Men pushing in in queues and not social distancing.

My question is, wouldn’t most of you be offended if the same thread was started but with women in the title rather than men

Recognising behaviour patterns is useful
Understanding behaviour patterns is important

Indeed.

Recognising behaviour patterns of people as group ( in a particular time and place ) isn’t the same as saying that every single member of that group anywhere in the world for the whole of human history has behaved like that .

Some people seem to find this hard to grasp. It’s not a personal attack on them/ their husband / son.

Hence they try to derail the discussions with their “ Not my Nigel” or “ so you all hate your sons then “.

Or “ once a man was nice to me in a supermarket so you are all twisted and bitter liars “.

I assume that’s why they stalk the FWR / AIBU threads attacking and derailing them. Perhaps they imagine that it makes other posters think that all men are great. It doesn’t - it’s just makes them think that certain posters annoying control freaks who enjoy stopping women talking.

We recognise the pattern . They are the same as the ones we know in RL who make every conversation about them.

No doubt they are all screaming at their TVs calling the scientists / epidemiologist / doctors liars because young people are dying with Covid19 and “ you said it was only old people “.

Statistical trends and patterns are not a guarantee of what will happen to one individual . The facts that one 84 Year old beat it after 2 weeks on a ventilator and that a perfectly healthy nurse in her 30s died, doesn’t make the pattern analysis wrong.

Nor does it make the experts evil twisted liars who hate older people and those with coexisting medical conditions, because they say they are more vulnerable.

Nope

That's a shame.

Denial is a funny thing to witness.

Why not start a thread then? You could apply your own feminist analysis to it. It might be interesting.

Because that would be a different thread.

Apparently, according to Rowantrees the purpose of this thread is to discuss the new behaviour that we are observing and see if any patterns can be observed, so why would someone need to start a new thread in order to engage in what this very thread apparently exists for?

That's what you can't ever get over, isn't it? The fact that women who have had bad experiences with men and who'd like to talk about that are supported here.

Nope. If this thread is for the op to present the examples of behaviour and then moan about what happened, cool beans.

What I think makes you all look ridiculous is to take those two examples and claim that this represents the behaviour of men as a whole or that women haven't done exactly the same or, from what I experienced, worse.

By citing the behaviour of two groups of men, totalling six individuals, you think that will enable you to explore sex based patterns of behaviour?

Yes.

It's how people started to talk about manspreading, mansplaining, male entitlement.

They describe it, and other people comment.

Why not start a thread then? You could apply your own feminist analysis to it. It might be interesting.

And if there isn't going to be a feminist element to the thread then I would gently suggest that it belongs on the coronavirus board rather than the women's rights board.

If you want a discussion about newly observed behaviour let's discuss panic buying, hoarding, abuse of frontline staff and key workers

It would be a useful & important discussion.
Some behaviours will be newly recognised in particular situations but well understood & familar to frontline workers elsewhere.

I would be interested to read such a thread & may feel I have something to contribute.

Hooves I didnt start the thread.

Interesting to consider how any discussions which contribute to the identification of significant patterns of behaviour may have started though.

I would be happy to contribute to a thread started by Hooves. It'd be interesting.

It's also strange how the op has been supported

That's what you can't ever get over, isn't it? The fact that women who have had bad experiences with men and who'd like to talk about that are supported here.

Shame that's never going to change, then.

If you want a discussion about newly observed behaviour let's discuss panic buying, hoarding, abuse of frontline staff and key workers

Why not start a thread then? You could apply your own feminist analysis to it. It might be interesting.

I imagine the point of the thread was to explore the possibility that there might be sex-based differences to some of the behaviours which detrimentally impact women during the current crisis.

By citing the behaviour of two groups of men, totalling six individuals, you think that will enable you to explore sex based patterns of behaviour?

Some behaviour patterns may likely be specific/more prevelent in certain groups. Recognising behaviour patterns is useful.

Really? So, a few examples of anecdotal behaviour enables anyone to recognise behaviour patterns does it?

Utter codswallop. None of you wanted a discussion further than "men are shit". You didn't want a discussion about new patterns of behaviour exhibited during this unprecedented time. You wanted a liturgy of man bashing anecdotes.

If you want a discussion about newly observed behaviour let's discuss panic buying, hoarding, abuse of frontline staff and key workers because I guarantee you that was fairly evenly split. In fact, in my experience it was more women than men doing it but I'm unbiased enough to recognise that there are more women than men present during the hours that I work.

Of course you are defending the women. If you are so even handed and so aware of the drivers of human behaviour as you are now claiming then you would have challenged the op immediately by writing the same excuses for that behaviour, but you didn't because she was complaining about men and so it was all good in your book.

No you're wrong on all points here Hooves
Maybe projection?

if only you could use your special power of making threads all about you, to actually contribute something positive. Instead you always seem hellbent on stalking every feminist thread that dares to criticise the poor men, even those that act like entitled cocks. Well done on making another thread all about you

Recognising behaviour patterns is useful.
Understanding behaviour patterns is important.

Have a re-read, please.

I don't need to. I don't agree with, nor support, the branch of feminism that you advocate. So no, you don't speak for me nor fight in my name.

Hooves I haven't said I agreed or advocated for any type of feminism nor have I expressed a wish or am likely to ever claim to speak for or fight in your name.

If you read what was actually written you wouldn't be trying to start a boxing match with shadows. You've said you don't want to read to understand so prehaps you just want to box/fight/disrupt?

Hooves if only you could use your special power of making threads all about you, to actually contribute something positive. Instead you always seem hellbent on stalking every feminist thread that dares to criticise the poor men, even those that act like entitled cocks. Well done on making another thread all about you. 👏🏼

So, what's the point in the thread? People have been behaving badly during the pandemic for a variety of reasons, is the true situation.

I imagine the point of the thread was to explore the possibility that there might be sex-based differences to some of the behaviours which detrimentally impact women during the current crisis.

The OP had experiences to share & (I presume wished to disuss).

Given this is a unique event & pressure any/all behaviour patterns will be newly observed.

Some behaviour patterns may likely be specific/more prevelent in certain groups. Recognising behaviour patterns is useful.

Have a re-read, please.

I don't need to. I don't agree with, nor support, the branch of feminism that you advocate. So no, you don't speak for me nor fight in my name.

Im not defending anyone.
I'm pointing out that whilst you seem keen to point to 'inevitable' vulnerabilities of the 'old man' described by PP as not respecting safeguards & boundaries you may not also have considered the vulnerabilities of the women you describe behaving badly.

Of course you are defending the women. If you are so even handed and so aware of the drivers of human behaviour as you are now claiming then you would have challenged the op immediately by writing the same excuses for that behaviour, but you didn't because she was complaining about men and so it was all good in your book.

Why didn't you point out to her that
They each could also be vulnerable, oblivious, ill-mannered, frightened, unthinking &/or other reasons informing such unnaceptable behaviours towards people working in frontline services (which has in recent weeks due to CV 19 come to include people working in supermarkets, pharmacies etc). if you are very well aware of the range & drivers of challenging/difficult human behaviours.?

So, don't use your type of feminism to fight in my name. You don't represent me.

Hooves seriously.
Have a re-read, please.

Strange that you didn't care to defend them in this way though.

Im not defending anyone.
I'm pointing out that whilst you seem keen to point to 'inevitable' vulnerabilities of the 'old man' described by PP as not respecting safeguards & boundaries you may not also have considered the vulnerabilities of the women you describe behaving badly.

In order to understand behaviour patterns it is neccessary first to notice, observe & discuss the possibility of patterns, including potential power dynamics.

My experience is not to have any problems since lockdown with anyone in public space (so either sex).
I'm also aware that there will be a number of factors contributing to this, including luck.

Ive worked frontline services so am very well aware of the range & drivers of challenging/difficult human behaviours. Some of which can definitely be sex-specific but not all.
I only joined the thread in the last couple of pages so there is nothing 'strange' about the focus of my response.

So, don't use your type of feminism to fight in my name. You don't represent me.

So if you think most of the women here are following a Feminism that doesn't represent you or should be in your name, are you just here to disagree with them?

R0wantrees

There are different forms of feminism. Most on here are radical feminists. That does not mean that radical feminism is the only form of feminism, the "correct" version nor that every feminist is a radical feminist.

So, don't use your type of feminism to fight in my name. You don't represent me.

You see, so what you're suggesting is that your brand of feminism is what will have one the day, right?

Not the work of thousands of other women who are also fighting for the rights of women but just not in your chosen way.?

So, yes please, do make it clear that you do not speak for me.