Dating safety

[IndieSolo]

I see women in my community quietly going about their lives with men around them all the dang time, with little hint that they are afraid of being in public with men around.

I would say it is likely that most of the woman you see have a good sense of their surroundings, and/or it just may not be noticeable to you when they are checking behind them or over their shoulders, to make sure they are safe. Of course, we tend to do it less often in places that are familiar, but we learn to do these things without being obvious. However, I am sure that most of the women you see out there have looked and taken stock of who is around them.

You may not notice the "little things" women do when we are going about our day in public. Things such as the way a woman has switched how she's holding her handbag, how her pace quickens and she manages to look back when she hears someone behind her, how she has checked to make sure the buttons on her blouse haven't come undone after a man looks her up and down, or that she's "casually" crossed the street to walk on the opposite side, or has chosen not to walk down a street in order not to pass a certain alley or if something feels amiss, or how quickly she exits an ATM vestibule when someone else walks in. Things like that, all the time. All the time.

 

[FallenAngelina]

My experience -- as a man -- about my being a sexual being is that I'm always a sexual being, period. I'm not sometimes a sexual being and sometimes not. As a man.

I had no idea that women were frequently treated as a sexual being sometimes, but never a sexual being while at work -- or whatever, whenever. How could anyone be so utterly stupid to think that women are ever NOT sexual beings, just as men are?

This is it exactly. A man's sexuality is just part of his person, nothing more to it. A woman's sexuality is a commodity, a choice, a possession of her mate, her parents - but definitely not her own, unless she takes very pointed and bold steps to own her sexuality herself. Something as simple as the length of her hair, what hemline to choose, what color, how loose or tight a shirt to wear conveys messages about how sexually "available" a woman is - not how sexually confident, but the degree to which she sexually puts herself out there. A man simply can't imagine how fraught with meaning a woman's clothing is. If she attracts cat calls or male aggression, certainly her clothing will let everyone know whether she was "asking for it" or not. There is simply no equivalent for a man because a man's sexuality belongs to him and he is the same guy in every circumstance. A woman's sexuality belongs to a complicated world of cultural and social subtext and it's certainly not hers unless she makes a heroic effort to claim it.

And "potential danger" is such a part of every woman's experience that I'm sure most of us don't even realize the many ways in which we protect ourselves. It's not an outright fear of rape that most women walk around with, it's a lifetime of guardedness from the bombardment of messages that we need to keep a lid on our sexual expression, for fear that showing it attracts all sorts of unpleasant and downright dangerous attention. It' not just sexual expression that we're told we need to guard, it's the very fact that we're a woman and that makes us vulnerable. A woman need not walk around feeling fearful and guarded to be taking constant and unconscious measures to protect herself in her daily life. It's just part of the female experience.

 

[River]

I guess I thought we men, in general, had evolved much more than the women here feel we have. I thought we had moved on from much of the dark old days of gender issues which spurred on feminism and the woman's movement. Or maybe I simply just WANTED this to be the case so much that I put blinders on to some extent -- such as I seem to have done with regard to our political situation in this country. Not that I was utterly politically naive! No. It's just that I'm shocked, just SHOCKED that Donald Trump could be leading one of the two major parties in the race for the White House. This tells me we have not gained a single inch, but have fallen by yards or miles, instead.

Thanks, women, for sharing your stories and perspective!

 

[FallenAngelina]

I guess I thought we men, in general, had evolved much more than the women here feel we have.

It's important (maybe helpful?) to note that the messages and experiences of "danger" are not specifically male perpetrated. Many messages about what is and is not "safe" get passed down from older women to younger. The female experience of vulnerability in the world goes way beyond specific men treating a woman in specific ways. As I said, from birth a female is bombarded with messages (and yes, experiences that confirm) that she, especially her sexuality, does not belong to herself, but that she must carefully guard how she is perceived and that her very life can depend on this. "Guard your reputation," "Don't get hysterical," "Nice girl," "Bad girl" - how we are perceived is everything (we are taught.) Even the term "independent woman" belies the social understanding that a woman who is complete on her own and can take care of herself is somehow worthy of note because "regular women" aren't capable of this. A woman belongs to the meanings assigned to her, not to herself. This is so pervasive, it's not even a cultural thing. I doubt there's a culture on earth in which the women and men experience the same degree of vulnerability just walking around. It's not men's fault. It's just the way things are.

 

[River]

A woman belongs to the meanings assigned to her, not to herself.

Do men, generally, belong to themselves? Maybe the gap between men and women in this way--in some sense--is not quite as broad as it may seem at first glace. I think of the tens of thousands of men who have gone off to die in wars recently ..., wars in which their lives and bodies did not belong to them but rather to a flag. Wars which they did not understand at all. Wars which they were simply told the "ought" to go fight.

Maybe few of us "own" our own lives in any significant way or sense? Maybe we're all flung this way and that by forces we neither understand nor control?

 

[FallenAngelina]

Do men, generally, belong to themselves?

We're talking about safety and specifically sexual safety, so yes - in that realm men do belong to themselves. A woman is always up for evaluation, everywhere she goes. Her appearance sends messages about her sexual availability in a way that a man's just doesn't. Women are vulnerable in so many ways that men can't possibly fathom. Everyone has to live within the conscripts of society, so in that sense, nobody is truly independent, but when it comes to being out and about and especially out on a date, a woman has so very much more at stake than a man can possibly imagine. That's why traditionally, the man takes the woman out - not just to pay and to be in control, but because we all understand and accept that women need protection. One basic, primal way that a man shows his worthiness to his prospective mate is to demonstrate how he can take care of her. And most women respond to this. Of course, this isn't so for everyone, but it's an example of the basic social understanding that a woman alone in the world is vulnerable and that a man is not.

 

[River]

.... Women are vulnerable in so many ways that men can't possibly fathom. Everyone has to live within the conscripts of society, so in that sense, nobody is truly independent, .... a woman has so very much more at stake than a man can possibly imagine.

I understand and accept the feeling underlying these words. As best I can, as a man. But are not these proclamations a bit strong? If men cannot possibly imagine, then we should not even attempt such an empathetic experience or insight. So we're obviously a very inferior species, innately and intrinsically. So perhaps women should give up on us altogether -- and should take over the world? Women, after all, are a statistical majority and should rule, right?

 

[Emm]

Just how bad is our safety situation, really?

The trouble is, we don't know. Have you ever read Schrodinger's Rapist? It's not that every man is a threat, but that we have no way of telling the ones that are until it's too late, and if you do meet up with That Guy, everyone will ask why you didn't take the safety precautions they previously ridiculed you for taking. Why did you meet a stranger alone? Why didn't you meet him somewhere public? Why did you accept a drink from him? It goes straight from "not all men" to "she was asking for it" without missing a beat. If someone is run over crossing a 4-lane highway they're seen as less of a "worthy" victim than someone who is hit while using a crosswalk, because they didn't take precautions to ensure their safety. Ditto sexual assault victims who haven't ticked every one of the ever-changing boxes on the "how to protect yourself" list.

And if the Wolves are everywhere, all the time, who would get on a bus, take a train, leave their home, meet a new potential friend?

Every woman. Every day. It may never happen to us, but it's the background radiation of our lives.

What worries me is fear run rampant so that we live in fear rather than basic openness with our fellow humans. That's all

We all make risk assessments subconsciously about everything we do, from whether to bite straight into a fresh pie, to crossing the road, or meeting a stranger for coffee. To most of us it's a sensible precaution to approach the hot pie with initial caution because most of us burned our tongues on hot food when we were kids. We take small bites at first and might blow on it to cool it down if it's steaming. To someone who has never burned their tongue, the tentative nibble may seem over-cautious. We look both ways before crossing a road, probably because we had it drummed into us as children, but also because as we grow up we learn about what happens to people who are hit by moving vehicles. We meet strangers in public places and make sure that if/when they turn out to be Schrodinger's rapist we've done enough to protect ourselves that we have a chance to escape, or at worst that there's enough of a trail left for the police to work out what happened to us and who did it.

Edit: Note to self, refresh the page before replying to a thread that's been open in your browser since yesterday afternoon. River, thank you for trying to understand.

 

[FallenAngelina]

If men cannot possibly imagine, then we should not even attempt such an empathetic experience or insight....So perhaps women should give up on us altogether -- and should take over the world? Women, after all, are a statistical majority and should rule, right?

Wrong. Inability to know another's experience hasn't prevented an awful lot of people from changing the world for the better, simply because the world would be better for having made the change. For example, slavery was an assumed fact of life for millennia, across many cultures and throughout history. An individual did not have to have had experience as a slave to know that slavery is a fundamentally harmful condition for all involved, obviously most harmful for the slave. Little by little, over the course of the centuries, slavery is now universally outlawed. Some underground pockets still exist, but humans no longer see slavery as the right of the victor, but as a basic human wrong. How did this change? How could it when relatively few people had direct experience as a slave?

Here in the US, we still live with the echoes of slavery and more recently, we've shifted massively with the Civil Rights Movement. True, we've not solved all of our problems with racism, but our society has changed a great deal in the last 60 years in regard to race. The very recent social changes in attitudes toward gay people is nothing short of a sociological miracle. Again, not all problems are solved, but our society has opened to homosexuality in a big way - and not because everyone has had a homosexual experience.

The everyday experience of women is changing to be less constrictive and more safe, but the change is slow and women are definitely not on a par with men yet in the arena of social safety. Certainly, the average American woman is much safer and more mobile today than she would have been a hundred years ago in 1916. She wasn't even considered mentally capable of voting until 3 years later! Her life definitely was not her own, as she either legally belonged to her parents or to her husband. Her sexuality, if she was one of the rare ones to even think about it, was the pervue of her sex partner (usually a husband or a male lover if she was bold enough to have one.) The everyday experience of a woman is indeed much safer and unrestricted than it was even a hundred years ago, but every woman will tell you that her experience is still very far from what men seem to have always enjoyed as a matter of course.

 

[River]

An individual did not have to have had experience as a slave to know that slavery is a fundamentally harmful condition for all involved, obviously most harmful for the slave.

Here you are raising the same basic doubt I raised in questioning your assertion that men can never imagine or comprehend a woman's experience. That is, unless there is nothing significantly analogous in how women have been treated by many men and how blacks or Africans (for example) have been treated by many whites.* I doubt you would assert that only women, and never men, can comprehend, imagine or empathize with a slave's experience. You don't seem to be saying that all men lack imagination or empathy.

I think it was empathy, understanding and compassion for slaves which cause the white abolitionists to rise up and challenge the practice of slavery. So it would seem many whites did both imagine and comprehend the slave's experience -- no, not fully, but enough to rise up against the practice.

Already this man (myself) better understands, imagines and empathizes with women with regard to rape danger (etc.) than I did a couple of days ago -- thanks to my ability to listen here.

No, a man will never 100% understand, imagine or understand what it is like to be a woman in this world. But if you ask me, if hes a REAL man, he will try -- and he will be willing to listen to women and gain at least a sizable degree of such imagination and understanding.

Some "men" are just not real men. They lack a capacity for imagining or understanding the experience of others, and empathizing and having compassion. Such "men" are sometimes labeled or diagnosed narcissists or sociopaths -- a phenomenon which seems to exist in a wide spectrum of degrees and kinds. Unfortunately, part of our problem seems to be that too few boys and young men have been encouraged to empathize with females because of cultural factors, such as patriarchy. But most guys are capable of understanding, imagination and empathy. And it is up to all of us, men and women, to speak our hearts and our truth to boys, young men, all men. Understanding, imagination, empathy and compassion are our inheritance as a species -- boys and girls, men and women. Only a small minority of us seem to be congenitally incapable of these.

[On a side note, I've recently concluded that a former friend of mine, a man who has been very problematic for me and the organization I helped found, lacks empathy to a level and degree which highly suggests he is a narcissist, at least, if not also a sociopath. It is a strange thing to interact with a person who substantially lacks empathy, and it has taught me a great deal about the importance of empathy in human relating -- though the lessons are still being slowly digested. Many narcissists and/or sociopaths have, apparently, a great knack at pretending to have empathy and compassion. They are often great actors. But they can only mimic real empathy and compassion, never really know it or feel it.]


*(for example -- and for example because not only whites have historically kept slaves and because not only blacks or Africans have been kept as slaves).


.

 

[Spork]

And as I've tried to keep in the conversation, lest the entire thread be about the topic of rape and devolve into a men vs. women debate....the OP's question of "what measures are sensible to keep myself safe?" need not be solely a question of mitigating the risks of physical danger. It is also very possible, and in fact way more likely, that one will put one's mental and emotional health in danger by approaching a prospective relationship in the wrong way. And that danger doesn't discriminate between the sexes, at all. That one is about the buzzword o' the day, "self awareness." Which really can be about the most awesome and amazing thing, when you shed light on your true Self and banish a lot of confusion that you may have grown up with, or might have come from your more recent experiences and circumstances.

Living life, learning lessons.

The single most powerful thing I think I've ever learned in my life, is how to accept responsibility for your life circumstances and experiences without taking it to a place of fault and blame and beating yourself up over it, but rather learning and applying that wisdom to future behavior. And that basic ability seems to be shockingly absent in so much of our society, to me it's a wonder anyone can function at all.

From my own life, example #1:
When I was 14, I got the stupid notion in my head that my mother and I should dress sexy and go to a carnival in the middle of the night. I had an image in my mind of being just like Star from The Lost Boys, I think. Wasn't she sexy and powerful and cool? I wanted to do that. So we did. And we ended up with a couple of drunk men who originally hailed from rural Mexico but were in the DC area working construction. The one who attached himself to me wasn't bad looking. He was in his late 20's. I was having a good time, enjoying being attractive, we all ended up back at my house...but when things got very physical, I suddenly felt an INTENSE revulsion and desire to get away. I tried to say no, and I tried to get away, and Victor (a name he chose for himself, not the one he was born with, I'm sure) was having none of it. I was very aware that in this situation, I was either going to give in and let him "finish" or he was going to beat me badly, and then have his way anyhow. I decided that I didn't want to force him to subdue me, so I got it over with. Afterwards, I felt as though I'd stepped in dog shit with a bare foot...I washed and put it behind me with no further trauma than a vague sense of disgust.

Since then, every time I've told that story, I have had people (women especially) tell me that I am a victim, that I have trauma I don't recognize and should seek therapy, and that this clearly must affect everything about who I am since then, and try to give me sympathy. That response makes me ANGRY for reasons I find a little hard to express. I say...yes, while I don't beat myself up over it, I was 14 and stupid, but I had the dumb-shit idea to go pick up men in the middle of the night at a carnival, I encouraged things to that point, and let him have every reason to expect he was going to get laid, and furthermore he was from a culture different from my own where the rules aren't quite the same. Lessons learned. I have not since put myself in such a situation; I KNOW BETTER. I'm not walking around cowering in fear, clutching my purse like a weapon or carrying pepper spray...but I am more aware of sitautions, and the people I'm dealing with, and the signals I may be sending them. And I avoid drunk men, and particularly being alone with drunk men.

I want to OWN the wisdom I gained from that experience. I don't want sympathy. I don't want a "victim" badge to pin to my lapel, I don't want a diagnosis to excuse any failings I might have in life. Was it that guy's fault? Sure, whatever, but you know what? I can't control him! I can't control any other human being in the world. But I can control myself. In a way, when other women talk to me about how I was a victim and I must stop thinking the way I do because I'm "blaming" or "shaming" myself (which I'm not)...what they're doing is telling me to stop trying to claim power I don't have, and give it into the hands of the rapist where it belongs. When the police (other men) punish the person with the power (man) then things will be right. My role is to cry in the corner until men avenge my broken honor.

Well, those women can suck it. I don't feel that way and I never will.

As for Victor, I haven't seen him in at least 22 years and I doubt if I ever will again...and I don't care what happens to him in the slightest!

A jellyfish once stung me, and then was lost in the sea, and I never got a chance to punish that jellyfish, and I care exactly as much, which is to say not at all.

Example #2 from my life:
The one I've already talked about where I thought I might be down for casual sex, and the guy said he was looking for love, and I jumped in recklessly and found out that he wanted only casual sex with me, and I was "in love" (NRE) with him. Emotional disturbance and confusion and misery ensued.

Now I know, that what I was reaching for was not "casual" it was more "solo-poly." Or at least the "solo" part of the definition, because I believe I could be mono if that was my circumstance...but merely because I don't want to ride the escalator doesn't mean I don't want to have feelings and a relationship.

....

Guess which of those two examples caused me more suffering? The second one. BY FAR.

In both instances, I analyzed the situation after the fact and took ownership for my own part in the engineering of the outcome, learned from my mistakes, and gained wisdom. I don't feel one single ounce of shame for any of it, merely because I acknowledge that I made some mistakes. That is how we live, that is how we grow. And being able to do that is a HUGE part of learning how to keep yourself safe in all ways.

(Sorry I'm writing essays, I'm bad about that...)

 

[River]

Have you ever read Schrödinger’s Rapist?

I just did.

Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

 

[River]

(Sorry I'm writing essays, I'm bad about that...)

Yes, it was very nearly an essay, at least (in style and form, not length). But it was very well written, insightful, honest ... and a very good read. No need for an apology at all! Thanks for sharing it.

 

[IndieSolo]

Yes, perhaps we should let this thread get back to suggestions on how to be safe on a first date, rather than an argument between the sexes.

 

[FallenAngelina]

...an argument between the sexes.

I thought it was an interesting discussion exploring why women are mindful of safety on dates, not an argument between sides. Apologies if my posts came off that way. Was not my intent at all.

 

[River]

I thought it was an interesting discussion exploring why women are mindful of safety on dates, not an argument between sides. Apologies if my posts came off that way. Was not my intent at all.

Yeah, it wasn't at all an argument for me, either. I feel that I learned from the discussion. I was previously unaware of the great extent to which women tend to be constantly on guard about the presence of men. I wasn't oblivious before, mind you. I just didn't know the extent of it.

Thanks, all, for the educational opportunity.

 

[Spork]

I thought it was an interesting discussion exploring why women are mindful of safety on dates, not an argument between sides. Apologies if my posts came off that way. Was not my intent at all.

It was an interesting discussion, and due perhaps to the fact that people here are generally pretty neat at communication and not being assholes, it really did not devolve into that. But I can tell you right now that, had some of these statements appeared in the forum I used to post in, it would have been a flame war of epic proportions. Which is one reason I'm here...and not there.

It is true that your typical, average woman does have some stuff to worry about and deal with, that your typical average man does not. The opposite is also true! I really think some great points got raised. But I also wanted to make clear (to River in particular) that merely because we are aware in a background sort of way and take steps to stay safe, doesn't mean we're all on high anxiety red alert at all times, suspicious that every date is out to victimize us, or holding back from connecting with people. When I put on my seatbelt, I don't envision myself flying through the windshield the whole time I'm driving...but I still wear the thing.

And again, a safe call, in my case, is usually a post-date synopsis to a girl pal or my Mom or something that helps me bounce thoughts and feelings, it has the dual purpose of being a safe call, and I don't do it during the date, but afterwards.

For some of us, who date in the BDSM community, it's VERY important. For those kinds of dates, I also check references. And it is expected that I will do so, and if a man has a problem with it, that is a big red flag.

 

[River]

But I also wanted to make clear (to River in particular) that merely because we are aware in a background sort of way and take steps to stay safe, doesn't mean we're all on high anxiety red alert at all times, suspicious that every date is out to victimize us, or holding back from connecting with people. When I put on my seatbelt, I don't envision myself flying through the windshield the whole time I'm driving...but I still wear the thing.

Good analogy. I never got the impression that the women here were freaked out, actually. I was initially surprised at some of the cautionary measures taken--most especially around meeting men in public places.

When you say you "check references," what exactly does this mean? What references -- friends?

 

[Spork]

Good analogy. I never got the impression that the women here were freaked out, actually. I was initially surprised at some of the cautionary measures taken--most especially around meeting men in public places.

When you say you "check references," what exactly does this mean? What references -- friends?

Previous play partners, and/or community leaders. In BDSM circles particularly, if I'm going to let a man flog me, I want to know that he knows what he is doing. This is less of an issue now for me because I'm IN the community and know people...but at first, the first man who introduced me to "the real thing"...I didn't know anyone that well. I dated him three times, in restaurant settings, and he provided the names of some people I could ask about him, which I did, and said that Svetlana, the lady who owned/ran our local dungeon/club/community center at the time, also would vouch for him. She did.

Only after really feeling him out with my instincts and asking others about him and getting a good report, would I visit him at home.

And yet, still, I held back until he told me that he was moving out of state. Why? Because my gut was telling me that despite his loud protestations that he was not interested in relationships, he was still stinging from his divorce, and his heart was reaching for a pairbond. I did NOT have an interest in him that way, and didn't want him to get emotionally attached to me. I thought it was a possibility. But when he said he was moving out of state, then I felt ok about it.

But all of that is kind of...well, BDSM safety is above and beyond normal dating safety. I was consenting to let this man bind me, flog me, and set me on fire, in his basement. So yeah, I checked references. lol!

 

[Magdlyn]

I feel safer with kinksters because of the emphasis on safe sane and consensual. Vanilla guys have a lot of shit buried under the vanilla, and are less respectful, I feel. They understand LESS about consent, not more than a kinky person who knows full well what they are getting into.

I've read the statistic time and again that 1 in 4 women will be raped by age... 18 or 21, I forget. Women! Pretty much still children, still adolescent. Personally I think the stats are low, since many women do not tell their own families they've been assaulted, molested or fully raped, much less report it to a poll, or the police. Pretty much every woman I know well enough to talk about such things, has been raped or close to it. Hell, husbands rape wives, and that was unrecognized legally until very recently.

I've been knocked down in city hallway by a guy, a stranger, intent on rape. He had followed me for blocks. My friend came running down from his apartment and the guy ran, or I would have been kidnapped or raped right there.

I was orally raped by a guy, a friend of a friend, who drove me home from a party, when he took a little detour to a lover's lane in a town I wasn't familiar with.

My sister was raped by a platonic friend at college after a party. She had an ectopic pregnancy as a result, which condition can be fatal if not caught in time.

Etc. Rape is EVERYWHERE. I can't believe anyone with a modicum of education, say, access to cable TV or the internet, has not heard the term "rape culture."

Going back to the question of whether women in work situations feel safer to meet a colleague one on one, than to meet someone for a coffee date, where it seems you guys agreed that was safer-- I beg to differ. Lots of women now travel alone for business, and often it is expected you will meet a colleague, even a total stranger, to work in your hotel room. That is THE reason most hotels offer so many more suites now. A bigger room with the bed far from the couch, tables, chairs, or even a completely separate room, seems so much safer. It is less likely to make a guy start to objectify his female colleague, and get rapey.

Of course women are sexually harrassed in their own workplaces on a regular basis as well. Men have to take seminars at some companies on what constitutes sexual harassment, and why they shouldn't do it!

Oy!