As you post neatly accomplishes.
"Any sign of disrespect has to be seen as a warning sign of possibly worse to come. Because, unfortunately, society underestimates and belittles the harassment women face every day, everywhere. Society similarly underestimate and belittle the very real threats of violence that women face every day from men."
Any sign of disrespect - So your swastika-clad dominatrixes must strut through the evil throngs of males who are guilty before proven innocent, are troglodytes, rapists, gropers and self-pleasurers who must be struck down with violent and lethal force. Yea, she must be ever ready with the demeanor of a prison guard, ready to strike down any who might be impudent enough to approach or attempt to engage in conversation the almighty she-person lest they turn out to be that 1 in a million nutbar wishing nothing more than to utter the phrase: "it puts the lotion in the basket."
I am simply saying that we all want equality for women. I think they should have had it from the beginning of time. Yet your comment describes a self-imposed prison that women carry with them wherever they go, a "kill or be killed" mentality that while it may be successful in keeping away the potential rapist (but I even doubt the true success of that), it also removes any chance of interaction with the 99.9999999% of men who want nothing but good things for said female. It forces women into a radical mindset so far apart from reality that they might as well not even bother to venture out from their apartment.
I hadn't previously read the passage about some jack-wad pulling down her top. That is an example of the sexual assault you may be referring to but positioning that as the day-to-day reality that women must suffer through is as ridiculous as saying that it was just an example of "boys will be boys" behavior. It was an assault and that person's vehicle license number should have been notated and the authorities contacted immediately. We may both agree that this behavior is always wrong and nobody on DU, least of all me, is trying to imply otherwise.
"every time a man forces his attention upon a woman, insults her, demeans her, or or threatens or her in any way. Woman immediately have to go into defensive mode no matter how harmless you would immediately consider the situation to be. Women have to immediately think, "is there any chance he is going to turn this into a physical confrontation?" "Is there any chance I am about to be stalked, sexually assaulted or possibly raped by this guy?" "
Every time a man forces his attention upon a woman - that is exactly what my post focuses on. This hypothetical man was in all probability just displaying typical "male" behavior -- the behavior that God gave us when he loaded us down from the moment the X chromosome met with the Y chromosome with the genetic material, instincts, and hormonal control systems that he did. Chest pounding, loud grunts, over-expansive limb placement and arm movements, guttural growls and hoots, these were the tools of our ape ancestors for locating and securing a mate, or of asserting their dominance over other proto-humans lest someone do something to diminish their chance TO mate. Today we see public speakers using exaggerated arm movement to portray (often false) comfort in the front of huge crowds. The preference of others that we exhibit an air of confidence, just the right amount of eye contact and a firm handshake, these are natural, innate and codified in our genetic makeup, and a mastery of them is mandatory for success in the business community. These behaviors (or should I say "behaviours") and our reactions to them are not one person's creation forced upon the other 6 billion of us, they are not taught in kindergarten or elementary school by rote or threat of a ruler against your knuckles. They are built into us every bit as much as the fact that your pupil will contract when a bright light is shone into them. So your assertion that just because a male tries to make a connection that turns out to be unwanted that makes him a potential rapist who must be beaten down with a cattle prod or maced into a quivering heap on the ground is a product of a feverish mind or a psychological issue with the male of the species. Women want to brand the man with whatever nasty, demeaning or vicious label they choose when the situation is as cut and dried as boy-monkey and girl-monkey: she isn't responsive to his advances. We both know that when your chemical signals get tweaked in just the right way, a moronic "hey baby, wanna grab a coffee" is most welcome. You just want us to dry up and blow away until YOU think you're interested in what we have to offer.
Take the good with the bad. Accept men as they are. Or, as I suggested earlier, bow out of the competition and start wearing comfortable shoes. The 99.999999% of men you verbally assault will be happier if you do.
An update to my earlier post, here is the study I referred to that shows women are controlled by chemical signals they are not even aware of.
The first study to indicate that chemical signals play a role in attraction was conducted by Claud Wedekind over a decade ago. Forty-four men wore the same T-shirt for three days. They refrained from deodorants and scented soaps so they wouldn't interfere with their natural smell. Women then sniffed the shirts and indicated which ones smelled the best to them. By comparing the DNA of the women and men, the researchers found that women didn't just choose their favorite scent randomly. They preferred the scent of man whose major histocompatibility complex (MHC) -- a series of genes involved in our immune system -- was most different from their own.
http://www.nhne.org/news/NewsArticlesArchive/tabid/400/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/4244/language/en-US/How-Smell-Influences-Sexual-Attraction.aspxSome women want to believe themselves "above" the baser nature of our species. They want to think that their behavior and their reaction to "that cute guy" or "that jerk who said X, Y or Z" is all controlled by their conscious mind, that they are not puppets on the string of chemical signals they have never heard of. The facts say otherwise.
Now that we have dispelled the myth that women are in control of their reactions to men, proved false the idea that whatever they feel or think in response to a male's actions or words is 100% right and just, we can then hold women to the same standard as men. Finally. Women are just as bigoted against men, just as self-centered and every bit the jerks that they say they hate men for, I rest my case.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
