Dear Abby: Neighbor sits on his couch in his undies

[cereta]

DEAR ABBY: I would like your opinion about something that's bothering me. I live in a senior housing complex in Massachusetts. Most of the residents are women in their 80s and 90s. (Some are also in their 60s.) A few men live here also.

One of the men sits on his living room couch with only his jockey shorts on. He leaves his door wide open when he does this. He seems not to care who sees him while walking by his apartment.

Some folks here believe it should be ignored and no one should look in while passing by. They say whatever he does in his own apartment is his own business. I believe that's true, but only when the door is closed. What do you think? By the way, he is in his 60s. -- BEFUDDLED IN MASSACHUSETTS

DEAR BEFUDDLED: What people do in the PRIVACY of their own apartment is no one's business. When the front door is open, it is no longer private. If the man's state of undress bothers some of the residents, they should bring it to the manager of the senior housing complex.

Comments

[cereta]

I'm curious to see what people have to say about this. On the one hand, I'm very much of the "your home, your state of undress" mentality (I live in a house with a ton of windows), and he's wearing skivvies, at least. OTOH, he's (a) deliberately leaving his door open in (b) a community made up largely of women makes me think there's more than just personal comfort involved.

Thoughts?

[recessional]

For me this is an area where I think considering all the factors is really important?

I tend to consider the right to wear whatever you want in your own home is very important, but on the other hand I'm not going to endorse, say, some person (either gender, frankly) standing nude in a big front window of a house that overlooks a route that kids take to school. (This was actually a case that came up in my hometown, and yeah the guy in that case was just as skeezy and Questionable as you probably think.)

This is particularly since the "problem" (if it's just a problem of "it's my house I can be naked if I want" is readily solved (get some fucking curtains), etc. On the other hand, if for some reason that's not a solution (or any other solution - frosting windows, whatever - isn't) it strongly implies to me that this isn't about personal freedom in your own home, it's about having a way to inflict your nudity on bystanders.

This case strikes me as analogous to that: if he wants to be in a state of undress in his own home, fine! Close the damn door. The fact that the door stays open, and that it is full of women, implies to me that this isn't about that freedom; it's about inflicting his state of undress on others.

[kaberett]

Yeah. I'm very much inclined towards clothing-optional households; if I have guests who are uncomfortable with nudity WE ALL WEAR CLOTHES. This is... not striking me as acceptable behaviour.

[recessional]

Especially since as sathari notes it's even . . . like if it's a heat or sensory issue there's stuff you can wear that has only mildly more coverage, technically, but that is still "clothing" and would make people less uncomfortable - a pair of basic cotton shorts, even.

There are connotations to it being specifically underwear, you know?

And like I still think it's something that has to be in-general contextualized - I'm not about to say an absolute "you should always consider the comfort of others in what you wear", because down the absolute of that route lies over-the-shoulder bag-straps being "stumbling blocks" and women harassed about covering their hair, and on the other hand I'm not going to say absolute hardcore "people should be allowed to wear whatever they want in whatever context especially if they're technically on their private property" because then you DO have predators taking advantage of this to, say, wander around their homes naked when female cleaning staff have been hired to come, or the guy I mentioned standing at the window exposing himself to children or whatever.

Because predators ALWAYS find a way to game the system.

So I think it has to be contextual and has to balance factors; but I also think in this case, with the details as described, this sounds way less about his right to be in whatever state he wants in his own home, and a lot more about being able to FORCE OTHERS to encounter him in whatever state of undress he happens to be in, which particularly when we're talking a guy in a building full of (older, vulnerable*) women, gets pretty sketch.


*given he is also older and vulnerable, there is also the possibility that this is less the result of a deliberate pattern-of-behaviour on his account than it is a result of dementia, and not something he would do deliberately in full possession of his faculties - but that to me then implies a worrying lack of care for him that should ALSO be addressed. So either way.

[sathari]

Yeah, if it were that he were wearing skivvies to answer the closed door, that would be one thing and a little more innocent, though, you know, maybe keep a bathrobe handy for that? But the door is just left open while he's in a state of undress, in a community made up largely of women--- that is sketchy. Close the door or find something to hang around your home in that is comfy but acceptable for public wear (gym shorts, even some pajamas/sleep pants would likely be less uncomfortable for the neighbors and other passersby).

[vass]

Today I learned a thing: "skivvies" is US slang for underpants. Here it's what you'd call a polo neck.

I'd seen USians talk about skivvies as undergarments before, but assumed it was an undershirt.

[deird1]

Ohhhh... I wondered why this conversation was making me so confused.

[naath]

I generally think "don't like, don't look". I'm not comfortable being told what to wear and don't want to tell others what to wear. If he were imposing himself into people's private spaces and refusing to let them not look that'd be different.

Seeing someone else naked (and he's not even naked) doesn't hurt you.

[amadi]

I don't think I can make a judgment on this without knowing two crucial things: first, can residents adjust the temperature within their apartments themselves or are they subject to the whims of building management and two, does the front door of this apartment open onto a common hallway or does it open to the outside? Because on the chance that this is this man's sole resort to keep from overheating, something I'm especially sensitive about, I don't want to condemn him as a creep.