Politics and Porn

[KimGordon67]

Well, this escalated. And we've also discovered that Russia is this awesome haven of feminism that's virtually free of sexual harassment and violence. I'm looking for a job there as I write!!!

In the interim, I did a bit of googling, and found this interesting wee question, posted by a guy, on a bulletin board: "I was wondering why some guys seemed so upset by the idea of not approaching women on the street." I thought that was a really interesting way to phrase it - instead of trying to work out whether or not women are justified in their dislike/like of these approaches, why are we not asking why guys find the idea of not doing it so upsetting?

Nezhul, I think asking 'your friends' is not really a representative sample. When I said I was relying on the voice of actual women, I didn't just mean 'my friends', but ongoing discussions about this sort of thing that occur across social media and in various other fora - including this very thread! In light of this, why can't you just accept that women - even women looking for boyfriends - might not enjoy it. I'm not 'scared' when I walk out the door ... the risk assessment only comes into play when a random guy approaches me, and as I said, there's a range of factors to consider. For example, if I'm in the library I'll feel differently than if the same guy approaches me walking down the road at 11pm ... but I still have to engage in risk assessment. (I used to work in a library, and trust me, some weird stuff happens there.) This isn't the same as worrying about the food I eat - as you noted elsewhere, we're not talking about cookies here. We're talking about making a judgement that involves the risk of being rude vs the risk of being verbally harassed and, depending on circumstance, potentially assaulted. But even the verbal harassment is freaking awful - there's honestly no way to explain the gut-wrenching misery that comes along with someone leering at you either visually or verbally when you don't want it, but can't get away because you're on a train, or just too frozen to think straight. And I've read enough of other women (not my friends) writing about these things to know this is a completely common reaction to a completely common occurrence.

I simply do not believe this is the only viable way you have of meeting women. I've had *mumble mumble mumble* [where 'mumble' = 'quite a few'] sexual partners in my life, and NONE of them have been the result of some random guy approaching me in the street. I can think of maybe three who were colleagues, and one who I met while studying. That still leaves *mumble mumble* that I met through other means - NONE of which involved them approaching me in public spaces where I was just going about my everyday business. I can also think of no friend of mine who had either a sexual encounter or a relationship result from such an approach. I'll admit we have a slightly different approach to sexual relations here, but I can't believe it's THAT different from in Russia.

There are no stats on street harrassment because no one collects them - it's not really a crime, and even if it was (which maybe it technically is), it would almost impossible to prove. The stats on 'real rape' (as, I guess, you define) are some of the most notoriously unreliable stats in the world. I've been actually assaulted, by a stranger, on the street - not rape, because I fought back (even though we're told not to, because it's better to be raped than killed). I never reported it. There's a myriad reasons why sexual assault isn't reported - my experience is just one of them.

Finally, this link goes to a photo of Brock Turner - you may remember him as the guy who sexually assaulted an unconscious woman next to a dumpster? See how he's well dressed, nice looking, probably pretty personable. So, if you can explain to me how we're meant to spot the creeps on the basis of some visible sign, please do so - you'd be doing the women of the world a huge favour. (I did think about embedding the actual image, but decided against it.)
http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/full/public/2016/09/09/0911turnerrape01.JPG

 

[Bramblethorn]

That much is true. UCR also doesn't provide stats on pool drownings, poisoning (accidental), auto accidents, and a host of other stats that are available from other sources.

...in particular, from the CDC.

https://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/water-safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/accidental-injury.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/

etc. etc.

I have zero interest in the number of children killed (accidentally) by firearms. That number (somewhere around 50/yr (+/-) is insignificant outside of the immediate family. Further, in many states even those deaths would result in a criminal charge. (In my state the charge would be "child abuse resulting in death", thus showing up on the UCR,)

You seem to have misread my post - I was talking about "accidental shootings" in general, not only "accidental shootings of children". Even the example I gave was of shooting by a child, not necessarily of a child.

Also, your figure of 50/yr is not accurate. CDC gives a count of 74 for 2014 (the research restriction doesn't prevent them from producing basic count data from death records etc.) but the CDC acknowledges that those sources are probably undercounting; it looks as if the real rate is over 100/year.

Total accidental deaths by firearm for the USA are around 500/year, i.e. 10x the figure you gave. An even bigger area of public-health interest would be suicides by firearm, which is about 20k deaths annually.

(Mind you, "significant" in political terms has little to do with body count and a lot to do with how the cause of death relates to people's ideologies.)

 

[Nezhul]

All you POST are assumptions.

This, as you know full well, is an outright lie. Anybody who wants to read the history of this thread, or others where we've talked, can see that I've provided links to scientific studies...

You mistake providing links with gaining credibility to your words.

I don't provide links exactly because I know that they are not all-encompassing and representative.

You provide studies for US citizens. This is not representative for Europe, let alone Russia. If you would go farther into Asia or Africa, your studies will be as accurate for their situation as a piece of toilet paper.
You provide links for news articles. But again, as I point out they are not representative.

Look, I finally figured out why I dislike arguing with you. You never defend against points and arguments. You dodge and deflect the attention elsewhere.
An argument should be a dialogue that goes back and forth - you throw in an idea, I explain why I disagree and throw in my argument. You should explain why you disagree with that and suggest another argument.

That's how it should work.

But you never acrually answer on point. You find something in my posts to nitpick or attack, and if I make a valid point - you move along, ignoring it and finding something to attack. Or deflect, twisting the original meaning or jumping to conclusions, providing news articles as if they were golden standard of the situation.

Example:
Me: The sexual harassment and abuse in Russia are rare.
You: Russian women disagree! (links an article that says that those things happen at all. Not an indication about how often, which was my point)
Me: These things happen. Not often.
You: The lack of statistics proves they happen often! (which is false, because it doesn't prove anything except poor organization)

And you will go on like that, nitpicking and dodging around the point. And the point I'm making is that you actually can not talk for all the women all around the world based on your experience.
Cultures are different. Countries are different. I'm telling you how the situation looks here in Russia because I live here my entire life. But obviously you know better, because you found a news article made by western press about sexual harassment in Russia, so obviously it happens just like where you live.

 

[KimGordon67]

You mistake providing links with gaining credibility to your words.

I don't provide links exactly because I know that they are not all-encompassing and representative.

You provide studies for US citizens. This is not representative for Europe, let alone Russia. If you would go farther into Asia or Africa, your studies will be as accurate for their situation as a piece of toilet paper.
You provide links for news articles. But again, as I point out they are not representative.

Look, I finally figured out why I dislike arguing with you. You never defend against points and arguments. You dodge and deflect the attention elsewhere.
An argument should be a dialogue that goes back and forth - you throw in an idea, I explain why I disagree and throw in my argument. You should explain why you disagree with that and suggest another argument.

That's how it should work.

But you never acrually answer on point. You find something in my posts to nitpick or attack, and if I make a valid point - you move along, ignoring it and finding something to attack. Or deflect, twisting the original meaning or jumping to conclusions, providing news articles as if they were golden standard of the situation.

Example:
Me: The sexual harassment and abuse in Russia are rare.
You: Russian women disagree! (links an article that says that those things happen at all. Not an indication about how often, which was my point)
Me: These things happen. Not often.
You: The lack of statistics proves they happen often! (which is false, because it doesn't prove anything except poor organization)

And you will go on like that, nitpicking and dodging around the point. And the point I'm making is that you actually can not talk for all the women all around the world based on your experience.
Cultures are different. Countries are different. I'm telling you how the situation looks here in Russia because I live here my entire life. But obviously you know better, because you found a news article made by western press about sexual harassment in Russia, so obviously it happens just like where you live.

But Nezhul, you're claiming to speak for all women in the world based on ... your personal experience as a man, and four female friends you asked, some of who agreed that stranger approaches weren't awesome.
This discussion covers at last three different national contexts - NZ, Australia, and the US, and I think a European country with Elle, and maybe the UK with Con. And we're all saying the same thing, based on personal experience, anecdotal evidence from our networks, and what a whole lot of other women on the interweb say - which is the best evidence there is for harassment, because as I noted above, the stats are sketchy at best. You can't possibly believe that Russia is some magical exception to this ... surely? I'm honestly not trying to be confrontational ... I'm just genuinely puzzled that you could really think that.

 

[Nezhul]

And we've also discovered that Russia is this awesome haven of feminism that's virtually free of sexual harassment and violence.

First - no, not feminism. In fact, culturally we still stand by gender roles a lot. We don't have feminists here as such, but the entire society acknowledges female rights and entitlements. Just as it acknowledges male rights and entitlements. Which are differendt, with their own hardships and their own freedoms that the other gender does not have.

Second - never said there's no violence and harrasment. It's there.
What you don't understand that there are different levels of it. Rape? There's probably a fair amount. Just like everywhere.

But molesting a girl on the street in broad daylight? Grabbing her? No, it's very, very rare. In fact, if someone does it then a few males who were nearby would probably step in and beat him up pretty badly. That's how our culture works. We hate seeing women - any women - abused, and we step in. And no, there will be no law suits if I break someone's nose on the street for molesting someone. I can even stay on the scene and talk to police about that.

Again, read this: Sexual molesting and harassment in public places do not happen often.

In the interim, I did a bit of googling, and found this interesting wee question, posted by a guy, on a bulletin board: "I was wondering why some guys seemed so upset by the idea of not approaching women on the street." I thought that was a really interesting way to phrase it - instead of trying to work out whether or not women are justified in their dislike/like of these approaches, why are we not asking why guys find the idea of not doing it so upsetting?

I don't find it upsetting.
I find it completely opposite from my experience. That's why I argue.

Again, what country are we talking about? I admit, I started in this discussion thinking all around the world it was OK to just come up to a girl and talk to her, ask her phone number and secure a date. Apparrently not.

The question I really want to ask - why are you so upset about the suggestion that in some parts of the world it is totally fine? You seem to reject this idea entirely.
Is that because no place, especially not something scary like Russia, can be better and safer than US in some aspects?

Nezhul, I think asking 'your friends' is not really a representative sample. When I said I was relying on the voice of actual women, I didn't just mean 'my friends', but ongoing discussions about this sort of thing that occur across social media and in various other fora - including this very thread!

You should understand that you are talking about English part of the internet. English forums, English blogs, English women, English articles.

While there's definitely a lot of people from all around the world communicating in the English segment - the majority is still US citizens, Canada, Australia, NZ and Britain.

For Russia, for example, I can tell you right away that 95% of people do not know English good enough to actually participate in the English segment of the net. They can read sites and stuff, but you'll rarely see them on forums.

I imagine that's so with every Language/culture. They talk and discuss things in their own communities. There are French blogs, German blogs, Russian, Chinese, Indian, Korean blogs - and those people's opinions go right above your head.

Again, the point I'm making here is that you take a small part of the world and extrapolate the opinions of it globally.

In light of this, why can't you just accept that women - even women looking for boyfriends - might not enjoy it.

Why can't you accept that women, even women not looking for boyfriends - actually might?

I simply do not believe this is the only viable way you have of meeting women. I've had *mumble mumble mumble* [where 'mumble' = 'quite a few'] sexual partners in my life, and NONE of them have been the result of some random guy approaching me in the street. I can think of maybe three who were colleagues, and one who I met while studying. That still leaves *mumble mumble* that I met through other means - NONE of which involved them approaching me in public spaces where I was just going about my everyday business. I can also think of no friend of mine who had either a sexual encounter or a relationship result from such an approach.

Well I didn't have a mumble-mumble partners, because I don't tend to start a new relationships often. But I've had several girlfriends whom I met on the street. Shocker, right? They are not tat rare in my life.

Also, no, definitely it's not the only source of meeting for me, but in my experience it has certainly been the most fruitious one when it comes to dating.
I don't see why I should consider throwing it away just because you don't do that in US.

I'll admit we have a slightly different approach to sexual relations here, but I can't believe it's THAT different from in Russia.

Actually, from what I've heard, quite different. Some of my friends moved to US and one is actually moving next week to work at NY. And from what I learned from this discussion - the differences may even be more than I thought.

Finally, this link goes to a photo of Brock Turner - you may remember him as the guy who sexually assaulted an unconscious woman next to a dumpster? See how he's well dressed, nice looking, probably pretty personable. So, if you can explain to me how we're meant to spot the creeps on the basis of some visible sign, please do so - you'd be doing the women of the world a huge favor. (I did think about embedding the actual image, but decided against it.)

Never said you can spot creeps or psychos visibly.
Again, read what I have already said: I describe the appearance as being good-dressed and good-looking simply to eliminate those sources of concern right away. Not to say that everybody who's good dressed are safe.
It's just - admit it - if a guy in bad clothes and with a bruise on his face approaches you, that's WAY more creepy when there's none of those and he is dressed good.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Look, I finally figured out why I dislike arguing with you. You never defend against points and arguments. You dodge and deflect the attention elsewhere.
An argument should be a dialogue that goes back and forth - you throw in an idea, I explain why I disagree and throw in my argument. You should explain why you disagree with that and suggest another argument.

That's how it should work.

But you never acrually answer on point. You find something in my posts to nitpick or attack, and if I make a valid point - you move along, ignoring it and finding something to attack.

This is not just nonsense, it's outright projection.

As one of many examples: when I posted information about that twin study, you nitpicked it on the grounds that the sample size wasn't large enough. I worked through the numbers and demonstrated that, yes, the sample size was indeed large enough to make a pretty strong finding. I also pointed out the bit in the original paper which did exactly the same thing.

...and you moved along, ignoring it, rather than admit your criticism was nonsense.

And you will go on like that, nitpicking and dodging around the point. And the point I'm making is that you actually can not talk for all the women all around the world based on your experience.
Cultures are different. Countries are different. I'm telling you how the situation looks here in Russia because I live here my entire life. But obviously you know better, because you found a news article made by western press about sexual harassment in Russia, so obviously it happens just like where you live.

Reminder: this whole don't-creep-women-out discussion started with you giving dating advice to a guy from Ohio. (In case anybody isn't familiar with it, Ohio is in the USA. Not Russia.)

At that point, you certainly seemed to think that your dating experience was relevant to the USA, even though you've lived in Russia your whole life. You stuck to your position even when it was criticised by posters from the USA and various other Western nations.

But now that the discussion's drifted a bit and we're talking about the situation in Russia... suddenly your position has shifted to "cultures are different, countries are different" and insisting that none of us could know what things are like in Russia.

This is not the first time I've noticed that your own behaviour seems to be quite inconsistent with the standards you demand of others.

You: The lack of statistics proves they happen often! (which is false, because it doesn't prove anything except poor organization)

Hey, you might want to change your password, because it looks like somebody else has been using your account. Just a couple of days ago somebody using your account posted this in reply to Con's criticism of a government decision:

Yea right. And they basically don't do that because they are stupid and can't do math.
Hundreds of specialists and economists also can't see a simple solution that is obvious to you.

I'm not betting on anything. But this "government is stupid, they could have done ____ and everyone would be happy" is an old delusion of the masses which more often than not proves to be rooting in ignorance rather than wisdom.

That's obviously quite contrary to the argument you're using now, so I guess you must have been hacked or something.

 

[Nezhul]

But Nezhul, you're claiming to speak for all women in the world based on ... your personal experience as a man

No!

Just no.

I'm not speaking for women around the world! You are. I'm telling you the situation here, where I live. I can pretty confidently speak based on my experience about Russia.
And only Russia.

YOU are saying that ALL AROUND THE WORLD women are sexually harrassed and that's why they DO make risk assessment and are creeped out when men approach them on the street.
Or, OK, before Mr. Brown here accuses me of another lie, you at least confidently say that in Russia it should definitely be so, because here, look, there's a link that sexual assaults happen in Russia, oooo!

and four female friends you asked, some of who agreed that stranger approaches weren't awesome.

Yeah. But not scary or creepy.
Are you saying to me that when a co-worker approaches you it's automatically always awesome?

Or whatever, where do you meet your new dates? Pick a safe environment. A guy in this situation approaches you. Is it always awesome? I don't thinks so, no.

The fact that it's not always awesome doesn't mean we (men) should stop doing that.

Not awesome != Bad.

You can't possibly believe that Russia is some magical exception to this ... surely? I'm honestly not trying to be confrontational ... I'm just genuinely puzzled that you could really think that.

I don't believe it's that magical, is what the point here.

I do believe dating and intergender relationships are very different in other parts of the world.

Also, US+Canada+GB+Australia = 6% world's population.
Gives you something to think about, huh.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Nezhul]

As one of many examples: when I posted information about that twin study, you nitpicked it on the grounds that the sample size wasn't large enough. I worked through the numbers and demonstrated that, yes, the sample size was indeed large enough to make a pretty strong finding. I also pointed out the bit in the original paper which did exactly the same thing.

...and you moved along, ignoring it, rather than admit your criticism was nonsense.

My ignoring it was in admittance that my "criticism", which was actually just a remark, was rooting in not reading the paper through.
You got me there. Do you really need an explicit admittance of your victory to get an erection out of it, or something?

Reminder: this whole don't-creep-women-out discussion started with you giving dating advice to a guy from Ohio. (In case anybody isn't familiar with it, Ohio is in the USA. Not Russia.)

Reminder: I already admitted that when I started this discussion I didn't think US had such problems.
Reminder #2: You are still talking for the entire women population all around the globe - confidently.
Reminder #3: Nice diversion of topic, yet again.

But now that the discussion's drifted a bit and we're talking about the situation in Russia... suddenly your position has shifted to "cultures are different, countries are different" and insisting that none of us could know what things are like in Russia.

Oh, so the fact that my positions shift in the process of discussion, because I learn new things - makes me automatically wrong, does it? That's not an argument, that's just more attempts to draw attention elsewhere.

Hey, you might want to change your password, because it looks like somebody else has been using your account. Just a couple of days ago somebody using your account posted this in reply to Con's criticism of a government decision:

One does not contradict the other, as you are trying to portray it.
Decision making and stats gathering are different things. When accepting or rejecting bills, the research is always conducted. No bills or laws go without it - it's a standard process.
What we are talking about when it comes to lack of stats - is poor management and/or lack of resources or desire to gather them

And again with the deflection! It has NOTHING to do with the original point! The lack of statistics does NOT mean that those statistics are so horrible that no one wants to show them. The lack of something does NOT mean that someone consciously choose not to create it.

In your last posts you made a lot of attacks, but zero on-point. You just try to keep the flame going.
And if I don't respond to some part of your posts because it has nothing to do with reality or the original discussion, you are quick to point it out and claim "victory" on that front.

 

[KimGordon67]

First - no, not feminism. In fact, culturally we still stand by gender roles a lot. We don't have feminists here as such, but the entire society acknowledges female rights and entitlements. Just as it acknowledges male rights and entitlements. Which are differendt, with their own hardships and their own freedoms that the other gender does not have.

Second - never said there's no violence and harrasment. It's there.
What you don't understand that there are different levels of it. Rape? There's probably a fair amount. Just like everywhere.

But molesting a girl on the street in broad daylight? Grabbing her? No, it's very, very rare. In fact, if someone does it then a few males who were nearby would probably step in and beat him up pretty badly. That's how our culture works. We hate seeing women - any women - abused, and we step in. And no, there will be no law suits if I break someone's nose on the street for molesting someone. I can even stay on the scene and talk to police about that.

Again, read this: Sexual molesting and harassment in public places do not happen often.

I don't find it upsetting.
I find it completely opposite from my experience. That's why I argue.

Again, what country are we talking about? I admit, I started in this discussion thinking all around the world it was OK to just come up to a girl and talk to her, ask her phone number and secure a date. Apparrently not.

The question I really want to ask - why are you so upset about the suggestion that in some parts of the world it is totally fine? You seem to reject this idea entirely.
Is that because no place, especially not something scary like Russia, can be better and safer than US in some aspects?

You should understand that you are talking about English part of the internet. English forums, English blogs, English women, English articles.

While there's definitely a lot of people from all around the world communicating in the English segment - the majority is still US citizens, Canada, Australia, NZ and Britain.

For Russia, for example, I can tell you right away that 95% of people do not know English good enough to actually participate in the English segment of the net. They can read sites and stuff, but you'll rarely see them on forums.

I imagine that's so with every Language/culture. They talk and discuss things in their own communities. There are French blogs, German blogs, Russian, Chinese, Indian, Korean blogs - and those people's opinions go right above your head.

Again, the point I'm making here is that you take a small part of the world and extrapolate the opinions of it globally.

Why can't you accept that women, even women not looking for boyfriends - actually might?

Well I didn't have a mumble-mumble partners, because I don't tend to start a new relationships often. But I've had several girlfriends whom I met on the street. Shocker, right? They are not tat rare in my life.

Also, no, definitely it's not the only source of meeting for me, but in my experience it has certainly been the most fruitious one when it comes to dating.
I don't see why I should consider throwing it away just because you don't do that in US.

Actually, from what I've heard, quite different. Some of my friends moved to US and one is actually moving next week to work at NY. And from what I learned from this discussion - the differences may even be more than I thought.

Never said you can spot creeps or psychos visibly.
Again, read what I have already said: I describe the appearance as being good-dressed and good-looking simply to eliminate those sources of concern right away. Not to say that everybody who's good dressed are safe.
It's just - admit it - if a guy in bad clothes and with a bruise on his face approaches you, that's WAY more creepy when there's none of those and he is dressed good.

"Again, read what I have already said: I describe the appearance as being good-dressed and good-looking simply to eliminate those sources of concern right away. Not to say that everybody who's good dressed are safe."
This just doesn't make sense - you're saying that being well-dressed and good looking eliminates concern, and then you're saying that not everyone who's well dressed is safe ... that's a direct contradiction.

"Second - never said there's no violence and harrasment. It's there."
I never said you said there was NONE - I said you said there was hardly any, which is what you said.

"Sexual molesting and harassment in public places do not happen often."
No one has suggested that 'sexual molesting' happens regularly in public anywhere else either - what they've said is that unsolicited attention raises the RISK of sexual assault - and, as I quite clearly stated previously, is often fairly unpleasant just in and of itself.
You would be unlikely to know if someone was harassing a woman. We're pretty well socialised to not draw attention to these things, to deal with it as politely as possible, and generally to just move away if that's an option. So I have no idea how you know it 'doesn't happen often' - there's no stats, you can't really observe it, and while some of your friends suggest that things do make them uncomfortable, we're apparently ignoring that.

I'm not from the US. I listed the wide range of countries that were represented in this discussion - another thing you chose to ignore.
I don't have any preconceptions about Russia, and I certainly don't think it's 'scary' ... I just cannot see any good reason why Russia's sexual politics should be so advanced that the same levels of harassment and sexual assault aren't present there as they are everywhere else in the world. You are literally the first person I have ever heard or read argue that their country had radically different rates of these things, and I've read a fair bit around this particular topic. In fact, I just Googled 'why are Russia's rates of sexual assault so low?', in case this is an actual thing, and did not get pages of explanations for why it would be so - and in fact, a whole lot of stuff that suggests it very much is NOT the case. (But again, I'm guessing that actual research will not hold up to your personal experience.)

"Well I didn't have a mumble-mumble partners, because I don't tend to start a new relationships often. But I've had several girlfriends whom I met on the street. Shocker, right? They are not tat rare in my life."
I referred to sexual partners, not 'starting relationships'. It's not really that relevant, but yet another example of you not actually reading what the person says.

Nezhul, this, and the previous discussion about trans people, are situations in which you've had the opportunity to actually find out something from people who clearly know what they're talking about, but you've instead chosen to argue back based on your 'personal experience' or, fundamentally, your opinion about something. You could have quite easily gone 'Well, I thought XYZ' and me and/or BrambleThorn and/or numerous other people who's contributed to this discussion would have said 'Actually research shows that ABC - here's a link or two for your information' or 'my experience as the kind of person we're talking about and the experience of my friends who are also those people suggest ABC' and you could have said 'Huh - fancy that.' But instead you chose to go 'no no no, in my personal experience, XYZ' and then make often ridiculous non-responses to every single point we made to demonstrate that, actually, ABC, at least some-to-most of the time.

I'm giving up now because, as a wise friend suggested, you're probably just getting off on the attention, and because you clearly have no desire to have your opinion challenged by facts, and would rather spend your time reiterating these alternative facts that you seem to have ready to go.

 

[Pockle]

just for shits and giggles......

Take the last three pages of this thread and change "Men" to "Muslims".

Now you begin to get a better idea of what's going wrong.

The minute we begin to live our lives in suspicion of another gender/religion/culture we are in trouble.

Taking it to its logical conclusion, we trust no-one and entomb ourselves behind a locked door only communicating by txt-spk.

Welcome to Huxley's Brave New World - take a pill and be happy.

 

[KimGordon67]

just for shits and giggles......

Take the last three pages of this thread and change "Men" to "Muslims".

Now you begin to get a better idea of what's going wrong.

The minute we begin to live our lives in suspicion of another gender/religion/culture we are in trouble.

Taking it to its logical conclusion, we trust no-one and entomb ourselves behind a locked door only communicating by txt-spk.

Welcome to Huxley's Brave New World - take a pill and be happy.

Oh FFS.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Also, US+Canada+GB+Australia = 6% world's population.
Gives you something to think about, huh.

And yet you're spending so much time talking to people from these countries. Do you ever feel like you ought to be spending more time with the other 94% of the world? I do.

 

[KimGordon67]

And yet you're spending so much time talking to people from these countries. Do you ever feel like you ought to be spending more time with the other 94% of the world? I do.

Christ ... look out India!

 

[Nezhul]

This just doesn't make sense - you're saying that being well-dressed and good looking eliminates concern, and then you're saying that not everyone who's well dressed is safe ... that's a direct contradiction.

Carefully read the next line after your quote. Then think about it. Then read it again, maybe, and that's until you understand that bad looks is only one thing that can make a man that approaches you creepy, and I don't want to discuss that.

No one has suggested that 'sexual molesting' happens regularly in public anywhere else either

They did. You did too, I think. We started talking about how if a guy approaches you on the street, you instantly make a risk assesment. Will he attack you for saying no? Verbally or physically? Will he grab or molest you? Will he follow you home?
That's where we started, and that's what I'm talking about right now. Did you switch to rape and murder scenes already?

what they've said is that unsolicited attention raises the RISK of sexual assault

That's just plainly wrong.
Because any meeting in any circumstances raises the risk of eventual sexual assault equally. He may be a guy from the street or your co-worker, or your friend's uncle - if he has it in him to assault you eventually - he will. It's not like people you meet in certain circumstances are magically safer.

Also define unsolicited. Our very nature tells us to pay attention to people of the opposite gender. And please don't bring gays or trans genders here.
If there was only solicited attention acceptable, then you'd have to meet ONLY in specially dedicated areas or wear a "looking for boyfriend" sign on your chest, to have somebody approach you.

and, as I quite clearly stated previously, is often fairly unpleasant just in and of itself.

Depends on the approach, don't you think? I've no doubt there are a lot of people who suck at communications. There are a lot of people who excel at it.
The fact that someone does it wrong shouldn't make everyone stop doing it. In other words, the approach itself is not the problem - the execution is.

I'm not from the US. I listed the wide range of countries that were represented in this discussion - another thing you chose to ignore.

I addressed it. Read carefully.

I just Googled 'why are Russia's rates of sexual assault so low?', in case this is an actual thing, and did not get pages of explanations for why it would be so - and in fact, a whole lot of stuff that suggests it very much is NOT the case.

Because only rape is ever reported. And accounted for. It's not low, as I said numerous times.

We were explicidly talking about other stuff. About you being called names for saying "no", about you being grabbed or followed home, etcetra. This just doesn't happen. It's not like it would be reported even if it WAS happening, but it doesn't happen often at all.

I referred to sexual partners, not 'starting relationships'. It's not really that relevant, but yet another example of you not actually reading what the person says.

OK, so word check here.
WHen I say relationships in the spec of this particular discussion, I talk about those that lead to sex. Ranging from one-night stands to being partners of a boyfriend-girlfriend type. So we are talking of the same thing here.

Nezhul, this, and the previous discussion about trans people, are situations in which you've had the opportunity to actually find out something from people who clearly know what they're talking about, but you've instead chosen to argue back based on your 'personal experience' or, fundamentally, your opinion about something.

Leave trans discussion alone for now. I admit I have no trans friends, but I have opinions there.

But this discussion? How come you soemhow distinguish between "people who know something" and myself with my "experiences"?
Aren't those "people who know" - are people like me with a different set of experiences? Yet somehow you suffest that my experiences are irrelevant when compared to "knowledge" that you gained somewhere.

Excuse me, how do you gain "knowledge" about such stuff? Noe through experience, obviously, because then we would have been on equal grounds, which we are not, based on your post. So - how?

You could have quite easily gone 'Well, I thought XYZ' and me and/or BrambleThorn and/or numerous other people who's contributed to this discussion would have said 'Actually research shows that ABC - here's a link or two for your information' or 'my experience as the kind of person we're talking about and the experience of my friends who are also those people suggest ABC' and you could have said 'Huh - fancy that.'

So, again, your words are something which is TRUTH itself? What gives? Are you better than me in some way? Is Bramblethorn some kind of world renown sexologist professor who specializes in approaching women?

What? Don't you think you just, kinda, a Hypocrite here, saying all that?

 

[Nezhul]

And yet you're spending so much time talking to people from these countries. Do you ever feel like you ought to be spending more time with the other 94% of the world? I do.

Notice how Bramblethorn ignores all the other well-made points by my precious self? It's because I'm so right he can't even argue, haha!
#BramblethornParody

 

[KimGordon67]

So, again, your words are something which is TRUTH itself? What gives? Are you better than me in some way? Is Bramblethorn some kind of world renown sexologist professor who specializes in approaching women?

What? Don't you think you just, kinda, a Hypocrite here, saying all that?[/QUOTE]

**response deleted - sorry**

 

[Nezhul]

Yea. No comments. "I can't prove anything with words or arguments, but you better listen to us because we know better."

End of discussion with you.

 

[KimGordon67]

Yea. No comments. "I can't prove anything with words or arguments, but you better listen to us because we know better."

End of discussion with you.

**response deleted**

 

[Bramblethorn]

Take the last three pages of this thread and change "Men" to "Muslims".

When Muslims approach women they've never met with a "you're beautiful, what's your number" - you are very welcome to tell them that this makes women uncomfortable.

Now you begin to get a better idea of what's going wrong.

The minute we begin to live our lives in suspicion of another gender/religion/culture we are in trouble.

"What's going wrong" here is that men - when told by multiple women that their behaviour is problematic - would rather spend hours arguing why their behaviour ISN'T problematic instead of just going "oh okay, if it makes women uncomfortable I won't do it because I value their happiness".

 

[Bramblethorn]

So, again, your words are something which is TRUTH itself? What gives? Are you better than me in some way? Is Bramblethorn some kind of world renown sexologist professor who specializes in approaching women?

Not quite, but it's closer than some of the assumptions you've made about me

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Pockle]

Oh FFS.

I'm laughing out loud, but not in a good way.

If swapping a gender wholesale for a religion within the back-end of this thread magically perverts the meaning into something darker, offensive and unacceptable, then maybe...

...the original Kim Gordon premise was offensive and unacceptable.

The world we live in is fast changing into a more hateful and dangerous place - maybe more helpful to offer solutions than join the queue to hate something.

 

[La damnee elle la licorne]

 

[Blue]

I'm laughing out loud, but not in a good way.

If swapping a gender wholesale for a religion within the back-end of this thread magically perverts the meaning into something darker, offensive and unacceptable, then maybe...

...the original Kim Gordon premise was offensive and unacceptable.

The world we live in is fast changing into a more hateful and dangerous place - maybe more helpful to offer solutions than join the queue to hate something.

You've completely misunderstood the premise of what she and everybody else is saying. Nobody here that I've seen has even tacitly implied that women should be afraid of men as an entire demographic. I have no idea where you or Nehzul are getting these things from.