Has making a pass at a woman just become illegal?

Chris Wilson said:
The bill also says "cause alarm or distress", telling some woman she has a nice backside could elicit a beaming smile or could result in her claiming she now suffers nightmares and is afraid to leave the house. Mark my words if this bill passes there will be plenty of ultra feminists adding it gleefully to their arsenal of weapons.
Click to expand...
Maybe, if an individual doesn't understand why a woman might feel upset or even threatened by being told she has a "nice backside", they are the reason the law is being put in place?
 
Hodders said:
Maybe, if an individual doesn't understand why a woman might feel upset or even threatened by being told she has a "nice backside", they are the reason the law is being put in place?
Click to expand...

Have you ever wondered why so many women go to some very considerable trouble and probably endure some real discomfort in skin tight jeans if not to show off their backsides? If no man took any notice the fashion would die out in a year. I have yet to have any derogatory retort from politely and humorously complimenting a woman on her figure. I fear some women will use this law, should it pass, to humiliate or damage a man for what was a complement.

I just asked my wife if such a remark made to her in good humour by a stranger would offend. She replied it would not and mumbled something about "if only".
 
Chris Wilson said:
Have you ever wondered why so many women go to some very considerable trouble and probably endure some real discomfort in skin tight jeans if not to show off their backsides? If no man took any notice the fashion would die out in a year. I have yet to have any derogatory retort from politely and humorously complimenting a woman on her figure. I fear some women will use this law, should it pass, to humiliate or damage a man for what was a complement.

I just asked my wife if such a remark made to her in good humour by a stranger would offend. She replied it would not and mumbled something about "if only".
Click to expand...
Why do women wear makeup?
 
Sexually flirtatious compliments work well in the right context, this normally isn't to a random woman on the street, though I'm sure many men have pulled this off successfully
 
Chris Wilson said:
Will inappropriate facial expressions be next to legislated against?
Click to expand...
If you go around with a facial expression like this Id hope so. ;)
maxresdefault.jpg

Chris Wilson said:
The legal test of a "reasonable person" that someone suggested I look up is claimed to be an objective test, whilst in reality any such metric is highly subjective. The test in tort was devised as a test of the actions of the perpetrator, but its now seemingly shifted to the belief of the recipient.
Click to expand...
Not when defining it in the legal sense it's not, when a judgment is passed by the courts it's no longer subjective it's objective. It stops becoming something that's judged based on the feelings of each individual and it becomes a judgment that's based on facts, the fact that the courts and law of the land that you agreed to be bound by have ruled that it was or wasn't. Don't like it? Go live on a desert island.
 
From the direction this is going, I don't think the underyling reason is about anything of a sexual nature.

Since social media makes people the centre of their own universe, many are living in a grandiosity bubble and simply don't want to interact with people unless they opt in to it. Anything else is seen as a mild threat at best.

I've noticed for a while that people will choose the technologies that minimize human interaction. People drive cars because it's convenient but also they're not in contact with the riff-raff. Technologies like self-service checkouts, home grocery deliveries, home working etc are also in that category.

So I expect that in future this will tip-toe towards any kind of communication. Much like anti-spam laws but in the real world. The "real world" / "digital world" dichotomy is fast disappearing. Who knows what will become of that but it seems to be heading in the direction of the film Equilibrium.
 
I love how much it seems to anger people that Chris Wilson has been in what must be a successful marriage given that it's lasted 45 years.
 
Orangeade said:
But overall I find this thread quite depressing as several names I recognise as being slightly older and thus assume they've already had a life of "normal" interactions in which they have rightly had no fear about such laws.... and now don't seem to care about what happens to the future generations.
Click to expand...

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