Breast-Feeding in Public

  • Lovebites xo

    Lovebites xo (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    26
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    @ Kurtni
    It's probably not medically beneficial past two years but quite a lot of women In Europe do breast feed until the child refuses the breast normally when they are toddlers (I get this from a documentary I saw about women who continue breast feeding till the age of six or seven)
    September 26th, 2012 at 10:18pm
  • folie a dru.

    folie a dru. (1270)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    36
    Location:
    United States
    @ Xsoteria
    Let me guess, you suggest her voluntary choice is to do it in the bathroom or cover up?

    ---

    As to the part where you said she didnt do anything wrong until she started attacking ... then don't include the part about women being out in public. I commented on what you said about the attacking as well, but you're the one who said the out in public thing. Don't say it if you don't want it commented on.
    September 26th, 2012 at 10:28pm
  • The Rumor

    The Rumor (365)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    31
    Location:
    Great Britain (UK)
    Xsoteria:
    I've been growing up with 4 babies at different times in my life, and never have I seen any of them feed for an hour. I honestly doubt that is the a common occurrence. But ok, we already determined that my penis is making my take on breastfeeding invalid so ok.
    Okay, so even if you forget the one hour part, I find it unreasonable to expect a woman to stand in a corner for twenty minutes, multiple times a day for months on end, simply because the alternative is her desiring a good amount of respect from passers-by. I'm not saying that people shouldn't look but to expect a breast-feeding woman to turn a blind eye to people being judgemental or downright rude to them seems unjust.

    I never said anything about your gender (in fact, I have previously made the point that women can be rude and unfair to breast-feeding mothers as well). I'd appreciate if you didn't accuse me of being sexist. I wasn't even aware you were male until people starting bringing that up and it doesn't matter to me in the slightest.
    September 26th, 2012 at 10:50pm
  • Xsoteria

    Xsoteria (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    35
    Location:
    United States
    The Rumor:
    Okay, so even if you forget the one hour part, I find it unreasonable to expect a woman to stand in a corner for twenty minutes, multiple times a day for months on end, simply because the alternative is her desiring a good amount of respect from passers-by. I'm not saying that people shouldn't look but to expect a breast-feeding woman to turn a blind eye to people being judgemental or downright rude to them seems unjust.

    I never said anything about your gender (in fact, I have previously made the point that women can be rude and unfair to breast-feeding mothers as well). I'd appreciate if you didn't accuse me of being sexist. I wasn't even aware you were male until people starting bringing that up and it doesn't matter to me in the slightest.
    I made that remark in regard to some other post, one which wasn't yours, so sorry about that. I didn't mean you were being sexist anywhere so far.

    As far as women turning a blind eye, I don't think that they should. I just think that there should be some balance in how everyone behaves, including women who breastfeed. I'd also like to reinforce my differentiation between those who look, and those who stare and ogle and what not.
    dru will wait.:
    @ Xsoteria
    Let me guess, you suggest her voluntary choice is to do it in the bathroom or cover up?
    No, I suggest she does what ever she likes, it's her reaction in different scenarions I have a problem with.
    September 26th, 2012 at 11:12pm
  • folie a dru.

    folie a dru. (1270)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    36
    Location:
    United States
    @ Xsoteria
    So how should she react when men are leering at her, in your opinion?
    September 26th, 2012 at 11:24pm
  • kafka.

    kafka. (150)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    32
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Lovebites xo:
    @ Kurtni
    It's probably not medically beneficial past two years but quite a lot of women In Europe do breast feed until the child refuses the breast normally when they are toddlers (I get this from a documentary I saw about women who continue breast feeding till the age of six or seven)
    In Central / Eastern Europe this definitely doesn't happen, feminist / women's health groups are having to make a lot of efforts to encourage women to breastfeed. I get this from being Central / Eastern European and getting involved with feminist groups / things there.

    What really baffles me in the whole 'women should just cover up if they don't want attention' discussion is the idea that being a creep is the necessary response to attractiveness. I would not try to frighten a woman I really didn't like by making comments about her body / staring at parts of it, why would anyone do this to women they like? It doesn't make any sense.
    September 27th, 2012 at 02:47am
  • charming.

    charming. (135)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    32
    Location:
    Australia
    Xsoteria:
    Expecting for everyone to bend over for you, while you make 0 effort in making it easier for them, you are in the wrong.
    Again, it is not unreasonable to expect appropriate behaviour, and it is not unreasonable to complain when someone is being inappropriate. That's like saying since people who go onto the street get mugged, if you get mugged on the street you can't complain. Of course you can complain. Because the mugger is in the wrong, not you. The level of transgression (legal vs social) is different, so the consequences should be different (e.g. prosecution in the case of robbery) but they are both transgressions of unacceptable behaviour and, as such, target for criticism/condemnation.

    The exact same logic you are using ("change your behaviour to minimise creepy behaviour from creeps, or you deserve what you get") is used to defend sexual harassment and assault. Unless you think inappropriate staring is natural and acceptable, I don't see how you are arguing this point.
    Xsoteria:
    Yes the man is here to tell you and put you in your place. This entire discussion is being severely obstructed by this general attitude, (which ironically enough, seems quite sexist) where either I'm made out to be some oppressor of women, or man vs woman, etc etc.
    Oh, the old "you're being sexist by pointing out sexism." If I was in a discussion with a group of people from a marginalised social group and they were unanimously suggesting I was being ignorant or offensive, I wouldn't try to play the victim. I'd take a second to work out why they all felt that way and potentially revise my position.
    September 27th, 2012 at 05:42am
  • Xsoteria

    Xsoteria (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    35
    Location:
    United States
    ^My position is thoroughly revised and well laid out. The frenzy which took place yesterday rarely had much to do with what I was saying, and most often to things I straight up never said, things I did say but were drawn out of context or whether or not I was a man and fitting to throw my opinion on breastfeeding (which I wasn't doing in the first place).

    So maybe, if at some point, you actually addressed what I was saying, instead of bouncing replies off of your own posts, I'd have reconsidered.

    I would mention the horrible and misplaced comparisons you keep making and so eagerly misinterpret and point out in my own posts, but the general futility of our conversation is just not motivating enough.
    September 27th, 2012 at 11:59am
  • charming.

    charming. (135)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    32
    Location:
    Australia
    Xsoteria:
    My position is thoroughly revised and well laid out. The frenzy which took place yesterday rarely had much to do with what I was saying, and most often to things I straight up never said, things I did say but were drawn out of context or whether or not I was a man and fitting to throw my opinion on breastfeeding (which I wasn't doing in the first place).

    So maybe, if at some point, you actually addressed what I was saying, instead of bouncing replies off of your own posts, I'd have reconsidered.

    I would mention the horrible and misplaced comparisons you keep making and so eagerly misinterpret and point out in my own posts, but the general futility of our conversation is just not motivating enough.
    The comparisons are valid, your comments were not removed from context, and your statements/position were what were targeted, not things you "straight up never said" or your gender, which is irrelevant except to make you removed from a) the female experience of sexism and b) breastfeeding [insofar as you have not breastfed an infant]. But if a woman were to say that women are responsible for the inappropriate behaviour of others, or if a woman was defending her 'right' to stare rudely / sexually / in disgust at a breastfeeding mother, I would criticise those positions. I've already said this.

    You're right on one, though, this conversation is futile if you're happy to maintain the basic sexist premises I've called you out on. Which I'm guessing is yes, since you're now describing a discussion where sexism arose as a "frenzy" on the basis of multiple women disagreeing with you.
    September 27th, 2012 at 12:34pm
  • Xsoteria

    Xsoteria (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    35
    Location:
    United States
    Again, you are telling me what I said and what I meant, while ignoring my previous explanationos and corrections. But since I'm such a splendid guy, I'll explain it again.

    Near the beginning of the discussion I made a distinction between rudely staring, ogling, harassing and simply looking. I'm pretty confident that at no point in this discussion have I mentioned that staring rudely is something I approve of. If at any point I did misword my attitude, I made sure in every other post and posts before it, to be clear in what I was talking about. If it did happen, it's simply due to an explosion of astonished responses which have stuffed my mouth full of words I didn't say or mean, that I digressed or used the word I didn't mean to. But I'm pretty sure it didn't happen.

    Summary: I am talking about non rude looking, non staring, nothing obscene, no guys sticking around watching pretentiously, no harassment, nothing.

    The problem is your rampant sexist attitude which automatically assumes that men are incapable of simply casually looking at things like this, without staring like a horny bull, with some twisted element behind it etc.

    Now. If looking casually, is indeed such a horrible thing, a creeper thing, then I can only assume it's because breastfeeding is something that shouldn't be seen in the first place. The whole talk about it being a wonderful natural act of nourishment, with nothing to be ashamed of, goes out the window.

    I don't think it's such a big deal if someone is breastfeeding their kid, it's a pretty normal thing. As a normal thing, it's nothing to be ashamed of. And as such normal occurrence, performed in public, being casually observed, is not a breach of some huge moral or social code.

    I considered drawing a picture, I'm good with commics and such, but that would probably be considered condescending. However, since I can't seem to reach you without pictures, I'll just pain one with words as best as I can.
    drawing:
    A man is sitting at a cafe table, sipping coffee, tampering with his phone, looking around - it's a busy day and stuff is happening around him. Accross him a table away or two, sits a woman with a small child. She starts breastfeeding her child.

    She becomes a part of the busy day scenary. She doesn't seem uncomfortable with doing this in a public place, makes no effort to show she's uncomfortable in this place, doing what she's doing. 'That's nice', he thinks. 'We really do live in an civilised and free society'.

    The man continues to sip his coffee, tamper with his phone, his eyes lead his thoughts away from the woman with the child. He's looking around. He DOESN'T AVERT HIS EYE GAZE. This sick, disturbed man keeps looking around, at things, without ever averting his eyes from the poor woman. At some point, this demented individual hears a giggle from the baby and it momentarily draws the attention of his eyes. He likes babies and thinks they're cute.

    He then returns to his phone. A moment later, he's looking at something on the street, whatever it is that drew his attention. There's stuff happening somewhere else, across the street and his demented eyes grossly slick past and over the woman to look at something on the other side of the street. It was a funky looking car, which he also likes. It's gone now.

    He takes note of some cute stuff the baby's wearing. He also notes that the woman has strickingly similar haircut to someone he knows. He moves on to do other things and look at other stuff.

    "Excuse me creeper, will you fuck off and stop looking my way?"

    "What?"

    "Don't what me, I'm breastfeeding a baby here, you can have the basic courtesy not to look?"

    "I'm sorry, I thought breastfeeding was a normal occurrence, at least in my family it was no big deal. You made no implications you were uncomfortable with being seen, so I just went about my business, regardless of whether or not you were breastfeeding a baby."

    "Well I am, and I shouldn't have to show you I don't feel comfortable doing this when someone is looking my way. You should know this without me having to tell you, show you, or imply it in any way. Despite it being perfectly normal to breastfeed in public."
    The only shame and abnormalisation of the act of breastfeeding, is brought about by her behavior. If she is ashamed of breastfeeding her child, then the act of breastfeeding is a shameful thing for her. If it isn't there is absolutely no reason for her to make an issue out of it?

    Allow me to remind you of my original post, and demonstrate how this entire argument, fueled by the constant misinterpretation of my words, and yes, straight up answering to things I never even implied to, has turned into a gross mockery of what I actually said.
    Xsoteria:
    It's true, she doesn't have to cover, but neither should you, a bystander, have to look away.
    September 27th, 2012 at 01:53pm
  • charming.

    charming. (135)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    32
    Location:
    Australia
    Xsoteria:
    Summary: I am talking about non rude looking, non staring, nothing obscene, no guys sticking around watching pretentiously, no harassment, nothing. The problem is your rampant sexist attitude which automatically assumes that men are incapable of simply casually looking at things like this, without staring like a horny bull, with some twisted element behind it etc.
    I mentioned "inappropriate staring" in practically every one of my posts. I was not suggesting in any way that all gaze is creepy or sexual which was why I repeatedly specified the behaviour I was objecting to. And you maintained that such behaviour was deserved because of the woman's "choice".
    Xsoteria:
    I don't think it's such a big deal if someone is breastfeeding their kid, it's a pretty normal thing. As a normal thing, it's nothing to be ashamed of. And as such normal occurrence, performed in public, being casually observed, is not a breach of some huge moral or social code.
    That's great that you see it that way. And many people agree with you. But many others do see it as a breach of moral or social code, and respond to it with the, again, inappropriate responses I've been talking about (leering, staring, gestures, comments, general shaming/harassment.)

    "Excuse me creeper, will you fuck off and stop looking my way?"
    "What?"
    "Don't what me, I'm breastfeeding a baby here, you can have the basic courtesy not to look?"


    Is this a scenario which ever/sometimes/often occurs? How does its occurrence compare to actual sexualised or disgusted stares? And if a woman has, over however many months or years, been subject to repeated occurrence of the latter, is it reasonable for her to be defensive when confronted with a man repeatedly looking at her child/breast? Having said that, I'm surprised that the person who has accused others on the board of using a straw man is relying on an imaginary instance of a single dubiously rude woman to justify their argument. Was your fictitious woman overly hostile? Sure, maybe. She misinterpreted a man repeatedly looking at her child/breast. I'm not saying someone who launches into a tirade of abuse is always in the right. And your fictitious scenario tempts us to side with the guy. However, we're in the man's head in that scenario. We have absolute proof that he is not staring in a creepy or hostile manner because we know what he is thinking. A woman who notices a man repeatedly looking at her has no such proof, and may have reason to assume the opposite - maybe he has an angry or creepy 'thinking' face; maybe she caught his eye enough times that it seemed like staring; maybe she's inferring from experience; maybe she just has a bad feeling about him; you or I might disagree with her reasoning, but it may have led her, nonetheless, to feel threatened by this man, whom she knows nothing about other than that she has caught him looking or staring at her or her child.

    The whole 'social contract' idea you brought up earlier is an ideal that doesn't take into account social power or, in this situation, social vulnerability. (Not to mention that a central part of it is that transgression is punished, again supporting that individuals have a right to complain of ill treatment within it.) A woman with an infant is in a more vulnerable position, and at risk of more, than a man who is looking at her. As such, even though I wouldn't support the abusive language your fictional woman used, as she is not in an ideal, nonviolent, universally-accepting-of-breastfeeding world, I support her right to voice her discomfort.

    Presumably a reasonable man would respond with, "I apologise for making you uncomfortable - it was not my intention, and I think you misinterpreted a few glances as staring. But as we live in a rape culture, I see how your distress might have arisen, and as such will employ the minimal effort to stop you feeling at risk of harm, by either looking away as you've asked, or explaining this to you and convincing you I meant no such harm."

    There is no real effort or harm in not staring at a person. There is effort in trying to exit a situation to find somewhere out of the public eye, and there is [potential] harm from strangers if a person does not do so. If you value reasonable action, it remains the responsibility of the staring stranger to merely avert their eyes. Is the alternative to explain to a woman that they have a right to look at her? If I'm at a bus stop at night and a person is 'looking' at me, I might say nothing, but I would love to be a person with the confidence to ask a stranger to stop doing something which is making me uncomfortable. They have no reason or right to make me uncomfortable. If they did have such a right, why would we have indecent exposure laws? Why not let a man masturbate to women on buses? Because no-contact harassment can still be harassment. If you're not talking about acts with overt ill-intent, that reduces it to a) a mistake on the part of the person who feels harassed, or b) a mistake on the accidental-harasser's part. In either case, the experience of harassment is present. If the woman doesn't say anything, the man is no more 'unjustly' attacked than if she didn't notice him at all; if she does say anything, again, he has the option of not looking at a person or of responding to the 'unjust' attack.

    If a man is wrongly accused of 'staring' (in whatever way, sexual, disgusted) at a woman's [clothed] breasts or butt, the same thing happens. He can either say "I wasn't staring, I'm sorry if you feel objectified, I was just glancing around and/or admiring your shirt/pants" or he can just look away. If he responds with "I can look where I like" and continues looking (probably, by this point, overtly) at her breasts or butt, I'm not going to applaud him and give him an award for protecting Men's Rights and the Social Contract. He's made her feel uncomfortable. If her comment ("Please stop looking at me") has made him feel uncomfortable, he can express that. If she felt uncomfortable and he says her calling him a creeper (when he wasn't creeping) has made him feel uncomfortable, probably she can empathise, they can both apologise, and everyone can move on with their lives not making others feel like they can't do normal everyday public things. I don't know I don't see how any of this is extreme or unreasonable. Neutral

    sorry for the wall of text
    September 27th, 2012 at 03:05pm
  • Xsoteria

    Xsoteria (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    35
    Location:
    United States
    ^Well this is actually the first time I'm getting the feeling you read my post, instead of relapsing into some strange monologue where I'm playing a secondary role of someone who's there for inspiration's sake at best. I know you (and some others) were talking about rudely staring, making generally uncomfortable atmosphere etc. That is why, if you look back, I tried making it clear what I was talking about, something which somehow passed unnoticed as you kept coming back with the staring and ogling and what not. When I went and said that I wasn't condoning staring ogling etc. and was talking about looking, you just sort of went pass that and focused on other parts of my posts, in context of your previous posts where YOU were talking about rude behavior.

    As for the imaginary woman in the story, someone in this thread said their reaction would be to tell the passerby to fuck off. I objected to the supposition that it's ok for someone to respond rudely to non rude behavior (looking as opposed to staring etc).

    The rape culture argument may ba applicable in some cases, but blatant sexist assumption that all men are rapists in disguise I can't agree with. If there's a real statistical probability that a woman will be raped at some point, it still doesn't excuse her from being rude with no basis, other than her everpresent fear of being raped.* Statistically, American white woman are more likely to get raped by blacks than people of other races. Does this mean it's perfectly fine for them to be racist and rude to black people? I don't think so.

    Having to talk against the population on the recieving end of some form of discrimination or poorer social position in regards to some things, isn't something I'm doing gladly, but I don't think that political correctness is doing its job if it simply creates more incorrectness by giving leeway to the oppressed ones, specifically leeway which will not help them in the least and doesn't contribute to their goal (breastfeeding women are allowed to go apeshit on random people, simply because they felt threatned, contributes nothing to the actual climate of women being globally allowed to breastfeed in public).
    September 27th, 2012 at 03:52pm
  • Xsoteria

    Xsoteria (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    35
    Location:
    United States
    That said, I'm all for civilised conversation and resolving things like human beings. If a man constures a woman's behavior as indifferent to the fact that someone sees her (she doesn't appear to have the need to cover up, move to a less visible position or location or whatever), so he acts casually about it, not really taking care of his eyes' direction, and the woman asks him not to look her way for whatever reason - is a perfectly fine request. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, as long as it's civil.

    That said, I think women should be the first one not to be ashamed of stuff like that, and once they all get into the mindset where someone casually looks at them/their way, everyone else will slip into the same mindset more easily. Though that may be wishful think on my part, I don't know.
    September 27th, 2012 at 04:06pm
  • charming.

    charming. (135)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    32
    Location:
    Australia
    Xsoteria:
    blatant sexist assumption that all men are rapists in disguise I can't agree with.
    I think you've misunderstood me/feminists. It's not an assumption that all men are rapists (despite that rape is actually under-assumed, not over-assumed, in society - studies have found that something like 1 in 14 men will admit to having raped someone if it's not referred to in the study as 'rape' - and looking at the prevalence of discourse/language, still, today, blaming/disbelieving victims - and all the other terrible rape myths/stereotypes) - it's an understanding that any man might be a rapist - even if you said, "Hey, not me, I'm really close to the women I know and they know they're safe with me" - the fact is that women are more likely to be raped by an acquaintance/friend/relative than by a stranger, so that's not of itself a comfort. And, still, any man you see on the street might be a rapist (this happened today.) While men are raped (and the various stigmas regarding the matter are appalling) it is not something the vast majority of men have to walk around being aware/wary of. Having said that: earlier you were against bringing up rape in this discussion, so I don't really want to go into it. But it's not just rape that women have to be constantly aware of - there are other elements of rape culture (and sexism more broadly) which impact on women and their experience of/in the world (from men and also other women), some of which I mentioned in my last post as reasons for why a woman might respond like that. Women's bodies being shamed or sexualised is a constant thing and a big deal. I was being completely sincere when I said it's great you see breastfeeding in such a positive and healthy way, and I wish the world was like that. But it is not, and the reality of that does matter to this (and, well, all) discussions.
    Xsoteria:
    Statistically, American white woman are more likely to get raped by blacks than people of other races. Does this mean it's perfectly fine for them to be racist and rude to black people?
    Is that statistic true? In terms of what it is implying about rape predisposition? I would believe that black men are more frequently arrested and convicted of rape, but I am skeptical that they are more likely, inherently, to be rapists. The power white men wield in society - socially, politically, economically - and because of these things, legally - is probably what skews those statistics. So it would be a misunderstanding of that information to act, as a result of it, racist and rude to black people.
    Xsoteria:
    if it simply creates more incorrectness by giving leeway to the oppressed ones, specifically leeway which will not help them in the least and doesn't contribute to their goal (breastfeeding women are allowed to go apeshit on random people, simply because they felt threatned, contributes nothing to the actual climate of women being globally allowed to breastfeed in public).
    I still disagree that feeling threatened is somehow not enough to justify a response. The response itself, in the situation, might not be appropriate but I would prefer to side with the person who has experienced feeling threatened rather than the person who has intentionally or unintentionally made another feel threatened; and, on the side of the alleged victim, we would then be able to ascertain whether that threat was fair or legitimate. The police don't demand proof before they take on a case, they [in theory; and, again, rape culture - myths about the prevalence of false reporting, as well as disbelieving certain classes of victim etc - may create the opposite in some situations] assume the testimony of a victim, immediately given, is true, and work to find evidence supporting it. The "innocent until proven guilty" idea, for instance, is not about denying that a crime has occurred or that a victim has suffered, but rather that evidence should be brought to prove a specific person was responsible for the harm/damage. But, like you're drawing a line between glancing, staring and leering, I don't see why there wouldn't be a perfectly reasonable line between requesting someone stops glancing/staring, and the abuse you've suggested - which I don't really think occurs in perfectly innocuous circumstances, and, even if it did, is quite far removed from 'a request to cease an action'; verbal abuse and foul language are in a number of jurisdictions offences. If your response to someone's non-criminal behaviour becomes criminal - e.g. the whole 'gay panic defence' - the situation has shifted to such a degree that the original premises, e.g. women have the right to not be ogled, may want revising. (E.g. "women have the right to be ogled but do not have the right to stab the ogler with cutlery.")
    September 27th, 2012 at 04:45pm
  • Lovebites xo

    Lovebites xo (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    26
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    @ kafka.
    I agree with you there, no one has the right to make a woman feel uncomfortable when it comes to feeding a child. I also have nothing wrong with people being curious, its only natural especially with young children. I think we need to be more open about it in public otherwise people are always going to be prejudicial.
    September 27th, 2012 at 05:03pm
  • kafka.

    kafka. (150)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    32
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Xsoteria:
    The rape culture argument may ba applicable in some cases, but blatant sexist assumption that all men are rapists in disguise I can't agree with. If there's a real statistical probability that a woman will be raped at some point, it still doesn't excuse her from being rude with no basis, other than her everpresent fear of being raped.* Statistically, American white woman are more likely to get raped by blacks than people of other races. Does this mean it's perfectly fine for them to be racist and rude to black people? I don't think so.
    This was on my (Tumblr) dash this morning and it's so relevant here:
    Quote
    There’s a poisonous double standard in our society which says that it’s reverse-sexist and wrong for women to feel threatened by creepy-awkward male behaviour because our fear implies that we hold the negative, stereotypical view that All Men Are Predators, but that if we’re raped or sexually assaulted by any man with whom we’ve had prior social interaction – and particularly if he’s expressed some sexual or romantic interest in us during that time – it’s reasonable for observers to ask what precautions we took to prevent the assault from happening, or to suggest that we maybe led the guy on by not stating our feelings plainly. The result is a situation where women are punished if we reject, avoid or identify creepy men, and then told it’s our fault if we’re assaulted by someone we plainly ought to have rejected, avoided, identified.
    Also, it's really preposterous to claim that women are made uncomfortable by men looking at them in a sexual(ized) way because they're 'ashamed' of their bodies - liking my body and wanting it to be the public property of any random male who happens to pass by are very different things. Many men are under the impression that women's only purpose in life is to get 'male attention' and we're quite simply overwhelmed with joy whenever a man judges us based on how we look, but this is complete nonsense - a lot of the time awkward 'glancing' and other kinds of creepy behaviour do make women feel ashamed of their bodies because combined with the victim blaming rhetoric of ~you got raped because you wore a short skirt~ they encourage women to believe that their bodies are unusually and uncontrollably sexual / 'tempting'.
    September 28th, 2012 at 09:17am
  • Xsoteria

    Xsoteria (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    35
    Location:
    United States
    ^I would like to point out that, in the part of my post you quoted, I was rather specific in saying that the part I considered rude, or wrong, was where the woman had no basis for assuming the man was a potential rapist, other than her own prejudice or fear. Which excludes people who behave suspiciously, "creepy" or anything of the sort.
    September 28th, 2012 at 06:30pm
  • Xsoteria

    Xsoteria (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    35
    Location:
    United States
    @pravda.

    Well we basically agree on the lines we would draw, I think. The responses of women differ in intensity and civility, as well as observer's/passerbyer's ettiquette and level of interest and active observation (ie. creepiness or however would you call it).
    September 28th, 2012 at 06:36pm
  • charming.

    charming. (135)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    32
    Location:
    Australia
    Xsoteria:
    I would like to point out that, in the part of my post you quoted, I was rather specific in saying that the part I considered rude, or wrong, was where the woman had no basis for assuming the man was a potential rapist, other than her own prejudice or fear. Which excludes people who behave suspiciously, "creepy" or anything of the sort.
    If someone I encountered in public had an unreasonable or irrational fear or belief set and felt threatened by my behaviour, but I could allay (somewhat) their fears by politely acceding their request/s (where they were as minimal as "Please stop looking at me") I would consider myself grossly in the wrong to refuse to comply purely on the basis of principle/ideology. Why create or maintain someone's suffering/discomfort for that, when it costs me nothing and does not actually infringe on my rights or comfort to willingly comply? Alternatively, if a woman's "everpresent fear of rape" (which you phrased in what comes across as a scorning or trivialising way, un/intentionally) is not logical or healthy (to your mind) wouldn't that make it (arguably, though I disagree) an illness? Why not exercise a very, very small amount of effort (not looking at a person) to stop an ill person feeling anxious, uncomfortable, frightened, threatened, whatever they're feeling? (Though, just to be clear, I am really against pathologising a woman's response to the harmful, really terrifying system of power she finds herself in the grip of. Being afraid - even constantly, yes - for one's safety, as a woman, in a sexist rape culture, is not an irrational response.)

    Notwithstanding that, as kafka and myself have pointed out (and as one of the links in her linked article argues very well), what you consider creepy or suspicious behaviour is not necessarily the same threshold others have, and you don't get to decide what should or will make others uncomfortable. And if creepy/suspicious behaviour is on a continuum, and does rely on factors like who is involved and where and when and whatnot (i.e. appropriate behaviour amongst your friends or your family or your culture or your superiors or your coworkers may differ, or being indoors/outdoors, or time of day) surely we should be looking firstly at the actual effect of the behaviour, and secondly at justificatory abstractions.

    Although I think I've said all this in my above post. Great that we can agree on the lines (e.g. that verbal abuse may be out of line) but I still feel you're dismissing the subjective experience of the woman - which is actually the main point which defends her right to respond/confront the alleged creeping - in favour of some kind of objective idea of what constitutes creeping, as though we can clearly define it and then punish those that fall within it. To a degree (e.g. when they breach the law) this is true. But when it's about a subjective feeling of danger/risk, I don't think this is feasible or fair on the person who has been victimised (intentionally or not.)

    And, again, "You are making me uncomfortable, please stop looking at me" is such a minor request. And, again again, I think the huge scene and verbal abuse is either strawman in that it doesn't happen [if she was uncomfortable with one person's attention, why would she draw the eyes of everyone in the vicinity?], or a red herring, in that nobody here is arguing that criminal levels of public disturbance / verbal abuse / threats should be permitted in response to incidental glancing. Arguably that level of response would not even be appropriate if the staring was more pronounced. Though if it was quite frightening, drawing the attention of others to protect oneself or stop the attention or have the [actual] creeper removed seems fine. In terms of keeping the peace, a quiet word with the manager or security might be more appropriate, but the point is an immediate sense of threat - an emergency, of sorts - which is, to my knowledge, available in most/every legal jurisdiction as a defence for otherwise less appropriate behaviour.
    September 28th, 2012 at 07:03pm
  • OhHushLyss

    OhHushLyss (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    32
    Location:
    Great Britain (UK)
    Before I go on, I must admit I haven't read all this forum fully, I read up to page five and then skimmed through the rest of the pages, sorry.

    Like others have already said my little one doesn't like to eat covered, he kicks off and refuses to eat for another hour or so! He likes to play whilst he eats and will often pop off to smile at me or to have a nosey round - when he does and I'm out in public I'll qucikly pull my top down so no-one sees :)

    When we went out in public in the very beginning I used to go to the feeding room and feed him there so that it would just be him, me and his dad and no-one had to see anything, but the room was plain and absolutely disgusting. I refussed to go back there after we went in one day and there was an open dirty nappy just lay there in the middle! So now I feed him whilst sat in a cafe or just wherever I am, as long as I can sit down :) haven't yet mastered being able to walk and feed out of the house. As of yet I've had no complaints off anyone or any funny looks. But if I did, I would certaintly kick off.
    Not sure what it's like where you all live but round mine, I show less skin whilst feeing my child than some people do just nipping to the end of the street, hell I could walk around topless and still be flaunting less skin than some people.

    At the end of the day, breasts were initially for feeding an infant, and thats what I'm going to use mine for, if you don't like it then you don't. Enough said. I'm not saying no one can pull their face about it, but if you were to aproach me and pull your face I would more than likely give you an earful, well depending on how you worded it. In all honesty I'd rather see a group of women nursing their child in public than people who eat like pigs and act like total idiots.

    And for those who have mentioned that it is likely the older generation/poor/rich people who choose to breastfeed. It's not the case, it's personal preference and what the child wants. A few of my friends wanted to breastfeed and weren't able to as their child didn't take to it and or just couldn't cope with it in the very begining. I know I was close to giving up at first as ny little one wouldn't latch on properly and it became rather painful but I pushed through and we're going great, although he still doesn't latch on properly now.... I've was thinking of moving him onto bottles whilst I wheaned him but the way he treats my boobs at time and his water bottles I'll no doubt end up going through five teats a day!! ...
    September 30th, 2012 at 01:53am