[–] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

Ah, the classic grade school, "Nuh-uh, you." Good one to try after all else fails. How about this for clarity: This is my last response to you because you seem to be willfully obtuse. Judging by the use of therapy speak and viewpoint that it is the people wearing skirts at fault, I'd also guess you are not a safe person to be around. Please do better in the future, but I am done with you.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    When I read "A Network of Anonymous Men Got to Work" I assumed they helped her and struck back against the people who did this to her.

    No, they went and made an already horrible situation even worse. Disgusting, why do men do this?

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    A lot of people in my life think it's weird that I'm so loyal to my dead-end white collar job with mediocre pay that sometimes has me work overtime, and this is why. At least I have job security, and it can be hard to have higher aspirations when I'm deathly afraid of ending up a NEET or having to resort to sex work.

    This was such a depressing study to read.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago

    Yeah, all unemployment numbers are bad really, though. They don't take into account underemployment or people who have had to mostly give up (or at least have been looking for so long that the stats drop them) and live with family, rely on a partner's income, or become unhoused. There are a lot of people across all categories that are missing from these numbers mostly for political reasons.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    No, I'm not, and using therapy speak (even incorrectly) to try to deflect is pretty shitty. You are clearly not going to understand, and at this point it seems willful. I'm done repeating myself

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    They are saying the same thing you are but with less relevance since it has nothing to do with the issue at hand: people taking non-consensual photos and videos of people's underwear at a festival and then selling them on on the internet, again without consent.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    Doesn't matter if it causes skirts to fly up. The issue is the people filming it and putting it online for others to jerk off to. Fuck that and you for victim blaming. And it only takes seconds to scroll to the part about the other non-ride related victims like the waitresses. And I'm blocking you as a pervert for suggesting the victims are to blame, so I won't see any further replies.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Because they did not do the thing that is wrong. The person who filmed them did. Blame that person for doing the harm, not the people who did nothing wrong. Saying they should be wearing shorts takes the focus off the perpetrator and puts the burden on the victim. Hence, victim blaming

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    People ITT not getting that women might be fine with the risk of some people they might already know seeing whats beneath their skirts for a moment during a pretty fast amusement ride, but wouldnt consent to getting filmed during this and uploaded to the internet for creeps to watch and nudify.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    The issue is recording someone without consent and posting it on the internet for profit, not what the women are wearing. You saying they should have worn something else is blaming the victim for the act of the person that did the actual thing that is wrong. Again, classic victim blaming. And before you say "They should have known that is what the ride does," yes, hopefully they knew that and consented to riding it with that information. That is still not consent to be recorded without their knowledge and have it be posted on the internet.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

    I think you are the one who didn't read the article. The ride was only mentioned in the beginning as the thing that started the cycling shorts use trend.

    It goes on to describe how widespread the practice of upskirting is at Oktoberfest in general, and how many workers are having to wear them to avoid being filmed and how patrons are concerned the law doesn't protect sharing film of the wind picking up a skirt and briefly revealing something.

    And you got my point exactly. Why are we blamed for people taking upskirt pictures of our underwear or bare bottoms. Just because our skirt wasn't down to our ankles and so tight around our legs we could barely walk or we wore sexy underwear, doesn't mean we were to blame for tempting them as is often the excuse in cultures that don't strictly criminalize and enforce punishment of the practice.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    You do realize in some cultures or at least in the 1800s and before women did not wear any underwear or wore something that was like a pathetic excuse for underwear, right. And it seems like you didn't read the story being talked about here at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Yeah because walking around in public women should always expect men to stick cameras under their skirts, right. I mean, some cultures don't even allow or at least discourage women wearing pants. What are those women supposed to do? I guess just being a woman in public means you should expect sexual assault, right? Stay at home if you don't want men to film up your skirt, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago*

    I agree it seems like common sense. Going on a ride that makes your skirt fly up is an informed decision. There are days when my SO goes out in a dress and she puts short shorts underneath just in case. You never know when there might be a rogue breeze. That’s just common sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›