sudneo

Nobody talked about victims. I was just contesting your BS exaggeration. But I see you can only discuss in absolutes and you decided to simply ignore every single point I made and flip the table with all the cards.

You must be really unsure about your ideas if you can't defend them at all.

YOU made it sound like reality is either you going around in complete peace and bliss without any danger whatsoever (man) or in complete terror with a deathly danger behind every corner (woman). Challenging this barbie view of the world is not aiming to flatten the differences (which I acknowledged since the beginning) between men and women.

So yeah, nice try but no. Maybe reflect on your position and admit you used an hyperbolic statement next time, I dunno, it might work better than strawmen and moving the goalpost.

Women fear for their safety around men in public, and rightfully so. Period. It’s so fucking bizarre that anyone would ever try to argue against this.

I am not. I am arguing against the fact that men don't (need to) worry about their safety in public. It's such a cartoonish way to think. You don't worry, good for you!

The statistics you’re quoting (and likely making up, but I don’t care enough about this to look) aren’t really relevant, I’m talking about real women’s real life experience.

So one comment ago you were telling me to look at statistics, now it's real life experience that matters.

BTW, just search and you will find data, for example https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/crime-and-justice/recorded-crime-victims/latest-release, https://www.statista.com/statistics/423245/us-violent-crime-victims-by-gender/ (which shows 2022 is essentially identical, but quite a gap in 2021), etc. Note that I am searching generic violent crimes. In terms of murders men are quite universally in higher number.

Again, talk to women. Or if you can’t do that, read what actual women have to say about this subject. Do you not value the opinions of women? Do you not believe them when they speak about their personal experiences?

This has nothing to do with my argument. I am not contesting women (need to) fear for their personal safety in public. If I were a woman there would be a host of additional things I would worry about. What I am contesting is the way you present this fact, as if the difference between men and women was a 0-100 difference, when it's not.

I don't really see the reason to make up bullshit exaggerations to drive a point that stands on its own without them. Women have to worry and do worry differently, both in terms of quality and quantity than men when they go in public. There are certain risks that in public are fairly irrelevant for men, which doesn't mean "men have nothing to worry about". There are also certain risks that are much smaller for women (e.g., getting into a fight in a bar because some dude's ego was hurt and needs to assert being the alpha).

Why is it necessary for you to make a completely unrealistic assertion (which BTW disregards my opinion as man while talking about men, so "Do you not value the opinions of ~~wo~~men? Do you not believe them when they speak about their personal experiences?" cit.) to support a very reasonable thesis? Do you think people can appreciate the safety issue for women only if they contrast it with a completely opposite (i.e., no issue at all) situation for what concerns men?

All the crimes I have mentioned are statistically way more likely than sexual assaults, a crime that notoriously happens mostly within one's home. So what you just said seems to me completely in antithesis with the original message.

Also, I completely disagree with your assessment. I live in a perfectly safe city and country, but when I travel I sometimes also go in worse areas, and most importantly I don't even know whether I am in a "bad neighborhood" or not, because I don't know the place. Hence I worry for my personal safety, which is exactly what prompts for those basic measures that you listed (and more), such as not flashing wealth unnecessarily. You do this exactly because you are aware that man or not you can be victim of such crimes just as much. In fact, statistics show that men are more likely to be victims of violent crimes in general, so I am not really sure where your core thesis come from.

Also worrying is not being terrified, is understanding a risk exists and taking precautions. Either way, this idea that as a man you have nothing to worry about is completely idiotic.

As someone from Rome, I feel you. Pickpocketing is somewhat an issue. In more than 20 years living in the city (before I moved) I never suffered from it, but it's very common among tourists (especially in the underground and certain bus lines). It sucks and often police does nothing because by the time they catch the people (if they do), everything is gone anyway.

That said, beside pickpocketing Rome is very safe (or at least most of the places where a tourist would go, except maybe the surroundings of Termini station).

Because robberies and mugging do not exist, because I should not worry about them or because they don't happen to me as a man?

When men leave the house, the worst thing we walk around in fear of is ridicule and rejection.

Do you live in a cartoon? Seriously, this is complete nonsense. I worry about my personal safety very often, when an environment presents certain risks (e.g., getting robbed, mugged etc.). It's true that I don't generally fear to be sexually assaulted by a woman, but to say that men don't (need to) worry about their personal safety is completely absurd.

For too long it told men they can treat women however they want

This is demonstrably false, as we have certain narratives that are literally millennia old (latin literature) about courtship, romantic gestures, protection and all the other stuff usually associated with how men should treat women. Usually this is some form of protection/care for a lower/weaker being, but it is absolutely a way society has been telling men how to tell women for centuries.

I would say that what you said applies not to feminism in general (who historically had strong links to class struggle and anticapitalism), but to a part of the modern status quo feminism which is focused purely on individuals and has been absorbed by the ruling class (e.g., once the CEO is a woman, the goal is reached). This is not a representation of feminism in general though, and I would say the same can apply to many other movements as well (e.g., ambientalism, antiracism, etc.) that (in part) lost their revolutionary nature and are left fighting for small changes within the status quo.

I think that in fact in at least some cases the lack of respect (or general ability to live a relationship with a man in a mutually loving way) is exactly due to that education. At the end of the day the flipside of the "subservient" attitude is that the man in the relationship is represented as a provider, with all the gender stereotypes that come with it: lack of emotions, self-reliance and of course the expectation for him to be a provider. I would say that most of the examples of bad relationships in this thread boil down to exactly these dynamics.

Also we are not anymore in the 1950, so that education today mostly happens implicitly, but it also gets mixed up with a lot of other messages from the wider society.

I personally also disagree about the fact that men are not taught how to fit in their gender role. I think they are, since very little, symmetrically to how women are too and possibly even more explicitly: you need to protect women (incl. sacrificing because that's what heroes do), the whole courtship thing, the fact that as a man you are responsible to provide for others, that there are certain activities that are manly, etc... Essentially is the exact same problem: gender stereotypes and sexism go both ways and impact both genders, although in different ways.

I agree, personally.

In general I feel the words are so abstract (blacklist and whitelist) that I can't really see how someone will see some other meaning...

Nftables is the modern iptables FYI. Linux firewall.

Totally discussing useless stuff here, but green and red to me give the feeling of temporary actions (and possibly alternating). Intuitively sounds more like slowing and speeding than it does permanently blocking or allowing something.

Black and white have the polar opposite meaning. At this point allowlist and blocklist might be a simpler solution to the "problem".