Proof that most “sexual harassment” stories are NOT about objective harassment

I was having a discussion with Cactuar about street harassment on FM. There, she was trying to say that she (and feminism) are mainly interested in tackling real street harassment – you know, the kind we can all agree is harmful and damaging. You know, like a guy running out of nowhere and starting to talk dirty to a woman in the subway, or some dudes starting to squeeze girls boobs, or following them around and yelling taunts.

One problem… I’ve been noticing and saying for years that this is a bunch of bullshit really intellectually dishonest, and that feminists keep expanding the definition of sexual harassment to make it possible for any man to be deemed a harasser for any reason – sometimes for merely being in the same room as the woman.

I’ve been saying for a while that they want it so that if an unattractive guy checks a woman out, it can be deemed harassment, whereas if an attractive guy does it, its not. Cactuar accused of me deceit and misrepresenting them, while claiming no such thing is ever done and they have nothing against sincere guys showing sincere interest in women, even in public and semi-public spaces.

Most feminist blogs (however) continually run and publish examples of stories that are not at ALL an example of objective harassment. Sure, there are a few cases of some guy squeezing some chick’s boobs or guys yelling taunts from a distance, but most of the stories involve a woman subjectivelly deciding something is street-harassment based on mere intuition and completely subjective criteria.

In some cases they involve akward men simply being social, some cases involve men simply sincerely trying to get to know a woman. Some cases don’t involve the man even DOING OR SAYING ANYTHING (they file these under non-verbal harassment).

Cactuar however blatantly tried to lie to me seemed to say that no such thing happens, and that they (feminists) have no problem with men simply trying to be social and meet women in public or semi-public spaces when its sincere and genuine interest. Honestly, she pissed me off with the blatant dishonesty of that claim, I found that somewhat unconvincing, because all it takes is a few minutes of browsing around feminist blogs to see most stories of “street harassment” involve some woman randomly deciding something is creepy based on NO objective criteria whatsover.

So I’ve decided to compile a resource for my claims. I’ll go on feminist-blogs and collect these stories of women being cruel and labeling men with the accusation of street harassment merely based on intuition or paranoid subjective criteria.

Note: I’ve only so far done 5 minutes of browsing on only the first of these websites, and so far came up with these 6 examples of subjective harassment being run AS IF they were objective harassment. I’ll increase this list over the next few months…

I’m not denying objective harassment exists, or that they also have stories of objective harassment. I’m only focusing on the problem that feminism JUSTIFIES and openly promotes the ability for women to tar and label and demonize men on nothing but a subjective hunch – while at the same time denying they do so… What follows is the abundance of example of such stories… Right from their websites.

Example Numero Uno

-> This story involves a chick who called the police on two guys. Why? Because they yelled “come here bitch” at a female dog… How is this a crime? Apparently, she KNOWS (telepathically) that the guys were only pretending to yell at the dog, but in truth, they secretly really were yelling at her because she was in hearing distance.  No, this is not a joke…

Example Number TWWOOOO

-> This is a story submitted as being “street harassment”. Guess what its about? It says that all men who have ever said to a woman “Hey, can I see that beautiful smile” are really VIOLENT ASSHOLES STREET-HARASSING HER in the name of evil patriachy par-taking in “street harassment”. Is she talking about groups of guys yelling that to a chick from across the street? Nope…

She even includes guys saying this to a woman when they’re simply seated next to her, or in the same checkout line. As we (the sane part of the population) know, this is, and very often can be a genuine and sincere form of flirting. But this website puts this under street-harassment… And let me remind you again, Cactuar showed an emotion of disbelief when I mentioned this website not being about objective-harassment.

Example Number TRESSS

->This is a story of a woman who witnessed TWO EVIL ASSHOLIC PATRIARCHS men beeping their car, and then later looking in the GENERAL direction of some women checking out some women who happened to be jogging on the side of the road (the men didn’t say or yell anything) – The site files the story under “non-verbal-harassment”.

FIRST she has no proof the beeping is related to the women jogging on the side of the road. Second, how does she KNOW what they were looking at? Third, being checked out is NOT objective-harassment and depends on whether the woman likes it or not, and who the checker-out is… Most female friends I know are flattered by being checked out.

And what PROOF does she have that they’re not friends with the women jogging by? How does she KNOW they’re not their boyfriends just saying “hey, how’s the exercise going?” to their girlfriends on the side of the road? Why does this website allow anyone to submit a story in other people’s names? Wasn’t it supposed to be only about objective-street-harassment?

The author of the story even whines complains about why the women aren’t offended enough. And how pissed off displeased she is that “society teaches women” to take being checked out as a compliment. How much does THIS fly in the face of the claim that these organizations are only interested in OBJECTIVE harassment!?

Let me summarize for you… Here’s a story of some chick who a) is pissed off that some guys might or might not have checked out some joggers b) she knows nothing about the women or the checker outters and their relationship c) she uses her subjective feeling about men checking women out, and DECIDES in the name of the potentially checked out women to deem this STREET HARASSMENT. d) The leading website on the subject ran this story on their frontpage.


-> Here’s another case that’s filed under “non-verbal harassment”. It’s basically a story of a woman ranting how THESE EVIL MEN DARE some men choose to seat next to her on buses when picking a seat. She further rants about how some of these men sometimes DARE CHECK HER OUT look at her, or SOME OF THEM EVEN DARE TALK TO THE QUEEN try to engage her in conversation. Note, she mentions nothing about the conversations being, lewd, or sexual in nature. Considering this is whiney-rant-central a website dedicated to the topic, I’m confident she’d have taken the opportunity to mention that they were lewd or rude conversations. Since she didn’t, we can safely assume she’s only had people engage in normal, everyday social chit-chat.

===These men stare at you====


As you can see from her story, you can notice she provides no objective proof of any of the actions being “street harassment”. She uses vague, subjective terms like “stare”. The same eye-contact that one woman perceives as a neighborly “flirting” or assessing of romantic interest, another will deem to be staring and third will call it “ogling”.

====undress you with their eyes====


I’ve many times in my life found out that a woman I had been interacting with, had thought I was “undressing her with my eyes”, and these were women I had absolutely no sexual interest in. Many gay guys say they too have many times been accused or assumed to be ogling or undressing a woman, when they, obviously weren’t. Paranoid and insecure women can read into any type of eye-contact as being undressing, since its completely subjective.

======try to start a conversation with you=======


Notice, she has no proof of these conversations all being romantic in nature, and even if they were, they still fit what I say. Even if the guy was romantically interested, there is no proof it wasn’t simply genuine and sincere interest. Notice how she mentions no groping, no stalking, no lewd language… Merely guys on a bus who make conversation. Yet, this is filed under “street harassment” on the website.

their attention is totally unwanted. The trolley and bus is not a great ave place to meet men, usually these men have criminal records, do not drive because they owe back child support, are extremely unattractive, unintelligent and do not have legitimate income.

The FBI should TOTALEEEE hire her. She can tell all these things about an entire bus through mere telepathy. Omg, she’s so amazing. And notice, even if these things were true, how does this make it “harassment”. It sounds like “I feel harassed because low status MALES dare to be in the same space as I” “Some of these low-status males DARE sit next to me when PICKING A SEAT!!!!” “some of these low-status males even sometimes DARE treat me like an equal and chit-chat with me, HOW DARE THEY, do they know I AM A QUEEN ABOVE THEM – you don’t TALK to the QUEEN!!!”

Notice how at the end of the story she gives up what I believe and theorize to be the real motive behind her rant? It fits what I’m saying – that many women want to use “harassment” as a way of punishing and demonizing low-status males. None of what she said or the examples she gave, would she rant about, if it were Denzel Washington performing them. Imagine Denzel seating next to her on the bus, and starting a friendly conversation. Would she call it “street harassment”? You be the judge…

Her rant at the end (in my mind) betrays her true motives… She seems pissed off displease that men of a lower-social-status are being in the same space as her, and some even treat her as an equal. I’m sensing her feeling some sort of superiority and classist tendencies. She wants to distance herself from “the lower castes” by labeling them as harassers. A desire to put herself above the “low class” she doesn’t want to feel part of.

This story is a good example of how the label “harassment” can be used not just to distance yourself from men you subjectively deem unattractive, but also as a way to distance yourself from a “caste” you do not want to be associated with.

Example Number FIVVVEEE

-> This a story of a woman who had a fight with a cab driver over CAB-FARE. From the story you can tell he’s an asshole, but she has NO proof its gender-specific and the cab driver wouldn’t have had this fight with any customer of any gender.

How does she tie it into “sreeet harassment”? Because after a big, long and arduous fight (OVER CAB FARE) that had nothing to do with sex, the cab driver at the end yelled a rape insult that was the equivalent of telling a guy “I hope you get robbed and stabbed to death”. Again, this was a fight between A CUSTOMER and a CAB-driver over FINANCES.

She has 1) no proof he wouldn’t have insulted a guy the same, and 2) it still has nothing to do with street harassment. How did this story end up on the website compiling stories of street harassment again? Let me remind you, it was suggested to me I was exaggerating or making up my observation that “anti-street-harassment” campaigns allow for subjective experiences to be deemed “sexual harassment”.

Example Number SIXXX

-> This is a story of some paranoid bitter harpy woman who decided that a man was a pervert who was secretly taking pictures of their butts, and then wrote down his licence plates. What proof does she have of this? Apparently telepathy.

Basically, these women were walking down the same street as a guy who had a camera. After they passed him, they heard (or however they noticed) him taking a picture. They concluded he must be taking a picture of their butts, and now published the story as “street harassment”.

I (alek) have worked as a professional photographer, and I will tell you this confidently -> EVEN IF I Was looking at a photographer DIRECTLY I couldn’t tell what he was taking a photograph of, their butts or the street. Yet these women KNOW this telepathically with their backs turned to him while passing him. And then they decide to tar him a “pervert”The leading website on the subject of street-harassment readily runs this story.


Again, I gotta be honest – I was infuriated when it was suggested to me that these people only care about objective and widely-agreed-upon forms of harassment. This flies in the face of everything I’ve ever seen from even mere, casual browsing of those organizations. I swear to you that I found the above 6 stories in JUST 5 minutes of browsing the first website that I opened on the subject. I’ll keep adding examples to this post over time..