this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2026
602 points (97.2% liked)
memes
22130 readers
3281 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you have consent, sure.
Consent for looking?
At someone in public?
Has it really come to that now?
Just tap her on the shoulder and ask “Hey miss, do I have consent to stare at your ass?”
/s
Please sign this consent form.
“Now sign this second copy, initials here, here and here.”
it's way creepier to ask for consent to look up the stairs in a staircase than it is to just do it.
"ma'am, i don't want to be a creep, so i need to know if you ENTHUSIASTICALLY CONSENT to having my eyes look in the direction of my travel. I AM NOT A CREEPER"
Yes, that's very correct too.
Wasn't the point I was trying to get across though.
But I get it, morality and ethics are very broad and gray, and people differ in what they think is okay. Some people would feel uncomfortable and do what they can to avoid it, while others think, eh, no harm, no foul, I'm just looking, right?
I do have to wonder what feelings if any the latter get if they get caught doing it. Again, probably a mix.
Why are Americans so prudish? If someone's attractive, they attract attention. It doesn't mean you're going to assault someone if you look at them. Geesh.
It's because of the Christians and Catholics. America is a very extremely deeply religious country when you get down to it.
Even our most staunchly non-religious folk. Still hold values based off things that are extremely religious.
It's still not nice. If you are afraid of asking to do it you probably should not do it. (Talking mainly about other people and not authority and stuff, that one is more complex.)
Maybe they attract your attention, but what are we, animals? (I know we are animals I just thought it was slightly funny)
I thinm what people want should be respected, either if they know what you did or not.
Also why are you talking about Americans? Is it like a joke or is the person actually American or something?
Probably because going by the amount of posts and comments about American politics, Lemmy is 95%+ American.
Our forefathers who came here to escape religious persecution so they could practice their own religious persecution probably have something to do with it.
Leave it to a non-American to ruin a joke thread with an incessant need to criticize Americans.
Because in USA the last part isn't set in stone from what I know...
Exactly, and why not take a photo while you're there, eh?
~~Creeper? Aw man...~~
I think there are only 2 ways:
Nothing else works
Wearing a skirt implies consent. Clothes (or lack of them) are a form of communication. For example, my well-endowed wife wears revealing clothes if she feels comfortable with the attention and if it is an appropriate time to do so. On the other hand, if she has a business meeting at the office (especially important during meetings with people from other cultures), she will never do so, because that way she would send an inappropriate message. In this way, she takes responsibility for her behavior.
wow, rapist defense on my left wing activism app
Consent for WHAT? This is fucking creepy.
You know that a woman consents with words, right? A woman could walk down the street naked and you still wouldn't have a "right" to force her into anything.
I'm amazed it has to be said, but no, wearing a skirt does not imply consent for anyone to look up it. The fuck kind of rapist thinking is that?
Edit: ITT people with poor reading comprehension skills. “Rapist thinking” doesn’t mean “looking = raping,” it means “the way rapists think.” As in, rapists also think that the clothing someone wears “implies consent” for their actions.
If you’re using the same reasoning as a rapist to justify looking up a woman’s skirt, and you don’t see what’s wrong with that, I worry for the women around you. Be better.
That's my take at least.
Exactly this.
While he may have gone too far. He isn't wrong in a sense. Clothing IS the responsibility of the wearer and you are consenting to being seen in said clothing if you wear it.
You can't blame anyone but yourself if someone sees something you actively chose to not cover.
This isn't consent for people to go out of their way to leer or try to circumvent the coverings. Cause even a skirt is a clear attempt at covering things.
But if someone sees something on accident or thought normal interactions then yes it's one hundred percent on the person wearing the cloths for choosing to wear them.
For example if a dude is wearing a banana hammock you cannot blame anyone for noticing his bulge. It is quite literally being put on display. Ogling said bulge will be inappropriate depending on how said ogling is done.
But it is the man's choice.
A skirt is no different, if you actively choose to wear one in which your ass is clearly on display while in normal day-to-day activities. People are in fact going to see your ass. It's just how things are. It's a fact of reality.
If you wear a reasonable length skirt in which it covers it, then no one should see your ass because no one should be going out of their way. In an attempt to see it, it's clearly being covered. And a skirt does not have to be very long to be of a reasonable length either.
Clothing ranges from the prudish and conservative all the way to these sutty and horny. So what you wear does matter. It is a choice.
Both parties can be at fault here. Someone who doesn't want to be leered at wearing s***** clothing that puts everything on display. Getting angry that people can see things is just nonsense. Just as someone going out of their way to walk upstairs behind someone in a skirt for the purpose of staring up, it is also in the wrong.
That's why you dress for the occasion. If you're going clubbing dress s***** it's part of the fun. If you're going to the beach, you're going to wear short shorts and a tiny little top. Part of the fun is showing off your body. It's enjoyable.
If you don't enjoy it, you have other options. Hell you have options that are still in the style of the more s***** options while also being more prudish preserve your modesty.
You don't have to wear a micro bikini. You can wear a normal one for example. You don't have to wear a banana hammock you can wear a Speedo.
Choices have consequences
Clearly you don't understand the difference between rape, which is a physical assault, and a stare. Eyes don't rape.
Showing parts of your body implies consent to be looked at, but it is not an invitation to touch or take pictures.
Cute how you're equating looking to raping.
seek psychiatric help
What happens if she puts on a skirt in the morning because she wants attention, but then at lunchtime an alt-right podcaster sexually assaults her, and then in the afternoon she's still in the skirt even though she's currently feeling traumatized and completely repulsed by any and all sexual attention?
Many such cases!
I'll take straw man for $500. Alex. I can see what you're trying to do here and it just doesn't work.
It would require us to agree that said person in a skirt be it man or woman does not have the autonomy to make their own choices on where they are or going.
At Rich point the entire question is moot. They're literally being forced against their will to do something they don't want to do. And that's a whole different can of worms.
Cuz any reasonable person would have gone back home or somewhere safe to either change, hide or do something to remove themselves from that problem that they're feeling vulnerable from if they have the option.
You cannot argue that someone is assaulted and traumatized more than likely will willingly choose to remain in the situation in which their trauma just occurred. Cuz no one will do that of their own free will.
In your 'what if' scenario the victim should be taken care of and away from trying to work or interact with the public in that manner.
Unless the victim doesn't think it's as bad as we do and they are fine with the attention afterwards. Either way that's probably their choice. Stop taking away their choice.
What if she's taking the train home so she can go watch The Good Place and cry and hug her husband? And what if I'm also taking the train, and I end up on the escalator behind her?
I would assume they would be fine with you following her on an escalator as long as you're not being a creep. There are a bunch of different ways to act between staring at the floor and trying sexually assault someone.
You are mixing two things here. Staring is not assaulting. This thread here is about staring. Regarding sexual (or other physical) assault: anyone can be physically assaulted regardless of their gender or age. Nothing justifies it, but wearing or behaving provocatively blurs the boundaries. I won't go deep into the details of human psycho-sexual intricacies, because this isn't a place for this, and also, judging by the number of downvotes, I see that this topic might be too difficult for some individuals to comprehend.
I think you misunderstood Me. I'm talking about if I, a random stranger who doesn't know anything about your wife's story, happens to stare at her ass the afternoon after she was sexually assaulted by an alt-right podcaster. Cause unless she went home to get changed, she's still gonna be in her sexy outfit. So she could be feeling horrible and not want any attention, but I wouldn't know it. And I might stare at her butt, because you said it's okay and I don't know what happened earlier.
I don't want to come off as agreeing with the other poster, but this argument is so awful that I can't just ignore it.
What if the assaulter was tall? Am I supposed to slouch all day everyday? Am I literally not allowed to exist because there are horrible people in the world of varying height?
I'm gonna be honest with you, chief: I'm gay and I love boobies and butts. I stare all the time. I try to do it in a way that doesn't cause discomfort, but if I'm behind a nice ass on the stairs, I'm gonna enjoy the view.
The only part of the above argument that I'm interested in debunking is the idea that clothes are consent. Since clothes can't always be changed, clothes as a form of consent is difficult to revoke. And any consent that can't be revoked isn't legitimate.
I can totally agree with that and I think your destination is absolutely the right place. I think you just chose the wrong way to get there.
Or maybe its not as clean cut you make it out to be. I respect your decision to not talk this out in this forum but 'they stupid' is a very $choose your adjective response.