|
|
|
|
|
by acdha
4163 days ago
|
|
You made an invalid comparison and, interestingly, when analyzed your scenario exactly supports tedks' argument. Both scenarios hinge on a man acting aggressively against a woman who doesn't share his wishes. In both cases, the man controls the situation: he can choose to leave, deescalate or push harder. In contrast, the woman has no option to go back to enjoying her evening unless he chooses to allow it. All of the other options involve risk: calling for help (or the police) may not work and may have a social cost (“what a bitch, he was just trying to buy her a drink”). If she tries to leave, he can follow her to somewhere with fewer witnesses. Maybe she calls the police: do they send someone, does the officer arrive quickly enough, does the guy talk them into leaving without doing anything – and does any of this enrage him enough to assault her later? Sure, the single most common outcome is that a drunken ass eventually gets the message and leaves her alone but all of those are possibilities which she has to weigh – and do so with the knowledge that if one of the low but still way too common terrible outcomes happens, TV and the internet will be full of people lining up to say it was her fault for making the wrong choice. That's why tedks rightly called it male privilege: you or I can simply go out to a bar and have a beer without thinking about any of this. Given the circumstances, I can completely understand why someone who doesn't enjoy that privilege would choose an effective alternative even if some guy thinks it's breaking the rules. |
|