Podium Girls

[meic]

I agree with that but not about where all the steaming piles of ordure were.

Try to convince somebody that they are wrong and if your argument just doesnt stand up to scrutiny no matter how many times you repeat it, or how loud you shout. Then turn to insults instead.

Lets get these points clearly stated.

The term sexism is too widely used and on the everyday sexism site, most of the posts were of a very petty nature and probably only in the mind of the observer. This them gets classed as the same thing as FGM and sexual assault as on the NYC subway.

Objectification is also too widely used and can range from men and women appreciating a specific part of another person's body in a sexual way and getting sexual pleasure from what they see. Which is common, natural and healthy. To something else which is rare, deviant and harmful that is happening in sick individuals.
This is then used to try and justify clamping down on overtly sexual attire and the looking at such.

Finally resorting to insult and "dog whistle" variations of it, to anyone who questions the current fashionable thought.

The pseudo-scientific articles related to it dont seem to have a working definition of sexism and objectification and neither does this thread which makes research and discussion very unclear and ineffective.

If somebody doesnt agree with my world view they are merely wrong not evil.
I will not convince them by insult but by presenting the facts and hoping they will actually read what is written, fat chance, they all ready "know" and are only here to lecture.

[Freddie]

Provide evidence exactly how? How do I catch up with a car, where the driver has shouted abuse at me and get that man - yes, Freddie, man - to come on here and say he's done that ? Do you want everyone who posts a topic "On the road" about a close pass from a car to find that driver too?

I have no more reason to disbelieve you than to believe you. I will presume these things to be true for the sake or argument, even though there is no evidence either way.

How do I find that man who behaved so disgracefully in Woolwich Wavelengths swimming pool in front of two women and three small children? My friend would back me up, but as she's female, you wouldn't accept her statement either. Old Windbag asked whether Jessica Valenti's piece reflected life for women in another big city - ie London. Yes, it does. I haven't - fortunately - had the number of experiences she has, but it does happen. The swimming pool episode was the worst for me, because my girls were involved.
You either believe me, or you don't. I know all these "anecdotes" happened. I'm sorry you question my veracity.
Jan

Jan, I have to ask, do you want these incidents to stop or do you just want sympathy? You have got a lot of sympathy on here from good men; men that would never dream of doing these things to women, but how does that help you out? The men that have done these things (presuming they are all as you relay them) don't come on boards like this and sympathise.

If I see such things happening to a woman, I would be willing to step in on her behalf, as you would seem to appreciate, if good men were present to defend you from bad men. That is not a problem. There are other women who would see it as demeaning; then it would be a problem and I would be considered (by them) sexist. How do you expect good men to navigate this, seemingly arbitrary, line between what is good and bad defence of women? Why should men who want to help put themselves in danger of being accused of being a sexist pig and through no fault of their own becoming a "bad man" in the process?

How do you expect the bad men who do these things to change by getting good men to feel bad through guilt by association? You haven't apologised for anecdotes relayed by men on this forum that have happened by the hand of women; AlaninWales for instance has relayed how women have slapped him on the bottom. I have also had unwanted groping from women, yes Jan, women! Will you apologise for them and if not, why not?

You didn't do these things, but what difference does that make, they were done by women and you are a woman. Maybe women in general should apologise for the actions of these individual women?

The problem you seem to have and the problem with feminism in general, is it spends a lot of time and focus on good men, men who (as this thread shows) are willing to defer their own benefit and incredulity for the sake of women. The problem being that these kind of men are never going to assault or demean you in the first place and this course of action won't stop bad men from doing it, so the only outcome of this is for good men to feel guilt by association. Do you not want your experiences to change, because this tactic will change things not a jot.

Lastly, I know you say Orpington is Kent, but it is really Greater London, which for many outside the capital makes it just plain London. In London all bets are off; expecting to be treated properly there is like expecting to be able to breathe underwater. I wouldn't live in London and expect the consideration given to me by people in less densely populated and less impersonal parts of the country, I think this is a good degree of your problem, rather than just men in general.

Now that 50% of London are born abroad, I don't think it is extreme to think 50% of the men there, for cultural and/or religious reasons, may have different, perhaps less considerate views about the treatment of women, than men born and raised in Britain. Once again, I don't think relaying your experiences to mostly British born, middle class men on this forum is going to fix any differences of opinion there.

If you really wanted the treatment you get to stop, the quickest and easiest way would be to move out of London to some nice little hamlet on the south coast, in Hampshire, Somerset, Cornwall or some such (I'm sure there are plenty of nice places up north too!). You will find that a good number, perhaps even most of these problems with men cease to exist, once you have done so.

[meic]

If you really wanted the treatment you get to stop, the quickest and easiest way would be to move out of London to some nice little hamlet on the south coast, in Hampshire, Somerset, Cornwall or some such (I'm sure there are plenty of nice places up north too!). You will find that a good number, perhaps even most of these problems with men cease to exist, once you have done so.

Where as having to move out isnt a fair solution. I can see part of the reason why views on this thread can be so polar. I live in a nice area have nice friends, male and female who mostly have nice happy sexual and social relationships with each other, like each other (male and female) sexually and non-sexually, any body who is bad is excluded from our company. The opposite of London really, in fact people come here from such places for those reasons. My children go to a nice school without any of the bullying that I knew as a kid.

Podium girls, Mel Gibson's six pack stomach and rugby players' thighs are enjoyed without it leading to any thing nasty. They are not the root of the problem. Those of my friends who watch the cycle racing can chose whether or not to sign the petition, I wouldnt try and influence them either way on that. I would just argue that it leading on to sexual abuse on the streets was not a credible argument. Just as their evening tipple of sherry doesnt make them go down Carmarthen on a Friday night to take part in the alcohol fueled violence (inc sexual violence).

[meic]

so the only outcome of this is for good men to feel guilt by association

It depends on your definition of a good man. You may feel that it is good enough to not deliberately wish harm on your fellow woman or to do anything with intent to harm them. Or even to just live and let live.
Others clearly expect a lot more than that, and are ashamed to call themselves a man because you dont fit their idea of what a good man should be. Nor will they actually spell out the rules you should be abiding by.

[old_windbag]

Where as having to move out isnt a fair solution. I can see part of the reason why views on this thread can be so polar. I live in a nice area have nice friends, male and female who mostly have nice happy sexual and social relationships with each other, like each other (male and female) sexually and non-sexually, any body who is bad is excluded from our company. The opposite of London really, in fact people come here from such places for those reasons. My children go to a nice school without any of the bullying that I knew as a kid.

I agree with what you say Meic, we don't all have the choice to move. But as I stated in a post earlier, perhaps large cities like london, new york etc act as filters for those in society whose behaviour leans towards the sexual behaviours that Jan19 has seen. In other words social groups form and grow based on "what is acceptable" in that group. I went to london on one occasion to see the motor show, on return to the car late at night we decided out of curiosity to see what soho was all about( I've never made use of such services but again they exist for various social reasons ). I saw more blatant pro*titutes than I've ever seen before or since...... but that area of the city has grown to be known for such and will attract more people interested in pursueing that lifestyle. With your view meic, you don't allow "bad" people to be part of your social group. Don't take what I'm about to say as a personal insult as its an objective view. We all discriminate and you use your mental checklist/moral values to filter out those whoyou would not associate with, we all do it. But likewise there'll be others who in their moral code feel burglars and armed robbers aren't bad but "kiddy fiddlers" are. Or people whose moral code does not see public exposure or mass debating being wrong. So social groups in those cases are formed based around what most of us will see as unacceptable, the internet has perhaps exacerbated the ability for these groups to grow and also locations to go to perform lewd acts( dogging etc ). Likewise in a large city it is maybe easier to form social networks based on these values without drawing as much attention as in a small village or town. Large cities are rather anonymous places where you can get away with more things unnoticed.

I've mixed with people whose moral views were very surprising( I know pjclinch will say I'm one of them ). I despise criminals, but in their world of different moral codes to our own they see their social structure as normal. Many of those involved in Jan19's swimming pool style behaviuor may know it's lawfully wrong, but in their mind they have an urge that goes beyond what is right or wrong. If they meet similar minded individuals it only helps reinforce that its ok to continue.

But again related to forming groups and the resultant behaviours of those in said groups, we really do need to address religion and its part in mistreatment or subjegation of women. I really do urge people to view the video link I posted a few posts back and see what life can be like and is under the excuse of religion. I think if many of the "perfect" individuals of our forum could put their efforts into fixing those issues then thered be many more women benefiting than the assumed inequality/sexual attentions caused by the role of podium girls.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/27/world/asia/flawed-justice-after-a-mob-killed-an-afghan-woman.html?_r=0

[Vorpal]

Moving isn't, and shouldn't have to be a solution.

No one, male or female, should have to be subjected to that kind of harrassment. And moving out doesn't stop it; just reduces it. I have experienced it from time to time in rural villages and towns. It just isn't so frequent there as in the cities, nor what Jan seems to experience.

If we want it to change, we need to challenge the behaviour. That doesn't mean men protecting women. That means people who see that kind of behaviour challenging it when it is safe to do so. That means if your friend catcalls someone they think is attractive, tell them that recipients of that kind behaviour are uncomfortable with it, rather than feeling complimented. If you see someone being victimised, call the police, get help, or help if you can do so without putting yourself in danger.

The best thing that you can do, if it is safe, is just ask the victim, 'Would you like help?' Most of the time that is enough.

If it isn't safe to help someone or challenge the behaviour, call the police if it's serious, wait and offer support to the victim, or agree to be a witness, or just offer to listen. If you know anyone involved, have a word later when the potential for threat is reduced.

But don't say that it must be something about the victim. Don't say that men must protect women. Don't say evidence is required when people relate their experiences. Don't say not all men do that. And don't say it's just 'bad men' or imply that is happens because there are foreigners in London. Most of it is ignorance, misunderstanding, and lack of respect. And people of both sexes and across a wide variety of cultural backgrounds do things like that.

If you and people like you, and I and people like me say something when they can, maybe next time someone will think about it or stop before it goes too far.

[jayd]

Meic,

"if anybody disagrees they just keep shouting "sexist, sexist"

"the people who shout sexist in order to silence critics"

Good grief. It was a simple question.

WHO are they? Who are The People?

"Next thing you know, just being male will disqualify you from the right to comment."

How will this happen?

I am not working overtime. I have been riding my bicycle. Doing some DIY. Enjoying life. I haven't brought up any ideas. I've merely quoted your words back to you, in the vain attempt to get some insight into who this collection of Gawn Mad Meic-Gaggers actually are. That you cannot describe them, or any instances of the people shouting "sexist!" that you can confidently cite as examples (since you seem pretty confident this could happen to you instantaneously ) then I will conclude that you are making it up, and collectivising some people on the internet into a "Brigade", out to smother your freedom of speech with their yoghurt-knitted dungarees.

[meic]

Meic,

"if anybody disagrees they just keep shouting "sexist, sexist"

"the people who shout sexist in order to silence critics"

Good grief. It was a simple question.

WHO are they? Who are The People?

Don't say evidence is required when people relate their experiences

"Next thing you know, just being male will disqualify you from the right to comment."

How will this happen?

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=106289&start=315#p1016520

I've merely quoted your words back to you, in the vain attempt to get some insight into who this collection of Gawn Mad Meic-Gaggers actually are. That you cannot describe them, or any instances of the people shouting "sexist!" that you can confidently cite as examples (since you seem pretty confident this could happen to you instantaneously ) then I will conclude that you are making it up, and collectivising some people on the internet into a "Brigade", out to smother your freedom of speech with their yoghurt-knitted dungarees.

You are so barking up the wrong tree, still.

[old_windbag]

If you and people like you, and I and people like me say something when they can, maybe next time someone will think about it or stop before it goes too far.

Putting aside exhibitionism and onanism in public( I don't associate this behaviour with rape, they are different areas ), when it comes to rape accusations whats your view Vorpal? I feel our system needs change in this respect with regards to anonymity. The victim( most often a woman but occasionally a man ) receives anonymity, no problem with that it's correct.... but the accused is named and put into the media spotlight? Surely this is totally wrong. Many men are genuinely found innocent( I mean innocent ) of the crime but by that time their name has been associated with "rapist" the public don't remember "innocent" in quite the same way. This also applies to most crimes of a sexual nature, accused paedophiles. Name them after they've been found guilty but surely not before, I'm not sure theres many equivalents in female terms to the stigma of a man being accused of a sexual crime that turns out they were genuinely innocent of. Also we know that with crowd mentality in some communities, men can be targeted as "being paedophiles" when simply living on their own. Actually another example I guess, of victimisation.

Anonymity should be across the board until justice has been seen to be done, if the man is innocent he should never be named, only if found guilty.

[pete75]

Provide evidence exactly how? How do I catch up with a car, where the driver has shouted abuse at me and get that man - yes, Freddie, man - to come on here and say he's done that ? Do you want everyone who posts a topic "On the road" about a close pass from a car to find that driver too?

I have no more reason to disbelieve you than to believe you. I will presume these things to be true for the sake or argument, even though there is no evidence either way.

If people were to follow that maxim then most postings here regarding stuff like bad driving experienced, poor service from a bike shop, good or bad places to tour etc etc would be regarded as dubious as there is no evidence either way as to their truth.
Jan has posted here for a long time and the nature and content of what she writes gives a strong reason to believe her and none at all to disbelieve her.

[reohn2]

Provide evidence exactly how? How do I catch up with a car, where the driver has shouted abuse at me and get that man - yes, Freddie, man - to come on here and say he's done that ? Do you want everyone who posts a topic "On the road" about a close pass from a car to find that driver too?

I have no more reason to disbelieve you than to believe you. I will presume these things to be true for the sake or argument, even though there is no evidence either way.

If people were to follow that maxim then most postings here regarding stuff like bad driving experienced, poor service from a bike shop, good or bad places to tour etc etc would be regarded as dubious as there is no evidence either way as to their truth.
Jan has posted here for a long time and the nature and content of what she writes gives a strong reason to believe her and none at all to disbelieve her.

+1

[meic]

Moving isn't, and shouldn't have to be a solution.

No one, male or female, should have to be subjected to that kind of harrassment. And moving out doesn't stop it; just reduces it. I have experienced it from time to time in rural villages and towns. It just isn't so frequent there as in the cities, nor what Jan seems to experience.

If we want it to change, we need to challenge the behaviour. That doesn't mean men protecting women. That means people who see that kind of behaviour challenging it when it is safe to do so. That means if your friend catcalls someone they think is attractive, tell them that recipients of that kind behaviour are uncomfortable with it, rather than feeling complimented. If you see someone being victimised, call the police, get help, or help if you can do so without putting yourself in danger.

The best thing that you can do, if it is safe, is just ask the victim, 'Would you like help?' Most of the time that is enough.

If it isn't safe to help someone or challenge the behaviour, call the police if it's serious, wait and offer support to the victim, or agree to be a witness, or just offer to listen. If you know anyone involved, have a word later when the potential for threat is reduced.

But don't say that it must be something about the victim. Don't say that men must protect women. Don't say evidence is required when people relate their experiences. Don't say not all men do that. And don't say it's just 'bad men' or imply that is happens because there are foreigners in London. Most of it is ignorance, misunderstanding, and lack of respect. And people of both sexes and across a wide variety of cultural backgrounds do things like that.

If you and people like you, and I and people like me say something when they can, maybe next time someone will think about it or stop before it goes too far.

As usual we are in broad agreement but the bits in red?

But don't say that it must be something about the victim:
Not victim blaming but an acceptance that we are not powerless to influence things and that starts with understanding of what is happening, why and where.
I would not blame my daughter if she got raped walking through the middle of a gang of drunken yobs in a dark park but I would teach her to avoid such situations, just as I would teach my son to avoid such situations.
Failure to be streetwise can end up with them catching you, it is the harsh reality of Britain's streets.

Don't say that men must protect women.
Not something that I am free to decide on, in my (clearly sexist) society my failure to do so would have me on a par with a murderer or peadophile. I actually couldnt live with myself either if I just walked away from that.
However I am talking about the serious crime level here not non-violent interactions.

Don't say evidence is required when people relate their experiences:
I dont see how we should create a special case here, normal rules should continue to apply.
Twice friends have told me about sexual assaults from ex-partners, I listened and sympathised and was upset by it. However if I was to wish to exact some revenge on their behalf (in violation of guidance above) I would NEED evidence.

Don't say not all men do that.
I didnt say that when my friends related their experience because they knew not all men did that and they were specifying a particular man. However in other instances, like this debate there is an underlying accusation that men are doing this and I among others am a man, so that includes ME. So I feel quite obliged to point out that not all men do that, especially not this one. Just like I say "not all cyclists jump red lights".
Now if you have a good reason why I should stand there in silence, acquiescing to the implication, for the greater good, I am listening.

And don't say it's just 'bad men'
I did say that when my friends related their experiences, I dont understand why I shouldnt, though to be fair I generally prefer to say nothing as everything I say tends to be wrong in all situations..

[pete75]

But don't say that it must be something about the victim:
Not victim blaming but an acceptance that we are not powerless to influence things and that starts with understanding of what is happening, why and where.
I would not blame my daughter if she got raped walking through the middle of a gang of drunken yobs in a dark park but I would teach her to avoid such situations, just as I would teach my son to avoid such situations.
Failure to be streetwise can end up with them catching you, it is the harsh reality of Britain's streets.

Lewd comments and even gratuitous touching seems to happen to women cyclists when they are merely riding on public roads, open to all. You appear to be suggesting they should avoid cycling on roads to avoid harassment....

[cotterpins]

as one who might have lost his appetite . . . but hasn't lost his taste! I think that the day I don't appreciate the beauty of an attractive women is the day I might as well stop watching the box and start getting measured for one!!

[monxton]

Couldn't agree more. The Mary Beard thing genuinely amazed me.

Sadly it wouldn't have amazed Mary Beard in the least. She is one of the most reviled targets of misogynists.