Support NeoGAF

[nVidiot_Whore]

I'm referring directly to taking creepy photos of women in public without their consent, whatever they're wearing. I don't think we'll get any consensus on other 'attention' issues in regards to clothing in this thread, but I think we can all agree that we should not A) take creepy-secret photos of women in public, B) validate such behavior by posting idiotic stuff like "I'd hit that," "hot," and/or other "would"-type responses, and C) not excuse guys who do that just because "boys will be boys."

Yeah I realized that sort of after I posted and added an edit.

I can understand secret photos being on another level of inappropriateness.

I'll think about this convo the next time I'm shown one.. and try to have a different reaction than I normally would.. I usually don't respond positively or negatively.. but I have to admit I've probably at least said "niccce" or something like that.

Food for thought.

 

[Devolution]

Women shouldn't wear clothes that sexualize themselves because it sttracts unsavory attention.

Men who take the pictures should stop being creeps because women should be comfortable wearing whatever they please.

No concessions have been made on either side.

Please dictate in full what clothes are sexualizing.

 

[T.M. MacReady]

our best best is to speak out against this behavior instead and shame those who think it's acceptable to do this instead of just posting Jack Nicholson gifs whenever someone posts a picture like that.

This is an internet forum. Its for fun, lighthearted discussion. All of Gaf needs to chill the fuck out and stop "shaming" each other because we dont all agree on everything.

The internet is a place where it is perfectly okay to post a funny Nicholson gif in response to a pic of a hot girl. Get off your pedestal and chill out. This isn't Reddit, with dedicated threads to taboo stuff. Its a SFW gaming forum. It is not a place to "shame" people for admiring a woman or disagreeing with your opinion. Get over it.

 

[phosphor112]

Please dictate in full what clothes are sexualizing.

He's making a light-hearted synopsis of the thread. Calm down.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

Women shouldn't wear clothes that sexualize themselves because it sttracts unsavory attention.

Men who take the pictures should stop being creeps because women should be comfortable wearing whatever they please.

No concessions have been made on either side.

Thanks!

But what if the man is doing it all Metal Gear Tenchu stealth style and she isn't aware...? Everyone wins and GAF is united?

 

[Anton Sugar]

You said that victims are targets. If your killed because your in a gang, are you not a target?

If you get mugged in a dangerous neighborhood, were you not a target?

Victim = Target is already incorrect. If your killed in the crossfire of a gun fight, you're a victim of murder. You weren't being targeted though.

Sorry, I don't follow. I said if you get mugged or murdered in a gang, you ARE a target/victim.

True, victims aren't always directly targeted. A better definition would be that a victim is someone who had an undeserved action taken against him/her without his/her consent. In the examples given, however, all of the victims were targeted.

 

[depths20XX]

lol @ expecting people to start yet another serious debate about sexism or whatever else anytime a girls clothed butt is posted in a thread.

It's not a big fucking deal

 

[Deleted member 47027]

Please dictate in full what clothes are sexualizing.

F Me Jeans are:



Unless I didn't understand your question - which is very possible.

 

[Devolution]

F Me Jeans are:

The cut on those pants reminds me of 80s cartoons every time I see it, I don't know why.

My point is where do you draw the line on sexual clothing? What is sexual clothing? Does something on one woman look more sexual than on another? Where do we draw these lines?

 

[Snakeyes]

Uh yes that happens to be my point. If someone has a curvy body that a garbage bag can't hide, what do you say to them when creepers creep? You don't need to shame people for looking a certain way, you need to admonish the creeps for generally shitty behavior.

Well yeah. It's just that the plastic surgery example is way too out there for him to sway his opinion, that's all.

 

[Blasty]

Sorry, I don't follow. I said if you get mugged or murdered in a gang, you ARE a target/victim.

True, victims aren't always directly targeted. A better definition would be that a victim is someone who had an undeserved action taken against him/her without his/her consent. In the examples given, however, all of the victims were targeted.

It doesn't really matter anymore. It appears we agree.

Please dictate in full what clothes are sexualizing.

You wouldn't agree that, say, wearing something practically transparent, isn't the wisest thing?

 

[LiK]

i approve

 

[Anton Sugar]

F Me Jeans are:



Unless I didn't understand your question - which is very possible.

 

[depths20XX]

Clothes that show the exact form factor of your butt and sometimes even the imprint of your underwear underneath, are indeed, sexy.

 

[Devolution]

Clothes that show the exact form factor of your butt and sometimes even the imprint of your underwear underneath, are indeed, sexy.

So no pants, no well fitted dresses. What else.

 

[Trey]

Please dictate in full what clothes are sexualizing.

I was summing up the arguments made on either side, not inserting my opinion. The level of provocation in clothing is a subjective thing, and really, irrelevant to the main point: A woman should be able to be comfortable wearing anything without fear of disrespectful attention.

 

[depths20XX]

So no pants, no well fitted dresses. What else.

Dresses don't really show it exactly. They only show so much. Pants have pockets etc. that do not reveal the exact form factor of the butt.

 

[H.Protagonist]

This is an internet forum. Its for fun, lighthearted discussion. All of Gaf needs to chill the fuck out and stop "shaming" each other because we dont all agree on everything.

The internet is a place where it is perfectly okay to post a funny Nicholson gif in response to a pic of a hot girl. Get off your pedestal and chill out. This isn't Reddit, with dedicated threads to taboo stuff. Its a SFW gaming forum. It is not a place to "shame" people for admiring a woman or disagreeing with your opinion. Get over it.

I don't think you're quite following what I'm talking about. We're discussing taking photos of women's backsides, and in some cases children (as the OP sit was about a teacher posting these kinds of photos of his students), without their knowledge. These aren't "hot girl" photos from magazines or dating sites. If you think that taking stealth shots of random women/children's asses for sexual reasons is fun or lighthearted, then I think there's something wrong with you.

 

[T.M. MacReady]

So no pants, no well fitted dresses. What else.

stop trolling everyone and being so hostile.

"exact form factor of your butt and sometimes even the imprint of your underwear underneath"

does not equal all pants or tighter dresses.

You're just looking for reasons to talk down to everyone at this point.

 

[CooTooLoo]

Please dictate in full what clothes are sexualizing.

Heels, anything low-cut, tight fitting and skin baring.

 

[T.M. MacReady]

I don't think you're quite following what I'm talking about. We're discussing taking photos of women's backsides, and in some cases children (as the OP sit was about a teacher posting these kinds of photos of his students), without their knowledge. These aren't "hot girl" photos from magazines or dating sites. If you think that taking stealth shots of random women/children's asses for sexual reasons is fun or lighthearted, then I think there's something wrong with you.

youre not following me, im commenting on the direction this thread has taken, and the holier than thou attitude Gaf has about everything lately, not the OP. too much "shaming" is making this forum seem uptight and full of itself.

 

[H.Protagonist]

youre not following me, im commenting on the direction this thread has taken, and the holier than thou attitude Gaf has about everything lately, not the OP.

Mine was specifically in regards to the creepy photos, as I stated in that very post. See my response to nVidiot_Whore.

 

[T.M. MacReady]

Mine was specifically in regards to the creepy photos, as I stated in that very post. See my response to nVidiot_Whore.

i guess i was thinking more along the lines of trying to keep things more lighthearted, but i did misinterpret you there a bit.

I do still believe what I said, but I shouldn't really have related it to your post. My bad

 

[turnbuckle]

I love it when girls talk about wearing Yoga pants because they are comfortable lol.

You have the freedom to wear Yoga pants in public but others also have the freedom to stare at your ass and take pics etc

All this to say: American women have no class at all

I'd say something that'd get me banned, but I'll truncate my thoughts by saying :you have no class at all.

I agree with your first sentence, but then you went completely off the rails.

 

[H.Protagonist]

i guess i was thinking more along the lines of trying to keep things more lighthearted, but i did misinterpret you there a bit.

I do still believe what I said, but I shouldn't really have related it to your post. My bad

No worries. The thread has several on-going topics related to that, but I just wanted to address the original OP issue as I also think it's one thing we can all agree upon and actually do something about.

And, the great thing about Off-Topic is the chance for both serious and lighthearted discussion. I don't think anyone's advocating for no fun, but we do seem strongly divided on yoga pants, which with the intensity that it's being debated is kind of funny in a way.

 

[Wazzim]

You can spot the creepers from a mile btw, they're always looking very weird to attractive females.

 

[Jake McLargeHuge]

Sexual Harassment in the workplace is one such example. Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-sex.html

I was more asking which was had more of an impact, changing norms through shaming or enacting legislature.

Legal recourse might be difficult and would be hard to enforce, which is why our best best is to speak out against this behavior instead and shame those who think it's acceptable to do this instead of just posting Jack Nicholson gifs whenever someone posts a picture like that.

I can agree not putting up with people who encourage it, but even if that went away the more deep-rooted voyeuristic stuff nobody can really deal with adequately. It's a tough nut to crack.

 

[Veezy]

I love it when girls talk about wearing Yoga pants because they are comfortable lol.

You have the freedom to wear Yoga pants in public but others also have the freedom to stare at your ass and take pics etc

All this to say: American women have no class at all

You calling my fiancee a slut? 'Cause she wears yoga pants when we go out.


I'm being dead serious, you think she's a fucking whore? Or that she has no class?

What about my sisters? How about my mom?

No fucking lie here, do you seriously believe that I'm surrounded by gutter sluts who just can't help desiring mens' eyes upon them and work their entire day around having a guy picture them naked while he strokes his erect cock? Or are you just so shut of from females that the idea of one showing their skin gets you into a rage where it takes every ounce of your being to not sexually harasses them because, dammit, they should have known better?

You ever been to Italy? Seen what the women wear there? How about Spain?


You have one shit perspective, boy.

 

[Devolution]

I was more asking which was had more of an impact, changing norms through shaming or enacting legislature.



I can agree not putting up with people who encourage it, but even if that went away the more deep-rooted voyeuristic stuff nobody can really deal with adequately. It's a tough nut to crack.

Shaming -> to legislature. Without an outcry from women how would there be public pressure on the legislature?

 

[Trey]

Shaming -> to legislature. Without an outcry from women how would there be public pressure on the legislature?

What kind of legislature?

 

[scar tissue]

Eh, if you're in public you should accept that people can take pictures of you.

Anyone's welcome to take some pictures of my ass or bulge.

That being said, guys who do this are kinda creepy in my book.

Edit:

You have the freedom to wear Yoga pants in public but others also have the freedom to stare at your ass and take pics etc

.

 

[TUROK]

Throw in another exception then, that if you've given consent to have the photo published then you're no longer able to withdraw it.

The main purpose of this hypothetical law would be specifically to target the "creepshots" as shown in the OP, and I'm sure that if you throw in enough special cases one can do so without affecting legit photos.

I'm just throwing out ideas here, not a legislator trying to draft up a law.

Yeah, this is pretty obvious. Your idea already has like a billion exceptions tacked onto it. Why? Because it's awful.

I thought phones had to have a mandatory shutter sound when taking a picture, to help prevent these sort of things? Anyways, it's creepy, but it's just one step above staring at a chick's ass, so trying to prevent it with any sort of laws is futile. It's just one of those things that can't be policed without being a major headache for everyone.

Eh, if you're in public you should accept that people can take pictures of you.

Anyone's welcome to take some pictures of my ass or bulge.

That being said, guys who do this are kinda creepy in my book.

Pretty much. Tough shit.

 

[Blasty]

What kind of legislature?

I believe bit being able to take pictures of people in public. That'd be a pretty ridiculous law with all sorts of holes though.

 

[FyreWulff]

Yeah if you can't be assed to ask the person for a pic then don't take one.

Unfortunately these types of shots are taken by a person who fucking knew that if they asked, the women would have said no.

 

[nVidiot_Whore]

I can't imagine how a law would be written to handle the issue.

Any thoughts on that? (taking pictures of asses and whatnot)

Seems like all laws dead end at the very difficult to prove intent.. otherwise who is to say that any given photo wasn't taken for sexual gratification?

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Yeah, this is pretty obvious. Your idea already has like a billion exceptions tacked onto it. Why? Because it's awful.

I thought phones had to have a mandatory shutter sound when taking a picture, to help prevent these sort of things? Anyways, it's creepy, but it's just one step above staring at a chick's ass, so trying to prevent it with any sort of laws is futile. It's just one of those things that can't be policed without being a major headache for everyone.

Dude, pretty much all laws have a billion of exceptions and special cases tacked onto them.
I've given you a couple of ways of ensuring that such a law would not be a major headache for everyone, and just be a major headache for the big hosting sites just so that they will be forced to take down these "creepshots".

I can't imagine how a law would be written to handle the issue.

Any thoughts on that? (taking pictures of asses and whatnot)

Seems like all laws dead end at the very difficult to prove intent.. otherwise who is to say that any given photo wasn't taken for sexual gratification?

My idea was to treat the subjects in these photographs as models which you sign a contract with then you intentionally take a photograph of them.
Of course, this automatic contract would mean that you need to seek out your model's permission prior to publishing the photo.

 

[Ciastek3214]

You calling my fiancee a slut? 'Cause she wears yoga pants when we go out.


I'm being dead serious, you think she's a fucking whore? Or that she has no class?

What about my sisters? How about my mom?

No fucking lie here, do you seriously believe that I'm surrounded by gutter sluts who just can't help desiring mens' eyes upon them and work their entire day around having a guy picture them naked while he strokes his erect cock? Or are you just so shut of from females that the idea of one showing their skin gets you into a rage where it takes every ounce of your being to not sexually harasses them because, dammit, they should have known better?

You ever been to Italy? Seen what the women wear there? How about Spain?


You have one shit perspective, boy.

Now you're putting words into his mouth. Damn.

 

[nVidiot_Whore]

I thought phones had to have a mandatory shutter sound when taking a picture, to help prevent these sort of things?

They almost all used to.

The iPhone doesn't have a shutter sound if you have it on silent. I don't think it was ever a law, at least not here in the US. Just something the manufacturers did or still do.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

dp.

 

[Einbroch]

I can't imagine how a law would be written to handle the issue.

Any thoughts on that? (taking pictures of asses and whatnot)

Seems like all laws dead end at the very difficult to prove intent.. otherwise who is to say that any given photo wasn't taken for sexual gratification?

They keep trying to pass the Camera Phone Predator Alert Act. Something that I think would help. Japan and Korea already have similar laws in place.

 

[Byakuya769]

stop trolling everyone and being so hostile.

"exact form factor of your butt and sometimes even the imprint of your underwear underneath"

does not equal all pants or tighter dresses.

You're just looking for reasons to talk down to everyone at this point.

"I don't like your illustration" = trolling now?

 

[FyreWulff]

Because they are real women and they are your shots. They'll get a lot of attention in certain online communities. It's the price society pays for cellphone cameras.

There doesn't have to be a 'price' for the existence of cameras. You can notice a nice looking woman but it's not like "oh well, sorry for cameras being widely available". People can learn that there's things you don't use it for. Taking pictures of a woman without her fucking permission is one of them just because she exists. It's fucking harassment that they have no control over to stop, especially when people post them to the net.

 

[nVidiot_Whore]

My idea was to treat the subjects in these photographs as models which you sign a contract with then you intentionally take a photograph of them.
Of course, this automatic contract means that you need to seek out your model's permission prior to publishing the photo.

How does this law identify what makes a "subject"?

Or are you saying all photos that show people in public?

 

[T.M. MacReady]

"I don't like your illustration" = trolling now?

dude, the guy answered her question and she just responded with hostile snark. how is that helping?

 

[Devolution]

"I don't like your illustration" = trolling now?

I've been accused of trolling a couple times in this thread, I don't think people know what trolling is.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

How does this law identify what makes a "subject"?

Or are you saying all photos that show people in public?

Any person that is the focus of your photograph.
That would enable photographers to still take scenic pictures that people happen to be in, or in crowds where no distinguishable person is the subject.

There's also nothing stopping us from just extending sexual harassment laws, and making it sexual harassment of some degree to take a picture with focus of someone's primary/secondary sexual characteristics without their consent.

Or you could make privacy laws cover individuals in public, and tack on a couple of exceptions to avoid causing a major headache to everyone.

 

[Snakeyes]

They keep trying to pass the Camera Phone Predator Alert Act. Something that I think would help. Japan and Korea already have similar laws in place.

16% Users Support Bill
59 in favor / 310 opposed

smh

 

[Devolution]

Any person that is the focus of your photograph.
That would enable photographers to still take scenic pictures that people happen to be in, or in crowds where no distinguishable person is the subject.

You pretty much have to do this anyway or else you're subject to a lawsuit. Even if you win it's not worth the hassle.

 

[depths20XX]

"I don't like your illustration" = trolling now?

She asked a question and I told her what was sexy to me. Then she responded with some exaggerated bullshit. I dunno if it's trolling, but it was kind of pointless.

 

[dorkimoe]

public is public. If they are in a private place thats different