To report my colleague for hitting me

[QueenyLaverne]

Colleague (quite substantial guy) who's job is to bring supplies up to our floor, brought some stuff up. He came to find me, I was on break, to tell me and did so in a very sarcastic way. Not unusual, he is a sarky bastard and we don't like him much, but hey ho we tolerate him and are nice to him. I jokingly pulled him up on it and said something like, 'oh, who do you think your talking to!' 'Laugh laugh' he said something else and I was holding a newspaper which I pretended to hit him with, it tapped him with as we were having banter.
He then comes at me and walloped me on my arm, it really hurt, my arm was still hurting at the end of my shift and I felt really quite tearful, not from the pain, (although it did really hurt) but more because I felt really violated.
Can you tell me if I'm being overly sensitive or if this is unacceptable behaviour and should be reported?
AIBU?

Italian

I got your message. Thanks a lot. I wasn't offended. Bewildered it's asked perhaps.

Do you think feminism has achieved it's goals of smashing patriarchy?

Yes, absolutely. If anyone is discriminated against because of sex, among the other protected characteristics, they can and should sue. I alos don't see it happening. In fact, in many ways, feminism won (past tense) so convincingly that in some areas (notably education) men are disadvantaged because of it.

I can't see how pointing out that most violence and crime comes from males is nasty!

Because it;s defining the way some people live their lives. I can see why it's likened to racism. If at every opportunity, someone pointed out a negative statistic about a particular race, even when it had nothing to do with the conversation, I would see it as a nasty way of thinking.

I think that is a stereotype.

It is but one confirmed in real life and on MN.

I guess I am always a little surprised by women who defend men's rights in a world which I see as being hopelessly biased in favour of men.

It's not so much that I defend mens' rights, it's that I don't feel the need to defends women's' rights in the UK. Having this conversation in real life usually ends up with me being told, I have internalised misogyny, I haven't read the right books, I'm a feminist and I don't know it or other patronising nonsense. There are issues in the UK and in the wider world. These aren't symptoms of a patriarchy though (which necessitates feminism), they're symptoms of a flawed society and this needs analysis, understanding and 'fixing' but without the monomania of feminism.

There's the frequently posted equality vs equity image. I think a better representation of what many posters mean by this would be sawing off the taller persons' legs to bring them down to the same height.

AskBasil

Wow, you have a bad attitude don't you.

Mumsnet isn't Reddit, so I trust you'll be able to grasp them.

I do tend to see things in black and white but I'm extremely clever and fairly reflective. I'm aware it's a shortcoming but I think I mitigate it.

You don't see a problem with a domestic violence police based on the premise used in the Deluth Model?

Bullshit. That's from a men's rights activism site. I know. I linked to it. I don't think the two are mutually dependent though.

You are an MRA and I claim my five pounds. Not an activist, but yes, I consider all people and think all demographics need help sometimes. I don't just think of nasty men and poor women. I think I've been fairly explicit with that.

Perhaps you can tell me why being an MRA is such a terrible thing.

Is it because it all needs to be about women all the time.

nobody believes them except rapists and their supporters

try not to lower yourself any further.

So now 50% of judges, CEO's, top surgeons, MP's and other people with power, are women?

That isn't the pay gap. That's a choice of which jobs to pursue. Why aren't there more women MPs? We live in a democracy. Is it because other women don't vote for them? The most powerful person in the country is a woman. Voted in by mostly intelligent and educated male voters.

I have no idea about the crime statistics and their general trends. The good news is though that white women receive the lightest sentences for the same crime. Swings and roundabouts, eh?

When reading about that "1 in 4" figure you mentioned, the 3rd hit on google was www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence

"About two in five of all victims of domestic violence are men, contradicting the widespread impression that it is almost always women who are left battered and bruised, a new report claims."

I think all violence is terrible and needs to be stopped. I think blaming men for it all and getting all irate and calling anyone who believes certain facts a rapist gets us nowhere.

MNers near enough constantly talk about the Daily Mail. If they had a problem with it, they could stop giving it ad revenue or money for the paper copies. I guess that's internalised misogyny?

Based on your posting history, you get plenty of free time. Certainly more than my DH.

As is mentioned on the trans-hating threads, only women can have babies and that's why it's okay to hate a tranny. Women are more likely to do housework and childcare as they have wombs, give birth, breastfeed etc. It makes sense for them to look after the children during that period. If men have achieved more in their career by a certain point then financially it makes more sense for them to be the primary earners and mothers the primary childcare.

Have a lovely day.

Oh and just as an aside, that site you quoted rape stats from SansComic, was of an organisation that was set up by a bloke who made a living from defending paedophiles, claimed that 60% of women raped in childhood had enjoyed it, that 75% of mothers of children who had alleged child abuse, had personality disorders and that child abuse investigations were an assault by the state on the family.

Still think it's not Ihatewomen.org?

I'll be honest, I don't do in-depth analysis of sources beyond looking at the statistics they are referencing and where they came from. I'll take your word for it.

Similar to Italian's ;ink from an unreputable source. You know this is an internet forum, not a literature review, don't you?

Ah yes, women make the choice to be poor.

Bullshit again.

Women make choices in the context of living with men, who also make choices. The workplace has been designed for men with wives at home and so when wives try and operate within it, it doesn't work for them as well as it works for the people it is designed for.

Ah yes, the old MRA chestnut about domestic violence and the 1 in 6 figure.

Everyone knows that's not comparing like with like. The 1 in 4 figure of female DV victims, happens in the context of coercive control. When you ask respondents how often they are hit by their intimate partner, the 1 in 4 figure stays the same, whereas the 1 in 6 figure for men, immediately drops off as soon as you ask about 2+ attacks, when it plummets. Further, follow-up research on some of those famous 1 in 6 male victims of DV, found that most of those respondents were actually DV abusers themselves and that one time their intimate partner "attacked" them, was in the context of them attacking their intimate partner - in other words it was self defence.

The reason MRA is shit? For the same reason "rights for whites" is shit. HTH.

While I don't think think the OP is completely passive victim in her story neither do I think any of this give any weight to the utter shit spouted by MRA redpll idiots.

Oh god I hate this soulless entitled aresholes

I just have to address the MRA "girls do better in education, boys are disadvantaged because of feminism" nonsense.

The reason girls do better in education than boys, is because boys are more likely to misbehave in lessons and see education as "not for them" than girls are. Bad behaviour from girls is not tolerated and is punished much more harshly; when girls misbehave, they are not just being punished for an infraction against the behaviour code, but for the infraction against femininity. So they tend overall, to behave better in classrooms, listen more and therefore get better results. And because schools are now expected to educate all their pupils, not just the ones with penises, they are no longer ignoring girls, they're educating them.

This doesn't mean that boys are being ignored however; because of their lower behavioural standards, boys actually get more time and attention from teachers, than girls do. Girls are doing better than boys in spite of classroom dynamics, not because of them.

The reason boys are doing worse than girls educationally, is because of masculine culture which values messing around and not being seen to be a swot, not because of feminism. Don't blame women for male behaviour. Again.

Based on your posting history, you get plenty of free time.

That's because my DC's are teenagers and I don't have a husband taking up all my time and energy.

I'm off out on a shopping trip with a teeanger now am so looking forward to more MRA crap to read when I get back.

AskBasil

I agree with your feminist POV but your anti-men (and boys) attitude is sad and the sweeping general statements you make, especially regarding why boys do worse in education, is alarming and saddening.

There is first of all, no definitive, clear explanation as of yet why boys do worse off in school that girls, in general. What is clear from some studies is that boys facing adversity through poverty fare worse than girls in the same situation, it impacts them more. It's not because they are given an "easy ride" in class, there are much more complex factors involved and these vulnerabilities should be addressed.

I think the problem with so, so many arguments about this stuff is that it is massively oversimplified. People pull statistics from anywhere to bolster their claim and justify their point. But the thing is, you don't need to be right. You don't need to be justified.

Whenever there is negativity towards a group, there is always a portion of the society that feels that the answer is aggression and direct opposition. It really is never the right answer. I understand the indignance, the emotional need for justice or revenge, or for the tables to be turned. But it will never make society better.

Hating men is not the opposit of mysogyny. It is just another form of anger, of hate, of prejudice. The right thing to do is to address mens behaviour when it is due, challenge all the laws, all the cultures that accept oppression of women, all that stuff. But don't lump everyone together, generalise and discriminate. Even though it might feel like the natural answer, it just doesn't get anywhere.

Statistics may give an image of the world and while it may be correct in some aspects it will never illustrate the full picture. And it just fuels generalisations and division. Also, I don't have any evidence for this, but I feel like it widespread publication of such incendiary information, used to say unequivocally that the statistics are correct about everyone, actually perpetuates whatever information they support, and set limitations on the people they relate to. For example, imagine you are a young black child in poverty stricken area, and you hear constantly from media that you are highly unlikely to be successful. How would that make you feel, would you likely be lead to try less hard, knowing that your life is "set up" for failure.

And also please don't trust mainstream media for all of your resources. They are a business and they will cherry pick "evidence" to make as many hyperbolic articles as they can. It's not just the DM, others can just be more subtle.

I'm not saying you don't have the right to pick fault in mens' actions when it's appropriate, be angry. But be as accurate as you can, and don't generalise. It's not fair.

ComicSans I don''t think it is worth my engaging with on this, we clearly see very differently. Some if my links may well not be helpful but I am sure basil's are better so I'd rather leave you to consider what she says and I agree with her.

Not sure where you are getting hating me from, AllGlitters.

It's interesting how giving an analysis of how boys are being failed Ina patriarchy = hating men.

hating men that should say. You may hate me too but I'd rather you kept that to yourself .

Alltthatglitters "What is clear from some studies is that boys facing adversity through poverty fare worse than girls in the same situation, it impacts them more."

Please can you link to studies and say why you think this is, please?

Scallops AskBasil's post for me was anti male, I'm not talking about the entire conversation you are having. I've previously agreed with a lot of what she has said.

And what I meant was it is a sweeping and inaccurate statement to say that boys are struggling because they "see education as not for them". Where on earth does she get this idea from and why on earth would it apply to every boy. I baulk at any post that begings, "the reason is...". Because as I said in my post, no offence, but I've seen so much massive over simplification and lack of willingness to see that things aren't black and white, my mind truly boggles.

over simplification this thread*

And the same goes for media, it's absolutely rife and so damaging. It's so ironic that a lot of arguments I've seen actively go further to creating a divide between men and women, in terms of feminism and simply as people.

But it's my unfortunate experience that a lot of people seem to prefer to stick firmly in their own camp of thought, throwing grenades of one sided opinion and often downright ignorance, rather than acknowledge that there is a mile of middle ground between them.

Don't worry I'm going to leave this thread now, it's not worth it when my point is getting completely missed (as I assume it is do to the "=anti men" comment.

www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/28/the-serious-reason-boys-do-worse-than-girls/?utm_term=.eb0e6a0bd297

What did she say that was anti-male? Anti-masculinity maybe, but if the trappings of masculinity are damaging boys how is it a bad thing to poin it out?

The divide between men and women is of men's making and choosing. That's what living in a patriarchy is all about. Pointing that out does not increase the divide.

No, but blaming the men who live in it too, does.Why are you dismissing how unfair her comment was about boys? Why ae you so unwilling to acknowledge that it was not accurate or fair to say? Exactly my point.

Black and white.

And - what did she say that was anti-male?

"The reason boys are doing worse than girls educationally, is because of masculine culture which values messing around and not being seen to be a swot, not because of feminism. Don't blame women for male behaviour. Again."

Where is the evidence???

Allthatglitters, pointing out generalised negative male behaviour is not the same as hating males and it's tiring to see that put forward as a serious argument.

However I did write that post just as I was about to run out the door to go shopping, so I take your point that masculine cultural pressure to be cool is just one factor in the overall picture of why boys do worse than girls across the board.

But your link is also not the whole answer, it's only one study in one of the worst educational systems in the developed world, the USA. Studies have shown that it's not just poverty which stymies boys because girls grow up poor too. There was a meta analysis done a while ago about this and it showed some pretty interesting results:

www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/09/why-girls-get-better-grades-than-boys-do/380318/

I've also read that the average difference in development contributes to their starting out feeling alienated in school and the suggestion is that boys should start school a year later than girls and be in the same class as girls a year younger than them as that would be developmentally more equal. I don't know how much truth there is in that, but it's an interesting theory.

We could have a whole other thread on this and it would easily get to 500 posts.

You gave a misogynist an opening, and he took it. He knows full well that if you complain he can say you 'started it', and that would probably be upheld unless there is camera footage. It's all about technicalities these days.

Just cut the guy dead from now on. Professional courtesy and nothing more.

(I accidentally caught a courier's hand with my fingernail this morning. I suppose I should feel grateful that he didn't headbutt me!)

gatorade that's a completely different scenario. It's cool, you like to blame men for anything and everything I guess, good luck with your miserable life.

AskBasil

No that's completely fine, I didn't really explain myself properly, it's not that I thought you were super man hating, I've actually agreed with pretty much everything else you've said on this thread, it is just what I took as generalisations to be offensive because I think they are so, so damaging and limiting, mainly to vulnerable people in society, like the young and poor and most oppressed, but ultimately to everyone.

And I agree the thing I posted about boys isn't the only answer either. And that is really interesting about boys starting later, I think honestly there might be something in that sometimes! But your right, different topic for a different thread

"There's no such thing as the wage gap."

Ahaha

Two years ago, my employer had an equal pay audit. The resultant increase in the salaries of senior female staff left a big hole in the budget.

That would be in 2015. Not 1975.

I'm lucky to work somewhere where such audits can be imposed. Most people do not.

There really is no such things as a wage gap, women choose jobs that pay less and take more time off to raise children, therefore the overall wage is less, not what they actually get paid weekly/monthly etc.

Um, did you read my post?

Good quality part time jobs aren't always available. Men often don't see it as their role to scale things back for the kids and most don't because men still earn more even before they start a family so the cycle continues. On here, many women working full time forget that their Dh can take time off for sickness plays and so on and there are multiple threads about them refusing