Friday, September 25, 2015

Cat-callers and street harassers justify their actions with deontology.

I have listened to many stories women have told about cat calling. They follow a common pattern that goes as such.


A woman is walking down the street, minding her own business, when a man calls out to her and makes some comment about her body or her clothes. The woman is disgusted, and either ignores them, or lets them know their comment was unwanted and not to cat-call. They respond by saying, "I was just giving you a compliment! Can't you take a compliment?" They usually say something like this instead of apologizing first, which shows just how little they care about the harm they've caused this woman, but that's not what this analysis is about. They emphasize their action, a "compliment," instead of the consequences of it (in fact, they ignore the consequences completely). This is deontologist, since it focuses on the action supposedly being just. By their logic, giving out compliments is a just action, and they have made a habit of ignoring women who have told them otherwise. This twisted logic, combined with an apathy for the consequences of their actions and an apathy for women, has resulted in great harm to millions of women. It is clearly wrong, and women have tried to tell men this, but by sticking to deontology, they continue to catcall and harass.


I'm fairly certain everyone in this class agrees that catcalling is wrong, since nobody spoke up to call us all "evil SJWs" when the conversation shifted to feminism in class, but in case you don't think it's wrong, I'm not going to be the one to explain to you why it is. Instead, you need to go to Youtube, look up testimonials from women who are routinely catcalled, and listen to what they have to say about it. If you find yourself thinking they're exaggerating, or lying, remember that they are the ones who live through it and you are not, and that it's highly unlikely that millions of women are all just overreacting. Put yourself in their shoes, and think about how you might feel, especially if it were to happen to you not just once, but hundreds of times.


I don't agree with deontolololololology.

4 comments:

  1. While I agree that catcalling is wrong, that does not necessarily mean that they are following deontology. Deontology is focused on the rightness or wrongness of the action alone. Catcalling would not be considered a just action because like you said, they have "twisted logic" and are not acting for the sake of duty alone but more for themselves and the response they get. They are not rational agents in these situations and are working with subjective principles that include irrational acts.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with you. Even thouhg I agree a little bit with Kant's ideas, I think that it is not right to act without thinking about the consequences of an action. Acting without thinking can have a bad outcome. People who think better before acting is most likely to act rationally. This men complimenting women on the street act according to their own purpose. They in some way believe that it is men's duty to compliment women, but they don't care about what women think. It may make women to feel uncomfortable which is not good. I honestly think that the consequences of an action are really important to define that action. Just imagine someone acting without thinking. This indivual wouldn't use reason, and he/she would have a really bad end.

    ReplyDelete
  3. While I certainly agree with you that cat-calling is annoying at best and terrifying at worst and just overall a bad idea, I'm not sure that it can be justified in the context of deontology. As Theresa said, deontology is greatly focused on the rightness and rationality of one's actions. It also focuses on whether or not one's actions are dutiful. While a cat-caller could certainly feel that their motives are pure and good (as you said, to them it's just a compliment regardless of how the person on the receiving end feels), I think they would be hard pressed to argue that it is their duty to society to cat-call people. Even if their logic is convoluted enough for them to claim it is, it could be countered that it is their duty to not make other people feel uncomfortable. Thus I do not think cat-calling can be completely rationalized by deontology.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I definitely agree with you that cat-calling is wrong. I do not think that I would refer to it as the men who are doing the catcalling think that it is their duty to do so, but I do think that some people do not believe that what they are doing is wrong.

    ReplyDelete