4 ms·

1. Yes, I am. The normal response to trying to figure out whether or not to walk down a particular dark street or across a particular campus at night is not to

1. Yes, I am. The normal response to trying to figure out whether or not to walk down a particular dark street or across a particular campus at night is not to pull up police records and perform a cluster analysis, it's to make a gut decision based on the cases of which you are aware. 2. Actually, I wasn't trying to say "men can't possibly know that", I was try to say that people who happen to have the firsthand experience of being a woman probably have more knowledge of the risks that women typically have to navigate than you do if you are male, unless you have had some reason to accumulate an unusual amount of information on the topic from firsthand sources. 3. Taking the condescending position that women need to to be coddled by men is very different from allowing that each woman needs to assess for herself what kinds and degrees of risks to her person that she is willing to accept and act accordingly. Whether you tell me that I am incapable of handling x situation myself and offer to shield me or you tell me that I should dismiss my worries about situation x because you know better, you are operating under the assumption that I cannot be trusted to assess the situation and act accordingly myself. I don't expect this is what you meant to say?

georgieporgie 15y ago
1) I don't understand why you're agreeing that you're using scary anecdotes to refute scary anecdotes and acting as if that is a defensible or valuable position. Decisions based upon fiction are not wise. See: Patriot Act, Iraq war, etc. 2) Being susceptible to or targeted by fear-based anecdotes does not make one more able to objectively evaluate them. Quite the opposite, in fact. 3) I don't know what you're talking about here. I was pointing out that your position is, in my opinion, fundamentally sexist, and that you likely wouldn't have batted an eye had I taken the more popular, sexist view.

georgieporgie 15y ago

1) I don't understand why you're agreeing that you're using scary anecdotes to refute scary anecdotes and acting as if that is a defensible or valuable position. Decisions based upon fiction are not wise. See: Patriot Act, Iraq war, etc. 2) Being susceptible to or targeted by fear-based anecdotes does not make one more able to objectively evaluate them. Quite the opposite, in fact. 3) I don't know what you're talking about here. I was pointing out that your position is, in my opinion, fundamentally sexist, and that you likely wouldn't have batted an eye had I taken the more popular, sexist view.