Tipping Point - Sexual Harassment In America

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
same words:
redhill directly insults a forum member = justified retaliation
davec references a forum meme = sexual harassment

:up:

Actually, I was referring to this comment that you happily jumped on board with:

"I dunno about you folks but I'm beginning to think this redhill character might be a little coocoo for cocoa puffs."
 
you must be really tired from running those goalposts around everywhere all day. maybe time to sign off and get some sleep. try to relax, dude.
 
Last edited:
Actually, I was referring to this comment that you happily jumped on board with:



"I dunno about you folks but I'm beginning to think this redhill character might be a little coocoo for cocoa puffs."



Are you now suggesting General Mills was producing advertisements considered sexually unacceptable?
 
re: sexual harassment

This conversation brings up an interesting point. In my opinion, you're nearly arguing that you feel perhaps emasculated by those two posters. That's not the same thing as sexual harassment. And though I don't feel that they're actually emasculating you, if you feel that way, you maybe should separate it from sexual harassment. Where someone sexually harasses you. Sexually. As in, in a sexual manner.

So now you're saying that being called a bitch isn't emasculating?
 
Here's what i don't get. Redhill added some comments to this thread, which i thought were an interesting and valid addition. Not that they diminished or took away from what others were saying. But they were valid, weren't they?
They certainly attacked no one.
Since then he's been defending himself left and right as if he's abused someone. I don't get it.
And why take to the other thread and take the piss out of him? Knowing he'll read it. Other than to be an asshole. Or feel part of the gang.
For the record i have no idea how redhill gets sexual harassment from daves/Headache's comments. But in general i think this whole 'beat him till he breaks' thing is fucking pathetic.
 
So now you're saying that being called a bitch isn't emasculating?



Actually, if you read that post, I most certainly distinguished sexual harassment from emasculation. So which one is it? Do you feel sexually harassed, or emasculated?

And context is everything. So no, I don't think being called a bitch in 99% of cases is emasculating. Unless he's literally calling you a female dog.
 
tenor.gif
 
For the record i have no idea how redhill gets sexual harassment from daves/Headache's comments. But in general i think this whole 'beat him till he breaks' thing is fucking pathetic.



But this is a big part of it. This is a poster that will make a statement, and then declare it infallible, any slight criticism is met with a bombardment of attack and martyrdom. He’ll twist, turn, manipulate in every form or fashion in order to play victim, while bullying and beating all in the same breath. He’ll gnash his teeth to the point that any thread he comes into is lost.

For better or worst it’s either a gang up or a walking on eggshells around him, there’s no ability to engage, and this is how it’s been for years.
 
Raise your hand if you give a shit and want to keep reading about anything that has been posted in this thread since last night.
 
To address the elephant in the room...

I made a post in a conversational thread about someone who never participates in said thread. The post literally is saying that I think he likes chocolate flavored cereal, but figuratively meant to mean I think he's got a screw loose.

Purposefully in a thread he doesn't participate in rather than in here to directly engage.

Now sure, fine - maybe PMs would have been a better option.

But said poster quotes the post across two threads, and shows it as proof that he's being sexually harassed. I'll simply allow that to speak for itself.

When said poster made his original post, I actually started typing something out about my own life experience, a topic I rarely discuss, and how gender norms and roles in our fucked up Puritan nation help create an environment where women are supposedly subservient to men and people are supposed to be ashamed of their sexuality, or even the perception of their sexuality...

And then said poster started saying a woman's experiences in college we're likes, lashing out at every poster imaginable. So I tabled that shit for another time.

This poster has a history of lashing out at anyone who dares to disagree, and deflects his own criticisms on others.

He's also now on ignore, cause fuck his shit.
 
To address the elephant in the room...

I made a post in a conversational thread about someone who never participates in said thread. The post literally is saying that I think he likes chocolate flavored cereal, but figuratively meant to mean I think he's got a screw loose.

.
That was completely obvious to everyone. Nobody thinks referring to someone as coocoo (or cuckoo) is a sexual reference, everyone knows it is meant to mean you think they are acting crazy.

:coocoo: if you will, in fact that emoji is typed as : coocoo : without the spaces.

redhill knows this too just tried to spin it a different way to play the victim and tie it in to this thread where the whole scenario originated.
 
Is the pile on over? You guys done proving me correct (again)?

You might want to confine it to the celebration of sexual harassment thread, instead.

There's no need to double down and ruin two threads simultaneously.
 
Is the pile on over? You guys done proving me correct (again)?

You might want to confine it to the celebration of sexual harassment thread, instead.

There's no need to double down and ruin two threads simultaneously.



this pity party of one is boring AF.

so i'm going to move on with something to throw out to the group. take this paragraph from a larger piece (written by man) on the Aziz Ansari issue:

Even Ansari, the semi-ironic expert who authored a book on interpersonal communication, claims to have not perceived Grace’s distress. He may have perceived “mixed signals,” but also that his advances were ultimately warranted. In a sort of internal ink-blot test within the story, Ansari was seeing something totally different from his date, Grace. This sort of human mating ritual always involves complex arrays of social cues.

Part of this complexity does draw from prudishness about sex, and sex panics, that are critical to avoid. It draws from a Victorian tradition in which women (particularly women) are imbued with the idea that to have sex at another person’s first suggestion is to somehow be easy (or some such); in which culture gets mostly oriented around the male libido; in which the female libido is seen to exist only for purposes of procreation within marriage.

That framework still informs much of the rhetoric that puts the onus on women to protect themselves from sexual assault or unwelcome advances. Never mind when the woman does want sex. For many people, even consensual encounters might involve some ritualistic “I should probably get going” or “How about one more drink?” banter. If agreeing to stay a bit longer is often taken as agreement to more than that, two people can end up on very different pages. In a charitable reading, that may be what Ansari thought was happening.

The reality is that this is an audit in which most everyone is implicated—everyone has some situation in which they could have been more communicative, more respectful—and there will have to be a way to tell these stories without precipitating a sex-panic-panic. Few people want a sex panic. When I even see the term sexual misconduct on a CNN banner, it feels regressive, like a person is being ridiculed for the sexual equivalent of eating with his elbows on the table. It does seem that the shared goal is a world filled with sex that’s as minimally policed as possible—pleasurable, communicative, respectful, noncoercive, consensual sex. As much or as little of it as you want.

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/01/this-is-not-a-sex-panic/550547/
 
Is the pile on over? You guys done proving me correct (again)?

You might want to confine it to the celebration of sexual harassment thread, instead.

There's no need to double down and ruin two threads simultaneously.
Frankly you're the one who started the ruin of this thread. You did it at the start of it, and I asked you nicely then to stop. It's very trying of patience.

Please don't respond to my post, I've honestly heard enough.
 
I didn't even know Aziz Ansari wrote a book about interpersonal communication. I barely know who he is.

I really don't think there's any sex panic or imagined or real policing of sex. I think people just need to work on policing themselves and aspire to know better and do better *Oprah voice*. To get real there are ways to take care of your needs without involving other people and possible bad consequences
 
Thanks for all the thoughts and prayers guys!

I will have to deliver between tonight and tomorrow AM, almost s month early because my placenta is failing and that shoots up odds of stillbirth. Hoping for smooth process and carry on in my absence!
 
Back
Top Bottom