Do men need a license to be allowed socialise (MOD NOTE IN OP)

Story. friend in states was walking some quite street when guys on scaffolding repairing a house started to wolf whistle, and yell things, she was just about to say something when a really attractive lady jogging in tight gym gear came by her from behind, and all the guys heads turned and followed her until she was out of sight, so they were not at all whistling at my friend, and she was telling me she was kind disappointed, in a kidding kinda way, but none the less people want to be seen as attractive, desirable, alluring...but they also want to take the higher ground if wolf whistled.

When you get boys as young as 9 watching porn that is freely available on their phones that’s a problem! They have no life experiences to discern the reality of the acting. After all it’s a €100 Billion Industry. Young boys have no idea that it is just figment of ones imagination being driven by total disregard for females. After all they have been watching females portraying themselves in the most degrading of situations, they couldn’t think any other way! It has no comparisons to a loving intimate relationship yet this is the relationship these young minds are developing with the opposite sex. And it is reinforced over time!

If it says "men", it's aimed at "men". If those making such statements have a smaller sub-group in mind, the onus is entirely on them to say so, or be rightly accused of bigotry - just as I would be if I said anything along the lines of "women are X or Y", because such a statement is automatically untrue and profoundly sexist in a world in which we recognise the supremacy of the individual over the demographic descriptors thereof.

This demographic-blind paradigm is something the vast majority of people my age were raised on. The idea that it is fundamentally unacceptable to make a statement generalising about literally any demographic whatsoever, and ascribing qualities to that demographic, without linguistically qualifying to to underline that you are only speaking about some members of that group, not the group as a whole. Anything less is considered bigoted and *ist, where * is whatever type of demographic (race, sex, etc) the statement has generalised.

There are no exceptions to this, and nor should there be. I would roast anyone who made a statement of "women are <adjective>" or "women should <verb>", because it is entirely unfair and wrong to ascribe literally anything - any duty, any description, any psychological tendencies, any personality assumptions - to an individual purely on the basis that she happens to be a woman.

Moreover, the media (rightly!) enforces this standard vigorously when people are making statements which generalise about any demographic groups which are not straight, white, or male. But those three, and the latter two in particular, are considered "fair game". This is profoundly wrong and unacceptable.

I and others who react in this way are simply asking for the same courtesy to be extended to us, as is extended to individual members of every other demographic group - that it be socially unacceptable in mainstream society to make any statement about us based solely on our membership of this particular demographic group.

We're simply asking that the standards we are held to by polite society be enforced upon anyone talking about us, to the same extent as they are to us when we talk about anyone else.

We can do a fair bit to make every citizen feel safer in Ireland. How effective it will be I don't know.

I'm basing this more generally now. Women, the elderly, people living alone, etc all have fears.

Firstly within schools we can improve education regarding how to treat people, behave, etc(A lot of this is done already tough).

Monitoring you own family unit. If you notice your kid is a bit off try and seek support instead of ignoring the matter.

If a child is growing up an environment where they are around criminality, violence, etc social services need to step in earlier and possibly have more powers.

Similar if a young person becomes involved in crime and it's not a one off. There family environment should be monitored, making sure they've access to education and also more time spent in youth detention centres.

Similar with adults who are involved in criminality we have to look and how we threat them and see what we are doing wrong.

We need to look at our sentencing, trying to see can we steer people away from reoffending, education for example, etc.

When do we say enough is enough with somebody who has hundreds of convictions.

Our mental health system all needs a reviewed and how long it takes people to access there services.

What's shown on out TV's/online content/etc. Will banning certain types of programs/porn/etc have an impact.

We can introduce laws regarding stalking, groping, whistling, etc. They should of course apply to both genders.

I don't know how effective they will be tough at the end of the day. At the moment we have laws some minor and some more serious and they are still broken every day of the week and I would question how safe people will feel with these in place because bad things will still happen.

We can have chats with friends/family and call out bad behaviour.

Approaching a stranger and calling out there behaviour is a different matter tough.

Be it on social media or the mainstream media we hear interviews/sound bits and they cause an a ray of emotions and don't really help.

Examples would be

''Men shouldn't sit around and discuss women's appearance or use certain words'' or something similar. Just in my experience both genders do this. Of course there is a cut of point but what should it be? and should different rules apply to men/women.

Last week #Notallmen was trending. I clicked into it and read various tweets from people being furious over this. It was mainly trending because about 10 oddballs tweeted it and then thousands others tweeted it lashing out over it.

Or these people getting put out because somebody held a door open for you, given up a seat, stepped aside, etc and Chances are they'd have done it for anybody.

Similar with generalisations of men, women, minorities, etc

I do understand people were upset, angry, afraid and that's understandable but it's important to use your social media or appearances in the media in positive way which will help to connect to people.

they would need to bring the class for pints daily to see how they interact

I see Varadkar was calling for a new Minister & a new dept to tackle this problem. How about taking on thousands more Gardai & have a visible presence on the street, worked in New York when Guiliari did it.

Oh, but elements of the US media are saying otherwise. They are using it as a justification for the actions of the police. In the situation he was killed his previous crimes have no bearing. I certainly wouldn't be eulogising him myself given what he had done.

These idiots are more likely to cause more violence against women than reduce it imo. When young men are constantly hearing about how they're violent, misogynistic and less valued members of society yet can see the statistics which show they actually have it worse than their female counterparts in almost every regard I think it's almost inevitable there's going to be a backlash from those already disposed to trouble or violence.

Maybe that's what the feminists want though? After all, vilifying men whilst deifying women is a profession for those we hear most from in the media and since by all reasonable measures, women already have it better than men in most western societies, maybe they now feel the need to engineer a problem for them to "fix"? More likely they're just morons though.