Why are women still afraid to walk home at night?

Maddog wrote:

Korben wrote:
What kind of responce where you looking for ? Do you think BLM ,do you think blacks are treated differently to whites .did you want me to say All life's matter ? and thus minimising the "slogan" BLM as was my point

My point is, you can be against fascism and not support the antics of antifa and believe that black lives matter and not support the BLM group.

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



This may be news to some people, but women are killed by women... and men are killed by women too...


I was reading a story only yesterday about a man who was stabbed 22 times in an attack by his wife.


Men are victims of domestic violence by women, a lot more than you might think... And are victims of sexual harassment and sexual assault too.

Yes start a thread about it Tommy.

This is about the huge % of women who are afraid to go out alone at night for fear of male sexual interference.

If men are afraid to go out at night alone it will be because of the actions of other men....not women.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I doubt that...and I"ve seen no proof.  BLM is strictly an American organization, as it opposes a de facto American policy of treating blacks and whites unequally.  Antifa is a sentiment, not an organization; it's the equivalent of saying 'the left infiltrated Clapham...'  So what?

Those claims are so fraught with ambiguities as to make them meaningless.  As Syl says, it's probably a 'Rent-a-mob'.  It's like an army saying, God is on our side.  Unless you have some physical manifestation to prove the allegation, it's just rhetoric.  

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/11/black-lives-matter-uk-to-start-funding-groups-from-12m-donations

You make being full of shit a fucking art from.  

HoratioTarr wrote:

Maddog wrote:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/11/black-lives-matter-uk-to-start-funding-groups-from-12m-donations

You make being full of shit a fucking art from.  

Kudos where it's due though.  It takes some doing.

Original Quill wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Kudos where it's due though.  It takes some doing.

If you want to join the losers, I can't stop you.  But before you go down that hole, read this:



To quote Grimes:  “He, who will not reason, is a bigot; he, who cannot, is a fool; and he, who dares not, is a slave." – quoting WILLIAM DRUMMOND OF LOGIEALMOND, Academical Questions (1805).

― David Robert Grimes, The Irrational Ape: Why Flawed Logic Puts us all at Risk and How Critical Thinking Can Save the World (2019).

Quill wrote:
BLM is strictly an American organization

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

My point is, you can be against fascism and not support the antics of antifa and believe that black lives matter and not support the BLM group.

What are the “antics of antifa”??  Since antifa has no presence—except as a sentiment—and then only to oppose fascism—the question arises: What are you protecting by not supporting antifa?  Are you really in favor of fascism?

Likewise, the inference of your opposition to Black Lives Matter, is that you feel Black Lives…don’t Matter.  Now the issues are joined, as Courts say: Black lives matter <-> Black lives don’t matter.  It’s why white supremacists of the south so vehemently favor a white separatist nation.

Go, if you want.     Amexit.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

What are the “antics of antifa”??  Since antifa has no presence—except as a sentiment—and then only to oppose fascism—the question arises: What are you protecting by not supporting antifa?  Are you really in favor of fascism?

Likewise, the inference of your opposition to Black Lives Matter, is that you feel Black Lives…don’t Matter.  Now the issues are joined, as Courts say: Black lives matter <-> Black lives don’t matter.  It’s why white supremacists of the south so vehemently favor a white separatist nation.

Go, if you want.     Amexit.

Do you ever use the internet for anything except pedaling your bullshit on here?  


https://youtu.be/QyqX_8o00uc

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

If you want to join the losers, I can't stop you.  But before you go down that hole, read this:



To quote Grimes:  “He, who will not reason, is a bigot; he, who cannot, is a fool; and he, who dares not, is a slave." – quoting WILLIAM DRUMMOND OF LOGIEALMOND, Academical Questions (1805).

― David Robert Grimes, The Irrational Ape: Why Flawed Logic Puts us all at Risk and How Critical Thinking Can Save the World (2019).

Quill wrote:
BLM is strictly an American organization

Quill was full of shit.  

Again.  

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:




Quill was full of shit.  

Again.  

Fuckin' liar.  You should be in Guantanamo, where all traitors belong.

Original Quill wrote:Wha...wha...wha...

If you have nothing to say, tell us.

Quill wrote:BLM is strictly an American organization

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Wha...wha...wha...

If you have nothing to say, tell us.

Quill wrote:BLM is strictly an American organization

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Truth!  Finally!  

Syl wrote:Back on topic...

A woman who had peacefully attended the vigil for Sarah was walking home when a man exposed himself to her.
She reported it to the police at the time, and was just dismissed by a male police officer.
Seems the message that women are not free to walk the streets without fear is going to be VERY hard to get across.

"A woman has claimed she was flashed by a man on her way home from the Sarah Everard vigil, only to be shunned by a male police officer.
She said the man exposed himself as she was walking next to Clapham Common, where hundreds of women had gathered to remember the 33-year-old marketing executive.
The 27-year-old woman, who gave her name as Georgina, told Lambeth Life that a female police officer said it ‘would be looked into’ when she reported it. But she claims a male officer then allegedly told her: ‘No, we’ve had enough tonight with the rioters.’ She claimed: ‘I was just shocked to be told essentially to go away. ‘Even if they said, “We’re not going to go into it but we’ll walk you” – that would have been something.’
She said the alleged incident made her feel ‘unsafe’ and scared around the police, when she should have felt ‘protected’. The woman added that she reported the officer to the Met Police who set up a meeting."





https://metro.co.uk/2021/03/15/sarah-everard-vigil-woman-flashed-on-way-home-shunned-by-met-police-14246091/?ito=cbshare

Syl wrote:It may be a less serious crime than the murder or rape of women, but it was a crime that many of the women gathered there was protesting about. It highlights exactly why women are afraid to go out alone at night. It also perfectly emphasises the different attitudes many men have re the callous way they don't take women's safety seriously.

The female cop was prepared to do something about it, the male cop wasn't.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:It may be a less serious crime than the murder or rape of women, but it was a crime that many of the women gathered there was protesting about. It highlights exactly why women are afraid to go out alone at night. It also perfectly emphasises  the different attitudes many men have re the callous way they don't take women's safety seriously.

The female cop  was prepared to do something about it, the male cop wasn't.

I gather from what Red says, the women were rioting.  He says: "...this is what happens when people riot".

Take a clue from BLM in America, don't riot, just demonstrate.  There are 'time and place' restrictions that define the difference.  Apply for a permit, and proceed according to instructions.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:It may be a less serious crime than the murder or rape of women, but it was a crime that many of the women gathered there was protesting about. It highlights exactly why women are afraid to go out alone at night. It also perfectly emphasises  the different attitudes many men have re the callous way they don't take women's safety seriously.

The female cop  was prepared to do something about it, the male cop wasn't.

I gather from what Red says, the women were rioting.  He says: "...this is what happens when people riot".

Take a clue from BLM in America, don't riot, just demonstrate.  There are 'time and place' restrictions that define the difference.  Apply for a permit, and proceed according to instructions.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I gather from what Red says, the women were rioting.  He says: "...this is what happens when people riot".

Take a clue from BLM in America, don't riot, just demonstrate.  There are 'time and place' restrictions that define the difference.  Apply for a permit, and proceed according to instructions.

The women were not rioting. Women had come together to hold a vigil for the murdered girl.
It was an illegal gathering due to the lockdown, police got involved. There is no doubt an element of trouble causers involved themselves as so often when people are trying to make a point.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I gather from what Red says, the women were rioting.  He says: "...this is what happens when people riot".

Take a clue from BLM in America, don't riot, just demonstrate.  There are 'time and place' restrictions that define the difference.  Apply for a permit, and proceed according to instructions.

The women were not rioting. Women had come together to hold a vigil for the murdered girl.
It was an illegal gathering due to the lockdown, police got involved. There is no doubt an element of trouble causers involved themselves as so often when people are trying to make a point.

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:

The women were not rioting. Women had come together to hold a vigil for the murdered girl.
It was an illegal gathering due to the lockdown, police got involved. There is no doubt an element of trouble causers involved themselves as so often when people are trying to make a point.

Which is basically what I said.  The normal clowns that show up to take advantage of the situation were there, keeping the cops busy dealing with them.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:

The women were not rioting. Women had come together to hold a vigil for the murdered girl.
It was an illegal gathering due to the lockdown, police got involved. There is no doubt an element of trouble causers involved themselves as so often when people are trying to make a point.

This is a huge problem with demonstrations today.  If you want to gather to express your sentiments about any political or social issue, the mere fact that you are in numbers to a RW'er means that you are trouble-makers...in a word, rioters.

Time and place restrictions conform to the standards that the authorities, themselves, have set up.  Unfortunately, the pandemic has exacerbated the problem, adding a new, hopefully temporary constraint.  Nevertheless, it must be made plain that there is a difference between demonstrations, which are in the finest spirit of democratic self-government, and riots and/or looting.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

This is a huge problem with demonstrations today. If you want to gather to express your sentiments about any political or social issue, the mere fact that you are in numbers to a RW'er means that you are trouble-makers...in a word, rioters.

Time and place restrictions conform to the standards that the authorities, themselves, have set up. Unfortunately, the pandemic has exacerbated the problem, adding a new, hopefully temporary constraint. Nevertheless, it must be made plain that there is a difference between demonstrations, which are in the finest spirit of democratic self-government, and riots and/or looting.

Dont you think trouble causers, who are there not for the cause, but just to make mischief, come from all political parties?

Syl wrote:Well whether they support any political party or not in their more normal day to day lives, , imo, the rent a mob idiots, who are not all uneducated yobs by any means, will turn up anywhere people are gathering to demonstrate .
They just like the fun of disruption.

Maddog wrote:Are these folks political?

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:Are these folks political?

And peaceful.  They appear to have a variety of causes.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:Well whether they support any political party or not in their more normal day to day lives, , imo, the rent a mob idiots, who are not all uneducated yobs by any means, will turn up anywhere people are gathering to demonstrate .
They just like the fun of disruption.

Well, then they are not rent-a-mob...who are, after all, making an honest living collecting the rent.

Seriously, you seem to agree with me...that there is no correlation between political affiliation and rioters/looters.  Even if your term rent-a-mob has any meaning...they would work for anyone, and are not party-affiliated.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Well, then they are not rent-a-mob...who are, after all, making an honest living collecting the rent.

Seriously, you seem to agree with me...that there is no correlation between political affiliation and rioters/looters.  Even if your term rent-a-mob has any meaning...they would work for anyone, and are not party-affiliated.

I use the term 'rent a mob' towards the idiots who just turn up to cause trouble when an often peacful demonstration has been organised.
A couple of decades ago they would have been the ones provoking violence at football matches.
They dont work for anyone, they do it for their own gratification.

Tommy Monk wrote:


The 'rent a mob' are overwhelming democrat supporters and here in UK are labour supporters... They don't care about the issues really, but just jump on the bandwagon and use any issue as an excuse to cause maximum disruption... So those in their political paymaster HQs can use this chaos for political pont scoring...



It is such an open secret that it is not really a secret at all any more... We all know what they're up to!!!

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:
I use the term 'rent a mob' towards the idiots who just turn up to cause trouble when an often peacful demonstration has been organised.
A couple of decades ago they would have been the ones provoking violence at football matches.
They dont work for anyone, they do it for their own gratification.

Well, why do you use a commercial transaction to describe their motives?  If you think they are disingenuous to their cause, why don't you say so directly?

In the meantime, when I back BLM or the NAACP, I mean those who are dedicated to making America a better place to live.  Anyone else who shows up and doesn't have a commitment to the cause, are simply not with me.  Don't ask me about them...I can't tell you.  They’re not with the cause.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Well, why do you use a commercial transaction to describe their motives?  If you think they are disingenuous to their cause, why don't you say so directly?

In the meantime, when I back BLM or the NAACP, I mean those who are dedicated to making America a better place to live.  Anyone else who shows up and doesn't have a commitment to the cause, are simply not with me.  Don't ask me about them...I can't tell you.  They’re not with the cause.

It's just a slang term used for trouble causers who turn up en-masse to cause trouble, it obviously has a different meaning for you.

Syl wrote:Most of the so called 'rent a mob' have no knowledge or interest for the cause they turn up to demonstrate for or against. I'm not saying that some are not highly organised, like the EDL mobs, they were always easily identified by their shocking use of English grammar and missing teeth.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Well, why do you use a commercial transaction to describe their motives?  If you think they are disingenuous to their cause, why don't you say so directly?

In the meantime, when I back BLM or the NAACP, I mean those who are dedicated to making America a better place to live.  Anyone else who shows up and doesn't have a commitment to the cause, are simply not with me.  Don't ask me about them...I can't tell you.  They’re not with the cause.

It's just a slang term used for trouble causers who turn up en-masse to cause trouble, it obviously has a different meaning for you.

Most of the so called 'rent a mob' have no knowledge or interest for the cause they turn up to demonstrate for or against. I'm not saying that some are not highly organised, like the EDL mobs, they were always easily identified by their shocking use of English grammar and missing teeth.

Didgee wrote:

eddie wrote:

Okay then that’s what I’ll stick to.

So how much of womens’ fear is based on mass hysteria?

For instance, I’ve had bad experiences but I am not fearful of walking alone at night.

I do not think the fear is based on mass hysteria from the media, though it can certainly add to the fear a number of women do have

Its good that you do not fear Eddie, but lets place this into perspective

I like many males are unlikely to feel uncomfortable with someone walking behind us, but a large number of women will because lets be honest. In society women are constantly objectified by males. Where a number of males fail to understand boundaries and harass women. Where they fail to understand comfort zones when on public transport for example and invade the spaces of women. Of course some males on their own around kicking out time of pubs and clubs will feel unsafe with drunken males on the street, but again the issue is males here.

The reality is there is a substantial number of violent males in this world who target both males and females, but its females who are more vulnerable compared to males. Its unlikely a male is going to feel uncomfortable with a female walking behind them, because females account for a very small number of crimes against males. Where as males account for a very large number of crimes against females. Many of which are sexual crimes, of which go unreported and the ones that are reported hardly see any justice. So society is doing very little to protect females and even worse bring to justice violent males

Considering a very large number of females are victims of sex crimes. Then its no wonder many of them will feel uncomfortable walking alone at night. Considering a third of all women and girls experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime, vastly from males. Its no surprise that many females will have their adrenaline kick in the moment they have a male/males walking behind them. A male should if they care about the safety of females, cross the street to allay the fear a woman has when walking alone at night. If they are behind them

So its great you are able to control fear when outside at night Eddie, but many females are unable to when alone. This has nothing to do with the media, it has everything to do with the lived experience that many females have faced with harassment, violence and emotional and mental abuse they have suffered in their lives

To tackle this we need to stop failing children, because that is where the problem starts when we fail to ensure that kids have good role models in their lives

https://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/ending-violence-against-women/facts-and-figures

@Hoaratio

Sorry but there is little to no evidence that violent games or TV leads to an increase in violence and this is more evident by the fact that this violence has not changed throughout history. Before the advent of TV and computer games violence was even worse towards women. What will lead to more boys growing up to be violent is their growing up in violent surroundings, child abuse etc. A lack of good role models. Many kids that turn to violence lack good male role models and this is problematic. This is not to say that single mons do a bad job, because many are good role models themselves and raise their children well

Hence if we want to help tackle male violence then the key is when kids are young and to ensure they have better role models.

I certainly agree that social media is an issue and is leading to more and more mental health issues in younger people. Epically young girls, leading to more cases of self harm. I think one way to tackle this is that to join any social media platform, nobody should be allowed to be anonymous online. Hence accountable for anything they say online. Its because of anonymity that allows people to incite hate and violence online. Social media platforms simple do not care about the well being of people, because they are in it for the money.

Social media is certainly becoming a massive problem and also allows for the organised way to react, as we see with far right and far left groups. When they organise their violence onto the streets.

https://www.theguardian.com/games/2020/jul/22/playing-video-games-doesnt-lead-to-violent-behaviour-study-shows

eddie wrote:Sorry didge, i did see that but forgot to reply. I agree with most of what you say in that post. I get it, I do, but we should learn not to live in fear. It ruins our enjoyment of life.

Didgee wrote:

eddie wrote:Sorry didge, i did see that but forgot to reply. I agree with most of what you say in that post. I get it, I do, but we should learn not to live in fear. It ruins our enjoyment of life.

I agree we should not live in fear, but that is very hard when females get very little justice in society around the world

eddie wrote:As I read through some of Maddog’s posts on here I thought to myself...

“Wow, yes, that’s the answer! Let’s all carry a fucking gun!”

eddie wrote:

Didgee wrote:

I agree we should not live in fear, but that is very hard when females get very little justice in society around the world

Well that’s true enough, I concur, but once one allows fear to take a hold...it becomes a terrible way to live.
I sort of have this theory that most of the bad things we can imagine, never actually come true.

Ben Reilly wrote:What just still sticks in my craw about this topic is the idea that non-rapist men have some responsibility to change their ways or something in response to this tragedy.

I don't rape. If a friend of mine bragged he was raping women, I'd call the police, but criminals tend not to go around confessing to their crimes.

It's like anything else -- in the film Detroit, which eddie and watched the other day, black people are rioting in Detroit in 1967, and a black security guard tries to help police in any way he can. At one point, a white cop asks the black guy, "How long do you think they'll keep this up?" and the black guy rightly says, "How should I know?"

It's just wrong to link a bad behavior to something about the way you were born -- your race, your gender, your culture, your sexual orientation, whatever.

It's not just prejudiced, it's illogical. The fact I was born a white male American doesn't mean I'm going to do anything bad that some other white male Americans may do. I might do bad things that Indian Muslims may also do. I might do bad things that women may also do.

I think a better predictor of the bad things you might do is where you are in society -- rich people tend not to shoplift very much, whereas poor people rarely embezzle from large corporations.

And anyway, besides all that, I'm sure that rapists have heard people condemn rape. They don't rape because they've never been told it's wrong; they rape because there's something wrong with them that all the "Rape is wrong!" in the world can't fix.

The only thing that would truly help is to put more police on the streets.

Ben Reilly wrote:What just still sticks in my craw about this topic is the idea that non-rapist men have some responsibility to change their ways or something in response to this tragedy.

I don't rape. If a friend of mine bragged he was raping women, I'd call the police, but criminals tend not to go around confessing to their crimes.

It's like anything else -- in the film Detroit, which eddie and watched the other day, black people are rioting in Detroit in 1967, and a black security guard tries to help police in any way he can. At one point, a white cop asks the black guy, "How long do you think they'll keep this up?" and the black guy rightly says, "How should I know?"

It's just wrong to link a bad behavior to something about the way you were born -- your race, your gender, your culture, your sexual orientation, whatever.

It's not just prejudiced, it's illogical. The fact I was born a white male American doesn't mean I'm going to do anything bad that some other white male Americans may do. I might do bad things that Indian Muslims may also do. I might do bad things that women may also do.

I think a better predictor of the bad things you might do is where you are in society -- rich people tend not to shoplift very much, whereas poor people rarely embezzle from large corporations.

And anyway, besides all that, I'm sure that rapists have heard people condemn rape. They don't rape because they've never been told it's wrong; they rape because there's something wrong with them that all the "Rape is wrong!" in the world can't fix.

The only thing that would truly help is to put more police on the streets.

Maddog wrote:

eddie wrote:As I read through some of Maddog’s posts on here I thought to myself...

“Wow, yes, that’s the answer! Let’s all carry a fucking gun!”

Nah, lets just not tell people (especially women) they can't.

I make myself very clear, yet people continue to try to twist my words.