The Daily Wail

Black Hole said:
What is it you don't understand about the need for gender-neutrality in legislation?
Click to expand...
I am not that worried about homosexual rape, like EEPhil is. Maybe I should be.

But how many times has anyone followed you home, then stuck their hand between your buttocks?
 
That's as maybe, but you're still advocating specific discriminatory privilege. I don't know if it's still there, but there was a car park in Cardiff with a "women only" floor, which is discrimination unless there is also a "men only" floor. Then there's all the arguments which will ensue when trying to decide who counts as "female" and who as "male".

One reason I am less sympathetic is because of all the fuss (some) women make about not being allowed into private men's establishments such as the MCC. I could accept that if it was a public institution, but private clubs etc should be allowed to make their rules as they like. It's those bombastic women's libbers who let the side down.

Assault is assault, and policing should protect all of us. If you stereotype men as perpetrators and women as victims, you're committing the same sin as stereotyping certain races as more likely to be carrying weapons or drugs, for example.

I also do not buy the argument that women should be able to go about dressed however they like and expect to remain unmolested. We were not brought up like that, and there is such a thing as deliberately putting yourself in harm's way. I wouldn't consider going into Newport on a Friday night (under normal circumstances), and if a female decides to do that it is deliberately taking a risk - just the same as you don't step out into traffic on the basis that the law should protect you from being run over.

I'm sure you can find all manner of reasons to disagree, and I do realise it happens that sometimes the "victim" has no choice but to be where they are when they are and without any provocation, but nonetheless if you want women not to be discriminated against in a modern society you also have to not discriminate against men (most of whom are not molesters, and some of whom have been abused in some way shape or form by the opposite sex because if they fought back they would automatically be assumed to be in the wrong).

I really don't know how men and women are supposed to meet and form relationships these days. The slightest chat-up line and you get vilified as a pervert.
 
Oh dear, such a stereotype you are! I am amazed at you, BH.

The old argument "she had it coming to her because of how she was dressed". My scratlet was dressed very demure when she was attacked. In a residential area, far from clubs and bars.

Stereotyping based on sex or skin hue is just using conditional probabilities. I agree, with skin, it is sometimes overdone. Sexual attacks by women on men are extremely rare. Go figure the conditional probabilities.
 
Anyway, there are some tips for everyone. If you are walking behind another, and think they may feel threatened, hold back, or cross the road. Definitely don't cross the road when they do.
 
Black Hole said:
Nobody told her she would be expected to curtsey to the Queen - really? I expect she simply didn't want to hear that sort of thing.
Click to expand...
Who in their right mind would curtsey to the queen?🤣 The queen isn't even from a good family, murderers, rapists, drunkards, racists, imperialists, the lot of them.

Curtsey? No, V sign, more like.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Scrat said:
she had it coming to her because of how she was dressed
Click to expand...
No, that's not what I'm saying at all, and I think you are trying to twist it your way.

Scrat said:
Anyway, there are some tips for everyone. If you are walking behind another, and think they may feel threatened, hold back, or cross the road.
Click to expand...
I find that offensive. If you are worried about the intentions of somebody who happens to be (perfectly legally and reasonably) walking behind you, stop and let them pass. Why should you expect other people to make allowances for your insecurities?

Scrat said:
Definitely don't cross the road when they do.
Click to expand...
But that is fair enough, assuming there is not a good reason to do so.

Scrat said:
Who in their right mind would curtsey to the queen?
Click to expand...
Whether or not you choose to show respect to the reigning monarch isn't the point. If your aim is to join the royal family (and don't tell me that was not Megan's intention), then you accept the culture or take a hike.
 
Last edited:
Black Hole said:
Whether or not you choose to show respect to the reigning monarch isn't the point. If your aim is to join the royal family (and don't tell me that was not Megan's intention), then you accept the culture or take a hike.
Click to expand...

She married, Harry, not that freak family.

Black Hole said:
I find that offensive. If you are worried about the intentions of somebody who happens to be (perfectly legally and reasonably) walking behind you, stop and let them pass. Why should you expect other people to make allowances for your insecurities?
Click to expand...

But they don't know you are legally and reasonably walking behind them, that is the point. Courtesy dictates giving a signal that you are not threatening them. I can't see you ever appreciating that though. You are more concerned with paying respect to a family that deserves none.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Scrat said:
Courtesy dictates giving a signal that you are not threatening them.
Click to expand...
Utter bollox. I have never threatened anyone in my life, and there is no reason anyone should presume threatening intent. I have had people step out of a doorway or whatever without looking (have you noticed how pedestrians do that?) and take up a direction of motion directly in front of mine, and then be walking slower than me and get in the way. Is that my fault? Can I always tell whether the figure on the footpath in front of me is female? No. Do I get surprised by cyclists coming up from behind without warning? Yes.

That is the fundamental problem with your thesis - you want to approach the problem from the wrong end, by stereotyping all males as threatening, and expecting people who don't know how to behave to be courteous (and there's you who don't believe in showing respect anyway). Why should I have my freedoms (as a civilised, law respecting, male) reduced so that another group can feel have more freedom? Unreasonable. There is only one way you can address this equitably, and that is to police lewd behaviour out of existence.

All law, and all official policy by public bodies must be gender neutral.
 
gomezz said:
What is the signal for that? I wasn't taught that during my Good Manners training as a child.
Click to expand...
It wasn't such an issue then, and in my younger days, assault and bullying were the norm, from children and teachers alike.

I agree, the thesis requires a minimum of social intelligence, and that is its failing, but those of us who can do it, can ease some tension, at least.
 
Black Hole said:
there's you who don't believe in showing respect anyway
Click to expand...
Of course I do! Don't conflate my attitude to people who demand excessive grovelling obsequiousness and that to everyone else.

If the royals demand bowing and curtseying, sod them!😁
 
Scrat said:
It wasn't such an issue then, and in my younger days, assault and bullying were the norm, from children and teachers alike.

I agree, the thesis requires a minimum of social intelligence, and that is its failing, but those of us who can do it, can ease some tension, at least.
Click to expand...
And again, what is the signal? Does it involve a number of fingers? A cheery wave of the hand? Or something more subtle in body language?
 
Although many of those seem to adopt a uniform style of dress and behaviour that signals they are to be avoided. So, in fact, it is the people who appear to act pleasantly that are the ones to be wary of as the ones who may have malice aforethought on their minds.
 
gomezz said:
Although many of those seem to adopt a uniform style of dress and behaviour that signals they are to be avoided. So, in fact, it is the people who appear to act pleasantly that are the ones to be wary of as the ones who may have malice aforethought on their minds.
Click to expand...
🐂💩
 
Is that the sign you use? How does that work out for you? I suppose the stench would allow someone to know to move away while still using their earphones to listen to music.
 
I used to find it odd that whenever I saw a female walking along the street she was usually on the phone. I now find it even more odd if they are faking it, because advertising you have a fancy phone makes you a target for mugging (and having it in your hand makes it easy to snatch by ride-by).

Then there's that weird way they use it, held out horizontally in front of the face on speaker, apparently not caring everyone else can hear the conversation!

To reiterate: I do not claim people "are asking for it", but I do believe one should minimise risk. Insurance companies are not very sympathetic if you claim for a burglary and it turns out you hadn't locked the door.
 
gomezz said:
Is that the sign you use? How does that work out for you? I suppose the stench would allow someone to know to move away while still using their earphones to listen to music.
Click to expand...
You are clearly not socially aware, then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top