Katy Perry sexually assaulted Shawn Mendes?

[Oivind 287]

4 hours ago, Phoebe said:

As said many times, if the roles would be switched and it would be a 32 year old male touching a butt of an 18 year old female he would be eaten alive by the media. Katy is getting support because she's Katy Freaking Perry, she's a woman and (I assume) it was done in a joking manner (it is no secret Katy has a goofy personality). If a 32 year old male had done it in the same joking manner I higly doubt the media and the internet would believe him. We would see words like creep, pedo, rapist plastered all over the forums. 

I agree with you in principle. But here's an important difference: Men are usually physically stronger than women, and often have more powerful positions. Now, if I had a female boss who groped me, I would have a problem with that, because I might feel she was pressuring me (a married man, even) to have sex with her. But if someone with no power over me, neither physical nor any other kind, did the same thing, it's not nearly the same. I should say that I don't have much of a personal space myself, and wasn't even that uncomfortable when a gay man stroked my thigh and tried to convince me to have sex with him: I just told him I wasn't gay (and was married, to boot). But I understand that other people have a personal space, and are uncomfortable when someone invades that space. But that is still different from feeling threatened. Maybe Shawn Mendes felt uncomfortable, but more likely he didn't mind, and I'm sure he didn't feel threatened in any way. So I don't see this as a big deal.

[Oivind 287]

4 minutes ago, RainbowBlonde said:

As Shawn said, he never met her before. We do not know what their relationship is, so I don't think you should just let Katy go with it only because Shawn happens to be fine with it. 

They're still pop stars, and not really random strangers who met on the street. And I don't think she has any power over him which could make him feel threatened. I'm not letting her go, but I don't think it's a big deal, either. Sure, there is a minor chance he might feel uncomfortable, and she shouldn't have done it.

Here's an example to illustrate what I mean: I'm a 43 year old male high school teacher. Let's say I groped one of my 18 year old female students. Now let's say it was the other way around, and she groped me. Do you see how different those two situations would be? It makes a big difference to me whether or not the gropee feels threatened by the groper.

[RadioIsOurs 13,876]

22 minutes ago, Oivind said:

I agree with you in principle. But here's an important difference: Men are usually physically stronger than women, and often have more powerful positions. Now, if I had a female boss who groped me, I would have a problem with that, because I might feel she was pressuring me (a married man, even) to have sex with her. But if someone with no power over me, neither physical nor any other kind, did the same thing, it's not nearly the same. I should say that I don't have much of a personal space myself, and wasn't even that uncomfortable when a gay man stroked my thigh and tried to convince me to have sex with him: I just told him I wasn't gay (and was married, to boot). But I understand that other people have a personal space, and are uncomfortable when someone invades that space. But that is still different from feeling threatened. Maybe Shawn Mendes felt uncomfortable, but more likely he didn't mind, and I'm sure he didn't feel threatened in any way. So I don't see this as a big deal.

3 minutes ago, Oivind said:

They're still pop stars, and not really random strangers who met on the street. And I don't think she has any power over him which could make him feel threatened. I'm not letting her go, but I don't think it's a big deal, either. Sure, there is a minor chance he might feel uncomfortable, and she shouldn't have done it.

Here's an example to illustrate what I mean: I'm a 43 year old male high school teacher. Let's say I groped one of my 18 year old female students. Now let's say it was the other way around, and she groped me. Do you see how different those two situations would be? It makes a big difference to me whether or not the gropee feels threatened by the groper.

So 'threatened' is the key word here, isn't it? If the same situation happened in the same place, but this time the roles are switched, does it really give Katy, who is considered physically weaker, more right to touch the younger person without consent? After all, it's a public place with lots of witnesses, and by your definition, feeling threatened should come from fear of being raped/further assaulted/manipulated by the physically stronger person. But there's really no chance that any of that would happen in such a scenario, wouldn't it? Then wouldn't that mean that feeling 'threatened' is actually irrational in such a situation?

[Phoebe 158]

2 minutes ago, Oivind said:

They're still pop stars, and not really random strangers who met on the street. And I don't think she has any power over him which could make him feel threatened. I'm not letting her go, but I don't think it's a big deal, either. Sure, there is a minor chance he might feel uncomfortable, and she shouldn't have done it.

Here's an example to illustrate what I mean: I'm a 43 year old male high school teacher. Let's say I groped one of my 18 year old female students. Now let's say it was the other way around, and she groped me. Do you see how different those two situations would be? It makes a big difference to me whether or not the gropee feels threatened by the groper.

I get your point and Shawn in reality probably felt uncomfortable (which is one of the reasons why it's still innappropriate to grope strangers), but for arguments sake let's say he actually felt threatened. What if he's thinking he has just been sexually assaulted, but is afraid of saying anything because the one touching him was Katy Perry, an influental superstar with millions of fans and supporters all around the globe. In that case she absolutely has power over him. Power isn't only physical. 

As a woman, this is a sensitive issue for me. I have been sexually harrassed and groped. Even "dirty" looks from men make me uncomfortable.  

[Oivind 287]

10 minutes ago, RainbowBlonde said:

So 'threatened' is the key word here, isn't it? If the same situation happened in the same place, but this time the roles are switched, does it really give Katy, who is considered physically weaker, more right to touch the younger person without consent? After all, it's a public place with lots of witnesses, and by your definition, feeling threatened should come from fear of being raped/further assaulted/manipulated by the physically stronger person. But there's really no chance that any of that would happen in such a scenario, wouldn't it? Then wouldn't that mean that feeling 'threatened' is actually irrational in such a situation?

Yes, "threatened" is the key word for me. Like I said, there is an enormous difference between me groping an 18 year old student and she groping me. The situation with Katy Perry and Shawn Mendes is somewhere in between, but a lot closer to the latter, IMO (and I consider that to be an almost completely harmless situation).

I guess it would be irrational to feel threatened with lots of witnesses around, but I consider irrational feeling to be legitimate feelings.

[Lassex 1,169]

Poor Shawn, ha TIHTY is coming Honestly, I don't know what to say about the ''double standard''. But I guess everything depends on his reaction. Maybe no-one should be allowed to grab a random person's butt without their consent, let's start there.

[Xaylan 1,326]

I think that if it was the other way around, no one would really care. There'd be the same amount of buzz as there is now.  

[RadioIsOurs 13,876]

19 minutes ago, Oivind said:

Yes, "threatened" is the key word for me. Like I said, there is an enormous difference between me groping an 18 year old student and she groping me. The situation with Katy Perry and Shawn Mendes is somewhere in between, but a lot closer to the latter, IMO (and I consider that to be an almost completely harmless situation).

I guess it would be irrational to feel threatened with lots of witnesses around, but I consider irrational feeling to be legitimate feelings.

He's 18, she's 32. 

[Oivind 287]

7 minutes ago, Phoebe said:

I get your point and Shawn in reality probably felt uncomfortable (which is one of the reasons why it's still innappropriate to grope strangers), but for arguments sake let's say he actually felt threatened. What if he's thinking he has just been sexually assaulted, but is afraid of saying anything because the one touching him was Katy Perry, an influental superstar with millions of fans and supporters all around the globe. In that case she absolutely has power over him. Power isn't only physical. 

As a woman, this is a sensitive issue for me. I have been sexually harrassed and groped. Even "dirty" looks from men make me uncomfortable.  

If he felt threatened, I would view the situation differently. And of course there is a chance he felt that way. Like I have said already, I agree in principle, but at the same time I don't like to overthink how people could react. I think society can become boring if no one ever does anything which is politically incorrect, because they fear someone might feel offended. We know that many women don't like to be touched like Shawn Mendes was, so I wouldn't do that. But if I was Katy Perry, I might take a chance, and touch Shawn Mendes' butt, just for fun.

I think you're right, this issue is probably more sensitive for women than men, in general. I tend to assume that other men wouldn't mind getting touched by Katy Perry, because I wouldn't, and for most men I think it's true. But I don't assume women feel the same way (on the contrary, I tend to assume they don't like it). I know not all women are the same, and not all men are the same. But I am so convinced Shawn Mendes was not offended, I just view this as harmless fun (knowing that there is always a chance I could be wrong).

[Oivind 287]

12 minutes ago, RainbowBlonde said:

He's 18, she's 32. 

Yes, but she's not his teacher.

[666 others 1,856]

Touching/groping someone without their consent is wrong, irrespective of the gender/age/ethnicity/musical preference/whatever of either party. How is it so difficult to understand and why there are so many back-to-square-one arguments over this simple fact?

Whether Katy Perry's intention was sexual or not, her action was wrong. Irrespective of whether Shawn Mendes felt uncomfortable/threatened or not. Because when celebrities perform such acts on camera, and the thing is laughed off as a joke, it gets normalized (Hey if Katy does that then its cool right? And look, Shawn enjoyed it, he's smiling, he is a huge fan of her! When I touch your butt without your consent why can't you be like him and enjoy it, b*tch?).

[Takemyhand 634]

On 08/03/2017 at 8:05 AM, chan said:

is there any men dot com models that looks like him??? i've been thirsty too sis 

Go to helix.com you may find what you need lol

[RadioIsOurs 13,876]

29 minutes ago, Oivind said:

If he felt threatened, I would view the situation differently. And of course there is a chance he felt that way. Like I have said already, I agree in principle, but at the same time I don't like to overthink how people could react. I think society can become boring if no one ever does anything which is politically incorrect, because they fear someone might feel offended. We know that many women don't like to be touched like Shawn Mendes was, so I wouldn't do that. But if I was Katy Perry, I might take a chance, and touch Shawn Mendes' butt, just for fun.

I think you're right, this issue is probably more sensitive for women than men, in general. I tend to assume that other men wouldn't mind getting touched by Katy Perry, because I wouldn't, and for most men I think it's true. But I don't assume women feel the same way (on the contrary, I tend to assume they don't like it). I know not all women are the same, and not all men are the same. But I am so convinced Shawn Mendes was not offended, I just view this as harmless fun (knowing that there is always a chance I could be wrong).

It's exactly this assumption that creates this double standard in society. Why does it have to be more sensitive for women than men? It's all stemmed from implications like this, the thought that men can take the notion of sex more stable than women can. What this only does is give the mindset that women are mentally weaker than men in terms of their sexuality. I can just go on about how this mindset can be so harmful and is one of the biggest reasons that women are being taken advantaged by men sexually. The more sacred you make the female sexuality to be, the more vulnerable it's seen as. Since this incident looks like a novelty, it's then seen as nothing. 

[Oivind 287]

3 minutes ago, RainbowBlonde said:

It's exactly this assumption that creates this double standard in society. Why does it have to be more sensitive for women than men? It's all stemmed from implications like this, the thought that men can take the notion of sex more stable than women can. What this only does is give the mindset that women are mentally weaker than men in terms of their sexuality. I can just go on about how this mindset can be so harmful and is one of the biggest reasons that women are being taken advantaged by men sexually. The more sacred you make the female sexuality to be, the more vulnerable it's seen as. Since this incident looks like a novelty, it's then seen as nothing. 

It doesn't have to be more sensitive for women, but I think it usually is. If a woman groped me, I could pretend to feel uncomfortable, but I would probably be lying. I think my friends would feel the same way. That's just the way it is. They are very typical straight males, though, and of course not every male is like my friends.

This does not mean I think women are mentally weaker. If anything, I tend to think the opposite. And there's probably a reason why most of my idols nowadays are women (Lady Gaga most of all). But I can't pretend I would be offended by a woman groping me, and I just have a hard time being offended on Shawn Mendes' behalf. I envy him, actually. I would love to be touched by Katy Perry. That's just how I feel, and I don't think less of you if you don't feel the same way.

[Oivind 287]

2 hours ago, 666 others said:

Touching/groping someone without their consent is wrong, irrespective of the gender/age/ethnicity/musical preference/whatever of either party. How is it so difficult to understand and why there are so many back-to-square-one arguments over this simple fact?

Whether Katy Perry's intention was sexual or not, her action was wrong. Irrespective of whether Shawn Mendes felt uncomfortable/threatened or not. Because when celebrities perform such acts on camera, and the thing is laughed off as a joke, it gets normalized (Hey if Katy does that then its cool right? And look, Shawn enjoyed it, he's smiling, he is a huge fan of her! When I touch your butt without your consent why can't you be like him and enjoy it, b*tch?).

It's wrong, all right, but when someone calls it sexual assualt, they make it more serious than it is, IMO. And in the end, the most important thing is how Shawn Mendes feels about it. Did he mind?

BTW, I don't think Katy Perry should be held accountable if someone else touches a butt in a situation in which it is less appropriate. It isn't a green light for anyone wanting to touch butts.