Men pushing in in queues and not social distancing.

[HeIenaDove]

I know in the scheme of things this is only small but its the bloody entitlement that gets to me.

When the new Coronavirus Bill came in last Thursday two men used the 2 m gap to try to push in front while i was queuing outside Tesco.

Re, social distancing , i try i really try to stay 2m from people at all times on the rare occasions but the amount of men who walk right next to me or towards me KNOWING that i will move.

This afternoon was the final straw Queuing outside Sainsburys observing the 2 m rule i had to wait until the queue moved to where the trolleys were . There was no way i could get to them BEFORE queuing and observe the 2m rule so i had to wait in the queue before i got to them. I leant across to put my pound in the slot and the FOUR men queuing behind me jumped the queue by moving along in front.

Im so fed up with the entitlement Every time its been a man EVERY TIME. Ive not seen this from women at all .

So, some men are being bastards in the current extraordinary situations, but we mustn't say so, because we're women.

Well, anyone who says that can fuck right off to the far side of fuck, and then fuck off some more.

As HelenaDove said a few posts ago:
"They were acting entitled and selfish. It wasnt insensitivity. You are minimizing."

Yes.

Pretty sure rules 12 and 17 came out of conversations I had with Bewilderness (preens). Meanwhile, Goose still doesn't understand what "class analysis" means, a bloke has shown up to tell us that he can't be bothered to read what we've said and shouldn't be expected to, and I'm genuinely confused as to why Dido would think Bewilderness's rules were meant to be a summary of her views (Dido's rather than Bewilderness's).

This thread is trippy. Needs more bread recipes.

John Prine has died.

Yep. Old bloke yesterday just stood in one of the 2 metre gaps in the line for the til. I tried to tell him twice but he 'didn't understand'. Arse

So, some men are being bastards in the current extraordinary situations,

As are some women. I had the misfortune to be working in a supermarket before I was shielded. Fuck me, the abuse that I got from customers was appalling, and the majority were women. Swearing at me for limiting the number of things they were buying, throwing items at me when I explained they couldn't buy more than they were allowed, abusive language aimed at me and other customers, so don't try and claim that it has only been men that have acted like utter arseholes in this because it hasn't. If you are going to support gross generalisations then expect to be called out.

Old bloke yesterday just stood in one of the 2 metre gaps in the line for the til. I tried to tell him twice but he 'didn't understand'. Arse

So he was old and therefore vulnerable - why didn't people let him go to the front of the queue? Certainly some arses in the queue, don't think it was the elderly man though.

Hooves, fighting for women as a class does not mean the same as agreeing with all women.

We are fighting for the rights of all women, even those who don't think their rights are under threat, even those we might find objectionable- that is the meaning of the Dworkin quote.

Fighting for women as a class also doesn't preclude us from having a duty to call out actions by other women make that damage women as a class.

Dworkin:
"Feminism is a political practice of fighting male supremacy on behalf of women as a class,
including all the women you don’t like, including all the women you don’t want to be around,
including all the women who used to be your best friends whom you don’t want anything to do with any more.
It doesn’t matter who the individual women are."

Really Bewilderness? Because that is the very opposite of the treatment that I receive on here.

Seriously Hooves, you need to read more carefully.
(Its not all about you)

Dworkin:
"Feminism is a political practice of fighting male supremacy on behalf of women as a class" (so for all women)

We are fighting for the rights of all women, even those who don't think their rights are under threat, even those we might find objectionable- that is the meaning of the Dworkin quote.

Who is "we" though? Your brand of feminism is not the only one, nor necessarily the right one. So, i, as a woman, don't have to agree with the way that you choose to represent feminism. Disagreeing with you does not make me a man, nor anti feminist.

so don't try and claim that it has only been men that have acted like utter arseholes

Who has claimed this?
Of course some women can behave in 'arsehole' ways Hooves

They each could also be vulnerable, oblivious, ill-mannered, frightened, unthinking &/or other reasons informing such unnaceptable behaviours towards people working in frontline services (which has in recent weeks due to CV 19 come to include people working in supermarkets, pharmacies etc).

Or they could be arseholes, some people are, as demonstrated repeatedly by behaviour patterns towards those they feel entitled to treat poorly.

They each could also be vulnerable, oblivious, ill-mannered, frightened, unthinking &/or other reasons informing such unnaceptable behaviours towards people working in frontline services (which has in recent weeks due to CV 19 come to include people working in supermarkets, pharmacies etc).

And equally, so could the men be who have been villified on this thread. Strange that you didn't care to defend them in this way though.

It's also strange how the op has been supported in starting a thread complaining about half a dozen men behaving poorly and yet you agree that women have been doing it too. So, what's the point in the thread? People have been behaving badly during the pandemic for a variety of reasons, is the true situation.

Who is "we" though? Your brand of feminism is not the only one, nor necessarily the right one. So, i, as a woman, don't have to agree with the way that you choose to represent feminism. Disagreeing with you does not make me a man, nor anti feminist.

When the wonderful new upsurgent (is that a word?) feminist movement in this country succeeds in securing those women's rights which have been under threat for the last few years, (and it finally looks like we will succeed, thank the Goddess) we will ask for a codicil to be added at the end of every law saying "Not Hooves though, she's not bothered.

Who is "we" though? Your brand of feminism is not the only one

Seriously Hooves it would be useful if you would read for understanding rather than skim read for point of reaction.

Bewilderness commented : "My attitude is best expressed by Dworkin
"Feminism is a political practice of fighting male supremacy on behalf of women as a class,
including all the women you don’t like, including all the women you don’t want to be around,
including all the women who used to be your best friends whom you don’t want anything to do with any more.
It doesn’t matter who the individual women are."

You misread and/or misinterpreted this.

Tinsel responded to you clearly
"Hooves, fighting for women as a class does not mean the same as agreeing with all women.

We are fighting for the rights of all women, even those who don't think their rights are under threat, even those we might find objectionable- that is the meaning of the Dworkin quote.

It should be clear who the 'we' refers to in Tinsel's post.

You see, so what you're suggesting is that your brand of feminism is what will have one the day, right?

Not the work of thousands of other women who are also fighting for the rights of women but just not in your chosen way.?

So, yes please, do make it clear that you do not speak for me.

R0wantrees

There are different forms of feminism. Most on here are radical feminists. That does not mean that radical feminism is the only form of feminism, the "correct" version nor that every feminist is a radical feminist.

So, don't use your type of feminism to fight in my name. You don't represent me.

So, don't use your type of feminism to fight in my name. You don't represent me.

So if you think most of the women here are following a Feminism that doesn't represent you or should be in your name, are you just here to disagree with them?

Strange that you didn't care to defend them in this way though.

Im not defending anyone.
I'm pointing out that whilst you seem keen to point to 'inevitable' vulnerabilities of the 'old man' described by PP as not respecting safeguards & boundaries you may not also have considered the vulnerabilities of the women you describe behaving badly.

In order to understand behaviour patterns it is neccessary first to notice, observe & discuss the possibility of patterns, including potential power dynamics.

My experience is not to have any problems since lockdown with anyone in public space (so either sex).
I'm also aware that there will be a number of factors contributing to this, including luck.

Ive worked frontline services so am very well aware of the range & drivers of challenging/difficult human behaviours. Some of which can definitely be sex-specific but not all.
I only joined the thread in the last couple of pages so there is nothing 'strange' about the focus of my response.

So, don't use your type of feminism to fight in my name. You don't represent me.

Hooves seriously.
Have a re-read, please.

Im not defending anyone.
I'm pointing out that whilst you seem keen to point to 'inevitable' vulnerabilities of the 'old man' described by PP as not respecting safeguards & boundaries you may not also have considered the vulnerabilities of the women you describe behaving badly.

Of course you are defending the women. If you are so even handed and so aware of the drivers of human behaviour as you are now claiming then you would have challenged the op immediately by writing the same excuses for that behaviour, but you didn't because she was complaining about men and so it was all good in your book.

Why didn't you point out to her that
They each could also be vulnerable, oblivious, ill-mannered, frightened, unthinking &/or other reasons informing such unnaceptable behaviours towards people working in frontline services (which has in recent weeks due to CV 19 come to include people working in supermarkets, pharmacies etc). if you are very well aware of the range & drivers of challenging/difficult human behaviours.?

Have a re-read, please.

I don't need to. I don't agree with, nor support, the branch of feminism that you advocate. So no, you don't speak for me nor fight in my name.

So, what's the point in the thread? People have been behaving badly during the pandemic for a variety of reasons, is the true situation.

I imagine the point of the thread was to explore the possibility that there might be sex-based differences to some of the behaviours which detrimentally impact women during the current crisis.

The OP had experiences to share & (I presume wished to disuss).

Given this is a unique event & pressure any/all behaviour patterns will be newly observed.

Some behaviour patterns may likely be specific/more prevelent in certain groups. Recognising behaviour patterns is useful.

Hooves if only you could use your special power of making threads all about you, to actually contribute something positive. Instead you always seem hellbent on stalking every feminist thread that dares to criticise the poor men, even those that act like entitled cocks. Well done on making another thread all about you. 👏🏼