sexual advances - the big question

I don't think that is a realistic definition and not one that really flies.

Well, that's really unfortunate for you - Larry - since that is a legal definition, taken from a uk.gov website. So whether it flies for you personally, or not, is not really relevant.

No man that I have entered into a relationship with has ever asked 'may I kiss you?'. He has, however, managed to ascertain my interest in him without resorting to sexual assault. Because I am clearly enthusiastically engaging with them.

I would hope you can say the same about your relationships, Larry.

The men who act like Rennard know their behaviour is unwanted. But htey do it anyway, because they have have the power, and because they know or suspect that the woman won't report it.

Promqueen,

I just don't think that the permission asking is wanted. Most women would find it unnatural and a turn off.

If it really is the case that most women want it, then you are right, it would be the solution. But if it is a tiny minority and the rest would feel it ridiculous, would you still advocate for it?

I can totally get that Larry, or anyone, might not know that it is offensive to address say, PromQueen, as Mrs DH Name. But the horrible arrogance, and, frankly, stupidity, comes in when he just refuses to believe it, when told. Clearly. Repeatedly.

Curry,

So when is a sexual advance acceptable in your opinion? And "when it is wanted" is a complete cop out. There is no point in discussing that. What I find hard to accept is that, in two parallel universes, two intimate discussions are happening between a man and a woman. In universe one, the woman is desperate for the man to take it further and when he kisses her, she responds and they end up years later happily married with 2.2 children. In universe 2, the woman is having an identical conversation but, in her mind, she wants just that, a conversation. The man tries an identical kiss to that in universe one but, this time, he is reported to the police for assault and ends up in jail.

Is that really what you want?

Poor old larry. You just don't get it, do you? Could it be because you haven't had the nice familiar feeling of centuries of oppression coming down on you every time you get a nice envelop coming through the post addressing you as an accessory to someone else? Some nice short pithy thing annihilating your intellect, your contribution to society, your position in the family, in a few short words put you in your place and remind you how fucking lucky you are to belong to somebody?

Like PromQueen and others, I am monstrously offended to be addressed as Mrs DHname.

For example,

"I suspect that if every unwanted attempt at a kiss or a hand on an arm/knee were taken to be sexual assault, 90% of the population (male and female) would be behind bars. "

1. I disagree that women make as many physical sexual advances as men (they are socialised to hint that they are willing to enter into something, rather than physically make a move)
2. I do however agree that many men who actually will never be, could be done for sexual assault. And this is one of the things that is not ok, in my view - that society condones something that is by any thought-out definition sexual assault.

Larry "If you were to actually analyse my posts, I probably agree with 90% of what you and the majority on here write and disagree with 10%. "

I don't think I agree with you 90%, unless you count the trivially obvious like "sexual assault is wrong" and "grass is green" (although if I said that, you would probably say that your mother, sister and most of your wide circle of female friends find that grass is a yellowy brown at this time of the year).

The main thing that I think we disagree on, and I think it is very important, is that, although you won't actually come out and state your position, you think that things are pretty much ok. You are alright with the status quo. I'm not. It's unequal. Women are paid less, women get beaten up in relationships more, women do more housework whether or not they WOHM, so, more work overall, and get less financial or other recognition for it. Women are still conventionally required to say whether they are married, and if so, addressed as if they belong to their husbands. Women are less likely to speak in mixed groups, women are subject to social control in the form of sexual power play which can be described as "advances" or "assault", depending on your position at any given moment. Women are controlled by the threat of rape, and many of them are, also, actually raped. Women are constantly patronised and belittled by men who make out that what they are doing is somehow affectionate or caring whereas it is deliberately humiliating. All this is happening right now in this country to women who are otherwise, relatively, globally, privileged. This is not alright by me. the status quo is not ok.

Running,

I don't think that is a realistic definition and not one that really flies. If two people are flirting then someone, at some point, has to take it further. If either person misreads the signals and puts a tentative hand on a knee or tries a gentle kiss, are you really telling me that is sexual assault? Does it also apply to women with men?

I just don't buy the idea (I know some do) of asking verbal permission for everything ("may I kiss you please"). It is funny the way you choose to say "a man" rather than "a person" in the last line. In many social situations, women are not shy at making a pass on a man.

There has to be room for misunderstanding without it becoming assault (clearly at a very low level). I suspect that if every unwanted attempt at a kiss or a hand on an arm/knee were taken to be sexual assault, 90% of the population (male and female) would be behind bars.

For those on this thread that think there is a 'grey area' of sexual assault - there is not.

Definition: Sexual assault covers any sort of sexual contact and behaviour that is unwanted, ranging from touching to any other activity if it is sexual.

There is no grey area, Larry. The word 'unwanted' is the major clue here. If it involves sexual contact, or sexual behaviour and is unwanted, then it is sexual assault.

And if a man isn't sure whether his sexual advances are wanted or not, he shouldn't be making them.

Promqueen,

I agree with 99% of your last post but it in no way represents the majority of views of people on MN or the feminist boards. I do think that there are areas of life where men and women should be allowed to behave subtly differently but still be perceived as equal. I am not sure most women want absolutely identical roles in society as men, especially in areas such as childcare. In any event, I certainly agree with you that people should have free choice to take any role they want (but should not be pressurised into it, such as a lot of feminists insisting that women are traitors should they choose a role such as SAHM).

Prom,

How can you be "monstrously" offended by being invited to a wedding (for instance) as MRS DH name. I can see that you could be irked or irritated but "monstrously" offended? Even when you know that the offence is unintended and the sender only feels that they are following tradition and has no personal view that you are in any way lesser?

Promqueen,

If you were to actually analyse my posts, I probably agree with 90% of what you and the majority on here write and disagree with 10%. However, the strength of feeling against my small reservations mean that you feel I am arguing passionately against you. I am not and I am listening to what you say.

On the other hand, I do feel that sometimes these boards are eerily reminiscent of animal farm in wanting to replace a flawed society with an equally flawed society, merely changing those who gain unfair advantage. Whenever a woman speaks out against the perceived feminist viewpoint on these boards she is portrayed as brainwashed or a tool of the patriarchy. Whenever a man has any opinion at all, it is a waste of the women's intellectual energy to engage.

Four legs good, two legs bad.

"So, why all the references to his obesity and appearance in the press" Sorry can't get too excited about that. Happens to women all the time. I wonder why too every time that happens.

"Curry I was about to make exactly the same observation about her career, and also you made the point about 'computers' diminishing women much more articulately than I would have as it makes me so angry (I have been known to splutter incoherently at anyone who points out that it's just "tradition" that nobody calls anybody anything that makes reference to a time when some people were legally allowed to be slaves, even though some names used to be derived in such a way as I understand)."

I think there is a huge difference between when addressing a woman as Miss/Ms/Mrs husband's name is used. In professional life, it is clearly not on as it is diminishing someone's status as an individual, ditto in any dealing which is not social. If it is inviting someone to an "at home", for instance, I think that could be defended as traditional. And if it is merely on an envelope of junk mail, I cannot see why it would be any more offensive than addressing me as "miss" which regularly happens.

"It would be OK if he'd done the things he's accused of if he were attractive, wouldn't it? Then all those women would have been flattered."

So, why all the references to his obesity and appearance in the press and from those making the accusations?

Xpost with Prom Queen. I type too bloody slowly because my fingers are frozen carefully so as to not deliberately give offence.

What curryeater said, and at "she did not want to deliberately cause offence" - someone is harassing her and she did not want to cause offence!? Can someone explain how that sort of situation can come about if it is not due to this power hierarchy? And "he did not imply any reward or threaten any consequence were she to rebuff him"!? I think the answer is "He was a bigwig in the Libdems and she was his junior". And following her around not taking a hint? OMG WTAF and all that.