to think the world is safer when men stay indoors?

[Trexical]

Now this assertion has to be balanced against the appalling increases we've seen in domestic violence since lock down but this article in the Guardian is shocking and offers an insight into what the world might look like if men ( and yes I make no apology as I know it's not all men) were forced to stay inside.

Startling excerpts include rapes down from 600 to 100 per day in South Africa and murder rates down in the usa by over 40,%.

Yabu- this is misandrist flawed logic
Yanbu- the world is safer when men are in lockdown

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/11/crime-falls-sharply-in-even-the-most-violent-us-cities

sweeneytoddsrazor
But that's what makes this situation so unique .. if anyone had suggested 6 weeks ago that the uk population would be confined to their homes and only permitted out once a day no one would have believed it..we have become so conditioned to what we know yet look.. in under 3 weeks this has become our normal.
Since time immemorial we have been told women and men getting killed is just one of those things, that they'll always be bad people ..but imagine if that's just lazy bulls*? .this shows there is a very clear way to reduce violence, rapes and murder on a global scale..it just need political will to make it happen

@mariequeenofscots
So what you propose is that men who do vital work be allowed out only during their shift times and only to travel to and from the work place?

Any other men must stay indoors?

Women will have free range to come and go and engage in any work they like, whether it is "essential " or not.

Of course you would be happy paying tax to support all these men forced to stay home?

It’s a thought experiment Buster. I’m not suggesting anything. I’m considering how blissful it would be to not have to endure the usual shit from men, which you as a man cannot begin to comprehend.

Maybe men should be considering why women feel these discussions are necessary....?

If the perpetrators were tagged..hell even moved to another city and barred from returning it would be a start.

Just my personal experience, but the sort of men who think it’s ok to beat their wives and children are not the sort of men who would take the blindest bit of notice of a piece of paper telling them to stay away. In fact, I know for some, it would incite contact. ‘No one is going to tell me I can’t see my wife’. And guess who these men blame for restraining orders etc? While I completely agree that it’s not the way it should be, it’s still safer for the victims to move where he can’t get to them.

Oh and you don’t need to tag me Buster I’m on the thread!

Thanks

Your proposal will see honest men, those who don't commit crime punished by being forced to stay home.

Men who are criminally minded will carry on regardless. After all we have a raft of legislation outlawing violence, and they disobey those.

The drop in crime is down the lack of available victims on the streets.

Your proposal will see honest men, those who don't commit crime punished by being forced to stay home

And heaven forbid men should suffer, is that your position?

I would still suggest that a decent man would be stopping to consider why women might find the proposition so attractive.

Now still, with no exit strategy, women are to stay home, to protect men.

And heaven forbid men should suffer, is that your position? I think the point was that it wouldn't work. Mark stays home because it's the law. He obeys the law. Dave doesn't obey the law. He likes to rape women. He goes out at night knowing there are no men about who might physically intervene in his attacks. Dave goes out and rapes the women whose defences are lowered. The rapes still happen.

Now still, with no exit strategy, women are to stay home, to protect men.
So you think if it was more women than men dying Boris would have insisted nothing close down and we all carry on as normal?

So you think if it was more women than men dying Boris would have insisted nothing close down and we all carry on as normal?

Yep.

I absolutely believe that if this virus disproportionately affected women, women would be told to stay home so men could "get on with" keeping the economy running. We would be told it was the obvious solution to avoid the country going broke and the light going out.

I have zero doubt of that.

I know I'm shouting into the wind here, but the fact that most violent crime is committed by men is absolutely not the same as saying that most men commit violent crime. The old NAMALT cliche makes it sound like there are a few men who don't commit violent crime but almost all of them do.

Nobody would (rightly) tolerate somebody saying 'Not all Muslims are terrorists' with the implication that almost all of them are, but there is probably a tiny proportion who aren't.

For anyone interested in the Yorkshire Ripper case, the police and societal response to it, and why there was outrage about the proposed curfew for women, I highly recommend the book Somebody’s Mother, Somebody’s Daughter, by Carol Ann Lee.

I have long thought it would be wonderful to feel safe to walk home from the pub at 10pm, go for a run along the river alone, head to my car in an near empty car park without checking-checking-checking all the time, drive through shady areas of my home town without locking myself in, leave my drink on table while I pop to the loo, get into a hotel lift late at night when alone. All things my DH does without a second thought.

I was listening to the London Night Tzar on the radio recently, saying that despite all-night bars and transport, London is not truly a 24 hour city, Which she put down partly to a perception of risk at night, despite there being v low rates of assault etc. I thought then that it’s partly because most women won’t/can’t make use of the things available and are self curfewing.

Well said, WeBuiltThis.