Forum menu
This shocked me when I saw it - 1 in 40 young women experience sexual assault in a year
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56444275
So yeah – can we men stop telling women what they should and shouldn’t be concerned by and start listening to them instead?
Women aren't a collective entity. Some of the voices critical of this moment are indeed other women.
Fear isn't a policy. It's one thing to listen to someone, another to use emotion as a basis for decisions that should be based upon reason. Some of our worst laws have been made quickly in the face of public hysteria.
Women aren’t a collective entity. Some of the voices critical of this moment are indeed other women.
Fear isn’t a policy. It’s one thing to listen to someone, another to use emotion as a basis for decisions that should be based upon reason. Some of our worst laws have been made quickly in the face of public hysteria.
Hey - all I'm saying is use your ears more and your mouth less.
My daughter pointed out that we are 77 days into the year and so far 118 women and girls have been killed.
We have a problem and it doesn't appear to be going away.
Guidance by CPS has effectively legalised rape by making the conviction rate is ludicrously small and the legal system has condoned this decision.
Looks like we chaps may well have to resort to the Falls Road method of rapist control to protect our female family members. (It involves bolt croppers for the more sheltered among us).
My daughter pointed out that we are 77 days into the year and so far 118 women and girls have been killed.
Wow. The figure for the whole of the year ending Mar 2020 was 188. Has the number of homicides of men and boys also gone up by as much (it was 506 in that same year). I wonder if lockdown etc has had anything to do with it.
I can't find that stat with a quick google - any pointers?
Women's Aid is the pointer I'm being directed towards, it refers to the list Jess Philips read out and was incorrectly reported to me. It's still a poor reflection on female safety from domestic abuse.
Some confusion on numbers, but doesn't alter the fact that they are still way too high.
way too high, and increasing, it's now one woman every 3 days
this shows a breakdown from a previous year
https://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/femicide-census-reveals-half-of-uk-women-killed-by-men-die-at-hands-of-partner-or-ex/
My daughter pointed out that we are 77 days into the year and so far 118 women and girls have been killed.
We have a problem and it doesn’t appear to be going away.
Are the lives of women and girls worth more than men and boys? That's the implication by drawing attention to the deaths of females only.
That’s the implication by drawing attention to the deaths of females only.
Only by the terminally argumentative. It's "all lives matter" all over again.
Are the lives of women and girls worth more than men and boys? That’s the implication by drawing attention to the deaths of females only.
Of course all deaths are tragic, we know this (and it's absurd to imply otherwise tbh), but you're missing the point. These are different problems with different contexts. I get what you're saying, but there's more too it than just the stats.
Your correct low grade harassment and violent physical attacks are not the same but at which point should we switch from being pissed off to being genuinely frightened?
Good question and no simple answer ... Perhaps just being alert is better.
To extend on
i_scoff_cake
That’s like saying a fear of being killed by lighting is valid because you once got rained on.
It's more like being scared of being hit by lightning in a storm then being hit by a falling tree.
[a far more real danger].
And why should we have to accept being made uncomfortable and pissed off on a regular basis anyhow?
That's just life ... it's not gender specific.
I was pissed off people trying to steal stuff off my drive right in front of my nose.
Should I have to ? Ultimately the easiest thing was just to sell the scrap under value. ultimately it wasn't worth the hassle.
Where should the line be drawn? Or as several people on this thread have more helpfully said how can they help?
I already do ... but the biggest "help" is explaining why the real risk is far less than the media like to make out.
for example: rainper gives some examples ... so "recently in 67.61M people some shit happened"
According to Gov.uk
There were 27,820 killed or seriously injured casualties (KSIs) in reported road traffic accidents reported to the police, for the year ending June 2019.
To put that in context, that's 76 a DAY ... but I don't see 76 national media stories every day.
How about start by tackling the low grade stuff and the rest may reduce.
So what do you think should be the sentence for a taxi driver double your age propositioning you? But more seriously the low grade stuff is unlikely to change the actual violence for a woman.
The dicks who cat call etc. are far more likely to get violent with a bloke who calls them out.
Speak to your children about how its not acceptable. Call out harassment where it is safe to do so – maybe have words with that acquaintance or colleague when they say something that could make a women feel unsafe or just uncomfortable.
Molgrips
But for women, violence, indimidation and abusive behaviour is everywhere. It could be at work, on a bus, in any social sitaution. We’re not talking about rape and murder, we’re talking about behaviour that puts women in fear.
I don’t even know what your point is. Are you saying it’s fine and there’s nothing to worry about? Or are you saying that men have it just as bad? Because we really really don’t. You need to really listen instead of reaching for the ‘but what about meee?’ card. The fact that you are refusing to really listen and understand is in itself sexist.
But the point is they don't need to be put in fear ... just annoyed.
Are you saying it’s fine and there’s nothing to worry about?
No, I'm saying the chance of anything "serious" is very small. As P7eaven points out this thread is conflating violence with feeling uncomfortable/annoyed.
People are dicks, Rule #1 is all well and good but still people are dicks and many rely on intimidation or making people uncomfortable to get what they want. [that includes saying things like you don't get to comment on racism because you're white]
The same sort of thing happens every day ...
I had someone pull out in front of me at the local supermarket earlier with the full knowledge they were pulling out in front .. they are simply relying on intimidation and I won't just ram them or get out and beat the shit out of the bloke. It's "yeah I'm being a dick but what are you going to do about it"
The builders behind are chucking stuff over our fence and dropping stuff on the shed roof but unless I just accept this there is nothing I can do that won't end up with me in court. It's "yeah I'm being a dick but what are you going to do about it"
This happens all the time because a small bunch of dicks know the rest of us don't want a criminal record or are adverse to violence.
To get STW there was the video of the shop owner refusing to let a thief take the bike but the blokes had to just stand around.
Excuse the link
https://www.****/video/news/video-2035356/Video-Female-pensioner-wrestles-alleged-bike-thief-Barnsley-store.html
As a bloke you can't be seen/filmed to touch the guy for "allegedly" trying to steal a bike... he knows this not to mention he will have no problem saying any of the men who do get involved are racially motivated (this is not a reflection on his race, all races have dicks)
Some confusion on numbers, but doesn’t alter the fact that they are still way too high.
So are 76 traffic fatalities and serious injuries a DAY..
Only by the terminally argumentative. It’s “all lives matter” all over again.
Except the way bigger number is the number of boys and young men.
A closer parallel is saying BLM but NOT asian...
Of course all deaths are tragic, we know this (and it’s absurd to imply otherwise tbh), but you’re missing the point. These are different problems with different contexts. I get what you’re saying, but there’s more too it than just the stats.
You keep saying we are missing the point .. have you considered you are missing the point and the "more to it" is actually "the media".
Another shocking number is female suicides in girls .. the overwhelming majority being due to bullying by other girls ...
There's another thread where the gist seems to be 'where have all the women gone on stw?'.
For the record, some of the comments on this thread are unlikely to make women feel welcome on this website.
As P7eaven points out this thread is conflating violence with feeling uncomfortable/annoyed.
No.
‘violence’, and ‘abuse’ and ‘harassment’
Is what I wrote. Nothing about feeling uncomfortable/annoyed’, not sure where you got that from my post.
I mentioned abuse and harrassment for clarification/the purpose of the thread, ie the title is a little misleading so the subject has widened. Inevitable, it’s a spectrum of behaviours after all. And the discussion has widened. It’s interesting to view what some consider ‘annoying’, others may lose sleep, or lose/move job/home.
If you believe that in all cases/for all genders that abuse is simply ‘annoying’ and/or discomfiting then that’s possibly ‘OK’ for you, but maybe not so OK for others. Reading your posts in this thread it’s almost like you’ve ‘normalised’ (in your mind) both violent and abusive behaviours simply because you view them as ‘normal’ even though you also seem to say you are ‘adverse’ to violence?
I had someone pull out in front of me at the local supermarket earlier with the full knowledge they were pulling out in front .. they are simply relying on intimidation and I won’t just ram them or get out and beat the shit out of the bloke. It’s “yeah I’m being a dick but what are you going to do about it”
The builders behind are chucking stuff over our fence and dropping stuff on the shed roof but unless I just accept this there is nothing I can do that won’t end up with me in court. It’s “yeah I’m being a dick but what are you going to do about it”
This happens all the time because a small bunch of dicks know the rest of us don’t want a criminal record or are adverse to violence.
Case in point. I’ve rarely wanted to ‘beat the shit’ out of someone for pulling out on me. Someone wrecked (dented passenger door, insurance write off) my old favourite car by doing just that. Claimed they hadn't seen me. Should they expect me to (or should I want to?) ‘beat the shit out of them’? Do you want to beat the shit out of all kinds of people or just blokes? Do you expect blokes to beat the shit out of you? For pulling in front of them at a supermarket? For looking at their beer funny?
Some numbers for the "it's just how it is" folks - since the government started a rape review two years ago, 1.4 million people have been sexually assaulted in this country. 98.5% of reported rapes go without charge or conviction.
Ain't good enough.
*edit
the (thread) title is a little misleading
What I mean to say is that ‘violence’ is widely defined between individuals and between locations. And also ‘domestic vs non-domestic’
For instance, if you were to live in Arizona, US, ‘domestic violence’ may for legal purposes mean something different than in the UK.
domestic violence most often refers to nonphysical violence or incidents that do not cause bodily injuries. Domestic abuse, on the other hand, would more likely meet the state’s definitions of assault or battery.
https://www.az-defenders.com/difference-between-domestic-violence-and-abuse/
I find that interesting, especially as it is the reverse of stevextc seemingly conflating my use/definition of the term ‘abuse’ to mean ‘something that should only cause annoyance/be annoying’
Definitions and context help.
Of course all deaths are tragic, we know this (and it’s absurd to imply otherwise tbh), but you’re missing the point. These are different problems with different contexts. I get what you’re saying, but there’s more too it than just the stats.
That BLM parallel doesn't make much sense because, in analogy, women are not being killed disproportionately.
What exactly is there 'more to it' than beyond the stats?
The very idea of elevating 'femicide' as a special crime seems to frame women as a privileged group.
^ I don’t think a female being killed because she was a female is especially ‘privileged’, do you?
*edit one may prefer the term ‘gendercide’. There are grievances that females have a ‘special’ classification.
Has anyone here read much about the SNP hate crime bill (and the controversy surrounding it)?
The bill did not extend the same protections to women as it did to other groups.
After reading 5 pages of this thread last night I have been pondering the various points of view. I am ashamed to say that I have been found wanting when it comes to the expected standards of male behaviour discussed. So with this in mind I had a conversation with my wife and 16yr old daughter (seperatley) about the subject.
Before I go into their view I just want to make sure that when I say i was found wanting, I am talking checking out a person who is my type, not anything more sinister.
Anyway, my wife's comments, and Pilot I would be interested in your view as you make very reasoned comments:
"Why have we got to a place in the world where everything has to be horrible" "Imagine if someone was walking down the street and someone wolf whistled at them, that was it, a whistle. Rather than going down a thought pattern of what a hideous person that was, maybe the recipient might choose to think that the person was just in a good mood and wanted to share some of that good mood by complimenting someone" I tried to intervene at this point but my wife was on a roll " And then the recipient of the whistle might have had a bit of a shit day but be able to take a small positive that someone paid them a compliment" My response was to say that I am pretty sure that any wolf whistle was not without lust/desire/malintent My wife's response was "But what if it was, what if that person was just happy and was loving life, what if the recipient just chose to laugh and take a compliment, does everything have to be horrid, sordid, gross, evil"
We went over other stuff as well, we were in agreement that the world has gone to shit, and how have we got to a point where someone can't walk down a road and feel safe. At this point let me divert to the same conversation with my 16yr old daughter.
Me "You have seen the media and discussion around safety of woman recently yes?" Daughter "Yes, suppose so" Me "Why do you think there is an issue, do you feel safe?" Daughter "No I don't feel safe" Me "So if a man was walking behind you on a pavement you wouldn't feel safe" Daughter "No, weirdo, he might kill me" Me "Why would you think that" Daughter "Well you see it all the time in the news" Me "But you know that the likelihood of that person being dangerous is low don't you?" Daughter "Yes but it is still a likelihood dad, some weird old person staring at me" Me "Why old? Couldn't it be anyone?" daughter "Well yes but it's always old weirdos you see in the news" Me "So if I was the weirdo would it be better if I crossed over the road to pass you rather than stay behind you" Daughter "But you're not a weirdo, you wouldn't scare or hurt anyone" Me " I am a weirdo to anyone else aren't I, it's just that you know me" Daughter "I suppose, but not everyone is like you, there are dangerous men out there" Me "You say men, wouldn't you be freaked by a woman following you?" Daughter "Well yes, but only if it was one of those drug addict types with no teeth" Me "WTF? There is a reason they are in the position they are in and might need help not being treated like a danger" The conversation took an off topic turn at this point to me trying to educate that you don't judge, you just don't.
This is the longest post ever, sorry. I just found it amazing that the two females in my life had such a different view on the topic. One wanted to just see the best in everyone and the other was totally on board with all men (apart from me) were a threat.
Discuss
Is what I wrote. Nothing about feeling uncomfortable/annoyed’, not sure where you got that from my post.
Sorry, not intentional
I mentioned abuse and harrassment for clarification/the purpose of the thread, ie the title is a little misleading so the subject has widened. Inevitable, it’s a spectrum of behaviours after all. And the discussion has widened. It’s interesting to view what some consider ‘annoying’, others may lose sleep, or lose/move job/home.
Yes, I lose sleep over lying on my tax return because it won't accept pence on the interest earned.
I quit jobs because I lose sleep over lying to clients ...
Other people think lying on a tax return to the nearest million is perfectly acceptable and lying to clients is normal.
I'm currently editing a document for a client and lying to cover up their mistakes, it makes me want to vomit but unless I submit to the bullying I won't get paid.
If you believe that in all cases/for all genders that abuse is simply ‘annoying’ and/or discomfiting then that’s possibly ‘OK’ for you, but maybe not so OK for others.
It's what you make it.
Reading your posts in this thread it’s almost like you’ve ‘normalised’ (in your mind) both violent and abusive behaviours simply because you view them as ‘normal’ even though you also seem to say you are ‘adverse’ to violence?
100,000 years of history and pre-history seems to indicate they are normal.
I take people as I find them, you might like to think Boris doesn't like lying .. I don't believe he actually knows what the truth is... you could lock him up for 20 years and he wouldn't understand, it's the way he's wired. "I was just saying what people wanted me to say" ... which is perhaps his definition of "truth".
in the same way the only language some people understand is violence ... you can't change that you just have to beat the shit out of them. Stick them in prison and they will simply continue violence and intimidation.
Modern philosophy/theology or whatever they call it (seems more like a religion to me) seems to think you can change a cat into a domestic animal or the scorpion riding the frog across the river into something else .. re-educate .. or whatever...
You can't, if you find a scorpion just crush it... or everyone around will get hurt or just accept it's a scorpion and needs to be treated differently and won't want to cuddle up like a dog.
Case in point. I’ve rarely wanted to ‘beat the shit’ out of someone for pulling out on me. Someone wrecked (dented passenger door, insurance write off) my old favourite car by doing just that. Claimed they hadn’t seen me. Should they expect me to (or should I want to?) ‘beat the shit out of them’? Do you want to beat the shit out of all kinds of people or just blokes? Do you expect blokes to beat the shit out of you? For pulling in front of them at a supermarket? For looking at their beer funny?
I don't want to beat the shit out of them, I'd be in court charged with GBH or a criminal record. Anything else is irrelevant in the same way I don't hate scorpions or camel spiders but when I found them in the house I'd kill them.
This is what they are relying on ... no-one will say or do anything because they can't.
I went back to the supermarket anyway .. police car pulled up outside on the double yellows, police woman buying something ... same shit.. "I dare you to say anything".
Obviously I can't or she'll smash a headlight or something then do me for it... pure bullying. No different to the blokes on the scaffold.
100,000 years of history and pre-history seems to indicate they are normal.
You realise things can and have changed massively during that time don't you?
Just look back even a few hundred years and see what things were acceptable which today are seen by 99% of people as barbaric and unacceptable. We are constantly evolving.
100,000 years of history and pre-history seems to indicate they are normal.
Like every complex behaviour there's a normal distribution, pacifist lovers like me at one end and violent nutters at the other. Some of the variation is genetic, some influenced by society. We can shift the the curve one way or the other by changing society, we will always have the extremes but we can move the average significantly and make the place less violent.
I don’t want to beat the shit out of them, I’d be in court charged with GBH or a criminal record.
Rather than because you don’t immediately wish to cause them intense physical harm for having ‘wronged’ you?
in the same way the only language some people understand is violence … you can’t change that you just have to beat the shit out of them. Stick them in prison and they will simply continue violence and intimidation.
Modern philosophy/theology or whatever they call it (seems more like a religion to me) seems to think you can change a cat into a domestic animal or the scorpion riding the frog across the river into something else .. re-educate .. or whatever
You don’t see here that you’re completing a circle of dehumanisation? An understanding of basic psychology should be enough to clue you in to the fact that not all violent people were ‘born a scorpion’ (or whatever poisonous, thoughtless inhuman thing you can think of)
Of course there are a percentage of people who are quite literally psychopathic and/or have NPD, yet aren’t some (many?) simply perpetuating a cycle of violence because that’s how they were taught to express their frustrations? Or because they learned those attitudes and ‘values’? Let’s say you were managing this group:
Are they humans to you, or some other kind of animal?
100,000 years of history and pre-history seems to indicate they are normal.
If that were true then every ‘normal’ society would look more like a bloodbath rather than people going shopping, doing gardening or holding support meetings?
Violence/abuse is surely no longer ‘normal’ in our world and shouldn’t be tolerated or taught as ‘normal’?
From a recent study:
The more children are exposed to violence, the more they think it's normal, according to a study in the current Social Psychological and Personality Science (published by SAGE). Unfortunately, the more they think violence is normal, the more likely they are to engage in aggression against others.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110329095742.htm
I don’t think a female being killed because she was a female is especially ‘privileged’, do you?
You're playing with words there, and anyway, that would describe a particular kind of murder not the general murder of women which these activists seem to want to privilege.
You’re playing with words there, and anyway, that would describe a particular kind of murder not the general murder of women which these activists seem to want to privilege.
Genuine question, which 'activists' are you referring to?
You’re playing with words there
No, the word ‘femicide’ isn’t so defined to confer ‘privilege’.
What did you think it meant?
This article covers a few issues raised throughout this thread:
How, as in the title, men aren't mentioned in the reporting. Male violence against compared with violence against. I'm sure this wasn't intentional on the part of the OP, but the language used in any discussion is important.
How rapists often don't commit other crimes, and convicted rapists are often jailed for non-sexual crimes.
I'm sure most of us have seen the news of the officer spared jail after assaulting a woman and part of the argument against community service was something along the lines of 'he wouldn't be safe working alongside criminals.' I mean, apart from the fact that he IS a criminal, how are women going to take any confidence that the system is there to protect them?
Lots of dismissive arguments that it's not fear based on fact, rather based on perception. As if it's OK for women to perceive a danger to themselves because they aren't statistically in as much risk as they feel. Totally devoid of compassion and empathy.
We need to stop normalising violence, improve the language we use when discussing problems in society, stop dismissing others because you have experienced something and feel a particular way, and try and develop a more compassionate/ empathetic mindset.
I’m sure most of us have seen the news of the officer spared jail after assaulting a woman and part of the argument against community service was something along the lines of ‘he wouldn’t be safe working alongside criminals.’ I mean, apart from the fact that he IS a criminal, how are women going to take any confidence that the system is there to protect them?
For anyone who hasn't heard, this is case involving PC Oliver Banfield. He received a curfew and his victim got £500 compensation. I've just watched her interviewed on C4 news. Police did everything they could to dismiss her report, and it was only taken forward when CCTV footage (with sound) came to light.
His victim will probably carry this with her for the rest of her life She must have been terrified.
Apologies as I haven't read the thread.
Yesterday a friend who runs a local shop was re-dressing her window. Her daughter was putting up stickers: 'Women should feel safe everywhere' and #She was just walking home.
Youths passing at the time shouted and called the young woman a c**t and told her to **** off.
This is the kind of thing that may lead (in these young men) to violence and need I say anymore. Disgusting.
I worked in a mixed school where they girls-only classes and sessions. Potentially very useful for discussing issues and strategies and putting them into practice in a mixed environment.
No, the word ‘femicide’ isn’t so defined to confer ‘privilege’.
What did you think it meant?
That isn't what I said or meant.
Privilege is belonging to a group where the murder of in-group members is framed as worse than the murder of out-group members.
Feminism used to be about formal equality now seems to have become a special interest group.
Totally devoid of compassion and empathy.
What about policy changes? Isn't this what they actually want?
That isn’t what I said or meant.
Privilege is belonging to a group where the murder of in-group members is framed as worse than the murder of out-group members.
That's not much of a ****ing privilege, is it.
I get what privileged means, but I wanted to know what you think ‘femicide’ means? You brought the word up. Is it the word you object to, or the (legal) definition and (legal) usage of it? Or are you claiming that the word has been co-opted to mean something else? As I say, some people prefer ‘gendercide’?
What about policy changes? Isn’t this what they actually want?
Current policies need to be enforced.
I don't think you have any intention of discussing this in good faith.
but I wanted to know what you think ‘femicide’ means? You brought the word up. Is it the word you object to, or the (legal) definition if it? Or are you claiming that the word has been co-opted to mean something else? As I say, some people prefer ‘gendercide’?
Why do you want to know that except to whittle on some pedantic definitional point?
I don’t think you have any intention of discussing this in good faith.
Would you demand empathy and sympathy for anti-vaxxers exploiting the handful of blood clots associated with some covid vaccines?
Why do you want to know that
Because I don’t wish to put words/definitions/context in your mouth. So we may discuss in good faith. So that I may understand what it is that you’re saying. For the purpose of furthering discussion? Etc.
except to whittle on some pedantic definitional point?
^ Not like this, for instance. Hence why I asked a very specific question. I still have no idea what your definition of ‘femicide’ is, compared to the legal definition. They may be the same, they may not! Hence I don’t know if it’s the actual definitive word ‘femicide’ that you object to, or if you are objecting to some other evolving (non-legal/legal?) definition of it, (ie something I’m unaware of, and hoping to understand if so)
I don’t think you have any intention of discussing this in good faith.
Would you demand empathy and sympathy for anti-vaxxers exploiting the handful of blood clots associated with some covid vaccines?
QED.
@stevextc - some of your attitudes and opinions of and towards violence on this thread are very worrying, I have to say. As in, needing-professional-help level of worrying.
You say that violence needs to be normalised because it's the only language some people understand. Did you stop to think why that might be? It's because people like you, a generation before, taught [i]them[/i] that violence was the only option. All it does is push it on down the line.
To be honest, I don't know why I'm bothering - you genuinely don't want to understand the issue and won't take on board that there might be a better path out of this than "might is right". Isn't it about time we tried to be better?