If men had a nine o’clock curfew.

[Samuel]

I the the point of the thought experiment, but I do wonder if it, and other similar types of illustrative tools, are all that helpful in the end.

It will always come up against the problem of over-generalisation, which leads to confusion and confrontation (as has been amply illustrated by the heated discussion on this thread)

It makes the point well that women daily adjust their behaviour out of fear of being assaulted, and of course it is presented with the (correct) assumption that its most likey to be men that assault them. Fine... but it doesn't logically extend to the point about women being blamed for being assaulted, or 'taking the risk'. I'd say that is the more important fact, and more revealing of the pervasive and negative influence of the patriarchy. There might be better, more powerful ways to make that point.

The fact that violent crimes occur is surely a reason for everyone to adjust their behaviour? Men, typically being stronger and bigger than women, are of course more capable of defending themselves, and therefore a less desireable target. Its no suprise that women, therefore, are more scared. I'm only just over 5ft 5 and qite a long way off being a beefcake and have spent my life avoiding situations where there might be trouble. Including certain social space, pubs, clubs, routes home etc. Hell, I even cross the road to avoid other blokes if I see them coming. I don't say that as a 'whataboutery' comment, only to say that feeling vulnerable is a strong motivating reason to change one's behaviour. I confess I don't feel much sympathy for the main thrust fo the thought experiment... but only from a 'shit happens' point of view.

What really gets my goat is the difference in how I, as a man, may be treated or judged after an assault differently to how a woman may be judged. The idea that women are somehow culpable for being attacked is a festering, putrid boil on society. It is surely one of the clearest demonstrations of male privelidge and the patriarchy. I think its actually highly patronising, "ohhhh, you couldn't help yourself could you? you poor man... she was just wearing a very short skirt and you got carreid away didn't you? ah, there there, its alright, the nasty temptress has gone away now". Fuck that, and fuck the patriarchy.

[Rhiannon]

So now you, the feminist, are back tracking?

I give up. I'm sorry for what happened to you.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

I give up. I'm sorry for what happened to you.

Accepted.

Hugs

 

[Robbie]

Bubbles was a she. No longer on this board.

Shame. She was so sensible.

[Rhiannon]

Accepted.

Hugs

 

I genuinely am, Humph. We both have been through it and none of that is acceptable.

Right back at you. 

[Robbie]

Accepted.

Hugs

 

Me too. Must've been horrific.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Hugs to Robbie too

 

[Nearly Sane]

I the the point of the thought experiment, but I do wonder if it, and other similar types of illustrative tools, are all that helpful in the end.

It will always come up against the problem of over-generalisation, which leads to confusion and confrontation (as has been amply illustrated by the heated discussion on this thread)

It makes the point well that women daily adjust their behaviour out of fear of being assaulted, and of course it is presented with the (correct) assumption that its most likey to be men that assault them. Fine... but it doesn't logically extend to the point about women being blamed for being assaulted, or 'taking the risk'. I'd say that is the more important fact, and more revealing of the pervasive and negative influence of the patriarchy. There might be better, more powerful ways to make that point.

The fact that violent crimes occur is surely a reason for everyone to adjust their behaviour? Men, typically being stronger and bigger than women, are of course more capable of defending themselves, and therefore a less desireable target. Its no suprise that women, therefore, are more scared. I'm only just over 5ft 5 and qite a long way off being a beefcake and have spent my life avoiding situations where there might be trouble. Including certain social space, pubs, clubs, routes home etc. Hell, I even cross the road to avoid other blokes if I see them coming. I don't say that as a 'whataboutery' comment, only to say that feeling vulnerable is a strong motivating reason to change one's behaviour. I confess I don't feel much sympathy for the main thrust fo the thought experiment... but only from a 'shit happens' point of view.

What really gets my goat is the difference in how I, as a man, may be treated or judged after an assault differently to how a woman may be judged. The idea that women are somehow culpable for being attacked is a festering, putrid boil on society. It is surely one of the clearest demonstrations of male privelidge and the patriarchy. I think its actually highly patronising, "ohhhh, you couldn't help yourself could you? you poor man... she was just wearing a very short skirt and you got carreid away didn't you? ah, there there, its alright, the nasty temptress has gone away now". Fuck that, and fuck the patriarchy.

Thing is I don't think you can seperate women modifying their behaviour and the idea that they might be 'asking for it'. The two things were always part of the thought experiment.


I will also point out that being tall, when I was younger cause some issues. There was often some one wanting to prove themself as tough. You learn to diffuse it. And diffusing it is of prime imporatance when you are worried about the safety of the other person. As i have mentioned before I had a friend killed with one punch a few years back. Being able to 'take care of yourself' isn't always a benefit.


I would also raise that the friend who was killed was gay. He was always more likely to be attacked than me, and my gay friends too modifiedtgeir behaviour and still do.

[Aruntraveller]

He was always more likely to be attacked than me, and my gay friends too modifiedtgeir behaviour and still do.

Ain't that the truth. 

[Rhiannon]

Ain't that the truth. 

 

Toxic masculinity affects men at least as badly as it does women.

[Aruntraveller]

This from today's Graun is somewhat relevant to this discussion:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/05/no-shock-powerful-hate-identity-politics?CMP=fb_gu

( also relevant to the Brett K discussion)

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

It really is just a thought experiment. Like you I enjoy a nocturnal life in the company of men. I think its value is in flagging up the ways in which women modify their behaviour, and the fact that if they do fall victim to attack not 'staying safe' is then used as a way of attaching blame to them.

I think the emphasis on women staying safe is changing though. My daughter just went off to uni out of London, and when I heard about the male student who went missing during Freshers' week after going out to a club and then his body was found in the river, I thought boys and girls should stay safe by not wandering home alone late at night, especially if they have been drinking.

I think people still find it more shocking when a woman gets sexually attacked, because it appears as if she feels more violated and is more traumatised by it, than if a man is beaten up or stabbed. Maybe I am wrong about that and it isn't any less or more traumatic and it just depends on the individual.

If it is more traumatic than getting beaten up, and she has therefore taken a bigger risk with her safety than a man wandering around at night, then playing it safer is just the option risk-averse people think she should have chosen because the outcome appears so much more horrific rather than because they think she was 'asking for it'. No doubt some/many weird people do still think she was 'asking for it' but hopefully that language is changing.

I think it may be an unfair generalisation about men being less traumatised than women, and men probably just verbalise less or hide the trauma because that is what is expected of them, whereas women have permission to talk about it repeatedly and openly and this adds I think to the perception that it is worse when a woman gets sexually assaulted. I could be wrong - but that is where the thought experiment has led my thoughts.

The thought experiment also got me thinking that I don't know the statistics of male vs female violent offenders as my perception is that women tend to get let off by the police and court system for acts of physical violence, whereas men are more likely to be arrested, prosecuted and sent to jail. I do know that I don't feel safe around a gang of women/ girls, ever since a gang of teenage girls decided to start throwing lone boys and girls in the boating lake when I was at at the park aged 12. But I also think I stand more of a chance of not falling down or being less hurt if a woman, who tends to be smaller/lighter than a man, hit me compared to if a man hit me. And I am aware that I stand more of a chance of knocking them out if I had to fight back compared to fighting back against a heavier, stronger man. Hence I think I am less at risk from women than men.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

. I do know that I don't feel safe around a gang of women/ girls, ever since a gang of teenage girls decided to start throwing lone boys and girls in the boating lake when I was at at the park aged 12. But I also think I stand more of a chance of not falling down or being less hurt if a woman, who tends to be smaller/lighter than a man, hit me compared to if a man hit me. And I am aware that I stand more of a chance of knocking them out if I had to fight back compared to fighting back against a heavier, stronger man. Hence I think I am less at risk from women than men.

Go to Woolwich town centre, or Sham town centre, there are gangs of young women roaming the same. They may insult young, or older men, but they will not usually attack them.

They will attack females.

[Roses]

One could argue that women have been downtrodden by the male of the species and considered subservient to them until very recently in the history of the planet, that some are now retaliating. However, I hasten to add, there is never any excuse for domestic violence whether perpetrated by men or women,

[Rhiannon]

One could argue that women have been downtrodden by the male of the species and considered subservient to them until very recently in the history of the planet, that some are now retaliating. However, I hasten to add, there is never any excuse for domestic violence whether perpetrated by men or women,

Where's you evidence for this?

[Steve H]

Where's you evidence for this?

Any reliable history book. Women didn't even get the vote until after WW1. Victorian married women did not legally own anything - all their belongings passed to their husband on marriage.

[Roses]

Where's you evidence for this?

Evidence for what exactly?

[Rhiannon]

Any reliable history book. Women didn't even get the vote until after WW1. Victorian married women did not legally own anything - all their belongings passed to their husband on marriage.

I want her evidence that women are retaliating against men with violence.

[Steve H]

I want her evidence that women are retaliating against men with violence.

She doesn't actually say that.

[Roses]

I want her evidence that women are retaliating against men with violence.

Where did I state they were?

[Rhiannon]

Where did I state they were?

What form of retaliation did you mention, except domestic violence? And if you didn't mean that, what 'retaliation' are you referring to?

[Roses]

What form of retaliation did you mention, except domestic violence? And if you didn't mean that, what 'retaliation' are you referring to?

It is a fact that some women are violent to men, in the domestic setting. I was speculating that this is unlikely to have happened in the past when they were treated as subservient to their husbands. I am still of the opinion that it is more likely that violence will be perpetrated by a male rather than a female.

[Rhiannon]

It is a fact that some women are violent to men, in the domestic setting. I was speculating that this is unlikely to have happened in the past when they were treated as subservient to their husbands. I am still of the opinion that it is more likely that violence will be perpetrated by a male rather than a female.

That's not retaliation against past patriarchy though, is it? Women were violent in the past as well.

[Roses]

That's not retaliation against past patriarchy though, is it? Women were violent in the past as well.

And your evidence for this is?

[Rhiannon]

And your evidence for this is?