"Do We Need a Law Against Catcalling?"
November 3, 2014 8:17 AM   Subscribe

A New York Times Op-Ed debates the need for a "Law Against Catcalling."

In light of a video exposing the reality of street harassment, The New York Times published an online Op-Ed debating the logistics of implementing "street harassment law"
posted by ourt (142 comments total) 18 users marked this as a favorite
 
I certainly have every confidence that police would adequately and fairly enforce this law.
posted by saturday_morning at 8:24 AM on November 3, 2014 [143 favorites]


I'm against handing out huge civil penalty awards to catcallers after they sue on first amendment grounds. Maybe we could have a law against creepily following people around for five minutes right next to them?
posted by BrotherCaine at 8:26 AM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]


How else will we fill prisons when marijuana is being legalized left and right?
posted by Behemoth at 8:28 AM on November 3, 2014 [39 favorites]


Jeezopeete, I will never understand why we seem to have no response to really shitty behavior other than to outlaw it. Catcalling stinks and shouldn't happen, but arresting people is not the right way to deal with it.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 8:29 AM on November 3, 2014 [61 favorites]


To be clear, I hate street harassment, and the apologists that come out of the woodwork every time someone posts that catcalling video make me absolutely livid, but this is a textbook case of the solution being worse than the problem.
posted by Behemoth at 8:30 AM on November 3, 2014 [22 favorites]


A lot of the jerks were careful to use completely unobjectionable language, so it's difficult to imagine offhand a law that would cover any but the worst parts of the experience depicted.
posted by George_Spiggott at 8:31 AM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]


I don't exactly agree with it, but I thought this Jacobin article on "carceral feminism" was interesting.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 8:32 AM on November 3, 2014 [9 favorites]


I can hear a lot of "can't a guy just say hello?" in opposition to such a law.

You've read the comments, I see.

I also disagree with the law - but if there is such a thing as Creating A New Social More, I'm all for that.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:32 AM on November 3, 2014 [15 favorites]


As much as I would like to see men of this sort punished in some way, I would expect any such laws to be enforced as often and as effectively as the standing laws against using one's cellphone while driving.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:34 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


In light of a video exposing the reality of street harassment,

It really is weird that we need to "expose" something a huge proportion of people knew all about. One thing I'd like to see is the pejorative phrase "white knighting" get defanged. Mockery for doing the right thing deserves to be ignored or treated with contempt, not cringing and backing down.
posted by George_Spiggott at 8:35 AM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]


It is illegal in a number of places. This site has links to the laws in various states.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:36 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


It depresses me that as soon as there is a high-visibility "proof" of widespread, casual misogyny, that gets captured by a discourse about laws and prisons. "Shitty people will stop being shitty if we arrest some of them on petty charges"...when has that ever worked?

In particular, when has it ever worked to defend women? Can you picture the absolute fucking nightmare that will occur when Johnny Meathead gets hauled down to the station or ticketed for being an asshole to some poor girl? He'll have to redeem his manhood in the eyes of his peers, he'll be angry that he's out money, he may conceivably have the genuine grievance of losing a job due to being in jail....That would not improve things for anyone lower down the social totem pole than Johnny Meathead. And it won't improve anything for anyone who is financially dependent on him, either. And it will be seen as a law written to protect rich white women, which will just reinscribe the "only spoiled rich white women think sexual harassment is bad, amirite ladies" narrative.

This country....I remember back when we used to point to the gulag system as a bad thing about the USSR.
posted by Frowner at 8:36 AM on November 3, 2014 [29 favorites]


Even currently prosecutable behavior typically goes un-prosecuted. Seeking police assistance is taxing even in the very, very best of circumstances.

I would, however, support a more general societal movement in which catcallers are more easily, more loudly, and by more people pointed and laughed at. Not always possible, alas.
posted by Sticherbeast at 8:36 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


"Limitations on free speech in order to crack down on street harassment" is the new "Spy on everyone to catch terrorists" or "Golden Key backdoors on all encryption to catch child pornographers".

There is no way a law could be written here that would only stop catcallers without opening the door for abuse and eroding free speech rights. This needs to be tackled by society, not the law.
posted by anemone of the state at 8:40 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]


It really is weird that we need to "expose" something a huge proportion of people knew all about.

No, see, it didn't count because it was just women who knew about it. Just like the people who were already living on the Americas didn't count until Columbus "discovered" them.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:41 AM on November 3, 2014 [33 favorites]


Suggestions for laws like this aren't made because the author thinks they'll actually work, if they even got to thinking that far, but because the person wants to make a prideful display of virtue.

What's the word for that sin, again?
posted by I-Write-Essays at 8:42 AM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]


Yeah, the anti-loitering and solicitation laws in California (and CA is not special in this) have been used most aggressively against gay men looking to have consensual sex with other gay men. So no, we don't need anti-street-harassment laws. What we need are more people - parents, pastors, siblings, friends, teachers, etc. - willing to speak up and speak out against harassment when they see it, and to teach kids that it's not okay. But that's a more difficult and longer-term project that requires more personal commitment from people, and doesn't provide us with that "Yeah, lock him up!" rush we are so fond of, so of course why would we do it.
posted by rtha at 8:42 AM on November 3, 2014 [25 favorites]


Like trying to assemble furniture with a corkscrew: proper tools for proper purposes, please.
posted by Navelgazer at 8:42 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


These guys are at the low end of the getting-attention spectrum. The women they harass are at the high end. Their difference in life experience, even if they come from similar social circles, is enormous. It's understandable that there would be a lack of understanding and empathy.

There needs to be some way to communicate the experience of the latter group to the former, in a clear and emotionally resonating way. People are working on this, as evidenced by the video and other efforts I've seen (the non-scoldy ones are better, I think).

We just need to go a few more cycles in the search for how to communicate this, creatively and also with gentleness and empathy (the feelings of lonliness or powerlessness or whatever the guys are dealing with are real, while not being a reasonable excuse).

If this progress continues, I really believe that these guys could grow to have a bit more empathy. Even more importantly, people who aren't actually perpetrating this (younger boys, bystanders, the friends of these guys, the mothers who are teaching) will do just a tiny bit more, each, to keep it from happening -- and they will know _what_ to do and say, and when, to kind of collectively bring our culture a couple of steps forward.
posted by amtho at 8:43 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]


Frowner - At least, now, there's a place for a counter-argument to prisons and arrests. We're experiencing progress at this very moment.
posted by amtho at 8:44 AM on November 3, 2014


Some counter-comment from criminal defenders: 1 2.
posted by grobstein at 8:48 AM on November 3, 2014


It really is weird that we need to "expose" something a huge proportion of people knew all about.

To paraphrase Zizek, now people can't pretend they don't know about it.
posted by anemone of the state at 8:48 AM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]


Bad idea. To stop what I think they want to stop would fail under First Amendment grounds. Laws which attempt to distinguish behavior to create a higher level (e.g., solicitation, imminent fear) are ripe for abuse and will not stop what I understand to be the real issue here.
posted by dios at 8:49 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


In the great misguided tradition of technical solutions to sociological problems, I think we need an app that will make it easy for victims of harassment to map hot spots -- like that place a mere 15 seconds into the video which is simply a gauntlet of idlers in chairs facing the sidewalk watching people walk by. Then you could have some staged confrontations where a whole bunch of volunteers just flashmob the fuckers and chew them out.
posted by George_Spiggott at 8:50 AM on November 3, 2014 [13 favorites]


In the great misguided tradition of technical solutions to sociological problems, I think we need an app that will make it easy for victims of harassment to map hot spots -- like that place a mere 15 seconds into the video which is simply a gauntlet of idlers in chairs facing the sidewalk watching people walk by. Then you could have some staged confrontations where a whole bunch of volunteers just flashmob the fuckers and chew them out.

How modest is this proposal, exactly?
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 8:55 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


I'm generally not for criminalizing it here, either, but I know other places (New Zealand I think?) have. I'd be interested if anyone has any links to analysis on how it's worked for them.
posted by WidgetAlley at 8:57 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


I certainly have every confidence that police would adequately and fairly enforce this law.


Well, it depends. If the catcaller was black, I am confident police would shoot him as many times as necessary, even if they had to stop and reload.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:00 AM on November 3, 2014 [17 favorites]


Jeezopeete, I will never understand why we seem to have no response to really shitty behavior other than to outlaw it. Catcalling stinks and shouldn't happen, but arresting people is not the right way to deal with it.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious


Eponyprescient.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:01 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


Rustic Etruscan: "In the great misguided tradition of technical solutions to sociological problems, I think we need an app that will make it easy for victims of harassment to map hot spots -- like that place a mere 15 seconds into the video which is simply a gauntlet of idlers in chairs facing the sidewalk watching people walk by. Then you could have some staged confrontations where a whole bunch of volunteers just flashmob the fuckers and chew them out.

How modest is this proposal, exactly?
"

It really wouldn't even be that hard to repurpose existing apps developed for humanitarian / crime documentation in 3rd world countries / disaster situations.
posted by pwnguin at 9:01 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]


can we instead test the backlog of rape kits? maybe make sure every elected official agrees that marital rape exists? or how about educate our own social circles about respecting women and believing them about their lived experiences? no? ok.
posted by nadawi at 9:02 AM on November 3, 2014 [56 favorites]


nadawi - that would require making an effort, no deal.
posted by maryr at 9:04 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


I mean, I don't need to change *my* behavior, you just need to change yours.
posted by maryr at 9:05 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


An "I'm being harrassed" app that allowed you to simply enter a value for the severity of the problem with one touch, by default at your current location but placed on a map so you can backtrack a block or so if you need to because you waited until you were clear of it before pulling out your phone, would not be difficult to write, nor the backend to track it and build the map database hard to build.

The trick would be keeping the noise out of it, not just from people who overused or innocently misused it but the trolls and griefers who would deliberately introduce noise into it.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:07 AM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]


There's an element here of cultural confusion, because at least a lot of the men from Latin America come from a culture where men are completely dominant, and so cat-calling and just really boorish behavior is relatively common and socially acceptable among most men.

That said, I'm facebook friends with a few Nicaraguan people and there isn't a week that goes by where the women don't complain about the cat-calling. It's not like women don't think men in Latin America are acting like assholes when they cat-call, it's just that they don't have the resources to do anything about it.

In fact, a post from just yesterday: En cada acera, esquina un acosador -- "A harasser on every corner."
posted by empath at 9:10 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


It really wouldn't even be that hard to repurpose existing apps developed for humanitarian / crime documentation in 3rd world countries / disaster situations.

My objection was less "practicality" and more that this -

Then you could have some staged confrontations where a whole bunch of volunteers just flashmob the fuckers and chew them out.

- would probably not end with just chewing people out.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 9:10 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


There's a reason I said "In the misguided tradition of..." With any publicity at all the app would get 100K downloads the first day, and by the end of that day there'd be thousands of plots at the White House and every other just amazingly funny spot people could think of.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:16 AM on November 3, 2014


Suggestions for laws like this aren't made because the author thinks they'll actually work, if they even got to thinking that far, but because the person wants to make a prideful display of virtue.

What's the word for that sin, again?


Progressivism?

(I kid, I kid).
posted by officer_fred at 9:18 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


Part of the problem with so much corruption in police forces right now (or rather our increased awareness of same) is that while I would nominally love more protection/punishment for this stuff, I have no faith it wouldn't turn into some kind of over-the-top violent shitshow, probably with lots of racism thrown in. Hell, I'm not confident things wouldn't end with accidentally shooting the harassment victim. Or arresting her.

As to the more interesting question of what would help, well yeah, enforcement of DV laws and arrest of stalkers, attackers and rapists would make me feel safer.
posted by emjaybee at 9:21 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


Presumably, there is variation in the amount of catcalling and street harassment that women experience -- between cities, regions, countries. Therefore, there must be some reason that it happens more in one place and context and not in another. If we can understand and explain that variation, then perhaps we can begin to design informed and more effective interventions. What empath notes is a good illustration:

There's an element here of cultural confusion, because at least a lot of the men from Latin America come from a culture where men are completely dominant, and so cat-calling and just really boorish behavior is relatively common and socially acceptable among most men.

This suggests to me that maybe those specific populations should be targeted by an intervention, for example, if a legal/policy approach is on the table, since it seems plausible that coming from a more male-dominated culture than the US is probably a strong predictor of propensity for street harassment.
posted by clockzero at 9:22 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


Another way to lock up minorities. Just what we need.
posted by holybagel at 9:24 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]


Rather predictably, some seem to have not actually RTFA, although the soundbite style that the NYT used for each "debater" doesn't do the conversation any favors. Only Nielsen really tries to make the case for laws against street harassment. Rottman and Kearl both note there is existing harassment law in place, with Kearl unequivocally stating "We don't need laws to prohibit mild verbal harassment," and that legal recourse should be reserved for sustained harassment campaigns (like the ones around Gamergate) and upskirt/creepshot ugliness. All of them seem make the case for more education and societal awareness around street harassment, which most of us seem to think is an admirable goal.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:26 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


I'd rather outlaw viral marketing agencies, but I don't think that's a good idea, either.
posted by michaelh at 9:29 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


In the great misguided tradition of technical solutions to sociological problems, I think we need an app that will make it easy for victims of harassment to map hot spots...

This already exists: Hollaback! can be downloaded from the App Store (iPhone) and Google Play (Android).

Other than that, nadawi already said what I was going to say. The long arm of the law is unfathomably racist and classist and we can't even get LEOs to take bona fide rape cases seriously, so the idea that any kind of incarceration-friendly solution can be had when it comes to individual instances of verbal street harassment is... let's say, detached from reality, at best.

No, we don't need laws against catcalling. But we do need to teach boys and men that girls and women are regular people, inherently possessing of basic humanity and inherently deserving of basic respect, and that harassment is not something you do to people in a civilized society. It's a social problem, not a legal one.
posted by divined by radio at 9:33 AM on November 3, 2014 [15 favorites]


In her part of the op-ed, Holly Kearl mentioned special training that that DC transit police received on how to intervene constructively in street harassment situations. A beat cop who is actually a member of the neighborhood they patrol and who has earned moral authority and respect could do wonders with a few words at the right moment — but that seems so far from the reality of policing in most of the U.S.
posted by metaquarry at 9:34 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]


The debate over the catcalling video very quickly turned from being about the constant harassment women face every day, to concern about whether men were unfairly portrayed (because there were too many men of color in the video, etc). And a debate about laws against catcalling will be all about the unfortunate men who will be harassed by police because of it. This knee-jerk WHAT ABOUT TEH MENS response is just sexism. It's not acceptable that women have to live in a constant state of intimidation and fear whenever they walk down the street (or, really, go anywhere in public). Women should not have to put up with this purely so that men can continue to enjoy more freedom than they do. Maybe someday when we are all wearing our Google Glass/GoPro cameras at all times, there will be more opportunity to name and shame (and prosecute if necessary). I wonder how much of an effect it would have had on the catcallers in the video to know they were on video.
posted by Mallenroh at 9:35 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]


Maybe we could have a law against creepily following people around

Since this is specifically about NY, that law exists:

§ 240.25 – Harassment in the first degree

A person is guilty of harassment in the first degree when he or she intentionally and repeatedly harasses another person by following such person in or about a public place or places...

I'm not convinced it improves maters much.
posted by CHoldredge at 9:36 AM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]


Here's the thing about the "can't a guy just say hello" argument.

I just spent three days saying hello to both women and men. If any of them felt harassed I would be shocked. I would sincerely apologize of course, but I would honestly be shocked. Because I just said hello and went about my business because I wasn't saying hello as a ploy. I was saying hello to a fellow person who was enjoying the same thing I was. And then I went on to enjoy that thing.

You can say hello. If all you're saying is hello.
posted by Doublewhiskeycokenoice at 9:46 AM on November 3, 2014 [9 favorites]


Well, maybe they should treat catcalling like public smoking. You won't get arrested for it, but you'll be fined if you're caught doing it. It'll be like the world's biggest swear jar. Or like those anti-swear machines in Demolition Man.
posted by FJT at 10:02 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]


Here, odinsdream, I'll cut that one right off for ya:

If you are making unexpected contact with me on the street you are Schrodinger's Rapist. Or, if you're really incapable of seeing yourself that way, think of it like this: I am Schrodinger's Victim of Sexual Assault. I may understand you're "just saying hello" or I may have a really scary history with men and I may be afraid of the unexpected contact. Personally, I'm not saying don't "just say hello," just saying be sensitive to the atmosphere in which you're saying it and the reasons you shouldn't loudly insist it's your inalienable right to approach women in the street for whatever reason.

(Crucial point here: "Women are under no obligation to hear the sales pitch before deciding they are not in the market to buy.")
posted by Mooseli at 10:06 AM on November 3, 2014 [15 favorites]


How about just making it legal for women to defend themselves with force against these guys? I'm thinking of that beautiful article that got posted on Metafilter a while back of the Hatpin Defense to sexual harassment.
posted by corb at 10:08 AM on November 3, 2014


Sexual street harassment as shown in the Hollaback video can be compared almost perfectly to a controversial behavior that already exists.

Harassment is emotional panhandling.

Someone with time/social needs on his/her hands is going around seeking emotional interaction with other people, who may be too tired to respond or not like the look of them. Yeah, the panhandler might get a smile or some change in response, but given the fact that their target has already been panhandled 50 times that day, it's stretching credulity to think that the target actually enjoys the interaction. Her/His sack full of fucks to give might already be empty.

And just like you don't even know how a panhandler for money will react if you say no, you don't know how nasty or even violent an emotional panhandler is going to get if you ignore him/her.

My point is that whatever restrictions/rules surround panhandling for money ought also to be considered for sexual street harassment; because they are pretty much the same behavior.
posted by jfwlucy at 10:10 AM on November 3, 2014 [16 favorites]


For the record, though, I agree that actual legislation will inevitably and disproportionately target minorities and immigrants who exhibit this type of behavior often because they feel lost in a place where their identity has become uncertain and their personal freedoms and powers are limited. The worst place I have ever been in terms of catcalling and general mistreatment of women was Paris, and I'm sorry to say that, apart from the creepy old dudes who feel entitled to treat everybody any way they want, the biggest perpetrators were poor immigrants who clearly needed to feel empowered in some way.

Society needs to change to help these people feel like they don't need to lash out, because this is mostly about domination and not about sex. As for immediate stopgap measures -- why not make the punishment a certain number of hours in sensitivity training/conflict management, and even provide some kind of positive-reinforcement certificate of training that looks good to employers for those who are able to concretely exhibit a change of perspective?
posted by Mooseli at 10:10 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


How about just making it legal for women to defend themselves with force against these guys?

Yeah, I was just thinking that the real problem is that not enough of these encounters are escalating to physical violence.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:10 AM on November 3, 2014 [22 favorites]


I wonder how much of an effect it would have had on the catcallers in the video to know they were on video.

Hannah Price’s series, City of Brotherly Love, features portraits of men in Philadelphia captured just moments after they harassed her on the street.

As seen on MetaFilter, in which a person or two argued that the catcallers were being shamed and that was bad.
posted by rtha at 10:13 AM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]


this dovetails well with a recent jacobin piece on carceral feminism
posted by p3on at 10:15 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


My point is that whatever restrictions/rules surround panhandling for money ought also to be considered for sexual street harassment; because they are pretty much the same behavior.

That's a really interesting idea! At least in NYC, I believe in some locations where there's a lot of catcalling, panhandling is also illegal already.
posted by corb at 10:15 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


As a middle class white guy, my ability to harass women* would be completely unimpeded by criminalizing street harassment because I can be creepy with the applicant for the intern position, the waitress at the nice restaurant, and the women stuck in the airport shuttle.

(* Harassment entirely theoretical, I don't do those things but if I wanted to I wouldn't need to do it on the street because society is structured to provide me unfettered and uncriminalized access to harassable women already.)

I'm all for changing mores on this but criminalizing only one specific form doesn't seem like the smart approach.
posted by Dip Flash at 10:19 AM on November 3, 2014 [14 favorites]


Agree that a law isn't the best solution. Many of the videos I've seen have primarily or exclusively featured African American men, which says either that there's selectivity making these videos or that we're failing in educating a segment of the population. I hate to put the onus on women but it does seem like the most effective response is to educate rather than punish harassers. Maybe a good-samaratin law that would protect those that come to the assistance of the harassed and stand up to harassers? Hollaback is awesome, but a better long term solution will be an education program (hopefully designed by both women and men with non-tone-deaf messaging) starting during the formative years.
posted by infinitemonkey at 10:21 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


While we're at it, can we have a law for those assholes in the pickup truck that always yell something out the window every time I walk down the main road? I *have* a car, dumbasses.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 10:22 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


Yeah, I was just thinking that the real problem is that not enough of these encounters are escalating to physical violence.

Let's not forget how it will undoubtedly result in such wonderful defenses like "how dare she shoot an innocent white man," and "hoodies/loud music/supernatural detection of drug use are reasonable cause," and "she's not really a woman, so it wasn't harassment," along with the usual "she didn't have a gun, it's her fault" nastiness that already exists.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:23 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


Many of the videos I've seen have primarily or exclusively featured African American men

THIS. That was what stuck out to me about the video when I first saw it but the conversational atmosphere was not amenable to deconstructing the video itself, rather than the behavior it had captured. That is an extremely problematic aspect of the video which detracts from its message because it implicitly others the harassers and gives white dudes an excuse to not relate.
posted by grumpybear69 at 10:24 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


Here's something from a proposed law in Utah banning panhandling:

"Aggressive panhandling is not protected free speech. Aggressive panhandling includes intimidating behavior, following someone down the street, blocking the sidewalk, touching or other obtrusive or threatening activities.
Passive panhandling is considered free speech, but local governments can put place, time and manner restrictions on passive panhandling." (e.g. before dawn, after dusk)

I would LOVE to see rules like this pertaining to sexual harassment enforced -- though I share others concern that the enforcement would be irregular, racist, and poorly performed.

But just the idea that no stranger would be allowed to approach me after dark on a city street and demand that I smile or tell him how my day has been makes me sigh with imagined relief.

Utah proposal
posted by jfwlucy at 10:27 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


Jesus. Please read this link.

Why doesn't she just kick him in the balls?!!
posted by jfwlucy at 10:29 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]


Panhandling is illegal in Savannah.
posted by brujita at 10:34 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


After seeing that video, I can certainly see why people would be in favor of a law like that. However, after just leaving a job in which I was the sole man in department, in a profession where men have not quite reached 10% - I can tell you that men are not the sole purveyors of verbal abuse and disrespect. I think someone said it nicely before - the solution comes from education at home and at school - but with both boys and girls.
posted by McMillan's Other Wife at 10:38 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]


it but the conversational atmosphere was not amenable to deconstructing the video itself,

the thread here discussed the race stuff in some detail, especially after it came out that the guy who made the video said that due to technical issues he mostly edited the white guys out. there's also been lots of conversations, especially among women of color, about the racial aspects.
posted by nadawi at 10:48 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


For some, it appears that opposition to harassment is in conflict with opposition to racism.
I've no doubt the proposed law would be as inconsistently enforced (ie, racist) as any other police operation; however, is the prevalence of men of color in the videos due to the prevalence of the behavior in that group, or are the videos selective?
Should we react less against the behavior because those who exhibit it have other, legitimate grievances? I certainly don't have good answers to these questions, but I don't think the proposed law is a good answer to the problem.
posted by librosegretti at 10:51 AM on November 3, 2014


Well, maybe they should treat catcalling like public smoking. You won't get arrested for it, but you'll be fined if you're caught doing it.
There is a Dutch initiative (site in Dutch) that proposes exactly that. It has the benefit that it doesn't require a victim to press charges. They define street harassment more strictly, they give examples about explicit sexual comments and actions (calling women whores, asking to have sex with them, making sex noises, pretending to be masturbating, etc.).
posted by blub at 10:56 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


How do they define/identify "sex noises" though?
posted by poffin boffin at 11:05 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


- would probably not end with just chewing people out.

If I ever get the funding for my "anti harassment zombie" project, it will just end with chewing.

Which, of course, could never possibly go wrong.
posted by GenjiandProust at 11:12 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]


however, is the prevalence of men of color in the videos due to the prevalence of the behavior in that group, or are the videos selective?

My assumption is that while the character traits that lead to the behavior are presumptively not linked to race, the ones in a position to behave that way a lot throughout the day are those who are marginalized and spend a lot of time on the street with nowhere very pressing to be. People of color are disproportionately marginalized.
posted by George_Spiggott at 11:41 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]


Why not have "Stand your ground' laws that any catcalling can be met with deadly force? (/hyperbole off) This is ass-hole-ish behavior, but it is not illegal behavior. Social pressure has forced more change more quickly than any law could.
posted by exparrot at 11:47 AM on November 3, 2014


My impression is that it depends where you are. My personal, lived experience includes being harassed on the streets of the Twin Cities and Salt Lake City. Statistically, those men were most likely mostly white.

And you know what? I don't have time in my day to shoot people. Seriously, I could be thinking about TV shows I hate or planning menus and otherwise using my time without wasting my time on other people beyond not tripping over them or jostling their packages.
posted by Lesser Shrew at 11:51 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


My assumption is that while the character traits that lead to the behavior are presumptively not linked to race, the ones in a position to behave that way a lot throughout the day are those who are marginalized and spend a lot of time on the street with nowhere very pressing to be. People of color are disproportionately marginalized.

Also, the video that got its own thread was indeed selective. The filmmaker pleaded technical difficulties: He said he caught about as many white men as men of color (if I remember right), but that white men harassed the video's subject in quieter ways that didn't register as well on film, so he left fewer of them in the video. I don't think that fully excuses the final product, which, inadvertently or not, uses racism and classism as a cudgel against sexism, but it does, after all, raise awareness of a real problem, so I don't think the video should be dismissed out of hand.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 11:51 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


before we get too far into the race conversation - in the video specifically, 53% of the shown footage was harlem and the filmmaker says the harassment was equal, just not equally as compelling (which itself can start a whole huge discussion, i think).
posted by nadawi at 11:52 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


This would drive my boss and some of my less enlightened co-workers completely berserk. I'm in!
posted by malocchio at 11:53 AM on November 3, 2014


I can hear a lot of "can't a guy just say hello?" in opposition to such a law.

Phrased that way, the opposition is disingenuous, because English is a tonal language, and in one tone "hello" means "top of the morning to thee, m'lady" and in a secondary tone it means "I find you sexually attractive and would like to initiate the kind of conversation in which two people evaluate the merits of leaving to a private location and fucking."

It goes without saying that in our society there are places and times designated for the latter use of "hello," and the street isn't one of them. A man who speaks in that manner to a woman outside of such a designated place has breached etiquette, morality, ethics, and the norms of civiliation, and should suffer consequences of a kind that will deter that kind of behavior in public.

But, whether the proper place for handling this is a jury box, and whether juries should have to decide what tone a "hello" was said, when they were not there to hear it, is not something I can support without a lot of careful thought into how sucha thing should be legislated into place.
posted by ocschwar at 11:54 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


I was first cat-called in the presence of both parents, and a younger sibling at age 13. It was an awful experience.
At 13 I knew damn well sexual attention from fully adult males to be
Bad and Wrong.
Also I felt betrayed because my parents did not do or say anything at the time.
My mother did later actually in a way, congratulate me. She said ugly girls NEVER get cat-called.
I'd dispute that one.
She was a product of her times, when women though a certain level of cat-calling was a compliment.
I personally always found it scary.
Later I was to have two separate extremely bad street hassle experiences, one where I was with my then tiny, now grown children. No bystander intervention, no means of self-defense because I had two very small children with me.
I wish I'd had a gun. I would have killed the guy. He needed killing as the Texans so charmingly say...
The second situation, I was alone, going to work. It pushed me over some sort of edge when the guy asked if I liked to suck dick.
I kept my voice so girly and said 'No not anyones..'
'Do you know what I would love to do?' I managed to even sound sort of seductive..
He asked 'What'
'I'd like to stick my foot up your butt..' ( still all sweet girly girl..) 'Until it meets TEETH!'
At which point i was yelling...
And he ran!
I chased him Yelling 'Stop where are you going? I was willing to pay 50 bucks for the privilege!!'

The first incident involved a Black guy and NUMEROUS probably Fascist skinhead punker types.
The second incident was a weasely looking little white guy.
Numerous bystanders there too. All races.
Anyway, no one asked me if I was ok or tried to intervene or help me.
I'd feel better about men in general if someone had even called the cops or something.
I have interacted with a few people about this video.
I *do not* for one minute favor anti -cat -calling laws. That is as many said, a cure worse than the disease.
Also, my understanding is that White cat-callers were edited out of the video.
Not cool. Cat-callers can be of any race.
The video ought to have reflected this fact.
Also if a guy is cat-calling me, I don't give a damn what his race is.
Women should be able to use the public space without this behavior.
Maybe decent men ought to be calling out other men on this shit.
Seriously... At the same time, I sort of understand the fear decent men might have about doing something...
In no case should women have to be afraid going places. It's wrong, it's bad, it's bad for the many good men out there who would like to have nice interactions with women, without women being fearful.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 12:01 PM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


For guys who can't figure out why catcalling is not seen as flattering, I'll just mention that when I lived near a park that was used as a pickup spot with gay males, I got catcalled on many occasions and one thing I intuited early on is that some of them came from homophobes trolling for someone to beat the shit out of.

Really, why would you feel safe in presuming that a stranger who says stuff to you based on your appearance is someone you'd want any interaction with whatsoever?
posted by George_Spiggott at 12:04 PM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]


Clearly, because of the inevitability of infringement upon free speech, unequal enforcement, and reasons previously mentioned, a law against catcalling is a bad idea.

What we really need is a law against proposing bad laws -- that will surely prevent wasting time and energy on this sort of nonsense in the future.

..wait. What are you doing? You can't arrest me, you ingrates, I'm doing the country a favor!
posted by Nerd of the North at 12:17 PM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


...And a debate about laws against catcalling will be all about the unfortunate men who will be harassed by police because of it. This knee-jerk WHAT ABOUT TEH MENS response is just sexism.
posted by Mallenroh at 2:35 PM on November 3 [3 favorites +] [!]


As a white feminist, I think it's very important (required) for me to examine how my feminism affects people of color. Street harassment is an issue*, but I'm very, very against any policy/law that would aid the police/prison system in it's current abuse, murder, and exploitation of black and latino men.

But I also think this is just a symptom of a much, much larger problem, and I'd rather see that tackled than a quick band-aid slapped on. The problem isn't men shouting at women on the street, the problem is that men view women as objects and service providers, and therefore are entitled to their time/body/energy, regardless of the opinion of the woman in question.

*I've been catcalled, I've been walking with a male friend where a group of oncoming guys surrounded me, cutting my friend off from me, making the experience even more terrifying. I've been grabbed, groped, forcefully kissed, followed, threatened. Trust me that I do not take this issue lightly.
posted by FirstMateKate at 12:23 PM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]


And a debate about laws against catcalling will be all about the unfortunate men who will be harassed by police because of it. This knee-jerk WHAT ABOUT TEH MENS response is just sexism

Yeah. I mean, if we have a real commitment to protecting women from sexual harassment, then we have to accept that yes, negative consequences are going to fall on the sexual harassers and that is okay.
posted by corb at 12:25 PM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


Corb,-there is a difference between harassers encountering negative consequences, and putting in place a solution that is very easily and almost guaranteed to be exploited by current power structures to perpetuate inequality.

Having a real commitment to protecting women does not have to be at the cost of protecting race minorities.
posted by FirstMateKate at 12:37 PM on November 3, 2014 [7 favorites]


I think it's more of recognizing that if such a law was in place, past empirical data suggests its enforcement would go something like this:

WHITE GUY: Nice ass!
COPS: What? He's giving you a compliment.

NOT WHITE GUY: Nice ass!
COPS: *chokehold*

Which perpetrates one injustice in the process of trying to rectify another.

Really, though, we all know the enforcement would go like this:

COPS: So no I don't always believe them and yeah I let them know that. And then they say 'Nevermind. I don't want to do this.' Okay, then. Complainant refused to prosecute; case closed.
posted by Panjandrum at 12:38 PM on November 3, 2014 [12 favorites]


Jeezopeete, I will never understand why we seem to have no response to really shitty behavior other than to outlaw it.

Oh we've had lots of alternative responses! We've had the "Why don't we consider the poor disempowered mens" response, "Let's get pastors and community leaders to speak out" (because that always works so well), "Why don't we just communicate", "Let's add "don't harrass" to the elementary school curriculum" (right next to "Don't smoke"), "It's really just cultural", and a proposal for an app that will tell women what areas of public space they're not allowed in (hint: all of them). I haven't seen "We need a total transformation of our society" or a Marxist "It's all Capitalism's fault", but give it time. Truly we are blessed for alternatives.

But lest we think I'm cynical or something, consider this: only forty years after the 70s era harassment laws, we actually have a thread where there haven't been suggestions of "if the women didn't dress so sexy there wouldn't be a problem", or "Buys will be boys", or "Really, it's a compliment". So yay, progress! Maybe in another 40 years we'll actually do something about the problem.
posted by happyroach at 12:39 PM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]


Deputize the homeless, give them an always-on wearable video camera and a tazer. Make cat-calling (and racism) a war crime. Pay bounties based on number of perps zapped.

Problem solved.
posted by blue_beetle at 12:39 PM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


Good job on making the rich, white men of the infamous Patriarchy even richer and more powerful.

I can hear the prison industries revving up the anti-catcalling PR machine now.
posted by Setec Astronomy at 12:40 PM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


But lest we think I'm cynical or something, consider this: only forty years after the 70s era harassment laws, we actually have a thread where there haven't been suggestions of "if the women didn't dress so sexy there wouldn't be a problem", or "Buys will be boys", or "Really, it's a compliment". So yay, progress!

Sorry to burst your bubble, those kinds of comments were made (at least one that I saw), just as they are in pretty much every thread about harassment and sexual assault, but thankfully they were quickly deleted.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:43 PM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]


It is already illegal, if you think about it. Catcalling is a form of protest and should not be done outside the same "free-speech zones" that other sorts of protestors have to abide by.

What is being protested is a woman's right to be treated as a human being.
posted by Renoroc at 12:48 PM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


The inherent racist tone in the video and the "law" certainly paints minorities as being the biggest culprits when it comes to street harassment. However, that certainly doesn't match my own experiences. Despite living in some poor, rough, mostly-minority neighborhoods throughout my life, the most/worst harassment I've ever encountered was from white teenage 'bros' and older white guys in middle/upper income suburbs - neither of which seem to respond well to their calls being flatly ignored.

That said, I am convinced those suggesting victims retaliate with physical violence just have noooo clue. Being harassed/catcalled by a group of strange men -- because yes, it's usually a group and it's usually men -- is fucking terrifying. Why is it terrifying? Because 1) you, as a person, are suddenly being included in someone elses' creepy sex fantasy and they feel they need to give you all sorts of unwanted graphic details about that, 2) you are being bombarded in this way several times a day by complete strangers - who knows if they're sane, not rapists, etc., and 3) because you know that if things did escalate, you'd be at a severe physical disadvantage.

But I suppose my biggest problem with the mentality of the victim having to physically fight back is that the responsibility for this other persons' behavior is now being put on their shoulders. Why should they have to correct this persons' behavior? We certainly don't expect strangers to discipline unruly children in restaurants. And, frankly, to suggest fighting back will result in anything other than the escalation of harassment (towards the victim) is terribly naive. A street harasser has already demonstrated they have no respect for their victim - so what on earth makes people think the harasser will acquiesce any wish the victim has for it to stop? And that's not even taking into account how many times a person may experience street harassment in a given day. Why should they have to spend their whole day punching people? Because everyone else sees it, figures it's not happening to them, and so it's all on the victims to "stand up for themselves"? Fuck that.

On the other hand, the harassers don't need to be held accountable with physical violence, even if a lot of people feel they deserve it. It won't solve the underlying problem. What they need is for this learned behavior to be corrected--not criminalized. That's where education (about why it's wrong and fucked up) and society (to implement the education and/or shaming the behavior) come in.
posted by stubbehtail at 12:54 PM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]


Sure. Let's ban catcalling. Because laws regulating public speech will pass constitutional muster, be used exclusively for their intended purpose, and be uniformly enforced regardless of violators' race.

(If you believe the above, I have some awesome real estate deals for you. Cash only, and in small bills.)
posted by starbreaker at 1:19 PM on November 3, 2014


in the video specifically, 53% of the shown footage was harlem and the filmmaker says the harassment was equal, just not equally as compelling

Separate but equal, as it were.

Pretty weak justification for editing out the white folk, nonetheless. If only for sociological reason, it would be interesting to see how the Wall Streeters practice the craft of sidewalk romance.
posted by IndigoJones at 2:37 PM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]


One of the best comments in the original thread was from lonefrontranger, who tried to get at the different general cultures of harassment in and out of minority poor neighborhoods. It's slightly uncomfortable-making, but it's important to consider how white harassment is of a slightly different culture that emphasizes plausible deniability. It's just as bad or worse than the upfront performative harassment that was captured in the video, but is not as obvious and likely to draw attention. Any law would definitely privilege those white males. White male harassers are goddamn ninjas of plausible deniability
posted by naju at 3:17 PM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]


Perhaps if men want to say hi so much, they should consider saying it to other men.

Elon James White started an interesting twitter hashtag about this, #DudesGreetingDudes, which has turned into an interesting discussion on changing the culture around this.
posted by bile and syntax at 4:11 PM on November 3, 2014 [7 favorites]


Elon James White started an interesting twitter hashtag about this, #DudesGreetingDudes, which has turned into an interesting discussion on changing the culture around this.

OMG, this is great: "Why so fierce? Let me see some smile in that beard! Did it hurt when you fell from Valhalla?"
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 4:33 PM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]


Pretty weak justification for editing out the white folk, nonetheless.

That's if you take it for face value, rather than some sort of post hoc fabrication to plaster over the wink-wink-nudge-nudge racism/classism featured.

I don't even know that it was a conscious decision - the filmmakers and audience often don't recognize their own inherent racism and class privilege.

Either way, it was a divisive video that does nothing but further erode race and class relations. Take a situation that's already unwell, grind some salt into the wounds in a way that intentionally targets poor minorities, film the reaction, fan the flames, profit.
posted by Setec Astronomy at 6:25 PM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


but if there is such a thing as Creating A New Social More, I'm all for that.

Ugg, I need to stop Google Now from showing me threads on metafilter.

It's already considered impolite to catcall. Why do you think guys do it? Do you think anyone does it because it's going to result in sex? (I remember a bit from David Cross about this).

For rebellious machismo guys who go around doing this, what could be better than making it slightly illegal?
posted by hellslinger at 7:37 PM on November 3, 2014


I certainly have every confidence that police would adequately and fairly enforce this law.

Yeah. Glenn Reynolds (full disclosure: a friend of my mom's) has expanded on this:
Slate's Hanna Rosin noted that pretty much all of the guys pictured were lower-class blacks and Latinos. Where were the white guys? The video's producers said they just weren't able to get much good footage of them, for a variety of reasons. Whether, in the 10 hours of filming it took to produce their two-minute video, there just weren't enough white guys saying offensive stuff, or whether the producers just had bad luck or whether they edited out the white guys, the result was that they released a video about "street harassment" that was also, quite plainly, a video of minority men harassing a white woman....

the notion of going after minority males for inappropriate behavior toward white women raises unsettling memories of Jim Crow. Emmett Till, for example, a 14-year-old black youth who visited Mississippi from his home town of Chicago, broke the local behavioral code by flirting with a white cashier while buying some bubble gum. A few days later he was kidnapped, brutally beaten, and fatally shot in the head. An all-white jury, presumably viewing Till's behavior as culpable, refused to convict his killers.

I feel sure, of course, that the makers of today's catcalling video didn't think for a moment about the Emmett Till case, and I am positive that they would not endorse the fatal lynching of the men they pictured. Nonetheless, it's worth noting that the history of controlling minority men's intersexual behavior in this country is closely intertwined with the history of lynching. Those who choose to get involved in this field need to be aware of that history, lest they unintentionally make things worse.

Certainly, based on this video, the call by some feminists to make "street harassment" illegal would have the effect of subjecting more minority males — already over-represented in the criminal justice system — to arrests, and to a criminal record that might haunt them for years in the employment market, producing more of what criminologists call the "disconnected." The victims of this effect, ironically, would include the minority women and children who often depend on these men for support. People are beginning to appreciate the pernicious role of the drug war in this regard; why add to the problem?
posted by John Cohen at 7:50 PM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]



Either way, it was a divisive video that does nothing but further erode race and class relations


No, that's not all it did. Unless you're willing to ignore all the women - of color and not - here and on other sites
who have talked about their experiences being harassed on the street.
posted by rtha at 8:02 PM on November 3, 2014 [11 favorites]


Catcalling is a form of protest and should not be done outside the same "free-speech zones" that other sorts of protestors have to abide by.

I'll loan you all my Schoolhouse Rock DVDs if you promise to reconsider that position.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 8:16 PM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]


Many catcalls are in the form of rape threats and/or accompanied by blocking the right of way of the harassed, which does not fall into the category of protected free speech.
posted by brujita at 8:58 PM on November 3, 2014


Take a situation that's already unwell, grind some salt into the wounds in a way that intentionally targets poor minorities, film the reaction, fan the flames, profit.

Totally. Viral Video Agency, and the girl is credited as "talent." Looks like she's an amateur wanna-be actress and this was just a gig for her. And in the description the producers more or less openly acknowledge that the best footage was of minorities because it was the most "compelling". How the hell are we supposed to interpret all that?
posted by ReeMonster at 9:56 PM on November 3, 2014


This was retweeted by someone in my twitter stream: https://twitter.com/David_EHG/statuses/527929547123990529.

It accuses the viral video author of being an urban developer with a gentrification agenda.

Not that it justifies or excuses the catcalling in the video, but maybe it does explain the ethnic/social profile of the catcallers in the video.
posted by kandinski at 2:43 AM on November 4, 2014


the woman in the video was cast for the part. it is not surprising that an aspiring actress answered a casting call. i hope we don't fall into insulting her for his bad editing. all she did was walk around for ten hours and she's been met with all manner of threats, we don't need to add insinuations of her being a fake or seeking attention to it.
posted by nadawi at 6:13 AM on November 4, 2014 [9 favorites]


I actually went through and read that Jacobin piece on carceral feminism. My only quibble with it was that all its solutions were basically "well, women should rely on each other to [create a business so they can afford to run a privately-funded shelter; accompany each other to events to protect victims of abuse; call out men in public; etc] rather than relying on the prison system and the police to end domestic violence."

Which seems to be weirdly missing a term, particularly for a marxist publication. I mean, as an anarchist, I'm pretty much used to "organize your peers and do [complicated, expensive, skilled, dangerous] thing yourself, don't rely on the state" reasoning and its weaknesses....which basically boil down to the fact that large expensive skilled projects are difficult for non-experts with day jobs to start and sustain.

But I would have thought that marxists would not steer totally away from state solutions - as noble as it is that a group of refugee women founded a collective business in order to fund a domestic violence shelter, why is it that the Jacobins aren't advocating protest and organizing to demand that the state dish out grants to fund these shelters? Why is it that the Jacobins aren't talking about how difficult it can be for autonomous small groups of women to basically function as a security force? (I've run up against this type of thing a couple of times, and sometimes it works if it's a self-contained solution - ie, you get everyone together to go move someone's belongings out of her ex's house, or you get everyone together to kick a guy out of a particular space - but when it's just extended to infinite women and infinite locations forever it gets very tricky and unsatisfactory.) What's even the point of being a marxist if you're abandoning state-based solutions?

(On a side note, I've seen a couple of pieces like this by marxists lately basically ceding the state to capital and saying "organize people to solve their own problems"....which just seems significant somehow, mostly depressingly, perhaps because I've been in the "organize people to raise their own money and solve their own problems without leaning on the state" trenches for a while now, and it's not exactly a panacea.)
posted by Frowner at 8:09 AM on November 4, 2014 [4 favorites]


I'm not totally clear on whether any one in that NYT debate would advocate outlawing the mild greetings that were the bulk of the incidents in the Holaback video. Would any of you in this thread desire that saying "how you doin today, pretty lady?" be subject to punishment?"

I come from a majority black city and my office used to be on a street where black men would lounge on park benches while they waited to be let back into the homeless shelter for the night. Catcalling was constant. And yes it was a primarily black thing, whites (who also loiter there) simply would not do it. And if you were a white man in a suit, as I was, YOU would get catcalled too with stuff like "nice suit boss!" and."how you doin' today?" I always felt that these overtures were possible precludes to panhandling but they rarely were.

I believe that, however threatened women may feel by this behavior, a great deal of it is simply THE WAY PEOPLE IN GHETTO ENVIRONMENTS interact. These men comes from a strongly social culture, where people who are complete strangers are accustomed to bullshitting and jive talking like they've known each other for years. If people of this ilk live in a residential neighborhood, they spend a lot of time outside lounging in the front yard shooting the shit, drinking beers, barbecuing, because they are crammed into houses with extended family, or with no A/C, and being outside and being social when you're unemployed and have no prospects is a way to make life bearable.

I have watched how black women of similar class respond to these catcallers and they often both play the game and can gracefully end the encounter with a well-timed sassy jibe, causing the catcaller to bust out laughing and shaking his head.

I am surprised that no one in this thread has argued against outlawing catcalling based on your own belief that one should have the right to speak to others freely as long as you are not threatening them. To even desire that people should be legally prohibited from saying "how you doin' today pretty lady?" is downright shocking to me.

Such laws would not only be morally wrong, they would be criminalizing a culture in which loitering, lounging, jiving and gabbing are central. The fact that this culture makes you uncomfortable and fearful does not mean you are reasonable to want it to be outlawed. If you would be in favor of such laws ... then wow ... I'm surprised that you believe your values to be universal to such a degree that you would outlaw other forms of sociability.
posted by jayder at 12:18 PM on November 4, 2014


To even desire that people should be legally prohibited from saying "how you doin' today pretty lady?" is downright shocking to me.

Yes, I desire that people should be legally prohibited from sexually harassing other people. If I have not so much as made eye contact with someone, for them to say "How you doin' today pretty lady" is rude, sexually harassing, and I only wish it were shocking. I did not consent to have my physical attributes commented on. I did not consent to their intrusion into my life based on their own desires to have conversation.

It doesn't matter what they want, if what they want is to make me uncomfortable.
posted by corb at 12:30 PM on November 4, 2014 [3 favorites]


this thread, and in fact the article in the fpp, is generally opposed to the idea of a law against street harassment (the closest most are coming is to suggest that there might already be laws that can deal with the worst of the harassment). i'm not really sure why you think you're taking a big bold stand against the thread or why you think no one else is discussing the racial aspects of how a law would be applied. are you reading the same thread i am? also, language is important - maybe consider if calling black women responding to harassment "sassy" is really getting across what you mean.
posted by nadawi at 12:35 PM on November 4, 2014 [6 favorites]


Well, jayder's comment takes some sort of cake. Not a cake I would want to eat, but some kind of cake.

I feel like I should link to Brittney Cooper's post On Why We are Not Out Here Going Hard for Brothers Over That Hollaback Video, which excuses neither the video nor the people who have used it as an excuse to minimize the ways in which street harassment hurts women, especially women of color.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 12:59 PM on November 4, 2014 [6 favorites]


Harassment and catcalling, separate from the issue about outlawing it or not, shouldn't be tolerated by any sane society. Claiming that it is something integral to a culture only serves illustrates how deep misogyny is embedded in most (if not all) cultures. Worse, hand-waving it away as boys being boys, blaming women who don't "sass back" to "jive" because of the millions of valid reasons why that is a bad idea, and nearly completely absolving white men contrary to what people in this thread have described as happening to them, is appalling on a number of levels.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:01 PM on November 4, 2014 [4 favorites]


Here's what Debjani Roy, deputy director of Hollaback!, which produced the video, has to say about this:
When speaking about street harassment at trainings, panels and other outreach efforts, one question repeatedly asked by participants is, 'How do you criminalize catcalling?' Criminalizing verbal harassment and unwanted gestures is neither the final goal nor the ultimate solution to this problem and can, in fact, inadvertently work against the growth of an inclusive anti-harassment movement. The criminal justice system disproportionately targets and affects low-income communities and communities of color, as evidenced by more recent policies such as New York City's Stop and Frisk program and other degrading forms of racial profiling. Our objective is to address and shift cultural and social dialogues and attitudes of patriarchy that purport street harassment as simply the price you pay for being a woman or being LBGTQ. It is not to re-victimize men already discriminated against by the system.
Via Reason, which contacted Emily May, a co-founder of Hollaback!, who provided the link to that article as representative of Hollaback's position. Reason adds:
Empower the government to arrest people for giving unsolicited greetings in public? Egads, what a terrible idea! ... New York City cops certainly don't need another reason to arrest black and Latino men on the streets, for one thing. For another, trusting agents of the state to correctly distinguish between protected and unprotected speech is a tall order in the most favorable of circumstances, and would only get worse if a broad new category of speech was outlawed—to say nothing of the unlikelihood of such a law passing a First Amendment test.
posted by John Cohen at 1:07 PM on November 4, 2014 [2 favorites]


but why is it YOUR culture that should receive the protection of the law? Why shouldn't their communication preference be protected by law?

you're trying to enshrine your liberal ethos as so authoritative that you want to use state violence to enforce it. To stop people from greeting and complimenting you. that would be hilarious if it weren't so absurd.

not everything you prefer not to happen needs state violence to make sure it doesn't happen.
posted by jayder at 1:10 PM on November 4, 2014


wow that was an astounding combination of concern trolling and gross racist dogwhistles, well done indeed.
posted by poffin boffin at 1:16 PM on November 4, 2014 [9 favorites]


I find it more absurd and hilarious that you're attacking corb, one of MeFi's few conservative-leaning anarchists, for being an authoritarian liberal statist.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:18 PM on November 4, 2014 [7 favorites]


That's a really great article, ArbitraryAndCapricious. I want to follow all her things.
Crunkadelic told me that street harassment is one of the ways men of color get to participate in patriarchy, even as they are foreclosed of many other opportunities to do so. We ain’t fighting for a world in which brothers get to be patriarchs. That is not what my anti-racist analysis will be used in service of.
posted by corb at 1:19 PM on November 4, 2014 [2 favorites]


I am surprised that no one in this thread has argued against outlawing catcalling based on your own belief that one should have the right to speak to others freely as long as you are not threatening them.

That's because we all have the belief that one should have the right to be left alone.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:30 PM on November 4, 2014 [2 favorites]


What, you don't appreciate a man's explaining to you what you should find threatening and complimentary?
posted by zombieflanders at 1:36 PM on November 4, 2014 [6 favorites]


wait what culture do you think corb is from? i think you're misinformed about a lot of things in this thread...
posted by nadawi at 1:43 PM on November 4, 2014 [4 favorites]


Sssh nadawi, we are moving on from them just telling us what kind of "compliments" we wanted to hear to telling us what ethnicity (and perhaps even what gender!) we are. I'm waiting to see just how wrong this can get.
posted by corb at 1:53 PM on November 4, 2014 [6 favorites]


I still am not understanding why you conclude that your culture is authoritative and universal and theirs isn't.

one time I was walking near my office with a woman, and a guy strutted by and greeted us with "HOW YOU NICE WHITE PEOPLE DOIN'?" Now not only was that comment unwelcome and unasked for, but it was a comment on the color of my skin which was none of his damn business. But dumb me, I wasn't enlightened enough to be offended even though, maybe had I not responded kindly he would have attacked us or something. I guess my point is that it would never occur to me to desire that such a statement be outlawed because I don't think people's wish not to be made uncomfortable is something the law exists to put force behind.

We live in a shitty society with a huge gulf between privileged people and people who have no privilege and weren't raised with the attention to social niceties that you take for granted. Outlawing behavior by lower class people that you find crass is attacking a symptom, not the disease. it's fucking disgusting that people in power (cultural/media/ideological power) not only enjoy disproportionate resources, but also want to control the speech of the poor because it "makes them uncomfortable," even though this behavior that makes privileged liberals uncomfortable directly grows out of privation and inequality that the rich liberals have fortunately been spared. It reeks of just wanting these poor people to shut up, and it's disgusting.
posted by jayder at 2:02 PM on November 4, 2014 [2 favorites]


I still am not understanding why you conclude that your culture is authoritative and universal and theirs isn't.

Well, there actually is overwhelming evidence that misogyny is indeed authoritative and universal, which technically means you're correct, although probably not in the way you want to be.
posted by zombieflanders at 2:08 PM on November 4, 2014 [3 favorites]


certainly at some point you'll get bored just straight making shit up and actually respond to things in the post, or the thread, or responses to you (or you could just get bored enough to do something else with your day)...
posted by nadawi at 2:19 PM on November 4, 2014 [2 favorites]


people who have no privilege and weren't raised with the attention to social niceties

Erm.
posted by corb at 2:23 PM on November 4, 2014 [4 favorites]


Jayder, I think we may actually be getting off on a tangent here.

A lot of people agree with you that writing a law on this would be counterproductive. However, I think that a lot of people are also getting hung up on what appears to be, on your part, a belief that men deserve the right to have all of their "hello, pretty lady!" saluatations received and acknowledged by all women.

That is something I disagree with - because just like you have the right to avoid speaking to any person you wish, for whatever reasons you deem necessary, so do I.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 2:24 PM on November 4, 2014 [5 favorites]


Heh, Jayder, quit while you're ahead. There's no way in hell you'll be winning this argument here.
posted by ReeMonster at 3:21 PM on November 4, 2014


What, you don't appreciate a man's explaining to you what you should find threatening and complimentary?

I don't necessarily agree with everything he's saying here, but I don't think it's necessary to police the site for people who are Writing While Male.
posted by John Cohen at 3:41 PM on November 4, 2014


(And before anyone tries to tar me as an apologist for catcalling — I wrote a very long comment the other day explaining why men should be against catcalling.)
posted by John Cohen at 3:43 PM on November 4, 2014 [1 favorite]


I reaaaalllly don't think that the main problem with jayder's argument is that he's male. Really not even a little bit.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 3:44 PM on November 4, 2014 [4 favorites]


I don't think it's necessary to police the site for people who are Writing While Male.

How about "writing like you think you know better than I what I ought to find threatening"? Can we police for that? Or, "writing, as too many men do too often, as if they are better judges of my experience than I"? Or does mentioning jayder's being a guy automatically fall into "policing we must not do" territory? According to you.
posted by rtha at 3:48 PM on November 4, 2014 [8 favorites]


It's not that he's "Writing While Male" that's the problem, it's that he's discounting women telling him that they feel threatened and not complimented, with a side course of patronizing racism and assumptions about their race/upbringing/politics that are (in at least one instance) false.
posted by zombieflanders at 3:48 PM on November 4, 2014 [9 favorites]


it's that he's discounting women telling him that they feel threatened and not complimented

I feel threatened by people knocking on my door and disturbing my tranquility. My dogs freak out, I worry about who it might be, I think about ignoring it but then I wonder whether it's someone telling me my car just got broken into or that it's a burglar who will assume I'm not home if I don't answer. Or I worry that some waste-of-space basement dweller I've offended online has somehow found out my address and is at my door to confront me. Anyway, suffice it to say I feel threatened when there's a knock at my door.

Would I propose outlawing people knocking on my door? Of course not. I don't feel that my subjective feeling of threat from a knock, just like your feeling of threat from a man saying "how you doin pretty lady? lookin mighty fine this mornin'!" in a public place, does not warrant or deserve a law to prohibit the undesired conduct. You live in a society where some people will say and do things you don't like and that annoy you. To try to outlaw statements that make NO threat against you but just make you feel uncomfortable or afraid, is childish.
posted by jayder at 5:43 PM on November 4, 2014


very few people are discussing criminalizing this behavior, especially at the good morning level, either in the post or in the thread. i really don't understand who you're arguing against.
posted by nadawi at 6:03 PM on November 4, 2014 [4 favorites]


I feel threatened by people knocking on my door and disturbing my tranquility. My dogs freak out, I worry about who it might be, I think about ignoring it but then I wonder whether it's someone telling me my car just got broken into or that it's a burglar who will assume I'm not home if I don't answer. Or I worry that some waste-of-space basement dweller I've offended online has somehow found out my address and is at my door to confront me. Anyway, suffice it to say I feel threatened when there's a knock at my door.

Would I propose outlawing people knocking on my door? Of course not.


In the first place, most people agree with you that we should not criminalize harrassment.

But in the second place, more importantly, you may not want to criminalize solicitation - but you do have the advantage of putting a sign reading "no solicitors" on your door so as to prevent solicitors.

So, to use that comparison - you've implied that there is no offense meant by someone simply saying "how you doing, pretty lady?" By comparison, that sounds to us as if we were all saying "okay, I can get you not liking Scientologists or something coming to your door, but what's the harm with Girl Scouts selling cookies? What's the problem with them?"
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:26 PM on November 4, 2014 [3 favorites]


To me, the main problems with jayder's comments are that he somehow seems to think that sexual harassment is an integral part of black and/or working-class culture and that only privileged women mind being sexually harassed. And I really just don't think that either of those things is at all true. But I just got back from fifteen and a half hours of political campaigning, and my brain is fried, so maybe I'm fundamentally misreading him.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:49 PM on November 4, 2014 [8 favorites]


FWIW, when I lived in DC I saw lots of black women get cat-called by black men and mostly they did not look like they enjoyed it. There was no bantering and no sassing.
posted by rtha at 8:10 PM on November 4, 2014 [4 favorites]


No, ArbitraryAndCapricious, I think you're reading him perfectly. I don't mean to be an ass here (maybe I do), but jayder, I really, really don't understand any of your argument. I'm even gonna bullet it out.

1)A heavy, heavy, heavy majority of people here have said that laws are awful and NO we most definitely should not implement them to fight this problem. You're trying to argue with people (who?) that want these laws put in place.

2)You're arguing that it's just part of black culture that's trying to get wiped out in favor of another culture. Street harassment is not a part of any culture, and you pinning it on the black community is weird and racist. Look, I sort of get where you're coming from-working class, southerners, minorities, they all have this thing where it's just more normal to talk to strangers out of the blue about bullshit. Growing up poor in the south, I couldn't go anywhere with my grandmother without her talking to some rando person about who knows what. But that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about harassment. And it sure as hell is different. Take it from the many, many vocal black men who've stepped up and commented on street harassment, urging other men to change their behavior. What are you saying to them? Are they denying some part of their heritage or culture by urging men to respect women? Can you not see how racist that is? And the whole "sassy black women can handle it! Buck up, whitey!" Just, no! Black women are not all sassy, strong fearless types who can take down a man with their sass-factor! And even if they were, It should not be the onus of the woman to learn to disable a man's harassment. The man shouldn't be harassing her

3)"You live in a society where some people will say and do things you don't like and that annoy you. To try to outlaw statements that make NO threat against you but just make you feel uncomfortable or afraid, is childish." OMG literally no one here is advocating for that can you please stop making straw men so we can have a real fucking discussion? Do you wanna go back up to my previous comment and read the shit I've been through, or should I lay it out here again. Or go read other women's stories of being harassed, and I dare you to look me in the eye (so to speak), and call a man blocking my path and graphically describing sex acts to me "annoying" or "no threat".

4)Your analogy about being uncomfortable when someone knocks at the door is straight up bullshit, sorry not sorry. For one, the purpose of people knocking at the door is not to make you feel uncomfortable. The inherent purpose of catcalling and street harassment is to make us feel uncomfortable, unsafe, and to assert dominance. Secondly, what's the actual probability that the person knocking at your door is a burglar? Slim to none. What's the probability that I, or any other women, will be sexually assaulted? Really fucking high. Even higher when we factor in that the person we're dealing with is perfectly comfortable with verbally harassing women.

5)I'm gonna preface my next point with this statement (even though I've already said it in-thread, but you seem to be fond of overlooking things that have been said) I do not advocate for a new law against cat-calling, street harassment, or any other topic under question. But I also do not think men have the right to say "hey pretty lady" at whoever the hell they want without their character coming under scrutiny. Sorry not sorry, again. Women don't owe you shit. I don't care if you intend it as a compliment. If you honestly mean it as a compliment to brighten someones day, when tens of thousands of women step up and go "no, actually. It makes us uncomfortable or unsafe", and you argue for being able to do it anyway- you are no longer arguing for the right to compliment someone. You are arguing for the right to intrude on a woman's personal space, regardless of how she feels about it. and that's utter bullshit.
posted by FirstMateKate at 8:25 PM on November 4, 2014 [13 favorites]


More than anything else, I think many of us are concerned that irresponsible, race-baiting tactics like the above video have historically worked. People vote out of fear, politicians love to look like they're Doing Something.

All of it is ominous. Those of you attempting to capitalize on this sort of tactic should be ashamed.
posted by Setec Astronomy at 8:38 AM on November 5, 2014


FWIW, when I lived in DC I saw lots of black women get cat-called by black men and mostly they did not look like they enjoyed it. There was no bantering and no sassing.

When women live in a patriarchal society, they learn to 'play the game' as a survival strategy. Just because they're smiling, that doesn't mean they enjoy it. I'm polite as hell to cops, and even chit-chat with them, but that doesn't mean I like getting pulled over.
posted by empath at 8:40 AM on November 5, 2014 [3 favorites]


Those of you attempting to capitalize on this sort of tactic should be ashamed.

What are you talking about. And to whom.
posted by rtha at 8:48 AM on November 5, 2014 [4 favorites]


All of it is ominous. Those of you attempting to capitalize on this sort of tactic should be ashamed.

Who's "you?" The fact that you guys can't actually point to that happening in this conversation, have statements from all but one of the op-eds from the FPP and the makers of the video in direct opposition to this characterization, and can barely point to any evidence of this being a political issue at all, makes this seem less like actual concern than concern trolling.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:49 AM on November 5, 2014 [1 favorite]


Lots of people have pointed out that Jessica Williams of the Daily Show did a similar video where she shows herself walking around New York encountering routine street harassment. There really doesn't seem to be a shortage of women of color saying that they find street harassment to be a problem.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 8:56 AM on November 5, 2014 [4 favorites]




« Older Black metal flouts indie rock’s PC conventions   |   Howdy, young feller! Come set a spell by th’ far … Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments