Sexual street harassment in Brixton
- Thread starter S A Villarino
- Start date
Thimble Queen
Called away to another place
Perhaps one of the clique could start up another private conversation thread about it...
snide cunt
Gromit
International Man of Misery
1. Please read the boards for a while before posting. Use the search function to see if your topic has already been discussed to save repeating questions/threads that already exist. Please note that these are discussion boards and not a free resource for journalists/students/market researchers.
The topic is worthy but worthy or not when did we start ignoring Board rule 1?
The topic is worthy but worthy or not when did we start ignoring Board rule 1?
snide cunt
Add that to the creepy, racist, sexist weirdo shit that I've already been called on this thread and stick it up your bum.
RubyToogood
RubyTwobikes
I never saw much difference between the apparent come-ons and simple abuse. I could get "hey sexy" and "fat bitch" in the same day, and it felt much the same.
Hmm I think it is a pretty universal thing to happen to women and not Brixton specific, although I take the point it is for a local blog. If it is a nasty bit of abuse, I just wish randoms would get involved and say 'oi pack it in'. I have noticed through the years quite a few of the matriarchs in Brixton telling men off for being shits. Personally, I'll never forget - even though I didn't know them- a dude telling off some entitled shit who was verbally and physically harassing me ( not in Brixton) to cut it out or he'd personally cut his dick off.
newbie
undisambiguated
just the opposite I'd have thought. Anyone who doesn't view this behaviour as problematic is justifying oppressive and sexist projection of power. That, at least, is the tone of almost every post in this thread, and in every other thread, conversation, article. Almost, not quite, as your post and those you cite demonstrates.so you get the behavior that a lot of women are defining as problematic and harassment. you just don't see that as a problem?stuff_it said: ↑
TBH I use thing like that and builder's wolf whistles to test out new going out clothes.
that's not snarky btw, I get some of the behavior sparkybird talks about at my work. and I respond to it in much the same way she does and that stops it being problematic to me.
in general:
the issue that remains is that not defining this behavior as problematic does not make it go away and it can assume that anyone who doesn't see this as problematic is normal and anyone who finds it problematic is being oversensitive.
Yet from observation that is not universal. Plenty, ime the clear majority, of such interactions lead to the woman looking uncomfortable and obviously getting away as quickly as possible, and the bloke looking crestfallen. Some don't though, sometime the woman being called out to responds in kind and appears to positively enjoy the experience. I don't know if she really does, or if she's acting or if it's simply a defence mechanism.
I observed an incident the other week, where a bloke called out to a woman as they went up parallel escalators at the tube. After a brief exchange of loud, sexualised banter at the top they both laughed and went on their separate ways. It appeared they both enjoyed themselves, as did some but not all of those who overheard it. Only a few seconds of banter, there's no great conclusions to be drawn from it, but it struck me as a ritualised acknowledgment which made both of them glow slightly.
Yesterday, on the tube, a bloke leaned over and asked the gooner the score. When told Arsenal lost 4-1, and the ref was the 12th man, he said "you'll get no sympathy from me, I'm spurs, you deserve everything you get". A little bit of back and forth, with giggles. It brightened the day. Again ritualised, and again not quite an obvious analysis about the power relationship involved.
Either of those interactions could have turned very wrong very quickly. In either case the 'target' of the remarks might have taken offence, might have argued, insulted, got angry, or might have shrunk away in uncomfortable embarrassment. In each of those anecdotes the initiator of the exchange chose someone who appreciated the banter (or at least, so it appeared). Many of the anecdotes on this thread are from women who did not appreciate being chosen (or picked on) for banter. There is, in my view, no reason why they should.
I wouldn't for a moment seek to justify oppressive and sexist projection of power. Nor would I want someone to start bantering at me about football when I'm sitting on the tube (whether having just been thrashed at home or not). Yet in both my anecdotes the recipient appeared happy with the interaction.
I can't help wonder how the would be initiator of banter is supposed to know who will react well and positively and who will take umbrage.
Geri
wasn't born to follow
I found the whole of your post interesting, and it made me think. The initiator cannot know how his (or in some cases possibly her) recipient will take their remarks, and I think the question of whether to make them or not comes down to self confidence. There are occasions when I would like to say something to someone, for example, I might admire something they are wearing and want to ask where it's from, but I very rarely do for worry about the person's reaction.
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
Well, tbh I would say that if you're in doubt, don't do it. Tbh there's times when I'm in interactions with people where I think I could say something a bit teasing or darkly wrong, but unless I'm quite confident of the manner it will be taken in, I think it's better not to risk it.
Also it's worth saying that I've had banterish interactions with strangers on the street, probably mostly with men actually, which have been fun and completely non problematic. That's unlikely to happen if the conversation starter is overtly sexual or along the lines of "cheer up love, it might never happen". People's millage obviously varies, but I don't know any woman who doesn't find the "cheer up love" retort to not be annoying. The milder sexual stuff is perhaps a bit more subjective (though IME it remains a majority of women who don't like it), but at the end of the day I'd think who is more likely to have the worst experience - someone not getting a random compliment from a stranger, or someone feeling harassed by a stranger? Again like in the paragraph above, best not to risk it.
Perhaps as an aside, but like with sick jokes and "wrong" humour, I think originality and actual humour plays a large part. Sometimes even if it remains unwanted, the originality and bizarreness of a stranger's come on (of course combined with other non verbals that make it less threatening) can make the interaction so ridiculous it's not threatening or tiresome, and more credulously amusing. And on other times, genuinely original and witty flirty comments or actions have made me openly smile. IME though, those comments have also tended to be more respectful than "show us yer tits".
newbie
undisambiguated
Geri is it your own selfconfidence or the way the person projects themselves?
My fil would include anyone within earshot in any conversation, engage with anybody any time (not that I ever heard him say anything remotely sexual, just anodyne chatter). Some people are like that, with, shall we say, a very different appreciation of boundaries to my own.
My fil would include anyone within earshot in any conversation, engage with anybody any time (not that I ever heard him say anything remotely sexual, just anodyne chatter). Some people are like that, with, shall we say, a very different appreciation of boundaries to my own.
Geri
wasn't born to follow
It's probably a mixture of both. I do engage in conversations with people in shops and waiting at the bus stop sometimes, I think it depends a) on my mood at the time and b) how likely they look to respond. It is very rare though that I will comment on something about they way they look.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Prove different. It should be easy if you are to be believed.
Fact is its protectionist "you're not one of us' bullshit. Anyone outspoken against the herd gets ostracised. Simple really.
However on urban thankfully there are still a fair few people who don't wish to be part of the herd. Lets all assume for the sake of convenience its only these people I am really interested in having discussions with.
Perhaps one of the clique could start up another private conversation thread about it...
Blah blah fucking blah.
Always the same anile chant, with you placed as some kind of resistor of oppression.
Pathological.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Possibly when the OP checked out with the ed that it was okay to post the thread?
He does permit them if they have the courtesy to do that, you know.
Thimble Queen
Called away to another place
If we all put him on ignore eventually he'll get bored and crawl back under his rock
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
Tbh, it's probably quite nice to be so convinced in your own righteousness and everyone else's wrongness that you never get a moment of self doubt or questioning...
newbie
undisambiguated
personally I agree, the risk of my own embarrassment and the other persons discomfort is greater than any possible benefit. So I'm very, very unlikely to initiate any sort of conversation, and have never given a stranger a compliment in my life. Far too intrusive, far too risky.
I'm well aware I conform to the standard London reputation, held by those from the provinces or abroad, as standoffish and unfriendly. Isn't the open approachability of my fil a better model, where chatter and banter are commonplace? Is it really always best to keep clammed up?
If it isn't, where are the boundaries? Clearly "show us yer tits" crosses almost all known boundaries, and I fully accept your point that "cheer up love, it might never happen" is so hackneyed it's no longer amusing, if it ever was. The weather, otoh, is too pointless and vacuous: for random banter to work some spark is needed, which implies an element of risk.
I don't know the answer to any of this. I don't personally like sexualised banter because it makes me, always an observer never a participant, feel uncomfortable. Except when apparently willing participants engage in having fun, like the pair on the escalator.
Pat24
Brixtonian
I remember being invited by some guy standing outside his front door to "come in for a good time" - I must have been about 19-20 y.o (this was just round the corner from my house). Also a guy stood on my path whilst I was cycling to ask me out - wtf?
Fortunately I don't get these sort of stuff anymore, which is good, the odd wolfwhilstle or whatever.
Fortunately I don't get these sort of stuff anymore, which is good, the odd wolfwhilstle or whatever.
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
Well that's my point - the effects can be the same to the person on the receiving end, but that doesn't mean there isn't a difference in intent. It's important to understand both of those things, why it happens in certain ways, and the effects all types of behaviour have. You can't have a one-sided conversation about this, because it will always lead nowhere.
If we all put him on ignore eventually he'll get bored and crawl back under his rock
Don't you get it? Are you really that blind? If you, the control freaks, the arseholes and the suck-ups like you put me on ignore it would make urban less boring for me because I wouldn't have to deal with your inane self-obsessed social-media popularity contest bullshit anymore.
I come here to get away from that shit. And people like you bringing it here and making discussions about who likes who instead of what is actually said.. is like a rancid stench to me.
weepiper
I fix the machines that fight climate change
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
I don't know who you are, Kizmet, I don't know about any history you and others here might have, and I don't consider myself to be a part of any of these little so-called cliques you appear to be obsessed with, but reading through this thread gives me one impression that is very, very clear: you're doing everything in your power to be a shit-stirrer, to get people's ire up, and you come across as a complete and utter sad twat. While you said one thing early on that could have been the starting point for interesting discussions, when anyone said anything at all that could be considered a dissenting opinion to what you wrote you went off at the deep end and started throwing around half-thought-out and frankly incomprehensible bullshit and have barely said anything of any real consequence wrt this subject since. You appear to have a massive chip on your shoulder, that has clearly affected your ability to string together thoughtful posts on this subject, as your only line of defence (apart from pathetically slagging others off all the time) seems to be to reiterate the things you said earlier in more and more convoluted ways without adding anything to it but while thinking that you're elaborating. You're not.
I'm sure you could have added an interesting strand of debate to this issue had you not got so fucking caught up in personal politics and patheticness along the way.
What are you achieving by continuing? A sense of power at being able to upset people? Rather apt, I guess.
I'm sure you could have added an interesting strand of debate to this issue had you not got so fucking caught up in personal politics and patheticness along the way.
What are you achieving by continuing? A sense of power at being able to upset people? Rather apt, I guess.
Its not about everyone else's wrongness... this is not kizmet vs everyone.
this is about a fairly small group of long term posters and a few more recent hangers on. Posters who demand a certain level of respect without doing the necessary work to deserve it but just because they have online friends or long posting histories. I hate that shit. It brings out the worst in people.
As far as I am concerned this is kizmet vs the con4trol freaks.
And yes. It is very empowering.
My dear old dead mum used to say... if the aresholes* hate you then you must be doing something right.
*she didn't say arseholes... that's my translation.
This kind of thing does give a person cause for self doubt.
To further give me cause for self doubt prove your apparent impartiality by pointing out that it cannot possibly be only one person having such an argument and please write something similar about pathetic personal politics to the posters who have ignored "interesting" point I made and accused me of being a racist, sexist, creepy case.
Do that and I will have a real reason to believe you.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
'If its money you want I have none. But what I do have is a particular set of skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. Stop posting now and you have my word you'll come to no harm. I will not pursue you. But if you don't, I will look for you. I will find you. And I will kill you'
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
How does someone 'prove' impartiality? For all you know I might be the silent leader of a shadowy cabal on here and everyone is secretly in my thrall via PM, following my every move. I get the feeling that anything I say and do will always leave you room to doubt my motivations and beliefs. And that is fair enough - there aren't many people I trust 100% either.
After what I wrote, though, why would you think I would then go and write diatribes against others when I made it clear that I saw your behaviour as the catalyst for all of this? I'm not a fan of confrontation, and the reason I barely post here anymore is because some of the schoolyard shit and nastiness annoys, frustrates, and unnerves me. All of the back-and-forths relating to you on this thread haven't made pleasant reading, regardless of who they have come from, simply because it's pointless distraction from what could have been a really interesting thread on a very pertinent subject. I wish some others hadn't risen to your bait (as I have done as well now, oh well) because it just adds to the problem. But make no mistake, my belief is that you were the catalyst. I can't give any deeper an assessment of the whole situation than what I see here, since, as I said earlier, I am not privy to what you and/or others may have done before, what history you all have... I'm commenting purely on what I've seen in this thread.
And I really wish it would all just stop. But that, of course, is not for me to decide.
Its a losing battle. The more of these arguments that occur the more people will get drawn into them. And its always easier to join the larger side.
But the alternative is to allow them to win and make the boards a sterile, closed version of Facebook where new or different opinions and styles are unwelcome.
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
That's why you'd never take an argument such as mine on face value. Because you seem to be convinced that anyone who disagrees with you must be being swayed by others, and not acting from their own beliefs or observations. You believe that you can only ascertain the veracity of any argument against you if it is accompanied by an equal or greater argument against the people you are disagreeing with. You'll accept an argument against you only if it actually agrees with you.
Do you understand how silly that sounds?
