Cat calling

Also, what is a lesbian separatist?

Is it something to do with the avoidance of men altogether, not just in a sexual relationship? Sorry, I don't get out much.

(and if it is, it's sounding very tempting at the moment...)

grow

I'm married (to a man) and have only raised boys. I have fantastic relationships with all my male colleagues. The people I know aren't violent, but most of sexual violence is committed by males as a class on women. It's not difficult.

And as for saying that avoiding entering into voluntary relationships with men is a perfectly valid course of action if you believe men are a grave threat to women, that this is some how a cruel thing to say, I don't get it.

Not cruel just idiotic.

It is called recognising your privilege. And I don't presume to think I manage it successfully all the time (or possibly even a lot of the time) I would never come on to a thread where black people are talking about street harassment and tell them what they should be doing to counteract that behaviour.

Racism isn't my fault either. But I am part of the white class and it is up to me to not perpetuate it and to help change society to remove that oppression. It is also my responsibility not to argue with black people when they tell me how racism makes them feel or tell them what they should be doing about it.

Dervel

I wasn't defending cat calling or in anyway suggesting that women who are cat called are to blame for it. Of course it isn't their fault, but it's not mine or yours either just because we happen to be men. The rest of my posts are an extrapolation of this and agree, nothing to specifically to do with cat calling. It mystifies me that women who apparently feel the way posters on here do about men, would voluntarily have anything to do with them.

Do you really think women and specifically feminists aren't doing anything about male violence? Really?

It just doesn't tend to involve making women change their behaviour.

You didn't say it was a valid course of action (lesbian separatism) you asked us why weren't telling women that is what they should be doing.

Plus, I may have a slightly different take than Datun on this (after all we aren't a collective hive). I do think it is a valid course of action and should be an option for all sort of reasons beyond male violence. That doesn't mean to say I would blame women for not taking that option - as that is what it is, a choice. It would also be highly hypocritical of me. But if you want to blame women for not avoiding men then fill yer boots.

However, I suspect you didn't insert lesbian separatism into the thread because you wanted an honest discussion about it. Rather, more of Twisty McTwistyface.

Well this went sideways very quickly not rtft yet but growapear just consider we haven't likely been on the receiving end of catcalling to the extent most women posting on here have. We can't really comment on how they should/shouldn't react.

On the topic of catcalling freedom of association is a basic human right. Implicit in that right is the freedom NOT to associate.

To give you a fraction of perspective we all find cold calling, market researchers in the street, people approaching to prosleytize this or that religion. Multiply that irritation by adding in someone passing comment on your personal appearance with a healthy dose of fear/caution as these people are almost all bigger than you.

If you want women to be vital and energetic participants in society, and I assume you do. How women are treated in the public space is of crucial importance to everyone. You can throw at me we (as men) are technically more at risk of physical assault from men. However we are at less risk of sexual assault/ rape. Additionally and only speaking as myself I have not been raised to fear anybody so when I'm out and about I enjoy a greater freedom in practice.

Yes we all perform our own risk analysis to keep ourselves safe, so may avoid certain streets at certain times, but the range of options I have as to where I go and when is much much larger than it is for the average woman.

We need to examine this and unpack it rather than try to steamroll the discussion at the "is it even a problem?" Stage. Yes it is let's try and fix it. Start a new thread about men dying in wars. Yes that sucks but it's not relevant here.

if we are unreasonable to expect men to take collective responsibility for it.

I'll just be accused of twisting things again - but what's the point in feminism if the only ones who have agency to do anything about is men, even the men who don't consider themselves in anyway responsible for violence ?

And as for saying that avoiding entering into voluntary relationships with men is a perfectly valid course of action if you believe men are a grave threat to women, that this is some how a cruel thing to say, I don't get it.

For clarity: God forbid that male violence should be acknowledged...

Wow, pear, you are twistier than an m&s cheese twist, and far less delicious.

I'm done responding to you here.

I'm getting a bit bored of the "Women, it's up to you to not put up with cat calling" argument.

There's a very good reason women don't are afraid of men who cat call andit's all to do with self preservation

To claim otherwise is to simply ignore the cold hard facts.

Tbh I think growapear will go round and round in circles on this in order to make it women's problem to sort out male violence and make it seem as if we are unreasonable to expect men to take collective responsibility for it. It is much more reasonable to expect women to change their behaviour and make women collectively responsible for handling bad male behaviour. God forbid that this should be acknowledged and tackled on a societal level. In fact I'd just take acknowledged at the moment. As we can see from this thread even that isn't the case.

"If females were the stronger of the two sexes, I had always thought our society would largely be switched around." Well apart from the fact that we aren't the stronger and probably never will be (by strength I assume you are talking physical strength as defined by men), why would you think that?

I don't think women's brains are "wired" differently (I don't think any brains are wired). I think we have different experiences because of our sex and even if we didn't live in a patriarchy we'd still have different experiences from men. For example we would still be the life givers/bearers.

And no lesbian separatists aren't foul victim blamers. They are making a choice for themselves. And it is a valid choice. Stop twisting people's words.

So, lesbian separatists are foul victim blamers then ?

Suggesting women do not have relationships, on the basis that it is often with in those relationships that sexual abuse occurs, blames women for male violence AGAIN.

Both sides go to war for the gains. The fact that hundreds of thousands of men are considered collateral damage, just shows how strong that imperative is.

If you can link to the stats that show a racial bias for cat calling please do.

But, yet again, women are not responsible for their own assaults, so I don't see how it would help.

Yonic

Are you suggesting that (some) feminists are truly too frightened of the mockery they would get (even on an anonymous internet forum) to state what seems the obvious conclusions of their reasoning ?

Or is it that "avoid men wherever possible, and certainly avoid having a relationship with one" is not the corollary of "women are very likely to be sexually assaulted, and it's most likely to be someone they are in a relationship with" ?

More seriously: it's not possible to function in the world without relationships with men: brothers, fathers, colleagues and classmates, at the very least.

I can't help thinking, that if women ran things, we would still be able to get the things we want, without killing one another.

This is also very interesting, why do you think that ? Are women's brains somehow wired differently so that they are more disposed to solving conflict peacefully ? I would have thought that was a controversial view. In order to have any idea about this we would need to imagine that women were the ones most effectively able to use violence or that they could resist male violence without any problem given that men would still try and use it. If females were the stronger of the two sexes, I had always thought our society would largely be switched around.

"I mean, if that is what you believe, why not just say it ?"

Mmm hmm. Because lesbian separatists never get mocked.

Which made little sense to me, because historically war has always been about the gains the men want on the first place

You are lumping the ones who want to make the gains and those who died trying to prevent them as the same on account of their biology. Men do not only try to stop "evil" in the name of war, unless you think that "men" have no interest in finding and locking up other men they consider evil ? Who actually takes the risk when it comes to ensuring these "evil" men are found and are locked away at night ? Who sits chained to them in the dock ? Women ?

I think that black men are statistically more likely to be found guilty of committing rape than white men, whether they indeed commit it at a higher rate is perhaps not possible to say. Black men are (I'm sure) statistically more likely to commit violent crime than white men, but taking a course of action where you treated black men more warily than white man would be racist.

And if you indeed believe, as you claim, that women should be taught to be wary of "men they know", and you also believe that women are quite likely to be assaulted, then what on earth is wrong with simply advising women not to form relationships with men ? I mean, if that is what you believe, why not just say it ?

On sex offences, black men made up 32 per cent of male suspects proceeded against, and white men 49 per cent.

From The Telegraph.

DO the stats show a racial bias? I thought that wasn't the case.

Datun, that's exactly what he said. But then, he's also trying to advocate some kind of weird racial profiling, so...

what is the purpose of identifying the subsection of humans who are more likely to pose a threat ? So you can take protective measures ? Again, wouldn't it be more practical to focus that effort on more specific groups ? Or maybe rank them or something ?

We have grow. It just happens that those rankings are somewhat skewed by some fairly disputable ideas from the 70s which just won't die.

Small girls are told to fear, in order: Strange men, strange women and that's about it.
What we should be told to fear is: Men we know, Strange men, Strange women, Women we know.

So, to narrow it down, the class of people women should be most wary of is "men they know".

I find it interesting that you and your friend want to make this a race thing though. Is that purely to get white men off the hook? Or do you have some other agenda here?

I think it was also growapears post which confused me.

He seemed to be saying that it is partly women's responsibility to stop male violence. Adding that men do try to stop other evil men in the context of war. Which made little sense to me, because historically war has always been about the gains the men want on the first place - territory, women, resources etc. I can't help thinking, that if women ran things, we would still be able to get the things we want, without killing one another. But I don't know enough about it - other than a profound belief that male violence is neither the fault nor the responsibility of women.