Women fear for their safety around men in public, and rightfully so. Period. It’s so fucking bizarre that anyone would ever try to argue against this.
I am not. I am arguing against the fact that men don’t (need to) worry about their safety in public. It’s such a cartoonish way to think. You don’t worry, good for you!
The statistics you’re quoting (and likely making up, but I don’t care enough about this to look) aren’t really relevant, I’m talking about real women’s real life experience.
So one comment ago you were telling me to look at statistics, now it’s real life experience that matters.
Again, talk to women. Or if you can’t do that, read what actual women have to say about this subject. Do you not value the opinions of women? Do you not believe them when they speak about their personal experiences?
This has nothing to do with my argument.
I am not contesting women (need to) fear for their personal safety in public. If I were a woman there would be a host of additional things I would worry about. What I am contesting is the way you present this fact, as if the difference between men and women was a 0-100 difference, when it’s not.
I don’t really see the reason to make up bullshit exaggerations to drive a point that stands on its own without them. Women have to worry and do worry differently, both in terms of quality and quantity than men when they go in public. There are certain risks that in public are fairly irrelevant for men, which doesn’t mean “men have nothing to worry about”. There are also certain risks that are much smaller for women (e.g., getting into a fight in a bar because some dude’s ego was hurt and needs to assert being the alpha).
Why is it necessary for you to make a completely unrealistic assertion (which BTW disregards my opinion as man while talking about men, so “Do you not value the opinions of women? Do you not believe them when they speak about their personal experiences?” cit.) to support a very reasonable thesis?
Do you think people can appreciate the safety issue for women only if they contrast it with a completely opposite (i.e., no issue at all) situation for what concerns men?
Nobody talked about victims. I was just contesting your BS exaggeration. But I see you can only discuss in absolutes and you decided to simply ignore every single point I made and flip the table with all the cards.
You must be really unsure about your ideas if you can’t defend them at all.
YOU made it sound like reality is either you going around in complete peace and bliss without any danger whatsoever (man) or in complete terror with a deathly danger behind every corner (woman). Challenging this barbie view of the world is not aiming to flatten the differences (which I acknowledged since the beginning) between men and women.
So yeah, nice try but no. Maybe reflect on your position and admit you used an hyperbolic statement next time, I dunno, it might work better than strawmen and moving the goalpost.
I am not. I am arguing against the fact that men don’t (need to) worry about their safety in public. It’s such a cartoonish way to think. You don’t worry, good for you!
So one comment ago you were telling me to look at statistics, now it’s real life experience that matters.
BTW, just search and you will find data, for example https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/crime-and-justice/recorded-crime-victims/latest-release, https://www.statista.com/statistics/423245/us-violent-crime-victims-by-gender/ (which shows 2022 is essentially identical, but quite a gap in 2021), etc. Note that I am searching generic violent crimes. In terms of murders men are quite universally in higher number.
This has nothing to do with my argument. I am not contesting women (need to) fear for their personal safety in public. If I were a woman there would be a host of additional things I would worry about. What I am contesting is the way you present this fact, as if the difference between men and women was a 0-100 difference, when it’s not.
I don’t really see the reason to make up bullshit exaggerations to drive a point that stands on its own without them. Women have to worry and do worry differently, both in terms of quality and quantity than men when they go in public. There are certain risks that in public are fairly irrelevant for men, which doesn’t mean “men have nothing to worry about”. There are also certain risks that are much smaller for women (e.g., getting into a fight in a bar because some dude’s ego was hurt and needs to assert being the alpha).
Why is it necessary for you to make a completely unrealistic assertion (which BTW disregards my opinion as man while talking about men, so “Do you not value the opinions of
women? Do you not believe them when they speak about their personal experiences?” cit.) to support a very reasonable thesis? Do you think people can appreciate the safety issue for women only if they contrast it with a completely opposite (i.e., no issue at all) situation for what concerns men?You’re right. You’re just as much a victim as any woman.
There, did you get what you wanted? Think you’re gonna be ok?
Nobody talked about victims. I was just contesting your BS exaggeration. But I see you can only discuss in absolutes and you decided to simply ignore every single point I made and flip the table with all the cards.
You must be really unsure about your ideas if you can’t defend them at all.
YOU made it sound like reality is either you going around in complete peace and bliss without any danger whatsoever (man) or in complete terror with a deathly danger behind every corner (woman). Challenging this barbie view of the world is not aiming to flatten the differences (which I acknowledged since the beginning) between men and women.
So yeah, nice try but no. Maybe reflect on your position and admit you used an hyperbolic statement next time, I dunno, it might work better than strawmen and moving the goalpost.