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

HerBex I'm pretty certain jenny agrees with us that a man (or woman) should leave someone alone when told to.

I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that jenny was talking about the tendency of some to tar all men with the same brush. I didn't read the blog linked earlier, but I believe that was the basis for that argument.

Too many directions in this thread to remember who said what!

Why are you asking me that HB? Who else have you asked - just Warmster? Why don't you go back and find my very first post in this thread and I think it will be very clear to you what my position is.

I think we probably share a lot of views jenny. I'm sure there are some on here who probably still feel I am not truly feminist in my beliefs. And probably remember me making some pretty stupid remarks about the views on this section

I thought there was a bit of a party line here too, and as with any forum, some posters may seem very insistent on it. But I've realised it really isn't like that. Thankfully!

So Jenny, would you like to engage with those questions that still haven't been answered? The one about whether men have the same obligation to put up with bores who interrupt their lives and the multiple choice one which asks what you'd do if someone made it clear that your company was unwelcome:

a) accept their answer as "no"
b) assume they actually meant "yes"
c) keep asking them, over and over
d) follow them around when they tried to walk away

Thank you Empusa

I think assumptions (and stereotyping) are part of human nature and very difficult not to do. For example, I will start to think that someone is naturally going to come from a 'standard' feminist viewpoint when crossing swords on here - only, of course, there is no standard feminist viewpoint. In a way, I'm one sort of feminist myself (although I'm obviously called anti-feminist on here) because I advocate an approach that takes a less divisive stance and acknowledges that the spectrum of all men's (and women's)characters is far wider that the difference between the average man and the average woman. There are many other sorts of feminists too... I gather it was a huge problem at one point as there were huge splits in ideology. Very like socialism! (Or the People's Front of Judea haha Sorry, Monty Python reference...)

That is how some men are: persistent, arrogant and a pain in the arse but harmless.

To me, persistent and arrogant people are NOT harmless. They're coercing people to get their own way. They do not care what effect they are having on an individual. They are not respecting the individual's right to make their own decisions who they talk to or interact with.

Persistence and arrogance was how my ex used to coerce me. It's how another ex still tries to coerce me, and it was only recently I twigged that the reason I reacted so badly to this wasn't because I felt like a bitch, but because I subconsciously related it to my previous ex. To me, persistence and arrogance, and refusing to accept a woman's decision to say no = rapist...

Now. Please explain how that's ok?

Seems?

Tbh Jenny, I've agreed with a few of your points. I think with certain idiots posting, it gets hard to differentiate between who holds which opinions.

I am totally in agreement with you that all men shouldn't be tarred with the same brush as some idiots. Unfortunately some of your posts came across (probably not intentionally) as assuming we all thought like that, and I have to confess, I was already riled and probably should have stepped back and realised that wasn't the case.

As a recent "convert" to the feminism boards, I'd probably have been posting the same as you about a week ago! I guess I've now seen how some posters come on here deliberately to paint all feminists as anti-men and "shrill" or over-sensitive. Unfortunately your posts got confused with those.

"I find it interesting how the people who conform to the original premise of a thread are the informed, reasoned and open-minded ones, whilst those who disagree or pose an alternative proposition are arrogant and intrusive trolls whose opinions have no credibility."

Ok, try now. The far-right forum bit was a 'compare and contrast' type thing about herd-mentality, but it's obviously confusing so I'll remove it. Bet you still go on about that though, or how I've deleted it, or how I've posted twice. ANYTHING but acknowledging that people who agree with you are open minded and reasonable, but those who don't are not.

I will grant you that Warmster seems a pain in the arse...

just thought I'd bring in an anecdote that made me think of this thread. this morning i was getting a snack for dd & I while we were at the local gym. she had gone off to watch tennis, while i paid. the guy behind me noticed my accent & started talking to me (i'm a brit in the US).

at no point did he become too familiar, or prolong the conversation, there was never any encroachment onto my physical space etc. he was just interested in how come i was living in small town USA when so obviously not from there.

he was just friendly and polite. i have no idea if he's married/single/gay/straight.

i'm guessing that if he saw someone he wanted to chat up, he would do so in a friendly, polite way, and would take note of all the signals that show if someone is enjoying the attention or not.

That is how it should be, not that someone hangs around in a vaguely uncomfortable, or even intimidating way, until you have to say 'taken' just to get rid of them.

So let me get this straight wamster, it's only a problem if someone physically hurts another?

Verbal abuse, or implied threats, are ok?

And also, if you can see that someone is getting uncomfortable with your presence, why would you want to stick around where you're not welcome?

Seriously?

I can see the idea of "hey, this is a public space, I've got the right to stand here". Well yes, on one level, we've all got the right to stand where we like.

But I am not going to go outside just now with my cup of tea and stand next to the four teenagers who are over the road gossiping because they don't want me there. The fact that it is a public pavement and I have the right to be there, is irrelevant, because I don't have an enormous need to have teenagers recognise my god-given right to stand next to them and make them feel slightly creeped out and disconcerted by my unwelcome presence.

What kind of a nutcase would I be if I wanted to do that? What kind of nutcase thinks it's a good idea to do that?

Xpost with Herbex. That is exactly what I am trying to say.

I think what is shocking us here Wamster is your insistence that just saying "no actually I'd rather not talk to you please" is not a good enough reason for any person male or female to leave the other person alone. The lack of respect implied in the open dismissal of the other person's right to object that someone talks to them. Do you really not see the connection to this behaviour and the behaviour of a rapist? I am not saying that a person who carries on talking to another despite the fact that the other has requested the conversation be terminated is going to be/is a rapist; I am saying that the arrogance which you so rightly identify behind this kind of behaviour but see as "harmless", is in fact a deeply dangerous one in some circumstances. Just dismissing it as what some men do and arguing that there is no reason to get worked up about it, just serves to indirectly validate their behaviour.

Look at this way, my dc hit me when they are angry with me; they are small and it doesn't hurt. I could just laugh and take no notice because their behaviour does not threaten me. However I always tell them not to and if they continue they receive the usual punishment of being banished to the bedroom for a few minutes. Why? Because if I laugh at them they think hitting is funny and will carry on: they will hit their friends. Because if I take no notice, they think there is nothing wrong with hitting and they will carry on hitting each other and their friends, until one day someone will get hurt. We all learn our behaviour from how other people behave. Tolerating people being disrespectful to women teaches other people that this is an acceptable way to behave. It is not. Respect is due to all regardless of sex or any other variable.

I really don't understand why someone who thinks normal decent behaviour doesn't matter, is on a parenting board.

Surely as parents one of the things we try to do consistently, is drum inot our kids the notion that treating other people with respect and consideration, is the normal standard of behaviour that we expect from them and other people?

Wamster, your flat assertion that it doesn't matter, is part of the problem.

Most decent, normal people of good will, accept that the effect they have on other people, does matter.

Most people would be really mortified and ashamed if they thought that they habitually had the effect of frightening, intimidating or just irritating other people by their behaviour.

Decent people don't want to behave like this and believe that good behaviour does matter. Manners maketh man. Or something.

Wamster are you going to answer the question about what you would do if you asked to sleep with/ talk to someone and they said no:

a) accept their answer as "no"
b) assume they actually meant "yes"
c) keep asking them, over and over
d) follow them around when they tried to walk away

Annie... I see your point of view here, but I suppose the bottom line for me is that -although I agree with you and what I am about to say is not an attack on you as a person- I just don't care that some blokes only go away when told that a woman has a boyfriend/husband. I don't see it as important at all.
It doesn't matter. All that matters is that women are not molested, verbally abused, trapped or assaulted. There are stories of those things happening to women here and those men should be locked up but the rest, the rest who won't go away until woman says she has partner but do nothing else?

I just think: so what? That is how some men are: persistent, arrogant and a pain in the arse but harmless.

And deliberately 'misunderstanding' posters and setting up straw men.

"If you went onto a far-right forum (or similar) and tried to put liberal views across then you'd be the troll wouldn't you?" Yes you probably would - especially if you had no intention of engaging in the debate or show any willing in understanding the other point of view.

jenny - I'm really happy to discuss this issue. But discussion is not what wamster is doing. She is just saying the same thing over and over again. That's not discussion, it's a monologue.

And what has trolling a far-right forum got to do with anything?

Why would anyone want to go troll a far-right forum? Surely it'd just be depressing!

Why would I want to go to a far-right forum in the first place, unless it was to try and stir up trouble? Nope, that's not my kind of thing.