Women
A place for discussion, camaraderie, and advice.
For, from, and with women. Hi 👋
RULES:
--Be good to one another.
If you're not sure about what you're about to type, ask yourself: Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
--About, but not only for, women.
We are here to talk about, learn about, and wonder about women and their/our experiences. Men are allowed to post here, but only for the purpose of asking sincere questions about women or for advice related to a women in their lives they are trying to support.
--No bullies. No Creeps. No trolls.
No personal attacks, no misogyny, no misandry, ageism, racism, or otherwise hateful or disrespectful commentary.
--No selling products or services.
You can recommend products/methods that work for you, but soliciting clients or patients is not allowed. No advertising or self-promotions, including using this sub to drive traffic elsewhere.
view the rest of the comments
Disagreement is not harmful to discussion, especially with the poor choice of analogy. What do you think the cash is supposed to represent here?
Cash in this analogy is representing a different target for evil people. Cash itself is not analogous to women, but evil people don't think of them as women. They think of women as targets.
If this argument is based on the belief in wholesale "evil people" and that the people who violate and abuse women all see them as targets, I can't continue. We have a fundamentally different understanding of where violence and abuse comes from...
Which goes back to the original headline. Is a women making herself a target by dressing a certain way (Not a literal target, hopefully?) Because that is what I'm disagreeing with. If that were true, then there would be an ideal way to dress in which a woman would not be "asking for trouble." It follows from there that out of a group of women with different outfits, who were all sexually abused in the same manner, some would have been asking for it more than others. That's what I can't get behind.
Nobody is saying what you are disagreeing with. We're all on the same side here and agree with the same stuff just saying it differently and you can't understand that for some reason. You're flipping out for no reason and I'm trying to explain that but it seems to be only making it worse for you somehow
Flipping out? If you think anyone who presents an alternative viewpoint is automatically upset, I don't know how to speak with you.
And yes, my opinion is different from the one I responded to. I don't agree with that analogy, fundamentally, as I explained.
My disagreement isn't rooted in an emotional response, nor am I upset. Sure seems like you are, though.
How could you disagree with the analogy when you fundamentally don't understand it. You think it means something completely different than what the poster meant it to say
Pretty sure I nailed it.
My initial response to you got upvoted, which means the general public thinks my explanation was better than your interpretation.
Now that obviously isn't proof, but it is a thought that maybe you should reconsider.
6 people = the general public?
That you believe that gives me a lot to consider, and it doesn't make your point of view more favorable.