Talk:Street harassment

message: This article was full of original research, weasel words, unverifiable claims, POV text, and included off topic links.  I've removed most of it.  In particular, all the racial theorizing is off topic and belongs in other articles.  --Xyzzyplugh 14:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I've removed much of this article 

message: The term "street harassment" is a recent invention of certain fringe segments of organized feminism, in an effort to further demonize (and potentially even criminalize) behaviors that are, in large measure, normal for males (as well as females, one should add). I, for instance, have been in the receiving end of catcalls by females (and sometimes males), and have never considered it harassment nor anything less than the compliment it was intended as (such as "free booty call here!" from a girl I was running past or "nice posture!" or whooping by a gang of girls in a car passing by or a butt-grab by a horny girl in a nightclub). Around here, that's perfectly normal for the girl to do the catcalling, as well as the other way around. There are numerous areas in society where it is perfectly normal -- female on male, as well as male on female; for instance, black society, hispanic society, or areas that are predominantly catholic, or even cities well-known for the friendliness of its residents, like Milwaukee; and it's a cultural thing. Other parts of society (which some may regard as simply being more hard-up and morally conservative, notwithstanding their politically liberal slant) may have a problem with it, particularly the WASP middle to upper classes and the academia in the Northeast where many of the feminists attempting to demonize this issue hail from.
The term should be explictly noted as being little more than the shibboleth of certain fringe constituencies that has no currency amongst the general population; and it may also be considered part of a larger movement to instill a regime of political correctness (which has started attracting the attention of human rights watch groups, as noted below).
More research needs to be done (and noted) in the article concerning the history behind this social engineering movement and the other aspects of the issue; for the language and terminology "street harassment" is not in general usage or acceptance outside a very narrow constituency. The invention was brought about by feminist legal theorists and is, indeed, explicitly noted as a social engineering project by those involved in the effort. A good place to start is the "Street Harassment Project" website (http://www.streetharassment.org). Note the biased language even present in its declaration, by the way: "fighting the [sic] sexual harassment of women (and perceived women) by men in public spaces". If the advocacy were anything less than disingenuously hypocritical, it would have been stated in gender neutral language as "fighting the sexual harassment of people by others in public spaces". This is one of the ways you can tell that the specific intent is to demonize men under the false pretext of social propriety. This is also seen in the explicit gender-specific language cited below.
Another place to look is the "anti-street harassment uk" site (http://www.anti-harassment.ik.com"), which also makes explicit its intent as a group of feminists to ramrod this pretext through society by social engineering: "we are a group of feminists to challenge [sic] public sexual harassment through [sic] consciousness raising and activism" (i.e. through "reeducation and reindoctrination").
It is considered a part of feminist legal theory and is discussed in these settings. A good example may be found by reviewing the curriculum vitae of various feminist legal theorists (particularly those who have graduated from the northeastern Universities), such as Cynthia Grant Bowman (http://www.law.northwestern.edu/faculty/fulltime/bowman/bowmcv.html or a cite of one of her articles at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/vaw00/Safe-T-Man.html) or a cite "Street Harassment as [sic] sexual subordination: The phenomonology of [sic] gender-specific harm", Wisconsin Women's Law Journal 12 (Fall), 167-206, from 1997 by Deborah Tuerkheimer.
(As a data-point: most catcalls I've witnessed in person, in fact, have been female to male (sometimes with me on the receiving end), not the other way around -- which only underscores the hypocritical bias of the stance advocated in the latter paper. If anything, it's women I've learned the behavior from.)
Predictably enough, both theorists come straight out of the northeast, well-known for its Victorian hard-uppedness: Bowman from Swarthmore in Pennsylvania; Tuerkheimer from Harvard; with Tuerkheimer at the University of Maine Law School, last I checked.
It should also be linked to the larger censorship movement it is part of, known as "Political Correctness", that has run rampant on campuses. No less than the Freedom House human rights watch organization has put the United States on report on this account (http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=22&year=2005&country=6858) "a number of the country's prestigious universities have adopted policies of 'political correctness' intended to combat harassment against traditionally marginalized groups. However, such policies are controversial as they may restrict the expression of opinions, uusually voiced by political conservatives, that diverge from mainstream campus views..." which is the larger context that the street harassment issue arises from. "Women are heavily represented in the law, medicine, and journalism, and predominate in the university programs that train students for these professions", which both undercuts the pretext of "traditionally marginalized group" underlying the stance behind "street harassment" exposing its hypocrisy, and bodes potentially ill for the future, should a large enough number of the ranks of these graduating classes come to align themselves with the warped perspective engendered (pun intended) by the fringe extreme amongst feminist legal theorists. It has also attracted the attention of the Department of Labor who, in its occupational outlook for College faculty, makes explicit note of the growing hazard.
:I'm sorry to tell you, but "street harassment"/catcalls aren't uncomfortable for people because they're dirty, hairy feminists; it's a disrespect for that person's dignity and boundaries. This page's description includes this sentence: "The victim's reaction, which will vary depending on circumstances, will not be positive." I took that to mean that "street harassment" doesn't include positive flirtation, it's referring to unwelcome attention. Whether this behavior is "normal" for anyone or not, continuing that behavior when the other party is obviously uncomfortable or frightened is harassment. However, to be truly NPOV the other side of this issue should be represented also, as long as it doesn't try to condone this behavior. 209.40.189.180 16:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not a neutral article (even with the removals) 

message: I would like if this page had some explanation why telling a woman to smile is sexual harrassment. Because round where I'm from, people (regardless of gender) tell eachother to smile all the time, if they're looking glum. If there's some kind of implied meaning behind telling people to smile that doesn't exist in my part of the English-speaking world, I think it merits inclusion here.  Generalmiaow 02:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not the person who originally put that into the article, but I can see why some people think it should be here and why others think it's confusing. A lot of harassers use phrases like "smile, sweetheart" along with their other, more demeaning actions--so when a person has heard it in the context of being harrassed, it's hard to separate it from that. On the other hand, with some people it's most likely just an sweet, innocent comment. I'm not sure how to explain any of this right. 172.145.192.23 18:42, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand now and I can relate to it, but without an explanation on the page it is simply too confusing. Thus I am removing it. I would suggest a more general term that covers telling people to smile in the context of sexual harrassment, such as one from a citable source... Generalmiaow 03:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

text: It is also saying you own the person if they are a stranger and have a right to control their emotions. What I do is not any stranger's business, so long as I do nor say anything to them. My face is my body, and as an adult, I should have the right to control what I do with my body without anyone who is not an authority over me telling me what to do. There are some men who think women owe them a smile, among other things. Nobody owes a stranger anything.72.11.37.111 (talk) 00:11, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smile 

message: The image for the Japanese train cars isn't appropriate because the article is about street harassment, and the article is specific that this is verbal harassment.  The train cars are for women to avoid chikan, which is groping in Japan.  Chikan is physical, not verbal, and it has it's own article here at Wikipedia. (The problem is so pervasive that men are being banned altogether from stores and restaurants, and other businesses, too.)  
Better images to include would be some from the street harassment groups mentioned in the article, such as Hollaback and the Blank Noise Project. I'm sure they would give permission to upload their images, particularly since I understand it's one of these groups that created the article in the first place.  Aine63 04:21, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Better image for the article

message: Even the article states that women can also engage in street harassment--we've all seen it happen time and time again--so the article should have a gender-neutral focus. (It is pure feminist propaganda that women aren't as bullying as men are.) Aine63 05:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *If I'm not mistaken, that old Salt and Peppa video for "Shoop" was completely about street harassment of men. LOL  Or, maybe I'm remembering it wrong. Good song, though :) Aine63 20:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: *I edited a sentence near the beginning, stating that female on male harrassment doesn't carry the implicit threat of rape or assault present in male on female situations. This is a highly biased sentence, since--especially among young teenagers--female on male situations can get quite rough, and may even constitute a psychological rape, even if physical rape is unprevalent, and since the kinds of street harrassment described in this article--sounding the horn of the car, or catcalls--are more often than not simply rude displays of machismo without real threat value. Wilderns 5 November 2006
*Wilderns, when you live your life as a female and have to go through the world wondering if taking a walk down the street will result in a honking car stopping to gang rape you, then you can have an opinion on what women are allowed to have as women's issues. I really don't think you will ever have to have that thought in the back of your mind. When you as a male have to feel antsy by keeping in the back of your mind the location of each woman in the street as someone who may brutalize or rape you, instead of being able to take that walk without a care in the world, then you can tell me about how gender neutral this issue is. Banjotime 20 March 2007
* Banjotime, I'll have to ask you to please not speak for all women. Not all women have the same experiences you do, nor do all women have the same fears. I'm female, and do not fear assault. Also, it's quite rude to speak as if no man has ever feared harassment or assault from strangers. This is not a gendered issue, and it is borderline victim-blaming to try to make it into one.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.149.47.197 (talk) 00:55, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Double standard

message: The statement "Women get harassed no matter how they are dressed despite commonly made arguments to the contrary." seems to be leftover from a previous edit war upon inspection of the article history. Suggest checking the entire article incase article is not merged. 24.160.206.18 06:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: It's been more than seven years since this was independent article. I think it deserves its own space and will BOLDly move in that direction. Feel free to object or comment. --Jprg1966 (talk) 16:15, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's try this again 

message: It seems that by the name, street harassment is a bit broader than sexual harassment. Cyclists get harassed a lot of times as my personal experience says, and yes, while a lot of it is sexual, it is not all sexual. Some people just don't like cyclists, or they think we're children, broken people, need to be helped, fragile, etc. Maybe male dominance is the root of some of that, but those types of encounters themselves are not sexual. Then some of the more sexual types of harassment are by people who are not actually interested in their victims. They heard gossip about their sexual orientation or something. Or the harassment is 8-based rather than sexual, like calling someone a "he-she" or asking what gender they are.72.11.37.111 (talk) 00:06, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The definition needs work 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Street harassment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141031005238/http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/viral-video-documents-york-street-harassment-26568112 to http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/viral-video-documents-york-street-harassment-26568112
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello there! I am taking part in a class and one of our assignments is to critique a Wikipedia article so I picked this one! I think this article is great and does a pretty good job trying to remain in a neutral voice. However, I was wondering about the neutrality of the sources that the information came from. I realize that it is very difficult for one to find a source on catcalling that isn't biased one way or another so I don't know if this is a fixable issue. I was also wondering about the citation for the "eve teasing" reference in the definition section. I'm not sure if you have to site a source for something linked to a different Wikipedia article but it seemed to come out of the blue and not match the rest of the section. There are also a couple places where there is a note for a citation needed but there is no citation. Also, source number eight no longer exists. The article must have been taken down. Finally, I was wondering if it were possible to add in the perspective of someone who does catcall and why. I know there is a section how they view it as a complement but where does this idea come from. I recognize that there probably isn't any way to find out and we would have to make conjectures which could go in an unbiased way but I just thought it would be interesting and provide the other perspective, even if it isn't necessarily correct. Great article! Thank you for tackling such an important issue!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ewest19 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing  

message: I thought I had been directed to what appeared to be a rather short article, only to discover that it was the lead! Way too long! I have tagged, and will try to work to resolve. Any assistance from others is appreciated. Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 22:19, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead too long 

message: This sentence "The practice of street harassment is rooted in power and control" has only a small view of possible causes.
What is with a lack of adequate opportunities for expression of interest or affection - simply an inability to social interaction?
would this not also require a (half) sentence?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrBn (talk • contribs) 16:00, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  other causes Suggestion 

message: I tagged the problems with this article in two recent edits (diff). It currently reads too much like an academic article in feminist studies (or some related field). Here are some phrases or words an unfamiliar person will not understand (bolded with a ?):
*"Street harassment is the embodiment of societal discrimination through power and control?.
*Similarly, for women of color who have been historically objectified?, exoticized?, deemed sexually available, and commodified?, harassers feel they are free to access their physical bodies.
There is more jargon, obviously. This presents a problem with WP:NPOV, since it states theories about "discrimination through power and control", objectification, etc. as fact. Furthermore,
This resembles original research in that it draws a general conclusion from just one study, asserting it as fact. I'm not aware of the exact policy for making original conclusions from just one source. But I would expect this to be true intuitively. We need secondary sources to analyze multiple studies to form conclusions. Remember that statistical studies, insofar as their new results are concerned, are primary sources. This article as a whole relies too much on individual studies and draws unstated conclusions from them. wikinights talk 08:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explaining the Essay-like} and Technical tags 

message: "Obra" here refers to "work site" or "construction site." I could not figure out how to edit the photo caption. Pls correct it. BerikG (talk) 23:33, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Inaccurate translation of the sign in the photo