Dr fresh.
You should read Pelican's response his was more succinct.
When you read my posts I would advise read them properly before you comment.
I said >> "When I’ve heard that comment I simply assume that the woman in question is simply indicating HER commitment to someone else or alternatively she doesn’t fancy me."<<
Then I said before the example >>"Consider this HYPATHETICAL"<<

In essence I was offering an alternative views to the same events.
Didn't you learn the golden rule as a child?
'do unto others as you would have done to you.'

Have you heard of body language an freudiian slips?
Usually what you think will show in your wording and mannerisms. Hence I said that Nina should show a more generous spirit and perhaps consider that she doesn't know what he's thinking.
Not every male is a potential rapist the same as not every female is polite, thoughtful wise and/or mature. I would advise ANYONE BE WARY NOT ALARMED. If all you are attracting is thugs and hoons then perhaps you need consider how you're baiting the hook.

Just fixing an error from my last post:

The following passage:

Be honest - If you're interested in a relationship, sex etc: then you may have to make the point one way or another...

It should read "NOT interested"

Although I guess the point is made regardless of this error.

re: "Do unto others" - Indeed - I think this is a good 'golden rule' as well...

It just might be a good idea for woman not to hang around pick up joints in the first place. It might also be a good idea if you are hanging around these joints not to lead men on in anyway. I know this sort of thinking is from the 50's (not that I was born then) but it just seems simple if you don't want to play the game don't wear the uniform and find somewhere or some people that share your values. If you don't like being whistled at when walking past the drunkards at the cricket don't go there. Ooops I think I am arguing the same case as those who don't want any censorship! Just a thought from a different angle. It is simple though that one plus one equals two. Woman encourage men to think the way they do because they want to play the game to.

Ever noticed that when you're shopping for something, there seems to be a lot of that thing about?

Author is so focused on the trees, the forest (wider perpective) disappears, as does the wood (her own psyche). The wood makes the tree, the trees make the forest. All she sees is trees and nasty people who might weild chainsaws and axes, in order to secure the wood.

She pretty much penned that article to point in a very specific direction, namely sexual assualt (forcing the wood from the trees) and a climate of fear around that (anyone who looks like they could weild an axe is a potential logger).

The thing about fear, is that whilst it may be well founded, the irrational nature of the contradictory thinking that drives that emotional construct has a way of infecting all of one's thinking and distorting perspective. If left unchecked it will lead to behaviour that compounds the fear. Flawed and damaging behaviour.

Her bio provides pointers to what informs her bias.

The subject is an interesting one and if handled with balance, insight and clear thiking could go some way into helping us understand each other and more particularly look beyond our own selfish insecurities and take the time to empathise with the opposite sides of life.

But, alas, it seems that this tedious gender snore and the battle of the exes is doomed to rage on.

Ever noticed how OLO only publishes one-sided accounts of gender politics, replete with stereotype and incessant projection/transference medleys. lm starting to think they do it deliberately. It gets a lot of hits and gender political contributions seem to be the most popular amongst posters. Not surprising now that l think about how intimately gender identity drives insecurity.

Pelican said,
"Isn't this issue more about manners and generosity of spirit rather than gender equality?"

Well said, I thought the same thing. I don't see a gender equality issue.

Before I married, I've mostly been very sensitive and respectful in 'rejecting' men because most behave respectfully. And sometimes it just takes a lie or excuse.
When married, there is a real excuse, of course. I don't feel inequal when saying I'm married, my husband happens to be married, too.

There have been a few occasions in my life when I let my stuck-up bitch out to handle the difficult or arrogant guys- you know, the type who is convinced that he's God's gift to women.

Trade,
I smiled when I read all of the excuses you listed :)

And Runner,
Someone doesn't necessarily have to be all dolled-up or hang around in a 'pick-up points' to be approached.
The whole world is potentially one big pick-up place except perhaps tool sheds and kitchens.

It's better to learn how to handle unwanted come-ons and be able to go places you like than it is to avoid going anywhere because you might be approached.

This is not rocket science stuff. As Tristan stated we are all human beings. As such we do better in groups when we treat each other well and with respect.

Like Celivia, I have never been rude or hurtful to a man who made approaches to me prior to (or after) marriage. If a man or a woman has the courage to approach someone is it not better to act in the way that you would wish to be treated.

Even if the response is obviously untrue it is still better to be rejected politely than with overt hostility.

[PS I am a woman - I note a few people on this form refer to me as a 'he' - not that it matters of course but given this thread was written about gender I thought I would mention it].