Incels, single men, and philanders have been catcalling women since birds learned to sing. Women have been ignoring them since then if they are not interested. Some women take a catcall as a complement and respond with a non-inviting flirt move. Some women may actually check out the catcaller to see if he might be interesting and if so make an inviting flirt move. She may even look up and smile. This is behavior that can be observed in all sexual creatures.
The campaign claiming that this demeans women is totally worthless. Women are sex objects. So are men. But whatever attracts his interest the man must make his interest known to the strange woman in order to have any chance of meeting her at all. Women are expected to be more subtle, but if she sees a stranger that may be a desirable sex toy or a sugar daddy she will certainly find a way to make it known.
"If a man stops looking lustfully at a woman, bury him he is dead." The feminist insistence that there is something wrong with a man who appreciates the physical differences in the women he meets when women are flaunting those differences in every encounter are not only making feminism look ridiculous but expecting men to not be male mammals.
There must be limits. It used to be that there were universal social signals that were respected and enforced by both genders. A man at a bar who touched a woman who had just turned her back to him risked anything from a physical attack by some other man, to ostracism, to somebody of either gender to loudly commenting "Leave her alone, go jack off in your own back yard." These signals seem to be still evolving in this more permissive and equal opportunity "Hook-up" culture, but among reasonable people seem to be known and agreed to. The rape culture is fighting back, but then rapists were never reasonable people. One can't help but wonder if the wolf crying in the first paragraph has not decreased sensitivity to actual abuse.
The Fremen Mirage
12 hours ago