Post: #26

I'm 6'6, I can't fit in just one seat because my legs cannot physically sit the proper way. If you have a problem with that, then fuck you.

Post: #27

^I'm 6'3" but the bus and subway seats are small as fuck around here. Haven't been to NYC in years, sure it's similar though.

Post: #28

privatize the fucking MTA.

Look at Hong Kong.

Post: #29

More often then not I see women with bags hogging seats.

Post: #30

(05-31-2015 10:16 PM)Remington Wrote:  I'm 6'6, I can't fit in just one seat because my legs cannot physically sit the proper way. If you have a problem with that, then fuck you.

This actually brings up an excellent point that's so obvious people seem to have missed it.

Men are bigger than women. Therefore they take up more space. Their legs are longer, therefore they sit differently. Hence, "manspreading."

I am not a big guy. As such, when I "manspread," it wouldn't matter. But the *other* half of the male population -- the ones 5'10" and over -- have longer legs. And when they sit just like I do, they're "manspreading."

So this law is discriminatory towards men. How can you have a law aimed at just one gender? Even rape laws cover both sexes. Someone needs to challenge this on constitutional grounds - a law aimed at just one gender can't be constitutional.

Post: #31

The main thing I don't understand is what the problem actually is here? Is it to do with the fact that they're taking up 2 seats? If so, why the fuck don't they just become a normal citizen and ask the guy to move. If he doesn't, then I can see why a woman would get annoyed.

Post: #32

Wow I'm a New Yorker born and raised but I got the hell outta there 3 years ago. Reading this makes me feel good about my decision but angry at the same time.

Post: #33

(06-01-2015 01:21 AM)britchard Wrote:  The main thing I don't understand is what the problem actually is here? Is it to do with the fact that they're taking up 2 seats? If so, why the fuck don't they just become a normal citizen and ask the guy to move. If he doesn't, then I can see why a woman would get annoyed.

They're treating it like grunting in the gym at Planet Fitness. "Aggressive male behavior" - remember this?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/18/nyregi....html?_r=0

There's no way this is only about taking up two seats, it's a campaign against men.

Post: #34

(06-01-2015 01:02 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(05-31-2015 10:16 PM)Remington Wrote:  I'm 6'6, I can't fit in just one seat because my legs cannot physically sit the proper way. If you have a problem with that, then fuck you.

This actually brings up an excellent point that's so obvious people seem to have missed it.

Men are bigger than women. Therefore they take up more space. Their legs are longer, therefore they sit differently. Hence, "manspreading."

I am not a big guy. As such, when I "manspread," it wouldn't matter. But the *other* half of the male population -- the ones 5'10" and over -- have longer legs. And when they sit just like I do, they're "manspreading."

So this law is discriminatory towards men. How can you have a law aimed at just one gender? Even rape laws cover both sexes. Someone needs to challenge this on constitutional grounds - a law aimed at just one gender can't be constitutional.

It's biomechanics; longer legs, larger upper body, and narrower hips (smaller point of contact) means the legs need to be spread wider for balance I would think. That and to give the balls room.

Post: #35

(06-01-2015 01:02 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(05-31-2015 10:16 PM)Remington Wrote:  I'm 6'6, I can't fit in just one seat because my legs cannot physically sit the proper way. If you have a problem with that, then fuck you.

Men are bigger than women.

Women may not be doing a good job in catching up to men in many aspects. But they are closing the gap on this.

Post: #36

We're missing the point here:

The men were Latino.

I'm 100% certain that this will be used, like stop-and-frisk, to disproportionately target black and hispanic men.

So, in essence, Social Justice Warriors are perpetuating institutional racism in NYC.

Or maybe it's intentional? After all, in the infamous 10 Hours in NYC as a Woman - all of the "harassers" were black and hispanic and 90% of it was in black or hispanic neighborhoods, but social justice warriors couldn't come right out and say "black and hispanic men need to stop this behavior". So SJWs helped institute a policy that on the surface targets all men, but in reality targets minority men, and they all collectively claim ignorance.

This shit is like "Petyr Baelish would approve" levels of deviousness

Post: #37

Kid you absolutely nailed.

The fems stopping manspreading just up ticked the amount of minorities that are going to be "arrested" for this kind of shit.

The suggestion this is intentional actually makes sense. Imagine if they had approved a catcalling law - you know exactly who'd be ticketed/fined/arrested/tazed/beat/shot.

Post: #38

This is just another case of some of the city's princesses trying to live in their own world. New York may be diverse, but it's really a matter of almost reluctant co-existence between the countless ethnic groups. I enjoy living within the city limits, but I wouldn't hesitate to move out if I got the chance to move to another quality city.

Post: #39

Yeah but fat people can buy one ticket and take up 2.5 seats on an airplane.

Post: #40

(06-01-2015 01:53 PM)spalex Wrote:  Yeah but fat people can buy one ticket and take up 2.5 seats on an airplane.

They should start charging fat people double on the subway too. They are taking up 2 places by default. Some probably would require 3 tickets.

Post: #41

So I'm wading through headline after headline but I'm having trouble finding the actual real information I'm looking for:

Is the actual LAW called Manspreading? It can't be, but I want to find out what the actual NYC law states for this particular infraction. Everywhere I read it blatantly is targeting males - the city of New York absolutely can't get away with something so unconstitutional. If this is so, then this is actually the first sign of civil rights going the opposite direction. Making discriminatory laws specific to gender.

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this in all honesty.

So these two men who were arrested recently for sitting with their legs too far apart. When the officers entered the car did this just outright cuff them and read them their rights and tell them they were sitting with their legs too far apart? Couldn't an officer just coming in and saying "Hey sit with your legs together" have sufficed? Can people not simply ask someone to move their legs or whatever is in the way so that he/she has room to sit? This is all fucking absurd.

Post: #42

(06-01-2015 02:11 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 01:53 PM)spalex Wrote:  Yeah but fat people can buy one ticket and take up 2.5 seats on an airplane.

They should start charging fat people double on the subway too. They are taking up 2 places by default. Some probably would require 3 tickets.

I was waiting to a board a plane recently. There were many people standing around waiting for their boarding group to be called when the kiosk attendant announced that the plane was having a having a weight and balance problem. She explained they would load more fuel and what not, and it probably wouldnt be a problem. However she closed with saying the worst case scenario was that several passengers might have to be rescheduled.

A friend of mine was with me and got pissed, thinking it way some huge issue. I said "Don't worry, its only logical to kick the fat people off first". I may have said it a little too loud, because I got some real butt hurt looks after that.

Post: #43

I hope somebody actually gets arrested and convicted so these ridiculous laws can be brought to appeal...

Post: #44

It's a simple matter of stability.

Women have wider hips and a lower center of gravity; their legs naturally close. Men have a higher center of gravity and narrower hips; their legs naturally spread open to keep themselves vertical.

Making space for Honour and his two buddies, Courage and Integrity, is secondary to the stability problem.

Post: #45

(06-01-2015 01:53 PM)spalex Wrote:  Yeah but fat people can buy one ticket and take up 2.5 seats on an airplane.

The first time I took an internal flight in the US I was seated next to a 400lb fat pig and her fatness spilled across into my area, I couldn’t sit up straight and I had to sit sideways at an angle. Do I have grounds to sue her for taking up my space?

Post: #46

You mean to tell me people are that soft they can't ask someone to let them sit. In fact manspreading which I have only seen on empty buses take up less space than handbags, strollers, and kids. The only problem that should be taken seriously if people aren' t giving up seats for the elderly. This is extremely stupid. This law is only good for a quota filler meaning it is not good at all. Speaking of NYC, I went to Harlem 2 weeks to see my Great Aunt and I have to ask why are the bus small?

Post: #47

Like a few others have mentioned, I don't see how this can be constitutional. My guess is that the two Latino men decided not to press the issue for one or more reasons. Maybe immigration status or better priorities or they might be involved in something else or maybe they don't have the resources or know their rights or whatever. Who knows.

But, that begs the question. What happens when it is some stock broker with money who knows his rights and has a killer lawyer? I am not a lawyer but I would think that any competent lawyer could argue that manspreading is an act of expression in a public place and is therefore protected by the first amendment. I don't know but I would think so.

This is why the whole catcalling shit didn't really bother me. At it's basic level those campaigns can never be anything more than attention whoring. I am honestly surprised that that shaming website hasn't been sued yet, but they probably walk the line on the legal side by not posting identifiable information. Either way, saying something like, "hey beautiful, why don't you smile for me" is never going to hold up in court due to first amendment. So, even if some SJW's got it put into a law, then that shit wouldn't stand for long.

Post: #48

(06-02-2015 12:24 AM)Troll King Wrote:  But, that begs the question. What happens when it is some stock broker with money who knows his rights and has a killer lawyer? I am not a lawyer but I would think that any competent lawyer could argue that manspreading is an act of expression in a public place and is therefore protected by the first amendment. I don't know but I would think so.

NYPD tends to leave that type alone.

Post: #49

Couldn't not take the opportunity to snap this one on my ride home from work yesterday.

Fat: check
Bags: check
Using smartphones to avoid glares from other pissed off passengers: check
Surly demeanours: check
Sitting in the courtesy seats: check

Manspreading is a huge problem in Sydney too. Shot taken from POV of the meat in a landwhale sandwich opposite.

Post: #50

This doesn't look like NYC but made me think of this thread.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/3...of_person/

This quote made me laugh. Only because the person who wrote this quote is blind, this chick is fat.

Quote:[–]CellarDoor8737 [score hidden] 2 minutes ago
So I guess it's not just fat people who take up more space than they should.