If a man puts a hand on your knee is that sexual assault. If he persists in pursuing you is that harrasmemt. Do we women need protection from this. Does that mean throwing out sexual liberation.

http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/...9134_3232.html

What do the men and women on p.ie think.

It cannot have escaped anyone’s notice the Weinstein effect. Do Hollywood women really not know what the casting couch is and how to avoid it. Or is this a case of Hollywood men in power abusing it.

There is a thought provoking backlash from, of course, the French. The difference between gallantry and abuse. To set the scene:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/201...nstein-scandal

Then you get women writing that if the man is handsome, they want to be thrown on the floor and taken hard.

What gives?

Originally Posted by Emily Davison

If a man puts a hand on your knee is that sexual assault. If he persists in pursuing you is that harrasmemt. Do we women need protection from this. Does that mean throwing out sexual liberation.

What do the men and women on p.ie think.

It cannot have escaped anyone’s notice the Weinstein effect. Do Hollywood women not really know what the casting couch is and how to avoid it. Or is this a case of Hollywood men in power abuses it.

There is a thought provoking backlash from of course, the French. The difference between Gallentry and abuse.

As usual there is a risk that the pendulum will swing too far. There is no doubt that male behaviour in the past was way over the line. (Donald Trump)

We need to find a happy balance - and a good start to that will be educating young men that any sign of rejection must be heeded.

Catherine Deneuve defends men's 'right to hit on' women

I get where the women are coming from, but (BBC report) the language used "hit on" is part of the problem - it is suggestive of sexual aggression and force. We have concepts that need to be ditched - that a woman might be "playing hard to get" so try harder if rejected.

Originally Posted by Eire1976

Then you get women writing that if the man is handsome, they want to be thrown on the floor and taken hard.

What gives?

Why does the man have to be handsome? Yes I used to like Mills &Boon. Does that make me pre disposed to the wrong view of the matter.

Someone just now on Pat Kenny said if he hadn’t been brave enough to out his hand on a girls knee he wouldn’t be married now.

Originally Posted by Eire1976

Then you get women writing that if the man is handsome, they want to be thrown on the floor and taken hard.

What gives?

The operative word there is "want" though. Some men seem to think that's an optional extra. Or else that it can be taken as read. It can't, except in some people's fantasies and porn.

But sure, if you are deciding between having sex with Harvey Weinstein or with George Clooney, it's not too hard to see which of them is at an advantage. Both would still need the woman's consent all the same.

Originally Posted by Eire1976

Then you get women writing that if the man is handsome, they want to be thrown on the floor and taken hard.

What gives?

It is a two way street - not all women are perfect and they need to consider what they say.

Originally Posted by Cruimh

As usual there is a risk that the pendulum will swing too far. There is no doubt that male behaviour in the past was way over the line. (Donald Trump)

We need to find a happy balance - and a good start to that will be educating young men that any sign of rejection must be heeded.

Catherine Deneuve defends men's 'right to hit on' women

I get where the women are coming from, but (BBC report) the language used "hit on" is part of the problem - it is suggestive of sexual aggression and force. We have concepts that need to be ditched - that a woman might be "playing hard to get" so try harder if rejected.

I think we can all agree that Trump is offensive. But, some women seem to not mind, personally I did not understand that, but it seems to be true nevertheless. He’s so gross and obnoxious in my view that it’s difficult to understand.

About educating men, do men not know what no is, it’s not my experience. But it’s also my experience that men need to be persistent. You mention any sign of rejection, us women can play hard to get, or be hard to get and need pursuing. Is that not how it works. Though one does wonder sometimes who is pursuing who.

what we are seeing now is a moral panic, at some stage it will blow over maybe in 5 or 10 years. It might get more extreme, watch out from companies like google to prevent a women being alone with men in the workplace, or possibly parents like myself advising our sons to not date girls on campus for risk of having your education ruined, don't date in the workplace for same reasons.
It kind of depends how the law goes, there is a push to lower evidence standards and up conviction rates which wont help

Originally Posted by petaljam

The operative word there is "want" though. Some men seem to think that's an optional extra. Or else that it can be taken as read. It can't, except in some people's fantasies and porn.

But sure, if you are deciding between having sex with Harvey Weinstein or with George Clooney, it's not too hard to see which of them is at an advantage. Both would still need the woman's consent all the same.

George might look good but might be an idiot. Weinstein, who is particularly bad looking might be charming. So I’m not sure that there is always a clear cut advantage there unless on the superficial first glance.

Originally Posted by Cruimh

It is a two way street - not all women are perfect and they need to consider what they say.

About the word hit on. Is that not correct. Can we not say it. Or what can we call it.