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 .

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.

Hooves I haven't said I agreed or advocated for any type of feminism nor have I expressed a wish or am likely to ever claim to speak for or fight in your name.

If you read what was actually written you wouldn't be trying to start a boxing match with shadows. You've said you don't want to read to understand so prehaps you just want to box/fight/disrupt?

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

Recognising behaviour patterns is useful.
Understanding behaviour patterns is important.

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.

No you're wrong on all points here Hooves
Maybe projection?

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.

By citing the behaviour of two groups of men, totalling six individuals, you think that will enable you to explore sex based patterns of behaviour?

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

Really? So, a few examples of anecdotal behaviour enables anyone to recognise behaviour patterns does it?

Utter codswallop. None of you wanted a discussion further than "men are shit". You didn't want a discussion about new patterns of behaviour exhibited during this unprecedented time. You wanted a liturgy of man bashing anecdotes.

If you want a discussion about newly observed behaviour let's discuss panic buying, hoarding, abuse of frontline staff and key workers because I guarantee you that was fairly evenly split. In fact, in my experience it was more women than men doing it but I'm unbiased enough to recognise that there are more women than men present during the hours that I work.

If you want a discussion about newly observed behaviour let's discuss panic buying, hoarding, abuse of frontline staff and key workers

Why not start a thread then? You could apply your own feminist analysis to it. It might be interesting.

It's also strange how the op has been supported

That's what you can't ever get over, isn't it? The fact that women who have had bad experiences with men and who'd like to talk about that are supported here.

Shame that's never going to change, then.

I would be happy to contribute to a thread started by Hooves. It'd be interesting.

Hooves I didnt start the thread.

Interesting to consider how any discussions which contribute to the identification of significant patterns of behaviour may have started though.

If you want a discussion about newly observed behaviour let's discuss panic buying, hoarding, abuse of frontline staff and key workers

It would be a useful & important discussion.
Some behaviours will be newly recognised in particular situations but well understood & familar to frontline workers elsewhere.

I would be interested to read such a thread & may feel I have something to contribute.

Why not start a thread then? You could apply your own feminist analysis to it. It might be interesting.

And if there isn't going to be a feminist element to the thread then I would gently suggest that it belongs on the coronavirus board rather than the women's rights board.

By citing the behaviour of two groups of men, totalling six individuals, you think that will enable you to explore sex based patterns of behaviour?

Yes.

It's how people started to talk about manspreading, mansplaining, male entitlement.

They describe it, and other people comment.

Why not start a thread then? You could apply your own feminist analysis to it. It might be interesting.

Because that would be a different thread.

Apparently, according to Rowantrees the purpose of this thread is to discuss the new behaviour that we are observing and see if any patterns can be observed, so why would someone need to start a new thread in order to engage in what this very thread apparently exists for?

That's what you can't ever get over, isn't it? The fact that women who have had bad experiences with men and who'd like to talk about that are supported here.

Nope. If this thread is for the op to present the examples of behaviour and then moan about what happened, cool beans.

What I think makes you all look ridiculous is to take those two examples and claim that this represents the behaviour of men as a whole or that women haven't done exactly the same or, from what I experienced, worse.

Denial is a funny thing to witness.

Nope

That's a shame.

Recognising behaviour patterns is useful
Understanding behaviour patterns is important

Indeed.

Recognising behaviour patterns of people as group ( in a particular time and place ) isn’t the same as saying that every single member of that group anywhere in the world for the whole of human history has behaved like that .

Some people seem to find this hard to grasp. It’s not a personal attack on them/ their husband / son.

Hence they try to derail the discussions with their “ Not my Nigel” or “ so you all hate your sons then “.

Or “ once a man was nice to me in a supermarket so you are all twisted and bitter liars “.

I assume that’s why they stalk the FWR / AIBU threads attacking and derailing them. Perhaps they imagine that it makes other posters think that all men are great. It doesn’t - it’s just makes them think that certain posters annoying control freaks who enjoy stopping women talking.

We recognise the pattern . They are the same as the ones we know in RL who make every conversation about them.

No doubt they are all screaming at their TVs calling the scientists / epidemiologist / doctors liars because young people are dying with Covid19 and “ you said it was only old people “.

Statistical trends and patterns are not a guarantee of what will happen to one individual . The facts that one 84 Year old beat it after 2 weeks on a ventilator and that a perfectly healthy nurse in her 30s died, doesn’t make the pattern analysis wrong.

Nor does it make the experts evil twisted liars who hate older people and those with coexisting medical conditions, because they say they are more vulnerable.

My question is, wouldn’t most of you be offended if the same thread was started but with women in the title rather than men

What's extra funny is that I keep seeing "random bloke was an arsehole to me in a lockdown related context" threads popping up in AIBU etc, but none of our "Angry of Why Can't You Be Nicer To Men" regulars seem to pop up in those.

(There's one right now about someone smoking in the long line to get into a shop and forcing the woman behind them in the queue to breathe their smoke, then calling her an ugly cow when she complained.)

That might be your question but it’s not the question I’m discussing.

So why don’t you start your own thread about that @Guyonhere1

BTW you forget to start your post with “ man here “ or “ I’m a man “ or “ speaking as a bloke “.

Recognising behaviour patterns of people as group ( in a particular time and place ) isn’t the same as saying that every single member of that group anywhere in the world for the whole of human history has behaved like that .

Some people seem to find this hard to grasp. It’s not a personal attack on them/ their husband / son.

Hence they try to derail the discussions with their “ Not my Nigel” or “ so you all hate your sons then “.

Or “ once a man was nice to me in a supermarket so you are all twisted and bitter liars “.

I assume that’s why they stalk the FWR / AIBU threads attacking and derailing them. Perhaps they imagine that it makes other posters think that all men are great. It doesn’t - it’s just makes them think that certain posters annoying control freaks who enjoy stopping women talking.

We recognise the pattern . They are the same as the ones we know in RL who make every conversation about them.

This ^^

Seeing the demonstration of behaviour patterns clearly online (where some may be less inhibited) can also be very useful in recognising detrimental behaviour patterns in real life.

Seeing the demonstration of behaviour patterns clearly online (where some may be less inhibited) can also be very useful in recognising detrimental behaviour patterns in real life.

IRL I highly recommend the "ignore and/or walk away from the person who's being tedious" approach. It's very liberating.

Apparently, according to Rowantrees the purpose of this thread is to discuss the new behaviour that we are observing and see if any patterns can be observed, so why would someone need to start a new thread in order to engage in what this very thread apparently exists for?

Hooves many of your posts are disingenous.
There's consistant repeated patterns.

I wrote:
"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."

I've also reminded you that its not my thread & that I joined in the last few pages.

My question is, wouldn’t most of you be offended if the same thread was started but with women in the title rather than men

At least we would have the good manners to read the whole thread, rather that go onto it, pontificating that we have a life and cant be arsed reading the thread, but we’re going to give our opinion anyway. You remind me of an overindulged child, who insists on shouting and demanding attention, when the grownups in the room are trying to have a conversation. Away and play with your toys and give the adults some peace.

IRL I highly recommend the "ignore and/or walk away from the person who's being tedious" approach. It's very liberating.

You forgot to tut loudly. 😁

IRL I highly recommend the "ignore and/or walk away from the person who's being tedious" approach. It's very liberating.

Indeed it is wise to avoid such persons, "for they are vexatious to the spirit"

By citing the behaviour of two groups of men, totalling six individuals, you think that will enable you to explore sex based patterns of behaviour?

Whilst similar bad behaviour by similar numbers of women is just individual women behaving badly.

The idea that most people are behaving responsibly and a small minority of people aren't isn't considered. Any suggestion that might be the case provokes nonsense responese like that ridiculous list, which bears no resemblance to anything I said but won't stop certain posters promoting it as such.

This thread serves only to bolster confirmation bias.