• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Where Is The Line?

Slyfox696 said:
And I bet you were the bitch for saying no, weren't you (at least in his eyes)?
Click to expand...

Well, actually, he wasn't rude about it. He's actually a really nice guy. Tbh, I was kinda in the wrong. Yeah, he did kinda just kiss me without warning, but I still overreacted a bit. But it's all good. We made up, and he has a girlfriend now.
 
TheGoverness said:
There seem to be a few people on here that are concerned with where the 'line' is drawn in regards to innapropiate sexual behavior. So I, TheGoverness, will be helping you all today in understanding what exactly constitutes innapropiate sexual behavior towards women. This is not a difficult concept to grasp. It's pretty easy, actually. If you are concerned with where the lines are drawn when it comes to women, how about this: don't try to touch a women in any sexual manner without prior consent. Simple as that. The line is very much clear and defined. That means that don't try to jump out of the shower naked trying to come onto a woman, and think that's appropriate behavior. Hint: it's not.

Did you write all of that down? I hope you did.

If you are still confused where the line is by this point, please seek medical treatment.
Click to expand...

I wish it were really that simple. The problem is that there are many behaviors and touches that one individual might think is sexual and another does not. For example, I am sitting next to a woman who is sobbing out about a tragedy that as befallen her. I put my hand on her leg as a gesture of comfort and support, but she takes it as sexual. I come up to you from behind, and place my hand on your shoulder briefly as a sign of friendship (on an assumption that for the example we know each other casually) and letting you know I'm there. You might take that as sexual in nature. What one defines as sexual is highly subjective. Sure there is common grounds on many things, but there is no universal grounds.

Looking at the shower thing. Mind you, this is not an excuse of what what's his name did (not bothering to look it up, but I did catch the reference to the incident), but looking at overall how stepping out of the shower naked is not always a sexual thing. What if the person coming over arrived early and someone else in the house let them in. The showering person might not know they are there, or before the other resident can tell them, they step out naked. Or the bedroom and bathroom are next to each other. Not expecting the visitor to be nearby, they step out naked intending to go straight to the bedroom and there is the visitor. There are many ways that a similar situation can arise that was never sexually intended, but the visitor can take as such.

The implication of your post is that anytime someone steps out of the shower naked to non-house members present it is sexually intended. May not have been your intent but it is there nonetheless.
 
MrWonka said:
I think that's largely due to your perceptions of your grandparents not reality. As much as it might weird you out to think about these things your grandparents were young once too. Your grandmother likely grew up in a time where women weren't even allowed to vote much less have much of a say in relationships.

Furthermore, while deeply religious people like to claim superior morality the reality is that religions like Christianity taught the broad power of a man over a woman. Many women were taught to be thrilled that any man whatsoever wanted to court them. If there were multiple suitors it was a smuch the decision of the girls father as it was the girls herself on who to choose.

Modern women aren't prudish, they just have more respect for themselves, and have fought to obtain more control over their own lives. It's something they always should have had.
Click to expand...

Modern women also have the uncanny ability to divert a guy's eyes away from her face. No excuse for a guy to take advantage, but why let it hang out if they don't want them to look?
I would also be very careful making false allegations about the so called deeply religious people.
Women fancy themselves hot stuff when more than one guy is hanging out, that isn't particular to religion. Being taught about men having power over them? You mean
Ephesians 5:22-33

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
Click to expand...

You confuse being a loving wife with being a submissive little punching bag, and don't give women enough credit.
 
MrWonka said:
Does the small of the back count as a sexual manner?
Click to expand...

TheGoverness said:
Depends on the intent.
Click to expand...

Sadly, it doesn't. It depends upon the touched person's interpretation. I could touch you in the small of your back with no sexual intent at all. But if you take it as sexual, then I have been put suddenly in the wrong, and told I am being sexually inappropriate.

MrWonka said:
What if I ask for consent and it's given, but the person I asked was a subordinate who might only be saying yes because she's worried about repercussions if she doesn't.
Click to expand...

Well that sounds like coercion to me, and that is not okay behavior in my eyes.
Click to expand...

If the intent is coercion, sure, but what if they are not intending to coerce, willing to drop it if the subordinate wants, but the subordinate still feels as described. Mind you, I am not condoning such situations in and of themselves, just addressing the concept that it must have been coercion simply because of the business relationship.

Sure, there are gray areas. A lot of consent is non-verbal, so that does factor into that.
Click to expand...
Sadly, your OP does not make it clear that you hold that gray areas exist. It implies a black and white line that is universal in its placement.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
What if it's my house. Do I have a right to be clothed in a manner or lack thereof of my choosing? (playing devils advocate here).
Click to expand...

While I agree with you, common courtesy says that you should at least be warning visitors of such a relatively uncommon practice, thus allowing them to decide whether they will be exposed to it. Common practice will of course be relative to where one lives.
 
Let me simplify this.



Don't be a dick to people.
 
Lovebug said:
Modern women also have the uncanny ability to divert a guy's eyes away from her face. No excuse for a guy to take advantage, but why let it hang out if they don't want them to look?
Click to expand...
Catching someone's eye from a distance, and having them gawk at you with drool coming out of their mouth are two entirely different things. Have you considered the possibility that's a test to see whether or not you're respectable enough to maintain eye contact.


Lovebug said:
I would also be very careful making false allegations about the so called deeply religious people.
Women fancy themselves hot stuff when more than one guy is hanging out, that isn't particular to religion. Being taught about men having power over them? You mean

You confuse being a loving wife with being a submissive little punching bag, and don't give women enough credit.
Click to expand...

Ummmm.....wow..... you own quoted verse........

Ephesians said:
22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
Click to expand...


The verse doesn't tell women to love their husbands, it tells husbands to love their wives. It tells wives to submit to husbands. In much the way a parent should love their children, but the children should "respect" and "submit" to the control of their parents. This verse as it is interpreted by wide swaths of the religious right absolutly demands women be submissive little punching bags to their husbands in everything. It tells husbands not to abuse that control, and make decisions for your wife that will be good for her, but it absolutley gives the man free rain to make final decisions regarding her life.

This verse is disgusting, and it is sad that you would have knowledge of it's existence, and still be okay with it.
 
MrWonka said:
Catching someone's eye from a distance, and having them gawk at you with drool coming out of their mouth are two entirely different things. Have you considered the possibility that's a test to see whether or not you're respectable enough to maintain eye contact.




Ummmm.....wow..... you own quoted verse........



The verse doesn't tell women to love their husbands, it tells husbands to love their wives. It tells wives to submit to husbands. In much the way a parent should love their children, but the children should "respect" and "submit" to the control of their parents. This verse as it is interpreted by wide swaths of the religious right absolutly demands women be submissive little punching bags to their husbands in everything. It tells husbands not to abuse that control, and make decisions for your wife that will be good for her, but it absolutley gives the man free rain to make final decisions regarding her life.

This verse is disgusting, and it is sad that you would have knowledge of it's existence, and still be okay with it.
Click to expand...

That is your interpretation.
 
KevinKohler said:
Let me simplify this.

Don't be a dick to people.
Click to expand...

Again, not so simple. There are things that I and people like me do that we don't think are dickish, but others might and have. Just because you don't consider something as being a dick, someone else might.
 
maquiscat said:
Again, not so simple. There are things that I and people like me do that we don't think are dickish, but others might and have. Just because you don't consider something as being a dick, someone else might.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but circumstances, time and perceptions change. We aren't the same people we were 20, 30 years ago.
We are constantly being told what is right and wrong, we are constantly being bombarded with opinions and trends, but we have to decide for ourselves what our limits are, what we can and cannot accept. Who is more susceptible to societal norms? The young, the old, the less or more educated, conservatives, liberals? I don't know, might just depend on how and where we were brought up, what role models we had.
 
joG said:
Dating? God forbid! I wouldn't even ask an employee into my office for a confidential exchange without a witness or a video. The risk is too great.
Click to expand...

I get edgy every time a female client asks to close my office door for a confidential conversation. It’s a tough decision. Do I prioritize client confidentiality or mitigate the risk of some kind of accusation against me?
 
TheGoverness said:
There seem to be a few people on here that are concerned with where the 'line' is drawn in regards to innapropiate sexual behavior. So I, TheGoverness, will be helping you all today in understanding what exactly constitutes innapropiate sexual behavior towards women. This is not a difficult concept to grasp. It's pretty easy, actually. If you are concerned with where the lines are drawn when it comes to women, how about this: don't try to touch a women in any sexual manner without prior consent. Simple as that. The line is very much clear and defined. That means that don't try to jump out of the shower naked trying to come onto a woman, and think that's appropriate behavior. Hint: it's not.

Did you write all of that down? I hope you did.

If you are still confused where the line is by this point, please seek medical treatment.
Click to expand...

What if she is your intimate partner?
 
TheGoverness said:
There seem to be a few people on here that are concerned with where the 'line' is drawn in regards to innapropiate sexual behavior. So I, TheGoverness, will be helping you all today in understanding what exactly constitutes innapropiate sexual behavior towards women. This is not a difficult concept to grasp. It's pretty easy, actually. If you are concerned with where the lines are drawn when it comes to women, how about this: don't try to touch a women in any sexual manner without prior consent. Simple as that. The line is very much clear and defined. That means that don't try to jump out of the shower naked trying to come onto a woman, and think that's appropriate behavior. Hint: it's not.

Did you write all of that down? I hope you did.

If you are still confused where the line is by this point, please seek medical treatment.
Click to expand...

This goes both ways... females grope men in bars/clubs. Men just shrug it off... laugh or push her gently away.
 
TheGoverness said:
There seem to be a few people on here that are concerned with where the 'line' is drawn in regards to innapropiate sexual behavior. So I, TheGoverness, will be helping you all today in understanding what exactly constitutes innapropiate sexual behavior towards women. This is not a difficult concept to grasp. It's pretty easy, actually. If you are concerned with where the lines are drawn when it comes to women, how about this: don't try to touch a women in any sexual manner without prior consent. Simple as that. The line is very much clear and defined. That means that don't try to jump out of the shower naked trying to come onto a woman, and think that's appropriate behavior. Hint: it's not.

Did you write all of that down? I hope you did.

If you are still confused where the line is by this point, please seek medical treatment.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a joke. Maybe the old timer's here will get it.

Gomer Pyle: "Miss Lou Anne, may I stick my finger in your belly-button?"

Lou Anne Poovie: "Why Gomer, I suppose I wouldn't mind that."

Lou Anne Poovie: "Gomer!!! That ain't my belly-button!"

Gomer Pyle: "SURPRISE! SURPRISE! SURPRISE! That ain't my finger neither!"

View attachment 67225260
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom