Fucking idiots

That you have the right to think and say what you like? Never denied it.

You just don't seem to be able to acknowledge the remotest possibility that anything could have any explanation or subtlety to it that you didn't decide was fact.

I find that strange. To be so rigid. But you have your freedom to do whatever you choose. Be that ignoring anybody else's valid comments or calling people vile names.

Fair enough Sardine. Maybe they were patronising. Maybe the op misread it as she was already annoyed by them stopping. THAT IS MY POINT. We don't know. And therefore we can't say it was because she was a woman, we can't say it had anything to do with the officer's attitude towards rape. Nothing. We can say nothing definitively. And if you say you take the word of the op, then that's absolutely fine. But I'm not allowed to take the word of anybody who says 'oh the police said that to me/my ds/my dh' or 'my dh a copper says that to everybody regardless of gender'.

It just seems so ridiculous that it HAS to be one thing. It could be one thing, it could be another, nobody was hurt, they didn't say anything obviously offensive. Why the need to call people fucking idiots? Why the vitriol towards the police because of this one event. Take history and institutionalised racism and have a discussion. Fine. I'll join you. But say this officer, this man who cannot defend himself had certain motives and you are chasing a ridiculous argument.

It's clear that you won't accept the remotest possibility that anything could be true that you don't say so yourself. It's almost ironic that you're willing to stick so steadfastly to something, so rigidly refuse to discuss other possibilities, so vitriolic in your language but you throw accusations elsewhere.

Please try and understand what I'm saying. I've seen you take offence because people say 'oh feminists are all the same, you wouldn't dare say it about x race or y religion' but you do the same to other groups. Such as the police. Not even the police. An officer. A woman talking about her husband or son.

You refuse to accept what other people tell you as it could be biased. So by the very same token, you who wasn't there when the officer stopped his bike and spoke those words, absolutely have no footing with which to discuss it. Except you do because you have your opinion. And to start from the pov that somebody is lying and to be so dismissive and rude of anything outside your own beliefs just does you no good at all.

xposts mine was in response to Line

Yeeeeees, but the OP of the other thread, who is the only one who was there and so I would say best placed to gauge the tone of the comment, thought that they were being patronising. Their demeanour pissed her off, that's why she started a thread about it.

So I think it's reasonable to discuss it from that POV. No-one else was there. The person who was, was pissed off. SWIM?

And as several people have said, their sons and husbands have had it said to them and others say that their husbands who are police officers say it to 6ft 2" men. So it's evidently not true that it's solely to do with gender.

And like I just said, maybe they weren't concerned, maybe it wasn't a warning. Maybe they were being friendly and they're just human. Maybe it was a rubbish joke, maybe maybe maybe maybe.

That's the point isn't it. It could have meant anything. To seize it as a tool to make a point (which is utterly valid and worth discussing), just cheapens your argument because people get stuck on the fact that you're just interpreting a situation according to your own beliefs and steadfastly refusing to concede that it could be any other way.

Don't use your mobile phone. Look where you're going. Stick to the path. That sort of thing.

Like when I say 'have a safe trip' to dh on his way to work. I don't expect him to sit by the bus driver issuing instructions. I don't expect him to do anything. I'm showing I care.

Maybe it was just a throwaway line and these reams of posts and arguments and posturing are over what was just a couple of coppers trying to say hello. They're human I presume unless Robocop was a documentary and sometimes we say silly things. I say thank you to cashpoints. It's quite possible they meant bugger all by it and slowed down so that the op knew they were coppers and not just random people flying past on bikes.

Magicjamas, I think SOH was offended by the 'apologist' accusation because she agrees with the sentiment that it's not up to women in any way to change their actions in order to prevent rape, in the same way that she is never culpable should it ever happen.

What she was saying is that the single phrase uttered to the woman in the op of the other thread wasn't necessarily anything to do with rape at all. That a policeman advises everybody in the same way when in a deserted area and therefore the discussion/arguments/accusations being hung on the encounter aren't 'fact', merely conjecture.

It's not only about rape though, in fact a rape attempt is unlikely to occur on some deserted lane, rapists are not known for hiding around street corners and waiting for passerby's. However muggers are known for attacking people on the streets. Asking someone to be careful is a sign that person cares for your wellbeing.

And in my experience police officers say things along those lines indiscriminately.

this is nothing to do with 'rights' and everything to do with probabilities. it makes perfect sense to alert someone to be extra careful when alone in the dark area.

i often ask my husband not to withdraw cash late at night from a 'hole in the wall' high street bank (he is disabled and cannot fight back). NOT because i am an idiot or ignore his human rights.

he can still be attacked in the broad daylight. but night makes it easier for the mugger (goodness forbid!!!!)

for the people who think that you can avoid rape by altering you routines etc:

are you aware that even in places with extreme restrictions on women's mobility and where they are obliged to cover completely women still are raped

I guess the sensible thing is to advise our daughters to not be women

LOTM - let me just get your message right: you would encourage your young daughter to march down the unlit and deserted lane because she has 'the right' to do it and anyone who says it may be unwise and be careful are "rape apologists"? Am i right?

Plus the OP on the other thread wasn't drunk. I'm not sure why you've brought that up. She was walking along in a perfectly orderly fashion at 11pm, to get to her house. She was not taking a wild risk, like jumping off a massively high bridge. She was just walking along the pavement to get to her home. How is that a "needless risk"?

"I intend to teach my daughter, and also my bonus daughter has been told, they you have to take responsibility for your own behaviour, so going out, getting steaming, having sex with an equally steaming boy, then waking up in the morning and screaming rape, means you are trying to excuse your own behaviour."

Consensual sex is not rape.

Read the stories on here where women have related their experiences - most of whom have not reported them as they feared they would not get anywhere - and see how many of those involve women who have woken up in the morning and "screamed rape" after a consensual encounter, or even how many of them are so called "grey area" where the people were both drunk and maybe he should/maybe he shouldn't. The answer is none. Women when they complain about rape on these pages are not complaining about having consensual sex. They are not complaining about getting drunk and doing things they regret. They are complaining about being raped, where the male has known damn well what he was doing.

Bugger. Typed a long reply and lost it by leaning on laptop

Basically saying that skulking off somehwere for a pat on the back, and to call people who disagree with you 'fucking idots' is truly spineless.