The risk of this happening will see a rise of men getting disgruntled

[MikeRafone]

when they try to talk to woman and get the silent treatment

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr7jej2elyyo

This is why I hate that tea advert where a young woman is busy, minding her own business at her laptop, and a bloke comes up with a cup of tea he's made for her - and she drinks it! There could be anything in it!

But she smiles and says nothing, because we've all been there and know that saying one tiny thing could encourage him/piss him off...

It's not a 'meet-cute' because he's awkward - it's just all kinds of wrong...

to send more people to their TikTok accounts?

Yes, not sure how giving the accounts and their footage more exposure to more creeps is going to help matters.

They DO fucking realise that their actions have consequences, but they dismiss all that through an overweening belief in the primacy of their own rights.

‘Male entitlement’ has become too feeble a term for the way a certain kind of man now strides around grabbing everything he covets, whether it be sexual favours, or sexual identity, or sovereign nations on another continent.

I hope one of our most reliably furious feminist voices will coin a new description of this vile iteration of maleness. (‘Toxic’ was handy, until it became a psychobabble buzzword)

Karen is a racist ageist sexist term.

People only get away with saying it because it is aimed at an ethnicity age and gender that people don’t have sympathy for. Or there is sympathy for the gender but people fail to recognise the racist aspect or the ageist aspect due to a lack of sympathy for the race or age.

Yeah. I can’t help thinking life worked better when men and woman talked, instead of hooking up with randoms on OLD. 🤷‍♀️

I think that anybody who addresses a stranger should be open to, recognise and respect a polite dismissal.....or a less polite one of course. If a woman does not want to talk to any man and therefore would not approach them, then surely that is the woman's choice and should be respected.

I meant name the person not the account.
Let their family, friends and neighbours know what creeps they have living near them.
Hopefully it’d mean the harassers end up getting harassed themselves.
Wishful thinking I suppose though.

Ah ok, yes I thought that you meant the account as well.
Yes, name the person. I'd be disgusted (to put it mildly) if my sons went around doing this.

But the Beeb are only saying (according to the poster) that they know the account ID and not the name of the person.

the social media company could be made to hand over the details, along with social media companies being forced to take down footage of other when it has been film covertly and permission not given

This stuff angers me so much and laws need to catch up its not just men its anyone pointing a camera in someones face without permission and uploading it to social media. Recording in hospitals, recording people in a mental health crisis, recording people after accidents, recording workers who work with the general public. Its so wrong

Is that possible under current law if the company is not based in the UK?

Can you explain your title OP?

I don't know, presently Gov. are looking at banning social media for under 16 year old, im not sure how well this would work and whether fines ( to the companies) for letting under 16 year olds onto social media will be worth while for revenue anyway

But this could be policed by the companies themselves much better

but look at the uproar of AI undressing woman on X

Why would the companies care if it gets them traffic?
I am not sure that any of ther people in the published cases have been under 16?
And why say what the BBC "should do" if you don't know if the Beeb have the right to do it as things stand?

indeed and the government needs to be stopping it, just as they did with revenge porn, they need to put in parameters and pretty dam quick to stop it happening and people being filmed and the content uploaded for shits and giggles and someone expensive without their consent

I think what OP is saying is that if there can be procedures put in place for under 16s accessing social media, then surely there should be procedures/laws put in place to deter people filming/harassing and uploading others to the internet without their consent?
(correct me if I'm wrong)

But you can bet he won't be shouting at other men across the street.

I'am saying that ( the government should be dealing with this promptly) but I also think the burden should be on the social media companies to be policing their own channels, not allowing people to have phone numbers read out online is basic, that. a complaint should not be ignored in the way it has been in these cases, the companies sit back and ignore the complaint as it makes them revenue

It is. Completely uncivilised and boorish behaviour which, if not curtailed by laws asap, will become the unassailable norm in terms of whose rights trump whose.

It’s already far too difficult just to go about your own little life unmolested or in any other way ‘uninvaded’. At this galloping rate we’ll all be left at the mercy of the uncontrolled and infamy-hungry bullies who think nothing of outrages even worse than that appalling young TikTok git recently, who would routinely barge into people’s houses, or violently attack people in shops, and act like he had every right to do it, and the more terrified his victim the happier he'd be.
His trust in his right to gratifying his basest urges at others’ expense resulted in great cruelty, even peril, and he was wildly fêted by his mouth-breathing peers.
He was treated with shocking leniency by courts, and this was when his activities were illegal….imagine trying to ban the likes of him when absolutely anything goes, legally.

Yes it's a truly vile, insidious term. I have doubtlessly been called a Karen and to be honest I'll wear it if it means I stand up for myself or anyone else.

Fuck anyone who uses it if they're using it to shut middle aged women of any colour down.