Starker on 11/1/2018 at 13:47
Well, Finns don't really do bodily contact in general when they meet people, do they?
Kolya on 11/1/2018 at 14:17
Quote Posted by Vasquez
It almost seems like we're mostly all agreeing, we just look at the matter from such different povs that it seems like we're disagreeing.
Is it Christmas again already?
Vasquez on 11/1/2018 at 14:19
Whaat, Starker? :D Finns shake hands like normal people, pat each other on the shoulder etc. I'm 49, not one of the young hip generation, but even in my circle of friends and acquaintances it's very common to hug when we meet (okay many of those are writers and other artists, so maybe we're just being outlandishly bohemian :joke: ). But, seriously, Finns are not nearly as reserved as other people think.
Also we go to sauna naked, even with strangers, and yet somehow manage not to get an unstoppable urge to grab anything we see.
Hmm. I'm approaching the conclusion that Finns are more advanced than other cultures ;)
Starker on 11/1/2018 at 16:38
Ah, in my experience, if Finns are touched, for example in a way an American might casually touch your hand during conversation, they recoil. Let alone more intimate greetings like cheek kissing. And you seem to need quite a bit more personal space than other cultures. I once saw an American and a Finn "dancing" across the room during a meetup, the American stepping closer and the Finn backing away.
Tony_Tarantula on 11/1/2018 at 16:51
Quote Posted by SD
No, he knows exactly what he's doing. He relies on the fact that most people will not actually bother to check whatever source he's misrepresenting. I'm sick to death of it.
Quoted it as presented.
And if you actually read the source material, it's pretty clear that they wish they hadn't banned him at all and it has jack shit to do with any altruistic reason: they just are pissed that the blowback is hitting other people.
It's actually MORE DAMNING: They think that if they hadn't banned Weinstein then more people doing the sexual harassment would be able to keep getting away with it.
Dia:
Quote:
Anyone with half a brain should be able to determine whether or not the person they're trying to hit on seems interested in them. It's not fucking rocket science. Bottom line: don't be a dick (see Vas' post above). That said, I'm totally sick and tired of all the over-analyzing, dissecting, what-aboutism, and what-ifs going on in this thread. Sorry to hear about your GAD, Vas; I seem to be suffering from anger issues lately.
Great to know that you give so little of a shit about people with Asperger's that they literally don't exist to you.
Besides which I've been noticing a pretty clear trend where the most salacious and bizarre accusations happen: I think there's a pretty clear trend emerging (in regards to the headline news cases at least) that liberal culture IS rape culture.
Which should surprise absolutely nobody who understands the actual academic roots of the postmodernism that underlies modern progressive thought. It's worldview that (if you take the academics at the helm of the movement at their word) repudiates all values other than power and equality, and interprets all events in the world through the lens of groups oppressing other groups without acknowledging the intrinsic value of individuals that the Christian tradition of "Logos" held dear....so OF COURSE powerful males are going to exploit those they have control of both sexually and otherwise. Their nihilistic worldview dictates that they should do whatever they wish to please themselves and damn the harm it causes others.
Historically speaking there's damn good reason why the oligarchs and monarchs have always hated religions (except those controlled by the state like Anglicanism): because independent religion popularizes the concept of moral principles that supersede any secular authority and therefore undermine the perceived legitimacy of abusive oligarchs. When the state is the highest moral authority (kind of what we're seeing today in modern America where Corporate committees determine what is acceptable) then whatever the oligarchs by definition can not be "wrong".
For that Tea video....yeah, that's great, if your audience is confused, sheltered, upper middle class males in a first world who don't know their own ass from a hole in the ground.
Exactly how far do you all think "teaching people not to rape" is going to go with either low functioning psychopaths (ex-cons, gang bangers, bikers, etc) or high functioning psychopaths (like corporate executives, Wall Street Lawyers, etc)? It's going to do jack shit. The problem isn't that they don't know what rape is. It's that they don't give a shit about anything except what they want and don't have any qualms about harming others to get it.
But let's be real: this kind of thing is designed ENTIRELY to shape values and attitudes among the kind of people who live in gentrified neighborhoods in coastal metropolis cities while working in upper middle class white collar jobs. The lower stratas of society don't even exist to these people and when their existence is acknowledge it's mostly either with an attitude of hatred or one of patronizing condescension.
Starker on 11/1/2018 at 17:36
The fuck are you on about, Tony?
The article does not say what you're claiming. This only demonstrates your poor reading comprehension. Again.
Not even going to comment on the strawman bullshit about modern progressive thought. As if you understand anything about postmodernism or the modern academia. Is this the next area you claim to be an expert in?
Ever heard of the divine right of kings? Or cuius regio, eius religio? Heck, even now you can see how the church is coddled by Putin in Russia. Rulers have embraced and used religion since time immemorial to derive authority from it and bolster their power. Just look at all the American presidents or even senators who are expected to be religious and very comfortably are so.
And clearly the idea of the tea video is not to teach people not to rape. It's to inform people about consent by way of an analogy. Which surprisingly is a murky grey area even in this thread. Not to mention that most rapists are not random psychopaths, but "ordinary upstanding citizens" that go too far. You are more likely to be raped by someone you know than a stranger.
Vasquez on 11/1/2018 at 17:53
KOLYA!! Thank god I didn't sip my tea when I opened this thread :joke:
Starker, yes, we like having more personal space and we're not, like, constantly touching each other :D And the older generations (older than me!) probably have more of the "never touch me unless we're in a fistfight" -types.
But I doubt even a Finn would mistake a casual touch to the arm to be sexual (obv depends how it's done, if you slowly stroke up and down while leaning closer or something, that might be different), even though s/he might not feel totally comfortable with it. And I recognise the backing off -dance, too, been known to take a step or two myself ;)
Harvester on 11/1/2018 at 18:04
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
Great to know that you give so little of a shit about people with Asperger's that they literally don't exist to you.
I have Asperger's and yes, it can be hard for me to get a feeling for when it's appropriate to initiate physical contact with a woman. I could just "steal a kiss" or something and tell by the reaction whether it's appreciated. But if it's not appreciated, I would have already made the woman uncomfortable, and that's the last thing I want. So because it's hard for me to tell when it's okay to touch a woman, I'm extra careful to initiate physical contact. That was not a problem with my wife because I knew her through and through, but when I first got to know her it took us a few meets before I was confident enough there was enough of a connection there to initiate the friendly Dutch "3 kisses on the cheeks" greeting when saying goodbye at the end of the evening. For reference, you do this to your aunts and cousins, it's really not sexual.
Last Friday I hosted a party for several co-workers and ex co-workers. One of them is a woman who until recently worked where I work. I'm quite fond of her, she's been very nice to me after my wife's passing and she's just fun to be around. We had a great time that evening and talked a lot. When she was leaving at the end I touched her upper arm with my hand for about 2 seconds when I told her I was glad she came and to drive home safely (no 3 kisses on the cheek or hug). That's the absolute farthest I'd go in such a situation, and only because I felt there was a connection that evening and we've had a reasonable amount of contact lately. I was actually worried she might not appreciate it, but she's still friendly to me and makes jokes to me on Facebook, so I guess it wasn't a problem. I would've liked to hug her that evening, but I can't sense whether that would be okay, so I decided against it. I suppose there wouldn't have been anything wrong with asking "can I give you a hug?" but I didn't think of it then.
In summary, I feel people who are for whatever reason less adept at sensing the vibe for when it's appropriate to touch someone should be extra careful. That might reduce their chances of getting laid, but it also reduces their chances of crossing women's boundaries.
Starker on 11/1/2018 at 18:17
Vasquez, yeah, I didn't really mean to put it in absolute terms. I was actually thinking more of Finns as compared to other cultures. I'd say you have more in common with the Japanese than other Europeans like the Italians or the French, as far as physical contact is concerned. But of course it might be just my own bias talking. And I've not been to Finland for a long while.
