Random men speaking to you

I'm a Southerner & local men are a nightmare to get chatting to, they always seem to need alcohol! So i'd agree with FamilyGuy2 in some respects about English people.

I speak to anyone as I think it greases the wheels (so to speak). I work in a predominantly male environment and often strike up a conversation with people in the kitchen, coffee queue or gym. It's how you get to know people isn't it? I'm not an extrovert (quite the opposite) but have learnt that breaking the ice pays dividends in terms of social interaction.

If I'm outside of work I'll strike up a conversation if there is cause to do so, irrespective of whether you're male or female. I think it's a pleasant way of passing the day and helps to break down the reserved nature of us English folk.

I say English as I've spent time on mainland Europe and Ireland/Wales and have found it noticably more open there than here. I don't think English people are anti-social but are harder nuts to break.

I have to say that I'd never considered the OP's POV though. I can often tell if someone isn't receptive and will usually drop it right there if I get the vibes but I have to say that most people are usually up for a bit of banter.

It's not the wrong thread juliex, don't worry.

Thank you for the kind comments, it is always in a crude manner as well, they have said similar to my mother and she is 65, begs belief.

sorry if this is the wrong thread, just had to let it off my chest.

That's an interesting direction re Saudi. The only way I can see that the OP could have peace in public is if we have something like the Saudi religious police. Then women could report men (ones unknown to them) if they approached them and tried to engage in conversation. Combined with my idea re hats, I think it's a workable solution. With current government cuts, I think this is pretty unlikely though.

Oops sorry - a bit of something I copied from another thread escaped and inserted itself into Feminism

What I meant to quote was Frans saying If feminists got everything they wanted the UK would be a bit like Saudi Arabia with the genders reversed!

And then say that would be an interesting world-first.

I feel offended on all your behalf that your Head of State is not an elected person

Well that would be an interesting world-first wouldn't it?

Let's advocate for a law that bans men talking to women they don't know!

If feminists got everything they wanted the UK would be a bit like Saudi Arabia with the genders reversed!

That sounds horrible & annoying to cope with juliex - that is deliberately intimidating behaviour from men, rather than just random chat.

I'm lucky that i haven't had that stuff aimed at me for a while, but i've been ill & think i looked ill until recently, which probably stops that behaviour.

Oh, i will, thank you. It isnt the first time either, i dont wear revealing clothing or talk alot when im out, im more shy than anything, but i get builders shouting a lot more than anything quite explicit as well, they dont mind if children are around either talking about f**g you with my ck you dirty s*t.

is it because i am blond? seems to attract idiots i find. glad im not the only one. :)

Juliex, sorry that prat spoke to you that way. you might like to google the Everyday Sexism project for examples of similar prattishness.

I need to read this thread when I'm less tired but, as a lifelong talker-at-bus-stops, I disagree with your general principle enim. I think random contact is normal human socialisation (look at young children) and I regret its erosion through mistrust.

Men do speak to one another randomly, and so do women. Clearly you have to make a judgement as to whether the contact is likely to be threatening - a man who turns a passing remark about the weather into a leery chat-up is invasive, so threatening, but would he be if he took more care over it and ended up politely asking for a date? Would it be wrong of a woman to do that?

Juliex, what a prat! Sure, men who act like that - and who yell comments on your appearance, etc - are doing it to demonstrate power (in their tiny minds). Everyday harassment is, I think, a different issue from social mistrust although they're linked and the harassment is a serious problem.

i get this a lot, usually chat up lines though, one said, do you know what i like about you? i said no. he said, the fact you have a c**t.

i could not believe it. anyone had that before?

Err, Leith, you gave me the example of using just one word, so that's what i did. Re needing help, the thread has been about random chats, not about requests.

However, if you came up to me in the second example then I would be feeling wary. You would have breached my boundaries and I would be looking to understand why. If you followed the Hello with " I'm sorry, I'm lost" it would explain why you had done so and my wariness would reduce.

Exactly so what your talking about is you making a assumption that in the later instance that you would be in some danger, or that in the night time you would not want approached by me.

Two problems with that are that 1. I might be the one asking you for help as you are the only person around, 2nd your fear or mistrust is both understandable and possibly predictable by other people. It does not or will not stop people coming up to you unless you take up NCG idea of a visual (Do not talk) signchoose.

Leith, if all you said was Hello on a winter's morning when you were walking your dog one way up the street and I was walking down the street to the shops, I wouldn't think you had an agenda other than being friendly.

If you were walking behind me the same way up an empty street in the dark and you jogged to catch me up and say Hello, I'd be much more wary of your agenda.

All you've said both times is Hello.

Ok Doctrine, both people know what they want to achieve from having an unplanned and informal chat. I agree somewhat with that, however saying "Hello" or "Good Morning" or "excuse me" are all seen as a form of politeness and in themselves probably not designed to start a long conversation. However some people do initiate a conversation with those words again for many reasons, not always though with some hidden agenda. I say Good morning to you, you say it back, I say its a lovely day, you agree or disagree, I may say some other unimportant thing. I am passing the time of day I am not asking you to be emotional involved in a personal discussion about politics.

How do you know from that example before it happens that I have any other agenda? What in that example would you think was my agenda?

Leith, I believe that both parties in the interaction DO have an awareness of which kind of interaction it is, just that the raw circumstances of it are insufficient detail.

For example, one teenager could ask another if they had their lunch money. It might be a friendly question, it might be meant in a bullying fashion.

So Doctrine if "some" feel different to some people what would you suggest?

NCG et al, some interactions have a different feel than others, even if they would sound the same if written down.

Not sure a red santa hat is quite my style namechangeguy

IME there are 2 reasons i speak to men - a) i want friendly interraction with another human... & / OR b) I fancy them.

I would think it's the same for men; it's called 'Being Human' :)

In summary, some women do not like being chatted to by unknown men. Some women do. Could you all please wear something that identifies your preference? Perhaps a red santa hat for those who welcome interaction, and a green one for those who object. Then there can be no excuses, and we can punish the men who continue to defy your wishes. Maybe we could put the offenders in stocks in the High Street, and have random men come up and bend their ear incessantly for 30 minute slots, one after the other. See how they like it, eh? The bastards.

What if indue that what you want and what you end up doing are two different things. For example what if the OP posted and only got posts supporting her view or taking her view that bit further. In terms of seeing this as an attack on women in general, an attack with sexual intent.

On one level the op gets reassurance that she is not alone, but if it only serves to create a dominant hegemony that all men are sexist and potential attackers. How is that either valid or helpful.

Also if debate and discussion are to have any value then dissent is essential, (Klaxon Goodwins law.) Germany in the 1930's became a society that oppressed dissenting voices and soon the people became fearful of expressing dissent. This is not to say that when people all agree on something that this is as bad as being a nazi, it is to say people who come from different perspectives and traditions can agree and form common interests. However what people from different view points offer is a means to teste the original idea.

In this context the original idea has been tested and pretty much refuted by possibly an equal number of posters which would suggest that some of the issue may be with how social interaction is perceived.

Yay for the North!