Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Back to forum list |
Back to The Lounge |
Jump to newest |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Last time I had the misfortune to be on the tube I had a woman call me out for looking right at her as she could apparently see me eyeing her up thru my sunglasses, so I took them off and let her see why I had sunglasses on underground as just come from moorfields eye hospital due to having surgery, my friend with me then threatened to call the police on her for abusing a "blind old man" seems people get offended for almost anything or will be offended for someone else just incase they didn't feel offended." So sorry that happened to you, I mean it is kinda ridiculous. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I try not to stare on the tube, out of politeness. Even when I see a super hot woman. Guess it's just not in my personality to stare, I like to think I'm more discreet than that. I doubt I'd like it if someone stared at me too. I can see why the OP might spot guys eyeing her up though " I mean mostly in the street, but it’s such a brief moment that I don’t mind it as much. I can see when being close and someone is basically undressing u with his gaze, well I see why that’d make people uncomfortable. Id just move and sit somewhere else if that was the case tho | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m a big fan of the thousand yard stare, don’t take it away from me …" You can stare x but it makes me laugh how some of you can’t even seem to be able to make it kinda not so obvious | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
". Has anyone actually been arrested for staring at someone?! What if they have something wrong with their eyes? Autistic people do that a lot too. Are they going to arrest them all? Jesus wept " I often go in to a bit of a day dream daze and not really realise I'm doing it. Its one of those tricky things for sure. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
". Has anyone actually been arrested for staring at someone?! What if they have something wrong with their eyes? Autistic people do that a lot too. Are they going to arrest them all? Jesus wept " I don’t know but it definitely encourages people to report it to the British transport police with phone line and all | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Cannot stand being stared at by strangers in public. It really creeps me out. An unknown man, staring at a lone female in public is creepy as fuck! I don’t mean a glance, I mean prolonged staring. I’m always really arsey now and say “what are you staring at?”, can’t help myself." I imagine that's what the sign is aimed at. That kind of behaviour. But - almost impossible to police and open to false accusation. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I try not to stare on the tube, out of politeness. Even when I see a super hot woman. Guess it's just not in my personality to stare, I like to think I'm more discreet than that. I doubt I'd like it if someone stared at me too. I can see why the OP might spot guys eyeing her up though I mean mostly in the street, but it’s such a brief moment that I don’t mind it as much. I can see when being close and someone is basically undressing u with his gaze, well I see why that’d make people uncomfortable. Id just move and sit somewhere else if that was the case tho " That makes sense, having to endure being mentally undressed by someone for a whole 20 min tube journey must be uncomfortable. I'm usually tired on the tube (going to or from work), so tend to just put my earphones in and zone out. It's crazy that it's a problem which requires it's own poster and threat of legal action now. I wonder if its got anything to do with face masks making it seem like people are staring more, as all you could see are their eyes? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"OP will you kindly cover your new lady bumps up please!!! " NEVER! Im just waiting for the warmer days so I can join Euphoria high | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
". Has anyone actually been arrested for staring at someone?! What if they have something wrong with their eyes? Autistic people do that a lot too. Are they going to arrest them all? Jesus wept I don’t know but it definitely encourages people to report it to the British transport police with phone line and all " Fucks sake. Don’t think I’ve ever been stared at. I’d probably just stare them out. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
". Has anyone actually been arrested for staring at someone?! What if they have something wrong with their eyes? Autistic people do that a lot too. Are they going to arrest them all? Jesus wept I don’t know but it definitely encourages people to report it to the British transport police with phone line and all " I wouldn't be able to get on the Tube or train for someone to stare at me and phone the BTP anyway | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
". Has anyone actually been arrested for staring at someone?! What if they have something wrong with their eyes? Autistic people do that a lot too. Are they going to arrest them all? Jesus wept I don’t know but it definitely encourages people to report it to the British transport police with phone line and all Fucks sake. Don’t think I’ve ever been stared at. I’d probably just stare them out. " I get the slurs and the violence and the mugging and all. But this seems a bit insane and also, what do you say? Somebody started at me I wanna report him?! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I saw one of those posters on the tube at the weekend OP, and had a similar discussion with my friend. My friend was saying how can staring be harassment? There is a big difference between a quick glance at someone, and prolonged staring which can and does make people feel uncomfortable. I've had it happen to me, in my place of work and it made me very uncomfortable and I felt it was inappropriate. I'm all for eye contact and smiling at people, but staring, feeling like you're being watched going about your business, isn't acceptable " Yes I see your point, I kinda am wondering what constitute as staring to be able to report it etc | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
". Has anyone actually been arrested for staring at someone?! What if they have something wrong with their eyes? Autistic people do that a lot too. Are they going to arrest them all? Jesus wept I don’t know but it definitely encourages people to report it to the British transport police with phone line and all Fucks sake. Don’t think I’ve ever been stared at. I’d probably just stare them out. " We'll have to have a " Staring " contest ..you seem quite confident.. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
". Has anyone actually been arrested for staring at someone?! What if they have something wrong with their eyes? Autistic people do that a lot too. Are they going to arrest them all? Jesus wept I don’t know but it definitely encourages people to report it to the British transport police with phone line and all Fucks sake. Don’t think I’ve ever been stared at. I’d probably just stare them out. We'll have to have a " Staring " contest ..you seem quite confident.. " Bring it on | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So I was waiting for the tube the other day and I noticed this huge posted by the British Transport Police about Staring … or better inappropriate staring And it said something about intrusive staring is sexual harassment and isn’t tolerated and encouraging to report the crime to the BTP Now, my question is, what constitutes an inappropriate staring? Is it staring somebody for too long inappropriate? It seems very vague but no wonders everyone is afraid of looking at everyone on the tube and end up staring into a shitty ad! Or anywhere else, for that matter. Is this getting all a bit absurd? I have to say, I see people being generally extremely careful in close proximity, but yeah I noticed the motorists to be the most obvious, maybe because they are in the car and I’m walking so it puts distance? Some of y’all tho are literally not even bothered to try and look a bit careful and coy (like moving urself to have a better view and check out type obvious) when in cars but either way, I usually just mumble to myself “can you be any more obvious!?” And just carry on walking! " It's the next step to totally immasculate men. The New World way of life. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I saw one of those posters on the tube at the weekend OP, and had a similar discussion with my friend. My friend was saying how can staring be harassment? There is a big difference between a quick glance at someone, and prolonged staring which can and does make people feel uncomfortable. I've had it happen to me, in my place of work and it made me very uncomfortable and I felt it was inappropriate. I'm all for eye contact and smiling at people, but staring, feeling like you're being watched going about your business, isn't acceptable Yes I see your point, I kinda am wondering what constitute as staring to be able to report it etc " Or what evidence is required if the staring, surely can’t just be someone’s word for it, that opens a whole over can of worms | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I saw one of those posters on the tube at the weekend OP, and had a similar discussion with my friend. My friend was saying how can staring be harassment? There is a big difference between a quick glance at someone, and prolonged staring which can and does make people feel uncomfortable. I've had it happen to me, in my place of work and it made me very uncomfortable and I felt it was inappropriate. I'm all for eye contact and smiling at people, but staring, feeling like you're being watched going about your business, isn't acceptable Yes I see your point, I kinda am wondering what constitute as staring to be able to report it etc " That's kind of it, somebody could decide that a glance is staring. So they go and report it... But then what? What actually happens? Do the police and swat team come swooping in to arast the guy that just so happened to look in a direction at the wrong time. There are just some things that might be uncomfortable but it can't be completely controlled. I don't quite like, and would feel very uncomfortable of being wrongfully accused of something that is not even on my mind nevermind the last thing. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So I was waiting for the tube the other day and I noticed this huge posted by the British Transport Police about Staring … or better inappropriate staring And it said something about intrusive staring is sexual harassment and isn’t tolerated and encouraging to report the crime to the BTP Now, my question is, what constitutes an inappropriate staring? Is it staring somebody for too long inappropriate? It seems very vague but no wonders everyone is afraid of looking at everyone on the tube and end up staring into a shitty ad! Or anywhere else, for that matter. Is this getting all a bit absurd? I have to say, I see people being generally extremely careful in close proximity, but yeah I noticed the motorists to be the most obvious, maybe because they are in the car and I’m walking so it puts distance? Some of y’all tho are literally not even bothered to try and look a bit careful and coy (like moving urself to have a better view and check out type obvious) when in cars but either way, I usually just mumble to myself “can you be any more obvious!?” And just carry on walking! " they judge it by the amount of drool hanging from the chin 1 inch ok 5 inch dodgy a foot get in the stocks hope this helps | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So I was waiting for the tube the other day and I noticed this huge posted by the British Transport Police about Staring … or better inappropriate staring And it said something about intrusive staring is sexual harassment and isn’t tolerated and encouraging to report the crime to the BTP Now, my question is, what constitutes an inappropriate staring? Is it staring somebody for too long inappropriate? It seems very vague but no wonders everyone is afraid of looking at everyone on the tube and end up staring into a shitty ad! Or anywhere else, for that matter. Is this getting all a bit absurd? I have to say, I see people being generally extremely careful in close proximity, but yeah I noticed the motorists to be the most obvious, maybe because they are in the car and I’m walking so it puts distance? Some of y’all tho are literally not even bothered to try and look a bit careful and coy (like moving urself to have a better view and check out type obvious) when in cars but either way, I usually just mumble to myself “can you be any more obvious!?” And just carry on walking! It's the next step to totally immasculate men. The New World way of life. " Yes it really is unacceptable that men are losing their right to sexually harass women | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So I was waiting for the tube the other day and I noticed this huge posted by the British Transport Police about Staring … or better inappropriate staring And it said something about intrusive staring is sexual harassment and isn’t tolerated and encouraging to report the crime to the BTP Now, my question is, what constitutes an inappropriate staring? Is it staring somebody for too long inappropriate? It seems very vague but no wonders everyone is afraid of looking at everyone on the tube and end up staring into a shitty ad! Or anywhere else, for that matter. Is this getting all a bit absurd? I have to say, I see people being generally extremely careful in close proximity, but yeah I noticed the motorists to be the most obvious, maybe because they are in the car and I’m walking so it puts distance? Some of y’all tho are literally not even bothered to try and look a bit careful and coy (like moving urself to have a better view and check out type obvious) when in cars but either way, I usually just mumble to myself “can you be any more obvious!?” And just carry on walking! " It's rediculous, nobody greats anyone anymore or makes any eye contact. Nobody is polite when passing. It's headphones in, eyes on the ground and off you go barging your way through life. I think it's rude. Me, I walk with my head up looking towards people as I walk, if I make eye contact, I nod and smile or say hi. Regardless of who it is. Being present in the here and now and acknowledging other people is a good thing. Staring, like burning a hole in the side of someone's head is rude agreed, but offensive, hmmm nor sure. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the posters prompt some to be more aware of how their behaviour could be perceived then I think that's a good thing " | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the posters prompt some to be more aware of how their behaviour could be perceived then I think that's a good thing " but if it can't be policed then they will pretty much still do it. There is no consequence to doing it. Those that aren't aware by this point are likely not going to change their attitude from a sign saying "don't stare" I don't stare at people, maybe a glance or a double take if they caught my eye. But I get self conscious thinking/knowing I'm being stared at myself (for different reasons obviously) but it's not like anything can be done about it if they are. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Try being a white person in India and you'll know all about staring. Not a thing in Goa but if you go to Punjab or Gujarat or anywhere like that OMG Made me feel so uncomfortable and I wouldn't even be presenting as female at the time either " Good point. It happens the world over. Biggest stare was when my black wife and I went to a market in St Lucia. The old women on the stalls were in fascination to see an older black woman with a handsome white man. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get stared at all the time because of my height. It’s life. Deal with it and move on. I also genuinely don’t understand how this can be a crime. I would love to know the actual law that is being broken and how it gets proven in a court of law. " What about as a woman on your own. Having a male staring at you continuously. Not looking away. Staring at your breasts. Is that life? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m a big fan of the thousand yard stare, don’t take it away from me …" Great band. “Comeuppance” is a tune. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get stared at all the time because of my height. It’s life. Deal with it and move on. I also genuinely don’t understand how this can be a crime. I would love to know the actual law that is being broken and how it gets proven in a court of law. " Its not always as simple as saying deal with it and move on. The definition of harassment is unwanted behaviour which you find offensive or which makes you feel intimidated or humiliated. Now I am not saying it would be an easy thing to police, or prove etc, what I am saying is I can understand how constant staring can be classed as harrasment. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get stared at all the time because of my height. It’s life. Deal with it and move on. I also genuinely don’t understand how this can be a crime. I would love to know the actual law that is being broken and how it gets proven in a court of law. What about as a woman on your own. Having a male staring at you continuously. Not looking away. Staring at your breasts. Is that life? " I have had groups of d*unken women stare at me on the tube and then discuss between themselves whether I am that “big” all over. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get stared at all the time because of my height. It’s life. Deal with it and move on. I also genuinely don’t understand how this can be a crime. I would love to know the actual law that is being broken and how it gets proven in a court of law. What about as a woman on your own. Having a male staring at you continuously. Not looking away. Staring at your breasts. Is that life? I have had groups of d*unken women stare at me on the tube and then discuss between themselves whether I am that “big” all over. " Exactly. And that does happen. I’ve seen that kind of thing happen a lot with d*unken women! Men seem to be expected to accept it though. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get stared at all the time because of my height. It’s life. Deal with it and move on. I also genuinely don’t understand how this can be a crime. I would love to know the actual law that is being broken and how it gets proven in a court of law. What about as a woman on your own. Having a male staring at you continuously. Not looking away. Staring at your breasts. Is that life? I have had groups of d*unken women stare at me on the tube and then discuss between themselves whether I am that “big” all over. " Equally not acceptable in my book. That kind of staring is treating people as objects. Hate it. But I disagree with trying to police it. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get stared at all the time because of my height. It’s life. Deal with it and move on. I also genuinely don’t understand how this can be a crime. I would love to know the actual law that is being broken and how it gets proven in a court of law. What about as a woman on your own. Having a male staring at you continuously. Not looking away. Staring at your breasts. Is that life? I have had groups of d*unken women stare at me on the tube and then discuss between themselves whether I am that “big” all over. " And that is not acceptable either. It isn't a competition. Its about being respectful of others and their personal space. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So I was waiting for the tube the other day and I noticed this huge posted by the British Transport Police about Staring … or better inappropriate staring And it said something about intrusive staring is sexual harassment and isn’t tolerated and encouraging to report the crime to the BTP Now, my question is, what constitutes an inappropriate staring? Is it staring somebody for too long inappropriate? It seems very vague but no wonders everyone is afraid of looking at everyone on the tube and end up staring into a shitty ad! Or anywhere else, for that matter. Is this getting all a bit absurd? I have to say, I see people being generally extremely careful in close proximity, but yeah I noticed the motorists to be the most obvious, maybe because they are in the car and I’m walking so it puts distance? Some of y’all tho are literally not even bothered to try and look a bit careful and coy (like moving urself to have a better view and check out type obvious) when in cars but either way, I usually just mumble to myself “can you be any more obvious!?” And just carry on walking! It's rediculous, nobody greats anyone anymore or makes any eye contact. Nobody is polite when passing. It's headphones in, eyes on the ground and off you go barging your way through life. I think it's rude. Me, I walk with my head up looking towards people as I walk, if I make eye contact, I nod and smile or say hi. Regardless of who it is. Being present in the here and now and acknowledging other people is a good thing. Staring, like burning a hole in the side of someone's head is rude agreed, but offensive, hmmm nor sure. " I kinda hate that everyone feels like they need to stare at a focal point cos they are afraid of making eye contact I saw a girl the other day, wear my dream pair of heels, she was super cute, so we sort of looked at each other and I smiled at her (so wanted those shoes ) I think it’s nice to smile at people | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems a bit “thought police” to consider arresting someone for where their eyes are pointing I’m all for, as a society, condemning that kinda stuff But things get weird when you bring the law into it Who decides what is and isn’t staring? Is there a time limit? Does intensity of the stare matter? Is it only an offence when a man stares at a woman? How does the court gather enough evidence to make a conviction? I think sometimes things are better dealt with by a society that protects eachother. A few people standing up and saying “hey stop fucking staring you creep” is an acceptable response. Asking someone to be handcuffed and potentially sentenced in court isn’t. In my opinion " Thats what I mean, who judges the amount of time and all I mean, also it’s so subjective I guess because some might find a quick wrong glance as inappropriate, and then what? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems a bit “thought police” to consider arresting someone for where their eyes are pointing I’m all for, as a society, condemning that kinda stuff But things get weird when you bring the law into it Who decides what is and isn’t staring? Is there a time limit? Does intensity of the stare matter? Is it only an offence when a man stares at a woman? How does the court gather enough evidence to make a conviction? I think sometimes things are better dealt with by a society that protects eachother. A few people standing up and saying “hey stop fucking staring you creep” is an acceptable response. Asking someone to be handcuffed and potentially sentenced in court isn’t. In my opinion Thats what I mean, who judges the amount of time and all I mean, also it’s so subjective I guess because some might find a quick wrong glance as inappropriate, and then what? " It is not actually enforceable. It is a well meaning attempt by the police to encourage perceived safety on the tube - which should be applauded by any reasonable person- but in reality nothing will actually happen as a result of a complaint because of proof issues. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems a bit “thought police” to consider arresting someone for where their eyes are pointing I’m all for, as a society, condemning that kinda stuff But things get weird when you bring the law into it Who decides what is and isn’t staring? Is there a time limit? Does intensity of the stare matter? Is it only an offence when a man stares at a woman? How does the court gather enough evidence to make a conviction? I think sometimes things are better dealt with by a society that protects eachother. A few people standing up and saying “hey stop fucking staring you creep” is an acceptable response. Asking someone to be handcuffed and potentially sentenced in court isn’t. In my opinion Thats what I mean, who judges the amount of time and all I mean, also it’s so subjective I guess because some might find a quick wrong glance as inappropriate, and then what? It is not actually enforceable. It is a well meaning attempt by the police to encourage perceived safety on the tube - which should be applauded by any reasonable person- but in reality nothing will actually happen as a result of a complaint because of proof issues." I see, but I think in part is also creating a society, particularly in London, or the big cities, where everyone is almost scared to look at each other in the eyes in a purely friendly way, because of that. Next will be … don’t smile at my dog, it’s harassing ! (I LOVE SMILING AT DOGS!) | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't actually think it's that ridiculous to be honest. If you've ever been alone in public and felt someone's eyes burning into you then you'll know exactly how unnerving it can be and I would agree that it is sexual harassment. I do imagine it would be difficult to enforce, and so many do just stare into space with no thought or intent behind it. But maybe someone will see the sign and think twice about making a woman uncomfortable. And maybe multiple phonecalls could lead to police becoming aware of someone who targets women this way. " I have many times, and I probably shouldn’t have to, what I did was moving somewhere else and get away from that person. My point was how difficult it is to evaluate the situation and also, how it can be dealt | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems a bit “thought police” to consider arresting someone for where their eyes are pointing I’m all for, as a society, condemning that kinda stuff But things get weird when you bring the law into it Who decides what is and isn’t staring? Is there a time limit? Does intensity of the stare matter? Is it only an offence when a man stares at a woman? How does the court gather enough evidence to make a conviction? I think sometimes things are better dealt with by a society that protects eachother. A few people standing up and saying “hey stop fucking staring you creep” is an acceptable response. Asking someone to be handcuffed and potentially sentenced in court isn’t. In my opinion Thats what I mean, who judges the amount of time and all I mean, also it’s so subjective I guess because some might find a quick wrong glance as inappropriate, and then what? It is not actually enforceable. It is a well meaning attempt by the police to encourage perceived safety on the tube - which should be applauded by any reasonable person- but in reality nothing will actually happen as a result of a complaint because of proof issues. I see, but I think in part is also creating a society, particularly in London, or the big cities, where everyone is almost scared to look at each other in the eyes in a purely friendly way, because of that. Next will be … don’t smile at my dog, it’s harassing ! (I LOVE SMILING AT DOGS!)" “And in your own words mr good boi, tell the court what happened” “First he grabbed my fluffy rolls, then he rubbed by belly and called me a chonky floof. It was traumatising” | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me " Yes it said it’s sexual harassment on the poster | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me " I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me Yes it said it’s sexual harassment on the poster " I stare at weirdos all the time. Nothing sexual about it. If I’m in the gym and your grunting too loudly I’ll stare you out for being obnoxious. Seems odd to automatically apply “sexual” to it | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
". Has anyone actually been arrested for staring at someone?! What if they have something wrong with their eyes? Autistic people do that a lot too. Are they going to arrest them all? Jesus wept I don’t know but it definitely encourages people to report it to the British transport police with phone line and all Fucks sake. Don’t think I’ve ever been stared at. I’d probably just stare them out. We'll have to have a " Staring " contest ..you seem quite confident.. Bring it on " Ten paces or face to face ?? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me Yes it said it’s sexual harassment on the poster " I doubt it's sexual harassment when people stare at me. It's because I'm a woman in a wheelchair, I'm definitely not worth staring at for any sexual reason. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. " I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m not a fan of being stared at it makes me feel so conscious and uncomfortable " I’m with you on this one. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it " And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. " I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"^ I also would like to say that I like to people watch. I am not against looking at people. But there's a big difference between glancing and having a look than purposely staring someone down to the point they are uncomfortable. " If harrasment is defined as how someone feels (which is what I think you said in an earlier post) then what happens if you are “people watching” and I think you are “staring”? What if I claim that I felt sexually harassed? I would imagine your answer would be “don’t be so bloody ridiculous!” but how do you untangle that? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling " Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling " I reread them. I completely misunderstood you. I am really struggling lately because I'm such a dumb feminist. I hope you can forgive me woman lover. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter…" Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling I reread them. I completely misunderstood you. I am really struggling lately because I'm such a dumb feminist. I hope you can forgive me woman lover. " Well your childish sarcasm says all I need to know I’m your ability to have an adult discussion so I’ll leave it there. Wish you the best | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so " But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling I reread them. I completely misunderstood you. I am really struggling lately because I'm such a dumb feminist. I hope you can forgive me woman lover. " ? You did misunderstand. He didn't imply what you said he implied. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"^ I also would like to say that I like to people watch. I am not against looking at people. But there's a big difference between glancing and having a look than purposely staring someone down to the point they are uncomfortable. If harrasment is defined as how someone feels (which is what I think you said in an earlier post) then what happens if you are “people watching” and I think you are “staring”? What if I claim that I felt sexually harassed? I would imagine your answer would be “don’t be so bloody ridiculous!” but how do you untangle that?" You can't untangle it, if that is how you feel then that is how you feel. But you know yourself it would be ridiculous to try and claim that I was sexually harassing you by having a quick look at you. And that's why you could probably never enforce this kind of thing, because it's so complex. All I was saying, is that sexual staring does exist and can easily pass as sexual harassment. If you want to use me as example of watching someone feed the duckies as sexual harassment, then fine. But when you've been sexually stared down and felt a man undressing you with his eyes you'll know why some would be in agreement with the poster displayed on the tubes. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling I reread them. I completely misunderstood you. I am really struggling lately because I'm such a dumb feminist. I hope you can forgive me woman lover. Well your childish sarcasm says all I need to know I’m your ability to have an adult discussion so I’ll leave it there. Wish you the best " Thanks bestie. You're a good egg. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling I reread them. I completely misunderstood you. I am really struggling lately because I'm such a dumb feminist. I hope you can forgive me woman lover. ? You did misunderstand. He didn't imply what you said he implied. " Did you not read what I wrote? I said I misunderstood. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. " True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling I reread them. I completely misunderstood you. I am really struggling lately because I'm such a dumb feminist. I hope you can forgive me woman lover. ? You did misunderstand. He didn't imply what you said he implied. Did you not read what I wrote? I said I misunderstood. " It read as sarcastic. Very. I'm bemused now. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory " It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. " And it’s even difficult to prove and deal with say stalkers … for examples | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. " Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later " So my question is… does it more harm than good? In the sense, say out of a 100 men… 1 would be having those intentions. The rest, not at all. But reading such thing would make most men concious even if intentions aren’t there. Creating that fear of even just looking at somebody. Potentially it’s a London thing, nobody wants that sort of contact, but i have a feeling there’s a lot of “can’t do this can’t do that because it could get me in trouble” kinda thing? I don’t know, food for thoughts. Also, would it stop the guy who’d stare in an inappropriate way anyway? X probably not | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get stared at all the time because of my height. It’s life. Deal with it and move on. I also genuinely don’t understand how this can be a crime. I would love to know the actual law that is being broken and how it gets proven in a court of law. Its not always as simple as saying deal with it and move on. The definition of harassment is unwanted behaviour which you find offensive or which makes you feel intimidated or humiliated. Now I am not saying it would be an easy thing to police, or prove etc, what I am saying is I can understand how constant staring can be classed as harrasment. " I’m not disagreeing with what you’re saying at all but I once held a door open for a woman and she was offended. I would hold a door open for anyone but this particular woman thought what I did met that description of harassment. So my question is where do we draw the line? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory " Harassment against any protected characteristic in the Equality Act is against the law. Harassment due to the gender of the person is treated the same as harassment due to disability, for example. There's obviously greater sanction for someone physically or verbally assaulting someone in a sexual manner. But of course, staring isn't verbal or physical assault. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory Harassment against any protected characteristic in the Equality Act is against the law. Harassment due to the gender of the person is treated the same as harassment due to disability, for example. There's obviously greater sanction for someone physically or verbally assaulting someone in a sexual manner. But of course, staring isn't verbal or physical assault. " That’s news to me I thought sexual harassment carried additional penalties like being added to a list or something. Or is that only when it breaks into sexual assault? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later So my question is… does it more harm than good? In the sense, say out of a 100 men… 1 would be having those intentions. The rest, not at all. But reading such thing would make most men concious even if intentions aren’t there. Creating that fear of even just looking at somebody. Potentially it’s a London thing, nobody wants that sort of contact, but i have a feeling there’s a lot of “can’t do this can’t do that because it could get me in trouble” kinda thing? I don’t know, food for thoughts. Also, would it stop the guy who’d stare in an inappropriate way anyway? X probably not " Your right that really, every little helps Even if it stops 1 guy The only counter to that is how much anger does it create within women when every man that stares at her isn’t arrested and immediately charged like the poster implies? How will it make them feel when they realise it’s just an empty threat? I think womens feeling about the police at the moment aren’t exactly great with what’s happened recently Just more food for thought. Even if it stops a few guys then yeah, put the posters up | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory Harassment against any protected characteristic in the Equality Act is against the law. Harassment due to the gender of the person is treated the same as harassment due to disability, for example. There's obviously greater sanction for someone physically or verbally assaulting someone in a sexual manner. But of course, staring isn't verbal or physical assault. That’s news to me I thought sexual harassment carried additional penalties like being added to a list or something. Or is that only when it breaks into sexual assault? " These type of offences are not covered by the equality act but public order and sexual offences act. And no physicality need occur. Voyeurism for example would see you placed on the sex offenders register… | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory Harassment against any protected characteristic in the Equality Act is against the law. Harassment due to the gender of the person is treated the same as harassment due to disability, for example. There's obviously greater sanction for someone physically or verbally assaulting someone in a sexual manner. But of course, staring isn't verbal or physical assault. That’s news to me I thought sexual harassment carried additional penalties like being added to a list or something. Or is that only when it breaks into sexual assault? " As far as I can see, any form of harassment against a protected characteristic (which sex and gender are), is treated the same. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your right that really, every little helps Even if it stops 1 guy The only counter to that is how much anger does it create within women when every man that stares at her isn’t arrested and immediately charged like the poster implies? " The posters don’t imply that ! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"^ I also would like to say that I like to people watch. I am not against looking at people. But there's a big difference between glancing and having a look than purposely staring someone down to the point they are uncomfortable. If harrasment is defined as how someone feels (which is what I think you said in an earlier post) then what happens if you are “people watching” and I think you are “staring”? What if I claim that I felt sexually harassed? I would imagine your answer would be “don’t be so bloody ridiculous!” but how do you untangle that? You can't untangle it, if that is how you feel then that is how you feel. But you know yourself it would be ridiculous to try and claim that I was sexually harassing you by having a quick look at you. And that's why you could probably never enforce this kind of thing, because it's so complex. All I was saying, is that sexual staring does exist and can easily pass as sexual harassment. If you want to use me as example of watching someone feed the duckies as sexual harassment, then fine. But when you've been sexually stared down and felt a man undressing you with his eyes you'll know why some would be in agreement with the poster displayed on the tubes. " I am actually 100% with you but just worried about the wider implications | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your right that really, every little helps Even if it stops 1 guy The only counter to that is how much anger does it create within women when every man that stares at her isn’t arrested and immediately charged like the poster implies? The posters don’t imply that ! " Hmm… I dunno. A poster saying that doing A is a crime definitely puts the idea in someone’s head that there will be repercussions for doing said crime. It also implies that the police are aware and actively monitoring for it, since they put a poster up. To me anyways. If I see a poster from the police saying “doing X is a crime” and I see someone doing X, I would think of that poster and expect something to happen | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Christ how intense would a stare have to be to make you feel uncomfortable. I live in Cornwall and people still say hello to complete strangers in the street. God help us all " When they also rub their thighs. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Christ how intense would a stare have to be to make you feel uncomfortable. I live in Cornwall and people still say hello to complete strangers in the street. God help us all " When you’re a lone female, out at night and a guy is staring to the point of minutes at a time - it’s scary as fuck. Lucky you that you’ve never felt intimidated or scared. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later " But police time is then spent on that when it could be spent on more impactful activity...it's like the 120,000 non-crime hate incidents. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Christ how intense would a stare have to be to make you feel uncomfortable. I live in Cornwall and people still say hello to complete strangers in the street. God help us all " Lucky you that you've never been made to feel uncomfortable by a man staring at you that intensely. Doesn't mean others don't encounter it. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later But police time is then spent on that when it could be spent on more impactful activity...it's like the 120,000 non-crime hate incidents. " Well, I kinda would hope they do a cost/benefit analysis For all we know, the tube could be putting the posters up for free and the police just have to sign off on the idea. Which, I think, makes it worth while. But I dunno enough. You also have to factor in how many nonsense calls those posts generate. How many “a guy was staring at me” reports do that have to file away? How many d*unk people thing 999 is a sensible solution to being stared at? It’s tricky. I don’t know. Sometimes I just let my thoughts run | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Christ how intense would a stare have to be to make you feel uncomfortable. I live in Cornwall and people still say hello to complete strangers in the street. God help us all " I live somewhere that people still say hi and chat in the street. It was still creepy and uncomfortable last time I was on the tube alone when a guy just stared, like he was undressing me, for the entire time. It was ages between stops before I could move, and moving made me very nervous that he might follow. It should also be remembered that predatory men start with small things like staring so it can be part of a bigger picture (like children or teens killing animals is warning behaviour). | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later But police time is then spent on that when it could be spent on more impactful activity...it's like the 120,000 non-crime hate incidents. Well, I kinda would hope they do a cost/benefit analysis For all we know, the tube could be putting the posters up for free and the police just have to sign off on the idea. Which, I think, makes it worth while. But I dunno enough. You also have to factor in how many nonsense calls those posts generate. How many “a guy was staring at me” reports do that have to file away? How many d*unk people thing 999 is a sensible solution to being stared at? It’s tricky. I don’t know. Sometimes I just let my thoughts run " Chatty Cathy I looked this up. These particular posters are part of a campaign started in August 2021 to tackle sexual harassment. The BTP added more officers just to tackle this issue - upskirting, wolf whistling, leering etc. No details on how the BTP will "call people to account". So I am undecided really if this is empty or will have some effect on statistics. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later But police time is then spent on that when it could be spent on more impactful activity...it's like the 120,000 non-crime hate incidents. Well, I kinda would hope they do a cost/benefit analysis For all we know, the tube could be putting the posters up for free and the police just have to sign off on the idea. Which, I think, makes it worth while. But I dunno enough. You also have to factor in how many nonsense calls those posts generate. How many “a guy was staring at me” reports do that have to file away? How many d*unk people thing 999 is a sensible solution to being stared at? It’s tricky. I don’t know. Sometimes I just let my thoughts run " These are specific to the British Transport police so under their remit, whereas the other crimes mentioned aren’t (unless happen on transport) so no resources is being taken away from anyone. They try to do some good on an issue that is a problem, but people still end up moaning over it, if they did nothing you’d still be moaning. They really can’t win ! | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I can relate to this. An ex work colleague would always stare at my chest during a conversation or meeting. I hated having to talk to him or be anywhere near him. " This is the thing, sometimes it's obvious what their intention and their eye contact/target is. Sometimes it's not. Staring is a pretty vague action. One of those tiktok vids or whatever the other week, maybe staged I don't know. Woman felt uncomfortable about being stared at in the gym, filmed it and called out a guy for staring at her. All the comments called her out and pointed out he was actually looking at the TV screen on the wall behind where she was standing. She did apologise... Sort of. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"*importantly! (Fat fingers!)" girls agree fat fingers are preferred | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Staring at someone is the same as getting in their personal space. It's not defined but you know when it's happening. Maintaining a stare, either when you realise you're doing it or the recipient is aware if you, is a pretty aggressive move. Animals do it as a way to assert dominance or cause fear and it has the same meaning in humans. " This. We all know the difference between a pleasant nod/hello/wink even a offffttt look. Its when it goes beyond that is the issue. But I agree that it will be almost impossible to police. Jo.Xx | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later But police time is then spent on that when it could be spent on more impactful activity...it's like the 120,000 non-crime hate incidents. Well, I kinda would hope they do a cost/benefit analysis For all we know, the tube could be putting the posters up for free and the police just have to sign off on the idea. Which, I think, makes it worth while. But I dunno enough. You also have to factor in how many nonsense calls those posts generate. How many “a guy was staring at me” reports do that have to file away? How many d*unk people thing 999 is a sensible solution to being stared at? It’s tricky. I don’t know. Sometimes I just let my thoughts run These are specific to the British Transport police so under their remit, whereas the other crimes mentioned aren’t (unless happen on transport) so no resources is being taken away from anyone. They try to do some good on an issue that is a problem, but people still end up moaning over it, if they did nothing you’d still be moaning. They really can’t win ! " Upskirting is actually a crime that would involve the Met though? I believe they have their first conviction as it's very new. I didn't think we were moaning - more discussing it to be fair. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later But police time is then spent on that when it could be spent on more impactful activity...it's like the 120,000 non-crime hate incidents. Well, I kinda would hope they do a cost/benefit analysis For all we know, the tube could be putting the posters up for free and the police just have to sign off on the idea. Which, I think, makes it worth while. But I dunno enough. You also have to factor in how many nonsense calls those posts generate. How many “a guy was staring at me” reports do that have to file away? How many d*unk people thing 999 is a sensible solution to being stared at? It’s tricky. I don’t know. Sometimes I just let my thoughts run These are specific to the British Transport police so under their remit, whereas the other crimes mentioned aren’t (unless happen on transport) so no resources is being taken away from anyone. They try to do some good on an issue that is a problem, but people still end up moaning over it, if they did nothing you’d still be moaning. They really can’t win ! " Honestly, if they didn’t try to police where peoples eyes pointed I wouldn’t moan I don’t like being stared at as much as the next person. But it’s their right to exist with eyes in whatever direction they want them to point. As I said in my first post, it feels a little “thought police” and on top of that, it’s completely unenforceable | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get stared at all the time because of my height. It’s life. Deal with it and move on. I also genuinely don’t understand how this can be a crime. I would love to know the actual law that is being broken and how it gets proven in a court of law. What about as a woman on your own. Having a male staring at you continuously. Not looking away. Staring at your breasts. Is that life? I have had groups of d*unken women stare at me on the tube and then discuss between themselves whether I am that “big” all over. And that is not acceptable either. It isn't a competition. Its about being respectful of others and their personal space. " Agree with everything Bella says. I can’t see how it could be policed, but if it makes people consider their actions then it’s not bad thing. It can make you feel really uncomfortable, and feel quite invasive, and I don’t think dismissing or belittling it helps anyone. It should be aimed at both male and female alike. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Staring at someone is the same as getting in their personal space. It's not defined but you know when it's happening. Maintaining a stare, either when you realise you're doing it or the recipient is aware if you, is a pretty aggressive move. Animals do it as a way to assert dominance or cause fear and it has the same meaning in humans. This. We all know the difference between a pleasant nod/hello/wink even a offffttt look. Its when it goes beyond that is the issue. But I agree that it will be almost impossible to police. Jo.Xx " tis true i used to stare hard at people to intimidate them during job interview auditions and sport | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later But police time is then spent on that when it could be spent on more impactful activity...it's like the 120,000 non-crime hate incidents. Well, I kinda would hope they do a cost/benefit analysis For all we know, the tube could be putting the posters up for free and the police just have to sign off on the idea. Which, I think, makes it worth while. But I dunno enough. You also have to factor in how many nonsense calls those posts generate. How many “a guy was staring at me” reports do that have to file away? How many d*unk people thing 999 is a sensible solution to being stared at? It’s tricky. I don’t know. Sometimes I just let my thoughts run These are specific to the British Transport police so under their remit, whereas the other crimes mentioned aren’t (unless happen on transport) so no resources is being taken away from anyone. They try to do some good on an issue that is a problem, but people still end up moaning over it, if they did nothing you’d still be moaning. They really can’t win ! Honestly, if they didn’t try to police where peoples eyes pointed I wouldn’t moan I don’t like being stared at as much as the next person. But it’s their right to exist with eyes in whatever direction they want them to point. As I said in my first post, it feels a little “thought police” and on top of that, it’s completely unenforceable " It’s not just about where peoples eyes look, it’s how. The poster is clear as are the other posters for the other subjects covered. It’s not a man v woman thing, it effects everyone. Women are just as guilty of being inappropriate | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later But police time is then spent on that when it could be spent on more impactful activity...it's like the 120,000 non-crime hate incidents. Well, I kinda would hope they do a cost/benefit analysis For all we know, the tube could be putting the posters up for free and the police just have to sign off on the idea. Which, I think, makes it worth while. But I dunno enough. You also have to factor in how many nonsense calls those posts generate. How many “a guy was staring at me” reports do that have to file away? How many d*unk people thing 999 is a sensible solution to being stared at? It’s tricky. I don’t know. Sometimes I just let my thoughts run These are specific to the British Transport police so under their remit, whereas the other crimes mentioned aren’t (unless happen on transport) so no resources is being taken away from anyone. They try to do some good on an issue that is a problem, but people still end up moaning over it, if they did nothing you’d still be moaning. They really can’t win ! Honestly, if they didn’t try to police where peoples eyes pointed I wouldn’t moan I don’t like being stared at as much as the next person. But it’s their right to exist with eyes in whatever direction they want them to point. As I said in my first post, it feels a little “thought police” and on top of that, it’s completely unenforceable It’s not just about where peoples eyes look, it’s how. The poster is clear as are the other posters for the other subjects covered. It’s not a man v woman thing, it effects everyone. Women are just as guilty of being inappropriate " How they look? I think this is where people get the idea that it’s ridiculous to bring the law into it. It’s sadly just not enforceable. How are you gonna convince a court that not only was someone staring, but the way they were staring was enough that they should be convicted criminally Like could someone stare at you for 5 seconds, but the way they stare means they need to go to prison? Could someone stare down someone’s dress for an hour straight, but the way they did it was nice so it’s all good? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Men are desperate fucking pests. It’ll never change. " Sense. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Also people that say it’s sexual harassment Why sexual? Maybe I’m staring because you look like a fucking weirdo and this is just another day at the zoo for me I will just say that the people who get it, get it. And the people that don't won't ever understand. I guess that’s the issue though isn’t it. “If you know, you know” will never stand up in court. It’s an empty threat by the police. Hopefully it’ll make some people reconsider, but I doubt it. Those that want to stare will and there’s nothing the law can do about it And that's exactly why I said it would be difficult to enforce... Staring comes in many forms, it's never pleasant but you're a fool to deny that staring of a sexual nature doesn't exist which is what you're implying in your previous comments. I never implied it doesn’t exist. I said it’s odd to automatically apply sexual to any form of staring Reread my posts if your struggling Exactly this. In all criminal cases the “mens rea” has to be established. The guilty intent of the accused. Without an explicit admission it’s a non starter… Automatically applying “sexual” to staring would be like to guys having a fight outside the pub and then arresting them for sexual assault Sometimes it’s just harassment or assault. Nothing sexual about it By automatically applying sexual to it, what your basically saying is “Unless the harassment is of a sexual nature, we don’t care” Also, to be arrested for sexual harassment comes with addition things like being added to a list. Limits with where you can work potentially. Is it fair to arrest someone staring at a weirdo and automatically lump them in with sexual predators? I don’t think so But the topic and the posters are about sexual harassment as Kylie said? Staring can be another kind of harassment as KC2020 said and could be equally as uncomfortable but isn't something the BTP have decided to highlight. True, my question is how we distinguish between the 2. And why they are highlighting that type only. Sexual harrasdment carries a more serious penalty I believe? (Might be wrong) So when they are so difficult to distinguish it seems like tricky territory It's impossibly tricky territory. When r@pists aren't being taken to court - the numbers are tiny - why spend energy on really difficult to prove low-level harassment. It's virtue signalling. Very good point. We have crazy statistics on domestic violence with victims not getting enough support, the police and under funded and we want to focus in on staring in the tube? As I says before, I think it’s an empty threat the police use in hopes it stops a few people. Which it may. But I think if you reported it, that’s as far as it would go. Just a report that gets chucked in the bin 5 mins later But police time is then spent on that when it could be spent on more impactful activity...it's like the 120,000 non-crime hate incidents. Well, I kinda would hope they do a cost/benefit analysis For all we know, the tube could be putting the posters up for free and the police just have to sign off on the idea. Which, I think, makes it worth while. But I dunno enough. You also have to factor in how many nonsense calls those posts generate. How many “a guy was staring at me” reports do that have to file away? How many d*unk people thing 999 is a sensible solution to being stared at? It’s tricky. I don’t know. Sometimes I just let my thoughts run These are specific to the British Transport police so under their remit, whereas the other crimes mentioned aren’t (unless happen on transport) so no resources is being taken away from anyone. They try to do some good on an issue that is a problem, but people still end up moaning over it, if they did nothing you’d still be moaning. They really can’t win ! Honestly, if they didn’t try to police where peoples eyes pointed I wouldn’t moan I don’t like being stared at as much as the next person. But it’s their right to exist with eyes in whatever direction they want them to point. As I said in my first post, it feels a little “thought police” and on top of that, it’s completely unenforceable It’s not just about where peoples eyes look, it’s how. The poster is clear as are the other posters for the other subjects covered. It’s not a man v woman thing, it effects everyone. Women are just as guilty of being inappropriate How they look? I think this is where people get the idea that it’s ridiculous to bring the law into it. It’s sadly just not enforceable. How are you gonna convince a court that not only was someone staring, but the way they were staring was enough that they should be convicted criminally Like could someone stare at you for 5 seconds, but the way they stare means they need to go to prison? Could someone stare down someone’s dress for an hour straight, but the way they did it was nice so it’s all good? " So as you think it is not enforceable, it shouldn’t be mentioned ? Using your example a 5 second stare is unlikely to be noticed. However, if it is a person that is regularly on your trip and it happens daily and longer and/or others report similar instances, then yes it could be enforceable and at least investigated. If you have been subjected to the kind of stares that do veer to the side of sexual harassment, then maybe you’d have a better understanding of why these posters are needed. If it makes someone think about not doing it great, or others being more aware of others behaviour and pulling them up on it, great. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think it’s interesting that people determinedly minimise behaviours such as staring. Adults who don’t have neurological problems know the difference between looking and staring at people in a way that is deliberately designed to make them uncomfortable. All women, and many men, have been victim to that and we know it. It’s all part of the bigger picture in inappropriate behaviour. Because “only” staring becomes “only” patting her arse. Which becomes “only” groping, which at some point leads to assaults and worse. Which usually gets followed with things like “what was she wearing?” “Was she d*unk?” and “where was she going?” Stopping the constant minimisation of, mostly male, inappropriate behaviour is the first step to making better head roads into conviction rates for far more serious things and also can hopefully help stop some behaviours in their tracks" Excellent response | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I can relate to this. An ex work colleague would always stare at my chest during a conversation or meeting. I hated having to talk to him or be anywhere near him. This is the thing, sometimes it's obvious what their intention and their eye contact/target is. Sometimes it's not. Staring is a pretty vague action. One of those tiktok vids or whatever the other week, maybe staged I don't know. Woman felt uncomfortable about being stared at in the gym, filmed it and called out a guy for staring at her. All the comments called her out and pointed out he was actually looking at the TV screen on the wall behind where she was standing. She did apologise... Sort of." People perceive things differently to a certain degrees. Obviously if someone looks at you and gets his/her tongue out and all that, it’s very obvious that is sexual in nature. Other times, it can be more subtle but still be of sexual nature. And again, what about the ones …say in cars, who are more obvious and definitely love to have a proper glance ? Like proper checking out cos they wanna see more and have a proper look (true story) How do we treat those? | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not to change the subject but would the perception change if the person staring was attractive?" That also raises a good question … I guess in all honesty, I don’t mind him checking me out if I think he’s attractive and not “slimey” There have been times when you lock the gaze with someone u like, and it feels like an eternity, and it’s like you just eye fucked and then he’s gone. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not to change the subject but would the perception change if the person staring was attractive?" No. If I'm in my place of work, or generally going about my daily life, minding my own business, I don't wish to be gawped at by anyone. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not to change the subject but would the perception change if the person staring was attractive?" Not imo, because the kind of staring that is problematic isn’t flirty looks. It’s intimidating staring. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not to change the subject but would the perception change if the person staring was attractive? That also raises a good question … I guess in all honesty, I don’t mind him checking me out if I think he’s attractive and not “slimey” There have been times when you lock the gaze with someone u like, and it feels like an eternity, and it’s like you just eye fucked and then he’s gone. " I thought some might enjoy it if the person staring was attractive because I know I would as a man. Obviously even very attractive people can be complete creeps too. I guess it’s all down to the type of stare. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not to change the subject but would the perception change if the person staring was attractive? No. If I'm in my place of work, or generally going about my daily life, minding my own business, I don't wish to be gawped at by anyone. " That’s fair enough. I suppose as someone mentioned earlier about being in the gym. Women are there to get in, do their workout and get out just like everyone else and shouldn’t have to be perved on. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not to change the subject but would the perception change if the person staring was attractive? Not imo, because the kind of staring that is problematic isn’t flirty looks. It’s intimidating staring." Fair point. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not to change the subject but would the perception change if the person staring was attractive?" Nope. I hate being stared at by men. Don't care what they look like. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not to change the subject but would the perception change if the person staring was attractive? Nope. I hate being stared at by men. Don't care what they look like. " That’s fair. I guess eyes across a room is a lot different to being eyeballed for an extended period of time. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not to change the subject but would the perception change if the person staring was attractive? Not imo, because the kind of staring that is problematic isn’t flirty looks. It’s intimidating staring." True. | |||
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Post new Message to Thread |
back to top |