Rude or polite

OP, you were fine, and I'm sorry you have to change your journey because of a creep.

Why was he a creep? Because he had the audacity to say "excuse me" to someone?

her arse handed to her on a plate yesterday by 99% of the respondents for behaving so rudely

Hardly a scientific poll, is it.

And, of course, we don't judge whether behaviour is appropriate by whether a group of time-wasters on the internet don't like it.

I recognise what the OP says. I used to live in a walkable city with a large homeless population, and used to be approached with an Excuuuuuuuuse me very very often. Always in a very assertive tone which is designed to make you pay attention.

I look a bit vulnerable when I'm out and about, perhaps because of how I carry myself, or because I look a bit of a day-dreamer. I'm also the kind of person that strangers talk to on trains.

So I had to learn to interrupt with a quick 'no, sorry', being assertive back. I also have to use this now with people going from door-to-door with hardship stories. The idea you have to stop and listen patiently to anyone approaching you with an 'excuse me', just because that was good behaviour in villages in the 1950s, is frankly insane.

This doesn't mean I don't stop to help strangers in distress or whatever, or people who clearly want help with things like taking a photo or just asking, 'sorry, is this the Newcastle train?'

OP, you were fine, and I'm sorry you have to change your journey because of a creep.

Well you must be psychic @MyBigBounty! 😆

My post was reported even though I specifically said:

I don't think OP is outright lying

Do you not use buses much?

Early buses are often frequented by the same people each day as they are used to get to work at the same time each day.

And if she said “No” to him the way she did, are you surprised that he sneered when people have done worse to her on this board for just retelling her experience?

@SerafinasGoose

This shows every appearance of faux naivety.

It's faux naivety to try to be respectful to others? Actually that's the creed I live my life by.

I was commenting on the pearl clutching and knee jerk reactions by some on here against men in general.

There is no more futile a word in the English language than 'should'.

🙄& nothing to do with appearing naive.

Of course it would be a wonderful world in which everyone showed consideration to others; in which there was a guarantee that every random male stranger approaching a female stranger had less than nefarious intentions

Knee jerk. So every random male stranger probably has nefarious intentions because they are male? No I don't assume that, but pretty much all my interactions with male strangers are pretty benign - obviously keeping myself safe. I would assume waiting for the morning bus I was pretty safe though.

She didn't say 'fuck off, creep'. She simply said 'no'. And that's fair. That's fine. That's permissible, and it doesn't need others' validation. People are entitled to go about their personal business unencumbered if they so wish.

Wasn't the point of my comment but obviously people can do and react however they wish within reason, but she was rude IMO - which is what she was asking in her title.

I agree about today's update being rubbish.

Are we to believe she has got herself a stalker now?

Updates/ drip feeds more like when posts weren't going her way as much as she liked.

And she's given updates.

Her instincts were correct.

@SerafinasGoose

That's a different thing from 'excuse me' spoken without further qualification, which I'd expect to hear if I was in someone's way and they wanted to pass. Simply stating those words and waiting for a response is an invitation to an interaction.

I agree, but according to the OP and qualified in a later post, that's not what happened. He didn't speak the words and wait for a response, because he didn't get the chance. She cut him off straight away.

I don't understand why it means you are bending over backwards to prevent hurting men's feeling if you don't shout NO in their faces if they say excuse me. I don't tend to shout NO in women's faces either if they say excuse me. Surely it's just normal behavour.

😂

I hope all of the people I’ve said ‘excuse me’ to (many of which have been at bus stops) don’t think I was hitting on them.

This shows every appearance of faux naivety. There is no more futile a word in the English language than 'should'.

Of course it would be a wonderful world in which everyone showed consideration to others; in which there was a guarantee that every random male stranger approaching a female stranger had less than nefarious intentions (or didn't simply assume that she 'owed' them her time, cooperation, or companionship).

Sadly, we do not live in such a world. I'm from a friendly village: we all say 'hello' to one another as we pass. That's a different thing from 'excuse me' spoken without further qualification, which I'd expect to hear if I was in someone's way and they wanted to pass. Simply stating those words and waiting for a response is an invitation to an interaction. It's an interaction OP didn't want, and which I also wouldn't want.

She didn't say 'fuck off, creep'. She simply said 'no'. And that's fair. That's fine. That's permissible, and it doesn't need others' validation. People are entitled to go about their personal business unencumbered if they so wish.

@Mothership4two NAMALT = Not All Men Are Like That

@SerafinasGoose

I'm equally tired of 'NAMALT' protestations. Or admonitions that OPs should really consider the feelings of men.

I think people should be considerate of people - men and women. The World would be a better place.

You see a particular brand of knee jerk reaction on here towards men - see it all the time on MN and it's on this thread. It's not particularly healthy. I will stand up against negative sexist comments towards women too (which you also see on MN).

I have no idea what NAMALT means

This

I think a lot of that is a direct result of the "all men are evil" rhetoric though, also insidiously creeping in. People feel the need to defend against that, and to show they don't think that, and rightly so. If the overly-vocal few weren't quite so vehement about that - and it's total nonsense but they keep spouting it - I doubt you'd get quite as many people declaring NAMALT, either.

I'm equally tired of 'NAMALT' protestations. Or admonitions that OPs should really consider the feelings of men. It happens on every single thread where the OP has complained of violation at the hands of a man. NB. this is not a suggestion that this OP's situation in any way resembles a violation. But if we are discussing sex-based bias, it's fair to bring it up.

This is now a feature of this site. And it's more than just tedious. It's an insidious, slow creep of an attitude that could be actively dangerous to women.

Perhaps those posters are simply recognising that pattern for what it is.

It's almost always without basis and it's also really tedious, but it doesn't anger me. Mostly because it shows up the holes in an argument that they either can't formulate or don't have, so they resort to that because it's the only thing they have left in their arsenal to try and make a point. Godwin's law, but for radical feminists. It does serve a purpose though in that you know there's absolutely no point trying to debate further with that poster because they simply don't have a valid point.

Basically it's the grown-up equivalent of a five year old trying to end an argument with "yeah, well, you're a poo poo head!"

And, like I said, it's pretty easy to tell when someone needs help when you can actually see them in front of you, so fairly obviously the reaction would be different.

Well not in mine or anywhere I have lived