Woman's hour now...!

Fair enough blibby I think another thread would be best to talk it though with the attention it deserves.

This is about single sex spaces though.

Re the Christine Jardiniere interview- is anyone else slightly sceptical of all the politicians who happen to have a personal connection eg trans friends? I wonder whether they sometimes invent that to emotionally manipulate the interviewer and listeners?

Hey no probs! Sorry if seemed arsey. Thank you for telling me why it came up!

I'm feeling particularly fucked off today. The libdems, that Scottish spike interview, and OJ, DM and crew laughing about how women and girls are vulnerable to rapists.

The obvious unimportance of women and girls in the things being pushed by the vocal activists is clear as day. Not even hinting it's straight out with it recently.

@NiceGerbil

What relevance does the fact that some males who commit offences against women and girls plan it sometimes with a long game. Some are opportunistic. And some are both.

It’s relevant in the context I originally said it, which was in response to a comment about how abusers will take jobs or whatever with the explicit intention of abusing.

While that point is true of some abusers, and possibly always true of the worst, it’s not true of all or even, I suspect, of the majority. So much abuse is opportunistic from men who didn’t do anything special to facilitate it, just reached out and grabbed what they wanted because they felt a right to do so.

I suspect (no, I don’t know for certain or have evidence, it’s just a hunch) that even the ones with the long term plans get started opportunistically.

Why do I think it’s important? Because if we focus only on the idea that only very bad weird men with long term plans are abusers, the massive amount of abuse that happens because too many “normal” men still feel entitled to women or girls bodies and attention goes unchallenged. And entitlement to women and girls’ bodies and attention is at the heart of the demand for male access to female spaces.

NiceGerbil I'm guilty of helping to keep that part of the conversation going, sorry! I know the main focus was the first part of the programme.

Oink- thank you!

So off topic then.

Apparently though as per a recent post. Saying that and if it's relevant how means a feminist is shutting down talking about male violence.

More than happy to discuss opportunitic, planned and those who do both and the escalation from one to the other.

If the fact there's a range of behaviours by men who engage however often in anything that makes women/ girls uncomfortable relates to the single sex spaces conversation.

The journal editor should set a time limit and if the authors fail to respond then the paper should have a warning as part of a process to retract it.

Kaleidoscope on R4 right now about trans children. Not really listening (pottering about) but seems interesting.

I have zero idea what it has to do with the matter at hand

It was about the other topic on the same show, about a running coach who abused girls

DrBlackbird good to know, an MRA pundit

I've seen that. Links to conversations on various sites.

Follow. Watch them as they realise. Grow increasingly uncomfortable. Glance round get phone etc.

It's fun and makes you feel powerful apparently.

[quote Waitwhat23]@nicegerbil I saw a comment on one of the threads here yesterday where some said that loads of Men's Sheds groups (and similar, I think it was Andy's Sheds?) had been set up in their local area by men, for men. No bother, no problems.

A group of women, wanting something similar but not wanting to encroach on the existing men's groups, had set up similar groups for women. They were constantly bombarded with questions as to why men couldn't attend and one man apparently demanded that he attend because the other men were 'being mean'.

Women just aren't allowed anything to themselves and you're totally right about it being about resentment and about the public sphere. The phrase 'teenage girls' world grows smaller while teenage boys' world grows larger' has never been more apt.[/quote]
YY of course.

Women are more than happy for men to set up their own groups for xyz.

The ones we wanted access to were related to our inclusion in politics, access to certain employment etc. Getting into certain sports and supported etc.

I couldn't give the mildest toss about men having clubs and groups for similar interests hobbies issues and support. In fact I genuinely think well have a good time/ I hope it helps.

There was something written by a woman who ran a charity. Two. One men one women.

She said when she did the publicity fundraising etc for the men all quiet. With the one for women an influx of complaints from angry men.

I'm sure someone's mentioned that to be something incels like to do - they'll follow a woman at night just for the pleasure of watching her discomfort and fear. They may not actually assault or violate but get off on the woman's terror at the prospect of it.

Oh and the fact there are also stacks of men who enjoy making us uncomfortable/ fearful/ embarrassed/ angry.

And the men who do sexually related weirdness that stays just the right side of legal/ misunderstanding etc.

@nicegerbil I saw a comment on one of the threads here yesterday where some said that loads of Men's Sheds groups (and similar, I think it was Andy's Sheds?) had been set up in their local area by men, for men. No bother, no problems.

A group of women, wanting something similar but not wanting to encroach on the existing men's groups, had set up similar groups for women. They were constantly bombarded with questions as to why men couldn't attend and one man apparently demanded that he attend because the other men were 'being mean'.

Women just aren't allowed anything to themselves and you're totally right about it being about resentment and about the public sphere. The phrase 'teenage girls' world grows smaller while teenage boys' world grows larger' has never been more apt.

What relevance does the fact that some males who commit offences against women and girls plan it sometimes with a long game. Some are opportunistic. And some are both.

Have to do with the long standing separation of male and female in a few situations where women and girls are either particularly vulnerable and/ or in a situation where they are doing things so many creepy men get excited about. Getting undressed, going to the toilet etc.

Thank you bore!

Littl yes- the clip on Twitter I think started a bit late so the context was lost. I'll find another one.

I liked the tinkly laugh before saying well a few murders I mean it's trivial in the scheme of things.

The idea that any problems can be sorted out later. That's the idea apparently.

1. Opposite of safeguarding
2. Women have been fighting for decades (longer) to get DV and sex crimes against us treated as they should be. Suddenly that's going to totally change?

But the tinkly laugh was a nice touch for sure.

Had a listen. Think I lost some context on the Twitter clip but have read no question about women (the bit I heard started at gay men which I assume was an example).

Thing is. Is anyone really surprised?

I mean yes it's shocking when it's said straight out like that.

In the end though. This is about misogynists and MRAs fucking with us and loving it.

Loads of blokes have always resented what they see as 'special privileges' for women. Huge things like book clubs, an hour for us a week at the pool.

The experience out and about esp if running cycling etc that I've read about on here.
Men feel it's their space. Deep down public space is for men. We are there because they tolerate it. Many jobs to a certain extent as well. They are doing us a favour letting us in their things and so really it's their right to remind us whose space it is. In all sorts of intrusive ways.

The resentment around us having things for us. When they have let us into theirs. Is really pretty common. So this is only what they deserve. We're taking the piss being all over the place like we belong there while also keeping men out of... Anything and everything. Clubs, groups, facilities, everything.

No no not all trans people obv esp so many transsexuals who are also being totally fucked over by this.

And incidentally.

Why do the transgender crew, I mean it seems like a fair amount of the vocal ones. Have a problem with male transsexuals?

I've got a few ideas now I think about it.

I agree with you @Blibbyblobby

I also think it’s relevant to the conversation because it’s the whole reason women need safe sex-segregated spaces.
I’m not sure why any poster would want to shut down any conversation about male violence on a feminism thread.

Did you listen to radio Scotland nice gerbil

You know with the clip where the guy said. A little spike doesn’t matter

@NiceGerbil WH is every weekday at 10am

Slight derail. Andrew R. Flores was co-author on the study previously cited upthread re …"a Review of Evidence Regarding Safety and Privacy in Public Restrooms, Locker Rooms, and Changing Rooms". Andrew has also authored papers with Lara Stemple whose other studies include…

• Sexual Victimization Perpetrated by Women: Federal Data Reveal Surprising Prevalence
• Sexual Violence Against Men in Global Politics
• The Sexual Victimization of Men in America: New Data Challenge Old Assumptions
• The Ohio State Scandal Should be a Wake-up Call: Men Are Also Victims of Sexual Abuse
• Sexual Victimization by Women Is More Common Than Previously Known

Me and the kids are watching the yes minister series at the mo.

One of them then listening to her was extra special :/

No Gerbil, I'm saying the opposite. Lots of so called "NICE NON VIOLENT MEN AND BOYS" are not nice at all. They don't see themselves as a Saville or a Weinstein, but if they see an opportunity to abuse or assault a woman without consequence to themselves they will take it because our culture tells them it's ok to do that. They aren't suddenly "Driven By what they have seen", they always had it in them but unlike the predators who plan long term ways to access their victims, many just take opportunities when they arise.

"Most women and girls are more than aware of men and boys seeing an opportunity to do or say something to a random woman or girl and taking it. Via multiple personal experiences."

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying.

It was a shitshow.

Apart from bumbling on about whatever to avoid answering a simple question.

She clearly had no idea of policy on children but managed to indicate that it was down to the doctors whether surgery was on the table. At whatever age. I mean surely common sense would tell you that on woman's hour of all places to not even nod to the fact this is huge irreversible risky surgery carried out on a healthy body and so a bit different to having an operation to correct something that is not functioning as it should.. But no minimum age???!!

I mean surely I haven't familiarised myself recently but it's a sound policy taking into account blah with understanding of the risks Vs benefits and age and whatnot.

No surgery- not blockers - if docs agree and she didn't think to give any reassurance.

There was something else she was terrible on as well it might come back to me.