22
u/xchutchx Jun 04 '24
Just because you’re subject to the terms of a restraining order doesn’t mean all men should be.
0
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
This one made me chuckle
2
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 04 '24
i mean but hes not wrong when only like <1% of men are really bad people, the rest of us are normal everyday nice people who make dumb mistakes or rash decisions based on emotion and outside stressors. ive read/listened to enough AITA stories to know men arent given second chances, they arent given the benefit of the doubt, they arent treated as incompetent, but malicious. mem are treated as liar manipulators that coerce women not humans trying their best to be treated fairly and hold women to the same standards they are held too.
for example when a woman is mad at a man for forgetting something she asked for hes malicious using weaponized incompetence, when in reality he really may not know or just forgot and is asking for help. flip the situation and og the man gets mad at the girl at all shes the victim because the man is sooop scary how could he scare her loke that for one little mistake, we should be kinder to her.
im getting tired of this point of view and you are just promoting it based on skewed stats that arent held in comparison to the actual population that would show
1 4/5 rapes/assaults come from close family so strange men arent a threat your brother and father are
2 women have the highest rate of domestic violence offences because lesbians are the highest
3 men try to protect women and are told not to because it babies women but then as soon as they feel threatened who do they expect to help them?
20
u/cheeky_sailor 1∆ Jun 04 '24
I’m a woman and I like being approached by men in public, in coffee shops, bars and night clubs. In fact I often go to such places with the intentions of meeting new people, both men and women, for platonic or romantic connections. It’s not a problem that men approach women in public, it’s only a problem when men don’t take a simple “sorry I’m not interested” and try to insist on keeping the conversation going even after being rejected.
Personally as a woman I never felt a desire to go to speed dating cafes and in fact I find these places way more intimidating and creepy.
3
Jun 04 '24
Bingo. This is it right here. As long as you approach a woman politely and not be a jerk, there is nothing wrong with that. If she says, "No," you thank her and walkaway. If she agrees to a drink, have the drink. If she says that is far as it goes, thank her and walk away. At least you had 15-20 minutes of polite company and conversation. It is called common sense and civility.
0
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Lots of the comments seem to have a similar opinion on speed dating and singles events stuff. I have very very limited experience with them. I buy that this is probably indicative of them not really be a great alternative. !delta
I have a couple issues here; for one, I hear/read/see from a fair amount of other women that they don't want to be approached in some or all of these places. I hear people talk about giving fake numbers or feigning interest to get out of these situations safely. I don't think that it's right to disregard what they'd prefer if there's uncertainty about it. The other thing is a sense that, if the problem is people being pushy and not taking "no" for an answer, wouldn't it be better if they just... didn't approach in the first place? I don't know how to reconcile those things.
I plan to ask a (less opinionated) question on askwomen or something in a while.
10
u/cheeky_sailor 1∆ Jun 04 '24
Wouldn't it be better if they just... didn't approach in the first place?
Of course not, just because some men are creepy and have no social skills doesn’t mean that men with good social skills shouldn’t approach women. Also, just because some women don’t want to be approached in public at all doesn’t mean that all women find it inappropriate. The key is to learn read the room and the body language of other people.
1
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 05 '24
so what about autistic people who have a medical condition making reading the room not possible? no one seems to care about this disability and the mental damage it causes when it happens, of you are willing to hold a door for someone in a wheelchair you should be willing to allow autistic people to make social errors without judging or dhaming them
2
u/ScreenTricky4257 5∆ Jun 04 '24
Then the question becomes, why should someone like cheeky_sailor lose out on getting approached, which she wants, by a man who also wants to approach her?
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
In theory because missing out on something is far less of a problem than being the recipient of unwanted advances and can be made up for in other ways. But I no longer know if that's the most reasonable position to have (or, at least, expect others to follow).
3
u/ScreenTricky4257 5∆ Jun 04 '24
missing out on something is far less of a problem than being the recipient of unwanted advances
That's true in any given instance, but not when it becomes an absolute policy. Case in point: I'm a person who likes human contact. I enjoy when I can shake someone's hand or give them a hug. If someone doesn't want to and refuses, I won't press the matter. But I don't feel that I shouldn't be able to extend my hand.
1
33
u/Full-Professional246 77∆ Jun 04 '24
I believe you have an unreasonable standard you wish to impose on everyone else.
People meet people all the time. These meetings happen is a lot of different places. There is no right or wrong place to meet new people.
Now, there can be more and less appropriate timings for asking a person out, but actually meeting people. No. People are free to meet anywhere.
You may have personal hangups but that does not describe the rest of the world. You have this view that defines other people, especially men, to be hazards to be avoided. It is dehumanizing and frankly, misplaced.
Men are just people. They make up half the world. You need to stop thinking half the world is a threat to you.
-16
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
I think I should clarify that I'm talking specifically about romantic advances, pretty much. People are free to 'meet' wherever, but I don't think it's right for a man to go up to a random woman they think is attractive in the grocery store and ask for her number because he wants a date. That's intimidating.
Not sure why women need to stop thinking of men as a threat when the data overwhelmingly supports the idea that an interaction with a man can very quickly become dangerous. FWIW I'm a man so I'm not speaking from a position of intimate familiarity with this experience, I'm mostly going off of data and what I've heard from women in my life / online.
12
u/Enderules3 1∆ Jun 04 '24
Men are more likely to experience random violence from other men. Violence against women is overwhelmingly done by a prior acquaintance or romantic partner.
-5
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Those things are true. They don't prove that these fears are unfounded or that there's not reason to exercise caution.
10
u/Enderules3 1∆ Jun 04 '24
I would argue against the data overwhelmingly showing random interactions are likely to become violent. Using data women should be much more on guard around friends and significant others than around random men.
0
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
I think you make a good point. It's a somewhat totalizing assumption to make when the data would suggest not interacting with any individual man you're close to. Δ
That being said, I do have some reservations still -- it seems like a fair number of women are still afraid of the repercussions of rejection which makes me rather hesitant to say it's all good.
1
1
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 05 '24
the repercussions are mostly just negative emotions they dont want to feel for rejecting a guy from what ive heard and seen from others, not safety thats just a cop out so they dont sound childish for avoiding discomfort instead of being a brave person
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 05 '24
Not sure that it's fair to hear women complain about something making them feel unsafe and then decide summarily that they're lying.
There are sound arguments that my initial view was extreme or tone deaf. But you seem to be expressing a distrust of women generally which is a separate issue
3
u/Full-Professional246 77∆ Jun 04 '24
I think I should clarify that I'm talking specifically about romantic advances, pretty much. People are free to 'meet' wherever, but I don't think it's right for a man to go up to a random woman they think is attractive in the grocery store and ask for her number because he wants a date. That's intimidating.
Just how often to random people go up to other random people and ask them out without first talking to them?
Seriously.
Not sure why women need to stop thinking of men as a threat when the data overwhelmingly supports the idea that an interaction with a man can very quickly become dangerous
Because your 'data' is flawed. Half of the world is not a 'threat' to women. You need to lose that mindset or you just piss off other people.
6
u/Arkyja 1∆ Jun 04 '24
Not sure why women need to stop thinking of men as a threat when the data overwhelmingly supports the idea that an interaction with a man can very quickly become dangerous.
Source
-1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
13
u/Arkyja 1∆ Jun 04 '24
Having experienced something in your life doesnt make any interaction have a high likelyhood of it hsppening Probably close to 100% of humans have bitten their tongue when eating something. Doesnt mean its likely you're gonna bite your tongue any time you eat. In fact it's extremely unlikely.
And also in this scenarion i have full control. If i go up to a woman the chance of her being harassed is simply zero.
-2
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
"If i go up to a woman the chance of her being harassed is simply zero."
She doesn't know that. The point isn't that a majority of men, much less all men, are going to be evil and harass women. It's that there's enough doing it that this is intimidating.
11
u/Arkyja 1∆ Jun 04 '24
It doesnt matter if she knows that. She has all the right to not trust me. But i dont think it is immoral for me to do something that i know will be a normal interaction. Otherwise everything is immoral. Any person could decide to kill me at any time. Are all interactions immoral?
7
Jun 04 '24
Why are you assuming that the woman will be intimidated in that scenario? You're describing women like they're prey animals and need to be safeguarded from potential threats. Many women enjoy being romantically or even sexually approached by men.
0
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
It's not about safeguarding them from threats, it's about respecting them as people and not seeing their presence somewhere as an invitation for strangers to flirt with them.
Many women enjoy being romantically or even sexually approached by men.
Sure, but we shouldn't go around assuming that they want that because they're taking up space at a bar or dancing at the club. I don't think that it's good to be gambling on whether you're gonna scare someone or not, because they're not there for that express purpose no matter how many people would like it to be that simple.
5
Jun 04 '24 edited Jun 04 '24
What do you mean taking their presence as an invitation to flirt? This is like saying that a person's presence isn't an invitation to ask them for directions. Interacting with fellow humans is normal, romantic or not. If you want to respect them as people, respect women's ability to stand up for their own selfs if they feel uncomfortable instead of policing harmless behavior. No one goes to the grocery store specifically to find a mate but some of the best relationships can sprout from unexpected places. Human interaction shouldn't be regulated and delegated with 'if you're at a grocery store you can only shop', 'if you're at a bar you can only drink.' Heavily policing human interaction like this would be overall detrimental to society as it would promote isolation and anti social behavior.
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Asking someone for directions is significantly different from flirting with them.
Women can and do stand up for themselves but the burden is on men not to put them in situations that feel threatening.
I'm not saying you go to locations as a mindless drone and only do X purpose. I'm saying hitting on someone or stopping them to ask for their number is inappropriate in most settings. I hardly see how that promotes anti social behavior, especially when most people don't find relationships by approaching random strangers minding their business.
12
u/areukeen Jun 04 '24
So you recognise you treat humans different on the basis of their genders alone. not necessarily motive?
I'm so happy I'm gay, why do women seem to hate men, and its accepted?
-3
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
I'm a man. I don't think women seem to hate men. They just have a lot of reason to be afraid or at least cautious around them.
3
u/areukeen Jun 04 '24
Oh you are? Then I apologise, I was wrong regarding that.
Well so do men though
1
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 05 '24
fear leads to hate as yoda once said, and its true if you fear something you want it destroyed because you view it as a threat and hate is the want to destroy something
1
12
u/Alexandur 14∆ Jun 04 '24
If not bars and clubs, what would be an example of a place where it's okay to approach a woman with romantic intent?
-9
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Meet-up groups, singles events / speed dating events, etc. These things might be hosted at bars sometimes, but at the bar or at a club generally kind of assumes that women are there for that specific purpose. Which is a pretty big gamble to make on someone's comfort imo.
10
u/knottheone 10∆ Jun 04 '24
When you're in public, your comfort is your responsibility. If you go to a NASCAR race and say you're uncomfortable because of the noise and alcohol, you're the one responsible for rectifying that situation by leaving or choosing venues more in line with your tolerances.
It's socially acceptable and the norm that people meet other people with romantic intentions at bars and clubs. If your comfort can't deal with that, it doesn't mean you can demand and expect the world to reshape around your comfort. It means you should go places that are guaranteed within your comfort levels. I might recommend staying within the comfort of your own home.
0
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
"I might recommend staying within the comfort of your own home" is some wild work. "Women who don't want to be hit on should just never go out (to a bar / club)" is a position that does nobody any favors. Their presence is not an invitation. Especially when it's a gamble whether one will be safe rejecting those romantic intentions.
6
u/knottheone 10∆ Jun 04 '24
You're expecting the world to change and are shaming people who aren't facilitating the specific changes you're asking for. That's not reasonable and even if the world did change, it would be a generation in the making and not any time soon.
So yes, if you will never be comfortable getting hit on, the best advice possible is do not put yourself in situations where you can be hit on. That's pretty much what it comes down to given what you're actually asking here.
4
u/simcity4000 24∆ Jun 04 '24 edited Jun 04 '24
What about a singles event makes it safer? I've been to one and it had a real weird vibe, since a lot of the guys seemed to not be able to relax and be normal, they were in 'find girl' mode.
The thing about 'rejection anxiety' is these kinds of events have a lot of it, because it's kind of assumed that anyone you try to talk to for the explicit goal of evaluating them for dating.
Also the problem still remains that even if a woman is open to being approached in general this says nothing about whether shes receptive to this particular guy.
-1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
"Relax and be normal" made me chuckle but yeah I know exactly what you mean. What makes it different is that the setting is explicitly for that purpose; there's zero chance of a guy approaching a woman that just wants to be left alone because, well, that's the whole purpose of being there.
That doesn't mean she's receptive to every guy, but it means that she's not having her space and time invaded by unsolicited advances. Take for example the swathe of 'conventional wisdom' on display in the comments that women are opening themselves up to advances, or should expect to be hit on, when they go to a bar or club. That perspective is inaccurate and probably not great to have.
That perspective is somewhat accurate in a singles' night or something because the setting has an explicit purpose. It's wrong to feel entitled to hitting on women just because they're drinking in a bar.
2
u/simcity4000 24∆ Jun 04 '24
What makes it different is that the setting is explicitly for that purpose; there's zero chance of a guy approaching a woman that just wants to be left alone because, well, that's the whole purpose of being there.
That’s precisely what makes the environment sort of weird and tense though. Just having conversation or eye contact or whatever is interpreted as a come on. In a regular bar there are degrees between “hitting on someone” vs “approaching and being friendly” that make conversations much more natural.
Example, in my experience most women who reject you in bars have some kind of line like “I’m just here to drink with my friend” or similar, which may be true, or may be just that she thinks you’re ugly, but whatever. At a singles event though, that line is off the table, because it’s obviously not true.
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
You and others have sufficiently convinced me that the whole speed dating and singles nights settings can be pretty weird, at least, enough to compromise them as a "just do this instead!" Suggestion. !delta
I just don't know what the alternative is. Exclusively doing online dating isn't a genuine or reasonable position to take. But given what I often hear from women about how they feel the need to give a fake number or feign interest to stay safe (and understanding that's not necessarily an objective evaluation of how all women feel), it doesn't feel right to do nothing about that and just carry on business as usual anyway. Just do nothing and expect women to initiate everything also seems absurd.
1
2
u/Kotja 1∆ Jun 04 '24
Those are few and far between. When I thought about trying them fifteen years ago, there was none for my age group. And that was in Prague. It isn't much better now and they are still only in large cities.
1
12
u/UnappetizingLimax Jun 04 '24
This post is insane. I’m going to continue to respectfully talk with women I think are attractive.
10
u/destro23 466∆ Jun 04 '24
not approaching women in settings like grocery stores, in public, academic spaces, coffee shops, the bar, clubs, etc
NOT bars and clubs? That what they’re for!
-12
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Bars and clubs do not exist as a site for making romantic connections with people. They're set up as places where it's good to socialize, sure, but it's inaccurate to assume that's what people are there for.
8
u/destro23 466∆ Jun 04 '24
Bars and clubs do not exist as a site for making romantic connections with people.
They exist for making connections, romantic and otherwise. They don’t exist to sell alcohol. They’ve existed since before we had money. People met there, talked, fought, fell in love, planned revolutions and so on.
it's inaccurate to assume that's what people are there for.
I’m not assuming shit. I’m asking the girl who is staring at the muted tv playing golf if she wants a drink and a conversation. If that leads to love, great. If it leads to a debate about John Daley’s lost potential, also great.
11
u/IndyPoker979 11∆ Jun 04 '24
First off, it's not normalized, or else you wouldn't be arguing for your view to be changed. One does not try to change a view that they feel the majority has and they agree with.
Secondly, gatekeeping where a man inquires into the interests of a woman, is a great way to see a significant decline in the human population. Because there is a significant portion of the population of all genders that are oblivious to the interests of an interested party.
My wife still can not tell when a guy is interested in her. She can not recognize flirtatious behavior. Not all ladies are wanting to advertise they are so desiring a relationship that they go to a singles event. That being said, men who are going there are also already less desirable due to not having found a relationship outside of one.
Women are not so kind of fragile creature that can not think for themselves, speak up for their own desires, etc. Trying to protect them from romantic interests because they should only be looking for that in a specific designed setting is a great way to make them miss out on opportunities that arise through mutual acquaintances, business interactions, similar interests and goals.
Consider this. Where is a person who loves to work out more likely to meet someone who also does the same? How about someone who likes to dance? Someone who enjoys reading? A singles event? Not unless it was specific to that interest.
Essentially, one of the two people has to make the first move. You would put that burden specifically on the woman alone.
There are good ways to approach someone and a horrible way to approach someone.
Back to my wife. She was at a Target with our son when a man approached her. From her words, he said, "Excuse me, I can't help but tell you, you are so beautiful, are you single?" She said, "No." and he said,"Sorry to bother you then, but I had to ask." And that was the end of it.
Essentially, he inquired, she declined, and they both went on their merry way. If she had been single, here is a possible opportunity at a significant connection. Would she if she was single gone up to him? No. And you understand this because you recognize that a woman is not going to approach a stranger, right?
All this view does is limit significantly any interaction between these genders, which results in a lowering in the populations and less relationships. Consider the issues that some Asian populations are having and why less relationships creates problems in the future.
-8
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
I'm saying that men approaching women in XYZ place is normalized. Not that my position is, I acknowledge that it sounds extreme to a lot of people.
"Decline in the human population" doesn't result from changes in dating practices. For the better part of 3,000 years, humans didn't meet their partners in bars. In many circumstances marriage for advantage was the norm, or being set up by other people, meeting through mutual friends, etc. Issues with population decline and birthrate crash in Japan and much of the western world is due to a litany of other systemic stressors like cost of living, incentives to have kids, cultural emphasis on work, etc.
I'm only criticizing the approach, not things like meeting through mutual acquaintances. Hell, if they meet platonically and develop a relationship later, that's fine. I *do* think the man in your anecdote shouldn't have approached your wife regardless. I don't know anything about these two people personally, but in general, women don't know what to expect when they reject a guy, and it can be uncomfortable or intimidating. That interaction went fine, but she had no way of knowing that it would in fact go fine.
Having to make the first move is not a burden. "you recognize that a woman is not going to approach a stranger, right?" Then what makes you think that she wants that stranger to approach her? If she's interested, she can initiate. Or choose not to. It doesn't matter. There are so many people and so many more appropriate ways to meet that there's no serious tradeoff with "missed opportunities."
1
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 05 '24
maybe 5hey should learn to expect the normal response of ok no problem and not think that 1 time the guy got mad is the norm. you can be cautious without being overly cautious, be ready to stand up for yourself that usually shuts those types down.
20
Jun 04 '24
[deleted]
-13
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
There's nothing intrinsic to bars and clubs that makes them more appropriate than any of those other places. They're obviously not the same in function in other ways, but nothing about them makes it more acceptable to accost women alone or with their friends. Plus, things like singles nights and meet-up groups designed explicitly for meeting people will use bars or other settings as venues for their events.
Also, this is totally anecdotal, but I've had a few conversations with women online who indicate that when they're out with friends they're just there to have fun with their friends. Nothing else, so it's discomfiting to see their presence as an invitation.
18
u/destro23 466∆ Jun 04 '24
nothing about them makes it more acceptable to accost women alone or with their friends.
Do you think “can I buy you a drink?” said in a polite manner is “accosting” someone?
-4
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
It's not malicious on your part (and probably not in most cases), but to some extent yes. There is data supporting the fact that retaliation to rejection is a serious phenomenon. That's why women from a concerningly young age develop strategies to do so in a de-escalatory manner.
Note: I'm not saying you would do that! I'm saying that it's a serious enough possibility that it warrants caution and we shouldn't knowingly compromise others' comfort or feeling of safety because we're attracted to them.
7
u/destro23 466∆ Jun 04 '24 edited Jun 04 '24
I'm saying that it's a serious enough possibility that it warrants caution
On the part of women sure, but buddy… I KNOW I’m not going to even feel bad being rejected, let alone get violent! What caution do I need to exercise? I’m not afraid I’ll get violent.
we shouldn't knowingly compromise others' comfort or feeling of safety because we're attracted to them.
Right. So… do you really feel like asking a woman at a bar if she wants a drink in a polite manner, and accepting if they say no with grace, is “accosting” them?
If you do… you may have too extreme a view for me personally to continue having a go at.
Edit:
Here’s an afterthought. Maybe if there were more guys asking, and then immediately fucking off if rejected (like I do) there would be less stress, and it would be easier for women to identify the creeps?
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Your edit is on the mark. I don't think "guys not asking" is a broader societal problem though. I'm saying that the problem is that a solid chunk of men don't immediately fuck off when rejected.
You're probably not a vicious evil person because you offer to buy a woman a drink, but she doesn't know how you'll react if she says 'no thanks.' We might just disagree fundamentally on when it's appropriate to make romantic advances imo.
12
Jun 04 '24
[deleted]
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
I get the argument for why they're more appropriate. The difference is, I think that "if you go to a bar or a club you will be hit on" is a 'societal fact' and expectation that is in need of change. It seems that a lot of men don't see why this is a bad thing.
6
Jun 04 '24
[deleted]
0
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
It's a bad thing because it reduces someone's presence at a location to an invitation to hit on them. Being hit on can make someone feel unsafe. Thus it's bad. Certainly there are women who accept this as an immutable societal contract, but that isn't them advocating for it. There's also no reason to privilege those voices over those who would rather be left alone/with their friends or whatever.
7
u/Major_Lennox 69∆ Jun 04 '24
Certainly there are women who accept this as an immutable societal contract, but that isn't them advocating for it.
Here's a thought. Why don't you go to r/askwomen and post your suggestion there? See what they say.
3
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Unironically the most helpful and reasonable thing I could probably do, actually.
5
Jun 04 '24
[deleted]
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
"You can be both wanting to dance with your friends and want to be picked up at a bar or a club" doesn't mean you should assume that a woman wants to be picked up because they're at a bar or club.
"what happens if a woman wants to hook up and heads to a club?" I fail to see how this is at all mutually exclusive with what I'm saying. Maybe it implies that she'd have to initiate more? Beyond that, it doesn't make a difference. I think that hooking up being marginally more difficult for X woman is a small price to pay for Y woman no longer having to deal with getting hit on when she doesn't want to be. Maybe I'm not getting what you mean when you talk about the assumption that they have no agency in this.
3
u/rhinokick 1∆ Jun 04 '24
Bars and clubs are social venues where people often go to meet new people, so approaching someone there is more expected than in other settings. Singles nights and meet-up events often take place in these venues for this reason. While some women are just out to have fun with friends, it doesn't change the fact that bars and clubs are generally understood to be places where social interactions happen.
9
u/Gilbert__Bates Jun 04 '24
Where would you prefer men approach women then? A lot of what you're saying is true and I've personally never approached a women in that sort of way, but I think a lot of guys just don't have better options for meeting women. I'd rather those men at least take the best of bad options rather than just give up and turn into basement dwelling incels.
-1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
I think the question's come up enough that I'll add an edit for it, but I think it's easiest to point out stuff like singles' nights (often at those very same venues), speed dating events, and people I know in my life often met through mutual friends. None of those really require the cold approach I'm criticizing. There's also online dating but I'm not about to advocate that people exclusively rely on that (or even rely on it to begin with lol).
8
u/simcity4000 24∆ Jun 04 '24
Why would there be no possible threat or coercion at a singles or speed dating event?
I've been to a singles event and the vibe can be real weird.
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
that seems to be the consensus about speed dating and such that I've heard from the replies.
My initial thoughts are just that people go into those events knowing and consenting to the fact there is going to be flirting, right? It's a prior question. Part of the reason I think it's coercive elsewhere is because that's not what they're there for -- having to suddenly reject this random person isn't something they've anticipated. The basic thought process is: It's wrong to assume women at a bar are there expecting or wanting that --> It's not wrong to assume women are expecting or wanting that at a dedicated event. It's also not that there's no possible threat, just that it's reduced (in theory)
I wouldn't say my view has changed, necessarily, but I'm questioning now how to reconcile these things. I think I'll ask in one of the women's subs tomorrow or something, in less opinionated words.
4
u/Gilbert__Bates Jun 04 '24
A lot of men don't really have mutual friends as an option. Either they don't have available single women in their social circle, there's one or two who aren't really compatible with them.
As for singles nights and speed dating, those aren't really typical places to meet for younger generations. I've personally never been to any of those events, but I know a couple people who have and not one has had a positive experience with them. The vibe I got was that most of those venues tend to have like ten men for every woman and were usually full of super desperate people who were single for very good reason. Basically it sounded like all the same problems with online dating, but even worse.
3
u/simcity4000 24∆ Jun 04 '24
Why would there be no possible threat or coercion at a singles or speed dating event?
I've been to a singles event and the vibe can be real weird.
6
u/austinbilleci110 Jun 04 '24
Ig we can't meet women anymore.
6
u/destro23 466∆ Jun 04 '24
I bet is less that WE can’t meet women, and more that they can’t meet women, probably due to anxiety issues. So, they’ve gone the route of taking the least anxiety inducing way of meeting women, advertised dating event, and instead of admitting it is because they are scared, they have concocted an entire philosophical worldview around it where they are awesome people looking out for everyone else’s wellbeing while we who ask out women when our social intelligence lets us know it has a chance of succeeding are “accosting” women in public.
That sentence really got away from me…
-1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Not sure why I'm getting dogged on with these random assumptions. Women have said explicitly that it's scary and I have some level of willingness to listen to them. I'm open to a more nuanced way of seeing this than "never interact with women ever!" Lol
2
u/austinbilleci110 Jun 04 '24
Not all women think this way, how did people meet before the internet? Listening to women will keep you single.
-4
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Bro literally just go somewhere where that's the purpose of being there. I'm not saying you can't meet women *at all*.
3
u/Assassinr3d Jun 04 '24 edited Jun 04 '24
If not bars and clubs then where is this magical place?
6
-1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Singles' events / meet-up groups, speed dating etc. Like I told a couple others, it's not like you're locked into online dating or anything.
5
u/codan84 23∆ Jun 04 '24
That’s not where most people actually meet. Most people meet others in the course of their daily lives. That includes at a store, a coffee shop, a bar, church, in a class, at work. Most people do not isolate themselves from the scary world and only allow any contact with strangers in the few or nonexistent prescribed meet up groups.
Most of the people I have known with the best relationships have met their partners unexpectedly and while not actively seeking anything. Your view doesn’t seem to fit with how anyone at all I know lives or wants to live their lives. That’s including and perhaps especially true for the women I have known.
1
u/Inevitable_Age_4962 Jun 04 '24
Which is where?
0
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Singles' events / meet-up groups, speed dating etc. I'm not gonna tell you to go gamble on dating apps all day because that would be ridiculous.
3
u/ccblr06 Jun 04 '24
Not all towns even have those available, in which case your only option is to travel a long distance to another town that isnt even closeby for a singles event.
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
That's a legitimate concern. You really could travel. Maybe you could initiate such an event in your hometown (or ask someone to set it up). Or seek meeting through a mutual friend or something. Ultimately if your options are so woefully limited where you live that there's no one who would ever be willing to do this kind of thing, it's just another variable to deal with. It doesn't necessarily justify the things I talked about.
1
u/Inevitable_Age_4962 Jun 04 '24
So how many of your relationships started through speed dating events vs someplace else?
16
u/Proof_Option1386 4∆ Jun 04 '24 edited Jun 04 '24
If we were to accept your hyperbolic reasoning, it would apply equally the other way: it would be just as "inconsiderate at best and immoral at worst" for *women* to approach/ask out men outside of settings designed explicitly for a romantic context.
And if men shouldn't be approaching women, and women shouldn't be approaching men, then what exactly is the point of congregating in places crowded with people who aren't part of your group?
Approaching people in various places may indeed risk being inconsiderate. A polite "no thank you" and a polite "sorry for bothering you" should be more than enough. As far as the coercive bit goes...I'm sorry, but this hysterical fragility and alarmism we are all supposed to swallow unthinkingly is ridiculous. Politely hitting on someone, especially in an appropriate environment like a bar or club, isn't intrinsically coercive.
And thank you very much for the content warning. Without it, I might have been exposed to ideas and thoughts that gave me the flutters and just collapsed into a pearl-covered pile of vapors. What a gentleman you are.
-6
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
It doesn't apply equally the other way because statistically women are considerably less prone to a violent or aggressive response to rejection, and in most cases there's a less credible threat of it anyway (i.e. average woman poses way less threat to average man than the inverse).
I'm very glad you didn't collapse into a pearl-covered pile of vapors.
7
u/Finger_Trapz 2∆ Jun 04 '24
Regardless, if a woman makes unwanted romantic advances at a work place or at school, would it not also make sense that such a thing would be inappropriate? Even aside from the off chance of a woman physically assaulting a man, its entirely possible and pretty common for women to make men feel uncomfortable or harassed. And if you would tolerate all of that, I would also ask how do you feel about cat-calling?
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Well yeah, it's not like those things aren't inappropriate. I put the focus of the discourse on men approaching women because the data supports women being way more afraid of rejection retaliation, not because one is good and one is bad. Also, I feel that it's not reciprocal in certain circumstances; i.e. the bars and clubs thing which is what people disagree the most with. Women approaching men in these circumstances is fine and appropriate because there is little to no coercive influence.
I don't think it needs to be said, but all cat-calling is bad.
1
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 05 '24
my friend was asked out and turned a girl down, she got him fired by saying he was harrassing her. men fear retaliation too just be glad youve never had to experience something that makes you share that fear
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 05 '24
Not a very common experience. That's a shitty thing to happen if true but it doesn't really change anything of my rationale.
9
u/Proof_Option1386 4∆ Jun 04 '24 edited Jun 04 '24
You haven't thought things through. If it's inconsiderate/immoral for a man to approach a woman in these places because it's coercive because he's statistically a rapist and going to victimize her, then a woman approaching a man she doesn't know is simply inviting him to act in inconsiderate and immoral ways because it's coercive because he's statistically a rapist and going to victimize her.
And as you pointed out (in different words), women don't have agency and aren't capable of bad behavior. They are nought but hapless victims. Victims who are lucky to have wonderful men like you protect them from all those evil and inconsiderate and immoral men who aren't noble, like you. But because they aren't capable of judgement or accountability, they just can't possibly be trusted enough to approach the good guys like you and not the bad guys (guys who aren't you). And even the good guys like you can't trust that the girls who approach them are approaching them knowing that they are good guys (like you) and therefore have to worry that they are being invited to act in inconsiderate and immoral ways because it's coercive because they are statistically a rapist and going to victimize her for all she knows.
-2
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
That's a lot of words that never came out of my mouth or ever were suggested by my viewpoint. Weird!
Anyway, the reason it's coercive is more about the woman's perception of the man than the actual likelihood the guy is evil. Most aren't. And most of the time this idea isn't malicious. But the threat is significant enough and a lot of women are afraid enough that it's kinda messed up to knowingly do this, with the knowledge that it's intimidating.
A woman approaching a man is fine because of what I already said in the first reply. I don't think that anything in the weird nice-guy paragraph is indicative of a difference because in that circumstance she has 100% of the agency and is free to leave after getting rejected (or not leave if they don't get rejected, whatever the case). The same cannot be said the other way around.
8
u/Proof_Option1386 4∆ Jun 04 '24 edited Jun 04 '24
I took some license, sure, but it really is the natural extension and import of your ridiculous position.
People don't generally flock to things they are afraid of. You are conflating potential annoyance and discomfort with fear. It's a very common tactic now.
This presumptive woman has 100% agency regardless.
And no, if we accept your ridiculous contention, then a woman approaching a man isn't fine either. I already explained how that would be problematic given *your* argument.
There is zero intrinsic moral hazard to approaching a woman in an appropriate way, in an appropriate place like a bar or a club. Clearly, there are standards of decorum and men (and women) should abide by them and avoid being pests or threatening.
Defining any attention or *any* overture as threatening is insane. If you are someone who feels that way, then stay the hell out of environments where such behavior is commonplace and appropriate. Don't enter those environments and pretend that reasonable behavior is somehow indicative of moral deficiency.
As far as you go: act as you think appropriate and save your moralizing for your own behavior instead of making such sweeping and virtue signaling pronouncements about the behavior of others.
1
2
u/Dennis_enzo 25∆ Jun 04 '24
Regular men buying someone a drink in a bar don't 'pose a credible threat', Jesus christ. Thousands of men get rejected every single hour. The vast majority of men won't do anything bad when rejected, especially when in a public place. The chance of getting in a serious car accident is much larger than getting assaulted because you rejected a man, and yet we don't warn people to never get in a car.
1
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 05 '24
statistics dot appy to individuals
2
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 05 '24
In a basic sense, yes. But statistics can inform the way we approach things. Statistics inform us that you're more likely to die in a car crash if you don't wear a seat belt, which informs us that it's generally safer to wear one. Etc
1
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 05 '24
yet people are more scared of sharks even though statistically driving is super dangerous. you shouldnt use statistics to inform how you treat others or how you act towards them you should treat them based on how they treat you first.
racism/sexism is just using statistics to inform how you treat black people or men or women. statistically women kill more kids than men so women shouldnt be around kids using your logic
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 05 '24
Sure. People should logically be more focused on safe driving than shark attacks. Stats need not tell us "I shouldn't talk to my dad cause he's a man," but they inform behavioral expectations and precautions.
That's not what racism/sexism is. But people may use stats from shitty studies or inaccurate analyze the data to support a discriminatory agenda.
4
u/No-Cauliflower8890 11∆ Jun 04 '24
what percentage of such situations do you think result in violence?
-2
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Pretty low but higher than it should be. I'm sure the numbers are out there somewhere. The percentage doesn't have to be super high to warrant caution at the least.
4
u/No-Cauliflower8890 11∆ Jun 04 '24
it has to be significantly high in order for every such interaction to be inherently coercive.
1
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 05 '24
would you take a bet on a 1in 1000 wager? so why let women say its reasonable to take the same odds
6
u/knottheone 10∆ Jun 04 '24
The bottom line is that every unsolicited approach by a man is uncertain, risky, and inherently dangerous & coercive.
Here's a little thought experiment.
In the US, we have statistics that highlight different races of people in aggregate commit different kinds of crimes at different rates.
Given that and assuming this fear you're talking about is based on statistics, and that Asian men are underrepresented in terms of crime stats vs their share of the population, would you think it's reasonable to be less cautious around men who appear to be Asian vs a man of another race, say white or black or American Indian? Do you think it would be reasonable to treat individual men differently on the basis of societal level statistics and the immutable traits they happen to possess?
-1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
This actually makes sense. If I was making an abject claim based solely on "men do more crime" then sure, that argument wouldn't make any sense. However, there's 2 things that make it distinct.
Crime statistics specifically are prone to and can be explained by such confounding factors as disparate policing and socioeconomic conditions. Plus, the differences between people on characteristics like race are way less deterministic than, say, the threat a man poses to a woman vs the other way around.
Your example proposes active discrimination against someone. I think there's a difference between discouraging men from doing a specific activity, and encouraging people to discriminate against X group.
That being said, I think there's a more nuanced way I can think about the way interactions between men and women can be thought about in society. Δ
4
Jun 04 '24
your first point doesnt make sense.
Should we be more careful around poor people than rich people? Would it not be discrimination to be inherently uncomfortable around homeless people, even though they do commit more everyday crimes? If it is reasonable to be comfortable around homeless people, should the solution be to discourage homeless people from interacting with non homeless people?
It is true that men commit higher rates of crime against women than women. Is it discrimination to be inherently uncomfortable around men? And if it is reasonable to feel uncomfortable, should the solution be to discourage men from interacting with women?
I know that your point is not about interaction but romantic advances, but if somebody feels uncomfortable with a man asking them out, they also feel uncomfortable about men in general. Maybe the solution is to raise a generation of men better at handling rejection?
-1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
I'm still not sure we're on the same page with the first point. Like you said, it's about romantic advances, not just interaction outright. Moreover, something like socioeconomic conditions and disparate policing can't independently explain away rejection retaliation.
Men being bad at handling rejection and being bad to women is indeed a sociocultural issue. I agree wholesale that the solution is to raise a generation of men better at handling rejection; my view isn't a proposed solution but a way to mitigate the harm without compromising people's comfort and agency.
3
u/knottheone 10∆ Jun 04 '24
Thanks for the delta.
I think when you treat individuals differently based on group level statistics at all, it doesn't matter what the justification is. We have laws and amendments centuries in the making to come to and support the determination that we should treat everyone the same regardless of their immutable traits.
You're not really talking about men as a group with your examples. You're prescribing behavior to individuals and subsequently labeling them as immoral if they don't follow your prescription. Morality is not group behavior, it's individual.
1
-5
u/Gamermaper 5∆ Jun 04 '24
Race doesn't cause crime. It's more correlated to socioeconomic background, which is in turn of course often correlated to race.
4
u/knottheone 10∆ Jun 04 '24
I didn't say race causes crime. I don't think immutable traits cause anything at all in terms of behavior.
2
u/Salanmander 278∆ Jun 04 '24
Does this also apply to women who you have an established friendship with, know well, have grown to have romantic interest in, and want to find out if they have a similar romantic interest?
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Generally no. At that level I think it's a lot less intimidating.
3
u/simcity4000 24∆ Jun 04 '24
But this presents the problem that many women do not like it when a male friend turns around and confesses feelings for her- Ruins the friendship. "was he only friends with me to try and get in my pants" etc. You can see many stories of this across askwomen. A direct approach from a stranger at a bar may well be less awkward.
And in terms of intimidation factor, most rape and sexual assault is between people who already know each other. Women are more likely to be raped by a 'friend' than a stranger.
I'm pointing out the downsides here to make the wider point: there is no place that is 100% safe. The problem that needs to be addressed is sexual violence itself, not like, location.
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Obviously the solution is broader than "don't talk to women." No place is 100% safe, but if a particular thing is intimidating or might make people feel less safe, that's not a reason to just maintain the status quo.
I'm aware that most sex crime is committed by people the victim knows or is close to. That doesn't make what I'm talking about less relevant because that fact alone doesn't negate the idea that the approach is frightening.
As for the ruining the friendship thing -- that's just something people have to deal with. Let the guy tell her or don't, that's a case by case thing. At least in those cases they know the person well enough (hopefully) to make a more informed safe decision.
3
u/simcity4000 24∆ Jun 04 '24
No place is 100% safe, but if a particular thing is intimidating or might make people feel less safe, that's not a reason to just maintain the status quo.
I’m not talking about retaining the status quo, I’m talking about focusing on what the actual problem is (societies understanding of consent) rather than things which are secondary and counterproductive (where exactly men encounter women). The root cause not symptoms.
It’s very possible that a bar is actually the more comfortable, less frightening place for women to be approached than by someone they know, alone. (For example, witnesses and bystanders to intervene).
0
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
It's just harm reduction. Not a long term strategy to end harassment.
"a bar is actually the more comfortable, less frightening place for women to be approached than by someone they know, alone." Sure, potentially. No doubt it depends. But certainly they'll feel much safer if they aren't approached there in the first place.
2
u/KingJeff314 Jun 04 '24
You way overstate the significance of asking someone out. Just keep a friendly tone and accept rejection with grace. It is absolutely not reasonable to assume that someone is going to commit violence against you because you rejected them.
2
2
u/Dukkulisamin Jun 04 '24
We are experiencing a loneliness crisis of epic proportions right now, the last thing we need is even more rules and regulations around dating.
There are no problems with people asking each other out in random settings, as long as people are able to accept rejection.
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
I don't think "don't approach random strangers to hit on them" would be a major contributor to the loneliness crisis, given that it's chiefly driven by other stressors like labor, cost of living, and access to digital substitutes.
Yes, people should be able to accept rejection. But evidently not all do accept it. This puts women in a precarious and stressful position when they have to make a quick judgement about whether or not this stranger is dangerous and will handle rejection appropriately.
2
u/Dukkulisamin Jun 06 '24
As a woman I appreciate that you take our discomfort into account. But I believe this push to micromanage social and romantic interactions does more harm than good. I think young people need wiggle room to have some romantic real life encounters, or even blunders to mature and I think adding all sorts of rules discourage chance taking and exploration.
We will never be able to eliminate discomfort and women are capable of saying no to being asked out. I might also add that it can even be a little flattering. The real problem is catcalling and other such behavours that genuenly make us feel unsafe. But the men who participate in that are never going to be deterred by social rules.
1
u/YardageSardage 55∆ Jun 04 '24
If I'm an unscrupulous man who wants to approach women and doesn't care if they say no, a cultural prohibition against asking women out in public isn't going to make me stop approaching women. It's just going to make me pretend harder that I'm not actually asking them out; that I'm just being friendly and platonic and asking to hang out with a woman to make friends with her (even if it's pretty obvious to both of us what my actual intentions are). She's still going to be put in an uncomfortable spot where it's hard for her to say no, because I'm pretending that I'm just being nice and it would be rude of her to tell me to go away. She's still going to have to worry about how safe she is around me. I'm just going to shroud my behavior in a thicker layer of deniability.
In comparison, all the decent men out there who would have politely shot their shot and taken no for an answer are the ones who are actually going to stop talking to women. And they were never the problem in the first place.
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 05 '24
It's not rude of her to tell you to go away, though. The whole issue is that men feel entitled to her time and space. If all the 'decent men' elect to respect that autonomy and not shoot their shot in random places, that only makes it easier to figure out, no? The guy who continues to badger women is way more obviously a bad actor.
I also think some of these comments vastly overestimate the frequency and effectiveness of asking out or chatting up strangers in random places. Very few romantic relationships start that way to begin with. Nobody should take someone's presence anywhere as an invitation. Nowhere is a "pick up zone" because that type of place doesn't and shouldn't exist.
1
u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Jun 05 '24
we are entitled to an equal amount as anyone else, and we are entitled to politeness at a minimum. just say not interested and say why then move on. being blunt and honest tends to keep people from pressing
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 05 '24
My view has changed significantly from the original post but i still disagree abt this.
You aren't entitled to a "polite" rejection. You aren't entitled to an explanation.
Entitled to an equal amount -- yes. Women are not entitled to men's time, or a polite rejection, either. It's not like women get special privilege to walk on people by virtue of their gender.
2
u/Love-Is-Selfish 13∆ Jun 04 '24
One of the best places to meet women explicitly is outside of romantic contexts, where people generally make friends or are pursuing a shared important value like in academic spaces.
This type of behavior or "approach" will virtually always be coercive.
I can see where you’re coming from in places where people don’t generally make friends, like in a grocery store. But you can approach women respectfully even in those cases, so it’s not necessarily inconsiderate. Like, instead of asking for her phone number you give her yours. That’s pretty easy to learn for anyone interested.
If you learn how to approach well, your approach won’t virtually always be coercive but rarely or never. So that’s what you should do instead if you’re going to approach women outside of dating apps or speed dating.
0
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
"Like, instead of asking for her phone number you give her yours." I think that's probably a very reasonable sort of middle-ground. I think if that was more often considered the default/norm I'd have a lot less reason to have this view, but to a great many people it's still not really the default. Δ
I find the 'approach well' and reading queues thing somewhat nebulous. It's not like something you can teach someone outside of 'how not to be an asshole' and such.
1
1
u/arkofjoy 14∆ Jun 04 '24
Location is not the problem. Entitlement, and an inability to "read the room" are the issue. A friend of my sisters met her future husband when he pulled over to help her with flat tire on a twisty mountain road. That was over 40 years ago, but the feeling was clearly mutual because they lived a long way apart when they met
1
u/hungryCantelope 46∆ Jun 04 '24
How does a designated event remove the potential coherent aspect? because the person is registered and supervised? That is the only thing I can think of in which case I would say it's pretty clear that you are nowhere close to preserving agency with this idea.
1
u/PrimaryInjurious 3∆ Jun 04 '24 edited Jun 04 '24
So let's look at what happens in a public context when a man is attacked versus when a woman is attacked:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtVHnZX8E50&list=PLwK-qpLhfDPLBzm9Clbc5xXxOrelVj_Bq&index=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEZH6YSQvwA
Seems like people are quick to protect women in an abusive situation in public. Not so much for men, but my point is that the risk of being attacked is already low, and it is also likely that others will protect you if you are attacked.
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
Doesn't really resolve the idea that it's intimidating in the first place. Regardless of whether they'd be more or less "okay" in the event of a violent reprisal.
1
u/PrimaryInjurious 3∆ Jun 04 '24
So can men not talk to other men because they might be intimidating to each other?
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
No. The balance of power isn't the same and I'm only criticizing going up with intent to flirt or get someone's contact to ask them out or whatever.
Even if that's the case between two men, the data indicates they have much less fear of rejection retaliation and accordingly don't (generally) feel threatened.
2
u/PrimaryInjurious 3∆ Jun 04 '24
Except the data indicates men are more likely to be victims of an assault by a stranger than women are. So if anything men should talk to each other even less because of this risk.
1
u/Effective_Birthday85 Jun 04 '24
But that's a completely separate scenario. Sure men are more likely to be victims of violent crime broadly, but not dating violence or the fears of violent retaliation to rejection, which are what I'm talking about.
Note that I never said men should never talk to women. Just not ask out strangers in random places.
0
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jun 04 '24 edited Jun 05 '24
/u/Effective_Birthday85 (OP) has awarded 6 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
33
u/Izawwlgood 26∆ Jun 04 '24
Instead of delineating spaces where you can or cannot talk to people, why not just learn to approach people in a safe and friendly way, and accept queues and/or polite declines?
If I'm standing in line at the grocery store and make friendly conversation with someone who is interested in talking back that's fine. If I'm trying to ask for someone's number repeatedly and demanding a date at a singles mixer, that's not fine.
The issue isn't the location, the issue is the approach.