Has making a pass at a woman just become illegal?

Chris Wilson said:
It's dreadful, women going demurely about their business, not seeking any attention, sexual comment or impropriety, it's simply appalling that men might look at them as sexual objects.
Click to expand...

So maybe all those women should be made to wear burkas?

Maybe men should learn to leave the caveman behind. There is nothing wrong with a woman choosing to wear what the hell she wants. That does not give a barely eveolved neanderthal the right to make her feel uncomfortable.

It's exactly the same as blaming a man for being mugged when he chooses to wear a rolex.
 
sidimmu said:
Evidence/sources needed for "sex crimes are rising due to immigration from specific countries" please.

No one wants sex crime to increase. But to claim all of our sex crime will increase due to immigration is racist and potentially untrue.
Click to expand...
I've already posted it.
 
Hodders said:
So maybe all those women should be made to wear burkas?

Maybe men should learn to leave the caveman behind. There is nothing wrong with a woman choosing to wear what the hell she wants. That does not give a barely eveolved neanderthal the right to make her feel uncomfortable.

It's exactly the same as blaming a man for being mugged when he chooses to wear a rolex.
Click to expand...


A man wearing a Rolex might be advertising his wealth, a woman showing as much of her body as she can is probably advertising her wares. Some might find that hard to believe, or even accept, but they aren't dressed like that in December because they are too warm, they are seeking bodily attention from men.

I really don't understand why some blokes deny this, I have to wonder if their partners or daughters go out with female friends looking like that, and they are in some sort of denial of what's really going on.
 
Last edited:
Tony Edwards said:
lol you dont half post some nonsense sometimes.

We have not had a left leaning government in at the very least 13 years.
Click to expand...
All the things people on the right complain about as been done under the Tories.

The biggest trick the Tories do is fake outrage and blame it on Labour.
 
nlel1975 said:
I’ve never walked by a fit girl and wolf whistled or called out “alright luv fancy a shag” in fact I’ve never even asked a girl out. Just surprised that eye contact with a stranger is considered sexual harassment. I’ll be more careful where I aim my gaze in future not wanting to make someone feel uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

Hyperbole much :rolleyes: No one is getting arrested for catching someone's eye.
 
Hodders said:
So maybe all those women should be made to wear burkas?

Maybe men should learn to leave the caveman behind. There is nothing wrong with a woman choosing to wear what the hell she wants. That does not give a barely eveolved neanderthal the right to make her feel uncomfortable.

It's exactly the same as blaming a man for being mugged when he chooses to wear a rolex.
Click to expand...

You notice how he completely ignores the burka comment. He is basically making the exact same argument as Islamic men, men can't be held responsible for their actions when women flaunt themselves in front of them. The irony is delicious.
 
... he didn't make a pass though, they collided, and she thought it could be a sexual assault .. maybe jury will award plaintifs damages and an Oscar.
 
Tony Edwards said:
But the law is not for 'normal interactions'. Its against the abnormal and laying them out so it is clear. Harrasment is not okay anymore.
Click to expand...

But I clearly highlighted in my post that there is often a perception that gets skewed.

Take me for example, I know that I am easy going, grew up in a superb family with great values. I'm very rounded with everyone and I would feel 100% confident that if you asked anyone that they would agree that I'm perfectly decent.

If it transpired that a law would be introduced that could possibly criminalise my actions if they were misinterpreted then it's a problem. Because I would not take that risk. And that's a huge problem as it leads to even further divisions.

And to reiterate I'm not saying me slapping someone on the arse, I'm talking about a misunderstanding willfully or innocently....

We have already seen this in the office environment. I don't do meetings with women alone in a closed office especially in different countries when I travel. I KNOW that 99.99% of women are decent but I'm not going to leave myself exposed.

You can make the case that I'm hyper aware, but we are living in a society that is extremely judgemental and lacks nuance.

And in the end, everyone loses.

So I'll repeat, are the existing laws not fit for purpose and is it worth over legislating for the small amount of edge cases?
 
Regardless of exactly what it is that is criminalised, there's a potentially more sinister side effect of this - most of the (potential) crimes being mentioned here are going to be almost impossible to prove and unlikely to have witnesses.

So either the supposed victim's claims are accepted at face value and the accused is deemed guilty regardless of lack of evidence, or the new law is basically pointless because there will be no way of proving what happened

Participant said:
Probably wise.

The way it's going you could face a charge of involuntary manslaughter by laughter.
Click to expand...
You mean themslaughter? :p
 
Last edited:
@skipper847

and how the hell is that statement calling people names?

Oh sorry, now you're going to go into meltdown and a hissy fit because you just say stuff and don't have to give a reason because the Mods have now given you a free pass to say anything you want.
 
Haggisman said:
So either the supposed victim's claims are accepted at face value and the accused is deemed guilty regardless of lack of evidence, or the new law is basically pointless because there will be no way of proving what happened
Click to expand...

Think of it this way when the laws passed, the "muscled, bronzed and tattooed bricklayers" won't be wolf whistling at ladies walking by because they might get in trouble. The creepy old guy that's following a young lady around the shop staring at her might think twice about it. It's not necessary for the law to rack up convictions if it changes behavior
 
mattx4 said:
Think of it this way when the laws passed, the "muscled, bronzed and tattooed bricklayers" won't be wolf whistling at ladies walking by because they might get in trouble. The creepy old guy that's following a young lady around the shop staring at her might think twice about it. It's not necessary for the law to rack up convictions if it changes behavior
Click to expand...

I think you're giving people too much credit ;)
 
I’m 47 and am not interested in 18 year old women. They say the biggest age gap should be half your age plus 7, so for me that would be 30.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom