guess the difference is that I don't find it an invasion of space. I don't expect any privacy in public as well... maybe this is why you guys are willing to ride the bus and live in dense areas, and I'm lusting after a house that I can't see any of the neighboring houses from, and whether I feel like singing along with my music, having a personal conversation, or have tears rolling down my cheeks, most of the time I insist on having the personal bubble of a car.
I guess the main issue for me is whether my personal state is one where I want privacy. If all is normal, I don't care who looks, and it doesn't matter whether I'm dressed scantily and provocatively, in my jammies, or in geek-standard loose pants and t-shirt. If my eyes and cheeks are all red, or if I'm fuming mad, being in public is the last thing I want, and if I must, I certainly don't want anybody looking at me.
And, as I just told Shauna, it's also a matter of where you're coming from. Growing up an early bloomer getting attention you didn't want, vs late bloomer, never particularly attractive to guys, socially maladjusted, inconveniently high libido, and unable to attract a guy despite repeated efforts. What's closer to the norm? I have no idea; I have a really biased sample working with a bunch of tech guys.
But, if you do something that 10% of the population would find rude, is it bad? How about 2%? How about 0.05%? I knew a guy (adult, lecturer in his 40's or 50's) who thought it was disgusting to watch other people eat, and that all eating should be done in private. Should I eat in private in case there are more people like that? Sure, it's an extreme example, but what if hardly anybody finds it offensive or invasive to be looked at? That's unlikely to be the case given all the jokes about "Look at my eyes, not my chest", but still... if somebody doesn't see it as even potentially rude, are you going to fault them? They don't have bad intentions. Have they not paid enough attention? How many people are just slightly bothered (enough to give a slight sigh when it happens or recognize what those jokes are about and laugh at them), vs deeply offended and invaded? How many of those women bothered by guys getting distracted by their chests are bothered because it's invasive, and how many just because the guy's just not listening or following normal eye-contact protocols? Again, I have no idea. Maybe we're both outliers. Being an outlier sucks; usually it means you have to go out of your way to get a state you're happy with, like living far out in the country and finding a house were none of your neighbors can see you, so the invasive rule-following bastards can't tell you where to park your fucking van, those fucking fuckers.
And I'm sure that's just how you feel about those people looking at you....
Very interesting discussion!
This all seems to come down to norms: what do you perceive to be a normal expectation, and what is an outlier? We both agree that finding public eating offensive is abnormal; we seem to disagree that finding uninvited staring offensive is (my experience suggests it's well within the standard deviation, but apparently not everyone else's does!).
As I said to Amy, I think it all depends on which population you calibrate against (the context argument, again). Different environments and cultures have different expectations for polite behavior, and somewhere you have to be able to read these and adapt... If you live in a dense urban environment, the ability to manufacture privacy by ignoring the person pressed against you on the bus is essential to making the system work. If someone violates the expectation, your first assumption is not that they're adapted to a different set of protocols, but that it's an intentional breach and is rude.
I agree that the ideal solution isn't to avoid absolutely anything that has a potential to offend, but to find the spot on the curve where you get the most coverage and still feel comfortable. I think staring is well within this spot, equivalent to petting a dog in someone's lap, or taking a bite of their sandwich. Living in a city, I would hazard a guess that this feeling is not rare; but perhaps not everyone agrees!
Charlie Brown: "What was that Miss Offmore? I shouldn't stare at women?"
Miss Offmore: "Wa wa wa wa....waaa wa waaa wa wa."
Hahahahahaha.....
Ok I gotta throw in my 2 cents on this thing. Though it may be politically incorrect to say so, I am of the belief that men ARE hardwired to this behavior. Now, does that mean that they should just have free reign to ogle whenever, where ever and for however long they feel like it? Or that women should not feel invaded by the behavior? Certainly not! I think expecting a man's eyes not to flick to a passing female is like expecting a leopard to change its spots. But we can as a society expect polite behavior to follow. The act of looking may be instinctual but as evolved humans we have the ability to exercise some control over our instincts. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to expect men to be aware of their natural tendencies, to be aware that while being ogled may be flattering to some women, it is also very offensive to many others. Although I don't believe we can ever realistically expect men NOT to look at all, I do believe that we can expect them to consider the feelings of their fellow humans and TRAIN themselves to just as quickly move their eyes on. In the American culture we teach our children not to stare, that it is impolite. That doesn't mean that we never glance at the people around us. It simply means that we don't visually linger on them, invading their sense of privacy. Glancing is human nature. We won't change that. But anymore than that is a conscious decision. Men will always glance at a passing woman but can and should make the conscious decision not to ogle.
Huh, I don't get anonymous's comment.
But for the others: yeah, Mom, exactly. *Looking* is certainly natural and often involuntary. Heck, I look at attractive men. But it's the choice to continue the looking beyond a glance or two -- in other words, stare -- that feels invasive = rude.
In addition... although individuals are indisputably individuals (e.g. Amy's reaction vs. mine), I might venture that a woman checking out a guy somehow feels less, well, vaguely *threatening* to a bigger, stronger, historically-more-dominant man. At least, threatened is how *I* feel.
Sure, sex is grand, sex is great ("we're the class of nine-ty-eight!"); but not bothering to be discrete about obviously entertaining sexual thoughts about a stranger is, I find, selfish and slightly violating -- especially since, as you don't know the person, you obviously don't have their consent. (Bert, for example, is perfectly welcome to check me out 100% of the time, and even have conversations with my chest.)
I mean at some point, where's the difference between visually and physically groping me?
All right, this is a bit rambly. Lange Rede kuerzer Sinn: Glancing is okay. Literally leaning out the truck window just to *see* if the female walking down the street is worth checking out further is ridiculous (as well as dangerous!).
Post a Comment