Let me restate the points that I have been making in simple form, to make them harder to deliberately misinterpret.

Despite the protests of others, I believe that flirting with someone that you are-not actually interested in (to some extent) is ego-tripping that has a real risk of badly hurting another person.

I also believe that some of the women who get raped have ignored foreseeable risks. I cannot think of any situation where it is possible to take reckless risks without someone commenting on this. I would like to point out that her behaviour is assessed independently of his. Therefore, it is possible to make some (carefully worded) criticism of her behaviour without implying anything about any men involved.

Other people might believe that it is alright to rape a flirt, a slut or any woman who puts herself in certain situations. I agree that these attitudes are disgusting. The way to undermine them is to acknowledge any mistakes of the victim, but add that “she didn’t deserve to get raped”. Pretending that she is perfect encourages other people to point out the truth and implies that she needs to be faultless in order to be a rape victim.

BTW Fractelle, if you were a true feminist, you would respect men like myself who only pursue women they are genuinely interested in and reserve your hatred for sleazy men. You would also do everything possible to stop them

Some pathetic personal attacks happening here.

It is alarming that it is actually men who believe the myth of man the sexual predator only held in check by possible legal ramifications. Even alluding to tigers! What a joke. Next time watch a bit of Attenborough's nature shows. Don't liken yourselves to anything in the animal world. And please don't come up with some silly comment regarding chimpanzees.

The predatory instinct is used for hunting in order to eat, not find a mate. The male has to 'prove' himself to be worthy before he is allowed to mate.

Fractelle, fascinating how some posters leap as if they've been stung by a cloud of bees. How you get under their skin! Liked your further expansion on flirting.

I just caught the end of the SBS Insight on mean girls, it was rather interesting.

It made me wonder how many of the female posters here, could have been included in the program.

<If I was a man I would resent being cast in that negative light just as a woman I resent being called a feminazi when I disagree with someone's point.Posted by pelican, Tuesday, 25 August 2009 9:08:56 AM>

Houellebecq, I suppose some guys just get use to it, me, I am resigned to the fact that this state of affairs exists, much like that of a condemmed man.

Why is it that so many men posting have such a bleak view of women? The level of martyrdom is disturbing.

You are very intent on looking through rose coloured glasses at your own gender and very scathing of the other. It comes through in so many issues particularly relating to child support - where there is a plethora of "all women are bad" posts without any thought to the many women who might be raising children without any support from their partners.

The arguments are all one-sided. Solutions will never be found with this sort of division until we stop looking at gender and seek to find a more humanistic approach.

There are mean people of either gender as raised on the SBS Program tonight. Men are equally as capable of humiliation, bullying and intimidating behaviours. There are good and bad in both camps.

Point scoring mentalities just won't cut it if we are to become a more equitable and fairer society.

Perhaps Nina, you should concentrate your efforts on your generation I think for mine it is probably too late. The good ones are already in the right place and the others...well old dogs and new tricks and all that.

Looking back to the original article, Particularly the following:

"one in seven teenage boys believed it was permissible to hold a girl down and force her to have sex if she had flirted or ''led the boy on''. Even more concerning, the study also reported that one in three year 10 girls had been pressured, forced or coerced into unwanted sex"

Even if this is exaggerated, using risk assessment principles this means that many girls are at risk from being ‘held down‘.

I do not consider that all males are potential rapists, indeed many males are respectful and considerate, depending on the circumstances, but the ones that are are physically indistinguishable from the ones that aren’t. Potential rapists do not wear a sign that advertises the fact.

I am a late baby boomer, I grew up in the sexual revolution post the pill, when sex was meant to be in marriage and marriage was meant to last till death-do-us-part. Also at a time when young men were being charged, and sent to prison or boys homes for the crime of ‘carnal knowledge’. That is, sex with a girl under 16. Under-age sex still happened, but it was less frequent.

Those laws are no longer enforced for teenagers, hence there is no arguable reason for teenagers not to have sex. Even though the laws still exist, the present lack of enforcement demonstrates very nicely that it was law that stopped much under-aged sex when the law was enforced.

At the same time there was no such ‘crime’ as rape within marriage - so a lot of rape happened in marriage. (Things have changed thank goodness)

Why do I bring these up? If we depend on the goodness of human nature to stop rape then rape won’t be stopped. It is the fear of being caught and punished that is the best way of changing behaviour.

Quoting Hobbes: .“man in the state of nature seeks nothing but his own selfish pleasure”

Pelican:"Why is it that so many men posting have such a bleak view of women?"

Years of experience... (couldn't resist, sorry)

Actually, I don't see any "bleak view of women" at all, merely a sense that we are sick of the constant demands of some women for special treatment and the ease with which our lawmakers give in to that.

In any situation in which a woman and a man are in conflict, if State authorities become involved they will assume the man is in the wrong as a first approach. that is how the laws have been framed and how the police and other agencies are training their members to behave.

Pelican:"Solutions will never be found with this sort of division until we stop looking at gender"

It's not the men "looking at gender", it's the entitlement junkies who think that their possession of a uterus somehow means they aren't required to take any responsibility for anything.

This thread has been about simply taking precautions to ensure your own safety. I do it every time I drive my car - in a perfect world, everyone would obey all the rules and never lapse in concentration and never be in a hurry or get enraged at traffic jams - the list goes on.Since this is not a perfect world I take precautions. It doesn't stop me doing anything I wish to, but it does mean I'm alert and always concerned about the intentions of that V8 hoonmobile or the B-Double truck coming up on the left.

I presume that most of the posters here would do similarly, including the women. Why, then are some of those women so determined that they should be exempt from taking simple steps to ensure their own sexual safety? This is a viewpoint I just don't understand, especially seeing as it has been made clear that they wish to reserve the right to exercise their sexuality without restraint. You can't have it both ways.