SEXIST MARRIED ASS HAT GETS ASS HANDED TO HIM (Video)

[doxydad]

Here's how the woman described this interaction:

"I almost made it all the way to my office in peace this morning when I passed these two businessmen who loudly faux-whispered 'Minnesota chicks are HOT' at me. I wish I had the composure to remind them that some day we may be across from one another in a professional setting, and that this type of interaction makes it hard for me to feel like I would be treated with professionalism and respect. But in the meantime, he got my card and a brief conversation about why making those kinds of comments to women as they walk by make them uncomfortable."

http://www.upworthy.com/married-dude-is-shocked-woman-he-sexually-harassed-stands-up-to-him-takes-him-down-tapes-it-all?c=upw1

[oberliner]

1. That is sexual harrassment?

Whispering "Minnesota chicks are hot" to a friend when a woman walks past you?

[redqueen]

2. OMG I know right?

Dudes can't even sexually objectify random women on the street anymore without some uppity feminist explaining why it's wrong, even if they do it quietly!

[oberliner]

3. I am just asking if that is sexual harrassment

I think the woman had every right to say what she said to those guys if the remark pissed her off. And every woman (and man) should feel empowered to do so.

I just ask if what the man said in and of itself is sexual harassment.

If an attractive woman walked past me and my friend and I said to my friend "Wow, that woman is attractive!" and she heard me - would that also be sexual harassment?

[The Magistrate]

4. You Would Have To Ask Her, Sir....

[oberliner]

9. OK

Thanks for the response.

[Laelth]

11. Hmm ...

The term "sexual harassment" (as it refers to a crime in many jurisdictions) can not be defined simply by the opinion of the person who has been subjected to some unwanted behavior.

I assume you agree with that, and, if so, it is not up to any individual woman to decide what does and does not constitute sexual harassment.

-Laelth

[The Magistrate]

15. No, Sir, In This Context I Do Not Agree

A foolish question deserves a flip answer, and in this instance the flip answer is quite correct.

The term has both a colloquial and a legal meaning, and it is obvious the former was meant here, since there is no case on record where a single instance of saying 'you are attractive' to a stranger has been prosecuted as crime, or served as basis for a successful civil suit, and yet it is abundantly evident that many women consider themselves harassed by comments strangers direct at their appearance which they overhear. Some women may enjoy hearing such a statement, depending on how it is couched and in what circumstances, however, and so there is no way a person overheard making such a comment could know if it was taken as harassment or not except to ask her....

[oberliner]

17. Correct me if I'm wrong

But are you suggesting that if the woman is not bothered by the comment then it would not be sexual harassment? Even if other folks would identify the remark as being sexist and insulting?

[The Magistrate]

19. I Would Consider The Reaction Of The Person Addressed The Most Important Factor, Sir

If a person is not bothered by something said to them, why should they care what someone else thinks of it?

[oberliner]

27. The content of what is actually said is not the most important factor?

I am asking to be educated - please, to anyone reading this, excuse my ignorance, no offense is intended.

Let's say a server at a restaurant greets customers with "What can I get for you beautiful ladies?" or "What can I get for you handsome gentlemen?" - if said ladies or gentlemen feel that comment is offensive then it would be fair to say that the server's comment constitutes sexual harassment?

Or would it have to be something more akin to the remark in the OP like "You chicks are so hot" or something that, in and of itself, would be viewed by more people as being degrading?

That was why I asked if it would be different if the person said "that woman is attractive" vs. "Minnesota chicks are hot" - to what extent does the content of the comment itself matter?

Again, I am asking to be educated - please, to anyone reading this, excuse my ignorance, no offense is intended.

[The Magistrate]

29. The Term You Are Looking For, Sir, Is 'Situational Awareness'

When you are in the presence of other people, you ought to have some read on whether a comment or action of yours would be appropriate or not, would be welcomed or unwelcome. There is no rule for this, because people are distinct individuals, and even individuals will vary in their reactions by mood or altered circumstance. You have to pay attention, and cultivate a sense of empathy. Personally, I presume familiarity is unwelcome, because I seldom welcome it myself, but sometimes it does seem the thing to do even so.

I would expect a waiter addressing a table of women as you suggest would probably be favorably received, and I would also expect he would have a sense of when it would not be, and it was best to try some other opening gambit to display friendly hospitality.

[Laelth]

18. We are in dangerous territory here.

When we use the same terms for crimes and torts that we also use for "colloquial" meanings, as you suggest, we imply criminal and/or tortious behavior when no law defines such behavior as either a tort or a crime.

In this case, oberliner asked what I consider to be a very good question. If we assume either the criminal or tortious meaning of the term "sexual harassment," it appears that you agree that saying "Minnesota women are hot" is neither criminal nor tortious. I am glad you agree with that.

Any person is entitled to their own point of view regarding what does and what does not constitute "sexual harassment" in the "colloquial" sense, and that is the point it appears you were making. With that I agree, but I am uncomfortable using the term "sexual harassment" in this "colloquial" sense because the term implies serious legal repercussions that I do not believe are warranted in a situation where the alleged criminal or tortfeasor says, "Minnesota women are hot."

-Laelth

[The Magistrate]

21. Only If One Is Trying To Be Deliberately Obtuse And 'Stir The Shit', Sir

Because you know perfectly well the behavior described was boorish, and offended the dignity of the person it was addressed to, and so was something a gentleman ought to have refrained from, though of course, a jerk would not only feel free to do it, but feel justified in doing it, and even claim to be affronted and insulted when called on doing it.

[Laelth]

31. I agree with your description(s).

Last edited Wed Aug 6, 2014, 08:11 AM - Edit history (1)

The behavior in question was, indeed, boorish, potentially offensive, ungentlemanly, and, even, jerky.

However, I still think it's dangerous to conflate "colloquial" terms with legal terms of art that carry serious legal repercussions.

-Laelth

[calimary]

14. Well, let's consider the "Minnesota chicks are hot" comment on its face.

Sexual harassment? This woman would say YES. "Chicks." Yeah. That's what we are. Why would they use "chicks" to describe female humans if not a term of minimizing classification. "Hot." Hotness. A yes. Hot - as in firing up the sexual juices perhaps? The ability to hoist the wand, as it were? Better be careful to avoid that four-hour erection, 'eh? "Hot" - which part of me is hot Mr. Man? My boobs or my ass? I'm sure you aren't driven to hardness by looking at my hands or my nose. Certainly not imagining my MIND. Or my BRAIN. Or my CHARACTER.

Dear oberliner - it's JUST. DAMN. TIRESOME. The comment "Minnesota chicks are hot" is nothing but - a prelude to think about how much they'd like to fuck her. Pardon my crudeness, but it fits the situation, I think. That's ALL WE ARE??? Boobs and booty with legs walking around? It's not an isolated incident.

Full disclosure here - I'm one DUer who has a real bone to pick about the world of appearances. Especially regarding women. How we're judged as "valuable" mainly because of our looks. It's always about how we look - as in - how fuck-able do we seem? ALL THE DAMN TIME!!! OVER AND OVER. If a man is ogling a woman and commenting on how "hot" she is, the clear and obvious takeaway is NOT that he wishes to engage her in the local debating society or the next archaeological dig or legislative conference. He imagines taking her to bed. PERIOD. As in - gee, I guess that's all we're good for, isn't it?

And it's DAMN FRICKIN' TIRESOME, my friend. GET. OVER. IT.

[oberliner]

16. Thanks for the response

I get why the comment pissed the woman off and I support her in calling out the guy who said it.

[calimary]

26. Thank you. It's amazing to me how much re-education is desperately needed in our society.

And NOT JUST IN THIS CASE!!! But this certainly IS one case.

It's just staggering - a DAUNTING task ahead when one considers the work that still needs to be done.

We have to re-educate the public about climate change.

We have to re-educate the public on the value of - AND NECESSITY OF - government.

We have to re-educate the public about the value of public education.

We have to re-educate the public about the critical importance of keeping church and state SEPARATE.

We have to re-educate the public about the value, importance, and vital public NEED - of the paying of taxes.

We have to re-educate the public about the value and necessity of simple compassion and empathy, which since bush/cheney have been objects of derision and scorn.

We have to re-educate the public about the very message of Jesus Christ our Lord. HE'S NOT THE ONE WHO SAID "If you don't work, you don't eat." HE'S THE ONE WHO SAID "feed my lambs, feed my sheep"; "look at the lilies of the field who neither toil nor spin yet not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed like one of these"; "the birds in the air do not work yet your Heavenly Father feeds them - are you not worth more than these"; and "whatever you do to the least of these, you do to Me..." You know, all that loving, tolerant, accepting, caring, compassionate bunk.

And yes, we have to continue to re-educate the public about the entire notion of the woman, the female. We're here on earth to do, accomplish, and produce more than just baby-making. I suppose it would be the same as to think that the only thing all men were good for or valued for - was how measurably hard or long they could get, or how many women they could satisfy at one sitting.

It's the objectifying. To paraphrase the "it's the economy, stupid" slogan from James Carville, once upon a time, "it's the objectifying, stupid." (Not saying you're stupid, oberliner.)

[oberliner]

28. That YouTube site has many similar videos

It is extremely depressing.

[chervilant]

7. "I'm just asking..."

Sigh...

[redqueen]

34. It's depressing, in these discussions,

how much focus is placed on what men may legally get away with.

Ignoring completely, of course, which actions that polite, considerate behavior might dictate.

[chervilant]

5. Seriously?!?

I'm shocked -- shocked, I tell ya -- that you would ask this question without using the sarcasm emoticon!

[oberliner]

8. OK, sorry

I withdraw the question and apologize for the ignorance.

[chervilant]

12. If you're asking in good faith,

intent upon learning how NOT to be sexist, then I fully support your inquiry. It's just so frustrating that we feminists are STILL fighting this battle. (Uphill all the way, apparently.)

[oberliner]

13. I consider myself a feminist

I realize that I have a lot to learn about what that means and what that entails. Being from a different generation, it sometimes takes a little while to catch up. I am always up for being corrected on my ignorance and adjusting accordingly.

[Dreamer Tatum]

20. The rules of the work environment apparently apply to everyone, everywhere, at all times.

Maybe people who get offended by complete and utter strangers making a comment
they weren't meant to hear and which was none of their business can appeal to
some meta-HR director. Someone who can sit these men down and say that saying
something to someone that might offend someone else, anywhere, ever, will NOT be
tolerated.

[chervilant]

6. I can see already

more candidates for my IL...

[oberliner]

10. No offense meant

I was just asking what I guess was a stupid question.

Apologies.

[calimary]

22. A gentle question back to you -

Last edited Mon Aug 4, 2014, 12:52 PM - Edit history (3)

I'm guessing you're male? It's kind of a syndrome, I think. Many men are NOT liberated, despite everything we women, we feminists (ME for sure! I'm rather PROUD of that term and the reforms, advances, and social maturity we feminists have tried to encourage since the '70s!) have attempted to foster. A man would never know or understand how it is to be regarded as a mere piece of meat. Back in my day, one of the big books we all read when we weren't supposed to - was "Portnoy's Complaint" by Philip Roth. Perhaps the most memorable moment in that book was when our poor hero, obsessed with the process of ejaculation, was so driven by his hormones that he actually violated the piece of liver he found in the family fridge one afternoon - "and then had, again, at the end of a fork" at dinnertime. That was SO KEY for me. Woman might as well be a piece of liver. We seem to serve the same function, don't we? A vessel. Or a container. In the Men's Pleasuring Department of your local full-service department store.

It's a reduction. A reduction and demeaning and diminishment of us as PEOPLE. As creative, contributing, valued PEOPLE. We're more than one-half of the world population. We are the TRUE majority. And we're still viewed by much of (male-dominated) society as nothing more than objects. Mainly container objects. Our value is what you put into us. Your "instrument" as it were, or your seed.

YEESSSSSSSSSS I know, biologically it's a basic thing. We were the ones into which an extra internal container was installed. Not just the container for food. Or the containers for liquid and solid waste products. Or the containers for filtration. Or the twin containers for air. But there comes a point where we're forced to ask - Is That ALL We're Here For? Is that our only value? Are we little more than cattle being judged at auction for milk production or quality of beef? Are we little more than superficially pretty ornaments outside the home and mere brood mares inside? Is THAT all we are? Is that ALL we're worth? Sure seems like it, especially when reinforced by the WOOHOOOOs out there snap-judging us for - I'm sorry but - our fuckability?

Don't mean to pile on you but I guess when you pose that question... this is the response that's provoked. I see I'm not the only one, here. And some of us are still chafing from being on the receiving end of that for most of our lives.

This is just me bloviating some more, here, but it seems to me what we are fighting is the AGE-OLD notion of woman as less. Children of a lesser god, as it were. Woman as property! Woman as a mere thing. A commodity to be bought, sold, traded, stolen, brokered in one way or other. Hell, men were doing that with their own DAUGHTERS!!! Selling them to the highest bidder for strategic or familial ulterior motives. Marrying them off as soon as their cycles started so they could - do what? Mainly BREED. Men were never "valued" in quite that way. Men have never known that diminishment. Men have never known that societal attitude - that you're a mere thing. Men have never been regarded as mere property. Men have never had to taste that bitter wine, much less have that bitter wine the ONLY wine they ever get served. Men have never had to know or understand, And they need to do both. That, seems to me, is the essence of the feminist imperative. Doing away with THAT. Evolving away from THAT.

[oberliner]

23. I get where you are coming from

I was just asking because I am not entirely clear on what constitutes sexual harassment and what doesn't.

Edit to add: Yes, I am male.

[laundry_queen]

41. Good post.

You speak for me.

[Sheldon Cooper]

30. Are you a woman? Have you ever walked down the street and just *knew* that if you

saw any men, sooner or later one of them would open his mouth? You don't need to be Carnac the Magnificent to figure it out - we fucking *know* this shit is going to happen.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

32. My cell phone has video capability. I thought most of them do, at this point.

And yes, it is usually a question of when not, if this shit will happen.

[calimary]

33. Unfortunate. And true. And DAMN TIRESOME.

[Sheldon Cooper]

36. The fuck are you going on about, Courtesy Flush?

In the midst of the gibberish, I did notice that you didn't answer my question. Interesting...

[Sheldon Cooper]

38. lol!

I'm having a great day and you are making me laugh. Do go on.

[Logical]

40. I wish she had these idiots on video and posted it on you tube! nt