Hate Crime

[Steve Walker]

On the original topic - catcalling women in the street is completely indefensible. It gets fuzzy at the edges, though - I've read articles which consider talking to a strange woman at the bar to be harassment. Well, that would be fine if we could all agree what is and isn't acceptable or even expected - frankly, things would be much easier for blokes if there was a social expectation that women would approach them rather than vice-versa.

[Vagabond]

social expectation that women would approach them rather than vice-versa.

 

There used to be, but pubs put up notices that said "No Soliciting"

 

I preferred my local , which forbade "spitting,swearing, and the passing of betting slips"

Edited July 14, 2016 by Vagabond

[corydoras]

There used to be, but pubs put up notices that said "No Soliciting"

 

I preferred my local , which forbade "spitting,swearing, and the passing of betting slips"

What sort of clatty people have to be told not to spit in a pub?

Edited July 14, 2016 by corydoras

[Vagabond]

What sort of clatty people have to be told not to spit in a pub?

Well, I won't start a war by telling you, but in those days the better class of pub provided spittoons.

[gozzer]

On the original topic - catcalling women in the street is completely indefensible. It gets fuzzy at the edges, though - I've read articles which consider talking to a strange woman at the bar to be harassment. Well, that would be fine if we could all agree what is and isn't acceptable or even expected - frankly, things would be much easier for blokes if there was a social expectation that women would approach them rather than vice-versa.

 

It's going to be in the hands, should I say minds, of the recipient of the whistle/call, and whether they felt offended by it. It's like the stupid laws that say if an action/statement causes anyone offence, then there is a case for prosecution. I never understood how anyone thinks you can legislate against offending someone, in most cases it depends more on one persons perception, rather than the intent of another.

 

John.

Edited July 14, 2016 by gozzer

[Newt]

It's like the stupid laws that say if an action/statement causes anyone offence, then there is a case for prosecution.

 

But think of the fun you could have getting every politician who publicly said/did something that offended you taken to court and prosecuted.

[chesters1]

But here you need money to do it ,the good old legal aid appears to only be available to foreigners now ,they all offend me the courts would be backlogged just with me !

I think thought crime will be an offence in my lifetime they just need the tech to do it ,the laws are probably out there ,you certainly cant call a spade a spade anymore but i think shovels are fine

 

Its a bit like kids today they are not naughty or the parents are not useless they have a disease or ailment to excuse it away

 

Its all nonsense they only words that can effect you are 'fire" ,anything to do with your sexual performance or "i sentence you"

Edited July 14, 2016 by chesters1

[Ken L]

^{“Society can and does execute its own mandates: and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself.”
― John Stuart Mill, On Liberty}

[gozzer]

But think of the fun you could have getting every politician who publicly said/did something that offended you taken to court and prosecuted.

 

Great if it would work Newt, but since a prerequisite of being a politician is being offensive, and a liar, I doubt any court would find them guilty. It would be like trying to prosecute water for being wet.

 

John.

[corydoras]

^{“Society can and does execute its own mandates: and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself.”}

― John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

Yeah well George Carlin didn't like Libertarians very much either Ken. Nor do I.

Edited July 15, 2016 by corydoras