Female Reader Has Interesting Perspective on NY Bill to Make Staring at Women a Crime

2007-12-03
By

Background: Recently I told you about a new New York bill which would make staring at women a crime. I wrote:

“I agree that in some cases staring at women can be rude. Making it a crime is quite another matter. I would also add that some women do everything they possibly can so men will look at them. Or if that’s not their intent, they sure make it seem that way.”

Sheba Jones, a reader, had an interesting comment on this issue. Sheba wrote:

“Ladies, keep in mind you can’t pick and choose who gets to see your butt when you wear a short skirt to try and impress the boss or the hunk in the mailroom. If you’re that worried about it, wear something else. You can’t always depend on someone else to be polite and not look when it’s right in their face.”

This seems very fair to me. Much of what women complain about is not that men are looking at them, but instead that the wrong man is looking at them. It’s not fair to condemn male onlookers for this (within reason), particularly since a man usually doesn’t know whether he’s the right man or the wrong man.

I offer for example the picture above. The woman is clearly dressed to bring as much sexual attention to herself as possible. She goes a little overboard for my tastes, but what man wouldn’t look? And why shouldn’t he? And what does she have to complain about?

17 views

  • http://home.earthlink.net/~jamiranda/GWPindex.html Burton

    This seems very fair to me.

    Glenn, you need to understand that “fair” is a patriarchical concept like “logic” and “reason” which men use to oppress womyn. :)

  • Sweater

    I think that making it illegal to look at someone is ridiculous especially since sometimes women and men do it on purpose to receive that gawking stare (especially that picture above) and I think that laws like these are so far removed from the actual issue that it makes the actual issue disappear into the background or seem less legit. What I think (hopefully) the reasoning behind that law is to stop sexual harassment or uncomfort for women while they are walking/driving/being outside of a private residence. But, from the women I have met that would dress like the girl in the picture above, they LIKE that and seem to need that extra attention to make themselves feel better… but not all women do, but still receive that treatment, which would make the women NOT looking for it uncomfortable. My fiance for example. She is slightly above the average attractive woman, is 4ft10 and about 100 lbs, with a full curvy figure. She HATE highheels, make-up and doing her hair daily… so she generally dresses in flat shoes, normal (not tight) jeans, and tanks or t-shirts. None of the clothing that she wears is particularly revealing in any way, and she just looks like an average person, not someone looking for attention like the girl in the photo above… but she has been cat called, and beeped at while walking down the street. She has had people follow her, tell her that they have heard that ‘short girls are good in the sack and would like to find out’, smack her on the ass, etc. She does nothing to provoke those responses in other men, and I have actually been present (although across the room) during times where she is being assaulted by other people. Also, she has actually been ‘forced’ to fake a phone number out of a man’s persistence. She was afraid of them, because after saying ‘no’ several times, they were almost pinning her to against a wall in a clothing store, so eventually she gave them a fake number so they would leave her alone. I think that, the true rationale behind the law mentioned above it to help stop the issues I mentioned above, that my fiance has faced. I’m sure that everyone that reads this site knows someone…especially a female that has experienced something similar… and equally as awful… and I’m completely enraged at the stupidity of the law mentioned above (again) because it completely takes away from what the situation really is, and it is a sorry attempt to improve the said situation.

  • JamesH

    In muslim countries women who wear makeup are punished.

    Now in the west they want to punish men who look at women. I think that there were monarchy’s where it was a crime to look at the monarch.

    It seems that in the effort for equality, instead we are faced by more and more efforts to create oppressive laws.

  • JohnG

    I don’t understand why people are so preoccupied with feel-good legislation that accomplishes nothing.

    Who’s going to enforce this?

    How would you even prove it?

  • PolishKnight

    I would imagine that someone being overly rude and leering at this woman would be more afraid of the blue-collar Joe-six-pack on her arm. He looks like he just came off of a construction site.

  • amfortas

    I was once upbraided by an obnoxious exhibitionist for ‘looking’ her way. “Stop looking at my breasts” she proclaimed, nay commanded, loudly, in a cafe, with a clear intent to embarrass. I hadn’t even noticed her as my mind was elsewhere.

    Nevertheless, she was put back in her box by my equally loud voice as I replied, “Madam, there are 2000 million women in the world with breasts – that is 4 thousand, million breasts. There are more breasts on display than there are vehicles on the road. Some are quite pretty. Why on earth do you think ANYONE would bother looking at your very ordinary, bog-standard ones? I would rather look at a truck”.

    I actually got a round of applause.

  • Artfldgr

    the ‘men’ in this lawsuit are the bangladeshi cab drivers that sit waiting for passengers. no one ever even checked if you can see anything from the staircase. meanwhile, there are a few medallion yellow cab companies in vallones area. they have harrassed the livery guys for years, even building a concrete island with lock fence (which looks odd), so that at this one stop at 36th st on the N,W line in astoria makes no sense (unless you live in the area and have watched them try to keep the guys away from that corner for some reason).

    two birds with one stone

  • mruffolo

    More anti-male laws from a feminist government: politicians kept busy passing legislation; police are busy enforcing; clerks kept busy collecting fines; judges and lawyers keep money flowing their way; and, jailers are busy too.

    Though America is home to about 5% of the world population, she holds about 25% of the the world’s prisoners.

    No surprise. Expect more.

  • cybro

    Chicks love this law. They would love to complain about some guy who went to jail for staring at her. That’s why stick their breasts at as all over the place. So they can complain how guys are always staring at their breast. They love it. It’s a total ego trip for them. Next time one them does it to you just say “hey nice stretch marks”. Watch how mad they get.

  • GreatMRNI

    Soon these ill-logical morons will be issuing tickets to people who don’t brush their teeth three times a day. It’s a feminized nanny state of a country, but oh, it feels so warm and fussy. Fussy for sure, warm, not so much!

  • fourthwire

    “Who’s going to enforce this?
    How would you even prove it?”

    Well that’s rather simple to explain……
    As soon as some feminazi gets a bug up her butt, she pressures the local law enforcement to use their resources to hold a stakeout and walk undercover policewomen around selected areas, using cameras to capture men staring at those individuals, then arresting them.

    Just as it’s not necessary to “prove” jaywalking, neither is it necessary to “prove” that men were staring at the undercover policewomen.

    The feminazis of New York would be thrilled, providing more political support for the DA’s, judges, and others supporting enforcement of such a law.

    The madness continues. Your tax dollars at work here.

  • cybro

    “Who’s going to enforce this?

    The cops will.

    How would you even prove it?”

    They don’t need prove all they need is a chick to point the finger at you.

    There are simular laws like this in Singapore already. I know someone that got arrested for staring at a chick for to long. The guy was an idiot but hey it happened.

    If you want to see how it works in action I suggest viewing the movie Rogue Trader were Nick Leeson (Ewan McGregor aka Obi-Wan Kenobi) is arrested for offending the modesty (blah ha ha) of some chick in a bar. Yeah, lots of modest chicks in bars.

  • mruffolo

    “Who’s going to enforce this?
    How would you even prove it?”

    Similar to Violence Against Women LAW (Ladies Always Win) is now enforced. Before the judge, her word against yours. The police are instructed to rest without discretion. Result is a man with arrest record for his next employer at a job interview to review and $1,000 in addition legal costs.

    Remember the Duke boys. A whore with semen from five different men in her and none of it yours, could get a man arrested for sex he did not have.

  • mruffolo

    Nuts and bolts of DV from a lawyer

    Domestic Violence in North Carolina

    “I am an attorney in NC and see first hand the abuse of the domestic violence statutes. Domestic Violence Protective orders are issued like candy Ex Parte by judges to pretty much whoever asks for them which typically grant exclsive use of the parties’ residence for at least ten days, immediately makes it illegal for the Defendant to possess a gun of any sort, generally offers an initial grant of custody of children, among many other things. Although a hearing must be held within at lease 10 days of the issuance of the order, what happens in a significant number of cases, is the Complainant strips the house of all belongings, whether or not they are hers or his and the be time, he gets his day in court, he has been significantly damaged.

    Further, all it takes to get an Assault on a Female is to appear before a magistrate and swear what you are telling him is true. As, I have never, seen a purjury prosecution when it turns out what the alleged victim says is not true, there is an incentive to lie. Once the Defendant is served with the warrant he must serve at least 48 hours in jail, unless a District Court Judge is present to set bond as Magistrates are not allowed to set bonds in AOF cases for a least 48 hours, despite they set bonds in all other criminal cases. Finally, sometimes, when a man and a woman get into a fight assault warrants are issued agaisnt both parties. The man is charged with AOF, a Class A1 Misdemeancor with a maximum punishment of 150 days. The woman with Simple Assault, a Class 2 Misdemeanor, with a maximum punishment of 60 days but with mandatory probation unless she has a significant prior record.

    So much for equal protection under the law.”

    http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2007/11/26/feminists_abuse_domestic_violence_laws?page=full&comments=true

  • jackal1994

    That tattoo she’s got might as well be a bullseye

  • http://www.false-accusers.com TheManOnTheStreet

    Lets see…

    Tiny shirt to show off boobs to men.. check!
    Stripper shoes to show off legs and ass to men…check!
    Slut stamp on back to draw mens eyes to her backside….check!
    Shorts three sizes to small to properly draw mens eyes to cameltoe and ass…check!

    All the legal forces of the land making it illegal for men to look…check!

    Unreal….

    PS, it looks almost like she and her boy-toy are heading into a den… no?

    TMOTS






Search