Teen Arrested for Home-Made "Hot or Not" List on Facebook

[Cuppa Tetleys]

Someone took The Social Network a bit too literally! I hope he wasn't planning on making billions! That is hilarious, I'm sure that if it happened at my school I'd be pissed and want to smack the guy, but from a third party perspective that's just funny. What an idiot.

 

[PhiMed]

A desirable woman choosing a man absolutely increases his social status. If you're going to harp about "trophies", let me stop you there. Trophies don't have the ability to leave, and they don't have the ability to award themselves to other competitors. "Cuckold" is an insult for a reason. Women are able to define a man's social status through their behavior.

All right, I see where you are getting at, and it would be a valid point...if it took her perspective into consideration. You're absolutely right that this might be the case, that men might get some kind of social standing through sleeping with a certain woman. But, why does she sleep with him? You can't talk about her getting power out of that interaction unless we know what's going on from her perspective. So, I can see where you are getting at, but that's a gray area. She might be raising the man's social status, but if it's coming from a place of weakness from her, you couldn't really call it empowering, could you?


And let's move to another point: it's possible for men to use women's sexuality to raise their social status...without women knowing. This is experiential, but I did have a friend who was very upset that a supposed male friend of hers told every he slept with her...even though he didn't. She could say she didn't sleep with him till the cows came home, but his friends didn't believe her...they believed him. So, even in that case, I would make the argument that more often than not, a woman's sexuality can be used to increase a man's social power without any benefit (and actually even at a cost) to her.


EDIT: just being able to affect a man's (temporary) social status isn't real power. There's no agency in it for the woman, necessarily. That's key.

The power a woman has is in her power to say no. We live in a society where men, in general, are the pursuers and women, in general, are the selectors. To use an economic phrase, it's a "buyer's market". Women have power in their ability to select. Continuing with that analogy, cases of "theft" do not suddenly turn a buyer's market into a seller's market. It just makes the thieves a bunch of jerks and criminals.

I think that your assertion that a woman choosing a man to have sex with necessarily denotes a position of "weakness" is an issue that you have to deal with. I don't know to what "weakness" you're referring. I know just as many monogamous heterosexual relationships where the woman is an overbearing dictator as I do relationships where the man is a verbally abusive dick. Your perception that all women who submit to men's sexual advances are inherently in a weak position is projection, plain and simple.

It seems to me that you want the ramifications of sexual activity to be equal, not congruent. Any other possibility implies an unjust world in your mind. This is a biological impossibility, so you will forever be frustrated. As long as there are two genders, there will always be inequality. Equality is too stringent a criteria. If everything must be equal, then what do "feminine" and "masculine" even mean anymore?

Congruence means that neither gender has an overall net advantage, and it's a more nuanced and difficult to measure proposition. This is a good thing, as both genders have parts to play. The early strides of feminism were necessary and good, but the past few decades have seen the philosophy warp into something that seems to be distancing itself from the very thing it was previously supposed to celebrate. Feminist arguments today nearly all begin their argument by stating that society views femininity as bad. Once you lead with that, you're essentially arguing for the eradication of society's notion of the feminine.

 

[Chefodeath]

Ok, dudes clearly a dick. But this doesn't have anything to do with the law.

He should be expelled yeah. But arrested? Come on. What he did was no worse than calling someone a dickhead. Yeah, it was incredibly sexist and fucking retarded but I still don't see how this is a legal issue.

This. It was just to see the kid expelled but legal action? Seriously?

 

[PhiMed]

I'd be the first to say schools need to crack down harder on bullies...

But a 3 month police investigation into what amounts to a list version of a beauty contest? That's WAY over the top.

You didn't read the article;

"The list ranked the girls using a ten-point scale for facial features, a five-point scale for various body parts and whether their 'stock' was up or down; they were also assigned nicknames like 'The Designated Drunk' and 'The Amazing Bisexual.'"

Also, he handed the list out to the entire school.

Please identify the criminal offense. If your assertion is that he's a jerk. You're correct. If your assertion is that he's a criminal worthy of jail time, you've got to identify the crime.

 

[Cory Rydell]

Absolutely ridiculous. How in the world is this disorderly conduct!!! yea it is very rude and you can be sure none of the girls at his school will ever talk to him again but the fact that the school expelled him is totally out of line. Maybe they should just start slapping kids wrists for talking about each other behind each others backs, cause I bet nobody ever did that in school. He at least said it to their faces. The school that did this is a joke with no concept of what should really constitute disciplinary measures and what rights they have (if they are a public institution). The police officers getting involved is also hilarious and shows that town has no real crime.

 

[vivster]

so he got arrested for doing something irl that has been done in the internet on much bigger scales for years?

when will we finally have the full freedom of speech and not just the "lite" version....

 

[Imp_Emissary]

As a survivor of sexual assault, let me tell you, more times than not the accuser is NOT protected.

Can I ask you something? I was raped as a child and find the term 'survivor' really... bad. It makes it seem like the attacker did something huge and devastating. Although it was, I find it best to take back that power and show them you aren't ruined by it and that you are okay. Survivor just seems so... I dunno. Do you ever think this way?

And on a different note: is it just me, or is there a shit-ton of sexism on this forum?

When men are born into the world through their Mother, in their eyes she is god. However, when they grow up it seem many
then look at others of her kind as little more then meat. Sad really. From everything to
nothing. Once the almighty provider of all things, now not but flesh to taken and used.
Sicking no?

About zeldagirl's and your talk. Just "The Attacked"? (out of room)

 

[Imp_Emissary]

I'm not siding with the guy's statements, but I stick by the belief that no one should be stopped from saying what they want, at least not by the government.

Because, after all, what's the difference between a Compliment and an Insult?

The problem is that the victim decides what all that is and no one else. Some (no where
near many) take advantage of that. Both men and women.

 

[zeldagirl]

The power a woman has is in her power to say no. We live in a society where men, in general, are the pursuers and women, in general, are the selectors. To use an economic phrase, it's a "buyer's market". Women have power in their ability to select. Continuing with that analogy, cases of "theft" do not suddenly turn a buyer's market into a seller's market. It just makes the thieves a bunch of jerks and criminals.

I think that your assertion that a woman choosing a man to have sex with necessarily denotes a position of "weakness" is an issue that you have to deal with. I don't know to what "weakness" you're referring. I know just as many monogamous heterosexual relationships where the woman is an overbearing dictator as I do relationships where the man is a verbally abusive dick. Your perception that all women who submit to men's sexual advances are inherently in a weak position is projection, plain and simple.

It seems to me that you want the ramifications of sexual activity to be equal, not congruent. Any other possibility implies an unjust world in your mind. This is a biological impossibility, so you will forever be frustrated. As long as there are two genders, there will always be inequality. Equality is too stringent a criteria. If everything must be equal, then what do "feminine" and "masculine" even mean anymore?

Congruence means that neither gender has an overall net advantage, and it's a more nuanced and difficult to measure proposition. This is a good thing, as both genders have parts to play. The early strides of feminism were necessary and good, but the past few decades have seen the philosophy warp into something that seems to be distancing itself from the very thing it was previously supposed to celebrate. Feminist arguments today nearly all begin their argument by stating that society views femininity as bad. Once you lead with that, you're essentially arguing for the eradication of society's notion of the feminine.

I did not mean to imply it denotes a position of weakness. I think you're putting too much stock into the notion that women increase a man's social status, and that's how she is powerful. It seems that in that situation, a situation in which a man's social status is improved because of the woman he sleeps with, that's one sided. There is no talk of the benefit to her. So is it truly her own power then, as you say it is? In some cases, yes, it might be. But my point was to mention that there is a greater context in that scenario you've presented, and the idea that women use sexuality to affect the status of men is not always an empowering one for women.

You're right - equal is not the right word. Equitable is better. Though, I must say, I don't know where you are going with the 'feminine' and 'masculine' argument in this context. My original goal was to point out that, when dealing with sexual relationships, each gender should be regarded in a manner that is fair and equitable. It won't be *equal*, because of inherent differences. But under the principle of treating men and women as sexual beings in an equitable manner, women should be not labeled 'sluts' for having lots of sex, nor should they be warned 'well, you should have been more careful about who you had sex with' or any other comment that a man would not, under ordinary and common circumstances, receive. Men and women essentially should be treated the same if they are going to choose to be sexual beings - one should not be lauded while the other is shamed. That is what I mean by equitable (formerly equal). The reactions to the notion that people should be equitable, not discriminatory, as it stands now.

Where am I arguing for the eradication of the feminine? (Unless that 'you' was meant to be a general 'you'). We aren't arguing for the eradication of the feminine, rather, a renewal of respect for the feminine. You used examples earlier that demonstrated the point (the one about a man being ridiculed if he's yelled by a woman in public was a good one) about how particular men (not all) view femininity as bad, or less-than masculinity. Feminists goals are to reverse that, and give it the same value as the masculine. If your perception is that feminists don't want anything to do with femininity, well, maybe that's true for some, but that's not the general case. I'm sorry if you've been left with that perception.

 

[nightwolf667]

And on a different note: is it just me, or is there a shit-ton of sexism on this forum?

Yes, there is a shit-ton of sexism on this forum.

It only became apparent to me relatively recently, but it's absolutely appalling and to be perfectly frank, I don't feel all that welcome around here these days.

As a woman, I've got to say that I agree. I've been seriously appalled the last few months at some of the opinions here, particularly the last round of sexism over the "Slut Walks" which were protests over the double standards applied to women and sex. Most of the arguments boiled down to "women should be free to dress how they want without having to worry about rape" versus "women who dress like sluts deserve what they get". I've been avoiding the Escapist lately because I just don't feel welcome here anymore.

Frankly, stuff like what the douchebag did makes me sick.

Hive Mind and Zeldagirl, your conversation was refreshing, thank you for it!

 

[Tiger Sora]

Might be a crime because he talked about sexual stuff about girls under the age of 18 and put it on the internet. That would somehow fall under some sort of child pornography category? Thats all I can come up with to warrant an arrest but I'm no where near a legal expert.

 

[Ewyx]

I don't think it's his problem if women in his school are sluts.

 

[Chemical Alia]

What a little shit. The internet wasn't as popular when I was in high school, but this brings back memories of something similar some students did to me, which was pretty devastating to my confidence at the time as I didn't even know them.

You can go to juvenile court and receive probation for knocking over mailboxes, sounds like disorderly conduct to me. I could see him being charged fairly with something like informal probation with a 6 month period to prove good behavior and have it dropped from his record. I know I'd be pressing charges if I were on that list, and I believe sexual harassment is grounds for expulsion from public schools in the US. Harassment is usually not taken seriously, so I'm a bit surprised he was expelled.

 

[agrajagthetesty]

And on a different note: is it just me, or is there a shit-ton of sexism on this forum?

Yes, there is a shit-ton of sexism on this forum.

It only became apparent to me relatively recently, but it's absolutely appalling and to be perfectly frank, I don't feel all that welcome around here these days.

As a woman, I've got to say that I agree. I've been seriously appalled the last few months at some of the opinions here, particularly the last round of sexism over the "Slut Walks" which were protests over the double standards applied to women and sex. Most of the arguments boiled down to "women should be free to dress how they want without having to worry about rape" versus "women who dress like sluts deserve what they get". I've been avoiding the Escapist lately because I just don't feel welcome here anymore.

Oh god, absolutely. I was in that thread too and it began to make me physically nauseous after a while. So much bigotry, blindness, double standards and ignorance. Some time before that there was also a thread about feminism which got pretty ugly.

It's really sad that you've been avoiding these forums because of it, but I can't say I blame you. I guess there's just a lot of entrenched male privilege around these parts.

Just an aside: I'm a woman too. But it's not only women that are aware of the sexism here; I've seen some men getting equally spitting mad about it.