I often see grown men eyeing up school girls..

Where as you speak of all feminists whenever you go an a anti-feminist rant.

Then why did you make a guarantee - not just an opinion, a guarantee! - on behalf of the 'majority of women' that they have in fact experienced some form of harassment?

You claimed to speak on behalf of the 'majority of women.' You can't, you're an individual. You can't speak for anyone else other than yourself. You are an individual, and that's all you ever will be, yet the manner in which you articulate your points suggests there's some sort of hidden code of sister hood shared by 'the majority of women' in The UK, and you are their official spokesperson.

Reality check: you aren't.

Yet here you are, using one article, written by 1 person, to justify your comments. You're also a guy, so how can you argue what women take as a compliment or not. So when there's girls saying that most of us don't appreciate these gestures, we are more qualified than you to say otherwise, because WE live with this ****.

Oh, great. Well on that basis I can determine that sexual objectification by women against men is a problem because 3 MILLION women have downloaded an online application called LuLu to rate men on a scale of 1-10 based on their sexual performance in bed.

As an aside, what evidence do you have that any of these 50,000 stories actually happened? Here's a clue: none.

Every single one is anecdotal evidence, and EverdaySexism explicitly stipulates the campaign is for women (i.e. no men allowed). What's more, we absolutely know women don't lie to garner attention or manufacture victimhood. A bit like the woman who recently proclaimed a security guard snatched her baby while she was breastfeeding him in a Primark. Of course, the baying mob of feminists believed her - the entire internet believed her.

However, anyone with a rational mind could see, upon first glance, that the idea of a security guard being able to snatch a baby in plain sight in a shopping centre filled to the brim with people in the safest country in the world was absolutely farcical. And it was. Completely.

Oh, blah, blah, blah.

As a guy, I have about as much authority as you in determining what an individual woman feels about being propositioned, or objectified. You don't know the woman, you don't know what she thinks about it, you don't about her experiences, you don't know ANYTHING about her. All you know is she has a vagina and you have one too, therefore you must be alike. Nonsense.

That's like saying I have an insight into the psyche of Adolf Hitler, or knew what he was feeling, because he happened to have a phallic member. Or do you have some magical connection to 'all women' through virtue of similar genitalia?

By all means, sit there and relay your own falsified, anecdotal experiences to one and all. However, don't sit there and pretend you share some form of telepathic connection to the entire 'sisterhood.'

It reads like you belong to a religion; your holy text is the feminine mystique, your shrine is the vagina, your missionaries are working for The Guardian, and your temples are 'safe spaces', women-only groups and gender studies departments on University campuses. All you need now is the sky fairy, a mythological belief which explains away every societal outcome - oh, wait, the patriarchy! More of a devil than a God though, right?

That's because every single feminists consciously opts-in to the label 'feminist', a label they know is populated by people who declare males are a 'biological accident.'

ALL women don't opt-in to anything; they are just women and co-opted for the nefarious, self-serving purposes of those who refer to themselves as feminists.

LuLu is a sexist piece of junk which actually made me throw up a little when I first heard about it. I actually happen to agree with your first paragraph.

Yes, because 50,000+ women are totally making these things up. You do realise that, as this is a societal problem, the only way in which it can be highlighted is through empirical evidence? It's not exactly measurable through statistics, any more so than racial harassment can be easily studied through anything other than anecdotes. Maybe you should ask some of your female friends / relatives if they've ever been affected by sexism. You might be surprised by their responses.

You've clearly never read the Everyday Sexism Project, or you might have found Laura Bate's wonderful commentary on how men are affected by sexism too. Again, this displays an alarming propensity by anti-feminists to cherry-pick their arguments...

So? That's like saying everyone who is a nationalist is a fascist as fascism is under the umbrella of nationalism.

Why can't some men comprehend or accept the fact that women do suffer from certain aspects of society? I argue that a grown man eyeing up a child is wrong and that makes me seen as a 'feminazi'. Please don't patronize me. Women can't ****ing express their opinion, on stuff that AFFECTS them, without a guy telling them ' oh you can't speak for all women, oh take it as a compliment'. You're excusing men sexually objectifying a kid, by stating you're opinion which is that some women like 'it' . You simply can't know that and therefore can't use it as an excuse.

Right, so it's all mythology. There's motive there to make it up, plenty of women absolutely hate men; plenty of women spend their entire lives trying to adjust the narrative in their favour. Then again, I can't prove this, much in the same way you can't prove their accusations are true.

Plenty of women spend all of their lives pitting women off against men, or believing women are nothing, have no sense of self, until they are viewed though the prism of masculinity. Plenty of women make masses of money from doing this, women like Laura Bates, Jessica Valenti, Julie Bindel and Caitlin Moran. Many of them have amassed £millions in book sales.

The way I look at it is why are they sitting bleating about it on the internet? Harassment is ILLEGAL. Report it. There's only one motivation to bleat about it: they want to control the narrative. Their issue isn't the harassment, but articulating the harassment to form a narrative. If that's their motive, their accounts can never, ever be construed of as impartial.

I've read it, much in the same way I've read the bible. All accusation, no citations. Our legal system works on a presumption of innocence.

I'm curious, and I have the arrogance to ask, why are people ignoring my posts, or points? I'm certain many are superior than yours/many, and my criticism rips them apart.

Edit: Or is it that no one has problems with my arguments, and accept them fully?
That'd make sense.

Hmm okay

Some is an indeterminate amount. I cited that article to disprove the notion women universally are opposed to sexual objectification. I can't prove women are universally in favour of sexual objectification, in the same way you can't prove women are universally opposed to sexual objectification. You can prove individual women are opposed to sexual objectification, I can prove individual women ar ein favour of sexual objectification.

See, this is where progressivism always falls flat on its ass - the primary unit of analysis should always be the individual, not the group.

You can't speak for all women, that's just a fact. You can't even come close to being able to articulate an argument on behalf of all women.

When have I ever excused men sexually objectifying a young child by stating an opinion women like it? That's just absolute nonsense and a complete misrepresentation of my argument by a desperate person who no longer has a point.

As for the rest of your post, it's very emotional. What's with the swearing?

Declaring your own victory is a bit like laughing at your own jokes. And I did respond to you. You've ignored it which, by your logic, means I win! Yay for me!

I'm curious, and I have the arrogance to ask, why are people ignoring my posts, or points? I'm certain many are superior than yours/many, and my criticism rips them apart.

Edit: Or is it that no one has problems with my arguments, and accept them fully?
That'd make sense.

Are you aware of the reasons why women don't report harassment?

1. It is unlikely to be taken any further, and in many cases isn't even taken seriously.
2. Women don't like to report workplace harassment because they're worried it will impact on their jobs or they will be labelled "troublemakers".
3. It's not always safe to complain about harassment - simple harassment sometimes leads on to physical or sexual violence.
4. Women don't always realise it's illegal and feel obliged to "keep quiet and put up with it".

All I can say is that I am sincerely envious of your position in life - you have clearly never had to face any form of harassment, nor have you ever been scared walking down the street because you thought somebody was following you, or felt embarrassed when someone wolf-whistled at you in public or barked at you out of a car window, or had to sit on a bus with your bag between you and somebody else because you thought they had wandering hands.

I have had enough of trying to justify something which you are blind to, having never had to deal with any of this yourself. It's like trying to persuade a white, middle-class UKIP politician that racism does in fact exist, or that not all people on benefits are doing it because it's an easy alternative to working.

Way to go though, mocking feminists and Christians with one sweeping statement...

Some is an indeterminate amount. I cited that article to disprove the notion women universally are opposed to sexual objectification. I can't prove women are universally in favour of sexual objectification, in the same way you can't prove women are universally opposed to sexual objectification. You can prove individual women are opposed to sexual objectification, I can prove individual women ar ein favour of sexual objectification.

See, this is where progressivism always falls flat on its ass - the primary unit of analysis should always be the individual, not the group.

You can't speak for all women, that's just a fact. You can't even come close to being able to articulate an argument on behalf of all women.

When have I ever excused men sexually objectifying a young child by stating an opinion women like it? That's just absolute nonsense and a complete misrepresentation of my argument by a desperate person who no longer has a point.

As for the rest of your post, it's very emotional. What's with the swearing?

I have as much right to think that I am right as you are to think your views are right too.

LuLu is a sexist piece of junk which actually made me throw up a little when I first heard about it. I actually happen to agree with your first paragraph.

Yes, because 50,000+ women are totally making these things up. You do realise that, as this is a societal problem, the only way in which it can be highlighted is through empirical evidence? It's not exactly measurable through statistics, any more so than racial harassment can be easily studied through anything other than anecdotes. Maybe you should ask some of your female friends / relatives if they've ever been affected by sexism. You might be surprised by their responses.

You've clearly never read the Everyday Sexism Project, or you might have found Laura Bate's wonderful commentary on how men are affected by sexism too. Again, this displays an alarming propensity by anti-feminists to cherry-pick their arguments...

That's because every single feminists consciously opts-in to the label 'feminist', a label they know is populated by people who declare males are a 'biological accident.'

ALL women don't opt-in to anything; they are just women and co-opted for the nefarious, self-serving purposes of those who refer to themselves as feminists.

So? That's like saying everyone who is a nationalist is a fascist as fascism is under the umbrella of nationalism.

You are doing with feminists what you think feminists do with women.