Solo traveler get sexually harrased by a local.

[aurum]

6 hours ago, Raze said:

You need to stop conflating society with biological sorting. Society sustains itself by having social conditioning, laws, and structures to control biological sorting to maintain itself. 

Society actually does care, this is why societies develop things like sexual shame, enforced monogamy, laws and taboos against sexual harassment, prostitution etc. 

Minimizing the amount for sexually frustrated males and repressing their unruly behavior are important aspects of what makes society function and not dissolve into warring tribes. 

If it was truly a dog eat dog biological sorting competition that guy could rape someone and if that passes on his genes he did the biologically “successful” thing. But it isn’t because we have civilization which curtails or organizes this behavior. 

There's nothing you're saying I really disagree with.

I think minimizing male sexual frustration is wise from a societal POV. And yes, historically society has had mechanisms in place that helped with that.

But if you want to understand why people can be so apathetic, it's because of how male biological sorting works. Fair or unfair, some percentage of men are considered collateral damage.

So if you don't want to be collateral damage, you have to take responsibility and compete. Otherwise you will get sorted by default.

Competition is not strictly "dog eat dog". Competition always includes cooperation, alliances, bonding etc. Which means playing by certain rules.

[Emerald]

A guy committing sexual harassment against a woman doesn't necessarily mean that he's doing so because he's sexually frustrated.

In my teen years, I had been on the receiving end of sexual harassment many times from many different male peers and occasionally adult men. I was really unprotected from it because of the social situations that I was in.

And it wasn't that all (or even most) of these guys had no sexual outlet. Every male peer that I'm talking about had girls in their social circle (because I was in their social circle and many other girls were too). So, the vast majority of them had girlfriends at one point or another. (Remember, this was the early 2000s and young men socialized back then.)

In my experience of being the receiving end of sexual harassment... they most commonly were just morally weak guys who lacked ethical boundaries in many facets of life and sexual harassment was just one of those ethical lapses that are common with this type of person. They would also cheat on girlfriends, steal from people and stores, lie without care, and do generally untrustworthy things.

It like, 'How a man does one thing is how he does everything." And it was usually that these guys were too lazy to maintain a code of ethics.

Several of them were also bitter misogynists who had contempt for women/girls and wanted to degrade a young woman as an expression of sexual aggression towards women, and used sexual harassment as a way to do that.

Or sometimes the guys just didn't view girls as whole people outside of being vessels for their own pleasure. They just weren't conscious that they were actually going over a person's boundaries because they weren't aware enough to see women as people. This one was usually just a result of a lack of reflection and lower critical thinking skills.

Some of them were also guys who were incredibly socially inept and would transgress sexual boundaries into the realm of sexual harassment because they just didn't get it.

Like, I remember in my freshman year of high school one unattractive guy with poor hygiene that was very socially uncalibrated would say, "Where's my hug at?" whenever he'd see me. And for context, I was in a very huggy alt-kid group where everyone hugged one another all the time. So, it would have been a clear act of social rejection to refuse someone a hug in this context... which wasn't something I felt comfortable doing at the time.

But when he'd come to the group specifically to ask me "Where's my hug at?", I'd reluctantly give him a hug to be nice. And I'd try to give him a quick 2-second hug, but he'd physically hold me there for 10-15 seconds and caress my sides and back up and down while I was trying to squirm away. And he was socially clueless that he didn't really belong in the group, as he just wasn't on the same wavelength. And he was also socially clueless that the long romantic sensual hugs were unwanted despite me trying to squirm away.

But the majority of these guys didn't sexually harass because they lacked outlets for sex... or couldn't get a girlfriend. 

There was even one guy on my bus who I never crossed paths with personally. But he was like a stereotypical rapey classically handsome jock guy from a movie. And he'd be saying very disgusting sexually degrading misogynistic things very loudly on the bus.

I honestly would not be shocked at all if I found out that he got convicted of sex crimes. And I just thought he was a vile person.

And he was certainly not lacking outlets to girlfriends or sex. He was frequently talking about his sexual escapades on the bus. And he was saying all sorts of disparaging sexual things to and about other young women.

It was like a daily occurrence on the bus, him saying really disturbing sadistic things. 

So, that guy is a perfect example of how sexual harrassment doesn't come from sexual frustration.

[Majed]

@Emerald Most guys are sexually frustrated. Having a girlfriend doesn't mean one is not sexually frustrated. You've only got one out of billions of hot girls, think about how frustrating is that. As men we crave variety, not just having one girlfriend. 

[Schizophonia]

@Emerald 

Sociopathy is a conditioning process; for example there are many men with these tendencies who were beaten by their parents or others. Without going into details I knew a man when I was little who was in relationship with a woman in my family, and he was severely paranoid and had sociopathic behaviours; well, in his childhood his parents beat him and locked him in the cellar to punish him if I remember correctly, and ofc probably other things. Even me can have sociopathic reflexes if my mental state deteriorates violently under a combinaison of certain conditions, and yet I am not particularly evil.

The brain is just a survival machine that adapts to an environment; therefore things like sexual assault are social.

But your paradigm is purely idealistic; there would be a superstitious concept that you call "ethics" which you claim to be objective when it comes from your imagination, who has no purpose and if people do not follow it it is because they "are too lazy to be ethical". The quality of an epistemology is its effectiveness to produce results.

Of course that doesn't invalidate the fact that you were harmed, it's something else.

Edited 4 hours ago by Schizophonia

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, Majed said:

@Emerald Most guys are sexually frustrated. Having a girlfriend doesn't mean one is not sexually frustrated. You've only got one out of billions of hot girls, think about how frustrating is that. As men we crave variety, not just having one girlfriend. 

By that definition, every single man that's not sleeping with every single woman in existence is sexually frustrated.

And there is no man on the planet that's sleeping with all 4 billion women. 

1. Are you saying that every single man is sexually frustrated? 

2. Are you saying that every single instance of sexual harassment comes from sexual frustration?

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, Schizophonia said:

@Emerald 

Sociopathy is a conditioning process; for example there are many men with these tendencies who were beaten by their parents or others. Without going into details I knew a man when I was little who was in relationship with a woman in my family, and he was severely paranoid and had sociopathic behaviours; well, in his childhood his parents beat him and locked him in the cellar to punish him if I remember correctly, and ofc probably other things. Even me can have sociopathic reflexes if my mental state deteriorates violently under a combinaison of certain conditions, and yet I am not particularly evil.

The brain is just a survival machine that adapts to an environment; therefore things like sexual assault are social.

But your paradigm is purely idealistic; there would be a superstitious concept that you call "ethics" which you claim to be objective when it comes from your imagination, who has no purpose and if people do not follow it it is because they "are too lazy to be ethical". The quality of an epistemology is its effectiveness to produce results.

Of course that doesn't invalidate the fact that you were harmed, it's something else.

Keep in mind that I'm talking about people who I know personally. Some of these guys were even my friends, despite their problematic behaviors.

Most of these guys weren't sociopaths at all. Most of them really were just too lazy to operate from a code of ethics... and didn't really care about integrity. (and there are environmental reasons for the laziness and lack of ethics, which I'll get to in a minute)

The vast majority of them were just low integrity guys with weaker ethical boundaries and less discernment about what kinds of behaviors they're willing to do and what kinds of behaviors that they're willing to accept in those they socialize with.

To give an analogy, it's like the difference between a person who has higher standards for the cleanliness and tidiness of their house compared to other people who have lower standards for cleanliness and tidiness.

So, one person might have low standards for tidiness and end up with garbage all through their house because they don't have the sensitivity or standards to even notice the garbage enough or see it as a big enough issue to deal with. And perhaps they stay in the status quo and follow the path of least resistance, so they end up too lazy to actively fix the problem. They don't have the activation energy to fix it because "Eh. It's whatever."

This is what happens with people who have weak ethical boundaries too. They just are not sensitive enough and they don't have high enough standards to live in alignment with a code of ethics. And unless they have a "come to Jesus moment", they just follow the path of least resistance... which is what I mean by ethical laziness.

It's doing things that make them less trustworthy... be being apathetic and not seeing it as a big enough problem to warrant the effort to change or fix it.

But I recognize that there's a huge environmental factor to it... but not necessarily that they were the target of violence per se. Only some of them were in violent environments, but all of them were raised in low-standard environments with the philosophy of "things just are the way they are".

But not every guy who was raised in those types of environments became like that, to be clear.

In my hometown, one of the worst things about the area that I lived is that people had very low standards in general... relative to ethics, hygiene, the state of their house, who they're willing to accept as a romantic partner, etc.

And that pattern of low standards is quite contagious to be around... especially if you've lived your entire life in it.

So, I've known a lot of people who have been living their entire lives in a context that normalizes degenerative behaviors to where none of it feels like a very big deal. But it's a lot of people robotically or semi-robotically doing things that compromise their integrity, healthy, and overall quality of life.

And a guy who has this level of apathy and "Whatever fuck it." mentality probably isn't going to do the work necessary to stick to a code of ethics... a may have a tendency to be less pressed about crossing others' boundaries... sexually and otherwise.

[Basman]

Sexual harassment is about more than just sexual frustration but uneven power dynamics. It is much more unsafe when a man flashes a woman than the other way around due to size difference. A woman flashing men openly is asking to get raped. Priest molesting kids is an authority preying on vulnerability.

A misogynistic culture is going to take sexual harassment of women less seriously. Raping your wife wasn't considered rape until recently.

Edited 56 minutes ago by Basman

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

I bet most men in relationships or marriages aren't getting that much pussy, their situation might be slightly better than that of a single guy (emphasis on might) but I bet most of them aint getting it like that in all honesty lmao and the frequency of sex would keep dropping lower and lower, studies might claim that married couples are more satisfied with their sex lives than their single counterparts but I bet that since women are the ones wearing the pants in that aspect, it is skewing the results significantly, I'm not believing that shit for one second. Having said that, there is absolutely no excuse to sexually harrass a woman like that

[Infinity16]

On 11/21/2025 at 0:24 PM, Raze said:

You need to stop conflating society with biological sorting. Society sustains itself by having social conditioning, laws, and structures to control biological sorting to maintain itself. 

Society actually does care, this is why societies develop things like sexual shame, enforced monogamy, laws and taboos against sexual harassment, prostitution etc. 

Minimizing the amount for sexually frustrated males and repressing their unruly behavior are important aspects of what makes society function and not dissolve into warring tribes. 

If it was truly a dog eat dog biological sorting competition that guy could rape someone and if that passes on his genes he did the biologically “successful” thing. But it isn’t because we have civilization which curtails or organizes this behavior. 

And yet sexual shame almost always falls upon the woman. The purpose was likely to make sure that the children that men have are actually the man's. After all, cuckold was the most insulting thing to call a man.