The real agenda about the sexual scandal hypersensitivity

You seem to relying on this concept “appropriate”. What defies appropriate? I think your definition of appropriate is “if the women likes it”. We both have the same premise that appropriate sexual conduct is with two consenting adults. Someone has to initiate sexual conduct from a conversion - that’s how it works, and society expects it to be the man. I had a situation years ago where a woman I met wanted to talk and hand out but not sexual relations which is fine. I didn’t realise that initially and made a small move which she stopped. Absolutely fine, but in some of these situations it seems man are being severely punished.

So tell me if a man initiated something physical and is rejected - is he an actual person whose life needs to be ruined?

Your second part, we don’t need to go into what is acceptable to the majority v unacceptable because I’m talking about the acceptable and normal processes between people that have always taken place and will always take place.

What you essentially want to do is to build a weapon to be able to clobber men over the head with simply because they are in the position that they need to initiate sexual relations.

How do you know if someone is going to want to be touched and it is too some extent appropriate for some minor touching when you care about each other(it need not be anything sexual at all) and maybe the employee's sad about something.

I think that you know if someone touches you on your knee and you don't like it then yes they have stepped over the mark but it is normally an honest mistake and they didn't mean too hurt you. What you should normally do is just say you don't like it and most of these people doing it are not nasty they would probably normally accept this and move on. If they don't then thats sexual harassment.

I think the last part is very important the accused needs to have actually have had malicious intent its not enough for the victim to be offended and not like what you have done. People are acting as if stepping over the line in relationships/friendships is unusual its happens in a variety of different ways(usually nothing to do with sexual harassment but its just an example) and people forgive them because they normally didn't mean to do anything wrong. Note this obviously doesn't apply if they sexually assault you as they have no right to touch those areas without consent.

Oh no, poor touchy man It’s so hard to keep your hands to yourself these days, right? Silly feminists have ruined everything. We can’t even slap a woman’s arse in clubs now. Back then it was just harmless fun with complimentary undertones! The regressive Marxist lefty liberal feminist Jew SJWs have truly taken over! Don’t they know a man is physically incapable of asking someone out in an appropriate manner?!

Thank you for bringing this postmodern social theory conspiracy against men to my attention, old chap. Keep challenging ((them)).

Your “act first, ask later” approach is definitely creepy. And yes, if you’re initiating unwanted physical contact then you ought to be punished lest you continue to escalate your inappropriate behaviour and violate people’s personal space. I don’t give a flying **** about ruining a creep’s life when in the real world, women have to be on the edge all the time: https://m.mic.com/articles/135394/14-women-were-brutally-attacked-for-rejecting-men-why-arent-we-talking-about-it#.TtJz5aMBg

Hate to tell you but I have my family and a small number of friends both male and female who can engage intellectually and can think for themselves. I have no interest engaging personally with most people or touching them. In fact I don’t really need to see the type of women who want to show to much - I don’t need to see their body parts.

No I am not talking about slapping people in the arse, I am talking about situations in the news where is seems men were simply sometimes attempting a first move. The female could have simply declined them. It’s simply oppression to dehumanise and ruin their lives for being rejected.

The Trump movement is a reality and we are rejecting all of your social justice warrior beliefs of agendas and double standards. And what happens in America eventually comes here.

It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t treat people with respect. Of course people should be treated with respect.

And thats the problem your lack of empathy for other people. I wouldn't want someone to get in trouble if they meant no wrong and simply had made a mistake.

I think this sort of attitude seems to think humans are perfect and that they don't ever make mistakes and its probably hypocritical because most of the people saying these sorts of things have made mistakes too.

It's just Women that have to be on edge all the time in the real world?:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/10752232/Our-attitude-to-violence-against-men-is-out-of-date.html

Actually, as the above link shows men are more likely to be victims of violence and even with domestic violence whilst women do get murdered more and experience more domestic violence than men the ratio is quite close.

Do you know why there is so much violence/domestic violence? because people aren't looking at things from other people's perspective, they aren't being agreeable and forgiving people if they maybe made a mistake.

It is those sorts of people that are quick to label themselves as victims and others as perpetrators that are probably much more likely to be violent and abusive thats what I think.

That by no means is saying we should tolerate actual sexual harassment(when men wouldn't accept no not simply just making sexual advances) or sexual assault and rape.

1) it’s not hard to refrain from touching others in a manner that can be interpreted as inappropriate. You really don’t have to be a perfect human to achieve this feat, trust me.

2) Your stats about violent crime in general are irrelevant to the topic at hand: sexual harassment.

How do you know if someone is going to want to be touched and it is too some extent appropriate for some minor touching when you care about each other(it need not be anything sexual at all) and maybe the employee's sad about something.

It is not rocket science. Just keep your hands to yourself and you will be fine. And with regard to our MPs we are not talking friendships or relationships. We are talking about professional relationships. We are talking about Palace of Westminster staff, or party activists or journalists. There is no need to touch any of them.

That is not to say people shouldn’t be punished for doing things that are outright wrong, but the bar is being moved to punish people just for being people.

Let’s be clear, people who go around clubs randomly touching strangers, or people who should obscenities at people are idiots. Simple as.

What we are saying is that there is situation in the male / female dynamics whereby men make a clumsy or mistaken sexual approach which is then rejected.

You seem to be saying it’s OK to ruin these men’s lives over this.

That’s right if you make a cup of tea, you have no right to expect someone to drink it.

The problem arises when someone says “I’m offended that you made the cup of tea” and then a number of people think you need to lose your job over making it.

The point I am making is that the level of sensitivity is so High that it is construing the nuances and grey areas, often hard to predict , fiddly areas of human behaviour, as offences.


Who you think likes to have leverage where you can destroy men for offering to make the tea? Feminists of course. You can start literally taking power from men. These are the same people who walk around almost naked with the letters “slut walk” and getting in everyone’s face, then all this fuss about a glance or incidental touch. We are taking not about normal people, but people with an agenda. All social justice warrior types have an agenda and they life life to further that agenda.

How do you know if someone is going to want to be touched and it is too some extent appropriate for some minor touching when you care about each other(it need not be anything sexual at all) and maybe the employee's sad about something.

You are now making excuses for people who can't keep their hands to themselves. Christmas parties are no exception. I don't grope or fondle people at Christmas parties. If I can do it, my esteemed, highly respected local MP surely can do it and given the scandal potential, I would expect him or her to be doubly careful.

What has changed is that this behaviour is being publicly routed as being unacceptable and in 2017, about bloomin time too.

Isn't it interested that it is men who are falling foul of this? If people are being people, why is it that women appear more than capable of keeping their hands to themselves?

1. You can ask them. You can even ask a date if they want to have sex. Not just start touching them up, kissing them.

2. Generally in the work place, pretty sure people don't want to be touched.

It's really not that hard. Have you heard the list of harassing MEPs that female assistants created? Ever wondered why not every single male was on the list? Ever thought it may be, because some actually know how to behave? Obviously not, else you wouldn't have such difficulties with this topic.

Women like men who take the lead.

No women is going to be attracted to a wimpy van who has to ask before every move.

That’s the paradox here. This is open discrimination towards men.

Men have to take the lead moves, and if the women is attracted to the man all is fine, and if she is not then you want to say the man should be ruined.

This is blatant sexism against men and it should be called out for what it is.

The hell are you on about? There's a way of asking someone out without sexually harassing them.

Let me spell it out for you, if people kept their hands to themselves there would be no people alive and you would not be alive.

Women like men who take the lead.

No women is going to be attracted to a wimpy van who has to ask before every move.

That’s the paradox here. This is open discrimination towards men.

Men have to take the lead moves, and if the women is attracted to the man all is fine, and if she is not then you want to say the man should be ruined.

This is blatant sexism against men and it should be called out for what it is.