Well, the common behaviours are the shit you’d associate with the stereotype primitive men: reducing people to objects of sexual attraction, being oblivious to boundaries, exploiting vulnerable situations.
In this case, you just don’t stare at the other sauna guests. You look for a spot, preferably away from others, sit down, focus on your own breathing and all that and leave everyone else alone to do the same.
To take advantage of the fact that someone is naked and exposed to ogle them, then strike up a conversation they didn’t ask for (because sauna isn’t for chatting, it’s for sweating) when they already feel vulnerable and exposed, violates the trust in mutual privacy that makes shared saunas possible in the first place.
The other person would genuinely not care at all if they’re seen almost naked by other people, or if they’re ogled.
Also, saunas are not for talking, but not because it’s a rule not to do so, but because most people don’t talk in there (probably because they’re a bit suffocated by the heat), but they can serve for that purpose too, and what’s so bad about looking for a conversation that the other part didn’t asked about? That’s not how most of friendships, connections, aquaitances and all that start? And, why would be a simple convo be something so traumatic, even in this situation?
How do you expect a person to know the other person’s boundaries if the other person isn’t shouting them from the rooftops nor is there any reasonable way to know without asking?
Yeah, that guy may have failed because he didn’t ask her if she was ok with starting a conversation right there or if she was or not comfortable with him looking at her, I think that’s where he should have started first in any case, but it’s not that big of a deal and, even if he only saw her as a possible bed partner, that’s not bad in itself, casual sex is too demonized by the neo-puritanism of mainstream progressivism. Many women agree or even actively want the same thing, and even if they don’t want it, it is valid that if another person seeks it, they can ask them if they agree or test the waters or something like that without so much stigma; just like many men.
Now, I ask, what if the roles had been reversed? Would she have been treated as harshly as he was? It may seem irrelevant to the point, but it’s not. Most likely, he would have been ridiculed or suffered public derision for leaving in that way.
You simply cannot expect everyone to be thinking at all times about every little thing that could hurt someone else’s sensitivity, cause them discomfort, be a sensitive nerve or a limit or red line for the rest, and at the same time expect that communication and life in society can still flow and function healthily. You’re only going to create a spiral of silence and paralysis, because anything you say or do could be hurtful, uncomfortable, sensitive, a limit or a red line for someone else, and you have no way of knowing; you can’t read minds.
In the context of the greenext it would have been being able to sit in silence with a stranger in a leisure setting without needing to make the situation about themself. That’s an extreme situation though because sauna.
Usually it’s just reading people to know how far you should take a simple “how’s it going?”. The best advice that doesn’t apply to most people but someone should probably hear is not everything is an opportunity to shoot your shot, not that this is what happened.
I would bet it would have been fine to talk with someone. It’s not ok to hit on them. Obviously you need to read the room for all of it though. Maybe they don’t want to chat at all, or maybe they are open to flirting, but if you can’t read it well then probably STFU and keep your eyes off others.
I have a question, if i don’t watch the person how do i read the room to understand if they wanna talk? I kinda have problems with such stuff
(I just wanna say that i never have been in a sauna, i doubt i would talk but i guess that of we are in the same room.with such heat for more than 10 minutes, talking would help enduring)
Yes, but not to the extent that you argue. Just as she couldn’t know if his intentions were good or bad (which she assumed were bad and they weren’t; they were just naive), he couldn’t know if she was going to be comfortable with it. Yes, there is body language, gestures and other types of non-verbal language, but you have to keep in mind that in a place like that it is already common for you to express discomfort due to the steam and heat, even if you enjoy it, and also for many people it is difficult to interpret some or all forms of non-verbal language, or for many it is outright impossible. Also, to complicate matters further, sometimes non-verbal language may not correspond to what the person is really thinking, or it may be too ambiguous. If you add to that the fact that in the end we read that language mainly through heuristics that are VERY fallible, you see that it’s not very reliable, and even less so in an extreme situation like that.
Just as she couldn’t know if his intentions were good or bad (which she assumed were bad and they weren’t; they were just naive)…
Did we read the same post? You don’t describe how hot she was if you’re just naive. The guy was obviously checking her out before speaking. The speaking was the final straw. Just as you can read others through their body language/actions, so can others.
and also for many people it is difficult to interpret some or all forms of non-verbal language, or for many it is outright impossible.
This is why I said if you can’t you should STFU. This wasn’t to be rude. It was a statement of fact. If you don’t know if talking will be fine then don’t if it’s against the rules.
No, if you can’t of you don’t know, then ask first. It’s not that hard. You’re being neurocapacitist and neuronormative, because despite the fact that I don’t know if the Anon is neurodivergent (and I don’t truly believe that he is), that statement goes implicitly against neurodivergents.
Also, you’re missing totally the point: there are all kinds of people, and checking out someone else is NOT intrinsically bad.
That damaged her? Hell no. Then it can’t be reasonabily considered bad, because that’s the only objective measure scale possible for “badness” and “goodness”.
how does one not act like a moid, what are common non-moid behaviors?
Well, the common behaviours are the shit you’d associate with the stereotype primitive men: reducing people to objects of sexual attraction, being oblivious to boundaries, exploiting vulnerable situations.
In this case, you just don’t stare at the other sauna guests. You look for a spot, preferably away from others, sit down, focus on your own breathing and all that and leave everyone else alone to do the same.
To take advantage of the fact that someone is naked and exposed to ogle them, then strike up a conversation they didn’t ask for (because sauna isn’t for chatting, it’s for sweating) when they already feel vulnerable and exposed, violates the trust in mutual privacy that makes shared saunas possible in the first place.
I don’t know, that’s way too extreme.
The other person would genuinely not care at all if they’re seen almost naked by other people, or if they’re ogled.
Also, saunas are not for talking, but not because it’s a rule not to do so, but because most people don’t talk in there (probably because they’re a bit suffocated by the heat), but they can serve for that purpose too, and what’s so bad about looking for a conversation that the other part didn’t asked about? That’s not how most of friendships, connections, aquaitances and all that start? And, why would be a simple convo be something so traumatic, even in this situation?
How do you expect a person to know the other person’s boundaries if the other person isn’t shouting them from the rooftops nor is there any reasonable way to know without asking?
Yeah, that guy may have failed because he didn’t ask her if she was ok with starting a conversation right there or if she was or not comfortable with him looking at her, I think that’s where he should have started first in any case, but it’s not that big of a deal and, even if he only saw her as a possible bed partner, that’s not bad in itself, casual sex is too demonized by the neo-puritanism of mainstream progressivism. Many women agree or even actively want the same thing, and even if they don’t want it, it is valid that if another person seeks it, they can ask them if they agree or test the waters or something like that without so much stigma; just like many men.
Now, I ask, what if the roles had been reversed? Would she have been treated as harshly as he was? It may seem irrelevant to the point, but it’s not. Most likely, he would have been ridiculed or suffered public derision for leaving in that way.
You simply cannot expect everyone to be thinking at all times about every little thing that could hurt someone else’s sensitivity, cause them discomfort, be a sensitive nerve or a limit or red line for the rest, and at the same time expect that communication and life in society can still flow and function healthily. You’re only going to create a spiral of silence and paralysis, because anything you say or do could be hurtful, uncomfortable, sensitive, a limit or a red line for someone else, and you have no way of knowing; you can’t read minds.
In the context of the greenext it would have been being able to sit in silence with a stranger in a leisure setting without needing to make the situation about themself. That’s an extreme situation though because sauna.
Usually it’s just reading people to know how far you should take a simple “how’s it going?”. The best advice that doesn’t apply to most people but someone should probably hear is not everything is an opportunity to shoot your shot, not that this is what happened.
I would bet it would have been fine to talk with someone. It’s not ok to hit on them. Obviously you need to read the room for all of it though. Maybe they don’t want to chat at all, or maybe they are open to flirting, but if you can’t read it well then probably STFU and keep your eyes off others.
I have a question, if i don’t watch the person how do i read the room to understand if they wanna talk? I kinda have problems with such stuff
(I just wanna say that i never have been in a sauna, i doubt i would talk but i guess that of we are in the same room.with such heat for more than 10 minutes, talking would help enduring)
“Oh, yeah, let’s read minds with the mind-reading powers that obviously all real and good humans have and should have” ahh comment.
Well, we did evolve to be able to communicate non-verbally fairly well. It’s not mind reading, but if you want to call it that then sure.
Yes, but not to the extent that you argue. Just as she couldn’t know if his intentions were good or bad (which she assumed were bad and they weren’t; they were just naive), he couldn’t know if she was going to be comfortable with it. Yes, there is body language, gestures and other types of non-verbal language, but you have to keep in mind that in a place like that it is already common for you to express discomfort due to the steam and heat, even if you enjoy it, and also for many people it is difficult to interpret some or all forms of non-verbal language, or for many it is outright impossible. Also, to complicate matters further, sometimes non-verbal language may not correspond to what the person is really thinking, or it may be too ambiguous. If you add to that the fact that in the end we read that language mainly through heuristics that are VERY fallible, you see that it’s not very reliable, and even less so in an extreme situation like that.
Did we read the same post? You don’t describe how hot she was if you’re just naive. The guy was obviously checking her out before speaking. The speaking was the final straw. Just as you can read others through their body language/actions, so can others.
This is why I said if you can’t you should STFU. This wasn’t to be rude. It was a statement of fact. If you don’t know if talking will be fine then don’t if it’s against the rules.
No, if you can’t of you don’t know, then ask first. It’s not that hard. You’re being neurocapacitist and neuronormative, because despite the fact that I don’t know if the Anon is neurodivergent (and I don’t truly believe that he is), that statement goes implicitly against neurodivergents.
Also, you’re missing totally the point: there are all kinds of people, and checking out someone else is NOT intrinsically bad.
That damaged her? Hell no. Then it can’t be reasonabily considered bad, because that’s the only objective measure scale possible for “badness” and “goodness”.