To think all men who travel should call 777 and have their GPS tracked and location checked?

[SummersOverSeasideTown]

As it says.
I'd be open to a curfew time, so men can travel during the day maybe, but at night they would have to log their journeys and expected arrival time.

IABU and men should continue to enjoy limitless freedoms and it should be women who have to call and be tracked.

IANBU and this is a reasonable solution to the alternative.

@Clocktopus

So you are not doing anything about your friends leering at men?

My friends don't leer at men, we don't really go to places where that would be a thing, and even if we did we are very unlikely to attempt to grope, stalk, or assault those men.

Im talking to starfish which is why i quoted her

Its not about being scared. Its the principle of it.

It's really not about the principle.

Women tend to be smaller, lighter, and less physically strong. A man getting leery and handsy, trying to grope her or force himself on her is more likely going to be a very one sided fight.

@Pumperthepumper Women murder! Maybe not as often as men but they are definitely capable of murder.

Yes, they do. Women do murder.

But what they don’t do is progress from leering to rape and murder the way we know men do.

And they also don’t murder at anywhere near the rate of men. You’re comparing two different things.

@Clocktopus

Its not about being scared. Its the principle of it.

It's really not about the principle.

Women tend to be smaller, lighter, and less physically strong. A man getting leery and handsy, trying to grope her or force himself on her is more likely going to be a very one sided fight.

@Clocktopus So if a woman grabs a man's arse on a night out, thats fine is it?

Im talking tostarfishwhich is why i quoted her

Apologies, I thought you were talking to me as I was tagged in the original comment.

So if a woman grabs a man's arse on a night out, thats fine is it?

Please quite where I said that it is.

Quote

The two guys last week who levered at me when drunk are no different to two women leering at a man when drunk.

They totally are though They're physically bigger snd stronger and are members of the sex which is known to intimidate and attack. Women might get lissedand leer at a man but they don't stalk them through the streets and attack them.
Are you a man?

@sleeponeday Its not about being scared. Its the principle of it.

Ah, for women, it’s being scared. That’s another reason it’s not the same thing, women can be offended but ultimately, it’s a fear of being attacked.

@StarfishDish
@Pumperthepumper It is the same though. The two guys last week who levered at me when drunk are no different to two women leering at a man when drunk.
Men are stronger and bigger than women and more violent (see previous stats) - perhaps you should look up UK sports council decision for info on this

@Clocktopus

So if a woman grabs a man's arse on a night out, thats fine is it?

Please quite where I said that it is.

@Clocktopus What I gathered from your comment is that because women are not as strong as men, if a man does it, the woman won't be able to fight back.

If a woman does it to a man, what is he supposed to do? Stand there? Do nothing?

[quote Pumperthepumper]**@Pumperthepumper It is the same though. The two guys last week who levered at me when drunk are no different to two women leering at a man when drunk.

Yes they are - leering women don’t lead to women who rape and murder. And we know this, and you know this, because violent crimes are overwhelmingly committed by men.[/quote]
So it's OK for women to leer at men because they don't go on to assault, rape or murder the man they're leering at.
Therefore it's OK for men to leer at women if they don't go on to assault, rape or murder the woman they're leering at?
Basically leering is OK if nothing physical happens?

Massive derail.
Can we get back to the original topic which was quite interesting.

[quote Pumperthepumper]@Clocktopus No, do tell me what women are doing to stop each other leering at men.
I'm genuinely interested to know!

Well, it’s not my humour so I definitely would say it was out of order.

But it’s not the same thing by a long way - it doesn’t have the same historical and cultural weight behind it, and it doesn’t translate into an endemic of female violence, murder and rape. So you’re not comparing like for like.[/quote]
I’ve already answered that. Not ok, and also not the same thing. Not an accurate comparison.

The whataboutery derail is utterly chaotic

[quote StarfishDish]@Clocktopus

"The Office for National Statistics figures show every year that one in the three victims of domestic abuse are male equating to 757,000 men (1.561m women)"

Another statistic for you.[/quote]
What proportion of the perpetrators are also men?

The principle that women aren't allowed to be more alarmed by sexual aggression, from far larger people with a propensity to rape and sexually assault, than a man is women, who don't do this?

Can you explain a little more what your logic is, here? The principle, surely, is that people have a right not to be intimidated. That's what makes the behaviour wrong. And while women are reasonably going to be so by men who do this because of the implicit underlying threat, that isn't there when women do it to men. It's annoying, but no more. So what is your 'principle'? I'm sure it's not just a reflexive determination to redirect any discussion of male abuse of women, but I will need you to clarify where you're coming from? The two are so clearly not at all 'exactly the same' to me that I struggle to understand what you mean.

Two men leering at a man is the same, yes. Though far rarer, 18% of victims are other men. But women, to men? That doesn't have any basis I can identify.

@Clocktopus

Im talking tostarfishwhich is why i quoted her

Apologies, I thought you were talking to me as I was tagged in the original comment.

No problem at all…should have just starred the quote

Pure laziness on my part

If a woman does it to a man, what is he supposed to do? Stand there? Do nothing?

Exactly the same as a woman would do - say coldly and firmly "Get your hand off my arse."

On a site predominantly aimed at women, why is it acceptable for users to post such misogynistic garbage blaming rape victims for their assaults and reducing them to inanimate objects? Why are such repulsive comments allowed to stand?

Isn't the tolerance of such hate-fuelled poison part of what sustains these problems? Women being told that "she brought it on herself" is a legitimate position they must respect. Why? It's prejudiced garbage.

Why should rape victims have to read posts declaring the assault their own fault or be expected to behave as if such views are respectable?

In what way is it "within the spirit" of the site rules to post such obscenities as are on this thread?

@MiddlesexGirl

Massive derail. Can we get back to the original topic which was quite interesting.

Yes, I think ultimately, it’s logical that if there was a male curfew, women would be safer on the streets. They’d be less safe in their houses though.

I think the solution is for men, all men, all of them, every single man, even the nice ones, to start taking responsibility for male violence. Every time a woman is murdered, the Good Men get to have a sort of ‘oh what a shame’ detachment from it, and it’s such a cop out. Where are the men demanding change?

"So it's OK for women to leer at men because they don't go on to assault, rape or murder the man they're leering at.
Therefore it's OK for men to leer at women if they don't go on to assault, rape or murder the woman they're leering at?
Basically leering is OK if nothing physical happens?"

Leering is scary because of the underlying threat. It can't be disentangled from the action - all women know what it is to walk home late in the dark and hear steps behind them, and flinch, no?

I didn't give a shit if people leered when I was out with my boyfriend. It didn't bother me because I knew I was safe. That's not the same as when alone. It's ridiculous to try to isolate incidents from social context.

@ftw163532

On a site predominantly aimed at women, why is it acceptable for users to post such misogynistic garbage blaming rape victims for their assaults and reducing them to inanimate objects? Why are such repulsive comments allowed to stand?

Isn't the tolerance of such hate-fuelled poison part of what sustains these problems? Women being told that "she brought it on herself" is a legitimate position they must respect. Why? It's prejudiced garbage.

Why should rape victims have to read posts declaring the assault their own fault or be expected to behave as if such views are respectable?

In what way is it "within the spirit" of the site rules to post such obscenities as are on this thread?

@ftw163532 Who has said that they're at fault?

I think the solution is for men, all men, all of them, every single man, even the nice ones, to start taking responsibility for male violence. Every time a woman is murdered, the Good Men get to have a sort of ‘oh what a shame’ detachment from it, and it’s such a cop out. Where are the men demanding change?

I agree. Apparently even as recently as the 1980s drunk driving was socially acceptable - a huge campaign changed that. When you look at the police who keep their jobs even after harassing women, or sleeping with extremely vulnerable ones, it's not a surprise that they harboured a misogynist sociopath without noticing. Misogyny is the norm.

Adding it as a characteristic covered by hate crime sentencing and reporting would help, perhaps.

I'm glad some comments are here, though. When arguing that societal acceptance of misogyny is the core problem, the evidence being so plain is surely helpful.