I think the fact that he was a young, fresh faced kid is also making a difference. If it was a pervy, old, drunk creep on the street, people might be singing a different tune.
That speaks to the sexual intent of the cheek peck as well. The reporter is young and pretty and of course female. I don't think the kid would be as eager to jump Peter Mansbridge. So it goes back to treating women equally or not.
The Following User Says Thank You to OMG!WTF! For This Useful Post:
If this happens as often as they are trying to say with their This happens all the time to women in the media, then maybe the TV stations should be doing something about it. Perhaps have big burly bouncers around them to make people think twice. Or maybe have a sign that says, This reporter is not live, there is a 15 minute delay, that would also stop people because then they know that if they do something to be "cool" it will not make it on TV.
I don't agree. I think there are sexual kisses, which could lead to this being fairly labeled a sexual assault. This wasn't a sexual kiss. It was a peck on the cheek. My mom used to call these 'bobecks" ffs. I can't believe in Canada anybody would be at risk for being labeled a sexual predator for giving somebody a bobeck.
I think the fact that he was a young, fresh faced kid is also making a difference. If it was a pervy, old, drunk creep on the street, people might be singing a different tune.
That speaks to the sexual intent of the cheek peck as well. The reporter is young and pretty and of course female. I don't think the kid would be as eager to jump Peter Mansbridge. So it goes back to treating women equally or not.
I think the fact that he was a young, fresh faced kid is also making a difference. If it was a pervy, old, drunk creep on the street, people might be singing a different tune.
That speaks to the sexual intent of the cheek peck as well. The reporter is young and pretty and of course female. I don't think the kid would be as eager to jump Peter Mansbridge. So it goes back to treating women equally or not.
If you want to go specifics, he also pulled his phone out, so there was some ego 'look what I can do' aspect to it. It seemed to fit right into the theme of harassing female reporters.
Dude, just because your not offended, or other examples aren't, especially men, doesn't mean it's not correct for others to be scared or offended. Why is this so tough for you?
The world can be very scary for a girl sometimes. And just because you mean it to be a peck, doesn't mean she sees it as such. Or should see it as such.
The Following User Says Thank You to Daradon For This Useful Post:
Dude, just because your not offended, or other examples aren't, especially men, doesn't mean it's not correct for others to be scared or offended. Why is this so tough for you?
The world can be very scary for a girl sometimes. And just because you mean it to be a peck, doesn't mean she sees it as such. Or should see it as such.
I agree. I'm trying to say this isn't a male vs. female, sexual thing.
It's a prank. It's people messing with reporters, which has been going on since the invention of live tv.
I understand that unwanted touching messes with some people just like someone lighting fireworks messes with people with PTSD.
What I'm arguing is there's not malicious intent.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to polak For This Useful Post:
If this happens as often as they are trying to say with their This happens all the time to women in the media, then maybe the TV stations should be doing something about it. Perhaps have big burly bouncers around them to make people think twice. Or maybe have a sign that says, This reporter is not live, there is a 15 minute delay, that would also stop people because then they know that if they do something to be "cool" it will not make it on TV.
It would be cool if TV cameras were equipped with tasers, so the cameraman could just hit a button when someone was messing a reporter and taze the idiot.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following User Says Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
I agree. I'm trying to say this isn't a male vs. female, sexual thing.
It's a prank. It's people messing with reporters, which has been going on since the invention of live tv.
I understand that unwanted touching messes with some people just like someone lighting fireworks messes with people with PTSD.
What I'm arguing is there's not malicious intent.
Pranks, especially on camera, get stiff penalties. Remember Ralph getting pied? Totally harmless pie. He was not harmed by the pie, he should shrug it off right?
So, you're making my argument?
The Following User Says Thank You to Daradon For This Useful Post:
Dude, just because your not offended, or other examples aren't, especially men, doesn't mean it's not correct for others to be scared or offended. Why is this so tough for you?
The world can be very scary for a girl sometimes. And just because you mean it to be a peck, doesn't mean she sees it as such. Or should see it as such.
Some people just never experience or see things from that perspective. They live in an egocentric reality where the actions of others are compared to their own needs and desires without an empathic element to their decisions.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to AcGold For This Useful Post:
Some people just never experience or see things from that perspective. They live in an egocentric reality where the actions of others are compared to their own needs and desires without an empathic element to their decisions.
Yeah, if you're referring to me than your out to lunch.
I'm arguing the intent wasn't malicious, not that the result couldn't have been hurtful or freighting.
Some people just never experience or see things from that perspective. They live in an egocentric reality where the actions of others are compared to their own needs and desires without an empathic element to their decisions.
Agreed. There are certainly a lot of people that aren't empathizing with the intent of the kid that was just having a little fun and what it must feel like at 17 years old (!) to be accused (and found guilty, by many) of sexually assaulting a middle-aged woman when you did nothing of the sort.
Agreed. There are certainly a lot of people that aren't empathizing with the intent of the kid that was just having a little fun and what it must feel like at 17 years old (!) to be accused (and found guilty, by many) of sexually assaulting a middle-aged woman when you did nothing of the sort.
It's scary for a girl to have a guy run up and do anything, even just getting close without touching. Because men are much bigger.
It's scary for anybody to have anybody run up to them unexpectedly. Some people have a quick or dramatic or hair-trigger startle response, too, regardless of gender.
Again, this "assault" has nothing to do with gender. I'd be startled if somebody ran up from behind me in that way and I'm a 6'4" guy that weighs 230 pounds. Getting startled doesn't magically go away the larger you become or the more manly you are.
Agreed. There are certainly a lot of people that aren't empathizing with the intent of the kid that was just having a little fun and what it must feel like at 17 years old (!) to be accused (and found guilty, by many) of sexually assaulting a middle-aged woman when you did nothing of the sort.
So as long as it is all in fun people should be okay with it?
So as long as it is all in fun people should be okay with it?
No, but empathy requires looking at a situation from all angles. Why must I only empathize with the reporter? I do empathize with her as it would be startling, would knock you off your game and would just in general be a piss off.
I can also empathize with the kid, though, can't I? I would think anybody that claims to be empathetic would find it hard not to. He's 17 years old. He's a kid. And if this thread is any indication more than half the people that viewed that clip thinks he committed a sexual assault. I happen to think he didn't, and I empathize with how scary it must be to be thrust into notoriety like that. It's a child versus the full weight of the CBC framing the story as a sex assault, the RCMP are involved, every discussion forum in Canada is talking about him. It's nuts - all because he was being a goof ball. Already his punishment far outweighs the crime. How do you not empathize with him?
