Criminalizing Cat Calling/Wolf Whistling

[Empty It]

I'm wondering if this whole thread is a whoosh, meaning we're into triple whoosh territory. 

A wooshception if you'd like.

[Mark Connolly]

9 minutes ago, Newbornbairn said:

I'm wondering if this whole thread is a whoosh, meaning we're into triple whoosh territory. 

More of a weet-woosh?

[Newbornbairn]

2 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:

More of a weet-woosh?

Or a wh-wh-wh-whoosh. Which is the sound Bairnardo* makes when he tries to Wolf whistle.

 

*me too 

[HeWhoWalksBehindTheRows]

22 minutes ago, Newbornbairn said:

I'm wondering if this whole thread is a whoosh, meaning we're into triple whoosh territory. 

Wooshception

[djchapsticks]

1 hour ago, Steve_Wilkos said:

I used to work on a construction site in Middlesbrough town centre where we were building a high-rise. 

A couple of days into the job, this stunning 10/10 lass walks past and waits at the bus stop, and I mean Ferrari chassis, fantastic set of shelves, and legs right up to her arse. 

.

I was about to chuck it at this point. 

Glad I didn't, what a rollercoaster!

[Miguel Sanchez]

 

[Mr Waldo]

A new law?   That'll take years.  Could they not just tag it onto the Hate Crime one like Nottinghamshire did?

I am a wee bit surprised a the support for a Conservative idea on here, Priti Patel will be pleased.  Should we be campaigning to the Scottish Government to do the same? But maybe even mention the fact that Scottish news just said that FIVE percent of reported rapes and attempted rapes in Scotland led to a conviction.  Maybe a bit of priorities eh!

Never mind, I've a high horse to get on, gotta prove my 'I am lovely' credentials at every opportunity. 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

A new law?   That'll take years.  Could they not just tag it onto the Hate Crime one like Nottinghamshire did?
I am a wee bit surprised a the support for a Conservative idea on here, Priti Patel will be pleased.  Should we be campaigning to the Scottish Government to do the same? But maybe even mention the fact that Scottish news just said that FIVE percent of reported rapes and attempted rapes in Scotland led to a conviction.  Maybe a bit of priorities eh!
Never mind, I've a high horse to get on, gotta prove my 'I am lovely' credentials at every opportunity. 

What the fucking hell is this dribbling, tear-stained mess supposed to mean? [emoji23]

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

4 hours ago, Les Cabbage said:

Anyone who thinks it’s harmless fun is an absolute moron.

I don’t think police should hang around in any specific areas looking for it; 1 because I don’t trust the police and 2 it can happen literally anywhere so what would be the point in that?

I wouldn’t be creating a new offence for it but it should definitely come under sexual harassment.

My girlfriend this deals with it all the time in Glasgow so much so that she changes what she’s wearing if she’s going to be walking anywhere alone because it makes her that uncomfortable.

If the police can afford to shove hundreds of officers at Livingston vs Hibs on a Sunday afternoon in front of 5000 supporters they can spend a bit of time processing fines for weird men being total fucking creeps and making young lassies feel unsafe in the streets.

Clubs pay for this. 

2 hours ago, Les Cabbage said:

Yeah but it obviously still uses their resource regardless of where it’s funded by, instead of using hundreds of excess bellends there they could put their time to better use.

Not really sure what point youre making? Vast majority of football duties nowadays are cancelled rest days, whereby the police officers have their day off cancelled and a ‘day in the book’ back. So its not people who would just be moved from the football to patrol building sites for wolf whistles. 
 

On the subject of the wolf whistling and cat calling, ive seen it get really bad recently, wee lassies 13/14 years old followed by adult males making sexual comments, I think there is an issue whereby it goes beyond the old fashioned (and still not right) benny hill style stuff. There is however already existing legislation which can be used for people who make sexualised comments etc to someone else so dont see the need for new legislation. We do need to vastly improve education of young men at an early age and adequately support victims of sexual assault and harassment. 

[GordonS]

If you can't let an attractive person pass you in the street without harassing them you're probably a pervert and a wrong 'un. I don't think we need police patrols going past building sites to deal with it though. This is essentially the olden days version of creepy men constantly commenting on the twitter feeds of attractive females in the (entirely misplaced and delusional) hope they'll one day get a shag out of it. I feel it can be dealt with in a similar fashion and a simple retort of "I'm not going to shag you m8" from the victim should suitably embarrass the cat caller in front of his similarly creepy pals. 

On the face of it that sounds sensible, but it doesn't reflect the experiences of women. Lots who've challenged street harassment have stories of the man turning aggressive. Plenty of others are too scared to answer back.

We need to remember that women are scared of us and it affects the daily lives of most of them. Women won't walk alone at times and places we would never think twice about.

[GordonS]

A gay guy also called in to talk about him and his boyfriend wolf whistle men in the street and thought that it was harmless fun yet thought it was degrading and nasty to wolf whistle females, I don't see the difference?

The difference is that men aren't systematically objectified, belittled, sexualised, discriminated against, raped and murdered by gay men.

I think wolf whistling strangers is always wrong, but it's worse for more vulnerable victims.

What's the P&B consensus should we be expecting an already stretched police force to deal with this and how would they go about getting convictions for cat calling?

This is something folk always say when someone suggests criminalising something. I remember it being said about the smoking ban, banning smacking, even going far enough back to when it was legal to rape your wife. "We'd need police in every pub/ house/ bedroom."

Reality is, this is a poor argument. Police don't have to witness something for it to be prosecuted. And with a lot of things like this, the mere act of banning it is usually enough to massively reduce it. How many prosecutions have there been for the smoking ban and when was the last time you were in smoky pub?

[GordonS]

Yeah, I suspect not. Last word... you see the problem I'm getting at though right. "Out of order" is entirely subjective. So "reasonable people" would disagree on what "out of order" is.  Reasonable people might also disagree on whether a person is guilty of another crime, like murder, but at the very least, we all understand unequivocally what murder is and agree on the definition.
You'd be asking the jury to effectively decide whether the offense someone has been accused of is even a crime, rather than just whether they're actually guilty of a well-defined crime.

FWIW we don't all agree on what constitutes a murder, which is why culpable homicide exists. Judges and juries decide on intent all the time.

And bear in mind that unless it's a summary indictment the accused will never see a jury.

[Gordon EF]

8 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Here's a thought.

Instead of getting all worked up over how a law might be worded, why don't men just stop harassing women in the street.

I didn't realise those were the only two choices.

[Gordon EF]

21 minutes ago, GordonS said:

FWIW we don't all agree on what constitutes a murder, which is why culpable homicide exists. Judges and juries decide on intent all the time.

And bear in mind that unless it's a summary indictment the accused will never see a jury.

There obviously can be uncertainty about whether an act is actually murder. But there's little ambiguity about what murder actually is.

[Jacksgranda]

34 minutes ago, GordonS said:

 

The difference is that men aren't systematically objectified, belittled, sexualised, discriminated against, raped and murdered by gay men.

I think wolf whistling strangers is always wrong, but it's worse for more vulnerable victims.



This is something folk always say when someone suggests criminalising something. I remember it being said about the smoking ban, banning smacking, even going far enough back to when it was legal to rape your wife. "We'd need police in every pub/ house/ bedroom."

Reality is, this is a poor argument. Police don't have to witness something for it to be prosecuted. And with a lot of things like this, the mere act of banning it is usually enough to massively reduce it. How many prosecutions have there been for the smoking ban and when was the last time you were in smoky pub?

When the last pope was elected.

[Jambomo]

Quote

My girlfriend this deals with it all the time in Glasgow so much so that she changes what she’s wearing if she’s going to be walking anywhere alone because it makes her that uncomfortable.

I have noticed that Glasgow seems to be worse for it than Edinburgh was. I’ve lived in Edinburgh for 30 odd years and it only happened once to me, I’ve only lived in Glasgow since last March and been wolf whistled at twice and had some pretty lewd remarks made by a group of builders about whether they’d have sex with me or not. I am a 42 year old woman and whilst I know I don’t look my age, I am far from a good-looking young lassie - so God knows what they get or how they cope.

With regards to wolf-whistling, I don’t like like it and feel embarrassed and a bit cheap when it’s done to me so no, it’s not a compliment.

Remarks are worse though, even when you think they are positive! I don’t feel complimented or happy that they find me attractive or want to have sex with me, I feel embarrassed because I have no idea where to look or how to walk so they aren’t looking at me that way. I feel a bit disgusting that a complete stranger is even thinking of me In a sexual way, and annoyed at myself for being scared of them especially when I’ve done various martial arts and self-defence stuff for years so in theory should be able to handle trouble or at least answer back.
 

Those comments played on my mind for a few weeks afterwards and I could have reported them, I knew where they were working. What good would it do? If I told the police they’d laugh at me, it’s barely a crime. They’d get a telling off and if I walked past again, I’d be getting worse abuse for reporting them. It’s a catch-22.

The only real answer is for people (and I do include men and women in this) to stop thinking that it’s funny or ok to be shouting stuff or whistling at all. If you can’t stop yourself commenting on people simply passing by you, then you’ve got problems.

Edited July 21, 2021 by Jambomo

[Moomintroll]

27 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

I have noticed that Glasgow seems to be worse for it than Edinburgh was. I’ve lived in Edinburgh for 30 odd years and it only happened once to me, I’ve only lived in Glasgow since last March and been wolf whistled at twice and had some pretty lewd remarks made by a group of builders about whether they’d have sex with me or not. I am a 42 year old woman and whilst I know I don’t look my age, I am far from a good-looking young lassie - so God knows what they get or how they cope.

With regards to wolf-whistling, I don’t like like it and feel embarrassed and a bit cheap when it’s done to me so no, it’s not a compliment.

Remarks are worse though, even when you think they are positive! I don’t feel complimented or happy that they find me attractive or want to have sex with me, I feel embarrassed because I have no idea where to look or how to walk so they aren’t looking at me that way. I feel a bit disgusting that a complete stranger is even thinking of me In a sexual way, and annoyed at myself for being scared of them especially when I’ve done various martial arts and self-defence stuff for years so in theory should be able to handle trouble or at least answer back.
 

Those comments played on my mind for a few weeks afterwards and I could have reported them, I knew where they were working. What good would it do? If I told the police they’d laugh at me, it’s barely a crime. They’d get a telling off and if I walked past again, I’d be getting worse abuse for reporting them. It’s a catch-22.

The only real answer is for people (and I do include men and women in this) to stop thinking that it’s funny or ok to be shouting stuff or whistling at all. If you can’t stop yourself commenting on people simply passing by you, then you’ve got problems.

I really cannot get my head round how or why anyone could find making unsolicited remarks to another person acceptable. I am honest enough to acknowledge it has never been a problem for me, but I could never make anyone else feel uncomfortable or insulted by something I said.

[Les Cabbage]

2 hours ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Clubs pay for this. 

Not really sure what point youre making? Vast majority of football duties nowadays are cancelled rest days, whereby the police officers have their day off cancelled and a ‘day in the book’ back. So its not people who would just be moved from the football to patrol building sites for wolf whistles. . 

If officers didnt get their days in the book as you call it they would spend the day doing something else.

And I also said in my initial post them patrolling building sites would be pointless.

Anyway, I’m no really arsed about police budgets or their annual leave handbook, it was just a sly dig at them in the midst of my views on the subject because I don’t trust them and I don’t think their time is spent well.

[tamthebam]

2 hours ago, GordonS said:

FWIW we don't all agree on what constitutes a murder, which is why culpable homicide exists. Judges and juries decide on intent all the time.

And bear in mind that unless it's a summary indictment the accused will never see a jury.

There's summary crime and solemn crime 

Summary crime proceeds with a "complaint" detailing the charge .

Solemn crime proceeds by way of Petition and then Indictment (before a jury if it goes to trial)

"Summary indictment" is an oxymoron.

The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 and the Act of Adjournal (Criminal Procedure Rules) 1996 are the required bedtime reading (insomniacs only) 

 

 

[GordonS]

2 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

There obviously can be uncertainty about whether an act is actually murder. But there's little ambiguity about what murder actually is.

No, there is ambiguity, as I said that's why there's culp hom. They both involve causing death but the distinctions in terms of the levels of intent and recklessness can be pretty subjective. Case law nails them down as best it can but no two cases are exactly alike. Say I'm the getaway driver for a bank robbery. In the chase from the scene I lose control and crash into an ambulance carrying organs for transplant. The organs don't get there in time and the patient dies. Murder or culp hom? Or nothing?

There are whole textbooks and moot competitions on this kind of thing.