Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Women in the Locker Room
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Regina" data-source="post: 1288959" data-attributes="member: 12872"><p>By the same measure, men do wear provocative attire at work. Men and women have entirely different attractions. What would be provocative to a woman is a uniform (i.e. police officers and soldiers). Women love em. And I think we can agree that soldiers and police officers are abundantly aware that women are attracted to those uniforms. Especially given your name. </p><p></p><p>We both know that women act "aggressively flirtatious" with police officers, therefor since the officer wears a uniform and KNEW that women enjoyed seeing them, she is entitled to act that way. Because after all the reporter knew that how she dressed was attractive to men and the men in the locker room were entitled to behave in that manner. </p><p></p><p>I'm with ya, she didn't have a right to make a complaint, but not because of how she dressed. She didn't have a right to complain because no one is entitled to not be offended. And yes, women can dress however they like without backlash. Because if the "they dressed within a manner that turned me on without my previous consent," doesn't hold water for a woman being flirtatious with cops, then it doesn't hold water for a man to do it because of a woman's attire either. </p><p></p><p>(And I am so NOT a feminist. Actually I respect men very highly, which is why I don't believe they have no control over their behavior when they see a woman that is attractive. I have more faith in them than that.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Regina, post: 1288959, member: 12872"] By the same measure, men do wear provocative attire at work. Men and women have entirely different attractions. What would be provocative to a woman is a uniform (i.e. police officers and soldiers). Women love em. And I think we can agree that soldiers and police officers are abundantly aware that women are attracted to those uniforms. Especially given your name. We both know that women act "aggressively flirtatious" with police officers, therefor since the officer wears a uniform and KNEW that women enjoyed seeing them, she is entitled to act that way. Because after all the reporter knew that how she dressed was attractive to men and the men in the locker room were entitled to behave in that manner. I'm with ya, she didn't have a right to make a complaint, but not because of how she dressed. She didn't have a right to complain because no one is entitled to not be offended. And yes, women can dress however they like without backlash. Because if the "they dressed within a manner that turned me on without my previous consent," doesn't hold water for a woman being flirtatious with cops, then it doesn't hold water for a man to do it because of a woman's attire either. (And I am so NOT a feminist. Actually I respect men very highly, which is why I don't believe they have no control over their behavior when they see a woman that is attractive. I have more faith in them than that.) [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Women in the Locker Room
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom