Some men really hate women being single don't they?

[solidgoldbrass]

inspired by a couple of other threads including the separatism one. Have you ever noticed that if a man you don't like or know or fancy is trying to persuade you to date him or spend time with him or even just talk to him, the only really effective way to make him fuck off is to tell him that you are another man's property. Just saying No, leave me alone, no thanks, actually I am having a conversation with my female friend and am not interested in talking to you, never seems to work until you throw in My Boyfriend or My Husband.

HDS - I've only posted on 3 feminist threads in the last month ( this being one of them )- one was about sexist lyrics in music, which I agreed with, and the other one was about a lesbian who was anti-feminist, I posted that women should be free to define themselves in anyway they like. All in all it's been about -12 posts in 30 days - I'm not sure that constitutes me having an 'agenda' - but clearly it does.

For some of them it's not even that they believe what they're arguing. They just have pretty empty lives getting a reaction online is their form of human contact.

I wasn't asking about your "agenda" filthy, I was asking why you felt it necessary to dismiss people's experiences and feelings on this thread? It is interesting that you associate that question with me thinking you have an agenda though.

ELNP - I think kudos is due to those who can ignore it . Anyway I will be ignoring it for a bit as I have work to do and eating to do! Far more important!

Trolling is tedious, wherever it happens. However, some very interesting ideas, insights and experiences have come out on this thread, in part do to different people engaging with folks who let's face it, haven't the slightest intention of even trying to understand perspectives they adamantly despise.

And, it's important to remember there are always lots more people who lurk than contribute to discussions like this. Some of the things that have been said will have meaning for them, may have given them more courage to deal with those men who believe they are entitled to a woman's time and attention, regardless of what she wants or feels. There are probably blokes who clicked the link for the Schrödinger's Rapist blog and thought about stuff they hadn't thought about before. So hey, frustrating as it is, it's not always a complete waste of time conversing with trolls.

Has anyone thought how interesting it is that we're talking about the intrusiveness of those men who won't take no for an answer, who misrepresent what you've said or flat out refuse to listen to what you say, who get nasty and personal when you refuse to agree with what they say, what they want . . . . . . . and the contributions of certain persons here? Hoo Hoo! :o

krikri I have to say, this thread is absolute proof that some people are so arrogant that they think they know better than someone else what that person is thinking.

So, bets on whether anyone will answer my very simple multiple choice question?

Yup Krikri

Just had an experience that put me in mind of this thread. Cycling across town, I managed to get in a tangle and my wrap-dress flew open exposing me to the world! Cue overly-theatrical shriek from me and a frantic wobble as I tried to slow down, turn a corner and cover myself all at the same time. A load of guys having lunch in their van all waved their hands at me making uber-theatrical 'ooooooooooooop!' noises at me. They were all laughing and smiling, it was all done in jest, and I laughed back, rolled my eyes at myself and cycled on.

Lessons learned: never cycle in a wrap dress and actually, it's very very easy to tell when unsolicited comments are friendly and harmless (type A). The guys in the van were type A.

However, had they roared something along the lines of 'show us your clunge' (something I have had while cycling: I blame The Inbetweeners ) then that would have been a type B comment. However, they (and some of the posters on this thread) would have claimed that 'show us your clunge' was type A, and thus my 'get to fuck, you bunch of wankers' would therefore be a 'humourless' over-reaction.

Of course, (as the Shrodinger's Rapist blog says so eloquently) it is up to the woman to determine what is type A and what is type B. For me, a loud 'whooooop!' is type A; for another woman, it might be a serious trigger.

swallowedafly Why have you reported some of the posters here? All they've done is disagree with you, for goodness sake, have they been abusive? Called you, or anybody, else names? Threatened you? Don't think so. All they've done is offered an alternative opinion, yet you've reported them for not agreeing with you? WTF?! .

This only reinforces my belief that some people are just not able to entertain others views. I don't blame you for disagreeing with anyone else, that is your right, but reporting them?

As for the rapist thing, god this is so tedious, I think rapists like to keep a low profile and not draw attention to themselves for fear of being caught; some of the most abusive men I know are the quiet types. The sort other women see as gentlemanly and charming.
The sort that do not approach women to chat them up.

wamster Could you answer one little question for us, you only need to write one letter, so it's not too much hassle.

If you asked someone out or asked someone to sleep with you, and they said no, would you;

a) accept their answer as "no"
b) assume they actually meant "yes"
c) keep asking them, over and over
d) follow them around when they tried to walk away

Great entertainment on this thread. Wamster posited an apparently imaginary scenario and then proceeded to take issue with everyone's reactions to it - before anyone had commented at all, let alone in the way he/she expected. Some people could start an argument in an empty room, as the saying goes.

A thing that occurred to me, though probably slightly beside the point, as the OP didn't mention nightclubs and the inference that getting laid is the only reason for visiting a nightclub is... unrealistic. However, if one accepts, just for argument's sake, that we were talking about nightclubs, and that you had gone there to pull, that still doesn't mean that by virtue of being in the place at all you are obliged to accept any offers made to you. Thus if the first bloke who approaches you is not your type (not to put it any stronger), you are surely within your rights to say no, I may be on the pull but I sure ain't pulling that. Obviously, being a decently brought up person, you don't put it quite so harshly. Only he seems to be under the impression that you are obliged to accept etc, and therefore doesn't take a polite brush-off. So you try a firmer answer, then a rude one, and finally "my boyfriend is joining me here as soon as his karate club finishes". That one usually works - which was the OP's original point. It works because there's a man in the story.

But I suppose it's fine because you have nothing better to do with your time than sit there waiting to be approached by various men all night. That's what you're in a nightclub for, right? What do you mean, you were in a coffee shop? Talking to friends? Oh come on, now you're moving the goalposts.

annie Spot on

I've been sitting here reading this thread mentally shouting 'Derail!' to myself like DS with his train set. it is a common and wearying experience on the Feminism boards that discussions get dragged onto snarky, unproductive ground. No names, no pack drill. Anyway, I'm still here, so I'll ask this:

As for the rapist thing, god this is so tedious, I think rapists like to keep a low profile and not draw attention to themselves for fear of being caught; some of the most abusive men I know are the quiet types. The sort other women see as gentlemanly and charming.
The sort that do not approach women to chat them up.

What I don't quite grasp, Wamster, is how come your extrapolations from your experience are completely valid, but any reference to personal experience from other posters on this thread tends to be met by a dismissive reaction from you?

Oh well, I can answer that one, Eldritch. It's because Wamster is right so everyone who doesn't agree is clearly wrong.

Next!

Because I find their logic twisted: they assume that the bloke goes away because another man is on the scene and because they believe that the bloke owns the woman, an alternative explanation is that they are trying their hardest to pull (and, so what, this is what people do) and on being told that the woman has a boyfriend, they withdraw because they realise that they are going to get nowhere because the woman has chosen another male already.
May not be about ownership and thinking that women are property of men, but a simple case of 'She has selected another man'.
If a man I like and hope to attract tells me he has a girlfriend, I don't think that that girlfirend owns him, I think 'he has already picked another woman' .

"they withdraw because they realise that they are going to get nowhere because the woman has chosen another male already. "

But why isn't "no " a big enough hint that they wont get anywhere?

But Wamster, some would say the two explanations in your post are not opposites, but simply two ways of saying THE SAME THING.

I don't see persistence myself as a crime. A few years ago, a bloke used to ask me out, he did so over and over again, I didn't go out with him in the end, but I was alone with him once: did he try to molest me or assault me or call me names? No he did not. He was arrogant, I admit, saying things like 'I don't get why you don't what to go out with me' (er, because you are arrogant) Just because a man is persistent in talking and asking a woman out does not mean to say that he is going to turn into an abuser.

In the end, it is what people do not what they say.

wamster Just for a moment could you try reading what people actually write?

No one, except you, has talked about crime.

Again I ask, if you asked someone out, and they said no, how would you respond?

Actually, Wamster, harassment is a crime as well as a civil wrong. Persistent conduct, even over one evening, is capable of constituting a course of conduct under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The persistence you describe in your post is perfectly capable of leading to conviction, whether or not you believe it should.