So are you single? Argos style....

ILoveYourVibes

Tell me how wrote: »

Hope I don't lose my job over this.

Don't worry. NOBODY FIRES MY INTERN!

Esse85

You'd wonder if this man was a solicitor or architect that dropped something off to this womans house and then text the same messages, would there be such uproar from the girl?
Or is it because its easier throw a delivery driver under the bus.

ILoveYourVibes

Esse85 wrote: »

You'd wonder if this man was a solicitor or architect that dropped something off to this womans house and then text the same messages, would there be such uproar from the girl?
Or is it because its easier throw a delivery driver under the bus.

Are you suggesting women have different rules for men with more money! :eek: ?

No way! I don't believe it.

I am shocked!

Truthvader

Sardonicat wrote: »

He broke GDPR. She reported him for that. His rule breaking, his consequences. End of.

He broke GDPR Oh my god I hadn't fully understood. A man who would do that is capable of anything. Clearly a maniac.

Let me make it up to you. Arriving in Dun Laoghaire at about 7 in my yacht. Dinner in the George for nine?

vikings2012

Esse85 wrote: »

You'd wonder if this man was a solicitor or architect that dropped something off to this womans house and then text the same messages, would there be such uproar from the girl?
Or is it because its easier throw a delivery driver under the bus.

Usually the client/customer makes a decision to engage a solicitor or architect. Their decision is made after researching their credentials, experience and reputation. It is also their job to forge a working relationship.

Whereas, the woman in this scenario did not know the Argos driver, did not know his background and did not know his motive. He merely took her personal information for his own potential gain.

pickarooney

MsStote wrote: »

To be fair I have had this, the guy was a big guy and worked for tesco. I mean he comes into my home and I was afraid of him after he texted me. I did not give him my number and I had to call his work. However he knows where I live, I feared retribution for it. Hell I have cameras up in part due to this. I didn't want money, I just didn't want that happening again.

Like I have the numbers of some of the drivers, few of them on my facebook as we get on. He just went too far.

Too many people equate big with dangerous. It's not a man's fault if he'd tall and well built and it means nothing about his character. If a man wants to hurt you, his size, like his skin colour, is of little consequence.

ittakestwo

Esse85 wrote: »

You'd wonder if this man was a solicitor or architect that dropped something off to this womans house and then text the same messages, would there be such uproar from the girl?
Or is it because its easier throw a delivery driver under the bus.

Only they could answer that but there is nothing to suggest they would act differently.

It is a weird thing to do. Obviously the employee only had the number to use for work purposes, and not use to send a text ask someone out. A lot would not be to bothered and not complain but there would be a few that would and anyone with half a brain with have released this.

MsStote

pickarooney wrote: »

Too many people equate big with dangerous. It's not a man's fault if he'd tall and well built and it means nothing about his character. If a man wants to hurt you, his size, like his skin colour, is of little consequence.

My fiance is 6ft6 and built like a brick crap house. I know just how cuddly he is. However despite me being physically stronger than most women, I would be unable to over power him. Christ most of the guys I know are well over 6ft and all lovely.
I NEVER mention skin colour and I have absolutely no idea why you want to use a red herring here.

As someone who is smaller, if my opponent is bigger I will worry. When they know my address it's scary. Then again maybe it was because I was held down outside of a pub by two men and sexually assaulted in front of 20 people, none of whom helped me. I feel safe in my home, I go to extremes to protect where I live but at the end of the day I have to get deliveries.
Have you any idea what it is like to be overpowered when in a fight? To have some put their body on yours and you can't do anything... You have no idea what that women has gone through, you wouldn't know looking at me.

I'm not some feminist twat, I do not hate men. Do you not think that some woman taking a guys phone number and texting him would be inappropriate. It's invasion of privacy and something people should never have to worry about.

imme

"Disgusted" the woman was according to the headline seeking'article'.

From the thread title I thought there was going to be a service introduced for singletons where you could pick a date from a catalogue, what a pity.

The driver obviously had no right to use her details to contact her privately.
Things like that aren't allowed anymore.

There'll be no rom coms made ever again.:rolleyes:

Esse85

It's not actually the act itself thats all that bad. If this was a once off isolated thing it's a small misdemeanour. So petty that it's not something the guards would bother with.

It gets a bad rap when people think back to all their bad experiences with the opposite sex and stack this on top and then it's like the final straw. This guy will most likely be penalised more harshly due to other negative experiences this girl endured from others before she received these messages.

It's like some on here making out what this guy did makes him a danger to society, unfortunately their baggage and previous experiences are influencing their opinion here.

The bigger crime here was using work details for personal gain, not in asking a girl was she single.

Seve OB

ziedth wrote: »

I had a creep on the girls Facebook page

Did you drop her a PM and ask her out by any chance?

breezy1985

Tell me how wrote: »

Your statement here contains a grey area with the use of the word 'probably'

Ha you are right. Im pretty certain he broke a law but I dont know enough about it. Certainly when I was taking customer details I was told it was law to protect the info but that may be a debit card thing more than phone numbers

breezy1985

Esse85 wrote: »

You'd wonder if this man was a solicitor or architect that dropped something off to this womans house and then text the same messages, would there be such uproar from the girl?
Or is it because its easier throw a delivery driver under the bus.

I know many women would prefer a delivery man to a solicitor or architect.

Either way anyone who uses confidential info for personal reasons is wrong

Esse85

breezy1985 wrote: »

I know many women would prefer a delivery man to a solicitor or architect.

Either way anyone who uses confidential info for personal reasons is wrong

Prefer them for what? To be calling to their home?

kenmm

Esse85 wrote: »

Prefer them for what? To be calling to their home?

Delivering goods.

Solicitors charge way too much.

breezy1985

Esse85 wrote: »

Prefer them for what? To be calling to their home?

I was replying to your comment so tell me what you meant by being happy about a solicitor rather than a delivery man ?

There are so many nuances that words on a screen or page can't account for. The guy did the wrong thing (whether he was a delivery guy, the Dalai Lama or a billionaire)

Guy delivers something and polite chat takes place, he misreads, follows it up with a text and it's not a huge deal other than him breaking the conditions of his employment and leaving himself open to justifiable censure. I can understand her being uncomfortable with someone knowing her address and wanting to know if she's alone in the house. It absolutely was creepy, not romantic or whimsical as some seem to see it.

Guy delivers something, stands there staring and breathing heavily and licking his lips, creeping woman out and following up with a text asking if she's single, breaking conditions of employment etc., and you better believe I'd be freaking out at some random creep knowing where I live and being interested to know if I was alone in my house. Sometimes you meet someone who just gets all your bells ringing. For all I know this guy is one of them.

You'd imagine most men would be smart enough to figure out it would at the very least make the woman uncomfortable. Either way, she is not the one at fault here.

Tell me how

Candie wrote: »

There are so many nuances that words on a screen or page can't account for. The guy did the wrong thing (whether he was a delivery guy, the Dalai Lama or a billionaire)

Guy delivers something and polite chat takes place, he misreads, follows it up with a text and it's not a huge deal other than him breaking the conditions of his employment and leaving himself open to justifiable censure. I can understand her being uncomfortable with someone knowing her address and wanting to know if she's alone in the house. It absolutely was creepy, not romantic or whimsical as some seem to see it.

Guy delivers something, stands there staring and breathing heavily and licking his lips, creeping woman out and following up with a text asking if she's single, breaking conditions of employment etc., and you better believe I'd be freaking out at some random creep knowing where I live and being interested to know if I was alone in my house. Sometimes you meet someone who just gets all your bells ringing. For all I know this guy is one of them.

You'd imagine most men would be smart enough to figure out it would at the very least make the woman uncomfortable. Either way, she is not the one at fault here.

He did not ask was she alone in the house though. Doing so would indeed have been straight creepy.

But, if it had been as simple as you stated here 'Guy delivers something and polite chat takes place, he misreads, follows it up with a text' which, for all we know, was how the guy experienced it, then calling that creepy would be, for me, to suggest that all unsolicited engagement of a romantic nature is creepy.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

He did not ask was she alone in the house though. Doing so would indeed have been straight creepy.

But, if it had been as simple as you stated here 'Guy delivers something and polite chat takes place, he misreads, follows it up with a text' which, for all we know, was how the guy experienced it, then calling that creepy would be, for me, to suggest that all unsolicited engagement of a romantic nature is creepy.

Asking if she's single kind of gives the game away about whether or not there's another adult in the house or not. Most of the time, at any rate.

Unsolicited engagement in a bar, at a party, most social spaces is fine. Not when someone already knows your address and you simply have no clue whether or not they take rejection well. Most women have experienced at least one occasion of abuse when someone approaches them on a night out and they decline to engage. You can't take it for granted that someone will leave it at 'no thanks'. That experience would make you very wary of a situation where someone knows where you live, and you're put in a position where you're rejecting their interest.

Completely different scenario when you can walk out of a bar and never see them again to rejecting them and not knowing how they're taking it, and they know where you live.

And the point is, we don't know how he took it. We don't know if he's a creep or not, we don't know if he pushes the boundaries (although he's pushed the boundary already by breaking the conditions of his employment). The woman gets to wonder if he's angry, if he's okay about it, if he's moved on, or if he's one of the rare psychos. Not a nice position to put someone in.

Esse85

Where are people reading that the driver asked was she alone in the house?

And if he was in her house, I would guess he was invited in, because I haven't seen anywhere that he forced his way in.

If your that easily "disgusted, unsafe", again don't invite a person in just because they have an argos t-shirt on them.

"I do not feel safe knowing my data was accessed so easily" but you invite a guy into your home.

micar

I'm single...male.

Brought my dad's dog (red setter) to the vet during the week.

Vet was lovely .....name tag says Kate. Was saying she's a red setter herself.

She gave the dog course of pain relief.

Anyway....2 days later my dad hands me his mobile....it was a vet from the practice.

My stupidly says.... .is this Kate and it was. She said she was thinking about Ruby and wanted to see how she is. Ruby is doing fine.

Part of me would like her really to have wanted to get touch with me rather than wondering about the dog.

Same scenario as the OP but I wouldn't mind.....I'd be more flattered and interested.

I'd say it was nothing malicious and she was just actually ringing about Ruby.

Insert sad face

Tell me how

Candie wrote: »

Asking if she's single kind of gives the game away about whether or not there's another adult in the house or not. Most of the time, at any rate.

Unsolicited engagement in a bar, at a party, most social spaces is fine. Not when someone already knows your address and you simply have no clue whether or not they take rejection well. Most women have experienced at least one occasion of abuse when someone approaches them on a night out and they decline to engage. You can't take it for granted that someone will leave it at 'no thanks'. That experience would make you very wary of a situation where someone knows where you live, and you're put in a position where you're rejecting their interest.

Completely different scenario when you can walk out of a bar and never see them again to rejecting them and not knowing how they're taking it, and they know where you live.

I have to disagree there that the answer to such a question would imply the physical situation one is in at that moment. It is a term used on legal documents, relationship status 'single' with no ambiguity as to the context.

I don't dispute the experience which unfortunately many women people have had but also the reality that many relationships originated with someone taking a chance to get to know someone and I have never before heard the argument that it is not something which you should do if you happen to know where that person lives. My friend is married because he knocked on the door of a girl whose house he walked past on his way from work and had noticed her.
My father met my mother when he was a helper on a delivery truck and she was a shop assistant on his route.

Are we to assume that every man is going to be inherently viewed as a threat and that it is our obligation to ensure we do not reinforce that idea? That seems a scary thought.

My sisters are all married now, but, if 5 years ago they were telling me about how they had been propositioned, I think I would have rathered hearing about this scenario than a guy with dutch courage approaching one of them in a bar.

I will repeat my point also just in case there is any ambiguity, what he did was inappropriate and him losing his job is a reasonable outcome given that but that it was not necessarily creepy behaviour.

Feisar

Candie wrote: »

Asking if she's single kind of gives the game away about whether or not there's another adult in the house or not. Most of the time, at any rate.

Unsolicited engagement in a bar, at a party, most social spaces is fine. Not when someone already knows your address and you simply have no clue whether or not they take rejection well. Most women have experienced at least one occasion of abuse when someone approaches them on a night out and they decline to engage. You can't take it for granted that someone will leave it at 'no thanks'. That experience would make you very wary of a situation where someone knows where you live, and you're put in a position where you're rejecting their interest.

Completely different scenario when you can walk out of a bar and never see them again to rejecting them and not knowing how they're taking it, and they know where you live.

And the point is, we don't know how he took it. We don't know if he's a creep or not, we don't know if he pushes the boundaries (although he's pushed the boundary already by breaking the conditions of his employment). The woman gets to wonder if he's angry, if he's okay about it, if he's moved on, or if he's one of the rare psychos. Not a nice position to put someone in.

I chatted to my wife about this scenario today. She'd be old enough school. In that there was a discussion here about a year ago about partners initiating sex prior to the other waking up. Her attitude was "well you consented when you married me". :eek:
Anyway, like yerself her two things were the use of data inappropriately and the knows where I live thing.

I don't get the know where one lives thing, anyone could follow someone home from Super Value and find out where someone lives. Apparently it's "different".

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

I have to disagree there that the answer to such a question would imply the physical situation one is in at that moment. It is a term used on legal documents, relationship status 'single' with no ambiguity as to the context.

I don't dispute the experience which unfortunately many women people have had but also the reality that many relationships originated with someone taking a chance to get to know someone and I have never before heard the argument that it is not something which you should do if you happen to know where that person lives. My friend is married because he knocked on the door of a girl whose house he walked past on his way from work and had noticed her.
My father met my mother when he was a helper on a delivery truck and she was a shop assistant on his route.

Are we to assume that every man is going to be inherently viewed as a threat and that it is our obligation to ensure we do not reinforce that idea? That seems a scary thought.

My sisters are all married now, but, if 5 years ago they were telling me about how they had been proposed to, I would have rathered hearing about this scenario than a guy with dutch courage approaching one of them in a bar.

I will repeat my point also just in case there is any ambiguity, what he did was inappropriate and him losing his job as a reasonable outcome given that but that it was not necessarily creepy behaviour.

TMH, I have never said and nor have I implied that every man should be seen as a threat. Please don't infer that from what I have said about this particular instance. It is reasonable for women (and men) to be aware of risk from many situations, and again, I never implied that men should be seen as a threat by default and I think it's unfair to imply I meant that.

Your mum and dad didn't meet by your mum receiving an unsolicited text from someone who knows where she lives. Most people get to know one another first. Maybe the guy who knocked on the girls door got away with it because she lived with her family. She might have received it differently if she lived alone.

I'll have to disagree with you. It is creepy to use confidential information to contact someone unsolicited, and as I said before, MOST men would know that sending a text like that would likely put a woman on edge.

He didn't even ask to see her again. He asked if she was single. Most peoples relationship status is a big clue to their living arrangements.

jaxxx

Candie wrote: »

There are so many nuances that words on a screen or page can't account for. The guy did the wrong thing (whether he was a delivery guy, the Dalai Lama or a billionaire)

Guy delivers something and polite chat takes place, he misreads, follows it up with a text and it's not a huge deal other than him breaking the conditions of his employment and leaving himself open to justifiable censure. I can understand her being uncomfortable with someone knowing her address and wanting to know if she's alone in the house. It absolutely was creepy, not romantic or whimsical as some seem to see it.

Guy delivers something, stands there staring and breathing heavily and licking his lips, creeping woman out and following up with a text asking if she's single, breaking conditions of employment etc., and you better believe I'd be freaking out at some random creep knowing where I live and being interested to know if I was alone in my house. Sometimes you meet someone who just gets all your bells ringing. For all I know this guy is one of them.

You'd imagine most men would be smart enough to figure out it would at the very least make the woman uncomfortable. Either way, she is not the one at fault here.

The fact that this even needs saying is just.. .. pfft. I dunno.


Yeah probably wasn't the smartest thing to post it all over Facebook, but no one can know what was going through her head at the time. Give the benefit of the doubt then or cast the first stone? I don't understand it at all.

Feisar

On another note do lads push their case after a no? My attitude was always ya blew yer chance.

Feisar

Feisar wrote: »

On another note do lads push their case after a no? My attitude was always ya blew yer chance.

The potential rapist/delivery driver types tend to anyway I'd say..

Feisar

Feisar wrote: »

On another note do lads push their case after a no? My attitude was always ya blew yer chance.

Some do, some get quite pushy and when you react to being pestered they can get abuslve, and on rare occasions that can be a bit threatening.

It is a very small minority, but even one can cover a lot of ground.

jaxxx

Candie wrote: »

Some do, some get quite pushy and when you react to being pestered they can get abuslve, and on rare occasions that can be a bit threatening.

It is a very small minority, but even one can cover a lot of ground.

I find this to be highly sexist and offensive and.. .. ..


Oh wait wrong thread! Oops! :eek:



*examines map


I KNEW I should have taken that left turn after Arts & Crafts.. .. ..

Tell me how

Candie wrote: »

TMH, I have never said and nor have I implied that every man should be seen as a threat. Please don't infer that from what I have said about this particular instance. It is reasonable for women (and men) to be aware of risk from many situations, and again, I never implied that men should be seen as a threat by default and I think it's unfair to imply I meant that.

Your mum and dad didn't meet by your mum receiving an unsolicited text from someone who knows where she lives. Most people get to know one another first. Maybe the guy who knocked on the girls door got away with it because she lived with her family. She might have received it differently if she lived alone.

I'll have to disagree with you. It is creepy to use confidential information to contact someone unsolicited, and as I said before, MOST men would know that sending a text like that would likely put a woman on edge.

He didn't even ask to see her again. He asked if she was single. Most peoples relationship status is a big clue to their living arrangements.

I am not suggesting you inferred something, I asked the question because what I am reading on this thread is that approaching someone who has not consented to being approached is unacceptable.

I have been on this discussion since yesterday and am trying to understand how it was unquestionably creepy for this man to reach out to the lady in this way given that many relationships originated with someone having to approach a person who they did not know everything about or whether they were open to a relationship or not.

And I would go so far as to say that I have heard more and more conversations lately that the world of internet dating is becoming less and less appealing and people would like to 'meet someone in real life'. This thread would tell me that that is not an attractive idea either.

We cannot read too much in to what way the conversation in the text went as there wasn't really a conversation but more that both of them posted disjointed comments.

kenmm

Feisar wrote: »

On another note do lads push their case after a no? My attitude was always ya blew yer chance.

I think the polite thing to do in this case is wait until she buys something else online.

Then assuming not fired, there's yer chance!

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

I am not suggesting you inferred something, I asked the question because what I am reading on this thread is that approaching someone who has not consented to being approached is unacceptable.

I have been on this discussion since yesterday and am trying to understand how it was unquestionably creepy for this man to reach out to the lady in this way given that many relationships originated with someone having to approach a person who they did not know everything about or whether they were open to a relationship or not.

And I would go so far as to say that I have heard more and more conversations lately that the world of internet dating is becoming less and less appealing and people would like to 'meet someone in real life'. This thread would tell me that that is not an attractive idea either.

We cannot read too much in to what way the conversation in the text went as there wasn't really a conversation but more that both of them posted disjointed comments.

She was at home, he knows where she lives. It's a total game changer to meeting someone socially, maybe chatting and smiling and reading each others signals. He delivered something to her house, and now she gets to worry about how he takes rejection. Sure, someone could follow you home from Sainsburys but that's not what we're talking about.

I would think there's plenty to be read into that text.

We're obviously not going to see the situation the same, but I think you're not taking on board how the fact that he knows where she lives and sent a text out of the blue using private information changes the whole dynamics of the situation.

It simply can't be compared with most social situations, and I really don't understand how people can't see that.

MsStote

Feisar wrote: »

On another note do lads push their case after a no? My attitude was always ya blew yer chance.

Yep and it's not like I'm some looker either. Yet thirsty guys tend to push it, even if I show em my engagement ring they still push it. #notallmen plenty of women like it too mind. I've seen and heard women being very push towards men who don't want any of it.

loalae

Tell me how wrote: »

I am not suggesting you inferred something, I asked the question because what I am reading on this thread is that approaching someone who has not consented to being approached is unacceptable.

I have been on this discussion since yesterday and am trying to understand how it was unquestionably creepy for this man to reach out to the lady in this way given that many relationships originated with someone having to approach a person who they did not know everything about or whether they were open to a relationship or not.

And I would go so far as to say that I have heard more and more conversations lately that the world of internet dating is becoming less and less appealing and people would like to 'meet someone in real life'. This thread would tell me that that is not an attractive idea either.

We cannot read too much in to what way the conversation in the text went as there wasn't really a conversation but more that both of them posted disjointed comments.

It's creepy because of the way he obtained her contact details. Asking her if she is single is not the issue. Using her contact details without her consent was the creepy part. She provided her details to Argos. He expoited that for his own means. She feels vulnerable because someone she doesn't know, who she didn't consent to contacting her in this context is doing so.

jaxxx

Candie wrote: »

She was at home, he knows where she lives. It's a total game changer to meeting someone socially, maybe chatting and smiling and reading each others signals. He delivered something to her house, and now she gets to worry about how he takes rejection. Sure, someone could follow you home from Sainsburys but that's not what we're talking about.

I would think there's plenty to be read into that text.

We're obviously not going to see the situation the same, but I think you're not taking on board how the fact that he knows where she lives and sent a text out of the blue using private information changes the whole dynamics of the situation.

It simply can't be compared with most social situations, and I really don't understand how people can't see that.

I think it's naive ignorance, that's how I'm coining the term anyway. Most here I think have never nor probably ever be in such a situation, and so struggle to put themselves in the shoes so to speak? If that makes any sort of sense at all.

Esse85

Candie wrote: »

She was at home, he knows where she lives. It's a total game changer to meeting someone socially, maybe chatting and smiling and reading each others signals. He delivered something to her house, and now she gets to worry about how he takes rejection. Sure, someone could follow you home from Sainsburys but that's not what we're talking about.

I would think there's plenty to be read into that text.

We're obviously not going to see the situation the same, but I think you're not taking on board how the fact that he knows where she lives and sent a text out of the blue using private information changes the whole dynamics of the situation.

It simply can't be compared with most social situations, and I really don't understand how people can't see that.

If she was that worried and scared, especially seen as the delivery guy is given her her address to do his job, she could easily of wrote back and said I'm actually happily married thanks or I'm in a long term relationship and my boyfriend will be home soon and I'd be 99% sure that would of been the end of it.

loalae

Esse85 wrote: »

If she was that worried and scared, especially seen as the delivery guy is given her her address to do his job, she could easily of wrote back and said I'm actually happily married thanks or I'm in a long term relationship and my boyfriend will be home soon and I'd be 99% sure that would of been the end of it.

But, like, why should she have to pretend to be attached (if she is in even single) just to feel safe in her own home. She did nothing wrong and shouldn't have been put in this position. I don't get why people are saying she should have done something differently.

Esse85

loalae wrote: »

But, like, why should she have to pretend to be attached (if she is in even single) just to feel safe in her own home. She did nothing wrong and shouldn't have been put in this position. I don't get why people are saying she should have done something differently.

It's called common sense.

Tell me how

Candie wrote: »

She was at home, he knows where she lives. It's a total game changer to meeting someone socially, maybe chatting and smiling and reading each others signals. He delivered something to her house, and now she gets to worry about how he takes rejection. Sure, someone could follow you home from Sainsburys but that's not what we're talking about.

I would think there's plenty to be read into that text.

We're obviously not going to see the situation the same, but I think you're not taking on board how the fact that he knows where she lives and sent a text out of the blue using private information changes the whole dynamics of the situation.

It simply can't be compared with most social situations, and I really don't understand how people can't see that.

There is no single engagement which could be guaranteed to not provoke a sense of panic because for virtually every type of engagement there is an example of where someone ultimately (and justifiably) felt uncomfortable) and as a consequence, that is why I am wondering is it now the case where it is best to never approach someone because outside of those definitive events (dating apps, speed dating event etc) you can't suggest you simply found them attractive and were curious if they were interested.

I wonder if a guy was asked was he single, and said yes and then 2 weeks later when his new GF found out he had a partner, would it be a reasonable excuse to say he thought she had been asking about was anyone with him. I think not somehow.

loalae

loalae wrote: »

But, like, why should she have to pretend to be attached (if she is in even single) just to feel safe in her own home. She did nothing wrong and shouldn't have been put in this position. I don't get why people are saying she should have done something differently.

Because the issue doesn't seem to be what the guy did with her private info or the text - it's her actions that are scrutinised.

hynesie08

Esse85 wrote: »

It's called common sense.

So is not obtaining someone's number dodgily and texting them without permission.

Tell me how

loalae wrote: »

But, like, why should she have to pretend to be attached (if she is in even single) just to feel safe in her own home. She did nothing wrong and shouldn't have been put in this position. I don't get why people are saying she should have done something differently.

All I think she should have done differently is responded to say she wasn't interested and mentioned that he shouldn't have used her number for this purpose.

And then reached out to Tesco directly rather than via FB.

Tell me how

Candie wrote: »

Because the issue doesn't seem to be what the guy did with her private info or the text - it's her actions that are scrutinised.

That's not the case Candie.

loalae

Esse85 wrote: »

It's called common sense.

But why should the "victim" in this scenario have to behave in such a way as to make life easier for the "perpetrator"? He was wrong. Why are people so eager to find fault with her?

Feisar

Candie wrote: »

Some do, some get quite pushy and when you react to being pestered they can get abuslve, and on rare occasions that can be a bit threatening.

It is a very small minority, but even one can cover a lot of ground.

Hmm...

I'm relatively well built, 6'2'' circa 14.5 stone. Used to be a black belt, spent a couple of years at MMA. What I'm saying is I could handle most situations or be to much hard work to be bothered with. I remember sparring a lad one time, several factors bigger than me, jabs felt like sledge hammers to the face.

What I'm trying to say is I'm trying to imagine a world were I'm at the mercy of someone elses physical power and I have something they want.

jaxxx

Tell me how wrote: »

That's not the case Candie.

Err have you not been reading a lot of the replies on the thread?? A lot of them have been exactly that!

Tell me how

jaxxx wrote: »

Err have you not been reading a lot of the replies on the thread?? A lot of them have been exactly that!

Because I have been the one discussing this back and forth with Candie since she joined the thread and have not queried the ladies behaviour. At all.

Feisar

Feisar wrote: »

Hmm...

I'm relatively well built, 6'2'' circa 14.5 stone. Used to be a black belt, spent a couple of years at MMA. What I'm saying is I could handle most situations or be to much hard work to be bothered with. I remember sparring a lad one time, several factors bigger than me, jabs felt like sledge hammers to the face.

What I'm trying to say is I'm trying to imagine a world were I'm at the mercy of someone elses physical power and I have something they want.

Most of the time that kind of thing never enters my head, but you have to be wary at times. I'm small, just under 5ft, and I've had someone once pick me up in a pub and throw me across a table of glasses to his friend.

It's hard to really explain how vulnerable someone could feel if someone knew where you lived and you were put in the position of having to reject them. It must be hard to imagine, if you've never felt physically unsafe, how things like that possibly affect others.

People say size doesn't matter but I can happily say that if someone my own size decides to punch me in the head I stand a much better chance of defending myself than I do if someone over a foot taller and twice my weight or more punches me in the head. In the second scenario, I'd be dead or brain damaged.

Esse85

loalae wrote: »

But why should the "victim" in this scenario have to behave in such a way as to make life easier for the "perpetrator"? He was wrong. Why are people so eager to find fault with her?

He was wrong to begin with absolutely. You can't use information like that for romantic gain.

She'd be making life easier for herself too, unless she wants all the stress and crap that's come with it.
I bet her life has been far more intrusive since that incident.

I wonder does she even regret reacting to the situation the way she did, on reflection I wonder has she considered a better approach would of been "I'm actually happily married thanks"

loalae

Tell me how wrote: »

Because I have been the one discussing this back and forth with Candie since she joined the thread and have not queried the ladies behaviour. At all.

"All I think she should have done differently is responded to say she wasn't interested and mentioned that he shouldn't have used her number for this purpose.

And then reached out to Tesco directly rather than via FB."

This is a direct quote from one of your previous posts.