Your exact words that I took issue with:
I don't dispute that more rapes are committed by "non-strangers":
...but the categories of "acquaintance" and "date" can mean people that you don't really know very well, even if they are not completely random strangers you have never seen before - together these three categories make 35%, and if you take the figure of c. 50,000 that gives 17,500 which is ten times the number of people hit by buses in 1991. Even if you only take the 8% for 'strangers' this is 4000, which again is higher - although I admit that reporting of 'non-stranger' rape may well be far lower than 'stranger rape' and this would impact on these figures.
However, all the above is simply for rape, and doesn't even start looking at the figures for "assault" which are of an order of magnitude higher again.
Two points:
1. The 'hit by bus bus' comparison is both incorrect and fatuous: you simply can't make a direct comparison as the fear generated by different types of risks - it is usually different for all sorts of things and not just 'irrational' or a patriarchcal plot. The fear itself also causes a significant blight on people's lives.
2. The fact that people want to protest about one specific issue that they feel strongly about (in this case their safety on the streets) is not negated by you pulling out another issue (people's safety at home). If you want to launch a cmapiagn about domestic abuse then go right ahead, but why on earth are you using this as a stick to beat these campaigners around the head with? It's a bit like telling people to shut up about road safety in Croydon because so many more people are dying of malaria in the Democratic Republic of Congo - ie stupid.
Are you really trying to say that women don't have the right to protest about how unsafe they feel on London streets after dark, and are you really saying that they are being suckered into feeling scared by the mass media and a patriarchy that is keeping them psychologically enslaved - that their very campaign is helping reenforce this oppression?
Maybe you'd like to invite some of your female friends who do feel safe out on the streets after dark to come and post their views here rather than simply speaking for them? I'd be interested in seeing of they concur with you about how stupid women are to feel threatened and how they have simply been suckered by the mass media. ffs, I am a reasonably well-built guy who is fairly confident about handling myself but I often feel wary of being out alone, on foot in various parts of London late at night and I also know a number of friends who have been attacked - the last one hit over the head with an iron bar two weeks ago. This had nothing to do with what newspaper he read.
Feel free to get back to me in the next few days.smokedout said:the chances of being raped or assaulted by stranger as a woman are ridiculously low, your more likely to get run over by a bus
I don't dispute that more rapes are committed by "non-strangers":
...but the categories of "acquaintance" and "date" can mean people that you don't really know very well, even if they are not completely random strangers you have never seen before - together these three categories make 35%, and if you take the figure of c. 50,000 that gives 17,500 which is ten times the number of people hit by buses in 1991. Even if you only take the 8% for 'strangers' this is 4000, which again is higher - although I admit that reporting of 'non-stranger' rape may well be far lower than 'stranger rape' and this would impact on these figures.
However, all the above is simply for rape, and doesn't even start looking at the figures for "assault" which are of an order of magnitude higher again.
Two points:
1. The 'hit by bus bus' comparison is both incorrect and fatuous: you simply can't make a direct comparison as the fear generated by different types of risks - it is usually different for all sorts of things and not just 'irrational' or a patriarchcal plot. The fear itself also causes a significant blight on people's lives.
2. The fact that people want to protest about one specific issue that they feel strongly about (in this case their safety on the streets) is not negated by you pulling out another issue (people's safety at home). If you want to launch a cmapiagn about domestic abuse then go right ahead, but why on earth are you using this as a stick to beat these campaigners around the head with? It's a bit like telling people to shut up about road safety in Croydon because so many more people are dying of malaria in the Democratic Republic of Congo - ie stupid.
Are you really trying to say that women don't have the right to protest about how unsafe they feel on London streets after dark, and are you really saying that they are being suckered into feeling scared by the mass media and a patriarchy that is keeping them psychologically enslaved - that their very campaign is helping reenforce this oppression?
Maybe you'd like to invite some of your female friends who do feel safe out on the streets after dark to come and post their views here rather than simply speaking for them? I'd be interested in seeing of they concur with you about how stupid women are to feel threatened and how they have simply been suckered by the mass media. ffs, I am a reasonably well-built guy who is fairly confident about handling myself but I often feel wary of being out alone, on foot in various parts of London late at night and I also know a number of friends who have been attacked - the last one hit over the head with an iron bar two weeks ago. This had nothing to do with what newspaper he read.


errrrr! to who?

