skirtcafe.org

Interesting article and some insight from men in kilts over this practice.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/u ... -1-4827363

This is a great article. I thought it would be another bad article about kilts, but instead it has real information.

"As I watched the ad, I realised I recognised the chap who was the victim of this violation. It was none other than legendary Edinburgh kiltmaker Howie Nicholsby, who has worn a kilt every day for the past 20 years. I tried to contact Howie, who I assumed would laugh off the incident with a tongue-in-cheek comment – after all, he had not looked too traumatised on the video and had presumably given his consent to appear in the ad – but when I finally managed to have a chat with him after he returned from holiday, I found that he did, indeed, feel quite strongly about the practice.

Read more at: https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/u ... -1-4827363"

This isn't just a great article, it's a fantastic one. I'm glad it got printed and linked to.

This sort of behaviour is an invasion no matter how one looks at it, and I'm not interested in hearing about how perhaps some random (and entirely likely small) subset of the male population might like it. Let's set a proper standard of behaviour and hold everybody to it, gals and guys alike. Why is this so hard.

I would not have been as circumspect as Howie was in that article. I would have communicated right off the mark that this is entirely unacceptable behaviour save for behind closed doors between consenting adults. Consent very rarely is operative in a public setting, and bending the rules based on the sex of the offender is doing nobody any favours.

A language barrier is no excuse for invasive behavior.

Look at this video 1 minute in. Would it be acceptable behavior if roles had been reversed?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aPWa5yhARLY

Surely part of the point of the report is that it shouldn't be.

I think the main point of the Youtube news report is that it shouldn't be ok for men to do it to women.. I also get the impression that the point of the demonstration was to show that women shouldn't be forced to wear such clothes or shoes.

Of course it did seem that men were more blatantly abused than women ever should or would be, but I think that these men don't intend to dress this way again. Still, point well taken that no one should be abused in such a manner, ever.

lazerr wrote:I think the main point of the report is that it shouldn't be ok for men to do it to women.. I also get the impression that the point of the demonstration was to show that women shouldn't be forced to wear such clothes or shoes.

Is this the first entry or the second? (I've not watched the youtube video.)

The takeaway needs to be that the behaviour is entirely inappropriate in all circumstances save behind closed doors between consenting adults. Full stop.

The other bits about "forced to wear such clothes or shoes" smack very familiarly with the entirely misandric notion of modern "feminism" and can be discarded as such as women are not "forced to ...". Full stop, also.

Face it, equality is transitive. If A equals B then B equals A. If it's bad for a man to grope a woman (physically or visually) then it's precisely as bad for a woman to do the same to a man.

There's no question that bad behavior is bad behavior. That people shouldn't be touched, especially not in their private parts -- that is why they're called "private" -- without the consent of the person being touched.

crfriend wrote:The other bits about "forced to wear such clothes or shoes" smack very familiarly with the entirely misandric notion of modern "feminism" and can be discarded as such as women are not "forced to ...". Full stop, also.

Strictly speaking that is true. But if the only way a woman can get a good-paying job in the work she has chosen and is most experienced in is to agree to wear clothes she would otherwise find unacceptable for work and tolerate unacceptable behavior, that's close enough to physically being forced to meet most reasonable people's definition of the term. To say otherwise is to deny the realities most people face.

Face it, equality is transitive. If A equals B then B equals A. If it's bad for a man to grope a woman (physically or visually) then it's precisely as bad for a woman to do the same to a man.

That's it!

BTW I was referring to the news report on YouTube showing the men dressed as women with high heeled shoes. The point of that action, I think, was to show how unfair it was for women to be required to wear these "uniforms" on the job (of course it was probably primarily a publicity stunt to get on the news.). Kind of an old story I guess, usually no one is forced, but many times it's implied, do so or don't work here.

crfriend wrote:misandric notion of modern "feminism" and can be discarded as such as women are not "forced to ...". Full stop, also.

Face it, equality is transitive. If A equals B then B equals A. If it's bad for a man to grope a woman (physically or visually) then it's precisely as bad for a woman to do the same to a man.

I think there’s a grave misunderstanding of what feminism actually is. Feminism can’t be ‘misandric’ since it’s about treating women and men the same way with no discrimination based on gender. It’s called feminism because it grew out of a fight of women for their rights which they’ve been denied for centuries, but it’s not limited to just their rights, it’s actually about equality. If anyone tells you that’s not feminism is about, they’re either misguided themselves or attempt to misguide you.

I know because I am a feminist.

andrewsh wrote:Feminism can’t be ‘misandric’ since it’s about treating women and men the same way with no discrimination based on gender. It’s called feminism because it grew out of a fight of women for their rights which they’ve been denied for centuries, but it’s not limited to just their rights, it’s actually about equality.

That's the idealised view of the faction known as "Equality Feminists" and which has largely been obsoleted by the more modern radical feminism that's more about relegating the status of men to sperm-donors, wallets, and prisoners. I'm a strong believer in equality, but it is simply not possible for one faction to be "more equal" than another -- and that's what's happening now. I cannot support that, either rationally or ethically.

andrewsh wrote: I think there’s a grave misunderstanding of what feminism actually is. Feminism can’t be ‘misandric’ since it’s about treating women and men the same way with no discrimination based on gender. It’s called feminism because it grew out of a fight of women for their rights which they’ve been denied for centuries, but it’s not limited to just their rights, it’s actually about equality. If anyone tells you that’s not feminism is about, they’re either misguided themselves or attempt to misguide you.

That's the feminism I also identify with. However, I expect the reports of people calling themselves feminists who are misandric are accurate. I suspect this is a distinct minority of "feminists" but maybe some of the more outspoken ones.

crfriend wrote:

andrewsh wrote:Feminism can’t be ‘misandric’ since it’s about treating women and men the same way with no discrimination based on gender. It’s called feminism because it grew out of a fight of women for their rights which they’ve been denied for centuries, but it’s not limited to just their rights, it’s actually about equality.

That's the idealised view of the faction known as "Equality Feminists" and which has largely been obsoleted by the more modern radical feminism that's more about relegating the status of men to sperm-donors, wallets, and prisoners. I'm a strong believer in equality, but it is simply not possible for one faction to be "more equal" than another -- and that's what's happening now. I cannot support that, either rationally or ethically.

Carl I have never been more made to feel like a wallet then when I was in a custody battle for my son. I was fighting for equal time which was already called for in my paperwork, however my son's mother was refusing to comply. I had even offered to continue paying child support. The lawyer got in my face and pointed his finger. he said, "You are a man, child support will never go away for you!"

crfriend wrote:

andrewsh wrote:Feminism can’t be ‘misandric’ since it’s about treating women and men the same way with no discrimination based on gender. It’s called feminism because it grew out of a fight of women for their rights which they’ve been denied for centuries, but it’s not limited to just their rights, it’s actually about equality.

That's the idealised view of the faction known as "Equality Feminists" and which has largely been obsoleted by the more modern radical feminism that's more about relegating the status of men to sperm-donors, wallets, and prisoners. I'm a strong believer in equality, but it is simply not possible for one faction to be "more equal" than another -- and that's what's happening now. I cannot support that, either rationally or ethically.

That is not true. What you’re describing has nothing to do with feminism.