All men should be aware of this

I would certainly tell a man who 'panicked' at a woman walking behind him in the woods that he was worrying unnecessarily, yes. I would kindly point out the relevent stats to demonstrate he was not at any appreciable risk. I'd also reassure him that he would be highly likely able to overpower or outrun her if she did prove dangerous.
Obviously I wouldn't say the same things to a woman, because it would not be true.

Any decent woman would not have acted the way the OP did

I hope OP doesn't mind the below. Not to make light of what, for her, was clearly a genuinely unsettling experience for whatever reason... but the evolving image this thread is creating of extraordinarily high-stakes rambling, filled with barely-disguised panic and high-stakes sexual politics, is pleasingly ridiculous.

Sorry it's come to this, OP. I honestly thought responses would be a simple,

Poor you for feeling that way - many women have experienced similar. But honestly, from what you say, this poor guy was probably perfectly innocent. Sometimes it's hard for men to know what's best! Certainly, though, you're right that a good start is building awareness.

(And, perhaps, to cover all bases in case someone gets angry and assumes the opposite: *Disclaimer: I also recognise men can feel vulnerable, too.)

Silly me, huh?

I seriously worry about a few women on here.
Rather than having a go at other women some of you need to wise up a bit.

You passed a man on the way into the woods. You doubled back so that you were now following him. You were only a few feet away, so he heard you behind him and he stopped to fiddle with his bag to give you time to get some distance and avoid walking in lockstep with him. All men should indeed show such consideration.

I agree that men should be aware that women have legitimate fears, so they need to adjust their behaviour in some circumstances.

However this immediately sprang to mind. Just like the OP, men can have triggers.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-55085677

He probably looked over his shoulder bc he thought it was odd/ threatening that you’d suddenly started following him and he wanted to keep himself safe too. You may have had MH issues for all he knew. Suddenly being followed by someone walking in the opposite direction is odd behaviour to be fair to him

Admittedly I haven't read all 27 pages of this thread but I think the OP is being very unreasonable. Fair point that everyone should be aware of their behaviour on other people and that men should take into account that women might feel vulnerable when alone in isolated places. But in this particular instance the OP behaved oddly by turning round and beginning to follow the man. He may well have been slightly nervous himself! His only crime seems to be that he had long hair!

Absolutely, yes! You've got it! In all of my subtle posts above, my key point is, indeed, that no man should ever worry about being followed - he'd be a coward to behave that way and no longer worthy of the noble name of Man. In fact, I don't believe in any male ever taking steps to keep himself safe, and am firmly of the opinion that all women, everywhere, are angelic beings who can do no wrong.

Alternatively...

Please argue with what I'm saying instead of utterly absurd strawmen. I've been very clear throughout that strawmen like yours quoted above are precisely what concerns me on this thread - and what exposes many posters as, at best, avoiding some of the complexity of this issue.

Goodness knows, I use a lot of words 😅 - now use them back at me to address what I'm actually saying!

The poster I'm responding to has said with some confidence and repeatedly that the man would have been frightened by the OP. While it's remotely possible he might, it's extremely unlikely.
There is no evidence to suggest men are at risk from strange women in the woods with knives and so no reason to argue so stridently this man would have thought otherwise.
Conversely, there is much evidence that men pose a risk to women so its not unreasonable women may fear them.
To try and flip a situation and pretend that a man would respond to a woman in the same way as vice versa is all just a bit silly really.
Its quite possible to state this man did nothing wrong without over egging the pudding.

You so eloquently explain what is making me so angry!
The man’s feelings - which would be even more ridiculous and irrational on this logic, becuase how many women actually carry knives and anyway my dear old aunt Margaret is lovely so how DARE you accuse women like that - are more important than the women’s. And instead of asking themselves why they think like this, other women are attacking another woman for what… exactly? Not being a perfect robot? Having primal instincts and possibly past trauma.
its misogyny at its finest. They don’t even need to do anything. Were doing it to each other for them.

I you are saying a man shouldn't worry if he is being followed. Would you say this to a woman? Didn't think so.

confusedbydating
"Oh good lord so now you speak for the women of Oman?"

No. I speak for myself.

I find this quite strange.

"Follow"? She turned around on a path to approach and pass him. "Cause a panic"? Really? A woman, changing direction on a wooded path, to walk in the same direction as a man? "Secure his own safety"?! Really?

It all makes a woodland meander feel a bit high-stakes Midsommar.

Her response may or may not have been rational. We don't know - we weren't there. But she felt uncomfortable, so walked towards where there were more people. Fair enough.

My response is, I hope, fairly rational. Basically, as a woman who's felt similarly threatened by subtle non-verbal cues in isolated situations with strange men, I'm giving OP the benefit of the doubt. It feels empathetic and respectful to do so, especially as she's a real person, out there, reading our words. Meanwhile, I also acknowledge above that I, too, dislike the whole "decent man" value judgement she made.

Your response, meanwhile, has a man who believe he's being "followed", understandably "panics" and rapidly seeks "to secure his safety"... In response to a woman on a walk appearing to change her mind about her direction shortly after passing him.

I mean, you can't have it both ways - it just doesn't work.

Woman (with recent experience of extreme violence in her locality) passes man (the sex responsible for 80% of violence and 98% of sexual assaults, and with 152% greater punching power than her), clocks him behaving strangely and reacts accordingly? A pathetic, selfish fool. Man, in a parallel situation? Quite understandably panicstricken, and needing to take shelter, now, NOW!

And it's this inconsistency I'm calling out on this thread. In short...

I think the OP's pretty easy to understand. She overreacted but may have had her reasons. She uses her story to make a wider point. Simple. In contrast, I find the more disproportionate, absurd and angry responses to her post fascinating.

Oh good lord so now you speak for the women of Oman?

Even if men in general may not that doesn’t mean that wasn’t the case for this man. Nobody knows.

but either way it seems his crimes where having long hair and needing something from his bag!

I have teenage and young adult sons. If a women suddenly changed directions and followed them they have confirmed they would be fearfull. I have told them that if this happened their own security is their priority and should do what the man in the past did. Wait and let the women pass. Not all women are innocent. I don't care about studies, I care about my boys and their friends, If a women acts in this unpredictable way they should have their guards up and do what's right for their safety.

What evidence do you have that men think this way? Because all studies suggest they do not fear violent attacks from unknown women.

confusedbydating
"The more you leave the Uk and speak to women internationally, the more you realise what a privelege it is to not be fearful of every man you meet."

I have lived internationally including Egypt and Oman, but I was certainly not fearful of every man I met even then.

The OP herself needs to show greater awareness. She needs to be aware that following anyone, regardless of gender will cause panic. The man did nothing wrong apart to secure his own safety by allowing her to pass.

I would never walk in the woods aloneday or night 😳unless. I had a massive dog with me !!

Some of these responses are pretty disingenuous.

Try this.

Which man, below, feels instinctively more threatening, and which feels safer? 1 or 2?

1) The moment I approached him, he abruptly hunkered down right in the middle of the path and started fiddling about at length with his rucksack. As he did so, he twisted his head slightly to look at me sidelong, with an expressionless face.

2) As I approached him, he stepped out of my path to the side of the road, and began to search for something at the bottom of his rucksack. He was intent on what he was doing, head down, and slightly angled away from me.

We all know which, and we all know why. So what's the difference? They're both doing pretty much what OP's guy did, after all! It's all in the exceptionally subtle physical cues. And those above are the ones I can clumsily put into cliched words - most of those we use in our interactions are far, far more subtle than these (we call them "non-verbal" for a reason).

I've cared for a rescue cat. Whenever I engaged with her, it was natural to me to adapt my body language to reassure her. And fairly easy and instinctive to do so, too. I'd position myself so precisely relative to the furniture in the room as to leave several escape routes. I'd angle myself just so (even a little bit too face-on could seem confrontational - but a little too steeply angled away, disturbingly unnatural). I'd watch the position of my hands and even my fingers on the floor (as would she, with wide eyes). And it mattered. Get it wrong, and she'd spend the next 2 hours quivering under the bed in terror. Get it right, and maybe she'd let me stroke her a little.

She could understand this. I could. Awareness of the subtleties of body language is all part of being human.

I don't think OP's inability to put into words the subtle cues that led her to feel as she did is a damning failure on her part. I think it's understandable! And I don't think her failure to offer alternative suggestions for the man necessarily indicates there was nothing else he could have done.

Maybe there was, maybe there wasn't.

But I do think that all those posters so ruthlessly absolutist in condemning the OP as utterly irrational (in irrationally hyperbolic terms) risk making her point for her. Some posts here show that same lack of sensitivity to subtle human interactions that she's arguing we should encourage greater awareness of.

To which I say, QED - she has a point.

I've have said in a previous post that the man could have thought the women could have a knife. It was irrational behaviour from the op. Changing direction and walking at speed behind him . Men have fears as well, not just women