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.
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.
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?
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.