Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Even in a serious discussion about women you make it about you. You're no innocent victim, you've been very disrespectful to plenty of people on here under various usernames.  

Here’s a thought. Why not get a T-shirt printed with ‘I am Chripper’ on it. Then wear it to the next Scotland game we’re all allowed to attend. I’m sure there’d be no risk, perceived or otherwise

This specific case does seem to have gathered huge attention though. Straw that broke the camels back or the involvement of a Police Officer ?  Been mentioned before but there was a young girl an

Posted Images

9 minutes ago, exile said:

Two quick answers (probably addresing question 2).

I think talking about it, and calling it out for what it is must be part of it. I saw something recently saying how often violence is expressed as something "done to women", "against women", in context of the woman's behaviour. But so often the male perpetrator was missing. As in, headlines shouldn't be "party reveller was raped" but "man rapes woman", or not "tragic beauty queen in honour killing" but "man murdered woman". Of course the perpetrator may not be known. As in this case. But once you see things this way, difficult to unsee.

Another thing 'we could do' is do more to call out misogyny and language about doing harm to women. Probably also to men. As in "she deserves a slap" (or worse). I don't remember any recently on TAMB but it did exist in the past, and of course does exist in other social media. Of course it's at risk of being "thought police" territory. But I think, to answer the question, this must be part of the answer. For TAMB, apart from anything else it is not very welcoming to new or existing members, if the TAMB is to maintain or attract members, if people are using casually violent language.

All good and valid points.

As far as the online point, social media definitely gives people a shield of armour and it urges people to act abusive (towards men and women) without feeling any repercussions. You only have to look at all the Black footballers that have to endure so much awful racial hatred and abuse online.

To a degree, it's the same here. No one can say that it isn't. The name calling (fine, maybe not threats of violence) and general disrespect is not pleasant. Everyone here is on the same side, and yet there are factions that have had petty little squabbles and vendettas that have lasted for years.

I was at the end of it a few days ago. A person jumped into a thread, with the sole intention of being abusive towards me. They got banned for a few days. More has to be done.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

All good and valid points.

As far as the online point, social media definitely gives people a shield of armour and it urges people to act abusive (towards men and women) without feeling any repercussions. You only have to look at all the Black footballers that have to endure so much awful racial hatred and abuse online.

To a degree, it's the same here. No one can say that it isn't. The name calling (fine, maybe not threats of violence) and general disrespect is not pleasant. Everyone here is on the same side, and yet there are factions that have had petty little squabbles and vendettas that have lasted for years.

I was at the end of it a few days ago. A person jumped into a thread, with the sole intention of being abusive towards me. They got banned for a few days. More has to 

Even in a serious discussion about women you make it about you.

You're no innocent victim, you've been very disrespectful to plenty of people on here under various usernames.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, exile said:

Two quick answers (probably addresing question 2).

I think talking about it, and calling it out for what it is must be part of it. I saw something recently saying how often violence is expressed as something "done to women", "against women", in context of the woman's behaviour. But so often the male perpetrator was missing. As in, headlines shouldn't be "party reveller was raped" but "man rapes woman", or not "tragic beauty queen in honour killing" but "man murdered woman". Of course the perpetrator may not be known. As in this case. But once you see things this way, difficult to unsee.

Another thing 'we could do' is do more to call out misogyny and language about doing harm to women. Probably also to men. As in "she deserves a slap" (or worse). I don't remember any recently on TAMB but it did exist in the past, and of course does exist in other social media. Of course it's at risk of being "thought police" territory. But I think, to answer the question, this must be part of the answer. For TAMB, apart from anything else it is not very welcoming to new or existing members, if the TAMB is to maintain or attract members, if people are using casually violent language.

There's is a recent post in the indy ref thread where a certain troll said sturgeon deserved a slap, from memory I think Redz pulled said poster up on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 hours ago, Lamia said:

Violence against women is clearly an issue which I do not dispute but it is men who should be more afraid of strangers. Women predominantly get attacked by people they know. Women have build up this irrational fear of men they don't know but it is something that needs tackled either way. I heard someone suggest that men should think of their actions when they are walking down the street and cross the road if approaching a woman. I don't want to live in a society where men have to do that.

Women are queuing up to give examples about their experiences walking alone but how many of them are basing this on something that has actually happened to them. I would suggest very few. That fear has come from somewhere though. We need to tackle the actual violence along with the fear but in doing so we need to recognise what is driving that fear because it is not all down to random male strangers actually attacking women. 

 

Screenshot 2021-03-14 at 13.18.54.png

Thank fuck someone is speaking sense somewhere, I got dogs abuse for suggesting the "all men must change" is way OTT
Yes men are predominantly the problem no doubt, but labeling us all is shite. 
I walk down the street and wouldnt bother man women or child, I step aside if needed or walk past when I can. The media make these things so bad that normal people get questioned and it's not right.

6 hours ago, ParisInAKilt said:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/13/this-is-not-what-sarah-would-have-wanted/

“As a 33-year-old woman, what will I take from this? I am reminded that life is short, and I will try to live mine to the full. Of course, I will be sensible and maybe take a few more taxis than I used to. But I will not live in fear. As soon as lockdown is over, I am going to go out, celebrate, get drunk with my mates in a pub. I will dance, laugh, cry, hug people and be grateful that I am alive. I will miss my friend deeply. I am so sad she will never see the end of lockdown and, as her friends, we will never get to enjoy these experiences with her again”

 incredibly sad.

Yeah I posted this to a facebook thread and got slated for it. Her friend is saying this has been taken way over what she would have wanted and yet people are still going on and on. They had a "vigil" and shouted abuse at the police, who were doing their job. Yes things got nasty, but in the middle of a global pandemic mass gathering don't help anyone, throw that in with a crowd angry at all police for one persons actions, it was never going to end well.

5 hours ago, Jim Beem said:

This specific case does seem to have gathered huge attention though. Straw that broke the camels back or the involvement of a Police Officer ? 

Been mentioned before but there was a young girl and her 2 year old murdered in Dundee 2 weeks ago and even up here, the media attention was a fraction of that generated down south. ☹️ That said, the girl and her kid murdered in Dundee were not exactly white middle england. 

I said this too, is it just because it was a police officer? what about all the other shit going on up and down the country? Your example is great as I honestly hadn't heard a thing about it.

3 hours ago, exile said:

Isn't that normal? I mean especially at night, and especially if catching up on someone in front?

No it's not normal at all. Walk around them or step aside if the space is tight, why would I swap sides of the road? Im not intending to do anything wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, phart said:

Where did this happen?

On facebook earlier with one of my friends posts. I ended up deleting the whole thing as it was getting ridiculous. 
I was agreeing that there are issues and things need to improve, but saying labeling all men is just nonsense. Apparently that makes me the problem :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Kirk said:

 

 

No it's not normal at all. Walk around them or step aside if the space is tight, why would I swap sides of the road? Im not intending to do anything wrong.

The thing has nothing to do with you or how you feel or what your intent is. It's not about you.

It's about potentially easing the anxiety of someone that isn't you.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, phart said:

The thing has nothing to do with you or how you feel or what your intent is. It's not about you.

It's about potentially easing the anxiety of someone that isn't you.

 

Sorry wrong quote

I get what you are saying, but if anyone is that worried out walking themselves then should they really be out walking themselves? Again I know that is part of the issue and rhetoric as everyone should be able to walk around freely without worry, but the reality of the world is that's not possible. The more the media whip this up the more is made of not being able to walk alone etc, when in reality it's not as dangerous as being made out.


 

Edited by Kirk
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kirk said:

Im not saying its about me, but the whole blaming all men is nonsense. And that alone has caused a massive divide in peoples responses here as people are arguing that ins and outs of that rather than coming up with a solution and supporting each other. 

You're conflating arguments , i'm explaining the rationale behind crossing the street, you had framed it in an egocentric manner. I explained it wasn't about you in anyway but the anxiety of someone else. That's the reasoning behind it. 

I'd suggest using Facebook as a source for any subject is the start of your problems Kirk, i'm not surprised you've found simplistic , infuriating arguements being made on there. I stopped using it a year ago for that very reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The streets arent safe, they have never been safe and will never be safe. Thats the way of human life im afraid.

What annoys me about things like this are the numerous things you see on things like FB where it lists a load of things like taking keys out, crossing the road, telling a friend to txt when home and pretending to phone somebody when passing a group. Then at the end it says if you have done these things then you are female. Well no, most guys have been scared when walking the streets. Just for different reasons. Women fear sexual violence, men fear phyical violence. Neither is acceptable.

The other thing that annoys me is the phrase "you cant know what its like". To be a women, a homosexual, trans etc etc. Totally correct but thw same can be said in reverse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phart said:

The thing has nothing to do with you or how you feel or what your intent is. It's not about you.

It's about potentially easing the anxiety of someone that isn't you.

 

And we need to tackle why this is because it is irrational and not born out by the evidence. I admit I feel this fear but I know it is irrational because this sort of violence is so rare. I would not want men to cross the road. 

It reminds me of a time I saw a little kid lost in a shopping centre and you could see people were reluctant to go over to her. That isn't a world I want to live in.

Yes we need to tackle the violence but we also need to tackle the irrational fear. I am not sure where it comes from or how you do that but it isn't by making men behave abnormally and be afraid to pass a woman in the street or for people to feel afraid to go to a lost child.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think I have never crossed a street to avoid another person, and I have no intention of ever doing so. I’ve walked a bit wider than normal recently due to COVID, but that’s usually a reaction to them going right to the side, so it’s clear what they are trying to achieve.

Some may argue that the second one is respectful, but the first isn’t, and they would be right, but it’s a different situation. 

I’m sorry that people are frightened and anxious, but our society isn’t a lawless free for all that they think it is. As I moaned about on the other thread, I wonder how much of the fear is based on real life, and how much of it is based on absolute nonsense from Facebook and Twitter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lamia said:

And we need to tackle why this is because it is irrational and not born out by the evidence. I admit I feel this fear but I know it is irrational because this sort of violence is so rare. I would not want men to cross the road. 

It reminds me of a time I saw a little kid lost in a shopping centre and you could see people were reluctant to go over to her. That isn't a world I want to live in.

Yes we need to tackle the violence but we also need to tackle the irrational fear. I am not sure where it comes from or how you do that but it isn't by making men behave abnormally and be afraid to pass a woman in the street or for people to feel afraid to go to a lost child.

Humans have been "scared of the dark" since they evolved 200,000 years ago, cause it's a survival increasing trait. Outside of species wide genetic rewrite, we currently don't have the technolog to accomplish, there's nothing much to tackle. It's not a big mystery and is pretty well understood in a behavioural context.

I personally don't see a big problem, I was told it lessened anxiety for some people , I took that at face value and was happy to adopt the behaviour. Lessening collective anxiety is rational behaviour in my opinion. Especially when there is no cost to me.

If folk consider it an egregrious affront then don't do it. It's a trifling matter in the grand scheme of things.

This is literally the most thought i've ever given it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're all the problem, simply because we are trying to rationalise it and work out the solution in a ritualistic state, instead of actively listening to women.

Listening seems to be the big issue here, as in, we, as men, just aren't doing it. Whether it be old fashioned testosterone or simply being too stubborn.

There are a few malcontents in this place that swagger around acting like big men, but I'm sure they are as good as gold in real life. I'd like to think that 0% of men here have even sexual assaulted a woman, etc, but there's always the potential. And it's that potential that makes us dangerous. Flip a switch and we could do something out of character. 

We just have to put away the testosterone, listen, understand and have empathy and own the fact that the male gender (all around the world) is a potential loaded weapon.

Who knows, this might blow up like the BLM movement. I hope it does.

I've known more women who have been raped than I would like to admiit. None have reported it. They shouldn't have to report it, as it shouldn't have happened in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never heard of this crossing the street to avoid a woman stuff. When did that even become a thing? It's not something I have ever considered doing. For those of you who do it, what happens if there is a woman on both sides of the street? Do you walk down the middle of the road and risk getting hit by a bus?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Orraloon said:

I have never heard of this crossing the street to avoid a woman stuff. When did that even become a thing? It's not something I have ever considered doing. For those of you who do it, what happens if there is a woman on both sides of the street? Do you walk down the middle of the road and risk getting hit by a bus?

That could effectively reduce the male population so that might be the plan! 🤔

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Orraloon said:

I have never heard of this crossing the street to avoid a woman stuff. When did that even become a thing? It's not something I have ever considered doing. For those of you who do it, what happens if there is a woman on both sides of the street? Do you walk down the middle of the road and risk getting hit by a bus?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know when I first became aware of the fact that as a male walking behind a woman (when no one else is around and particularly when it's dark) might cause her unnecessary anxiety but I would say it's something I've done all my adult life. I know she has nothing to fear from me but the point is she doesnt. 

if there's two women in opposite paths then any anxiety will be reduced as other people are present and any assault is less likely.

interestingly both my son and I have been attacked by random males, I was in my early 20s in Castlemilk waiting for a bus and my son was attacked in the affluent low crime area where we live. I think he was about 20 or 21 at the time. Neither my wife not daughter have ever been attacked but both are more aware of the possibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Orraloon said:

I have never heard of this crossing the street to avoid a woman stuff. When did that even become a thing? It's not something I have ever considered doing. For those of you who do it, what happens if there is a woman on both sides of the street? Do you walk down the middle of the road and risk getting hit by a bus?

I never considered it either, then when I went to university we had various "workshops" about personal safety etc and it was mentioned. This was in 2001.

If there are woman on both sides of the street then you're not walking behind someone alone and it becomes a moot point. It's not like you zig zag when there are dozens of women either.

I'm genuinely astonished how something that seems so simple has multiple folk bewildered. I guess the gaussian distribution is a lot wider then I realised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...