Women's fears of being in the outside world: BBC Radio 4 - Clipped Wings

[TheBiologyStupid]

A thoroughly depressing, and depressingly necessary, BBC Radio 4 programme about women's enjoyment of nature being spoilt by the fear of being attacked by men:
Clipped Wings www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00180d0

[nauticant]

A thought-provoking listen. Good to hear it being put in front on the Radio 4 audience in the 8pm slot.

[CousinKrispy]

Thanks for sharing this.

[Truthlikeness]

I haven't got time to listen atm, but this is something I recognise in myself. When I was younger I spent a lot of time alone in nature and hugely valued it. Now I avoid isolated spots when alone for the fear of bumping into a dangerous man and that's desperately sad. I suppose I could force myself to do it regardless, but it affects my enjoyment.

[MrsOvertonsWindow]

I thought about this as I was wandering through the woods with the dog this morning. Nobody in sight and I idly wondered what I would do if I was threatened. (no point looking for help from the dog - he's be too busy making friends with them) 🙄

[TheBiologyStupid]

It sounds like you are the programme's intended audience, Truthlikeness.

[PlantingTrees]

Ooh I’ll have a listen. This really bugs me too. And then there are the recent sad events in the news where women have been murdered by random men in wild places. It really affects my enjoyment and I just wish it didn’t. But I can’t help it.

[Alphabet1spaghetti2]

I would go anywhere alone when I used to have 5 large dogs. Never had a fear. Since the last one died, I don’t go out into nature or for a walk alone. I don’t go on holiday alone. I’ll go shopping when I have to and go to work. Otherwise nope, not happening. Exercise will be done either at a gym or as part of my work (cleaner). I fully admit at home I have items I know I could use to fight off an intruder and have taken self defence lessons. - I can’t outrun anyone, my only option would be to stand and fight like hell. (I have been attacked in my own home and ‘won’ - I refuse to call it survived).
My 6’2” Dh doesn’t understand at all.

[MagnoliaTaint]

Yes the arsenal of weapons by the bed is something I recall from living alone. I had a golf club, bat and knife. (And a violent ex, so it wasn't wholly paranoia).

It's not just outdoors, is It?

A dog is slightly reassuring, although mine would be trying to waggy tail them to death rather than actually usefully growling.

[MintyMoocow]

I will not be listening to this programme. Do you know what the odds are of actually being attacked by a random man in a wild place?
Get out, enjoy nature. You are doing yourself so much more damage by sitting in on your arses and worrying about something that will almost certainly never, ever happen!

[Fitterbyfifty]

The odds might be low but unfortunately it does happen. A few years ago I was out on my own in the countryside and a man told me he was going to rape me. I got away. Was he joking? I don't know but I think of it often. I bet he has never given it a second thought.

[becausetrampslikeus]

I tend to feel safer out in the wild than in a town street or park

I think I assume that people that far out are there with the purpose of climbing the hill or such, you wouldn't go that far out to look for a lone woman to attack or because you are bored or mad with the world

I suspect the bigger one risks are twisting an ankle or getting lost

[MaMaLa321]

I'm old enough to remember when Feminism was about being strong, not worrying about all the things that can (but almost certainly won't) go wrong. You'll feel a lot better going for a country walk than moping inside.

[MagnoliaTaint]

The odds of being attacked in a rural setting are lower than in an urban one.

Dismissing women's fears isn't all that helpful, though.

[becausetrampslikeus]

Just thinking though

On average men are ?much? More likely to suffer random attacks yet they still go out


So should the question be why are women in particular afraid given they are less likely to be involved in an incident

[londonmummy1966]

Not really wild but I used to enjoy a mid morning walk on Wimbledon Common. Saw the odd dodgy character that disconcerted me but continued to go until Rachel Nickell was murdered - never felt safe there on my own again.

[MagnoliaTaint]

Because women are at a greater disadvantage due to men being stronger and able to rape/impregnate. In general.

[RIPWalter]

There is an older male who loiters around women and makes inappropriate comments where I walk my dog (he is a dog walker not just there for no reason), women are warning others about him and their encounters with him, it's a shame, as whilst I don't particularly fear him, another women had said that it makes here not want to walk there (and she doesn't want to walk the other side of the lake as her other dog found a whole in the wall and was killed instantly on the road). It's sad that a man can so easily ruin a womens quiet enjoyment of a beautiful place.

[Alphabet1spaghetti2]

@becausetrampslikeus it may be just perception and media hype. But women seem to be attacked more when just simply going about their daily lives - whereas men tend to be attacked as result of deliberately putting themselves in more dangerous situations- getting drunk at a venue, being in a gang, etc (absolutely they do get attacked doing daily activities as well).
as I said, it might be down to media reporting or, because men don’t seek to report to the police?

[zafferana]

I'll have a listen. I'm a runner and where and when I can run is massively affected by this. I found myself on a really isolated bit of country road not very long ago in broad daylight and it terrified me! During the past couple of years there were always walkers and other runners who made me feel safe, but now with everyone back to work I feel I have to stick to well-trafficked footpaths unless I'm with a group.

[littleburn]

@becausetrampslikeus I believe it's that men are more likely to be violently attacked by a make stranger (stabbed on a night out, for example), but that women are the majority of victims of rapes, sexual assaults, flashing, harassing comments etc by male strangers, and that those behaviours are much more common place.

[littleburn]

*male stranger! Bloody autocorrect!

[becausetrampslikeus]

I am not sure that's quite correct- I think men are more likely to be. randomly attacked than women ( quick skim of ONS www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/thenatureofviolentcrimeinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2020 but it might have been too quick a skim )

Of course it's hard to untangle when women are selecting out of spaces that men go to willingly hence them appearing at greater risk, but that gets back to the question of why we respond more negatively to a lower threat

And I don't think it's ok to say " we know we will lose if attacked" -since we appear less likely to be attacked the total risk could well be lower

So now I am thinking is it nature or nurture that makes men bigger risk takers

[UsernameNotAvailableHmm]

Very sad and very true - Clipped Wings

[nepeta]

@becausetrampslikeus

I am not sure that's quite correct- I think men are more likely to be. randomly attacked than women ( quick skim of ONS www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/thenatureofviolentcrimeinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2020 but it might have been too quick a skim )

Of course it's hard to untangle when women are selecting out of spaces that men go to willingly hence them appearing at greater risk, but that gets back to the question of why we respond more negatively to a lower threat

And I don't think it's ok to say " we know we will lose if attacked" -since we appear less likely to be attacked the total risk could well be lower

So now I am thinking is it nature or nurture that makes men bigger risk takers

But is the threat lower? It's lower because women take steps to avoid certain times and places, and this means that the statistics on how often men and women are victims of assault are already based on that mitigation behaviour by women. And it's the actual statistical frequencies of becoming an assault victim which then are used define the threat level we are talking about here.

So the two are intertwined: The risk is lower for women because women are already taking more precautions.

What would happen if women took all the same risks men do? Which sex would face a higher threat of being assaulted?

I suspect it would be women, because of the average strength differences (someone planning an attack prefers victims who can't fight back as effectively), and because women would face risks of attack for more reason than most men: not just muggings, say, or gang fights etc. but sexual assault as well.

It's difficult to draw conclusions about risk taking preferences given all this, because absent the mitigating behaviour many women engage in, the risk of attack would probably be higher for women than for men.

[becausetrampslikeus]

Agreed , hard to untangle the base risk given the behaviour difference. ( had tried to say that but clearly not clearly!)