Random men speaking to you

[enimmead]

I'm sure men don't randomly speak to other men in the street. Strangers. So why the hell do they feel they have to speak to random women. I don't think it's got anything to do with chatting up.

Yesterday, I saw a 20 something bloke with his mates slip in front of me on the ice. As I got out, he said "Hi love, did you see that!!!" I'm could be his mum bit older than him. Why speak to me? I just smiled but I bet he wouldn't' have said anything if I'd been male.

Just walking down the street, other side of the road bloke smiles and says "Hi love". No idea who he was.

Do blokes do this to other random blokes?

On threads like this I feel weirdly compelled to keep repeating that I am white, female, well educated and am a talker-to-strangers. But I have no difficulty understanding the feminist problem of inappropriate contact.

Your posts above are interesting, FG2 and NCG. You touch on the issue of intersectionality. I tend to leave this alone, while recognising its importance - trying to evaluate relative disadvantage is a whole profession! "Female" is my only major disadvantage, so I only feel qualified to note that women get a worse deal in any described sector. I'm now just beginning to suffer "elderly" and "disabled", which is as frightening as it is interesting!

I'm in favour of positive discrimination. The reason I'm so sure about this is that I've lived through half a century of changing colour and gender prejudice. I'm glad that anti-discrimination laws help to remove barriers but there is insufficient 'leading from the top'. It's kind of natural for people to appoint people like themselves to trusted positions. Here are some pictures:
Apple board of directors
Microsoft board of directors
Billionaire CEOs
World's Most Powerful people (At least a black man & a white woman top this one ...)

So ... Back on topic, I agree that Enim's OP might be a less than obvious example of annoyingly sexist interruption but certainly recognise the phenomenon. Dismissing ill-tempered space invaders as angry little men can feel satisfying, Larry, but we're talking about a very large sector of society. I will tell people to go away - with increasing assertiveness / decreasing 'politeness' - and men will get angry. Often. It's not a rare event.

If I said "Cold, isn't it?" to some passing bloke with a kid, and he ignored me or grunted or said go away, I would obviously respect his wish not to engage. The world's full of men who do not afford this respect to women. Absolutely full of them! And it is wearing.

Have you seen this? "Another post about rape" It's worth a read. Her main point:
"If we teach women that there are only certain ways they may acceptably behave, we should not be surprised when they behave in those ways. And we should not be surprised when they behave these ways during attempted or completed rapes."

FG2, we can't say "some" men or "most" men or "43%" of men every time. On this board, it's convenient to assume the word refers to the majority of men - the body of citizens which is male. It sometimes becomes necessary to note that "some" (etc) men don't fit the generalisation.

Of course there are feminist men and feminism-supporting men. There are a hell of a lot of un-feminist and anti-feminist women, too. For this reason, I prefer to use the term patriarchy. But there's always someone who'll come along and reduce that to "men", thus re-starting the same complaint.

garlic,re your example of saying "Cold, isnt it" to some passing bloke with a kid.
He then ignores you etc.

But you have already said it.
And yes, you may think twice about saying it again, if you see the same bloke again.
But he may be in a different mood the next time. But I agree, if you have done it say twice to the same bloke, and met with the same response twice, you may not do it again.

But, would you expect him to think bad of you in the first instance.
In fact, are you saying you shouldnt do it at all, to anyone, ever again?

They are being nice, but being nice is a way of getting through your defences and even if they are a nice guy, they are still male and have the potential to rape, so its reasonable to consider that these friendly advances are, psychologically speaking, the early 'tests' made to see if you are confident, or freaked out and subservient.

I think its best just to say 'good morning' or smile and be polite, or perhaps laugh a little to show that you are comfortable and not in a fear state ready to be assaulted.

I think differently to you Heroine.
Where I live, I dont know of anyone who has been raped.
In fact, I do not know anyone personally who has been raped.
Thinking about it, a parent with a young person probably a little younger than my children, did tell me a couple of years ago, that she thought her daughter may have been raped, when her daughter was very drunk. But the daughter isnt sure, so the mum isnt sure.
That is the only one I personally know about.
So I have a problem with seeing all guys as potential rapists.

Sorry.. i was being sarcastic - In reality I am astonished at the 'lets explain my social phobia as being a problem with men and their sinister objectives' relentless negative interpretations placed on simple human interactions by the kind of feminist I hate - the man-hating, fake intellectualisting of negative emotions into man-blaming.

What all the posters seem to be experiencing here is less about male domination and aggressive exploitation of privilege and more about personal paranoia over-intellectualised to 'mean' something that in reality is nothing more than what it is, someone had someone in their eyeline, felt jolly and interacted. You do realise that in the world England is laughable for its abject fear and anxiety caused by a simple nod in the street by someone you haven't actually interacted with yet.

Its utterly ridiculous that socially paralysed women are leaching their own paranoia into a debate in order to extend it into 'everything men do and everything men think' its ridiculous.

I have seen many men say 'oops mate' or 'bloody hell its wet' or 'heavy door that' etc etc. I am sure that all the people these comments were made to didn't go home and agonise about the amount of gay men who came on to them that day and do they ooze gay slagness just by being on the street.

Honestly if people like the OP are leading the debate on social interactions, then no wonder we are turning into drones who go to supermarkets and shop with 300 people we don't even make eye contact with. Welcome to a paranoid dystopia of the fearful shaking woman nervous of social interaction - was this the objective of feminism you intended?

No, amillion, I must have explained myself poorly.

I was replying to Larry's post where he said How would you feel if you said "nice day" to a decent looking chap with a toddler (for instance) and he replied "Sorry, but...." as you replied to a man?

I would take him at his word and leave him alone.
But the world is full of men who do not respect a woman's right to be unfriendly.

And the reason I keep repeating that I'm a talker-to-strangers is that I'm never saying you shouldn't talk to strangers

If you respect other people's rights, there's no reason to be disheartened by a 50% knock-back rate (my average, at a guess.)

But an awful lot of men do not respect a woman's right not to engage with them.

Thinking about it, I can conjure up a male-to-male example. It happens in pubs. Some geezer, T (for twerp), says something a bit crap to D (for decent). Maybe he suggests D wouldn't mind giving that a go, meaning the barmaid. D ignores him. Twerp goes "I'm talking to you!"
"Yes, I didn't like the way you spoke about the barmaid," says D.
"Why, what's wrong with you?" goes T, and rants.
Or it could be about a football team, or The Coloureds, or whatever. Basically, Bloke T has zero tolerance for being disagreed with.

It happens to all of us at times. What most men don't realise is the tedious frequency with which it happens to women, and how threatening it can be.

A few years ago I had to be rescued by a bunch of nearby Ds in a bar, because the T who'd been talking to my friends had ignored all their increasingly strong hints to bugger off. I told him it had been nice to meet him and that, but we'd like him to go away now. He lost it.

Before I wade out to the shops, I'll post this link again:
www.everydaysexism.com/

I'm now just beginning to suffer "elderly" and "disabled", which is as frightening as it is interesting!

I'm also now a old bat and it is interesting to see the change that age makes, both in male advances and female responses (am generalising wildly so forgive that please).

When I was young there was all the crap that goes with it - am thinking of building site remarks, obvious chat up that doesn't stop when you politely make it clear that you are not in the market or even when you firmly make it clear - classic male entitlement responses e.g. "stuck up cow" etc. and much worse. I never found it difficult to differentiate between those sort of men (aka wankers), and the making of friendly conversation in queues, at bus stops etc., which I was always happy to indulge in: it passes the time and a laugh and smile can help make a stranger's day if they are feeling down or lonely.

The benefits of being a crone is that you generally lose the male entitlement crap and it is a huge relief and about the only plus I can think of to getting older. That, and you care less about these sorts of things - and if you do care you have no hesitation in saying you are brassed off about it.

Mind you as a youngster I would always challenge building site crap, walking towards the men who did it and giving them a very succinct piece of my mind. It was amazing how they backed off and the 'leader' then became the butt of the other men's derision, which was deeply satisfying. I strongly believe women should stand up to men like these and challenge them (which is NOT absolving men of the need to stop being arseholes BTW).

But, in general a friendly hi, good morning, nice day, how are you love? type conversation does, I find oil the wheels of society, and even if one is not feeling terribly sociable it can help lift your - and their - mood whether it is men or women.

YYYYY, grimble!

Heroine

Thank you for your last post. It has brought some balance, if not to this discussion, to my own mind

Garlic

Thanks again for your input, it's much appreciated. I find it interesting that you agree with positive discrimination. Whilst I see what you're saying about the people at the top, feel that it does not address equality. Thus by promoting favour to one sex, it detracts from another. I thought this would go against feminism as it stands for the advocacy of women?s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes. I'm not criticising your opinion but just find it interesting.

Regarding the use of the term 'some' I understand what you're saying but think it's lazy. It's the difference between writing:

"why do men...." and "why do some men....."

Call me pedantic but it makes the difference between sounding like misandrists and a balanced human beings. As an outsider it gives the impression that 'some' feminists on here have no interest in striving for balance but just hate men full stop.

But anyway, from my very brief spell on here I have come to the realisation that women have clearly been on the receiving end of a lot of unwanted and obtrusive attention. I understand this and sympathise. However, irrespective of frequency, how does one know whether a person is genuinely engaging in an innocent exchange or exercising their supposed privilege?

I grant that any human exchange is an imposition in that it is done to elicit a response. However, the crux is in the intrinsic nature of the exchange. But how does one really know?

I guess some are obvious but I would tend to agree with Heroine in that a large proportion are utterly meaningless, innocent exchanges.

Thanks for the link too. I'm glad that sexism works both ways and it is evident on this board too. I realise it seems one sided (towards women) but us men often take the 'men are hopeless at x,y,z' on the chin. It's like when my wife goes away with her friends for a long weekend and her mates say, "how are you going to cope on your own? you'll starve". It goes over my head given I spent many years looking after myself perfectly well but we are supposed to be hopless creatures lol.

True enough but I think you'll find the vast majority of feminists abhor "men are useless lol" type comments. We're acutely aware of gender stereotypes!

I don't seem to be at all successful in making my point about the sheer, everyday normality of men's boundary-crashing behaviours to women. I won't be painted as some sort of antisocial twat who can't tell the difference between an ordinary, friendly approach and an insult. Neither will I devote even more hours to my attempts at explanation. Sometimes you just can't get people to see/hear what they don't want to.

There are plenty of threads on Mumsnet dealing with what feminism's about, and I am really happy to join in. I always think of the nine readers to every poster, some of whom might welcome a bit of a "Feminism 101" discussion. On this thread, for the moment, I think I've tried hard enough. I've also covered why I'm not specifying which proportion of men I'm referring to each time I use the collective noun. I have total confidence that everybody here understands that.
By 'everybody' I mean "the majority of readers whom I anticipate being interested in this thread"

larrygrylls
How would you feel if you said "nice day" to a decent looking chap with a toddler (for instance) and he replied "Sorry, but...." as you replied to a man?

I'd think "Oh well". And leave him alone. (By the by, why do you say "decent-looking"? I think you're giving yourself away a bit there).

But I wouldn't respond to an innocuous "nice day" by saying "Sorry, but I'm not in the mood for a conversation. The conversations I'm replying to go on rather like this:

Random bloke: Nice day isn't it?

Me: Yep.

RB: I said nice day isn't it?

Me: silence:

RB (moving closer, threatening body language): I'm trying to talk to you! What's wrong with you? I just came and said "Nice day isn't it?"

Me: Sorry, but I'm not in the mood for a conversation.

RB: What's fucking wrong with you? You moody cow! I was just trying to be FUCKING FRIENDLY! (stomps off swearing)

Referring to, not replying to.

The problem is though Garlicbaubles that this thread covers a whole load of interactions, from a man just smiling at a woman to wolf whistling and worse. Any man reading this thread would struggle to see where a line is being crossed. Every woman is different and as we can see here what some women see as everyday interaction some see as men being needy or exercising some sort of male privilege.
Another problem is that some women actually like male attention. Women's attitudes are just as varied as men's. I've heard women say that "I like a man who will flirt with me". These are married women who have no intention of being unfaithful but just like the attention. I couldn't flirt with a stranger to save my life so I am never going to upset any women who don't like this attention.

Garlicb - I don't seem to be at all successful in making my point about the sheer, everyday normality of men's boundary-crashing behaviours to women.

I don't think that anyone here would deny that some people can be crass and unthoughtful towards others, and we all know what arses some men can be towards women. I would say, in my limited experience, that if a bloke is an arse towards women, he will be an arse to other men to, though not necessarily the same way.

I think many of us are struggling though with the OP's example. It becomes difficult to see what to do about your own behaviour when you can't see what exactly somebody did wrong in a particular case. The guy slipping over is a million miles away from some of the other extreme examples subsequently posted. So, we all know Enimead was upset - but we can't work out why, or what we could do in his shoes other than just not talk to her at all. And we don't know how to extrapolate this to any future situation we might find ourselves in.

"Hi love" oooh, the sheer effrontery of it. How very dare he??

I get random pensioners - men and women.

Weird.
I try not to make eye contact and scuttle off ASAP.

I had better clarify that I know outright sexist behaviour is crossing a line. I'm referring to milder social interaction that some in this thread see as offensive.

*But an awful lot of men do not respect a woman's right not to engage with them.

It happens to all of us at times. What most men don't realise is the tedious frequency with which it happens to women, and how threatening it can be.*

This.

Stubborn,

He persisted when you clearly indicated that you were not interested. That is plain rude and unpleasant. The conversation that you mention in this post is completely different from: "nice day", "sorry, but I am not in the mood for conversation". And invading personal space is also intimidatory.

"Decent looking" as in one who looks like a decent kind of friendly chap, not physically good looking.

Garlic,

I think using "men" or "the patriarchy" to signify some men is a bit disingenuous. It is a bit like a man beginning a sentence "women" and following up with some sexist generalisations and then, when challenged, claiming he did not mean all women, just a significant minority. It really is not hard to add "some", "most" or "a few" depending on what you are trying to say. It completely changes the tone of a post and makes it far less accusatory to a general audience including men.

First off, I haven't RTT, just the first and last pages.

But... seriously, what's wrong with people chatting to other people? I say hello/morning/afternoon whatever, to many people, most of whom I don't know. Random men and women pass greetings to me. What's wrong with that . I may be missing something here, or perhaps I'm too vacuous to "get it". (wonders back to Chat and AIBU)

Oh, and what Inde says ^^

The one thing that you can't get across is the whole context, tone, mannerisms - you only get what was said.

I've said enough on this thread and tried to explain how I felt.

No, I know it's annoying when people don't read the thread, but the reality is that I just don't have time to read 18 pages. I suppose the question is whether you think that should preclude people from contributing or not.