Naked Female Storms Western Wall

[Forty Two]

But, the leftist progressives should view this as unwelcome sexual conduct in a safe space....

Why do you have this need to tell other people how to behave?

don't the women and children have the right to be safe from nude people running around as they try to meditate and worship in their safe spaces?

No.

I did not tell anyone else how to behave. I suggested what the leftist progressive "social justice" view should be.

The progressive view would suggest that safe spaces, free from nudity, would be available for all. After all, progressives social justice folks were looking to get a statue of a man in his underwear removed because it made women feel unsafe. http://archive.boston.com/yourcampus/ne ... versy.html "[T]his highly lifelike sculpture has, within just a few hours of its outdoor installation, become a source of apprehension, fear, and triggering thoughts regarding sexual assault for many members of our campus community," says the petition. "While it may appear humorous, or thought-provoking to some, it has already become a source of undue stress for many Wellesley College students, the majority of whom live, study, and work in this space."

So, by the same token, a naked person approaching one of the most sacred Jewish religious sites might trigger some issues with many members of that community. While it may appear humorous, or thought provoking to some, it clearly is a source of undue stress for many devout Jews, the majority of whom congregate, meditate, pray and worship in this space....

[Forty Two]

She's obviously a sorceress, tempting the devout into evil ways. There is only one answer: Exodus 22:18.


But she's got a lurvly body...

We all need to check our privilege. How do we know it's a she? Could be he or zhe or zir or they, etc. That might actually be a man, for all we know.

[laklak]

Don't matter. I'd do zir anyway.

[Forty Two]

Rape apologist!

[NineBerry]

Don't worry, I'd do you, too, 42.

[Forty Two]

[Brian Peacock]

...

So, by the same token, a naked person approaching one of the most sacred Jewish religious sites might trigger some issues with many members of that community. While it may appear humorous, or thought provoking to some, it clearly is a source of undue stress for many devout Jews, the majority of whom congregate, meditate, pray and worship in this space....

As well as reading this as an affront to decency and the sensibilities of a certain denomination of a particular faith one could also read it as a political protest or an artistic statement.

Just saying.

[rainbow]

But, the leftist progressives should view this as unwelcome sexual conduct in a safe space....

Why do you have this need to tell other people how to behave?

don't the women and children have the right to be safe from nude people running around as they try to meditate and worship in their safe spaces?

No.

I did not tell anyone else how to behave.

You did. You told the "leftist progressives" how they should view this.

Don't try to slime out of the Control Freakist Fascist demand.

Let them view it as they wish to view it.

[Forty Two]

...

So, by the same token, a naked person approaching one of the most sacred Jewish religious sites might trigger some issues with many members of that community. While it may appear humorous, or thought provoking to some, it clearly is a source of undue stress for many devout Jews, the majority of whom congregate, meditate, pray and worship in this space....

As well as reading this as an affront to decency and the sensibilities of a certain denomination of a particular faith one could also read it as a political protest or an artistic statement.

Just saying.

What does reading it as political protest or an artistic statement have to do with it? In the article I linked to the progressive SJW protest against the statue of the man in his underwear, they were protesting it despite that it was clearly an art piece (an artistic statement). Further, the whole progressive SJW notion of "safe spaces" is to be free from political ideas and protests that they say are dangerous and offensive.

If a political protest was offensive to women (like, perhaps, protesting against women voting, or public displays and marches calling for women to go back to the kitchen and know their place), or if a public artistic statement was unwelcome to women and sexually charged, would that make them o.k? If it did, then the whole concept of microaggressions and safe spaces goes right out the window.

[Forty Two]

But, the leftist progressives should view this as unwelcome sexual conduct in a safe space....

Why do you have this need to tell other people how to behave?

don't the women and children have the right to be safe from nude people running around as they try to meditate and worship in their safe spaces?

No.

I did not tell anyone else how to behave.

You did. You told the "leftist progressives" how they should view this.

Indeed, that's not behavior. That's my view of what the leftist progressive ideology logically entails.

Don't try to slime out of the Control Freakist Fascist demand.

Let them view it as they wish to view it.

Having a view as to how others who advance a particular ideology should view things, if they indeed follow that ideology, is not preventing anyone from viewing things as they wish to view them.

And, if suggesting how people should view concepts and ideas is a "freakist fascist demand," then you're indicting the entire leftist progressive and SJW community. Their whole purpose is to demand that other people see it their way. They think we should all view racism as something only whites can be, and sexist as something only men can be. They want us to stop using common English, and use made up "pronouns" on demand. They want us to stop using polite conversation and colloquialisms, because they might be "microaggressions" (my your hair looks nice - or, you speak english very well - -where are you from?) There is hardly a group that wants to tell people how to behave and what to think more than feminists, SJWs, and other leftist progressives.

[Hermit]

the leftist progressives should view this as unwelcome sexual conduct in a safe space.

Puritans equate streaking with sexual conduct. Leftist progressives don't.

don't the women and children have the right to be safe from nude people running around as they try to meditate and worship in their safe spaces?

Yes. And they have a right to feel offended too. Isn't that what libertarians keep preaching?

[Forty Two]

the leftist progressives should view this as unwelcome sexual conduct in a safe space.

Puritans equate streaking with sexual conduct. Leftist progressives don't.

But, they do equate a statue of a man in his underwear with sexually threatening conduct... Not sure why they would be fine with a nude person running around, but not with a statue.

don't the women and children have the right to be safe from nude people running around as they try to meditate and worship in their safe spaces?

Yes. And they have a right to feel offended too. Isn't that what libertarians keep preaching?

Sure, but if a man came in nude to a feminist protest, with his todger flopping around naturally, they'd likely feel offended and declare it to be patriarchal oppression and sexual harassment and that the activity should be prohibited.

From a libertarian perspective, there wouldn't be laws against nudity, but there also would not be bans on statues of men in their underwear, and there would not be regulations against microaggressions or safe spaces free from offensive expression.

[Hermit]

the leftist progressives should view this as unwelcome sexual conduct in a safe space.

Puritans equate streaking with sexual conduct. Leftist progressives don't.

But, they do equate a statue of a man in his underwear with sexually threatening conduct... Not sure why they would be fine with a nude person running around, but not with a statue.

I have never heard a leftist progressive describe a streaker - be that streaker male or female - as conducting him/herself in a sexually threatening manner.

don't the women and children have the right to be safe from nude people running around as they try to meditate and worship in their safe spaces?

Yes. And they have a right to feel offended too. Isn't that what libertarians keep preaching?

Sure, but if a man came in nude to a feminist protest, with his todger flopping around naturally, they'd likely feel offended and declare it to be patriarchal oppression and sexual harassment and that the activity should be prohibited.

I can actually understand the intent of the man being offensive. The feminists would have obliged by feeling offended. Would you like to explain how this relates to the female streaker at the wailing wall? Matriarchal oppression? Sexual harassment? Something?

[Brian Peacock]

...

So, by the same token, a naked person approaching one of the most sacred Jewish religious sites might trigger some issues with many members of that community. While it may appear humorous, or thought provoking to some, it clearly is a source of undue stress for many devout Jews, the majority of whom congregate, meditate, pray and worship in this space....

As well as reading this as an affront to decency and the sensibilities of a certain denomination of a particular faith one could also read it as a political protest or an artistic statement.

Just saying.

What does reading it as political protest or an artistic statement have to do with it? In the article I linked to the progressive SJW protest against the statue of the man in his underwear, they were protesting it despite that it was clearly an art piece (an artistic statement). Further, the whole progressive SJW notion of "safe spaces" is to be free from political ideas and protests that they say are dangerous and offensive.

You seem to be under the impression that I am somehow obliged to answer for, or to justify the arguments or positions of, so-called progressive SJWs.

If a political protest was offensive to women (like, perhaps, protesting against women voting, or public displays and marches calling for women to go back to the kitchen and know their place), or if a public artistic statement was unwelcome to women and sexually charged, would that make them o.k?

I don't think there's a single, definitive answer to that - at least not to the question posed.

If it did, then the whole concept of microaggressions and safe spaces goes right out the window.

How?

[cronus]

Rules are simple. No tits on the wall.