examples of misogyny permeating our culture, demonstrated by the bloke pouring hot coffee on his head.

[UnDeuxTroisCatsSank]

I read this article about a homeless man who accepted $5 from an arrogant shit in exchange for pouring hot coffee over his head. And the arrogant shit filmed it on his phone, presumably for "fun".

The homeless man, Ronald Leggatt, explained later he was desperate for the money and so willing to take the burns from the hot coffee.

Shocking and appalling behavior from the arrogant shit.

There's a happier ending in that someone overheard the whole thing, confronted the shit and then tried to make things better for Mr. Leggatt, including paying for him to get into a shelter during Hurricane Jonas and getting him some clothes from Walmart.

But this whole sorry story got me thinking. About the parallels with prostitution. Hang on, bear with me.

I just thought that most people would be appalled by the story of Mr Leggatt and empathize with his desperation to get $5 and yet when women are desperate, penniless, just surviving in dire financial straits and ready to do something, anything even though it will cause them harm such as sell their bodies, I don't see good Samaritans rushing to buy them clothes in Walmart and checking them into hostels for the night.

I think many people feel that people working as prostitutes are (a) willing and (b) maybe even like it. Never considering what desperation can make a person do.

Mr Leggatt was desperate and acted in a way that most people would never do.
Many prostituted women are desperate and act in a way that many people would never do.

One is understood and receives empathy, the other not only accepted but vilified, judged and othered.

Just thoughts about the misogyny that permeates our culture.

(And I hope Mr Leggatt gets medical help and support, because he does sound desperate, poor bloke.)

it isn't possible to rape a prostitute, because it's "theft", rather than rape. And yes I've heard that argument many times, because people are that ignorant.

I realise that the thread has moved on, but this struck a cord with me, I was in the pub the other night and a policeman I know was making this exact argument. I thought at the time how frightening it was that our police have these opinions.

I have to say I think this story bears a pretty tenuous link to prostitution or the subjugation of women in society - it's actually a bit off putting to have every single issue 'used' as a way to talk about that.

This story is about the exploitation of a homeless person. Nothing more, nothing less.

No, it's about the mindset that allows it to happen and the culture that makes people think it's OK.

People don't think it's okay though, do they? As in the wider population. There is a link here to the follow-up story, where wider society's true reaction is apparent;

www.vosizneias.com/228217/2016/01/24/lakewood-nj-orthodox-lakewood-resident-steps-up-to-help-homeless-man-subjected-to-cruel-prank/

There were a lot of positive actions resulting from this act. In addition, the article claims that the 'arrogant shit ' has mental problems, and that this was not part of a concerted group action. I have no idea whether this is true or not.

If it is true, and the arrogant shit has mental issues, I think the OP is stretching it a little to apply it to wider societal norms. Plus, he may not be an arrogant shit at all, but rather someone let down by America's lack of mental health care.

All in all, a lot of ifs, buts and maybes.

I understand that AF but you could hijack a million and one news stories to make precisely the same point.

I am just so tired of it...microwaves are a feminist issue...duvets are a feminist issue...Syria is a feminist issue.

Whaat if this homeless geezer had been a woman? I don't think it would have made a blind bit of difference to how wrong people perceived it to be.

It's not an example of misogyny at all.

I guess it's the difference between people who view their lives through a feminist lens and those who do not.

I see it as a parallel between the utter coldness and heartless of offering someone desperate the chance to hurt themselves for money and the same mindset of men who use prostitutes. Others may not.

I don't think microwaves and duvets have any parallel with human emotions though.

*heartlessness

Yes, there's a parallel. But there is a parallel between many other situations and prostitution, I don't see it as particularly stand-out significant in that sense.

My point about household items is that just about anything can be viewed as a feminist issue, and sometimes there is more at stake than simply whether it affects women or issues to do with women.

I think what I mean is that I find it a bit insulting to the homeless guy that we're using his story as a way to explore feminism and prostitution. Like that's all that matters about it?

The thread is full of valid opinion, and interesting discourse but using this story to start it wasn't necessary, IMHO.

Why not ? Op was triggered to do so. That is her prerogative. You may not have done the same but so what.

So, it runs the risk of turning people off the whole topic.

It makes me cross. I imagine I'm not the only person, though of course I don't know that.

I am very much in favour of the equality of women, was brought up in a feminist household, and read Spare Rib when I was 12. I don't know that I'm a feminist as such, but that depends on your definition.

The more I see unrelated issues hijacked like this, the worse I think it makes us look. As though everything is solely important in its role as a feminist issue, and not in its own right.

I think that could be damaging to the cause.

But if you don't agree then I will leave you to it, because this is a hijack in itself and I don't want to interrupt the discourse too much.

I'm sorry if I've caused any offence, but I thought it a valid point.

Ah, Pip. I get it now. This is a "feminists, you are doing it all wrong" post isn't it ?

So far, so predictable. They are ten a penny on this board.

Why so touchy? All Pip seems to be saying is that the link between the homeless man and prostitution is tenuous. I thought so too, at first. But actually having re-read the OP, I've changed my mind. The common link is the desperation of the injured party. So I get where the OP is coming from. Still, the possibility that the 'arrogant shit', as she so delightfully puts it might be suffering from mental issues has been overlooked, it what might be seen as a clumsy attempt to shoehorn her feminist POV into the discussion. I don't think that was necessary.

I don't think Pip's post is a feminists, you are doing it all wrong" post.

That's a great way of shutting down discussion AF. However. It gets used a fair bit on FWR.

I can't remember how many times I've seen the protestation that there isn't a hive mind yet any perceived criticism such as Pip's gets this accusation thrown at it.

For what it's worth I think the comparison between how society in general might view the shaming of a vulnerable man for money and how society in general views prostitution was valid.

I disagree with the view that it can be assumed there will be universal disapproval of the treatment of the homeless man. I disagree also with the view that ,apart from a few radical feminists, the rest of the world is happy to tolerate prostitution.

It was demonstrated by the appalling concept of "bum fights" that there was a section of society which were fine with the shaming of vulnerable people.

It is clear there are women, many who call themselves feminists, who consider prostitution is tolerable, it just needs to be made safer (utter nonsense in my view)

what is more "shutting down (of) discussion" on the feminist chat board than saying "this is not a feminist issue" ?

if you believe that, why contribute at all ?

I don't see what is so problematic, even on a feminist board, in a poster saying she does not think a particular topic has any particularly feminist slant.

Responding to such a comment with "this is a feminists, you are doing it all wrong" post" is simply refusing to engage with her.

It is exactly the same as what you have accused Pip of doing. She's not "doing feminism" in the way you think it should be done.

Agreeing with AF

Are females not allowed to say that feminism is doing wrong now either ?

Posie So Pip is saying "feminists, you are doing it all wrong" but AF , doing exactly the same to Pip, is just expressing a valid opinion?

My objection to part of the content of the OP is exactly as I've stated. I think the remainder of the thread carries very valid discussion and I had no wish to shut it down, and I'm sorry if that was an effect of my post.

It was only the taking of a terrible event and using it to make a feminist point, that was bothering me - particularly as I don't think the link is very pertinent.

I'd be more interested in comparing the way male prostitution is seen by society, to how female prostitution, or how female homeless people are seen in comparison to male homeless people.

As I said, what if the homeless man had been a woman. Do you think society would have made less of a fuss about that? Or about the same?

I don't think the fact it was a man has a huge bearing. The fact it wasn't a prostitute, of either gender, may have had more weight.

Also I don't mind being 'predictable' if that's what it takes. I think it's really dismissive to say that. Or do you think I'm some sort of MRA?

I have a habit of agreeing with AF I find her opinions usually aligning with mine. It's a terrible habit of hers

Well she is normally right Posie so it's not a bad thing

I think the point was that it was analogous because the homeless person was paid to do something potentially harmful to himself by a man who didn't give a shit about him, Pip. But yes, I kind of see what you're saying.

Somewhere between you and AF maybe?

I agree that the discussion has been really interesting on the whole.

Pipi, I don't think OP meant to minimise the homeless person's suffering by drawing the analogy .

Perhaps because the harm done to him was more acute and directly due to one richer person, vs the harm done to prostitutes over a period of time, it's easier to quantify.

I'm not sure that a focus on male vs female prostitutes draws much of an analogy as I think society in general minimises the harm done to sex workers by their method of earning a living (and that includes lap dancers, porn actors, web cam workers etc).

No I'm certain there was no intent to minimise. And I can see the analogy, but I think it's a bit weak.

I just don't understand how it links directly to misogyny - there are male prostitutes too, so it's not like men (homeless) get sympathy, and women (prostitutes) don't. You can't really extrapolate that from the story.