to not understand the " would you have reacted the same if it had been a women" comments?

[Toizzy]

I've seen it quite a few times here and have seen it again tonight.I just don't understand it, although I realise what message it sends I would think it's quite normal if the answer is no .
Am I wrong to see it like that?

Yabu. It's double standards.

If we are talking about abuse situations then YABU. Men and women have the right to be treated with the same respect.

YABU. you shouldn't treat men and women any differently. If a man can't punch a woman in anger neither should a woman punch a man etc.

Yabu. I quite like how some people will point out double standards. It would be hypocritical of us to bang on about sexism towards women and then treat a man differently just because he's a man.

I know what you mean, but see it like this:

There is a discussion and someone pops up with "Would you still say that if it was a man/woman?", most posters respond with 'Of course I would". I wonder what the point of asking is as most of the time the point under discussion comes under a 'what is good/bad for the goose is good/bad for the gander' category.

I was thinking of abuse situations. I'm not saying it's right just that I can understand that you can feel more secure with a woman than a man and that it's understandable because we know that if someone is an abuser its most likely a man.

because some people see a particular scenario unfolding with a man as the main player and are immediately suspicious whereas they wouldn't bat an eyelid if it was a woman?

this is why female abusers get away with it, because a lot of folk won't have considered a woman capable of whatever heinous crime they'd jump to if it was a man.

On a couple of occasions I have parallel-parked the car in fairly tight spot on a busy street and a male passer-by has said "Well done" to me as I got out of the car.

Would they say that to another man?

Because people are conditioned by the patriachal society to excuse men, so when the status quo is challenged, some folk feel the need to put it right.

Yeah, it is literally all about making sure that men's sense of grievance about any focus on their behaviour is mollified. Look at any discussion of rape, for example, and see how quickly it turns from men's violence and sense of entitlement to how unfair it is to generalise about men and how all men are the real victims because of the vanishingly small number of false allegations. It's the same instinct at work - divert attention from the massive epidemic of male violence against women, children and other men and focus on how hard done by men actually are at the hands of women. But don't talk about male violence. You must never, never focus on that. Men don't like it.

I must say I disagree with the last few posts, I'm against stereotyping of BOTH genders.

I mean, if somethings so obviously dodgy alarm bells are ringing then go with your instinct, but it's unfair to jump to conclusions about ANYONE without a shred of evidence- or at least probability tipping it in a particular direction.

in the example I'm 99.9% sure the OP is referencing, it did read as being biased against males, which is why clarification was sought.

Ooh what was the example HeartShapedBox?

Oh and YABU, for the reasons already given. Although I do think it depends on the situation sometimes (not with abuse though).

My absolute 'favourite' a man posted with 'hi ladies' there was uproar about the fact he had used 'ladies' then there were other threads started by a female who also used 'ladies' nothing said!
Another typical example. .. my wife is cold and disinterested in sex... cue MN .. 'are you doing enough housework?'
My mind boggles.

I dunno.

In abuse situations I look at it in two ways. Emotional/psychological abuse is one thing, both sexes are equally as capable of inflicting horrors on the other. Physical abuse, I obviously don't condone female on male violence but I also don't think it's as terrifying for the average man. Women aren't generally as strong as men, a man does generally have the power to defend himself. (The strength differential is widely accepted, too, that's the argument when it comes to things like sports etc)
Of course I say again I'm not condoning it, and the mental anguish is horrible which ever way, but the actual physical damage won't be as bad as when the perpetrator is 6 inches taller and 3 stone heavier, than the other way round.

Note I am talking averages, generalisations etc

^Another typical example. .. my wife is cold and disinterested in sex... cue MN .. 'are you doing enough housework?'
My mind boggles^

How on earth would that boggle you? Of course if a woman is tired and ground down by mundanity - especially contrasted with her male partner - she wouldn't have the energy for sex. That's common sense - what else would you say to a man looking for more sex in his relationship?

it was the thread with a tantruming toddler, a dad put him over his shoulder and removed him from whatever the situation was and the OP (who was a sw or similar) went to check the child wasn't being kidnapped as he was shouting "mummy"- I can't for the life of me remember the title, sorry.

When 2 men a week are killed by their female ex partners I'll start being less prejudiced.

so because some men are evil bastards they all are?

naw, that doesn't fly with me.

some people of either sex are evil fuckers, you can't tar everyone with the same brush.

Yes, that's exactly what I said. All men are evil bastards. You can see where I said that in my previous post.

Oh, wait.....

did I say you actually typed that word for word?

no, I didn't.

but anyone who murders their p or exp without extenuating circumstances is an evil bastard as standard, yeah?

most people accept murder in most instances as a major no-no, correct?

you can't ne snippy about someone paraphrasing when you've just typecast an entire half of the human race.

YANBU. I hate reading comments under news stories where for instance, a male yob beat someone to a pulp while his girlfriend held his coat, and all the commenters are just fizzing with rage that he got a jail sentence and she didn't. Yet stories where a woman gets a disproportionate sentence never attract the 'If the genders were reversed...' comments, for some reason...

I am slightly suspicious that men sometimes post here so they can browbeat their OH, and the reason for that is that it's exactly something my ex DH would have done. I was wrong in all ways, and if he stopped any 'man in the street' they would agree with him. He would have adored Mumsnet.

No she didn't.

It is a gendered thing. Women don't murder their partners at anything like the same rate. It's true that most men are decent, most men don't abuse, most men don't hit and very few indeed murder. But some do, and it's a problem. Male violence is a bigger problem to society than female violence.
It's not typecasting half the human race to state facts.

tbf though, statistically more women are.likely to.report violence from men than men are likely to report violence.from women, so aren't the figures skewed to begin with?

I think sometimes the question is valid and sometimes it isn't.

The housework/sex thing for example, no-way would anyone respond to 'my husband doesn't want to have sex with me' with 'are doing enough housework?'. Never. If it's 'My wife doesn't want to have sex with me' then 'are you doing enough housework' is fine?! There is a clear double standard and I could see why someone may ask the 'reverse gender' question.

But, we live in an unequal society, men and women are not the same so it's actually sometimes valid for someone to have different opinions of a situation based on whether the person in question is male or female. We might like the idea of completely disregarding gender when forming opinions of a situation, but it doesn't really work like that.