Fucking idiots

[LadyOfTheManor]

I am extremely pissed off by the attitudes on this thread;

Here

Some women need a good clout around the head.

xposts mine was in response to Line

It's clear that you won't accept the remotest possibility that anything could be true that you don't say so yourself. It's almost ironic that you're willing to stick so steadfastly to something, so rigidly refuse to discuss other possibilities, so vitriolic in your language but you throw accusations elsewhere.

Please try and understand what I'm saying. I've seen you take offence because people say 'oh feminists are all the same, you wouldn't dare say it about x race or y religion' but you do the same to other groups. Such as the police. Not even the police. An officer. A woman talking about her husband or son.

You refuse to accept what other people tell you as it could be biased. So by the very same token, you who wasn't there when the officer stopped his bike and spoke those words, absolutely have no footing with which to discuss it. Except you do because you have your opinion. And to start from the pov that somebody is lying and to be so dismissive and rude of anything outside your own beliefs just does you no good at all.

The tone was enough for the OP to have begun the thread about it. Obviously I won't listen to people who aren't police officers when trying to tell me about how the police do their work.

Think what you like :) I'm all up for freedom of thought.

Fair enough Sardine. Maybe they were patronising. Maybe the op misread it as she was already annoyed by them stopping. THAT IS MY POINT. We don't know. And therefore we can't say it was because she was a woman, we can't say it had anything to do with the officer's attitude towards rape. Nothing. We can say nothing definitively. And if you say you take the word of the op, then that's absolutely fine. But I'm not allowed to take the word of anybody who says 'oh the police said that to me/my ds/my dh' or 'my dh a copper says that to everybody regardless of gender'.

It just seems so ridiculous that it HAS to be one thing. It could be one thing, it could be another, nobody was hurt, they didn't say anything obviously offensive. Why the need to call people fucking idiots? Why the vitriol towards the police because of this one event. Take history and institutionalised racism and have a discussion. Fine. I'll join you. But say this officer, this man who cannot defend himself had certain motives and you are chasing a ridiculous argument.

You just don't seem to be able to acknowledge the remotest possibility that anything could have any explanation or subtlety to it that you didn't decide was fact.

I find that strange. To be so rigid. But you have your freedom to do whatever you choose. Be that ignoring anybody else's valid comments or calling people vile names.

Thank you for acknowledging that fact.

That you have the right to think and say what you like? Never denied it.

Agree with all your posts Line.

Why the need to be so rigid LOTM? Why so hostile and why the language?

Is all of that post to me Line or just some of it? I haven't said a lot of the things you mention and assume that much of it is aimed at LOTM?

LOTM I read your posts with less and less ire and more and more amusement. You cannot of course help not being terribly bright: I daresay that is 70% nature doing its work, and 30% the failings of the education system. You might however try not to be so punishingly ignorant and so hilariously crass. Still: you have least saved most of us the continued effort of endeavouring to engage with you - with every finger put to the keyboard you destroy your arguments before they are made.

Indeed I'm rather moved to wonder if Chris Morris of Brass Eye fame hasn't invented you as a sort of modern cautionary tale.

Oh no Sardine, my point to you was that yes, I freely admit that it could be exactly as the op perceived it and had it been a discussion solely about that, I'd agree that we'd never know but she was there and probably knows best but no harm done.

The rest of it was directed at the way the discussion's gone in general and an explanation as to why I've so doggedly pursued a largely futile case. Because I genuinely don't think all of the added angles are justified. And the name calling and hostility has just been a bit, well distasteful I think.

Magicjamas - nice to see you in this section.

I remember we exchanged posts on another similar thread.

Not sure if you saw my post on the other thread about why I thought the OP was not being unreasonable?

Anyway I wanted to address your comment "this is one area I really struggle with, as it seems to remove any level of personal responsibility at all as long as you are female".

I struggle with it a bit too, even though I deem the "be careful" comment to be sexist (in this context).

I think that all responsible parents teach DC about road safety/"street" safety/personal safety/alcohol safety/safe sex/self defence etc.

However, I don't want "be careful" messages to lead to women feeling that they have "put themselves in danger". The less women walking around etc the less safe the street are and the more likely that society blames a victim.

It's just that I can't accept that it is "wrong" for women to walk around on their own after dark. It's just so limiting . I think it is so ingrained for many women that it becomes normal.

eg When I left university and lived in London on my own, my Mum had me really really wound up about me being safe getting home. I used to have a rape alarm in my pocket, keys ready and very very alert as I went down the side street to my flat.

The myth of a stranger attack being my most likely risk (which my Mum lived in fear of for me) was strongly ingrained in me. It is only recently that I realise that my Mum would have been very pleased if "nice young gentlemen" from work were escorting me home - now of course my risk of rape would have been much higher from one of these collegues.

Sorry bit rambly - anyone care to elaborate re personal resonsibility/safety v the fact that men can stop them selves from attacking/raping?

How does theory translate into practice for you?

Recently I was at a function (without DH) and my ex-boss started walking me back to my car and I didn't even realise it. We were walking along and I said "oh you're in this car park are you?" and he said "no I am walking you back!". I wasn't offended at all! I see this as different to 2 policemen on bikes cycling past saying "be careful". When he walked off though I thought to my self he is probably at risk of being mugged now as a lone bloke!

Also re "if the "non consenting" (by reason of incapacity) girl could be equally culpable of assault, if she performed various acts on a boy, who was also, by reason of incapacity, incapable of giving consent." - you said that no one ever answered you re that Q.

Yes women can be charged and convicted of sexually assaulting men. However as rape and sexual assault is overwhelmingly men doing it to women it is seen as a "gendered crime", that is not to minimise women on men attacks but to recognise that gender has some bearing on it and deserves focus and eg cultural shifts/public education etc. Hence, for example the Home Office's Call to end violence against women and girls: action plan.

I struggle with it too Forkful. I was brought up with my dad saying 'don't go out dressed in that short skirt you might get attacked!' and we had many rows over the fact that I felt I should be able to wear whatever I wanted/go whereever I wanted and that men should be able to control themselves.

And I still believe that now. But as a mother to 2 dds will I want them walking on their own at night? No. If they were attacked would it be their fault? No, of course not. But would they care whose fault it was? Wouldn't they just want to not have been attacked? Therefore I'd rather they didn't walk around at night on their own. (I take your point though about non stranger crime being much more likely).

I have followed this thread with an open mouth. I have never posted in this topic before because the long words and clever people (like you LOTM) scare me.

But I wonder who you would be calling for if you were mugged or raped on a dark night. Hopefully these racist misogynists will come to your aid.

Hang on, where has LOTM's last gem gone?

Ah, is on previous page.

Please ignore comment above.

I would call the police. If I was mugged. Isn't that OK?

If I were raped then it would depend on the circumstances whether I would call them or not. And actually, that's not OK.

I am finding that thread increasingly irriitating too. Reducing the whole principle to 'oh yes let's pillory police officers for being nice' as if that was the point! Ho ho ho aren't we all sensible and aren't all those silly feminist being daft....

It isn't the same as someone saying 'take care' when they say goodbye as some seemed to suggest. It has more purpose and intent than that.

How the fuck was the OP supposed to 'be careful' as she was already in that place, in those circs and at that time. What could she do to be more careful? Suddenly become a martial arts expert? Become invisible?

And when it comes down to it why shouldn't she be able to walk home at 11pm with her shopping?

Saying 'be careful' is 1. totally pointless and 2. telling her that if anything happens it will be her fault.

I know this thread has died out a bit, and no-ones reading, but I wanted to just discuss the comments by BlooferLady and ShowofHands that, basically, if their policemen husbands had said something similar to what ws said to the OP (on the other thread..), it couldn't be sexist.

I'm straight and married. I do not think my husband is a misogynist. I don't even think he's particularly sexist. But he obviously benefits from unearned privilege, which women don't have in this society. Do I think he could say and believe things that are motivated by (to be generous) 'benevolent sexism'? Of course I do!

And to make it even clearer, if a woman said that a member of the group to which my husband belongs (i.e. not even my flaming husband!) said something which she found sexist, would I dismiss it and say 'no! that comment could not possibly be rooted in sexist ideas'. No I wouldn't.

You might say its impossible not to respond personally. But if you believe we live in a sexist society (if you don't then fair enough...), you can surely admit the possibility that your husband might say or do something sexist, however well-meaning, or unsconscious, or whatever. All the things we now see as outrageously sexist, once appeared to be well-intentioned, even to their victims.

I think that's true charitygirl.

When I was young I wandered all around london at all times of teh day and night, often by myself, got the occasional unlicenced cab, night buses, was often not very sober etc etc

Everything was fine. And I'm not going to add "I was lucky" because although things do happen to people, being attacked when you're going around by yourself at night is relatively unusual.

The things that have happened to me, have all happened in situations which were "safe".

So that's that bit.

When I met DH, he expressed extreme concern that I ever went around by myself at night. He talked about cabs, and coming to meet me from teh tube station to walk me home, and how in his family, that's what they did for his sister. One of the men would turn out at 1 am or whenever to go and meet his sister, maybe give her a lift home. To my mind that was simply

Anyway. The only thing that his caution achieved was to make me feel more nervous about going around at night. ie it achieved nothing except to make me feel vulnerable. Making women feel vulnerable is not a result.

Bottom line is that everyone, men women children the elderly etc should be aware of basic safety precautions and to follow their instincts. Risk assessments should be based on stats not on fear. And (for the women on these boards) I just realised - this only gets worse. Many many older women (thinking my mums age) would not go out after dark. This effect doesn't seem to happen to men so much. Then of course they find themselves living alone and that's a vast amount of freedom gone. And the risks aren't that high.

The streets shouldn't be reserved for the people who feel the most confident. It is a shame that they are.

Sardine I was attacked on a dark empty street by three strangers when I was 19 yo after working a late shift (after midnight). And again, several months later, by one guy, empty street and dark. Returning as one does from a late shift at work. I was attacked because I was a woman (I do not want to explain the details). Both crimes went unreported because in one case I successfully fought the bastard and did not feel the need to subject myself to any more stress. In both cases I was terrified that my poor mum will be devastated, so in a way I was protecting her from the trauma. I was 19 a little naive about how I travel in my day-to-day.

I think in your feminist agenda you are spectacularly missing the point. If my parents or the school or the media, gave a stronger message of personal safety (no walking about with ipods in your ears, keep personal alarm handy, choose the route wisely) I may have been better prepared for the situation that is nobodies fault (not police and not mine).

As for gender issue, sorry, I am sure men have their fair share of unpleasant encounters, but it is not the same as what women can be subjected to because they are the weaker (in the purest meaning of this word) sex.

I never ever told my stepdaughters NOT to go somewhere, but I do go on about being careful, listening to the surroundings and choosing the routes to travel to/from their destination.

Bemybebe sorry for your experience, I will agree that it is simply smart to tell people not to walk around with headphones on, and to take areas which are exposed as much as possible. Whilst simply being aware will not always prevent yourself from being attacked it is much better to be safe than sorry.

I do however disagree with you regarding attacks on men, simply being stronger (in general) actually means that attackers will be more violent towards their victims which would explain why the majority of hospitalised or murder victims are male so if you have stepsons I would give them the same advice as your stepdaughters.

bemybebe I am sorry for what happened to you.

I don't understand that "feminist agenda" point though. My advice was "Bottom line is that everyone, men women children the elderly etc should be aware of basic safety precautions and to follow their instincts. Risk assessments should be based on stats not on fear. " What on earth is wrong with that?

I think that it is shit for anyone to be attacked on the street. For women though (don't know the stats for men) and I'm sure for children, the biggest risk lies with people that they know, not strangers.

I refuse to capitulate personally to exhortions to follow a random list of safety precautions which are supposed to "keep me safe" - when in fact they are unlikely to reduce my risk of attack - and will seriously curtail my freedom. Well not these days, I don't get out much but that was how I felt when I was younger. Other people can do what they like. I am not going to cower inside, dependent on others to transport me around, I am a grown independent woman, and I'm not having it. It's as simple as that really.