Some men really hate women being single don't they?

You've deliberately misinterpreted what I have said here, Don'tCallMePeanut.

I wouldn't expect anything else, though.

But, then of course, women can never do any harm, can they?

"My point is this: it's not just the men that need re-educating if persistent chatting up is a problem"

Can I just re-phrase this? Let me know when you have a problem...

"My point is this: it's not just the men that need re-educating if harrassment is a problem"

"My point is this: it's not just the men that need re-educating if sexual harrassment is a problem"

"My point is this: it's not just the men that need re-educating if sexual assault is a problem"

When the man is creating the problem, he is the one who needs re-educating. Not the woman. The woman is passive (eg; the persistent chatting up is happening to her, I don't mean whether she is passive or aggressive) The man is active. He is the one doint the persistent chatting up.

HerBex,
I think to say that anybody must be a man if they disagree with them shows a certain cowardice, disregard for men, and lack of imagination.

A sort of cowardice because there is no way I can prove to you realistically that I am indeed female.

Disregard for men because, after all, if I were a male who had feminist tendencies I would take it as an insult and bloody rude if people hurled the fact of my gender around as an insult because they disagreed with me.

Lack of imagination because obviously not every woman is going to agree with everything those who claim to be feminists say.

Everything so far put forward by those who are against men persistently chatting woman up insist that it is men who change and not women.

Out of interest, I asked my friends how they would feel if a man chatted them up persistently. I stressed that I did not mean how they would feel if he was violent or abusive, just persistent.

A few of them said that they made a point of refusing the first few offers of a drink made by a guy they were interested in 'just to see if the guy was really interested', then, after the guy had persisted a bit more- which may mean he go away and come back later, which they would welcome-they would accept the drink and the two of them -as my friend crudely put it- would 'get off with each other'.

Now imagine that same bloke -who was successful with my mate- tried this persistence (not abusive or threatening just not accepting words like ' I don't want a drink) with women who did not want it. He's not to know not to be persistent because, well, it worked last time.

My point is this: it's not just the men that need re-educating if persistent chatting up is a problem (for those that it is a problem for, that is).

No worries empusa, I should've been clearer in the first place

"The point is, I was not making a blanket or 'absolute' generalisation. That was a snarky remark directed at the poster who said that upthread."

Ah, in which case, sorry!

Not hugely on the ball today :(

Empusa, I was lucky that my claims weren't dismissed, but this was more down to xP being more than willing to admit what he'd done (he seemed to think it would prove he was sorry and I'd take him back)

But from the tales I've heard, when it's a woman's word against a man's, the man's word seems to be accepted, through "lack of evidence", "no witnesses" etc. This was even the case when my niece had people willing to give statements that her ex had trashed her car and admitted it, or print offs of him using the phrase he sprayed on her car, or him messaging her to say he'd be happy to see her dead.

Maybe you've been lucky in your experience. Or maybe there's just been a lot of unlucky women in my life and on MN.

And the thing re: Bridesmaids, it does seem to be a common viewpoint. Even my mum resorts to asking if

The point is, I was not making a blanket or 'absolute' generalisation. That was a snarky remark directed at the poster who said that upthread.

Research into the reasons for the high rates of attrition in complaints of sexual assault point to police ineptitude as one of the causes for low reporting, complaints not being investigated properly and complaints being dropped early on in the process. It's just a fact. Things have improved somewhat, but,as that news story shows, there are still problems.

Only if you choose to read it that way. I'm just pointing out that generalising it to all police doesn't actually make sense.

Was your post meant to invalidate the experiences of those who have been helped?

As someone who has worked in many clubs and pubs, if there is a man bothering you the security or management will tell him to leave you alone if you ask them, and eject them if they continue to harrass you. It's frustrating that more women don't realise that, so don't try.

Is that supposed to invalidate the experiences of all those who have not been well served by the police, empusa?

"But hey, we shouldn't make 'absolute' generalisations about the police, eh?"

Generalisations are more than a little daft. I've had a lot of help from police and never once been dismissed, even when I've not been able to give them much to go on. So let's not go down that route.

Going back to one of the issues discussed upthread - another story about the police being dismissive of women's reporting of crime.

Stories like this are not uncommon. But hey, we shouldn't make 'absolute' generalisations about the police, eh?

Oh and Wamster you can't "disagree" with someone elses feelings. If a random comes up to you in a pub and goes on and on and on at you and won't go away, you don't mind at all. Fine. Right up to the point where he threatens you and then you immediately call the police.

Fine, that is how you feel.

Most of the other women on the thread feel that if they are pestered by a random it is very annoying and they often find that the only way to make him leave is to say they aren't single. They find that interesting and wonder why their word that they don't want to talk to the random isn't good enough, it takes citing another man to get them to leave. None of this is "wrong" or something to "disagree" with. It's how the majority feel and they want to discuss it. You keep telling everyone that how they feel is wrong (which is very rude) and not allowing people to talk about what they want to talk about (which is very rude).

HTH in explaining why people are being short with you.

Did I miss the post where someone said wamster was a bloke? I can't see it!

Bandwithering that is interesting about "bridesmaids". I'm surprised that an observation like that is in a hollywood film of that type but then it's not a film that appeals to me so maybe I'm judging too harshly! I would imagine it passes the bechdel (sp) test!

Most of this thread has been successfully hijacked by you Wamster, to make it about whether women's irritation about being treated as another man's possession, is valid or not.

You've very successfully managed to ensure that very little of the subject matter has been on SGB's original point - that of being treated as male possessions.

Shall we all talk about that now?

Wamster not everyone who disagrees gets accused of being a man.

Just the ones who behave like trolls, like yourself and Jenny.

And that's the real concern of twattish MRA's isn't it - the very existence of a feminist section on a parenting website. They hate that.

Can anybody explain why other women who disagree with the feminists here get accused of being men? I mean I obviously disagree with some here-and that is fair enough, but why the 'you must be a man' business?

Feminists have differing views from most other women- why the need for action otherwise? If we all had feminist views, why the need for separate section?

Has anybody seen Bridesmaids? There's a bit in it where Annie is at an engagement party (so full of couples). Her friend the 'engagee' is introducing her to other people and they all keep assuming that any man standing vaguely in her proximity must be her partner. Even though those men are decades younger/older dressed totally differently etc. It's quite astute imo. They can't fathom that you might be single, but they naturally assume that some randomer they haven't seen to exchange two words with, who is dressed like a homeless man 20 years older than you, is your husband!!

Same old cliches, as ever.

So because I disagree with you I must be a male ('his')? Pathetic.

Haven't read all this thread yet but...no men seem to have a problem with me being single :( would be nice if they did, I haven't been on a date for nearly 2 years or chatted up (properly) for quite a while.
I do have some nice male friends & acquaintances though. I feel like I must be unattractive but I've been ill with MH issues. My sister says her male friends have noticed I didn't seem well & were concerned, so were male work colleagues of mine. So it seems nice guys back off if they know you are vulnerable - probably just as well although I could do with a nice man to cuddle up to!
Also..I have a lot more self-esteem and self-respect than when I was younger so the dodgy men & 'users' that I used to attract don't approach me at all now. The only men who ask if I'm single are elderly patients at work (although am off right now) - it's just to make conversation & be nosy!

Yes hagocrat "just ignore him and he'll go away"

Yeah right