Reddit reviews License to Harass: Law, Hierarchy, and Offensive Public Speech (The Cultural Lives of Law)

I intended to reply to you much earlier, but I knew to have any chance of convincing you would take a lot more work than I wanted to do. Anyway, I recently came across some hateful feminist rhetoric that made me think of you, and I decided to come back and respond.

Basically, it's all harmony: men being kind to women, and doing everything possible to make women happy, and women being kind to men, and doing everything possible to make men happy.

We are never going to agree, so I don't want to invest too much time having the sort of fruitless academic debate of which I'd speculated had overrun the Feminist movement.

Suffice to say, you demonstrate the same sort of world view and debate tactics that I was addressing in my original post.

First, the link you sent me.

Chart#1. I've lived in San Francisco, and hence, I didn't even need to check the sources to debunk the 100% figure. Even if my wife were the only women to have never been harassed, her experiences alone confirm that it was less than 100% of women, but I reviewed the the sources anyway. If you direct your attention to the foot notes, you find 17 footnotes:

Footnote 1) A book with 2 stars on Amazon who's methodology isn't exposed.
Footnote 2) A Canadian study which can be found online The wording of the question >"sometimes women receive unwanted attention. In this case I mean anything that does not include touching such as catcalls, whistling, leering, or blowing kisses. Have you ever received unwanted attention from a male stranger" 60% said yes Now, that's 60% simply for unwanted attention at some point in their lives.
Footnote 3) A link to a page describing a study where the methodology is not exposed, and the link to the study is dead.
Footnote 4) A book which seems to be largely about racism where women were asked whether they'd ever been the target of "offensive or sexually-suggestive remarks". I can't review the methodology without buying the book.
Footnote 5) dead link.
Footnote 6) A journal page#7. Not random sample, but interviews within a specific neighborhood known to have issues.
Footnote 7) A link about train molestation in Japan. I can't find the actual data, but's it's certainly not about the united states or catcalling.
Footnote 8) dead link.
Footnote 9) A study from Pakistan. It seems legit, and they have some serious problems there to be sure.
Footnote 10) unscientific online questionnaire.
Footnote 11) Article about Egypt with no link to methodology.
Footnote 12) dead link.
Footnote 13) dead link.
Footnote 14) Unscientific survey of Koreans: 42.5% said they'd experienced harassment on the train.
Footnote 15) Study in Israel, looks legit. "83% finding regarding women attesting to having been sexually harassed."
Footnote 16) Study in England, looks legit. "14% of all women have experienced unwanted sexual attention. "
Footnote 17) No link to data, and I don't read eqyption.

Conclusion: There was not a single scientific study from the United States that I could verify online. The closest scientific study I could verify was Canadian one with a lifetime any-type unwanted-attention statistic of 60%. That sounds about right to me. About 60% of have, at some point in their lives, received some unwanted male attention. That's a far cry from the situation you were describing.

Chart#2. It's data is based on an informal online anonymous survey, and is therefore not remotely scientific.

So, even in the source you listed, there was no viable proof for when you said >constant, violating, impossible-to-deal-with-effectively reality for at least 90% of women in the world, and, if even "stopstreetharassment.org" doesn't have any scientific data on the subject, there either isn't any, or it doesn't fit the narrative. In other words, you believe a mythology. The evidence from the site found suggests that, outside of a couple of isolated pockets, street harassment isn't nearly as pervasive as you suggest.

Also, you went ahead and jumped from "catcalling" to "street harassment" which includes leering (i.e. looking) at women. It's the same deal with the "rape culture". Rather than debate an actual thing and maybe devise some sort of universally acceptable agenda, we've jumped from a general criticism of debate to "rape culture" to "catcalling" to "street harassment." All of this seems to be a way to draw attention away from any actual issues, and instead talk about how generally bad men are.

In terms of gender identity, any generalization is sacrilege, but in terms of "cis" oppression, things are made to be so general that you've literally linked "leering" with "rape", and a man looking at an attractive girl is seen as a sort of oppression.

Basically, you believe stuff which isn't true.
>a constant, violating, impossible-to-deal-with-effectively reality for at least 90% of women in the world.

This is a grotesque exaggeration, and totally untrue: exactly the sort of aggravated mythology I was talking about.

You need to excuse yourself from the debate because you're not making anything better for woman. Quite to the contrary, you're picking fights on behalf of women, and you're losing them while generating hate and resentment in the process.