Woman in NYC cat call video is suing..

[JWPlatt]

the growing discontent of men that woman are so protected that men lose all presumption of innocence - their right to due process - which, by the way, puts women on an even higher pedestal and causes men to avoid them for fear of recrimination and accusation. It basically means the bad guys will keep at it while the good guys are losing the will to try any more. The risk is too high.

I can't believe I'm the one saying this, but...you may want to lighten up a tad.

srsly though, this isn't a court of law. No need to talk about "due process" or anything like that. Just basic respect and dignity that everyone should give everyone else.

You might want to read the news. Those aren't my thoughts. They are the headlines and the articles within that I am retelling to you.

 

[thestrangequark]

the growing discontent of men that woman are so protected that men lose all presumption of innocence - their right to due process - which, by the way, puts women on an even higher pedestal and causes men to avoid them for fear of recrimination and accusation. It basically means the bad guys will keep at it while the good guys are losing the will to try any more. The risk is too high.

I can't believe I'm the one saying this, but...you may want to lighten up a tad.

srsly though, this isn't a court of law. No need to talk about "due process" or anything like that. Just basic respect and dignity that everyone should give everyone else.

You might want to read the news. Those aren't my thoughts. They are the headlines and the articles within that I am retelling to you.

Oh you mean like Cosby?

 

[JWPlatt]

Oh you mean like Cosby?

No, not at all. I mean the debate surrounding "yes means yes" cascading through colleges. Well, I suppose Cosby is involved in a sense, like saying crime is bad and you could be talking about any criminal in the world.

 

[Gaith]

Well in Brazil, Dear Wife was cat-called all the time (this was long before she met me)..if the person doing the calling was alone, she'd smack them up-side the head.. She told me that she NEVER got that here in the S.F. Bay Area.. Is cat-calling a North East USA thing? have other women on the board here been victims anywhere else in the USA?

I've never gotten around to polling my San Francisco female friends on local levels of catcalling, but I've definitely heard more on the subject from my DC friends.

It could be partly a class issue - SF is a very educated place, with not too many manual laborer types milling about at all hours. It could be partly a climate issue, that even in warm weather the humidity remains too low for people to get all sweaty and thus inclined to blow off steam in inappropriate ways. And it could be that SF's culture and guys are just plain superior. (Not that that's any great hurdle to clear, mind.)

If there was no contract to put the video online, then she might have a claim. However, I suspect even an oral contract is sufficient (it doesn't need to be written) and I'm not sure all named defendants would be culpable. She may be telling the truth, but I suspect she's just having second thoughts because it wasn't worth the little pay she got considering the significant negative consequences.

Quite. I wonder just how much ad revenues those 40m YouTube views brought in. Regardless, I imagine she was probably paid a flat rate, and maybe now wants a bigger cut of an unexpectedly large viral hit. Seeing as she was hired from craigslist as an actress, it does rather defy the imagination that she didn't expect the piece to end up online.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I think the issue is whether she agreed to have it used for commercial purposes, not whether she agreed to put it online. This is based on reading the story, I'm certainly not an expert in this subject and I haven't read the complaints in the case.

 

[Greylock Crescent]

That's just taking things to the completely opposite extreme, though. It's not treating them like human beings again, but like priceless art exhibits that can't even be approached.

That is a very interesting point of view. It begs comment on the growing discontent of men that woman are so protected that men lose all presumption of innocence - their right to due process - which, by the way, puts women on an even higher pedestal and causes men to avoid them for fear of recrimination and accusation. It basically means the bad guys will keep at it while the good guys are losing the will to try any more. The risk is too high.

The risk of of what, though? Being "shot down?" Believe me, there was a time in my life when I was scared to death that my interests/advances would not be welcome. But, well, that was my insecurity and issues I had to deal with.

Otherwise, if you see someone you're attracted to, smile at them, they smile back, you introduce yourself, show an interest in getting to know that other person as, well, you know, a person, then there's no risk that involves anything close to (or as melodramatic as) "presumption of innocence."

And if the attraction is mutual and events progress far enough, it's not going to break the mood to ask for a definitive consent before proceeding toward anything close to needing a presumption of innocence.

In fact, why would you (or I) be engaging in any activity where such presumption would be necessary? Instead of presuming (or assuming) consent, take a moment and make sure it's explicit. That doesn't place anyone on a pedestal, but rather makes sure that everyone is being treated as, well, an actual person, rather than merely an object of desire/lust, etc.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

True. And I'm fine, thanks. My story was very old. Old like from your childhood, assuming that's your birth year in your username.

Speaking of which, feel free to call me Ziyal. In the Bajoran naming tradition, the family name is first and the given name second.

OK cool thanks Ziyal.... Yes the number in my name is my birth year. Though most people think I'm still 35

You're just a mere child to me.

Cool but I think I'll call you Tora because I love the way it sounds....

Hey guys since a few of you have brought up the whole "yes means yes" thing what of it?

Under duress yes doesn't mean yes at all. That's my opinion and what about this thing about rape culture. Where did that come from? Not helped when you have people commenting and creating terms like "rape, rape" and wasn't that a Judge that coined that term?

Also wasn't there a scandal involving some university or college where they had an ongoing problem of this happening?

 

[Greylock Crescent]

Hey guys since a few of you have brought up the whole "yes means yes" thing what of it?

Under duress yes doesn't mean yes at all.

That's simple ... when interested in seeking consent, don't put someone under duress.

Also wasn't there a scandal involving some university or college where they had an ongoing problem of this happening?

I don't have the article handy, but rape (often in the form of date rape) is a significant problem across many college campuses in the US - one that is only just now being given the attention it requires.

 

[thestrangequark]

Oh you mean like Cosby?

No, not at all. I mean the debate surrounding "yes means yes" cascading through colleges. Well, I suppose Cosby is involved in a sense, like saying crime is bad and you could be talking about any criminal in the world.

It was a joke.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Oh you mean like Cosby?

No, not at all. I mean the debate surrounding "yes means yes" cascading through colleges. Well, I suppose Cosby is involved in a sense, like saying crime is bad and you could be talking about any criminal in the world.

It was a joke.

However with Cosby the joke is now on him.. What a scumbag?

 

[JWPlatt]

That's just taking things to the completely opposite extreme, though. It's not treating them like human beings again, but like priceless art exhibits that can't even be approached.

That is a very interesting point of view. It begs comment on the growing discontent of men that woman are so protected that men lose all presumption of innocence - their right to due process - which, by the way, puts women on an even higher pedestal and causes men to avoid them for fear of recrimination and accusation. It basically means the bad guys will keep at it while the good guys are losing the will to try any more. The risk is too high.

The risk of of what, though? Being "shot down?"

Really? That's the trivial consequence you read into my comments? Please read my posts in context of the discussion more closely. No, the risk of being male, falsely accused, presumed guilty and having your life ruined. Search "yes means yes" and read the articles about the issues and the unintended consequences that get the complaints in addition to the positives about protecting people (men and women) from harassment. Then make an informed judgement for yourself about what's fair. It's not black and white and I'm getting the sense that the law may eventually be argued before the US Supreme Court about whether and if, in fact, there is presumed guilt within these laws. And "although," as the wiki says, "the Constitution of the United States does not cite it explicitly, presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. See also Coffin v. United States and In re Winship."

Here - I'll do you a favor and present a pro and con article for your review:

Pro:
https://verdict.justia.com/2014/10/29/making-sense-yes-means-yes

Con:
https://shiftthink.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/yes-means-yes-guilty-until-proven-innocent/

 

[Locutus of Bored]

That is a very interesting point of view. It begs comment on the growing discontent of men that woman are so protected that men lose all presumption of innocence - their right to due process - which, by the way, puts women on an even higher pedestal and causes men to avoid them for fear of recrimination and accusation. It basically means the bad guys will keep at it while the good guys are losing the will to try any more. The risk is too high.

The risk of of what, though? Being "shot down?"

Really? That's the trivial consequence you read into my comments? Please read my posts in context of the discussion more closely. No, the risk of being male, falsely accused, presumed guilty and having your life ruined. Search "yes means yes" and read the articles about the issues and the unintended consequences that get the complaints in addition to the positives about protecting people (men and women) from harassment. Then make an informed judgement for yourself about what's fair. It's not black and white and I'm getting the sense that the law may eventually be argued before the US Supreme Court about whether and if, in fact, there is presumed guilt within these laws. And "although," as the wiki says, "the Constitution of the United States does not cite it explicitly, presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. See also Coffin v. United States and In re Winship."

Here - I'll do you a favor and present a pro and con article for your review:

Pro:
https://verdict.justia.com/2014/10/29/making-sense-yes-means-yes

Con:
https://shiftthink.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/yes-means-yes-guilty-until-proven-innocent/

Well, let's see. The context of the discussion I was having with Trekker before you cut in and turned it up to eleven was about reading a room and body language cues to determine whether a woman wants to be approached to be asked on a date, to dance, or to share a drink with you, or whether she's just on her way to work and wants to be left alone.

You have from there made the leap in logic to sexual consent laws on college campuses allegedly being unfairly biased against men and how that only helps "bad guys" while keeping the "good guys" down or some such, which was not even in the same state much less the same ballpark of what I was discussing, which was about helping a nervous guy gain some confidence and not look on everything like such a hopeless struggle.

So you should probably be a little more forgiving of some confusion about the stakes of what it is you are talking about, because prior context does not support your escalation of the topic.

 

[JWPlatt]

Ok, I suppose. To your points, nervous guys will be more nervous, knowing the future stakes of the purpose for their initial contact may turn out to be life-changing for the worse and the results of the law possibly and ironically placing woman in the position of "priceless art exhibits that can't even be approached" if the purpose of the initial contact is to pursue a relationship. It will be interesting to see how things play out.

 

[Tora Ziyal]

No, the risk of being male, falsely accused, presumed guilty and having your life ruined.

The most reliable statistics I've seen say that 2 to 8% of rape reports are false (one source for those numbers), not that different than false crime reports in general. False reports are, of course, inexcusable. I feel terrible for the specific men who have been victimized by them. But their number is minuscule compared to the number of women (and men) who have actually been raped or sexually assaulted. There is no major "risk of being male, falsely accused, presumed guilty and having your life ruined."

 

[Greylock Crescent]

^ Yep. No major risk ... particularly if the guy in question takes the time and effort to make sure there is definitive consent before proceeding.

 

[Gaith]

Ok, I suppose. To your points, nervous guys will be more nervous, knowing the future stakes of the purpose for their initial contact may turn out to be life-changing for the worse and the results of the law possibly and ironically placing woman in the position of "priceless art exhibits that can't even be approached" if the purpose of the initial contact is to pursue a relationship. It will be interesting to see how things play out.

Dude, I'm the first to stick up for nervous guys, but even I find this line of thinking absurd and offensive. The chances of a woman suggesting (or even agreeing to) sex after only a brief initial conversation with a stranger are miniscule, so false-accusation paranoia has no place in a discussion about catcalling and street harassment.

(Moreoever, given the ever-increasing acceptance of dating apps and the proliferation of online-based social groups, it has never been easier to meet women in ways other than approaching them in bars or other public places. There's no shame in being nervous about how to proceed once you do meet them, but if you're honestly that frightened about false rape accusations, it might be best to seek professional help.)

 

[Greylock Crescent]

That is a very interesting point of view. It begs comment on the growing discontent of men that woman are so protected that men lose all presumption of innocence - their right to due process - which, by the way, puts women on an even higher pedestal and causes men to avoid them for fear of recrimination and accusation. It basically means the bad guys will keep at it while the good guys are losing the will to try any more. The risk is too high.

The risk of of what, though? Being "shot down?"

Really? That's the trivial consequence you read into my comments? Please read my posts in context of the discussion more closely. No, the risk of being male, falsely accused, presumed guilty and having your life ruined. Search "yes means yes" and read the articles about the issues and the unintended consequences that get the complaints in addition to the positives about protecting people (men and women) from harassment. Then make an informed judgement for yourself about what's fair. It's not black and white and I'm getting the sense that the law may eventually be argued before the US Supreme Court about whether and if, in fact, there is presumed guilt within these laws. And "although," as the wiki says, "the Constitution of the United States does not cite it explicitly, presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. See also Coffin v. United States and In re Winship."

Considering the topic of conversation was appropriate ways to interact with a woman you're attracted to in a social setting (at a bar, on the street, etc.), that's what I was responding to. Truth be told, I think the escalation to a discussion of sexual relations, inherent to your post, represents a dangerous presumption and sense of entitlement. As if noticing an attractive woman in a social setting is necessarily going to lead to situation where sexual contact is possible (likely) - without having had any "getting to know you" conversations to begin with, much less discussions of sex (and therefore of consent) before hand.

 

[thestrangequark]

No, not at all. I mean the debate surrounding "yes means yes" cascading through colleges. Well, I suppose Cosby is involved in a sense, like saying crime is bad and you could be talking about any criminal in the world.

It was a joke.

However with Cosby the joke is now on him.. What a scumbag?

It was more on JWPlaitt's MRA crap.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

It was a joke.

However with Cosby the joke is now on him.. What a scumbag?

It was more on JWPlaitt's MRA crap.

ah....

MRA? Is that Men's Rights?

 

[thestrangequark]

^Yes.