Sexism, Gaming, Pax and Fear

Jayhawker wrote:

So, it's not a "she deserved it," but rather a, "she was asking for it" post?

I think it's a 'does what it says on the tin' post: trying to make sense of the dissonance. Now, I'm a guy so this is an outsider perspective, but it seems when women dress, dressing sexy is dressing powerful. Maybe it's that we guys just see sex, but for women there's another level to it, and that's where the dissonance is.

I also think there's a difference between dressing to attract attention, and dressing for self-expression. They might want attention to the costume as cosplay, but not attention to the costume as sexual enticement. I think his question was why you'd pick a sexy character then, and I think that's part of the answer: dressing sexy isn't always about garnering sexual attention, it's sometimes just about sexual self-expression.

CheezePavilion wrote:

I also think there's a difference between dressing to attract attention, and dressing for self-expression. They might want attention to the costume as cosplay, but not attention to the costume as sexual enticement. I think his question was why you'd pick a sexy character then, and I think that's part of the answer: dressing sexy isn't always about garnering sexual attention, it's sometimes just about sexual self-expression.

Bingo.

Also, consider that there is not as wide a range of non-sexualized characters to choose from if you want to dress as a female. If you like other parts of what they represent, sometimes "sexy" just comes along for the ride because at the time it helped sell a zillion copies of Tomb Raider or whatever.

.

Back to what I meant though. Women are aesthetically pleasing/I'm heterosexual-those two phrases are basically inseparable in my mind. I'm also very honest. I can't really fathom lying to a woman and saying that I want to be friends when I'm trying to get her naked. I can't claim being platonic from the start because my preferred path is from friend to lover to partner. If I claim platonic at the start and my feelings change I would be lying; I cry and tremble at the thought of being a cad. While I have not confirmed this, women don't believe it when I say that I want a friendship where sex is possible but not the goal. Finally, people are dangerous. Thus at the end of the day, women I could have sex with have higher utility than ones I can't and that puts them below the threshold of risk/reward required to make social contact.

What the actual f*ck. This is the creepiest thing I've read in ages.

The difference between saying "Wow! You look really sexy in that outfit. Perhaps we could get together sometime?" and "I bet a man can't please you in bed, but I am willing to try, hotstuff!" is exponential.

No, it really isn't. Either way, you (the general you, not you Rev) are a) offering up unsolicited opinions on a woman's appearance; b) objectifying the woman by relating to her not in terms of her individuality, but in terms of your sexual interest.

You are entitled to your opinion about a woman's body, or anything really, but you are not entitled to that woman's interest in your opinion. It doesn't matter what she's wearing, how attractive you find her; no matter what your status or identity or sexual orientation or anything -- you do not have a God-given right, as a man, to inform her of what you think of her body. A woman is not a public monument. She is not an object waiting for a man's approval or evaluation. And when she dresses a certain way, whether it's a low-cut shirt or a cosplay of Lara Croft or just some paint-stained overalls, she does so because she chooses to, not because she requires running commentary from the peanut gallery.

I mean, I'm all for flirting, and if you really want to hit on a woman, then hey, go right ahead. But there's so many other ways to express your interest in her besides making it about the degree to which she floats your dong.

KaterinLHC wrote:

This is what many men do not understand: You are entitled to your opinion about a woman's body, or anything really, but you are not entitled to that woman's interest in your opinion. It doesn't matter what she's wearing, how attractive you find her; no matter what your status or identity or sexual orientation or anything -- you do not have a God-given right, as a man, to inform her of what you think of her body. A woman is not a public monument. She is not an object waiting for a man's approval or evaluation. And when she dresses a certain way, whether it's a low-cut shirt or a cosplay of Lara Croft or just some paint-stained overalls, she does so because she chooses to, not because she requires running commentary from the peanut gallery.

I wonder if you may have come across something important here. (I may be wrong, seeing as how I am (a) male; and (b) not a cosplayer)

Cosplayers dress the way that they do because they enjoy it. Some of them will not mind (or even appreciate) comments on how sexy they look, some of them will not. (note, besides the point of my comment.) Now, given that the majority of people at a con are (a)*not* cosplayers and (b) male, chances are *very* good that they have a general cluelessness of the (in)appropriateness of comments on the sexiness (or lack thereof) of a given cosplayer. Now I think (due to my general optimism for the human race) that the majority of the comments are not made out of a desire to Tab A into Slot B but out of a general (innocent??) ignorance in what is appropriate and what is not.

Now, ignorance does not make it acceptable, rather it is a sign that there is an educational opportunity out there.

I wonder if there has ever been a con panel on "This is appropriate behaviour". I mean, the military gave me classes, when i was taking my Officer Training School, on the proper way to interact with superiors, subordinates, etc. Why can't something similar be done for con-goers?

KaterinLHC wrote:

A woman is not a public monument. She is not an object waiting for a man's approval or evaluation. And when she dresses a certain way, whether it's a low-cut shirt or a cosplay of Lara Croft or just some paint-stained overalls, she does so because she chooses to, not because she requires running commentary from the peanut gallery.

So women are free to objectify themselves, but even a politely worded expression of appreciation (per pheonix's post) is some moral crime? This is the dissonance I was talking about - again, the specific examples she provided were 100% wrong, but if the thesis of your blog post is "I'm not just a pair of tits" then at the very least you're undermining your argument by dressing as a character who - let's face it - is often portrayed as a walking pair of tits. To say nothing of the fact that she works for a company that has helped perpetuate that stereotype in the past.

NormanTheIntern wrote:

So women are free to objectify themselves, but even a politely worded expression of appreciation (per pheonix's post) is some moral crime? This is the dissonance I was talking about - again, the specific examples she provided were 100% wrong, but if the thesis of your blog post is "I'm not just a pair of tits" then at the very least you're undermining your argument by dressing as a character who - let's face it - is often portrayed as a walking pair of tits. To say nothing of the fact that she works for a company that has helped perpetuate that stereotype in the past.

Let's be clear here: There is no set of clothes of any kind that exists in the universe that if worn by a woman will change her in an objective sense from a human being into an object. If you see her as an object or treat her as one, that is on you and nothing about the clothes she is wearing transfers that responsibility.

There is no such thing in the real world as a walking pair of tits. There is no time when it's okay to mistake a human being for one. There is no set of external factors that can undermine a woman's argument that she is not one.

A lot posts are debating on whether cosplaying in a sexy outfit give a man a right to inappropriate comments, but what about all the other instances she mentions in her blog post? The ones in which there wasn't any cosplaying involved? So sexy clothing makes it okay, but it's not okay otherwise?
Others have said this much more eloquently than I have, but there is no way any of this is acceptable. It's not acceptable if you're wearing a business suit, it's unacceptable if you're cosplaying as Lara Croft, it's never acceptable. Ever.

I'm just going to echo what was said in the blog: This has to stop.

It's really quite a simple rule. Don't be rude. I don't care if someone is dressed like a nun or is naked. Don't be RUDE.

The con-class idea above has been tried, at least in a YouTube video. And it didn't go over all that well. You can guess the reaction of the male contingent at even this gentle, light-humored poke at both sides of this equation.

I'm exhausted and I'm probably going to regret typing this, but I don't get why this is so frelling complicated!? There is nothing special here; it's the same set of manners for any light social setting. You don't have to bust out a new set of moves to talk to someone, male or female, just because they're wearing a Joker costume. Even if it's this one.

Let me see if I can come up with a more masculine example. Say a stranger pulled into a parking lot with a perfect cherry red '67 GTO. You seriously dig the car. You wouldn't go up and make some comment as to how you wouldn't want to sit in the back seat because of all the sex they must be having back there (if you would talk like that to a stranger then I really can't help you). You wouldn't go up and start stroking the bumper.

You'd compliment them on the car. If they aren't in a rush somewhere maybe they stop and you maybe make some small talk about where/how they got it. Maybe ask to take a picture with it. Then you hand the driver your camera or flag down a passer-by to do the deed. You stand next to the car, but not so close you scratch it with the buttons on your jeans. You don't drape yourself all over the hood like a car show girl. Some polite farewells, and then you all go your own way.

The car is the point of the discussion, and notice how I phrased so it really doesn't matter who or what the driver is. You don't come at it expecting them to give you a ride or even really much more than the time of day and if they can't even do that you enjoy the view of the car while it's here and move on.

That's how it should be when you're talking to a cosplayer as well. You compliment them on what they're doing and how well they're doing it. Not on them as a person. You don't make demands on them as a person.

KaterinLHC:

Forgive my asking, but isn't unsolicited advice kind of a running thing that's okay/not okay/whatever in your cultural sphere? It happens when parents comment on the (supposedly) pitiful lives of singles, singles comment on the hell parents subject themselves to, parents comment on aspects of their children's lives that their opinion was not asked on, and so on and so forth. I took it as just being a thing you guys do. Presumably, most of the time it's not a problem, or so I thought. I can't really say.

Would you say that offering up your unsolicited opinion on anything whatsoever to any stranger in most situations (and definitely at a con) constitutes an invasion of privacy that needs to be justified? If not, then what's a nice and clear social rule? Nuance is great and all, but a simple rule is much, much better.

Whatever this rule is, I think this should be enforced across the board.

Leads to the second question.

Many guys (and most guys I know of) generally initially get attracted to a woman because of how she floats their dongs. I'm actually not that way, but I'm kind of broken. Given that interest and that opinion, how else would a guy hit on a woman, except exactly as how Phoenix Rev expresses? Many guys know nothing about a woman who interests them other than how much she turns them on. That may creep you out, but it's true for a lot of people nonetheless.

If we're okay with people hitting on other people indiscriminately, shouldn't we have a clearer guideline than "Be attractive," and "Be handsome?"

FWIW, I'm not generally in favor of this social standard. It weirds me the hell out. I don't like men or women hitting on me. It's creepy and occasionally humiliating and scary. I prefer a gradual familiarization scheme, like the fox in The Little Prince.

Jayhawker wrote:

My mind is boggled that the Felicia Day video is shown as an example of something good. If a journalist stands up and asks that question, he is fired.

If Felicia responds by asking for the guy to be removed, she risks the IHM's wrath.

That question is why my wife, while she enjoyed PAX with me, would never go alone. She told me that there are too many examples of guys not only being inappropriate, but absolutely no sense that she could trust the crowd to back her up.

I'm not sure if this was addressed at me. I did not bring up the Felicia Day question as something good. My question was should one defend the honor of a person that doesn't try to fight for themselves. I could go through youtube and find a hundred videos of girls being asked rude questions but obviously enjoying it. If one is going to fight for the honor of these cos players why not also talk to the women that do nothing or encourage the comments?

Don't mistake my question for a rejection or acceptance for what she did or a acceptance or rejection for the comments.

Baron Of Hell wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:

My mind is boggled that the Felicia Day video is shown as an example of something good. If a journalist stands up and asks that question, he is fired.

If Felicia responds by asking for the guy to be removed, she risks the IHM's wrath.

That question is why my wife, while she enjoyed PAX with me, would never go alone. She told me that there are too many examples of guys not only being inappropriate, but absolutely no sense that she could trust the crowd to back her up.

I'm not sure if this was addressed at me. I did not bring up the Felicia Day question as something good. My question was should one defend the honor of a person that doesn't try to fight for themselves. I could go through youtube and find a hundred videos of girls being asked rude questions but obviously enjoying it. If one is going to fight for the honor of these cos players why not also talk to the women that do nothing or encourage the comments?

Don't mistake my question for a rejection or acceptance for what she did or a acceptance or rejection for the comments.

You used Felicia Day as an example of a woman who thought a crude comment was funny, and asked if since that was okay, why wasn't what the jerk from the blog said okay. I posted the video to show that Felicia Day was clearly not okay with the question and didn't think it was funny.

The reason the woman who wrote the blog isn't talking about women who think those sorts of things are okay is because it really doesn't matter if there are other women that think such things are okay. She does not and is declaring that she will not tolerate them being said to her anymore. Is it really so difficult to respect her wishes? Is it really so hard to not have innuendo or blatant sexual comments as your default mode of interacting with strangers?

IMAGE(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VZO6zqW1qqo/TuFXx2ligsI/AAAAAAAAAog/aOrAqw1n6L4/s1600/Sexism+bingo.jpg)

Baron Of Hell wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:

My mind is boggled that the Felicia Day video is shown as an example of something good. If a journalist stands up and asks that question, he is fired.

If Felicia responds by asking for the guy to be removed, she risks the IHM's wrath.

That question is why my wife, while she enjoyed PAX with me, would never go alone. She told me that there are too many examples of guys not only being inappropriate, but absolutely no sense that she could trust the crowd to back her up.

I'm not sure if this was addressed at me. I did not bring up the Felicia Day question as something good. My question was should one defend the honor of a person that doesn't try to fight for themselves. I could go through youtube and find a hundred videos of girls being asked rude questions but obviously enjoying it. If one is going to fight for the honor of these cos players why not also talk to the women that do nothing or encourage the comments?

Don't mistake my question for a rejection or acceptance for what she did or a acceptance or rejection for the comments.

So... she obviously wanted it because she didn't fight back hard enough?

Coming out of habitual lurk to say that Roland's post was one of the most dysfunctional things I have read lately. I can only hope all of it was parody. If it wasn't, it might be good to pretend it was. Not trying to slam someone for being honest, but if that was honest then there are some major, major issues going on there. The fact that this mindset is out there and (let's be honest) prevalent is as good a reason as any to be sensitive to these issues, especially in an environment in which men are sizing women up for their "utility".

/puke

The horrible notion that exists among dudes (but is rampant on the internet) is that these women put themselves out there and inflict their attractiveness on you. Their attractiveness is an act of passive-aggression, so it is only natural that you respond. You consider your "favorable" response to their aggression as being a good and flattering and understandable response. And when they say that your response is unwanted and indeed inappropriate, you take that as further act of aggression. You may not think of it as aggression, but you speak about it like it is and formulate narratives that follow this train of thought.

If she doesn't want ___ to happen, then why did she dress like ___? She is being a total b**ch / tease / crazy feminazi, amirite?

As if the first thing has anything to do with the second.

And you see this elsewhere, like those pathetic pickup artist guys who justify their entire thing with the fact that the women tacitly deserve to be used. After all, they're dressed like that, they're the ones who got drunk, and anyway they're probably awful because they probably only like attractive dudes with money. Oh wait... I feel like that was already expressed in this thread.

Sorry, this gets me rather upset. I literally cannot believe that so many men have no clue how to act toward women, or pat themselves so firmly on the back for having the willpower to not creep all over them. I can't believe that women are this spooky other that cannot be fathomed and must indeed be feared. This is not difficult stuff, guys.

And the fact that some women roll with this in stride is a testament to the women, who have complicated reactions just like real men do! It's not a signifier that your actions are ok, and that the women who take issue are the ones doing something wrong.

I'm sorry, but "greater utility"? Really?

Really?

clover:

I think what Baron of Hell is saying is that there is a subculture of people to whom asking that question would be perfectly reasonable and even lauded. If there are such subcultures, then it becomes a question of whether it's impolite to extend cultural cues from one subculture to the mainstream.

Yellek wrote:

It's really quite a simple rule. Don't be rude. I don't care if someone is dressed like a nun or is naked. Don't be RUDE.

This is a very simple rule and I try to live by it as much as I can. The problem arises when folks come up with different interpretations of "rude" based on their own experiences.

As a man and a non cosplayer, if a woman (no matter how attractive or unattractive) were to approach me unsolicited and tell me that she felt compelled to comment that I was attractive, I would sincerely thank her for the compliment and ask her to call my wife to remind her I still have it. If, on the other hand, she were to go on about crudeness and objectification, I would, rightly, feel very uncomfortable.

I think, however, that something very different is going on with this cosplay business. From comments above, I get the impression that even making the polite (and rather obvious) comment that Meagan looks very attractive is, in and of itself, an affront on her person. It is this precise border of that offense that folks (even myself) are having difficulty grasping because it doesn't necessarily square with one's own experience.

All that said, even if I don't necessarily understand it, it is still important that I adjust my own expectations of "rude" based not on what *I* would find acceptable, but rather by what the subject has expressed brings her discomfort. At the same time, I don't think it is unreasonable that most folks would begin at Phoenix Rev's line and adjust as more information becomes available.

clover wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

I also think there's a difference between dressing to attract attention, and dressing for self-expression. They might want attention to the costume as cosplay, but not attention to the costume as sexual enticement. I think his question was why you'd pick a sexy character then, and I think that's part of the answer: dressing sexy isn't always about garnering sexual attention, it's sometimes just about sexual self-expression.

Bingo.

Also, consider that there is not as wide a range of non-sexualized characters to choose from if you want to dress as a female. If you like other parts of what they represent, sometimes "sexy" just comes along for the ride because at the time it helped sell a zillion copies of Tomb Raider or whatever.

Or even when it's totally tangential to the character.

I have seen a "sexy Frankenstein" costume for sale before at Halloween. The same is true for virtually any "Sexy noun" combination.

Shockingly, none of these ever come in male versions - even when the original character is male.

bombsfall wrote:

I literally cannot believe that so many men have no clue how to act toward women, or pat themselves so firmly on the back for having the willpower to not creep all over them. I can't believe that women are this spooky other that cannot be fathomed and must indeed be feared. This is not difficult stuff, guys.

Strongly agreed.

It's a sign of how prevalent this dysfunction is that even on GWJ there's clearly a long ways to go.

LarryC wrote:

Forgive my asking, but isn't unsolicited advice kind of a running thing that's okay/not okay/whatever in your cultural sphere? It happens when parents comment on the (supposedly) pitiful lives of singles, singles comment on the hell parents subject themselves to, parents comment on aspects of their children's lives that their opinion was not asked on, and so on and so forth. I took it as just being a thing you guys do. Presumably, most of the time it's not a problem, or so I thought. I can't really say.

Who is the "you guys" that you're referring to? It's certainly not okay in my book.

If my parents offer me their unsolicited opinion, it's because they think they have a right to express it and that they are entitled to my interest in it, because of the nature of our relationship. When I am four years old, this is true. When I'm forty, not so much. In my opinion, this is something parents must unlearn when their children become adults. Everyone deserves respect for their personal agency.

Would you say that offering up your unsolicited opinion on anything whatsoever to any stranger in most situations (and definitely at a con) constitutes an invasion of privacy that needs to be justified? If not, then what's a nice and clear social rule? Nuance is great and all, but a simple rule is much, much better.

It is rude and an invasion of privacy to frame a stranger's choices in the context of how you feel they relate to you, whether that choice is to wear a Lara Croft costume or a low-cut top or nothing at all. "I like your sexy costume" is a great example, because "sexy" is an adjective that's entirely in the eye of the beholder. In your attempt to compliment the cosplayer, you are making her costume about your sexual interest. You are taking her hard work and making it about you.

If you really would like to compliment the cosplayer's costume, a polite way to do so would be to compliment the hard work that went into making it. "Your costume looks great, it must have taken you a long time to make", or, better yet, something specific like, "the embroidery on your tunic is beautiful, did you do it all by hand?" or "your shorts look just like Lara's, did you have to customize them"? See the difference? This time, you are acknowledging and addressing her hard work without making it about you, and expressing polite interest in something she is obviously passionate about. (And if you don't care about the details of how the costume was made, then just say, "your costume looks great" and leave it at that. But at the same time, don't expect her to show any interest in you back, if you can't be assed to muster up interest in what she obviously cares about.)

Many guys (and most guys I know of) generally initially get attracted to a woman because of how she floats their dongs. I'm actually not that way, but I'm kind of broken. Given that interest and that opinion, how else would a guy hit on a woman, except exactly as how Phoenix Rev expresses? Many guys know nothing about a woman who interests them other than how much she turns them on.

Isn't the answer obvious? Go learn more about her. She might initially catch your eye because of her appearance, but she can't actually interest you as a person until, well, you learn more about her as a person. So ask her about her interests, her hobbies, her passions. Ask her about her. Then, once you've established to her that a) you're a healthy, well-adjusted person who can successfully hold a conversation acceptable of polite society instead of just slavering over boobies, and b) that you're interested in her as a person, and not just a walking pair of tits, then go ask her out. It's really as simple as that.

Women are people. Duh.

This whole business has me thinking about the encounter Prince Harry had in a bar recently in which an out homosexual commented on how attractive he was and that if he were to ever change his mind regarding his sexual orientation, that he would welcome a call. Folks praised Harry for responding to this advance with the grace one would expect from decades of finishing school. The message there was that when someone compliments you (politely) about your attractiveness (even when it is unsolicited and unreciprocated), the default response is not to take offense, but to accept the compliment and move on.

To be clear, I am certainly not making excuses for caddish behavior, but much like Phoenix Rev, I am having a little difficulty understanding the offense in telling an attractive person that they are attractive provided one does it with respect and doesn't go all Howard Wolowitz.

Paleocon wrote:

To be clear, I am certainly not making excuses for caddish behavior, but much like Phoenix Rev, I am having a little difficulty understanding the offense in telling an attractive person that they are attractive provided one does it with respect and doesn't go all Howard Wolowitz.

There is a big difference between letting someone know you think they are attractive, and commenting on their tits or otherwise objectifying/victimizing them. The key word you used was 'respect' I think everyone is in agreement on that point.

I know you know it Paleo, but this is far from the case in the OP. Comments like 'I want my babies in there' are not generally considered respectful.

Let's be clear here: There is no set of clothes of any kind that exists in the universe that if worn by a woman will change her in an objective sense from a human being into an object.
A woman is not a public monument. She is not an object waiting for a man's approval or evaluation. And when she dresses a certain way, whether it's a low-cut shirt or a cosplay of Lara Croft or just some paint-stained overalls, she does so because she chooses to, not because she requires running commentary from the peanut gallery.
I literally cannot believe that so many men have no clue how to act toward women, or pat themselves so firmly on the back for having the willpower to not creep all over them.

A few QFTs. Normal rules of social behavior don't change because you're cosplaying, and they don't change because you're at a board meeting. We've heard a number of common defenses of victimizing women on this thread, and I'm sure it's worse elsewhere (she is asking for it, she didn't fight back, I'm a guy so I can't help it) but frankly it's just not OK.

I don't want to point fingers here, but for those of you struggling to find empathy, ask yourself why you would ever really want to make another person feel like victim and less then a person? Imagine how it would feel if you were subject to the pain and disrespect that comes with that sort of objectification? Why would you want anyone to feel that way? Just please think about it, and consider treating others how you would really like to be treated.

And to head off the tide, no, that does not mean the same thing as "but I like getting sexy comments about me".

DrunkenSleipnir wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

To be clear, I am certainly not making excuses for caddish behavior, but much like Phoenix Rev, I am having a little difficulty understanding the offense in telling an attractive person that they are attractive provided one does it with respect and doesn't go all Howard Wolowitz.

There is a big difference between letting someone know you think they are attractive, and commenting on their tits or otherwise objectifying/victimizing them. The key word you used was 'respect' I think everyone is in agreement on that point.

I know you know it Paleo, but this is far from the case in the OP. Comments like 'I want my babies in there' are not generally considered respectful.

Oh, we agree on that for damned sure. I am just trying to explore the apparent chasm between the interpretations of borders between Phoenix Rev and Katherin.

Perhaps if the sum total of your interactions with a person is likely to be "I find you attractive", maybe it's sometimes best to not unburden yourself. I say "likely" because unless they respond and say "wow, really? what's your name, sailor?" it probably would be.

Some serious WTFing going on in this thread.

As a cosplayer, and husband of a cosplayer, I've seen this behavior directed at my wife in my vicinity. I've also heard her tell tales of it being much worse when I'm not around, to the point where there are entire classes of costume that she refuses to wear, for fear for her safety. Not everyone is a leering grotesque caricature of a caveman, but enough are that they've impacted nearly every con we've attended.

Regarding 'asking for it', etc - I like going to burlesque shows. In the course of the show, the dancers (male and female, though predominantly female) will take most of their clothes off. During the intermission, or between dances, they'll often talk with the audience, or just hang out and have a drink. While I may blush like hell, I'm not so gonad-ruled that my only conversational gambits involve talking about their body parts.

bombsfall wrote:

Perhaps if the sum total of your interactions with a person is likely to be "I find you attractive", maybe it's sometimes best to not unburden yourself. I say "likely" because unless they respond and say "wow, really? what's your name, sailor?" it probably would be.

I can certainly agree with that given context. What is appropriate in pick up joint is clearly less so in a boardroom.

Is it possible that, given how much "hooking up" there is at cons, part of the problem might be in context misinterpretation?

bombsfall wrote:

Perhaps if the sum total of your interactions with a person is likely to be "I find you attractive", maybe it's sometimes best to not unburden yourself. I say "likely" because unless they respond and say "wow, really? what's your name, sailor?" it probably would be.

Well, that's my feeling to. I don't really know how to flirt with girls but I cannot imagine a situation where I would say something like "Hi BLA you look really pretty in your costume" unsolicited. Now, I might if a girl asked me "What do you think of my costume" I might say something like "I think you look really pretty as Lara Croft" or something. Like the girl from the blog. She's really pretty but I think it would be weird if I don't know here to just walk up and say "Hi girl I don't know, you're really pretty" without the context of us knowing each other it would be weird. I just don't know if that would be offensive if someone would say "Just so you know you look really great as bla bla".

Actually, does anyone watch "How I met your Mother"? There was an episode a few years ago where the group in the show go to a gay bar. In the episode the guys get hit on by some gay guys at the bar and they do the thing that guys always say "I would love for someone to hit on me!" at first...then later in the episode they show the guys trying to have a talk and they keep getting hit on and they comment "Why can't they leave us alone we're just trying to have a conversation here" and to me that really drove the point home for girls it's most likely really flattering the first few times they get "hit on" in public for no reason. But after a while, they're just trying to eat a sandwich and some guys keep hitting on them so they get tired of it. Maybe I'm wrong but who knows.

Also, re: Felicia Day, this was from late last night:
IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/tt8M1FR.png)

Paleocon wrote:

Is it possible that, given how much "hooking up" there is at cons, part of the problem might be in context misinterpretation?

I think you'd be surprised about how much "hooking up" actually goes on. Either that or I'm not paying close enough attention at the ones I've been to.

This isn't the 60's/70's and PAX certainly isn't a swingers Con.