All men should be aware of this

She changed direction, she caused the man worry hence the reason he stopped so she could pass. Why is it ok for OP to worry the man but not the other way round?

Exactly. There were a few really sexist responses to the suggestion that he might have been worried. One poster said that if he was worried, he didn't deserve to be called a man (or words to that effect) which I found really shocking. That kind of thinking is how boys end up damaged by toxic masculinity.

I think he probably looked over his shoulder because you turned round and started walking in his direction OP.

In general I do agree men aren’t aware enough though.

Yes playground flashback. And you are the bully. Congratulations.

Im leaving with you. We have explained the point. We have both done our bit. I have a raging hangover anyway I can’t think properly now.

if anyone else quotes me I’m not engaging further because I nearly called someone a dick too and like you I want to be better than that

OP felt ok when she thought it was a woman with long hair. She didn't get any vibes then. As soon as she realised it was a man she suddenly got vibes. Why? The man didn't act any different from before, the only difference is she saw it was a man. That's sexist, it was still the same person. Also why did she assume it was a woman. Men have long hair throughout history, it's not new. I was born in the 70s, men have had long hair all that time as well. She changed direction, she caused the man worry hence the reason he stopped so she could pass. Why is it ok for OP to worry the man but not the other way round? Again sexist OP caused the problem. The man did nothing wrong.

This genuinely made me laugh - a bit of a playground flashback. Polite engagement, parody and satire, facts, stats, and closed questions are all leading to responses like this, and I'm increasing feeling a dangerous temptation to sink into Yaa boo sucks! myself in response. As such, I'm properly out now. I've not much more to say anyway. My posts speak for themselves, for anyone who wants to read them - as very much, do some of the replies.

Why should I have to. If you misquote the post by leaving parts out to try I prove a ridiculous point just because You carnt be bothered to read it properly I not going to explain it to you

How is it strange to say it’s not for you to dictate whether or not something makes someone else feel uncomfortable? And then I gave you an example of something you might consider benign which might make someone else extremely uncomfortable.
i love how misogynists immediately label feminists crazy. Its the modern day witch label.

What an incredibly strange response to my perfectly logical and factual post. Are you not well?

In your opinion. Who the hell are you to dictate other people’s experiences? Would you tell a Ukrainian refugee to get a grip if they said look I find loud noises a bit triggering, can you let me know so I can leave if you’re doing building work? No you bloody wouldn’t. At least I hope you’d have empathy. But maybe you wouldn’t idk maybe you’re not sexist maybe you are just not very cooperative or kind

Yeah and he’s free to keep walking in the same direction and stop to get something out of his backpack too if he so chooses. There is zero indication he is/was a predator fgs.

Honestly as the mum of a young adult male, I find some of this ludicrous.

Most VAWG happens in intimate or family relationships.

For goodness sake, put your courage where your mouth is and explain it to me, then. It's all too easy to make comments like this. If you really understand and care, go a step further and engage with me by laying it out in a way that allows me either to say, "Oops, you're right - sorry!" or to explain why I still disagree.

After rereading several times, I can see where a distinction may be perceived/argued on the basis of a trans identity, perhaps, but this doesn't negate the fundamental contradiction of:

"When I go out in a dress I tend to avoid men actively, and clutch my handbag a bit tighter in certain situations." = I classify a group as a bit threatening

versus

"actually classifying us all as threatening is a bit unreasonable" = it's unreasonable to classify a group as a bit threatening

The only possible argument I can see that you may be making against this is that it's justified for that poster / trans people to generalise about groups in this way, but not other individuals / demographics? Or perhaps that particular, differing contexts affect whether or not you feel such a generalised response is justified. It's honestly hard to see what else you may be arguing unless you tell me.

ETA Btw, to the trans poster - sorry you feel this way, and thanks for your understanding of why women may. Much of your post sounds very thoughtful and sensitive. Do feel free yourself to tell me where you see me going wrong in interpreting the rest of it, too! 😊

He didn’t do anything wrong - you were the one acting strangely

Because he did absolutely nothing to warrant her being uncomfortable! So it was a false accusation.

SHE was the one who did something disconcerting. She passed him in the other direction, then turned around to follow him. If she was uncomfortable initially, why on earth would she follow him, instead of continuing on her way on the opposite direction?

And if a man passed you in the opposite direction, and then turned to follow you instead, I'm going to guess that you'd be more then uncomfortable, you'd be freaked out.

The guy in the OP did absolutely nothing wrong. But OP acted weirdly, and so it seems he took action so that she would go past him. Men are allowed to be unnerved, too

I am not sure what to say to this really. What would you have preferred the man to have done?

Because SHE was the one who turned round and followed HIM. He never changed direction.

Did you read it right?

She also decided to follow him. Bit difficult to keep your distance if you’re being followed.

They weren’t IN the woods. Back of child’s school and OP decided not to head into the nearby woods.

By leaving out the middle part of the post you are deliberating altering the meaning of the post.

"I literally quote from the post! The intervening words I don't quote don't in any way address the quite explicit inconsistency."

They really do. Perhaps you should take the time to more carefully read through those words again

I just think some of us want to know what they should or shouldn't be doing - that OP wants to make them aware of? Unless we bring in an all-day, all-male curfew, men are going to be out and about and doing normal everyday things - just like women.

Nobody is denying the terrible fact that women always have to be vigilant and on their guard around men, as there's usually no easy way of knowing which ones are the bad ones; but what do the good ones actually need to do to mitigate that?

Even if you asked men to stay away from certain public places so that women could feel safer, it would only be the good men who would actually consider doing that; so what would that actually achieve in promoting women's safety?

I literally quote from the post! The intervening words I don't quote don't in any way address the quite explicit inconsistency.

As PP says, "But you do it. You don’t think they’re all threats but you know they have the potential to be."

If you'd like to explain the subtle distinction I'm not seeing here, please do. As you know, I'm all for subtlety... 😁

But you do it. You don’t think they’re all threats but you know they have the potential to be. We do this in child safeguarding. We’re told to assume all adults are potential child abusers until proven otherwise to protect the kids. No one has a problem wit this. So why do you have a problem when we apply the same logic to men?

It's not confusing if you actually read the post