The Porn Dude

Battered Woman Dressed Provocatively: WWYD?

Miss*Bijou

Sexy Troublemaker
Nov 9, 2006
3,136
44
48
Montréal


wow...
I have to admit I found this pretty shocking.



<img style="visibility:hidden;width:0px;height:0px;" border=0 width=0 height=0 src="http://c.gigcount.com/wildfire/IMP/CXNID=2000002.0NXC/bT*xJmx*PTEzMTYzMzI3MDA3MDMmcHQ9MTMxNjMzMjcxMDg*MyZwPTEyNTg*MTEmZD1BQkNOZXdzX1NGUF9Mb2NrZV9FbWJlZCZn/PTQmbz*2ZWUyZDE3MGU2OTU*ZDAzODc1ZWExY2ZlMDYyN2ExYyZzPWZhY2Vib29rJm9mPTA=.gif" /><object classid="clsid:D<param name="movie" value="http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf" /><param name="quality" value="high" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowNetworking" value="all" /><param name="flashvars" value="configUrl=http://abcnews.go.com/video/sfp/embedPlayerConfig&configId=406732&clipId=10642168&showId=12569153&gig_lt=1316332700703&gig_pt=1316332710843&gig_g=4&gig_s=facebook" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf" quality="high" allowScriptAccess="always" allowNetworking="all" allowfullscreen="true" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="344" height="278" flashvars="configUrl=http://abcnews.go.com/video/sfp/embedPlayerConfig&configId=406732&clipId=10642168&showId=12569153&gig_lt=1316332700703&gig_pt=1316332710843&gig_g=4&gig_s=facebook" name="ABCESNWID"></embed></object>




If you're curious and want to watch the entire first part, the video is here:

http://abcnews.go.com/WhatWouldYouDo/video/battered-woman-10642092
 

TooLegit

New member
Apr 28, 2011
47
0
0
A few years ago, I was in line at the grocery store and some guy punched his girlfriend in the face. Apparently she said something 'disrespectful'. There just happened to be a semi-pro fighter in line behind them and he knocked the idiot out in one punch. Doubt he learned a lesson though.
 

threepeat

New member
Sep 20, 2004
946
2
0
Edmonton
This is an extension of our earlier conversations on dress, but this doesn't surprise me at all. For better or worse, dress is a form on nonverbal communication. Like all forms, it can get misinterpreted in that the message the person thinks they are conveying is not necessarily what gets received.

To follow up on my earlier analogy, if you had three similar set ups where a (1) rich-looking guy, (2) middle-class looking guy, and (3) poor looking guy, all dropped their wallet, I bet you would get three different reactions on how hard people tried to give it back to him.

I also predict that if you reversed the gender roles on this and it was a guy getting beaten up by his girlfriend, the crowd would also mind their own business.

On the bright side, you can also spin this story as "dressing well improves woman's chance of getting assistance."

The media cynic in me as well said that they ran this experiment until they got the textbook reactions they were looking for.
 

Unpossible

A.C.A.B.
Dec 26, 2008
908
13
0
I also predict that if you reversed the gender roles on this and it was a guy getting beaten up by his girlfriend, the crowd would also mind their own business.
They did that scenario and IIRC only one woman tried to help. Even an off duty cop did nothing.
 

hipdude

Banned
Sep 14, 2011
44
0
0


wow...
I have to admit I found this pretty shocking.



<img style="visibility:hidden;width:0px;height:0px;" border=0 width=0 height=0 src="http://c.gigcount.com/wildfire/IMP/CXNID=2000002.0NXC/bT*xJmx*PTEzMTYzMzI3MDA3MDMmcHQ9MTMxNjMzMjcxMDg*MyZwPTEyNTg*MTEmZD1BQkNOZXdzX1NGUF9Mb2NrZV9FbWJlZCZn/PTQmbz*2ZWUyZDE3MGU2OTU*ZDAzODc1ZWExY2ZlMDYyN2ExYyZzPWZhY2Vib29rJm9mPTA=.gif" /><object classid="clsid:D<param name="movie" value="http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf" /><param name="quality" value="high" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowNetworking" value="all" /><param name="flashvars" value="configUrl=http://abcnews.go.com/video/sfp/embedPlayerConfig&configId=406732&clipId=10642168&showId=12569153&gig_lt=1316332700703&gig_pt=1316332710843&gig_g=4&gig_s=facebook" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://abcnews.go.com/assets/player/walt2.6/flash/SFP_Walt_2_65.swf" quality="high" allowScriptAccess="always" allowNetworking="all" allowfullscreen="true" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="344" height="278" flashvars="configUrl=http://abcnews.go.com/video/sfp/embedPlayerConfig&configId=406732&clipId=10642168&showId=12569153&gig_lt=1316332700703&gig_pt=1316332710843&gig_g=4&gig_s=facebook" name="ABCESNWID"></embed></object>




If you're curious and want to watch the entire first part, the video is here:

http://abcnews.go.com/WhatWouldYouDo/video/battered-woman-10642092

What was shocking about it???

Its absolutely normal for people to stand up to a male abuser when there is a battered woman. There are so many guys who love to be this hero in public jumping to the rescue of a battered woman. There are so many women who feel solidarity with other women when it comes to being abused by men.

What is disappointing is that the video shows it as just a black and white issue. It doesn't talk about the complexity of the situation. It just shows a battered woman getting abused by her boyfriend and people jumping to the rescue. It doesn't delve into her mind, her situation, why she remains with him, and why he is like that. It doesn't show any dynamics.

Nobody learns anything from this fluff. I guess they made it just to make people feel good about themselves by demonizing the "other".
 

hipdude

Banned
Sep 14, 2011
44
0
0
The media cynic in me as well said that they ran this experiment until they got the textbook reactions they were looking for.
You have to be a cynic to think this? No, you just have to have a brain. Don't feel bad that you have one and are willing to use it! If more people would use their brains, the media would be forced to make more insightful programs, and then perhaps someone out there might come up with better strategies for dealing with these situations, and perhaps people would learn not to abuse each other.

But if they keep dumbing down complex issues, nobody learns anything. You just get people to say they are shocked. You get people who are too sensitive, who become unable to think of solutions because they are reeling from trauma at what they see on the screen. Sorry, but I prefer to take a tough stance and really delve into the issues for the purpose of understanding and perhaps one day, solving these problems.
 

Alix Turner

Member
Apr 27, 2011
433
0
16
they wouldn't have turned this into a news story if it hadn't been offensive and shocking.. think about it, if everyone had responded in a courageous and unbiased fashion and helped the provocatively dressed girls.. no one would be talking about it

The footage is way too chopped up for me to believe for a second they really made a point of having the girls behave in the exact same manner for both dates (I heard a conservatively dressed girl whimper immediately and loudly when she got grabbed, and no such behaviour when she was in the second outfit... maybe that had an effect on how people reacted), and even so.. they'll have to get a bit more in depth than two girls in two different outfits each and an "expert" that has a bit more expertise than being a professor (no school named) that "studies" violence against women..
 

Miss*Bijou

Sexy Troublemaker
Nov 9, 2006
3,136
44
48
Montréal
What was shocking about it???

Its absolutely normal for people to stand up to a male abuser when there is a battered woman. There are so many guys who love to be this hero in public jumping to the rescue of a battered woman. There are so many women who feel solidarity with other women when it comes to being abused by men.

What is disappointing is that the video shows it as just a black and white issue. It doesn't talk about the complexity of the situation. It just shows a battered woman getting abused by her boyfriend and people jumping to the rescue. It doesn't delve into her mind, her situation, why she remains with him, and why he is like that. It doesn't show any dynamics.

Nobody learns anything from this fluff. I guess they made it just to make people feel good about themselves by demonizing the "other".

Honestly, It seems to me like you're totally missing the point here. The topic isn't about the complexity or the dynamics between the battered woman and her boyfriend, it's not about them but rather about how others around them are reacting and whether they react the same way when the woman is dressed provocatively.


Also, we're saying "provocatively dressed" here but it's not like it was over-the-top either, so it surprised me there was such a difference in how people reacted to the situation. I agree that it's hard to know whether the actors were the exact same way in each scenario (they weren't "fighting" about the same issue since the second one was specifically abusive about how she was dressed while the first obviously wasn't).


The assumption that the two white ladies seem to focus on, that the couple were pimp & prostitute, was so stereotypical and pretty ignorant IMO. There was nothing unusual about a more fitting dress that showed more cleavage; it isn't by any means unusual or the most provocative any of us can come across on any given day. Certainly not anywhere close to a stereotypical image of a "hooker", so I think the fact that these two women jumped to that conclusion and seemed to think it was in anyway even relevant, was quite disturbing although probably not too surprising. And of course, as was said in the video, what difference should it have made in determining whether or not to intervene.


It was probably naive to expect that people would react in similar ways to the women regardless of whether they were wearing mildly more "provocative" or revealing clothes. I guess it makes sense but I still think it's pretty sad. It's even more sad if it doesn't cause us to pause and think about it. I don't think it's a matter of blaming those people but neither is it a matter of justifying it. It's not about the abuser or the battered woman or the complexity of abusive relationships, it's about our own biases in regards to treating a situation or person differently based on something that is actually not relevant and shouldn't make any difference on how we choose to act - because it makes no difference on whether the person is in need of help.


In other words, I understand there isn't anything so surprising about it and I understand why that happens and where it comes from - but I don't think it makes it ok. The message isn't "don't dress provocatively because if you do and find yourself in trouble, no one will help" or "why do women stay with abusive boyfriends" but rather "why does the way a woman might be dressed determine whether we we step up and help when we witness her being abused and how do we change that?".


So again, maybe I'm misunderstanding you and you can let me know if that's the case but it seems to me you've missed the point.


By the way, welcome back, Hunsperger. ;)
 

Miss*Bijou

Sexy Troublemaker
Nov 9, 2006
3,136
44
48
Montréal
Very astute observation of yours here Alix, this semi- controlled study, like statistics, can be manipulated to produce whatever results you wish based on the slight "X" factors or variables that you have mentioned.

People are emotional animals & will react solely based on that.

Remember the fight or flight response you learned in high school psychology?
This is not all that different excepting that the fight or flight response is base more on instinct than learned behavior.


:fear:

You learned psychology in high school?

Gawd, no one is implying it was meant to be scientific. It is nice to reflect and discuss regardless.



By the way, welcome back, Crusty/Mr.O. ;)





I also predict that if you reversed the gender roles on this and it was a guy getting beaten up by his girlfriend, the crowd would also mind their own business.

Very true. Though for different reasons, that's also a problem, isn't it? I think so..



On the bright side, you can also spin this story as "dressing well improves woman's chance of getting assistance."

I'm not sure how that can even be determined. What is "dressing well"? Was the "provocatively" dressed woman not "dressed well"? Would something that qualifies as "dressed well" be the same in all settings, situations, at any age, across cultures, place, time of day and according to everyone unanimously & objectively? Taking that angle creates a whole new set of questions, doesn't it?
 

threepeat

New member
Sep 20, 2004
946
2
0
Edmonton
Very true. Though for different reasons, that's also a problem, isn't it? I think so..
Yes and no... my point is that a lot of things can cause a crowd not to react to something. You could write probably 15 different stories on "variable X makes people not react." They just happened to choose the one that makes us look most like assholes.

I'm not sure how that can even be determined. What is "dressing well"? Was the "provocatively" dressed woman not "dressed well"? Would something that qualifies as "dressed well" be the same in all settings, situations, at any age, across cultures, place, time of day and according to everyone unanimously & objectively? Taking that angle creates a whole new set of questions, doesn't it?
If you prefer, I can change my point to "dressing conservatively improves a woman's chance of getting assistance."

Truthfully, I don't have a big problem with most stereotypes and generalizations, because that is how people learn. For example, if you are attacked by a black bear, you are supposed to fight back. If you are attacked by a grizzly bear, you are supposed to play dead. We are generalizing and playing probabilities, but because the subject of our analysis is a bear and not a human, no one cares. But the mechanism is the same. People learn by taking mental shortcuts so they don't have to reinvent the wheel all the time.

If we apply this to fashion, when people see certain types of dress they form a preconception in their head. It's a shortcut so we can recognize the businessman or the doctor or the plumber or the SP.

I used to do some teaching of high school kids, and learned very early that kids were much easier to manage if I wore a full suit vs just a dress shirt and slacks. I decided then that I can either rail against how judgmental people are, or I can learn from it and learn to work with it.

If you want to try an experiment, try changing the pictures on your website to pictures of you wearing regular business clothes, maybe some pajamas, or jeans and a T-shirt. No lingerie, no tank tops, no bustiers. See if that impacts your business. Should it? No. Will it? I'm certain it would.
 

Miss*Bijou

Sexy Troublemaker
Nov 9, 2006
3,136
44
48
Montréal
Yes and no... my point is that a lot of things can cause a crowd not to react to something. You could write probably 15 different stories on "variable X makes people not react." They just happened to choose the one that makes us look most like assholes.


If you prefer, I can change my point to "dressing conservatively improves a woman's chance of getting assistance."

Truthfully, I don't have a big problem with most stereotypes and generalizations, because that is how people learn. For example, if you are attacked by a black bear, you are supposed to fight back. If you are attacked by a grizzly bear, you are supposed to play dead. We are generalizing and playing probabilities, but because the subject of our analysis is a bear and not a human, no one cares. But the mechanism is the same. People learn by taking mental shortcuts so they don't have to reinvent the wheel all the time.

If we apply this to fashion, when people see certain types of dress they form a preconception in their head. It's a shortcut so we can recognize the businessman or the doctor or the plumber or the SP.

I used to do some teaching of high school kids, and learned very early that kids were much easier to manage if I wore a full suit vs just a dress shirt and slacks. I decided then that I can either rail against how judgmental people are, or I can learn from it and learn to work with it.

If you want to try an experiment, try changing the pictures on your website to pictures of you wearing regular business clothes, maybe some pajamas, or jeans and a T-shirt. No lingerie, no tank tops, no bustiers. See if that impacts your business. Should it? No. Will it? I'm certain it would.

I realize this but the conclusion the ladies' came to, that the couple were hooker and pimp and therefore they just needed to be kicked out? That's just something we need to learn? Don't be mistaken for a hooker with her pimp if you want people to believe you are deserving of their help?


I realize it's easier to work with it and wear a suit to work. But on those mornings, you knew you were working in a school, you knew kids listened to you when you wore a suit, so you wore a suit. You didn't have to start wearing a suit all the time, in case you might at some point during the day or night might suddenly have to get some kids attention. You didn't have to decide whether or not to wear a suit to go swimming because you pretty much knew that wasn't when you were going to need it. You only wore the suit when you were working at that school and you wore it for a specific reason. Whether or not it's actually true, you're using the knowledge that a suit is more intimidating to these kids to your advantage.

You also knew that if you didn't wear it, the difference would be that you'd have a harder time getting their attention. Or, worse case scenario: you wouldn't be able to get their attention at all, which might be annoying and perhaps stressful...but that's about it. And pretty different than not receiving help when physically abused, in danger or threatened, wouldn't you agree?


I understand the concept, I realize in most cases it's best to go along with it. If I'm going for a job interview, I realize my general appearance and the way I choose to dress is going to influence how the person sees me and that even with the same answers I give, it could be interpreted completely differently. Fine. There a specific goal in a specific situation where I want the interviewer to view me as professional and to take me seriously etc..


The problem here is there really isn't any way to isolate one scenario where one can expect to be abused and in need of help from strangers. So what exactly does this "knowledge" do for me or any other woman? Should we dress conservatively everytime we are in a public setting where we might end up needing strangers' help, should we be victim of abuse? And if a woman has an abusive spouse (or just in case he might turn out to be), she should just "learn" to keep herself covered up because it will make it more likely that someone will help her if her spouse is abusive to her?

Forget skirts or heels or anything form fitting. Especially anything that would reveal cleavage and don't wear bright lipstick or makeup either, lest you be confused for a hooker - the horror! - because otherwise, you probably won't get any help? Is that the message?


The suit sends a message that says "I mean business" and results in kids paying closer attention. The lingerie is pretty appropriate in this situation considering the nature of the services being offered. It says "oooh baby come on over" and hopefully that's what ends up happening. lol But what does wearing a dress that is more sexy (but in no way inappropriate or out of place) convey? And how does that result in concluding that this woman doesn't deserve any help as she is abused? I don't see how that leap is made. Or what women are supposed to "learn" from that situation. Wear turtlenecks and baggy pants at all times, even out on a date or else don't expect anyone to come to your help, should you need it? Is that really what you're saying?


So am I to interpret the position you're all taking to mean that if you had things your way, we would all behave according to social norms, no matter how unfair and bigoted and we would accept this is the way things are so we would never, ever question them, challenge them or call them out on it. We would simply keep things just the way they are, follow along without a word and certainly never suggest changing the way things are done to be more fair. Well, that's nice.
 

hipdude

Banned
Sep 14, 2011
44
0
0
Honestly, It seems to me like you're totally missing the point here. The topic isn't about the complexity or the dynamics between the battered woman and her boyfriend, it's not about them but rather about how others around them are reacting and whether they react the same way when the woman is dressed provocatively.


Also, we're saying "provocatively dressed" here but it's not like it was over-the-top either, so it surprised me there was such a difference in how people reacted to the situation. I agree that it's hard to know whether the actors were the exact same way in each scenario (they weren't "fighting" about the same issue since the second one was specifically abusive about how she was dressed while the first obviously wasn't).


The assumption that the two white ladies seem to focus on, that the couple were pimp & prostitute, was so stereotypical and pretty ignorant IMO. There was nothing unusual about a more fitting dress that showed more cleavage; it isn't by any means unusual or the most provocative any of us can come across on any given day. Certainly not anywhere close to a stereotypical image of a "hooker", so I think the fact that these two women jumped to that conclusion and seemed to think it was in anyway even relevant, was quite disturbing although probably not too surprising. And of course, as was said in the video, what difference should it have made in determining whether or not to intervene.


It was probably naive to expect that people would react in similar ways to the women regardless of whether they were wearing mildly more "provocative" or revealing clothes. I guess it makes sense but I still think it's pretty sad. It's even more sad if it doesn't cause us to pause and think about it. I don't think it's a matter of blaming those people but neither is it a matter of justifying it. It's not about the abuser or the battered woman or the complexity of abusive relationships, it's about our own biases in regards to treating a situation or person differently based on something that is actually not relevant and shouldn't make any difference on how we choose to act - because it makes no difference on whether the person is in need of help.


In other words, I understand there isn't anything so surprising about it and I understand why that happens and where it comes from - but I don't think it makes it ok. The message isn't "don't dress provocatively because if you do and find yourself in trouble, no one will help" or "why do women stay with abusive boyfriends" but rather "why does the way a woman might be dressed determine whether we we step up and help when we witness her being abused and how do we change that?".


So again, maybe I'm misunderstanding you and you can let me know if that's the case but it seems to me you've missed the point.


By the way, welcome back, Hunsperger. ;)
Thanks very much for your informative and edifying response. Yes I think you are right, I had missed the point. But to your point about the reaction to the perceived "provocatively dressed" woman, its rather disappointing that what I would consider insignificant differences in wardrobe to warrant such a drastic difference in reaction. Society is far too conservative and judgemental about sexuality. And I supposed I missed the point because to me, the way she was dressed was nothing to even be worth noticing or reacting to.

It was unfortunate that they chose different persons as the second couple. To make the point clear, they should have chosen the same persons in the second couple, but only changed the "provocativeness" of the wardrobe on the woman. That it was a black man, and that the bruises were different, only muddled the control of the experiment - people could have responded differently due to race, the types and amounts of bruises, or simply the differences in the perceived behaviours of the actors (ie: one male might have seemed more threatening than the other).

Fortunately I do believe that most like you probably sensed their intention correctly over and above their lousy execution.

By the way, I'm not Hunsperger.
 

Miss*Bijou

Sexy Troublemaker
Nov 9, 2006
3,136
44
48
Montréal
Actually, when you watch the whole thing - the reaction of others is based on the degree of aggressiveness of the male. People intervened with the first couple because they were confident that the guy wouldn't go "off" on them. With the second and third couple people phoned 911 or told the manager - but - did not put themselves in personal danger because of the aggressiveness of the male. There is also a different perception of the woman in the second and third couple, but that was deliberate on the part of the TV crew. The bruises just emphasize that the male is perfectly capable of going "off" on a person stupid enough to intervene.

Al, I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say the second and third couple..

Just to make it easy to know we're referring to the same scenes..

There are 2 couples:
1-white couple
2-black couple

Each doing 2 scenarios (and the women have the same amount of "bruises" in both cases):
A-wearing non revealing clothes
B-wearing revealing clothes

So there are 4 scenes in total:
1A
1B
2A
2B


What do you mean there is a different perception of the woman in the second and third couple? I don't know which one that refers to.. And how so?

I also don't see how the guy from 1A (which you can watch by following the link as it's not in the video) was any less capable of going "off" than he was in the second scenario (1B)?
 

Miss*Bijou

Sexy Troublemaker
Nov 9, 2006
3,136
44
48
Montréal
And I supposed I missed the point because to me, the way she was dressed was nothing to even be worth noticing or reacting to.
That was what I found shocking in the different reactions because I didn't think the way she was dressed was all that provocative and definitely not over-the-top. So it was shocking to me that the difference in reactions was so striking.

It was unfortunate that they chose different persons as the second couple. To make the point clear, they should have chosen the same persons in the second couple, but only changed the "provocativeness" of the wardrobe on the woman. That it was a black man, and that the bruises were different, only muddled the control of the experiment - people could have responded differently due to race, the types and amounts of bruises, or simply the differences in the perceived behaviours of the actors (ie: one male might have seemed more threatening than the other).

That is what they did though... They did the same experiment with 2 separate couples. (See above details). So each couple tested two scenarios; first with the woman dressed non "provocatively" and then with the woman dressed provocatively. Each woman had the same amount of "bruises" in both of the scenarios they tested.
 

threepeat

New member
Sep 20, 2004
946
2
0
Edmonton
I realize this but the conclusion the ladies' came to, that the couple were hooker and pimp and therefore they just needed to be kicked out? That's just something we need to learn? Don't be mistaken for a hooker with her pimp if you want people to believe you are deserving of their help?


I realize it's easier to work with it and wear a suit to work. But on those mornings, you knew you were working in a school, you knew kids listened to you when you wore a suit, so you wore a suit. You didn't have to start wearing a suit all the time, in case you might at some point during the day or night might suddenly have to get some kids attention. You didn't have to decide whether or not to wear a suit to go swimming because you pretty much knew that wasn't when you were going to need it. You only wore the suit when you were working at that school and you wore it for a specific reason. Whether or not it's actually true, you're using the knowledge that a suit is more intimidating to these kids to your advantage.

You also knew that if you didn't wear it, the difference would be that you'd have a harder time getting their attention. Or, worse case scenario: you wouldn't be able to get their attention at all, which might be annoying and perhaps stressful...but that's about it. And pretty different than not receiving help when physically abused, in danger or threatened, wouldn't you agree?


I understand the concept, I realize in most cases it's best to go along with it. If I'm going for a job interview, I realize my general appearance and the way I choose to dress is going to influence how the person sees me and that even with the same answers I give, it could be interpreted completely differently. Fine. There a specific goal in a specific situation where I want the interviewer to view me as professional and to take me seriously etc..


The problem here is there really isn't any way to isolate one scenario where one can expect to be abused and in need of help from strangers. So what exactly does this "knowledge" do for me or any other woman? Should we dress conservatively everytime we are in a public setting where we might end up needing strangers' help, should we be victim of abuse? And if a woman has an abusive spouse (or just in case he might turn out to be), she should just "learn" to keep herself covered up because it will make it more likely that someone will help her if her spouse is abusive to her?

Forget skirts or heels or anything form fitting. Especially anything that would reveal cleavage and don't wear bright lipstick or makeup either, lest you be confused for a hooker - the horror! - because otherwise, you probably won't get any help? Is that the message?


The suit sends a message that says "I mean business" and results in kids paying closer attention. The lingerie is pretty appropriate in this situation considering the nature of the services being offered. It says "oooh baby come on over" and hopefully that's what ends up happening. lol But what does wearing a dress that is more sexy (but in no way inappropriate or out of place) convey? And how does that result in concluding that this woman doesn't deserve any help as she is abused? I don't see how that leap is made. Or what women are supposed to "learn" from that situation. Wear turtlenecks and baggy pants at all times, even out on a date or else don't expect anyone to come to your help, should you need it? Is that really what you're saying?


So am I to interpret the position you're all taking to mean that if you had things your way, we would all behave according to social norms, no matter how unfair and bigoted and we would accept this is the way things are so we would never, ever question them, challenge them or call them out on it. We would simply keep things just the way they are, follow along without a word and certainly never suggest changing the way things are done to be more fair. Well, that's nice.
The thing about dress is that it is nonverbal communication that is going on all the time with anyone who sees you -- you can't really turn it off like you can speech. It is also subject to the interpretation of the receiver just as much as the intent of the sender. You can say you meant "X" but if they hear "Y" at the end of the day the intended message was not sent.

I'm not saying a woman who dresses provocatively is less deserving of help -- I'm just agreeing with the study that she's less likely to get it.

People form stereotypes and value judgements based on their previous experiences. My experience with racism, prejudice, and any kind of discrimination is that you can tell people till you're blue in the face what they should think, but the most you will do is push the expression of those views beneath the surface -- the core values and judgements have not changed. To truly change preconceived notions, that's done the hard way -- one person and one experience at a time.

To circle back to my student and suit analogy, once the students got to know me, it matter very little what I wore. They had a larger set of experiences with me as an individual and no longer relied on their preconceptions of people in suits.

To change peoples' perceptions of women dressing provocatively, you are going to have to change their experience of everything they've seen in life and in the media. That's simply not going to happen during a two-minute fight in a restaurant.

And... I get back to my earlier point that I think that ABC spiked those results. There are a lot of clubs and restaurants where that dress would be appropriate, but based on the customers they talked to, it sure looked like the neighbourhood family diner, and in that setting, yes, she looked like a fish out of water and was treated as such. If she was at a nightclub and that happened, the reaction would be different because the customers would be different and so would their value sets.
 
Last edited:

Miss*Bijou

Sexy Troublemaker
Nov 9, 2006
3,136
44
48
Montréal
The thing about dress is that it is nonverbal communication that is going on all the time with anyone who sees you -- you can't really turn it off like you can speech. It is also subject to the interpretation of the receiver just as much as the intent of the sender. You can say you meant "X" but if they hear "Y" at the end of the day the intended message was not sent.

I'm not saying a woman who dresses provocatively is less deserving of help -- I'm just agreeing with the study that she's less likely to get it.

People form stereotypes and value judgements based on their previous experiences. My experience with racism, prejudice, and any kind of discrimination is that you can tell people till you're blue in the face what they should think, but the most you will do is push the expression of those views beneath the surface -- the core values and judgements have not changed. To truly change preconceived notions, that's done the hard way -- one person and one experience at a time.

To circle back to my student and suit analogy, once the students got to know me, it matter very little what I wore. They had a larger set of experiences with me as an individual and no longer relied on their preconceptions of people in suits.

To change peoples' perceptions of women dressing provocatively, you are going to have to change their experience of everything they've seen in life and in the media. That's simply not going to happen during a two-minute fight in a restaurant.

Of course not, I wasn't expecting to see any change but I think the video should be viewed as our reflection in a mirror, where we can acknowledge what preconceptions we have and how we might want to change in ourselves. There is no other way to accomplish that without first realizing it and to me, the video should have been a bit of an eye opener. I don't expect things to be different tomorrow morning but I don't think accepting that's just the way we are is likely to change much either. :)
 

threepeat

New member
Sep 20, 2004
946
2
0
Edmonton
My point was that people immediately made a risk assessment with all three couples. They felt they could safely intervene with couple one. They did not feel that they could safely intervene with couples two and three. That's entirely due to the evident bruising already on the woman and the aggressiveness of the male.
Exactly. What's not talked about at all in the analysis of this video is -- and guys, correct me if I'm wrong -- is that one of the first things a guy thinks in that situation is "can I take this guy?" That has at least as much bearing on if the girl receives help as any other factor.
 

Miss*Bijou

Sexy Troublemaker
Nov 9, 2006
3,136
44
48
Montréal
There are 2 couples...(plus a third from a previous show/experiment)



There are three couples in this study. The forth couple is a replay of a 2006 similar program.

So:
Couple one is Black haired woman with guy in turtleneck
Couple two is Blond haired woman with guy in suit
Couple three is Black haired negro woman with negro guy in long sleeved T shirt

Couple one (1A) and two (1B) are the same. Same blond haired woman. ;)


Couple three is Black haired negro woman with negro guy in long sleeved T shirt

The guy is wearing long sleeved tshirt (2A) and then a blue 2-tone sweater with large horizontal stripes. (2B).




Exactly. What's not talked about at all in the analysis of this video is -- and guys, correct me if I'm wrong -- is that one of the first things a guy thinks in that situation is "can I take this guy?" That has at least as much bearing on if the girl receives help as any other factor.

Same guys in both scenes/scenarios..
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts