I didn't watch it all the way through, but it's not clear to me that she feels in any way threatened, or...that her laughter isn't genuine. Probably safer all around not to do it, but I don't think that, on the basis of what I saw, it's fair to suggest that those guys missed obvious clues.
Not m-fun, that's for sure. I am revising my understanding of what you consider fun.
Also, Kwame's back, and he's already killed the Grizzlies for 4 points, so...Kwame!
2: Watch all the way through. The joke goes on way too long, and the tying-to-the-pole bit is entirely gratuitous.
I agree with 2; my sense is that she trusts those guys a lot, which is good.
That said, it's still a sexualized form of teasing, and potentially dangerous, and definitely in the gray area. I do think it's fair to suggest that men ought to know better, and that women ought to be less willing to put up with that kind of "teasing" in the name of enjoying male attention.
2: There were definitely moments where she's going back and forth between it's-ok laughter and it's-not-ok laughter.
she's going back and forth between it's-ok laughter and it's-not-ok laughter
That was my sense too.
Also, I'm sure she's under enormous pressure to be one of the guys, which makes it a lot harder for her to say no and mean it.
Not m-fun, that's for sure.
The guys were up to their usual frolicking and giggling when all of a sudden There Was A Plan. To Bind Someone.
6: I don't think this is a case of trying to enjoy male attention so much as to be a good sport in an all-male workplace. Totally different dynamic.
If there had been a mud puddle to dump her in, there would have been a point to this; as it is, though, it's just a colossal waste of duct tape. I mean, that's like $10 of duct tape right there!
As I said, I didn't watch it all the way through. (Should I? Probably, but not gonna. Too long.) I don't know how this should work, exactly, as the joke always goes on way too long. This sort of roughhousing strikes me as pretty normal, and--I dunno--I would worry about leaving her out of it somehow. I can't tell who posted the video, but the description makes it sound like she did.
As I said, probably best not to get physical with her, as there are specific and obvious issues regarding that sort of behavior. Better to just switch up the drawers in her desk or whatever. But a substantial part of some types of male bonding is pushing and pushing until the other person snaps. Psycho, but true.
What's your take on the relative merits of the individual guys? I find cigarette guy kinda creepy and disturbing.
substantial part of some types of male bonding is pushing and pushing until the other person snaps. Psycho, but true.
Totally. Which reminds me of an awesome video, in no small part because of how high pitched that fat kid's voice gets.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QylzwaO6HHA
This sort of roughhousing strikes me as pretty normal, and--I dunno--I would worry about leaving her out of it somehow. Except for the fact that it's bondage taping. I don't see a group of guys doing the same thing to another guy.
Cigarette guy's a little creepy 'cause he tickles her when she's almost completely tied up. That crosses the line from "rough-housing and pranking" to "weird sexual vibe".
19: I could totally see a bunch of guys doing that to another guy, particularly if that guy were pledging their fraternity.
Except for the fact that it's bondage taping. I don't see a group of guys doing the same thing to another guy.
Sometimes I wonder if you know any guys. This is a pretty standard move. Usually it's athletic tape, but still.
Except for the fact that it's bondage taping. I don't see a group of guys doing the same thing to another guy.
I remember a few guys getting duct taped to trees at band camp. Good times.
18: The video linked won't load for me, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "fatass" suggests that the victim here isn't really part of the bonding experience.
21: Or if he were Wallace on Veronica Mars.
I was disturbed by cigarette guy. She seemed to trust the black guy; she relaxed into him when they stood her upright. I thought the brownhaired guy binding her legs was a follower who kept going because he was happy to be one of the cool kids, in on the joke.
Never having been in a fraternity or the military, I have no firsthand experience of this, but guys in those groups have historically done all sorts of pranks and hazing to each other. Ladies and gentlemen of of the Unfoggertariat, I give you the US Navy's Crossing the Equator Ceremony.
Nine pages, keep clicking.
22: I used to know men, before I moved to this feminist utopian commune. But even back then, I wasn't usually present at all-guy hazing rituals, funnily enough.
#13: You prank women GI's with the mud puddles you have, not the mud puddles you might want or wish to have at a later time.
I should say that I'm not endorsing this sort of bonding behavior--I don't much like it myself--just pointing out that this falls into the "bonding" category.
#27: Unfoggertariat s/b Unfoggetariat. I have fat fingers today.
17: Yes! When that prick lit up was when it crossed the line for me.
And yes, SCMT, it really is about how much too long it goes, and the taping to the post. Especially since she really fights being taped to the post. Up 'til then, she's just overpowered, Resistance is Futile, and it's reasonably play-along. But when they try to tape her torso to the post, she starts using non-violent/passive resistance techniques, really making it hard for them to tape her. This only makes sense if she really wants it to not happen. Because if she's fine with it, she lets them tape her torso up, and it's over. Either she's not willing for that to happen, or she suspects that her attachment to the pole will last too long.
That said, even fairly sober guys will do this sort of thing to each other. But, of course, that doesn't automatically make it OK to do to the lone female. Just as snapping towels among jocks is WAY different from jocks snapping nerds/geeks/outcasts.
My overall takeaway is: military life is just fucked up. Either she was OK with it, all the way, and that's fucked (because it was about 2X too much by any sane standard). Or she wasn't, and that's way worse.
Band of Brothers, indeed.
an awesome video
Oh lordy that's funny. "Don't shoot me anymore" being the most defeated sentence you can utter.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "fatass" suggests that the victim here isn't really part of the bonding experience.
He's perched on a rock in middle of a stream, and he gets pelted with a few paintballs. Pretty sure it's his friends shooting him.
Cigarette guy even looks like Charles Graner.
I can't think what route she could have used to stick up for herself, in the absence of "no means no". Once the joke was running, to stop it she would have had to what, threaten to get them disciplined? Emphasized that she's female, and not like them, and invoked the clout of sexual harassment? Can you think of anything short of that that would have ended the teasing? Maybe stillness, and "I don't like this."
How would men being hazed make it stop, or do they need "no means no" too?
How would men being hazed make it stop
Does not compute.
(There really isn't a way. Certainly not one that'd let the guy being hazed ever be part of that social circle ever again.)
Emphasized that she's female
That's pretty much it. If it were a guy, they wouldn't care how much he protested. See, e.g., the video gswift linked.
re: 36
I have pretty recent experience with the whole hazing thing, and there is a certain tone of voice that most people will key into really quick and stop. Problems arise because a few people are sadistic fucks above and beyond the call of simple bonding--and you can rarely tell who these people are ahead of time.
I didn't look at gswift's video; I really can't watch people getting teased in a mean way and it sounded painful. But that makes it sound like:
there's no reason we can't get women to be more comfortable with sticking up for themselves while also telling guys to follow the rule.
isn't the right formulation. If there's no way for men or women to stick up from themselves, then the rule should be "don't gang up on people, and stop when they don't like it.".
there is a certain tone of voice that most people will key into really quick and stop
Exactly, there's a "no" that everyone understands really does mean "no." But when you resort to it, you put yourself in the "weak" or "bad sport" category, so people are really reluctant to use it. (There's also the sadist problem, but that's different.)
Although I suppose I should note 39 was in reference to structured organizational hazing, I.E. frats. Jackass informal social circle hazing is pretty much impossible to stop, but that type of hazing has much less to do with bonding the hazee and hazer than it does with creating solidarity among the hazers at the expense of the hazee.
My read on the video was that it was mostly the former. Could be wrong, though.
the fat kid's especially funny because of hte way his leg twitches every time he get hit. liek rockettes or something.
Did anyone else click through Gaijin Biker's link to the Naval Crossing the Equator ceremony? Good God.
Jackass informal social circle hazing is pretty much impossible to stop
That's more bullying than hazing, I'd say. I think of hazing as being (at least in intent, not necessarily in effect) good-natured, with a large part of the purpose being the promotion of solidarity between the hazee and the hazers.
Thinking back to the hazing-filled years of my youth, the difference between the good-natured and the mean-spirited stuff was that availability of a "way out" for the target. The bullying didn't really take into account the possibility of crossing a line.
44: I did, but I lack the words to describe what I saw there.
44: Serendipitously, I happened across a Discovery Channel show on the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan this weekend; during the show, the ship crossed the equator, so they covered some of the ceremony. At least the officers get the same treatment as the enlisted men.
45: That's probably true, bullying really is a better descriptor.
The strangest thing about the ceremony GB linked was how consistent it is with other hazing rituals. I'm sure someone somewhere must have authored a taxonomy of hazing activities, because there seem to be a few biggies that get repeated again and again.
My grandfather was in the Navy during WWII. We still have his shellback card, which looks almost exactly like the one at the end of that site.
#34: If "fatass" is welcomed back into the group, it was all in good fun. Probably every one in the group will be pranked at some point or another.
But if "fatass" is the one kid who keeps getting pranked over and over again, his "friends" may not be very good friends at all.
The strangest thing about the ceremony GB linked was how consistent it is with other hazing rituals.
I bet that one's older than most.
i doubt hazing got made up sometime in the 1700/1800's. unless you mean older than most extant rituals, or something.
At least the officers get the same treatment as the enlisted men.
There's that, I suppose. But so many of the ritual roles are feminized, so many of the ritual actions specifically sexually demeaning---how much would it suck to be a woman during that ceremony? Also, with actual women present, the pretense for the cross-dressing would start to look pretty damned thin. I'm guessing that this ritual will take a new form within a couple of Navy generations.
(To bed.)
ogged and gswift are both going to hell.
re: 51
I mean the specific activities. Barking like a dog, for example. Although I suppose there are a finite number of activities that are both sufficiently humiliating and not dangerous.
Anyway, on the original topic: Does anyone know about the existence of hazing type rituals in fully gender integrated militaries? I would be interested to know to what degree it can be attributed to men being jackals or if it is endemic to militaries everywhere.
39's right. I was watching it thinking "if that were me, I'd be using my pissed-off voice and saying cut it out, motherfuckers." Or she could have bitten the guy who was holding her. Or started screaming. But yeah, the problem with anything except the first option is it makes you a pariah right quick.
I thought everyone knew about the equator-crossing bullshit.
52: According to this book 17th century pirates had an equator-crossing hazing ritual (a different one, where they dunked the n00bs in the ocean). The guy at the site GB linked claims the modern ritual is at least as old as the US Navy, and he could well be right.
My question is whether a man in the same position would have played along as much as this woman. It seems like this woman is acting like she's more okay with what's going on than she really is. If she were a guy, would she have been entitled (or even expected) to struggle and curse?
men being jackals or if it is endemic to militaries everywhere.
Unless I'm missing something, these things are going to run together.
If you're a guy, you're expected to fight back, and you are judged by how much of a fight you are able to put up. See the branding prank in the movie "Jarhead".
re: 59
I was thinking specifically of the IDF, although there may be other examples I am unaware of.
If she were a guy, would she have been entitled (or even expected) to struggle and curse?
Yeah, absolutely. Actually, it's hard to imagine this being done to a guy in fun, because you really need to control his body, and he's obligated to fight back, and there's a good chance that someone will get hurt, or people will become genuinely angry. But if you did have a guy in this position, there's be a lot of "you fucking motherfuckers, you're going to pay for this!" going on.
Wait, so swearing at people and getting angry is okay? I'm so confused.
I think it depends on the context whether a guy is expected to fight back futilely or not.
Or rather, this only would have happened if the victim and probably most of the assailants were drunk.
And, to 63, absolutely. The viler the threats, the better, in all honesty.
I'm not judging the woman's response. There's no right or wrong way to react to an incident like that.
I'm just asking if she was subject to different, and perhaps more coercive and demeaning pressures than a guy in the same situation.
I mean, it's one thing to have your buddies seize you and tie you up. It's a whole 'nother level of indignity to have to pretend that you like it. The disconcerting thing about this footage is that the woman seems like she's acting.
The disconcerting thing about this footage is that the woman seems like she's acting.
This was kind of my point: because we know that women are socialized to act this way, we make rules like "no means no."
I'm just asking if she was subject to different, and perhaps more coercive and demeaning pressures than a guy in the same situation.
There would seem to be relatively few limits to how coercive and demeaning guys will get in hazing each other.
OTOH it's hard to say that the pressures involved are really the same. Sure, a guy in that situation would be expected and desired to fight back -- as some have pointed out, that's actually the whole purpose of the exercise. But if she had actually fought back, whether her fellow GIs have reacted as they would to a guy is harder to know. And probably a lot harder for her to know.
Lindsay is on to something. On the one hand, you have the hazing "just one of the guys" vibe. On the other, she also has to play the "shrieking girl"--I'm thinking specifically of the trope where a guy engages in some sort of shenanigans and is rewarded with a pleased faux-protest.
It's a shitty situation because, one one side, she can't fight back--even if her fighting is all in good fun--because of gender roles, but she can't protest because then she won't be taken seriously. I'm not sure "no means no" helps because it just displaces the pressure that exists currently about not insisting(the "no" that everyone understands) into a pressure to simply not say no in the first place.
Shitty all around.
There should be some hazing at the next Unfogged meetup.
I recommend the twinky stuffed with spam.
There should be some hazing at the next Unfogged meetup.
Meet-up, beat-down.
Or is the hazing in addition to your trouncing me?
I will make you eat non-halal foods! Unwittingly!
Actually, it's hard to imagine this being done to a guy in fun, because you really need to control his body, and he's obligated to fight back, and there's a good chance that someone will get hurt, or people will become genuinely angry.
I'm not sure I agree. Depending on his size, either a guy will act more or less as she did, or he'll be sufficiently sized to prevent it by fighting back. But no way do you take a beating without smiling--or at least not crack--through it. I think a guy might figure out sooner rather than later if he was going to be able to prevent it, and, if not, stop struggling. But you're the one with the most experience bullying, so you're more likely to be correct.
I'm off to bed, maybe gswift will enlighten you.
70: I knew we should have pantsed you.
I'm not sure I agree. Depending on his size, either a guy will act more or less as she did, or he'll be sufficiently sized to prevent it by fighting back. But no way do you take a beating without smiling--or at least not crack--through it. I think a guy might figure out sooner rather than later if he was going to be able to prevent it, and, if not, stop struggling.
I've never seen anyone not fight back. Certainly no smiling either. At least in my circle of friends, no way could have something like that stayed "fun", because the odds of subdueing the guy without getting hit was going to be slim.
The guys I've seen this done to were both not very strong, and were taken by surprise.
There will be no hazing at Unfogged meetups. Pantsing will be decided on a pants-by-pants basis.
78: He said hazing, not sexual foreplay.
Obviously, someone will yell out "ALALALALALALALALA! DOWN WITH AMERICA! DEATH TO AMERICANS!" and then everyone will turn and look quietly at Ogged.
I suppose they would get off scot-free. It's kind of a loophole.
83: Nicely done.
Other stuff: I think we're trying to draw a line between hazing and bullying. I, for one, am confused as to where that line really is. This video seems to have crossed it at some point (sometime around the time it seemed okay to, heck, lean back and catch a smoke).
The cigarette guy is mega-creepy, because of his nonchalance. Like, when she's tied up, he just kinda reaches out and tickles her, as if, finally, he can relax now that she's fully restrained. It's fucked up.
I don't know why people (in this thread) are trying to make a distinction between this and hazing, as though hazing is cool, but this isn't. Hazing is fucked up, people. There's a reason why it's prohibited by schools across the country, the NCAA, and all kinds of other organizations. In some ways, canonical hazing as described is worse than what's going on here, because it's entirely possible that if this woman had yelled at them, told them to fucking stop or that they would pay, they probably would have. Not the case in many instances of hazing.
That's not to diminish the disturbingness of this video, though. There's a powerful sense in which women become almost phsyically unable to avoid playing nice and going along with men. A particular guy at my school is what we refer to as a "groper"--he's constantly touching women. Me and my friend were saying that I should start grabbing his ass, just to give him a taste of the manhandling. I was seriously going to do it, too. However, the next time I saw him, he gave me a gratuitous shoulder rub and I just stood there and was like "hey." No objection, no ass-grabbing. And I'm more forceful than most.
re: 81
It's not a problem. Sane people would know better than to try to pants us anyway ...
Me and my friend were saying that I should start grabbing his ass, just to give him a taste of the manhandling.
the idea that y'all got together and thought of this as "punishment" is hilarious.
Oh man, some guy is trying to get his Borat on in the op-ed pages. His editor must have been drunk when he signed off on this. Not funny.
http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,650206029,00.html
what providence that there was a doctor around
Actually, it's hard to imagine this being done to a guy in fun, because you really need to control his body
I think the way you do this to a guy is when he's passed out drunk. The amusement is not in subduing him, but in his waking up and realizing his situation. At least, that's what happened in The Irish RM, when they sewed some guy up in a featherbed.
Also, m leblanc, you need Becks to come and visit you. She can punch the guy out.
"The only traditions of the Royal Navy are rum, sodomy and the lash." pseudo Churchill.
Coming in late, but while this kind of hazing is common in macho groups, I'd never put up with it voluntarily myself because it also usually establishes a pecking order, which would normally be with me at the bottom where I refuse to be.
One of my son's Asian-American friends was stuffed into a dumpster in ninth grade, but in context it wasn't a bad thing. He was an athlete and this was like his initiation into the jock clique, where he remained for four years.
It's not necessarily as bad as it looks, but it does overlap with the kinds of bullying and humiliation that's used to ruin people's lives.
If the same thing had been done to other now-accepted (male) members of the group already, the sexist aspect was secondary. Just "one of the guys".
In the context of Abu Ghraib it doesn't look so good, though.
It also doesn't look good in the context of the epidemic of rape in the military.
This is certainly one of the kinds of issues that people who objected to women in the military were thinking about. I think that most military people think that bonding through hazing is normal and even good. But with women involved a lot of other issues arise.
Furthermore, military hazing is sort of a practice abuse for people whose job involves hurting others, i.e. enemies. And in many historical militaries, abuse of the lower ranks by the upper was written into the system, and abuse of women off-duty was part of the reward system for the guys.
The use of rape as a reward for the enlisted men probably continues today. We know there were rapes at Abu Ghraib. The rape of a female detainee is mentioned in the Taguba report, and the pictures at Salon show what is clearly the rape of a male detainee, although that is weirdly not how the Pentagon interpreted the picture.
Other web sites have pictures that purport to show Iraqi women being raped by American Soldiers.
We know there were rapes at Abu Ghraib.
My recollection is that the rapes to which you refer were committed by Iraqi forces with US forces looking on.
Goddamit, I just posted something really long and thoughtful here, and it disappeared.
You expect us just to believe that?
Also, 100!
Let me try to rewrite:
This is hard stuff to talk about, partially because I don't get, firsthand, the not-bullying-really-but-guys-just-do-this-stuff-to-each-other dynamic. But for those of you who recognize it, isn't part of it that the people being abused on any given occasion are pretty much, physically, the peers of the people abusing them, and are just as likely to be on the other side of the abuse next time?
What I find unpleasant about this is that she hasn't got much of a shot of being the abuser -- she's just significantly weaker than the guys around her.
My MIT co-op, as you'd expect from a house inhabited by repressed college-age nerds, was prone to outbursts of playfighting and mock wrestling. And after a certain amount of voluntary participation, I decided I hated it, and developed an icy demeanor when that sort of thing broke out. The upshot was always the girl getting pinned, and I don't like consistently losing, and I don't like being restrained. And every so often I'd get overinvolved in not giving up gracefully when overpowered, and would get in a lucky elbow someplace, and then I'd have to get all apologetic about hurting the guy: "Hey, we were just playing. That hurt. I think it's going to bruise." I don't mean to impugn the motives of the guys in the house, who were just in it for the opportunity to roll around on the furniture playfully with a member of the opposite sex, but what it felt like was a reinforcement that I was weak and helpless, and that in any altercation with a man, I didn't have any hope.
Hey, we were just playing. That hurt. I think it's going to bruise.
Ugh. I'd rather not go into specifics, but let me just say that I am pretty familiar with this line. As if you had the nerve to actually fight back when you were being restrained. Fuck.
in any altercation with a man, I didn't have any hope
As long as the man isn't wearing a cup, hope springs eternal.
I was always humorless about that sort of thing. My response has been to feint for the guy's face. You can't win a fight that way, but you can make victory costly. He will realize that you're not kidding, and if he's kidding, he'll back off. This can be a risky tactic though if the other guy is serious.
Going for the groin is futile because guys always protect that first, but a feint there can distract him.
None of this would work once your armes were immobilized, of course.
104: That's when (or one time) foreheads are awfully useful.
Yeah, the thing across gender lines is that there's a clear understanding that you aren't allowed to try and hurt the guy, or you're no fun at all.
If I'm getting the dynamic right here, if the guys in the video had been trying to pull that on a smaller, weaker guy, he would have had the option (if not taken unawares) of taking your tack -- fighting back in a way that would have meant someone was going to get hurt -- and that a possible outcome there would have been that they would have backed off, and he would have gotten a certain amount of respect: "Dude, you're crazy." And that's something, that even if she had the strength to pull it off, that women generally get socialized very strongly not to do.
LB: agreed, and it's quite weird. On the other hand, if the roughhousing is between guys, it is much more socially acceptable to hurt the guy (being pinned) a bit in the process, and he's not supposed to complain too much. So yeah, different rules.
don't get, firsthand, the not-bullying-really-but-guys-just-do-this-stuff-to-each-other dynamic
Having thought a little about it since my prior comments, I now think that the distinction between hazing and bullying is pretty blurry. To wit, if you are sized to get in your own, it's hazing; if you're not, it's bullying. But the rest of the mechanics are the same, and the perpetrators don't make any particular effort to recognize the distinction.
As for your MIT wrestling days: you should have hit them harder. The fucked up thing about trying to treat women as a man would be treated in these circumstances is that it's nearly impossible: there's often going to be a guy or two who takes liberties, even if that's not foremost on his mind. Those guys are dicks, but unless the other guys are willing to acknowledge that they're dicks, it's best, I think, to avoid roughhousing with women. (Hell, I'm against it with guys, for the most part.)
Male relationships are sort of weird.
Oh, and in certain circles the roughousing thing is taken much more seriously and still somehow has rules. Like: drunken brawls for fun but no intentional breaking of bones or hitting too hard about the head, that sort of thing.
109- and absolutely no smashing the fish tanks!
Having thought a little about it since my prior comments, I now think that the distinction between hazing and bullying is pretty blurry. To wit, if you are sized to get in your own, it's hazing; if you're not, it's bullying. But the rest of the mechanics are the same, and the perpetrators don't make any particular effort to recognize the distinction.
Yeah, from an outsiders perspective, this looks exactly right.
As for your MIT wrestling days: you should have hit them harder.
That's the thing, was that I wanted to stay friends. What I wanted to do was to win one by breaking the guy's nose with the back of my head, but across gender lines that doesn't come off as "Don't start nothing with Lizard, she's crazy," it's much more "What's wrong with you?" ('Liberties' really weren't the issue -- that is, they were largely the point, but not the problem, if you see what I mean.) So I figured my only reasonable options were either to voluntarily accept a role where I lost all the time, or to stop playing that game. I do icy very well.
Oh, and in certain circles the roughousing thing is taken much more seriously and still somehow has rules.
See, this is my sense, too. You're allowed to fight back, but you're not allowed to do whatever is available to you in fighting back. Gswift and ogged say diffferent, though, and the white nationalist militia guys probably have more experience with "jumping" someone in.
110 makes me wonder what roughhousing is like among the brain-in-a-vat set.
My experiences of roughhousing are: with my slightly younger brother, where it was always very close to the edge of violent hostilities; with my younger sisters, where it amounted more to bullying or attempted bullying; with a couple of my friends in high school, where it was sort of gentle and lacksadaisical; moshing in college, where I was told by my friends I should tone it down a bit; and with my wife, which is enjoyable and non-threatening.
What I wanted to do was to win one by breaking the guy's nose with the back of my head, but across gender lines that doesn't come off as "Don't start nothing with Lizard, she's crazy," it's much more "What's wrong with you?"
In my own experience, breaking the nose isn't OK with all-guy experience either. When I've seen guys resist too forcefully, it (a) gets a little out of hand, and (b) there is damage to the relationship. It's often damage that can be mitigated, but...there's some rulebook of allowed responses, but nobody's actually seen the the book. I suspect, as a general rule, guys respond after assessing their willingness to risk escalation. Then you buy your ticket and you takes your chances.
you're not allowed to do whatever is available to you in fighting back
Yeah, that's right. My friend D and I used to roughouse all the time (because he's gay) and we would, for example, punch each other just about as hard as we could in the ribs, but we'd never hit each other in the face or the balls. So it's not really a matter of how vigorous your response can be (it should be vigorous, unless you want to be pansy-boy), but about a few things that are off limits when you're just playing.
The "he's crazy...respect" is real, but if you hit a guy in the face, that's bad crazy, whereas if you go wild but still respect the rules, that's good crazy.
Also, different cliques have different rule books. In some groups you can apparantly grab another guys package.
There was a sexual harassment suit at a Mitsubishi plant that revolved around issues just like this. The guys roughhoused a lot, and had a code that said you could grab another guy's unit. Women who were drawn into this scene sued and won.
Actually as a guy, I'm not sure I would want to work some place where the roughhousing code allowed unit grabbing.
A guy who fights back dirty (as I suggested) doesn't get into the men's club, doesn't become a buddy, and doesn't get admiration, but he gets left alone.
Goodnatured roughhousing on an equal basis might be in some sense the ideal, and it does happen, but struggling for dominance is more common. Same with fist fights of honor where you prove "who's the better man". The feisty guy who plays by the rules and always loses gets some little bit of respect as a "regular guy", but because he loses he's low on the pecking order.
he gets left alone
This depends. Some people roughouse basically for fun, and insofar as fighting back dirty communicates that you're taking things seriously and not having fun, they'll leave you alone. But some people roughouse in a meaner, pecking order kind of way, and fighting back dirty can set off their barely latent sadism.
fist fights of honor where you prove "who's the better man"
You can see this stuff on the net (most of the ones I've seen have been neo-nazi dudes fighting each other; I'm sure that's just a coincidence), but it's beyond anything I ever did. Those are some crazy, pain-loving dudes.
SCMT: I'm guessing the `rules' vary a bit in the subculture. My main experience with this sort of thing was a much, much rougher crowd. There was a lot of rough horseplay, but there is no way that someone would be expected to just take something like that. In fact, they wouldn't be allowed to. Sure, a small guy surprised a few bigger guys might not be able to stop them at the time ... but a line had been crossed. He would have been expected to do something about soon after; surprise and/or a weapon to even up the sizes. If he didn't he'd pretty much be outcast, and a fair target.
But I'm talking about social circles where there is a good idea of what `serious' and `not serious' fights were, and a fair bit of both. Frats & hazing is a different world., but related. Here I think it is still socialization; but has more to do with figuring out who can take a hit and will stand up in a fight, and who won't. Oh, and some of it is about guys who just like to fight, kind of a sport.
You have to be willing to escalate, lose friends, and be uncool. The meaner sorts of roughhousing are bad whether you play the game or not.
After the age of 15 I never had to put up with serious bullying and never had to push anything very far either, but I'm just not someone who could be a good sport about that shit. If I played fair, I'd usually lose, and I wasn't willing to lose.
116 -- be sure to ask about that when you are interviewing.
I'm still going to beat you up, Emerson.
I was counting on B. and w-lfs-n to pants you, but my gang seems not to have what it takes. I suspect that you bought them off with grovelling and sexual favors.
as an aside: I never had much time for this, and avoided it as much as I could. I was never big enough to avoid it on expectation, so had to establish that I wouldn't stand for being dicked about. Never went looking for it, and tried to discourage it, but it's hard. Some guys did it just for chuckles, and it could get pretty hard going sometimes.
Unlike Johns, experience ... in these crowds fighting dirty wouldn't keep you out of the club, or make you `uncool', it would just mean that most people left you some space.
I've known a lot of people who believe in fighting as "the moment of truth", etc. That's where the interest in boxing comes from. I've never felt that way at all, and I've always hated the whole thing.
wouldn't stand for being dicked about.
Wait, are you a Brit? Because that's totally different.
I find this thread both fascinating and disturbing.
As a guy, I have always tried to avoid these sorts of power hierarchies, and have tended towards the response of singnaling very strongly that I don't find mock-fighting fun.
Really, though, I've largely been able to avoid it. I was never bullied much in school, and the social circles I've traveled in don't involve much hazing. This whole conversation is almost completely outside of my experience and the behavior described seems very creepy.
128: technically yes, but I've never really lived there for long. The experiences I'm talking about were all in north america (both US & Canada).
Those are some crazy, pain-loving dudes.
But often not the sharpest tools in the shed.
NickS: some of what I'm talking about happened `on the street', as they say --- bit different than what you run into in school or most social circles. It's all bullshit, but if you are there it is very difficult to avoid bullshit.
Now I'm wondering how much ogged can bench. Is he really a tough guy? I always pictured him somewhat slender, with narrow shoulders.
I've always pretty much hated that sort of rough-housing.
Luckily, I think I give off a slightly frosty vibe about it so when I lived in a shared flat where a lot of that went on it was more or less an unspoken rule that I wasn't part of it. Everyone knew. They could verbally abuse the fuck out of me, take the piss and mock in other ways, but not the physical stuff.
I'm not very strong, Brock, but I try not to let that stop me. Anyway, this is all many years ago. Nowadays, I'm an old dude trying to get back into shape after surgery.
Luckily, I think I give off a slightly frosty vibe about it so when I lived in a shared flat where a lot of that went on it was more or less an unspoken rule that I wasn't part of it. Everyone knew. They could verbally abuse the fuck out of me, take the piss and mock in other ways, but not the physical stuff.
Yeah, that's pretty much my standard as well.
Who is 132?
Lately, I've been seeing videos of people who voluntarily Tase themselves (or their willing friends). This seems ill-advised, given how many people those things kill.
Part of what I find fascinating about this thread is the reminder that it isn't always possible to avoid playing into situations with highly gendered behavior.
For myself, I'm heavily generdered male in a lot of ways, but there are many of other areas in which I just try to avoid/sidestep traditionally "male" behavior and this thread demonstrates that isn't always possible. It's only within a certain range of experience.
137 -- In HS I knew a friend of a friend who reportedly enjoyed being tased. I never personally witnessed it however.
Lately, I've been seeing videos of people who voluntarily Tase themselves (or their willing friends).
Let me guess: after you rented all the volumes of "Faces of Death," Netflix started recommending this.
Lately, I've been seeing videos of people who voluntarily Tase themselves (or their willing friends).
Yeah, taser videos are great, but they're almost always guys. The next wave is attractive young women in their underwear getting in on the "fun". What the throwing stars add to the equation is mot immediately apparent to me.
There were several fighting rings and opportunities to get tazed at Burning Man. Apparently there is demand for that experience. I did, in fact, see people lining up to get tazed.
144: hell, all you have to do is go to a show
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbEoYJibTLo
I try to offer lots of different opportunities. If y'all had just said that you wouldn't come to my parties unless I provided a taser, it would have saved a lot of confusion. I could ask my friends at Fish and Game, if you guys are hoping for some bearbaiting.
147: This is only from my limited experience, so I'm not sure how widely generalizable it is, but it's much easier to throw someone off a roof once you've tasered them.
a heavily gendered male
Huh, never heard it said quite that way before.
148 - I think that is totally inappropriate. I would never let my guests taze and throw each other off the roof. 'Less there was a pool below. Even so, the conscientious host would make sure her guests landed in the deep end, which could be hard to see for all the bubbles.
The video apo links in 143 is one of the ones I was thinking of, and this is the other.
Huh, never heard it said quite that way before.
I'm so heavily gendered, it has an elbow.
I think that the fun party should have tazing and enemas both. For bonding and achieving a higher consciousness of oneness, there's nothing quite as powerful as a "purification circle".
I'm really sorry I won't be able to make it, but that's the weekend that I wash the dishes.
153 - You set aside special weekends to wash the dishes?
I think 153 was along the lines of "I can't make it, I'm washing my hair that night."
You actually don't need to wash them every time you use them.
Similarly with underwear.
153 - You set aside special weekends to wash the dishes?
He sets aside special weekends to wash the dishes every time I send out invitations.
160 - You send out special invitations to John to wash his dishes? That's thoughtful of you.