To be hopping mad about this?

[ParisTravelodge]

My Dds (twins aged 14), have just returned from a school trip to Germany.

Whilst there, they and other girls in the group had their bums felt/slapped by German boys of 17/18 yrs.
This happened frequently in markets, shopping centres etc.
They were all horrified by this, and told a female teacher in her 20s, who told the girls it was their own fault for wearing skinny jeans and leggings!

Am writing letter to school about it.
A friend suggested I am overeacting to cultural differences, and the girls should be flattered!
Tbh I am angry at teacher's response mostly.
What do you think?
Has anyone else experienced this?

OP I'm glad that the boys were equally shocked at the sexual harassment and the teacher's reaction. Gives me hope. If they were with the girls at the same time as the harassment it must have been quite horrible for them too, because they would been put in the position of showing their contempt for the German boys' treatment of their friends and potentially being challenged to physically defend 'their women' which is another way sexism affects boys and men too.

Have you had any luck with the school today?

Tazers

That'll learn em.

' potentially being challenged to physically defend 'their women' which is another way sexism affects boys and men too.'

Now that's where it gets tricky for a teenaged boy, show disapproval of another boy/man's actions or words yes.
But defend a female physically? Especially one that is not in immediate, actual danger involving potential serious injury or death
That's very cave man and possessive, and may well be misinterpreted by the girl in question. So no, DS is unlikely to do that.
Would those arguing from a feminist stance here want him to?

No Dustin I wouldn't want my DS to do that at all. I am arguing from a Feminist stance (I hoped by putting 'their women' in speech marks to make it clear that was not my phrase but more expressing how the boys would feel under pressure to respond) and I think there are many sad effects of sexism on men and boys and this would be one of them.

I agree there is a huge difference between getting involved in a physical fight to defend your friend from injury or death, which a lot of people, genders regardless, would do - as opposed to being made to feel that, as a man, you are under pressure to "protect a woman's honour" and specifically for boys and men, to do that using physical force. I can imagine a situation where if the boys in the OP had shouted at the German boys, the jeering response would be "So what are you going to do about it?" - and then it quickly becomes physical. We need to equip our sons to deal with situations like that as much as we need to equip our daughters with being sexually harassed for their own safety and others.

This is why all the focus on women avoiding rape is a red herring and a complete waste of public resources. For rapists to be isolated and become as socially abhorred as they should be (as opposed to a page on FB to 'Like!'), the male friends who think "Oh Nigel* is only joking when he's talking about taking a girl up the arse when she's not expecting it - or more importantly consented to it - he wouldn't really do that - it's all bravado/pub chat" have to think to themselves, well so what if he's lying or being the big I am, I'm going to have to say out loud what a pathetic tosspot he sounds and point out that what he's actually boasting about is anal rape in - front of all of our friends. And then speak up fearlessly.

In every stag do trip to a lapdancing club/Amsterdam brothel I'd bet there's at least one (if not more) man thinking, "oh god do I really have to do this to be accepted by my friends, am I going to be called gay** for the rest of the weekend if I don't, it's not even as if it's going to be enjoyable for me and I am going to have to lie to my wife/girlfriend, if I show I'm nervous or uncomfortable am I going to be the one who is bundled up on stage to eat the banana out of the strange woman's vagina because it's just not funny unless someone is being humiliated."

I would like my DS to grow up in a world where he is not obliged to read Nuts or Zoo to prove he is male and whatever talents or skills or interests he has, he can pursue without fear of being told he ought to be interested in sport, or straight men don't really do theatre do they?** All the crap spouted (generally by those who think Feminism is about man-hating and reject it on the basis that they could never be a Feminist because they just don't hate men enough or they're not a sexual prude) about "Boys will be Boys", "All men watch porn" are just plain offensive and while men and boys as a group, and at a societal level, enjoy the advantages of being the gender with the most power, wealth, choices, freedoms etc, at an individual level sexism can be as stifling and life-ruining as for women depending on the impact and the individual concerned.

I don't see shifting the focus from women "keeping themselves safe" to educating men and boys about rape as being idealistic or pointless at all. To think that it's pointless you have to view men as incapable of empathy or compassion or as even incapable of recognising women as flesh, blood and emotion the same as them - let alone political/financial/career etc equals. We are letting our sons down tragically when they can no longer identify whether a quote is from a convicted rapist or their favourite weekly magazine, or even where they are confronted with the fact that the quotes they identify the most with turn out to be those of a convicted rapist, as opposed to their favourite weekly magazine. I would go so far as to say the current level of societal and peer pressure on boys and young men is such that to speak out against rape is a taboo in itself and involves putting yourself in the firing line for ridicule and humiliation. If that doesn't demand some kind of challenge to educate men and boys about avoiding being rapists - which has to start with not admiring rapists or identifying with rapists - I don't know what does tbh.

** Homophobia doesn't just make gay people's lives a misery - stereotypes and expectations also impact on anyone who wants to step outside of their expected gender role
*sorry to any Nigels

Aye Will the ELC be stocking the tazers in pink plz?

Feminists, in general I believe, support a woman's choice to wear what she wishes for herself.

The MN Feminists are particularly hard line on this, but not all Feminists (a noisy minority?) believe you have do it all the time, irrespective of the situation.

Regarding "Change the Worlders" and "Real Worlders" I would suggest a name change. "The World is Capable of Changers" and "Why bother to change the world nothing will happen-ers"

No, it's more like the No Compromisers and the Duck and Weavers, or Zealots and Pragmatists.

If we followed the second of these groups, women would not have the vote, black people would not be allowed on the same buses as white people and Irish people would be included in the same categories as dogs were accomodation is concerned.

I don't think that's right. You are essentially arguing that progress in black rights is only due to hardliners like Malcolm X and SWAPO and owes nothing to Luther King and Nelson Mandela, or that Irish peace was only from those who bomb, not those who looked for settlement. The real lesson is that the zealots are noisy but marginally effective, it's the pragmatists who really get things done.

We do need to change society's perception of sexual assault on women, this will not come from other women making judgements about young girls. Which these school girls are.

No one is arguing that, what is being argued is tactics. Zealots are typically very keen to send other people into the firing line for their beliefs ( eg it's not the MN Feminists frothing here who are going to get their own bums pinched keeping to the faith in a German market), pragmatists are prepared to duck and weave more ( sensible trousers here girls).

I also find it strange that the poster calling for not making judgements is a chief armchair judgypants howling for the head of a young female teacher who made a call that worked - worked, solved the problem, etc. How dare she!

But to what cost? She has taught the girls they were responsible for what was done to them?

But to what cost? She has taught the girls they were responsible for what was done to them?

No, she has taught them that being pragmatic works.

And what is the alternative lesson? Keep the faith and approbation of a bunch of hardliners on MN, and keep getting your bum pinched?

But what pragmatic advice do you give to the girl/woman who was dressed "modestly" and got sexually assaulted?

"No, she has taught them that pragmatism works"

If this 'pragmatism' works, please explain why women in (for example) Afghanistan are regularly sexually assaulted.

I find that the best way to point out the flaws in whatmeworry's arguments is to simply repeat them verbatim. Anyone who likens telling girls to wear different clothes in order to avoid sexual assault with Nelson Mandela does a pretty good job of discrediting their own argument, I reckon.

Yes, women should be able to wear what they like and not be sexually harrassed. The German boys were wrong and so was the teacher's reaction.

However in this case I would give the teacher the benefit of the doubt.

She had just spent 1 week (or whatever) with a bunch of youngish teenage girls who were in all likelihood had spent the week, as teenage girls will do on school trips (I know I did), preening, posing and giggling. She was probably exasperated and irritated with it. Yes it's the wrong message to send but she probably just mishandled a situation which had been worrying/ concerning her for the whole trip.

This thread has caused me to really think about what I as a female really see as sexual assault compared to when I was younger.

I remember being at school in my school uniform with a thick White cardigan over it being felt up by two boys, having someone repeatedly thrust their groin into my back when on a night out, men grabbing and pinching as I passed by on occasions... I don't ever remember feeling empowered enough to confront it or even consider it sexual assault.

But you know what, it is sexual assault, I would even go as far as to remove the sexual element and call it bodily harm... If a teenage boy approached a teenage girl in the street and punched her in the face, and her teacher told her that it was because she looked at him the wrong way, there would be outrage.

The severity may differ but the intent does not... Boys and men act like try own women because they are given underhand permission to act that way, by both women themselves and society as a general.

jari and others who think like her, it does not matter what anyone wears, nobody has the right to violate another person. My goodness some of you think that humans are like primeval animals with no self control, I like to think that we have evolved since then . I wear leggings on a daily basis (8 months pg), should I not then, just incase I attract the opposite sex . What a load of rubbish!

I had my bum groped on a tram the other day - I was wearing leggings but with a dress & a coat down to my knees. I also had a 3 month old baby strapped to my chest. What's the pragmatic advice to me? It was the leggings what done it?

Well rilla

The fact that you were wearing leggings obviously sent the person into a fit of lustfulness so powerful that they could no longer control themselves.

Plus you had a child strapped to your chest, meaning that you had obviously participated in coitus at some point, and we all know once you have had sex with one man it means you are fair game to all.

But to me the biggest risk factor was going out unaccompanied in public without your chaperone, what do you expect?

But what pragmatic advice do you give to the girl/woman who was dressed "modestly" and got sexually assaulted?

Nothing is foolproof, but surely if something reduces the probability of assault its worth looking at?

What I really don't understand is the mindset that says if something is not 100% effective, its not worth doing at all.

And if the argument is that its not worth doing because it conflicts with an ideological mantra, well that's just religious zealotry in another guise.

If we followed the second of these groups, women would not have the vote, black people would not be allowed on the same buses as white people and Irish people would be included in the same categories as dogs were accomodation is concerned.

I don't think that's right. You are essentially arguing that progress in black rights is only due to hardliners like Malcolm X and SWAPO and owes nothing to Luther King and Nelson Mandela, or that Irish peace was only from those who bomb, not those who looked for settlement. The real lesson is that the zealots are noisy but marginally effective, it's the pragmatists who really get things done.

worry I cannot see how you have got from what I have said to bombers and Malcolm X. My point is that we need to chip and chip and chip away at society's image of what is acceptable and what constitutes sexual assault and rape. We will not be able to do that if we tell the victims to moderate their behaviour, because essentially in some instances "boys will be boys", and that some clothing/women are "asking for it" more than others - which is the byline in telling women they should not wear leggings.

I note that you haven't quoted my point about the common demoninator being the attackers. You will see that I argue there is no uniform necessary for sexual assaults and rapes to take place. Therefore in reality there is nothing a woman can do to stop a sexual predator, not even wearing boyfriend jeans

I am unsure if the zealot and armchair judgypants are aimed at me? If so I don't think I am either. I want society to recognise that women and men have the right to not be touched if they don't want to be, and that no forms of sexual assault are "fun". I had my arsed pinched not long ago, turned round and yelled "how dare you" at the idiot behind me at the bar queue. I wouldn't have had the confidence to do that as a young girl, I would have been intimidated and embarassed. That is what I want to change.

"Nothing is foolproof, but surely if something reduces the probability of assault its worth looking at?"

But it doesn't.

So it's not.

"And if the argument is that its not worth doing because it conflicts with an ideological mantra, well that's just religious zealotry in another guise."

That's it, I give in. I am unable to discuss sensibly with the nonsensical.

Brilliant I missed that bit.

I think it's a case of just handing over the rope

Can I be Joan of Arc?

Yes. And I'll be Mary Magdalene. In leggings.