• CarrotsHaveEars@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    9 hours ago

    In my opinion, if someone feels it’s impolite to stare, then to someone else it’s impolite to expose. It’s one of the most passive-agressive things to do, being angry at someone who stares when the exposure is intentional.

    • Zorque@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 hours ago

      There’s a specific difference between staring and taking an admiring glance. The former is generally associated with objectification, the latter a shared appreciation. Knowing where that line is makes the difference.

      • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        A good chunk of the population is very challenged by such delicate social distinctions. Like upwards of a third. And even among the rest, everyone’s going to draw the line differently. These bright line rules you believe in don’t exist for most people.

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Someone can have an attractive face, it’s still impolite to stare. You’re literally advocating that women wear burqas. Logically, if women don’t want to have their faces stared at by creepy men, they should have to cover their faces up.

      Just because someone exposes a part of their body doesn’t give you permission to stare at it. It’s impolite to stare at someone’s face, at exposed tattoos, or exposed cleavage. Really it’s simply impolite to stare at anyone’s body.

      Otherwise, I hope a really aggressive bear of a gay man joins your workplace and starts obsessively staring at you. If you don’t want him staring at your face obsessively all day, you can simply wear a mask.

      • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 hours ago

        it’s still impolite to stare

        It’s a free society: anyone can look at any direction consciously or unconsciously. No one has a duty to make others comfortable about it. You can both embrace the mutual discomfort of each other’s existence. Or you can call it impolite as they heedlessly carry on untroubled by the nonsense of it all.

        • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 hours ago

          What a bunch of “umm aktually” pseudo-intellectual bullshit.

          Since you seem allergic to understanding proper context, realize that we’re obviously talking about proper social etiquette and expected behavior. We’re not talking about legal sanction. That much is obvious from context.

          And the idea that we don’t have certain duties in social settings is just absolute horseshit. Yes, we don’t have legal duties here. No one will arrest you for staring. But every person has duties of acceptable social behavior in polite settings. The force of law is not the only, or even the primary, way we have of enforcing social behavior.

          You can whine all you want about some theoretical pseudo-intellectual take about how you’re not bound by any law to change your behavior. That still won’t keep you from getting fired for being a creep after you rudely stare at your coworkers’ bodies.

          It’s a free society, but that matters for nothing in everyday life. You are largely free to take most actions, but you’re certainly not free from the personal and social consequences of being a perverted creep.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        And plenty of people would be offended that you chose this imagery as offensive.

        As a straight guy with gay friends, I considered myself finally accepting (or maybe desperate) when I could take the attention of a gay guy as a compliment and be kind about redirecting them