Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think it's normal for parents to be more protective of daughters

158 replies

cadburykingdom · 30/09/2014 09:31

I know my parents were more protective of me than my brothers. I'm more protective of DD than DS. All of my friends growing up with siblings reported similar.

I have a friend now who disagrees and says they shouldn't be and it's not normal but I would think it is.

Girls are more vulnurable and go through so much more so it makes sense.

AIBU?

OP posts:
pictish · 30/09/2014 17:18

Statistically, young men are far more likely to be the victim of assault and violence than young women, so imo if I had to say which was more vulnerable, I'd have to say boys. A single punch can kill.

skylark2 · 30/09/2014 17:26

YABU.

It depends on the child. I've always been more protective of my socially awkward DS than his outgoing, confident sister. Not so much because he needed protection but because he's always been capable of seriously teeing off authority figures if he loses his temper. He's the sort who would tell a friend's parent, or a teacher, or a policeman that they were being an idiot. He'd probably be right, but that's not the point...

No, girls aren't more vulnerable, and no they don't "go through more." I'm afraid I don't believe that everyone you've ever met until now was stuck in 1950. Not least because I've seen (and answered) pretty much this exact question before multiple times on other websites, and not recently either - and it got the same type of response there too. You're claiming that an attitude is standard when actually almost nobody shares it.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 30/09/2014 17:34

cadbury
I am very sorry for what you have been through Flowers
I can understand why the world might not feel like a safe place for a young woman given the experiences you have had.

cadburykingdom · 30/09/2014 17:39

Thank you chaz Thanks
You're right i think my view has been clouded due to what i have been through. There is no way i want dd to go through the same and it terrifies me that she might Sad

OP posts:
ErrolTheDragon · 30/09/2014 17:44

I don't have a DS so this is a bit hypothetical for me.... I intend to make sure my DD can protect herself.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 30/09/2014 17:45

It is a balance for all parents. You want to protect your DC from the potential dangers but you don't want to stifle them. They need to develop independence and resiliance and to take risks; its part of growing up but I think it is hard to step back and let them do it.

Bulbasaur · 30/09/2014 17:49

Statistically, young men are far more likely to be the victim of assault and violence than young women, so imo if I had to say which was more vulnerable, I'd have to say boys. A single punch can kill.

Are you saying a single punch couldn't kill a woman?

You're completely misinterpreting statistics. I will assume it's just naivety.

Just because men get assaulted more, does not mean that it's safer for a woman to walk alone than it is for a man. Women are much more likely to heed the advice of staying in a group. It is relatively uncommon for a woman to actually walk home alone.

I have been targeted, harassed, and followed while walking alone. I have been left alone while with a friend (yes it was a girl if details are important). I have had someone try to start a fight with me once (really, I just laughed and told him he would win which shut him down). DH has been targeted and followed while walking alone, and yes people have tried to start fights with him. In a group, no one said a thing. In fact when we've been together we've both been left alone.

But let's not stupidly pretend that women are safer alone then men. I'd say a woman walking alone is probably more vulnerable and open to harassment than a man walking alone.

The point is, regardless of gender, there is safety in numbers and we need to stop telling boys they need to be tough so they don't feel silly calling a friend to walk to the store with them.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 30/09/2014 18:02

Bulbasaur
Women are much more likely to heed the advice of staying in a group. It is relatively uncommon for a woman to actually walk home alone.

Is there research on this? I am interested how you know it is uncommon for a woman to walk home alone.

I know anecdotes are not data but I certainly walked home alone.

pictish · 30/09/2014 18:08

bulbasaur how do you know women are more likely to stay in a group? Because that's what you and your friends do?
Are you confusing anecdotal evidence for data? I will assume that's just naivety.

Bulbasaur · 30/09/2014 18:57

Women are also more likely to be the abuser in domestic violence situations. Are we going to say that men are more vulnerable?

I know you really, really want women to come out on top for once. Unfortunately, closing your eyes and wishing it so does not make it true. :)

But really, just like with the statistic "Women get in more accidents" is misleading because men get in more fatalities.

Men getting assaulted more is misleading because most assaults are of the "it takes two to tango" bar fight instead of being merely targeted and randomly jumped. Women are socialized to react to risk differently than men.

I'm not doing your research for you. You may google why men are more likely to get assaulted and it will give you information as to why.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 30/09/2014 19:18

In more than 50% of cases "I'm not doing your research for you" means that the poster has no research to back up their claims.

Or maybe I just made that statistic up. Hmm

Cakecrumbsinmybra · 30/09/2014 19:28

I don't know, I just have boys. But to tell me that I would be more protective of another child, than I am of the two I already have sounds like nonsense.

Dawndonnaagain · 30/09/2014 20:25

I am sorry for what you have been through Cadbury. However, I have two men in my family who have been raped and it is far more common that people think.

BoomBoomsCousin · 30/09/2014 21:33

Cadbury I am also very sorry about your experience. I'm not surprised it has you feeling the way you do.

HampshireBoy I'm not suggesting your sons shouldn't have walked the girls home, I'm sure it was time well spent. I'm saying that a girl walking home alone is not less safe than a boy walking home alone. So your boys merely transferred the risk to the girls to themselves.

If it is "natural" for parents to be worried about their daughters out at night - why were you not worried about your sons? They were vulnerable too.

You are concerned that if anything had happened to the girls your sons would have been held responsible, and you are probably right - our society would blame their parents for letting them out, them for being out and the boys for not walking them home, we love to blame when women get sexually assaulted. But if anything had happened to your sons, who would have been held responsible? The girls? Your sons? You? Well no, generally when a man or boy is attacked, unless he started the fight, the people responsible would be the people who assaulted them. It is this blame culture that hampers women's and girls' freedom and is both paternalistic (the blame of the boys and parents for not protecting them) and mysogynistic (the blame of the woman/girl for being attacked).

PrettyPictures92 · 30/09/2014 23:49

If I was to be more protective of either of my dc it would be my son. He's so sweet and kind and caring, shy and very trusting. My daughter is tough and willful and won't let anyone walk over her. She's smart and enthusiastic and is going to be one hell of a strong woman when she's older. She doesn't need protecting. My son doesn't either, but it's hard to resist the urge not to be over protective of either of them and remember they need to grow up and live their lives

HampshireBoy · 01/10/2014 09:19

HampshireBoy I'm not suggesting your sons shouldn't have walked the girls home, I'm sure it was time well spent. I'm saying that a girl walking home alone is not less safe than a boy walking home alone. So your boys merely transferred the risk to the girls to themselves.
I am sorry but this is not true, a girl walking home alone along a quiet road is more vulnerable than a boy - due to some of the scumbags there are in this world. If you look at the data, boys get in more fights and scuffles but these are generally where there are groups of people or in town. Girls are attacked more where there are no other people within reach.

If it is "natural" for parents to be worried about their daughters out at night - why were you not worried about your sons? They were vulnerable too.
As parents we never stop worrying about our DC, whatever sex or age they are, however one of the things we should do is teach them to evaluate risk and to mitigate against it. The risks to two six foot tall boys walking home together was a hell of a lot less than a single five foot girl walking home alone. Mind you, we live in a quiet Hampshire village so to be honest the risks to any of them were pretty low - I think the worry was more walking along quiet roads, what goolies and ghosties were around. Wink

PiperIsOrange · 01/10/2014 09:25

I'm more protective of DS, he has ASD and I do worry about him more.

Italiangreyhound · 01/10/2014 09:33

I'm so sorry Cadbury.

Personally, I think all children might be vulnerable in different situations, so teaching them to be safe and stay safe is important. Where I live the most common danger (which has tragically taken the life of a local young person) is walking along country lanes at night and being hit by a car.

I agree with comments about walking alone being dangerous for girls and women and I think crowds and pubs can be dangerous for anyone but boys can easily get drawn in to fights/violence. This is just my humble opinion. I think giving the message to kids that either boys or girls needs more protecting etc is not helpful, so both boys and girls need suitable support and help and need to be able to work out what is safe for them where they are.

CrayolaCocaColaRocknRolla · 01/10/2014 09:36

To be honest I feel I would need to be protective of BOTH my children. The stories DP has told me about his childhood, vile things happened to him that never happened to me. I would feel the need to be more protective of my son if anything. I would worry about the same things with sons as will daughters (apart from sons getting pregnant Grin) but no, there is nothing really normal about putting one aside like, "you're fine, you won't have anything happen to you, but you need more protection because you are a girl"
men get raped, men get sexually assaulted, women and men get hit, glassed, mugged, not one child of either sex is really immune to having things happen to them. one doesn't need more protection than the other.

BoomBoomsCousin · 01/10/2014 12:20

HampshireBoy I didn't realise you menat your boys were together walking the girls home. I thought you meant they had individually each walked a girl home. Does change the relative risks somewhat, though I would heavily dispute the idea that your sons were a "hell of a lot" less at risk, because (as you state) it just isn't really that risky walking home, alone or otherwise, male or female in most places in the UK. And the risks that do exist are more inclined towards the nondicriminating kind, like being hit by a car.

Girls are not most likely to be attacked while walking alone - the "scumbags" in this world are more likely to attack a girl they are already legitimately with than they are to scour the streets looking for someone on their own. Just as most boys who suffer violence are accompanied, so are girls.

And even if it were the case that boys were only in danger in groups, it doesn't justify parents proscribing their daughters' behaviour to protect them but not their sons'. If they "know what boys are like" why do they let sons out to hang around in groups? Surely if boys fight in groups, then they know boys fight in groups and they know their sons are in danger in groups don't they?

MyBaby1day · 03/10/2014 06:43

I'm a bit on the fence as you will worry about both boys and girls, although I do feel I would have a tendency to be a bit more protective over a girl as they are more vulnerable, walking home at night for example. Sure I'd worry about a boy but that bit more about a Daughter. More a fear of sexual things tbh.

Hakluyt · 03/10/2014 07:38

I worry much more about my son than my daughter. Even statistically boys are far more at risk than girls- and in practice, I know plenty of boys who have been attacked and mugged and beaten up. Not a single girl, though.

Delphiniumsblue · 03/10/2014 07:52

Same here Hakluyt. Boys and young men are statistically the highest risk group.

bruffin · 03/10/2014 08:01

I have a ds and dd and it's just different type of worry and protectiveness. I would worry about my dd coming home by herself late at night, but my ds has been mugged twice at 4 in the afternoon Confused and last night he text to say that he was off the train but still wasnt home 40 minutes later and i was worried. FWIW i have never heard of girl mugged for their phones etc
My dh cousin lives in guildford and said her dds used to walk the boys home to make sure they were safe in a certain area.
I worry far more about my ds mental state and health and education, dd just seems to get on with it. But then ds does have spld, various allergies and a form of epilepsy which he has grown out of.

Pumpkinpositive · 03/10/2014 08:53

Is there research on this? I am interested how you know it is uncommon for a woman to walk home alone.

So am I. I've been walking home alone at all times for 20 years and never encountered any of the problems PP was talking about. Didn't realise I was that unusual.

Had a few unwelcome encounters in broad daylight waiting for a bus.