Rowdy hen parties and very sensitive women

[Halibut]

I'm not making anything up that hasn't been said - why are you suggesting that?

 

Also if you read back through the posts - i have never tried to distract from the issue or to justify harassment against women. In fact, the only people who have passed comment as to the extent of what people do or don't feel when they have been harrassed are you and Halibut.

 

Why does saying something happens to men mean you are justifying it happening to women? I certainly haven't said that. I don't believe anyone else has - are you sure I'm the one making things up?

 

You don't believe this happens to men as much - which I have already said I agree with, but oddly that wasn't either of your points. Instead Halibut insinuated that because a man may not be scared or threatened then it somehow had less of an impact on a person , which you then supported. That's a very strange argument to run by two posters so staunchly in favour of equality and against harrassment.

 

In fact its a bit of a disgrace.

 

I stand by that. It's self evidently true.

 

If something happens to a person that is merely annoying or mildly embarrassing it's self evidently true that it's had a lesser impact than something happening to a person that causes extreme fear and distress.

[Michael_W]

I stand by that. It's self evidently true.

 

If something happens to a person that is merely annoying or mildly embarrassing it's self evidently true that it's had a lesser impact than something happening to a person that causes extreme fear and distress.

 

Let's not be so narrow minded enough to think all women are soft and fluffy and that all men are nasty and menacing ?

I know plenty of women who could probably eat you and me for breakfast

[Halibut]

Let's not be so narrow minded enough to think all women are soft and fluffy and that all men are nasty and menacing ?

I know plenty of women who could probably eat you and me for breakfast

 

I certainly don't think that Michael and indeed, like you, I'm lucky to have some mighty women in my life.

[Guest makapaka]

I stand by that. It's self evidently true.

 

If something happens to a person that is merely annoying or mildly embarrassing it's self evidently true that it's had a lesser impact than something happening to a person that causes extreme fear and distress.

 

That's just a nothing statement where you are ignoring the rationale which you applied it to. That argument only works if you assume that one sex is always only annoyed and mildly embarassed by sexual harassment and another is always in fear and distress.

 

Notwithstanding the above - why was it important to you to try and establish not that it happens less often to men, but that they are less affected by it when it happens? Don't you think that's an unfair generalisation - and something which I believe had someone done the same in regard to women - you would have rightly questioned.

 

I think it's because of a similar argument put forward by Cyclone above, that you automatically assumed that people were trying to justify harassment of women by mentioning the issue of harassment of men.

 

In your haste to try and fight this perceived argument - you have ended up trying to run a generalised argument on the supposed reduced effects of sexual harassment on males - arguably doing the exact thing you were calling in to question, that being the justification of harassment.

Edited October 24, 2017 by makapaka

[Halibut]

That's just a nothing statement where you are ignoring the rationale which you applied it to. That argument only works if you assume that one sex is always only annoyed and mildly embarassed by sexual harassment and another is always in fear and distress.

 

Notwithstanding the above - why was it important to you to try and establish not that it happens less often to men, but that they are less affected by it when it happens? Don't you think that's an unfair generalisation - and something which I believe had someone done the same in regard to women - you would have rightly questioned.

 

I think it's because of a similar argument put forward by Cyclone above, that you automatically assumed that people were trying to justify harassment of women by mentioning the issue of harassment of men.

 

In your haste to try and fight this percieved argument - you have ended up trying to run a generalised argument on the supposed reduced affects of sexual harassment on males - arguably doing the exact thing you were calling in to question, that being the justification of harassment.

 

There's no 'supposed' about it. Overwhelmingly, sexual harrassment and assault is perpetrated against women by men.

 

Unless you disagree with this premise then I'm really not sure what your issue is.

 

Yes, men are also sometimes sexually harassed or assaulted, sometimes seriously. This is of course a bad thing.

 

Men are much less frequently victims of sexual harassment or assault and at the lower range of seriousness of offences, less likely to be traumatised by it in my view.

[Guest makapaka]

There's no 'supposed' about it. Overwhelmingly, sexual harrassment and assault is perpetrated against women by men.

 

Unless you disagree with this premise then I'm really not sure what your issue is.

 

Yes, men are also sometimes sexually harassed or assaulted, sometimes seriously. This is of course a bad thing.

 

Men are much less frequently victims of sexual harassment or assault and at the lower range of seriousness of offences, less likely to be traumatised by it in my view.

 

You’ve missed my point again - reduced effect is different to reduced occurrences. I haven’t argued that there are not more occurences against women..

 

Saying that it has less effect because it happens less often is a daft argument because it doesn’t deal with the impact on the individual.

 

You’ve changed your argument to it happening less often - you weren’t trying to establish how often it happened when you directly asked someone how they felt as a consequence of being sexually harassed. There was no need to ask that question unless you were seeking to argue that males were less affected as victims - not less affected as a proportion of the human race.

[Halibut]

I'm not saying men don't suffer when they're subject to serious sexual assaults such as rape. Of course they do.

I'm suggesting that many fewer man are subject to sexual harassment and assault than women do and that at the lower end of the scale, eg sexual comments, unwanted touching, men are less likely than women to be frightened, distressed or upset.

 

Can you tell what exactly you think is wrong with position? Frankly, I'm getting tired of your circular thinking.

[monkey104]

What I'm trying to say is that the woman could be totally naked, but that's still not an invitation to assault her. The invitation to have sex is separate to her clothing, that's the whole point.

 

If you spot a £50 note on the table in a pub, does spotting it give you the right to pocket it without it being theft? Of course it doesn't!

 

The clothing, or lack thereof, is not an implicit invitation. That's the huge part that some people don't seem to be able to understand. There's a small issue still involved called CONSENT. The excuse that you just couldn't control yourself in the sight of her beauty is not an excuse.

 

You are correct and I do get that women should be able to dress and behave how they like free from assault and Harrasment ,so they should. I just can't accept that to keep themselves safe they can't be informed of the minds of some men and that their dress/ actions may not be appropriate.

 

But to use your £50 note analogy, being the honest person I am I would probably tell you that you had left £50 on the table and it is unwise to do so as it may get nicked.

[Guest makapaka]

I'm not saying men don't suffer when they're subject to serious sexual assaults such as rape. Of course they do.

I'm suggesting that many fewer man are subject to sexual harassment and assault than women do and that at the lower end of the scale, eg sexual comments, unwanted touching, men are less likely than women to be frightened, distressed or upset.

 

Can you tell what exactly you think is wrong with position? Frankly, I'm getting tired of your circular thinking.

 

Well for one it stereotypes men and women in terms of their reaction when being victims of harassment and assaults.

 

Some of your previous comments also demonstrate quite a bit of hypocrisy in terms of the views you consider yourself to hold.

 

I’m equally tired.

[Halibut]

Well for one it stereotypes men and women in terms of their reaction when being victims of harassment and assaults.

 

No - it just acknowledges years of male privilege and entitlement and the impact it has on women.

 

Some of your previous comments also demonstrate quite a bit of hypocrisy in terms of the views you consider yourself to hold.

 

I’m equally tired.

 

Then by all means have a cup of tea and a biscuit or a nap, then you can come back refreshed and explain which of my comments reveal the hypocrisy of the views I consider myself to hold. Sounds exciting!