FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > accommodate

accommodate

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

Ive heard it said that if a guy cant accommodate , its a sure fire sign that they are married or in a relationship. This could be true in some cases . If this applies to guys then it should apply to woman . But it seems to me it doesn't. I haven't come across anyone saying if a female cant accommodate its likely shes not single . Im single and cant accommodate for a number of reasons .

My question is . Should we try not to jump to conclusions about the reasons why someone cant accommodate ? How do you lovely open-minded people feel about this subject ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It’s a fair assumption to make (about both sexes) seeing as lot of people on here, are on here to cheat. However, I like to find out why myself. And it doesn’t really bother me as I don’t travel

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

A lot of people have children. No way would I ever have anyone in my family home no matter what the circumstance.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"A lot of people have children. No way would I ever have anyone in my family home no matter what the circumstance. "

And who cares what people assume. My private life and anything that may happen on fab is and always will be totally separate.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"A lot of people have children. No way would I ever have anyone in my family home no matter what the circumstance.

And who cares what people assume. My private life and anything that may happen on fab is and always will be totally separate. "

Exactly. I’ve already decided when I have children I won’t be accommodating. Unsure what I’ll be doing

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he Mac LassWoman over a year ago

Hefty Hideaway

My reason is a good one. I get a few comments on it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

OP, why is your name biscuit pete?

I need to know

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I wouldn't jump to that conclusion from the off myself. They could live with family, have children etc.

I have that I can't accommodate because I have children.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Or the fact that statistically a woman is more at risk (of being attacked and overpowered) than a man is therefore it’s mote dangerous then to have a man visit your home than a woman visiting a mans home.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"A lot of people have children. No way would I ever have anyone in my family home no matter what the circumstance.

And who cares what people assume. My private life and anything that may happen on fab is and always will be totally separate.

Exactly. I’ve already decided when I have children I won’t be accommodating. Unsure what I’ll be doing

Sleeping probably!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ce WingerMan over a year ago

P.O. Box DE1 0NQ

"A lot of people have children. No way would I ever have anyone in my family home no matter what the circumstance. "

Yeah, but I would cook you breakfast and there wouldn't be crumbs in the butter after I had left

You might have to wash your sheets though

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable"

My husband is epileptic and can drive, I don’t have epilepsy and I cannot

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I can’t acxomodate because I’m in prison

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Guys will always be treated with suspicion here

The 'can't accomodate' scenario, is just one in a long line of things where it isn't all that equal

It's the nature of the beast

I wouldn't sweat it - find meets who will work with you as much as you will work with them

BTW, you do have a look of Tommy Lee Jones op, especially in your second pic

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *sGivesWoodWoman over a year ago

ST. AUSTELL, CORNWALL

I don't accommodate unless I know people really well. I live alone so no way will I have random strangers from the Internet in my home. I've had issues with people from fab when I have previously accommodated.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

My husband is epileptic and can drive, I don’t have epilepsy and I cannot

So what’s your excuse?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

My husband is epileptic and can drive, I don’t have epilepsy and I cannot

So what’s your excuse?"

We are in such a shitty financal state that I can’t even afford a provisional driving license, let alone lessons

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"OP, why is your name biscuit pete?

I need to know"
messaged you with the answer

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable"

Sexism? Why?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *SAchickWoman over a year ago

Hillside desolate

Doesn't bother me if they can't accomodate, some of the younger guys I've met had flatmates (which we usually end up working around anyway) I've met a guy in the past who had his parents living with him, some guys just don't want people in their home they don't know that well. Which is fair enough.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable"

Inexcusable... have a word with yourself! People having to go to foodbanks in 2019 is inexcusable, people not driving is a choice

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *sGivesWoodWoman over a year ago

ST. AUSTELL, CORNWALL

"Guys will always be treated with suspicion here

The 'can't accomodate' scenario, is just one in a long line of things where it isn't all that equal

It's the nature of the beast

I wouldn't sweat it - find meets who will work with you as much as you will work with them

BTW, you do have a look of Tommy Lee Jones op, especially in your second pic

Tommy Lee Jones is hot.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Inexcusable... have a word with yourself! People having to go to foodbanks in 2019 is inexcusable, people not driving is a choice "

They have to go to food banks but they’re on sexsites??? Surely it’s them that should be having a word with themselves

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *erby DomCouple over a year ago

Ashbourne(ish) and Chesterfield(ish)

"Ive heard it said that if a guy cant accommodate , its a sure fire sign that they are married or in a relationship. This could be true in some cases . If this applies to guys then it should apply to woman . But it seems to me it doesn't. I haven't come across anyone saying if a female cant accommodate its likely shes not single . Im single and cant accommodate for a number of reasons .

My question is . Should we try not to jump to conclusions about the reasons why someone cant accommodate ? How do you lovely open-minded people feel about this subject ?"

We don't pre-judge or jump to conclusions. There are a myriad of reasons why someone would opt not to accommodate. We don;t simply because we don't want to let someone we have never let into our house so we prefer club meets. Its all down to personal preference and if someone pre-judges you for it then there's nothing that can be done about that anyway.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *SAchickWoman over a year ago

Hillside desolate

"Guys will always be treated with suspicion here

The 'can't accomodate' scenario, is just one in a long line of things where it isn't all that equal

It's the nature of the beast

I wouldn't sweat it - find meets who will work with you as much as you will work with them

BTW, you do have a look of Tommy Lee Jones op, especially in your second pic

Tommy Lee Jones is hot.

*scrolls back* Holy shit he really does

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *sGivesWoodWoman over a year ago

ST. AUSTELL, CORNWALL

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

My husband is epileptic and can drive, I don’t have epilepsy and I cannot

So what’s your excuse?

We are in such a shitty financal state that I can’t even afford a provisional driving license, let alone lessons

You shouldn't have to justify yourself to anyone on here as to why you don't drive.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Inexcusable... have a word with yourself! People having to go to foodbanks in 2019 is inexcusable, people not driving is a choice

They have to go to food banks but they’re on sexsites??? Surely it’s them that should be having a word with themselves "

Ah yes. Poor people cannot have a sex life

And he didn’t say anyone on fab went to food banks - people in general

But ah well. You’ve heard my excuse for not driving. I have no desire too either, even if we had the money

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

My husband is epileptic and can drive, I don’t have epilepsy and I cannot

So what’s your excuse?

We are in such a shitty financal state that I can’t even afford a provisional driving license, let alone lessons

You shouldn't have to justify yourself to anyone on here as to why you don't drive. "

Oh, I know

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Inexcusable... have a word with yourself! People having to go to foodbanks in 2019 is inexcusable, people not driving is a choice

They have to go to food banks but they’re on sexsites??? Surely it’s them that should be having a word with themselves "

Are people who don’t have much money not allowed to have sex then?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hubnwife_36dd_ukCouple over a year ago

chester

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Personally we take the approach that neutral ground is the sensible option.

Going to the other party's so called accommodation leaves you wide open to all sorts of problems (from illicit recordings, "extra" players turning up, other house-members rifling through your bag etc while you are playing etc etc)

As for single women going there..pleeze can we think safety?

Equally allowing strangers into your own home: plenty of opportunity for future harassment/nuisance once they know where you live, going to explain to the insurance company how your keys got lifted or somehow somebody unlocked the front door and chummy came visiting while you were playing etc etc)?

No, keep it neutral.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Sexism? Why? "

Because the OP’s post is about the attitude towards men that can’t accommodate.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iamondsmiles.Woman over a year ago

little house on the praire

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable"
dont show your ignorance there are a lot of medical reasons why someone cant drive.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Guys will always be treated with suspicion here

The 'can't accomodate' scenario, is just one in a long line of things where it isn't all that equal

It's the nature of the beast

I wouldn't sweat it - find meets who will work with you as much as you will work with them

BTW, you do have a look of Tommy Lee Jones op, especially in your second pic

Tommy Lee Jones is hot.

*scrolls back* Holy shit he really does

Who does?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *SAchickWoman over a year ago

Hillside desolate

"Guys will always be treated with suspicion here

The 'can't accomodate' scenario, is just one in a long line of things where it isn't all that equal

It's the nature of the beast

I wouldn't sweat it - find meets who will work with you as much as you will work with them

BTW, you do have a look of Tommy Lee Jones op, especially in your second pic

Tommy Lee Jones is hot.

*scrolls back* Holy shit he really does

Who does?"

The OP

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"My reason is a good one. I get a few comments on it. "

Brilliant. Me too!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *erby DomCouple over a year ago

Ashbourne(ish) and Chesterfield(ish)

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusabledont show your ignorance there are a lot of medical reasons why someone cant drive. "

Absolutely

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Inexcusable... have a word with yourself! People having to go to foodbanks in 2019 is inexcusable, people not driving is a choice

They have to go to food banks but they’re on sexsites??? Surely it’s them that should be having a word with themselves "

Who mentioned them being on sex sites?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Sexism? Why?

Because the OP’s post is about the attitude towards men that can’t accommodate. "

Ah ok fair enough on that part. Driving comment is still bollocks though.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusabledont show your ignorance there are a lot of medical reasons why someone cant drive. "

Jesus Christ.. what? Bearing in mind we are talking about people on this type of website wanting (and complaining about) to meet people, but unable to accommodate and reluctant to travel. How realistic could that be?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Guys will always be treated with suspicion here

The 'can't accomodate' scenario, is just one in a long line of things where it isn't all that equal

It's the nature of the beast

I wouldn't sweat it - find meets who will work with you as much as you will work with them

BTW, you do have a look of Tommy Lee Jones op, especially in your second pic

Tommy Lee Jones is hot.

*scrolls back* Holy shit he really does

Who does?

The OP"

Blimey yeah!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uxomBloomsWoman over a year ago

Near Tunbridge Wells

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I jump to conclusions about everything on a profile. If I get to the end of it and nothing has put me off it's a miracle.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Sexism? Why?

Because the OP’s post is about the attitude towards men that can’t accommodate.

Ah ok fair enough on that part. Driving comment is still bollocks though. "

I can’t wait for the ‘I live in the south east so I’ll never “need” a car, and if I do, I’ll let someone else with one drive me anyway....’

What other excuse?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uxomBloomsWoman over a year ago

Near Tunbridge Wells

"OP, why is your name biscuit pete?

I need to know messaged you with the answer "

But I wanted to know too!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hoenixAdAstraWoman over a year ago

Hiding in the shadows

All I can say is... Wow!

Some serious attitudes & ridiculous opinions voiced on this thread!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Sexism? Why?

Because the OP’s post is about the attitude towards men that can’t accommodate.

Ah ok fair enough on that part. Driving comment is still bollocks though.

I can’t wait for the ‘I live in the south east so I’ll never “need” a car, and if I do, I’ll let someone else with one drive me anyway....’

What other excuse? "

Skint. Public transport is cheaper. Medical reasons. Genuine anxiety when it comes to driving. Poor gross and fine motor skills. Don’t want too. Don’t need too. Can’t be bothered. Many reasons

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"OP, why is your name biscuit pete?

I need to know messaged you with the answer

But I wanted to know too!"

Perhaps OP will share here?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

men have children living with them

men live with there parents

men share a flat or a house

they only live in a rented room.

there is lots of reasons i guess ....

hence theres hotels ..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *amissCouple over a year ago

chelmsford

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

I was thinking this, a single woman is more vulnerable alone, in her house than a man, but a man has every right, not to accommodate too.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arry WindsorMan over a year ago

Heaton Park Manchester

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusabledont show your ignorance there are a lot of medical reasons why someone cant drive. "

Leave him alone I can see that any minute now he's going to offer to buy all non drivers a car and driving lessons out of his own pocket and with free fuel for life too.

Such a generous feeling chap!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"OP, why is your name biscuit pete?

I need to know messaged you with the answer

But I wanted to know too!

Perhaps OP will share here?"

cos he's rich and he likes tea ........

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inky-MinxWoman over a year ago

Grantham

"My question is . Should we try not to jump to conclusions about the reasons why someone cant accommodate ?"

Who says we jump to conclusions? Who says we're not working form empirical evidence?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Sexism? Why?

Because the OP’s post is about the attitude towards men that can’t accommodate.

Ah ok fair enough on that part. Driving comment is still bollocks though.

I can’t wait for the ‘I live in the south east so I’ll never “need” a car, and if I do, I’ll let someone else with one drive me anyway....’

What other excuse? "

Who me? I’ve got a car. Still wouldn’t accommodate though

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Sexism? Why?

Because the OP’s post is about the attitude towards men that can’t accommodate.

Ah ok fair enough on that part. Driving comment is still bollocks though.

I can’t wait for the ‘I live in the south east so I’ll never “need” a car, and if I do, I’ll let someone else with one drive me anyway....’

What other excuse?

Skint. Public transport is cheaper. Medical reasons. Genuine anxiety when it comes to driving. Poor gross and fine motor skills. Don’t want too. Don’t need too. Can’t be bothered. Many reasons

My hubby has family in London who choose not to drive because of the traffic to and from work, so they cycle as it’s quicker, easier and cheaper

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Personally we take the approach that neutral ground is the sensible option.

As for single women going there..pleeze can we think safety?

No, keep it neutral."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

could be cos they dont do there housework or have a change of bed linen

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rtraymondo76Man over a year ago

Cheltenham

"A lot of people have children. No way would I ever have anyone in my family home no matter what the circumstance.

And who cares what people assume. My private life and anything that may happen on fab is and always will be totally separate. "

Agree totally with this. I have no (kids or other) problems to accommodate myself, but accept that everyone is free to make their own decisions.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Sexism? Why?

Because the OP’s post is about the attitude towards men that can’t accommodate.

Ah ok fair enough on that part. Driving comment is still bollocks though.

I can’t wait for the ‘I live in the south east so I’ll never “need” a car, and if I do, I’ll let someone else with one drive me anyway....’

What other excuse?

Who me? I’ve got a car. Still wouldn’t accommodate though "
so how are we going to meet lol

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *amissCouple over a year ago

chelmsford

"I don't accommodate unless I know people really well. I live alone so no way will I have random strangers from the Internet in my home. I've had issues with people from fab when I have previously accommodated. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made."

Again.. this can’t be allowed. Men should not be Labelled as ‘muderer/rapist/child abuser’ until proven otherwise. It’s the fault of the left-wing media who perpetuate this myth. Men are far more likely to be attacked than women. And that actually is a fact.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It’s time to debunk these myths and banish the stereotypes. Everyone has to make their own judgement or risk and be accountable for their own actions. Blaming men for everything is the cause not the solution

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *erby DomCouple over a year ago

Ashbourne(ish) and Chesterfield(ish)

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Sexism? Why?

Because the OP’s post is about the attitude towards men that can’t accommodate.

Ah ok fair enough on that part. Driving comment is still bollocks though.

I can’t wait for the ‘I live in the south east so I’ll never “need” a car, and if I do, I’ll let someone else with one drive me anyway....’

What other excuse? "
I'm blown away at the fact that you think "you" are entitled to some form of excuse from non-drivers LOL.

This thread has been an eye opener that is for sure. Some amazing attitudes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 03/01/19 00:06:03]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

Oh now you’re just being ridiculous

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

well actually i cant accomodate as one of my bed legs has broken and can only take the weight of one person

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iamondsmiles.Woman over a year ago

little house on the praire

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *amissCouple over a year ago

chelmsford

"Guys will always be treated with suspicion here

The 'can't accomodate' scenario, is just one in a long line of things where it isn't all that equal

It's the nature of the beast

I wouldn't sweat it - find meets who will work with you as much as you will work with them

BTW, you do have a look of Tommy Lee Jones op, especially in your second pic

I like the Crocodile Dundee pic

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

They could just have a atmate or have expensive stuff that they think people will steal though you can't just assume they are attached

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"could be cos they dont do there housework or have a change of bed linen

Yeah, my house is a filthy pit.

I dont want no one thinking I'm a dirty slut

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

ive got a cat and a dog and they bite strangers so cant accomodate

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?"

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact "

Rightio

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact "

How?? A good friend of mine on here has his kids every other night so he can’t accommodate. He’s not married. It’s choice. Another man I know won’t accommodate because he got stalked once. It’s not just women.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact "

My profile states that I cannot accommodate and cannot travel.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *erby DomCouple over a year ago

Ashbourne(ish) and Chesterfield(ish)

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact "

WTF are you talking about with sexist this, sexist that. It isn't sexist not to want to allow someone into your home whether you are male or female. It is personal preference based on a risk assessment or simply the individuals personal situation.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *amissCouple over a year ago

chelmsford

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

..'until proven otherwise'.. a bit late then...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact

My profile states that I cannot accommodate and cannot travel. "

And you’d meet another site user that also couldn’t accommodate or travel?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *erby DomCouple over a year ago

Ashbourne(ish) and Chesterfield(ish)

"And you’d meet another site user that also couldn’t accommodate or travel?"
Why is that concept so hard to grasp. There are lots of options, hotels, clubs, social meets.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact

The OP is about the difference between perception of a man and a woman in a the same situation. Guess that’s why it’s a debate

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *SAchickWoman over a year ago

Hillside desolate

"OP, why is your name biscuit pete?

I need to know messaged you with the answer

But I wanted to know too!"

Now I want to know!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"And you’d meet another site user that also couldn’t accommodate or travel?Why is that concept so hard to grasp. There are lots of options, hotels, clubs, social meets."

That you’d have to travel to!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *SAchickWoman over a year ago

Hillside desolate

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact

My profile states that I cannot accommodate and cannot travel.

And you’d meet another site user that also couldn’t accommodate or travel?"

What's the right answer?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

..'until proven otherwise'.. a bit late then..."

Not sure which of you has made that comment, but you’re posting as a couple. So one of you at one point must have had to make the first move, take the first risk...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uxomBloomsWoman over a year ago

Near Tunbridge Wells

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

Oh my god I actually laughed out loud, I thought you were doing satire but you really mean it! Amazing!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *erby DomCouple over a year ago

Ashbourne(ish) and Chesterfield(ish)

"And you’d meet another site user that also couldn’t accommodate or travel?Why is that concept so hard to grasp. There are lots of options, hotels, clubs, social meets.

That you’d have to travel to!!"

You really have got a chip on this subject, you can travel locally without a car. You are not debating as you are not listening to anyone's opinion except your own.

Note to self: Stop feeding the troll.

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

It ‘can’t be allowed’ that women prefer not to invite strangers to their home?

Of course it can be allowed. As long as it is acknowledged it’s also sexist. And wrong. And probably has no basis in fact

My profile states that I cannot accommodate and cannot travel.

And you’d meet another site user that also couldn’t accommodate or travel?

What's the right answer?"

The right answer is, no-one truly cares about any of the details, if you're someone they fancy and want to shag.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"And you’d meet another site user that also couldn’t accommodate or travel?Why is that concept so hard to grasp. There are lots of options, hotels, clubs, social meets.

That you’d have to travel to!!

You really have got a chip on this subject, you can travel locally without a car. You are not debating as you are not listening to anyone's opinion except your own.

Note to self: Stop feeding the troll.

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *entakuruMan over a year ago

Exeter

I live with a couple of lodgers, and an elderly relative with care needs. As a result very rarely do I have the place to myself for more than a few hours. So although entertaining people is OK, and people I'm regularly seeing are welcome, it's out of consideration for the people round me that I don't disturb them with too much random raucous FAB sex. So I'm just being honest upfront.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 03/01/19 00:36:33]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

As in previous years, women were significantly more likely to have experienced sexual assault in the last year than men (3.1% compared with 0.8%). This is true for all types of sexual assault, with the exception of sexual assault by a family member, where there was no significant difference.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

Data from the Home Office Data Hub show that in the year ending March 2017, females were victims in 88% of r#*& offences recorded by the police, with the remaining 12% males (Figure 5). Similarly, more victims of other sexual offences recorded by the police were female (80%) than male (20%).

Single women were more likely to have been victims of sexual assault (6.4%) than women with other marital statuses, in particular those who were married or civil partnered (1.2%) (Figure 9). Single men were more likely to experience sexual assault (1.6%) than men who were married or civil partnered, cohabiting, or widowed.

Women living in a household with no children (3.8%) were significantly more likely to be a victim of sexual assault than women living in a household with other adults and children (2.0%), but there was no significant difference compared with single adults with children (3.0%). The same was true for men, with men living in a household with no children (1.0%) being significantly more likely than men living with other adults and children (0.5%) to be a victim of sexual assault, but there was no significant difference compared with single adults with children (0.8%).

So where did you facts come from ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Touche to the above.

Trouble is, lots believe if they say it then it's a valid fact in a debate!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *amissCouple over a year ago

chelmsford

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

..'until proven otherwise'.. a bit late then...

Not sure which of you has made that comment, but you’re posting as a couple. So one of you at one point must have had to make the first move, take the first risk..."

It's the female...not sure what the rest of your post meant...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

So where did you facts come from ?

Only the office for National Statistics. The Crime reports for England and Wales 2017. Published 2018

Chapter 8

Men are twice as likely to be victims of violent crime and 3 times as likely to be victims of an assailant not previously known to them. They are also 3 times more likely to be murdered.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

So where did you facts come from ?

Only the office for National Statistics. The Crime reports for England and Wales 2017. Published 2018

Chapter 8

Men are twice as likely to be victims of violent crime and 3 times as likely to be victims of an assailant not previously known to them. They are also 3 times more likely to be murdered.

We are talking about accommodating for sex. So sex crimes are predominantly what would be in context here, albeit not ignoring violent crime. I have have provided the statistics of those assaults happening in peoples homes.

If to keep this all on context, what are the percentages of those crimes that happen in a persons home and also the difference between single women living alone, single women living with children, single men living alone, single men living with children. As sexual crimes and violent crimes are recorded separately it would be good to compare and contrast.

Lets focus on the forum subject. Women and men accommodating.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

So where did you facts come from ?

Only the office for National Statistics. The Crime reports for England and Wales 2017. Published 2018

Chapter 8

Men are twice as likely to be victims of violent crime and 3 times as likely to be victims of an assailant not previously known to them. They are also 3 times more likely to be murdered.

Lets focus on the forum subject. Women and men accommodating.

In addition. Your facts regarding men being assaulted / victim of violent crime. What percentage of those are man vs man and man vs women etc that would also be helpful.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

My question is . Should we try not to jump to conclusions about the reasons why someone cant accommodate ? How do you lovely open-minded people feel about this subject ?"

I'm house sharing atm due to my ex loopy(wife)devastating my world then refusing to sell the matrimonial home so hotel meets for this one

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uxomBloomsWoman over a year ago

Near Tunbridge Wells

X WAFFLE X you're wonderful.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

So where did you facts come from ?

Only the office for National Statistics. The Crime reports for England and Wales 2017. Published 2018

Chapter 8

Men are twice as likely to be victims of violent crime and 3 times as likely to be victims of an assailant not previously known to them. They are also 3 times more likely to be murdered.

Lets focus on the forum subject. Women and men accommodating.

In addition. Your facts regarding men being assaulted / victim of violent crime. What percentage of those are man vs man and man vs women etc that would also be helpful. "

Here is the part that you left out of your fact

•perpetrators were most likely to be male, being reported to be the perpetrator in around three-quarters of violent incidents (78%)

78% is a rather hi percentage of who are the perpetrators in a violent crime.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

So where did you facts come from ?

Only the office for National Statistics. The Crime reports for England and Wales 2017. Published 2018

Chapter 8

Men are twice as likely to be victims of violent crime and 3 times as likely to be victims of an assailant not previously known to them. They are also 3 times more likely to be murdered.

Lets focus on the forum subject. Women and men accommodating.

Thanks for your concession.

it seems we agree that men are more at risk of being harmed (in all contexts) than women. We also assume that violent crime all causes is far more prevalent than sexual crimes. We also agree that neither should be expected as a result of arranging a meet via this website , or accepted in any context in, or by, society.

I presume we also agree that all parties would feel safer in their own home than visiting that of another. The paradox, seems to me to be the reluctance of women in general to accommodate on the grounds of safety. For they should not only feel safer (subjective), but be safer (objective).

I would propose that it is as a result of the greater numbers of men using the website, and the excitement that that brings when a meet is arranged that perhaps men are expected to, (and actually do) take far greater risk when meeting a stranger away from their own home

The OP discusses that it arouses suspicion if a man is unable to accommodate, but not a woman. Women often defend this by saying that they wouldn’t be happy to accommodate themselves on the basis of safety. This concern seems (on the basis of the above) illogical.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

So where did you facts come from ?

Only the office for National Statistics. The Crime reports for England and Wales 2017. Published 2018

Chapter 8

Men are twice as likely to be victims of violent crime and 3 times as likely to be victims of an assailant not previously known to them. They are also 3 times more likely to be murdered.

Lets focus on the forum subject. Women and men accommodating.

In addition. Your facts regarding men being assaulted / victim of violent crime. What percentage of those are man vs man and man vs women etc that would also be helpful.

Here is the part that you left out of your fact

•perpetrators were most likely to be male, being reported to be the perpetrator in around three-quarters of violent incidents (78%)

78% is a rather hi percentage of who are the perpetrators in a violent crime.

Do hope this is cut n paste

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

So where did you facts come from ?

Only the office for National Statistics. The Crime reports for England and Wales 2017. Published 2018

Chapter 8

Men are twice as likely to be victims of violent crime and 3 times as likely to be victims of an assailant not previously known to them. They are also 3 times more likely to be murdered.

Lets focus on the forum subject. Women and men accommodating.

In addition. Your facts regarding men being assaulted / victim of violent crime. What percentage of those are man vs man and man vs women etc that would also be helpful.

Here is the part that you left out of your fact

•perpetrators were most likely to be male, being reported to be the perpetrator in around three-quarters of violent incidents (78%)

78% is a rather hi percentage of who are the perpetrators in a violent crime.

I think that’s the point. Man goes to woman’s house, and there’s a chance he is harmed by either the woman or another man there. Either way, he’s still the victim. And not less so (but more likely to be) because he is a man

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isterPepperMan over a year ago

Central Swindon

Women don’t owe it to you to feel safe in your company.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

So where did you facts come from ?

Only the office for National Statistics. The Crime reports for England and Wales 2017. Published 2018

Chapter 8

Men are twice as likely to be victims of violent crime and 3 times as likely to be victims of an assailant not previously known to them. They are also 3 times more likely to be murdered.

Lets focus on the forum subject. Women and men accommodating.

Thanks for your concession.

I'm unsure how we would agree that men are more at risk of harm in ALL context. if you read my statistics provided it shows women are far more at risk of sexual assault. Also the percentage of sexual assault living alone or with children id higher than those men living alone or with children.

I agree men are more at risk of being a victim of a violent assault - and that 78% of the time that is by the hands of another male. It is however difficult to compare statistics as the violent crime stats do not include where the crimes occur. Where as the sexual assault crimes recorded do provide this information.

If you glance over my points once more

The OP was asking for reason not to accom. Many women state that they feel unsafe.

When looking at the statistics for sexual assaults you will see the women most likely to be victim of sexual assault are women living alone. Also men living alone however as you will see the the stats show that the percentage of men victim to a sexual assault living alone is significantly less than that of a single women.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arl17Man over a year ago

Central Portugal

Fucking hell... thought Bradley Wiggins was chilled...

Guess he rides better than typing on forums

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Fucking hell... thought Bradley Wiggins was chilled...

Guess he rides better than typing on forums

He'll be telling us the world is flat next, that's how he rides so fast !

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arl17Man over a year ago

Central Portugal

"Fucking hell... thought Bradley Wiggins was chilled...

Guess he rides better than typing on forums

He'll be telling us the world is flat next, that's how he rides so fast !

So long as he’s not popping up the Alps

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

Good points well made.

And.. why should men run the much greater, and much more likely risk of exploitation/assault/battery than a woman.

Does a guy really know who is going to be in a house any better than a woman does?

My suggestion.. Before stating something is a fact. Make sure you check its a fact and not just your opinion.

The government national statistics show that your "fact" is in fact a myth or your opinion.

•indecent exposure and unwanted sexual touching was experienced by around three times as many women as men (2.7% compared with 0.8%)

•fewer than 0.1% of men had experienced r#** or assault by penetration (including attempts) compared with 0.9% of women

So where did you facts come from ?

Only the office for National Statistics. The Crime reports for England and Wales 2017. Published 2018

Chapter 8

Men are twice as likely to be victims of violent crime and 3 times as likely to be victims of an assailant not previously known to them. They are also 3 times more likely to be murdered.

Lets focus on the forum subject. Women and men accommodating.

Thanks for your concession.

If you glance over my points once more

The OP was asking for reason not to accom. Many women state that they feel unsafe.

Ok, I think we’re getting closer to finding some middle ground.

It’s not all about the sexual assaults. I think comparing one type of crime with another is not the full picture. I don’t think either one of us would want to say a woman should be affected more by getting touched up than a guy should by getting battered. I suppose the upshot of all this is to say that everyone makes their choices based on whatever they feel is their own assessment of risk (and consequence).

In general I would hope that by the time any forumites agreed to meet they felt they’d done enough due diligence to feel that that risk was reduced as much as possible.

My reason for making the points I have so vehemently is that I hope all genders appreciate the risk that not only they are taking themselves, but that they are asking the person they are meeting also to take.

I would imagine that that the risks are vanishingly small compared to how they might be perceived by some, but exist nonetheless. Once all the checks and balances are done, and you’ve committed to the decision, be safe, and let the nerves be ones of excitement not of reckless terror. Have no sense of obligation and no expectations, look forward to welcoming someone new into your home and your life, it might be the start of something amazing..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *SAchickWoman over a year ago

Hillside desolate

Oof this is a scrolly thread eh?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"Women don’t owe it to you to feel safe in your company."

Everyone owes everyone the right to feel safe. Gender has nothing to do with it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arl17Man over a year ago

Central Portugal

"Oof this is a scrolly thread eh? "

Very scrolly

My little finger is worn out so off to bed lol

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arl17Man over a year ago

Central Portugal

Btw.... can Accomodate

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Women don’t owe it to you to feel safe in your company.

Everyone owes everyone the right to feel safe. Gender has nothing to do with it. "

I don't think its about "owing". Perhaps not the right term .

But I do agree with you here, that no matter if you're male or female everyone has the right to feel safe and be safe.

Unfortunately in this cruel world its not the case.

So always pays to be extra vigilant.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *abulously curiousCouple over a year ago

manchester

What genuine reasons for not?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Inexcusable... have a word with yourself! People having to go to foodbanks in 2019 is inexcusable, people not driving is a choice

They have to go to food banks but they’re on sexsites??? Surely it’s them that should be having a word with themselves "

Aren’t you a ray of sunshine!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable"

Hang on I don't drive and i'm not epileptic.

Fuck me the level of privilege here is nuts.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Not driving.. I have crippling anxiety and chronic pain I don’t drive. I can’t accomodate because I live on a farm with family... however I will travel by train bus etc for meets I’ve been up as far as Brighton for the right person!! Never judge a book by its cover some people have genuine reasons.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Hang on I don't drive and i'm not epileptic.

Fuck me the level of privilege here is nuts."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Not driving.. I have crippling anxiety and chronic pain I don’t drive. I can’t accomodate because I live on a farm with family... however I will travel by train bus etc for meets I’ve been up as far as Brighton for the right person!! Never judge a book by its cover some people have genuine reasons. "

Fuck excuses.

I just dont particularly want to drive. Nobody owes this guy any explanations.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Fuck excuses.

I just dont particularly want to drive. Nobody owes this guy any explanations."

Amen

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

A statistic I'd like to see is how many women have read this thread and blocked BradleyWiggins

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tingly ByronMan over a year ago

In a town Fab forgot

"A statistic I'd like to see is how many women have read this thread and blocked BradleyWiggins"

I wondered what all the noise was.

It's the sound of the block button being hit up and down the UK.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tingly ByronMan over a year ago

In a town Fab forgot

"My reason is a good one. I get a few comments on it. "

Brilliant. I sooooo want to steal it. But I do accommodate.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Hmm spot the 'Troll' in this thread. I can't accommodate because in this shitty economy and poor Government housing policies I can't afford my own place so I'm living with my parents. I don't mind fronting the bill for a hotel room after a social. What isn't fair is people seeing 'can't accommodate' in my profile and giving me a miss based on that without any perspective.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Bradley we all want to know if your thumb Is still numb this morning

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *issmorganWoman over a year ago

Calderdale innit

Not accommodating alone doesn't make someone a cheat,there are many reasons why they can't/won't.

There are other red flags usually along with that usually when someone is playing away.

I don't know why it's just men who are accused of it though,think maybe many women will say its children at home maybe ?.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I have kids live with me,so can only accommodate when at school.which seems to be a problem when trying to meet

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *entakuruMan over a year ago

Exeter

Fuck excuses.

I just dont particularly want to drive. Nobody owes this guy any explanations."

The roads would be a better place if the people who actually don't like driving or enjoy it in any way didn't drive! Kudos to you

I'm always happy to drive people to random places if they cover my fuel and keep me in cheeseburgers and cold drinks.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *entakuruMan over a year ago

Exeter

"Hmm spot the 'Troll' in this thread. I can't accommodate because in this shitty economy and poor Government housing policies I can't afford my own place so I'm living with my parents. I don't mind fronting the bill for a hotel room after a social. What isn't fair is people seeing 'can't accommodate' in my profile and giving me a miss based on that without any perspective."

I think the thing with this site is as a bloke you have to learn what works and what doesn't. I have actually put why I can't accommodate on my profile. Only time will tell if that helps or hinders the cause but I have noticed an upswing in contact and activity lately so I'm hoping it's helping.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Some people don’t accommodate for various reasons, married or lies about status.Could live at home or have pets or not proud of where they live so can be anything.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *essysteveCouple over a year ago

ALICANTE AREA SPAIN

Is it about jumping to conclusions or is it that many of us don't want any issues when swinging and if there is a chance that someone might be cheating then why not step away - there are many people on the site that can accommodate which gives a clear message that they 'should be single'

Who wants the hassle of an irate partner finding out and causing waves …...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *essysteveCouple over a year ago

ALICANTE AREA SPAIN

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable"

Well with that attitude you will not probably go far on this site ……….

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *essysteveCouple over a year ago

ALICANTE AREA SPAIN

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Inexcusable... have a word with yourself! People having to go to foodbanks in 2019 is inexcusable, people not driving is a choice

They have to go to food banks but they’re on sexsites??? Surely it’s them that should be having a word with themselves

Ah yes. Poor people cannot have a sex life

And he didn’t say anyone on fab went to food banks - people in general

But ah well. You’ve heard my excuse for not driving. I have no desire too either, even if we had the money

Fully agree with you - but heyho… I thought Doctors where intelligent - but this one (if he is to be believed) cannot even read quotes from people.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Oh damn it! Is it over? I was Al ready polishing up the white armor and saddling up the horse to ride in to battle.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Women don’t owe it to you to feel safe in your company."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"A statistic I'd like to see is how many women have read this thread and blocked BradleyWiggins"

Why? I don't agree with him but he's entitled to his opinion the same as anyone else is.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *sGivesWoodWoman over a year ago

ST. AUSTELL, CORNWALL

"Guys will always be treated with suspicion here

The 'can't accomodate' scenario, is just one in a long line of things where it isn't all that equal

It's the nature of the beast

I wouldn't sweat it - find meets who will work with you as much as you will work with them

BTW, you do have a look of Tommy Lee Jones op, especially in your second pic

I like the Crocodile Dundee pic

I would soooo do the OP, he's fit as fuck...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tingly ByronMan over a year ago

In a town Fab forgot

"Guys will always be treated with suspicion here

The 'can't accomodate' scenario, is just one in a long line of things where it isn't all that equal

It's the nature of the beast

I wouldn't sweat it - find meets who will work with you as much as you will work with them

BTW, you do have a look of Tommy Lee Jones op, especially in your second pic

I like the Crocodile Dundee pic

I would soooo do the OP, he's fit as fuck...

Easy tiger.......

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

the reason i don’t accommodate has nothing to do with me being married, it’s our children being here that’s stopping us from having people over on a regular basis.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse "

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Im a hobo

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *abulously curiousCouple over a year ago

manchester

"I have kids live with me,so can only accommodate when at school.which seems to be a problem when trying to meet "
even with a genuine reason like that? Wow x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Im a hobo

Are you a Magic hobo?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *SAchickWoman over a year ago

Hillside desolate

"Im a hobo

Are you a Magic hobo? "

I knew who posted that before I even scrolled back

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Im a hobo

Are you a Magic hobo?

I knew who posted that before I even scrolled back

Theres a voice keeps on calling me

Wasnt me tho

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 03/01/19 21:38:34]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *lem-H-FandangoMan over a year ago

salisbury

My question is . Should we try not to jump to conclusions about the reasons why someone cant accommodate ? How do you lovely open-minded people feel about this subject ?"

I'm married, and i can't accommodate.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not. "

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"A statistic I'd like to see is how many women have read this thread and blocked BradleyWiggins"

Hopefully the same amount of guys. No post has discriminated between men and women. I suppose that means everyone has an equal chance/entitlement to be offended. No post was mentioned any one person in particular, I’m talking about populations and the generalisation society creates.

If any white knights want to feign distaste, feel free. And please, let’s have the stats. At least my sources were quoted.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I never actually look at the can accomodate or not to be honest. Hotel meets would be my preference anyway until I know them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

Hang on I don't drive and i'm not epileptic.

Fuck me the level of privilege here is nuts."

Where’s the privilege in saying everyone should be able to drive? Surely it’s the opposite of that. It’s a universal opportunity.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?"

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

Happy now you argumentative little fellow. It saddens me when someone that used to be tidy on this site succumbs to the sometimes unfair ratio of male to females and the lack of success turns to bitterness and resorting to only getting attention by trolling and starting arguments, saddens me.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

[Removed by poster at 03/01/19 22:36:19]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

Every statement I made has been about equality rather than highlighting differences or making judgements. If a difference between men and women has been made, my post has challenged the reasons for that difference. Challenging the status quo when there is inequality is not about being argumentative. I would hope history has taught us that.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *wisted999Man over a year ago

North Bucks

I don’t think your suggestion will catch on Op.

Look at all the conclusions that have been jumped to in this thread alone.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user."

But the thread was about why people assume men that can’t accomkdate are cheats and challenged when women who also can’t accomodate are not. The reasons were that it’s more likely single parents are women with children in the home or women not wanting a man to come to their home for safety reasons.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user.

Precisely. All sexist reasons.

Plenty of men have said why they can’t accommodate, but the feeling is still that the kid thing trumps them all.

That will continue to happen until there is genuine equality (and that includes men caring for children half the time).

With regard ‘safety concerns’, I quoted statistics from the Office for National Statistics saying men are at far greater risk of Voilence than women.

The thread is about people’s assumptions (including those about willingness to accommodate). It’s those assumptions I’m challenging.

I can only hope for the right reasons, the aim is moving towards a situation which is fairer and safer for everybody.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Getting a bit nasty in here admin

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I can't accommodate for strangers. Once im comfortable with someone i can

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusable

My husband is epileptic and can drive, I don’t have epilepsy and I cannot

So what’s your excuse?"

I don't need to give an excuse. It's just my choice. I prefer men who can as it makes life easier but if not hotels are always fun. It's none of my business why someone doesn't

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user.

Precisely. All sexist reasons.

Plenty of men have said why they can’t accommodate, but the feeling is still that the kid thing trumps them all.

That will continue to happen until there is genuine equality (and that includes men caring for children half the time).

With regard ‘safety concerns’, I quoted statistics from the Office for National Statistics saying men are at far greater risk of Voilence than women.

The thread is about people’s assumptions (including those about willingness to accommodate). It’s those assumptions I’m challenging.

I can only hope for the right reasons, the aim is moving towards a situation which is fairer and safer for everybody."

Yes but men are at a higher risk of violent crime where the perpetrators are also men, NOT women. Women get r*ped and sexually assaulted by MEN more than men getting sexually assaulted by women. You can’t argue with that fact.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user.

Precisely. All sexist reasons.

Plenty of men have said why they can’t accommodate, but the feeling is still that the kid thing trumps them all.

That will continue to happen until there is genuine equality (and that includes men caring for children half the time).

With regard ‘safety concerns’, I quoted statistics from the Office for National Statistics saying men are at far greater risk of Voilence than women.

The thread is about people’s assumptions (including those about willingness to accommodate). It’s those assumptions I’m challenging.

I can only hope for the right reasons, the aim is moving towards a situation which is fairer and safer for everybody.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Cum on guys n gals put a sock in it

We're playing how many organisms received/delivered over here

And also who's got the nicest set of legs on fabby dabby swingers

Lot more fun than listening to you lot whittling on

Put it to bed

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

My question is . Should we try not to jump to conclusions about the reasons why someone cant accommodate ? How do you lovely open-minded people feel about this subject ?"

Maybe they still live at home

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Cum on guys n gals put a sock in it

We're playing how many organisms received/delivered over here

And also who's got the nicest set of legs on fabby dabby swingers

Lot more fun than listening to you lot whittling on

Put it to bed

You dont have to read threads.

You know that, right?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user.

Precisely. All sexist reasons.

Plenty of men have said why they can’t accommodate, but the feeling is still that the kid thing trumps them all.

That will continue to happen until there is genuine equality (and that includes men caring for children half the time).

With regard ‘safety concerns’, I quoted statistics from the Office for National Statistics saying men are at far greater risk of Voilence than women.

The thread is about people’s assumptions (including those about willingness to accommodate). It’s those assumptions I’m challenging.

I can only hope for the right reasons, the aim is moving towards a situation which is fairer and safer for everybody.

I’m not arguing with anyone. But I am challenging the reason for the discrepancy.

I said in an earlier post that men going to a woman’s house should be aware of the possibility of harm not only from the woman, but from other men that may be there (or of being robbed or exploited).

I also said that women should feel much safer in their own houses, and logically that would be the better place for them to have meets.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

What did you say?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *amissCouple over a year ago

chelmsford

I wouldn't want a stranger off here knowing where we lived..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eal_curves_is_backWoman over a year ago

London

"Rampant sexism again.

Women give the same tired old excuses about having kids as a reason for not accommodating time after time.

As for not driving, unless you’re epileptic, in 2019 it’s inexcusabledont show your ignorance there are a lot of medical reasons why someone cant drive.

Discussed ad nauseam.

People tick "cannot accommodate" and "cannot travel" for different reasons. It can be that they are simply not on this site for hookups with strangers. Shock horror, I know.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user.

Precisely. All sexist reasons.

Plenty of men have said why they can’t accommodate, but the feeling is still that the kid thing trumps them all.

That will continue to happen until there is genuine equality (and that includes men caring for children half the time).

With regard ‘safety concerns’, I quoted statistics from the Office for National Statistics saying men are at far greater risk of Voilence than women.

The thread is about people’s assumptions (including those about willingness to accommodate). It’s those assumptions I’m challenging.

I can only hope for the right reasons, the aim is moving towards a situation which is fairer and safer for everybody.

I’m not arguing with anyone. But I am challenging the reason for the discrepancy.

I also said that women should feel much safer in their own houses, and logically that would be the better place for them to have meets. "

To suggest to a woman that having a STRANGER to there home is safer than meeting in a public place or a club. I think you may need to take that free ticket on a one way trip mars mate !

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user.

Precisely. All sexist reasons.

Plenty of men have said why they can’t accommodate, but the feeling is still that the kid thing trumps them all.

That will continue to happen until there is genuine equality (and that includes men caring for children half the time).

With regard ‘safety concerns’, I quoted statistics from the Office for National Statistics saying men are at far greater risk of Voilence than women.

The thread is about people’s assumptions (including those about willingness to accommodate). It’s those assumptions I’m challenging.

I can only hope for the right reasons, the aim is moving towards a situation which is fairer and safer for everybody."

Your statistics are about violent crimes. Where 78% is men vs men.

We are taking about inviting people into our homes.

My statistics reflect that. Your statistics DO NOT

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user.

Precisely. All sexist reasons.

Plenty of men have said why they can’t accommodate, but the feeling is still that the kid thing trumps them all.

That will continue to happen until there is genuine equality (and that includes men caring for children half the time).

With regard ‘safety concerns’, I quoted statistics from the Office for National Statistics saying men are at far greater risk of Voilence than women.

The thread is about people’s assumptions (including those about willingness to accommodate). It’s those assumptions I’m challenging.

I can only hope for the right reasons, the aim is moving towards a situation which is fairer and safer for everybody."

"the kid thing trumps it all" I have provided figures for single females living alone. Single men living alone. Single women with a child. Single men with a child.

I've nor been sexist and only provide one side of statistics . I've provided both make and female stats , single with and without children , also those in marriages in civil partnerships.

You need to compare and contrast in order to form an argument. Otherwise you are comparing apples to oranges. You provide figures, but the are not in context to the discussion.

We are discussing accommodating at home. My stats explore this. Yours do not even glance at the subject.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *radleywigginsMan over a year ago

northwest

"It’s because 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother after a relationship breakdown, therefore they assume a woman has kids at home if they can’t accomodate.

If there are children, 9 out of 10 times they’ll be a dad!!!

Still not an excuse

Yeah and if you read the comment you’d see I said that 9 times out of 10 the children will reside with the mother rather than the father therefore father has a free house mother does not.

If that isn’t sexist, why isn’t it 5 out of 10 times they will live with the dad?

Because it’s not 50/50 that’s why.

In 10 years the proportion of single fathers has stayed at 10% ok 10% out of 100% would make it 1 in 10 or as I put it, 9 times out of 10 the children reside with the mother.

In addition, none of my posts have been personally directed at any particular forum user.

Precisely. All sexist reasons.

Plenty of men have said why they can’t accommodate, but the feeling is still that the kid thing trumps them all.

That will continue to happen until there is genuine equality (and that includes men caring for children half the time).

With regard ‘safety concerns’, I quoted statistics from the Office for National Statistics saying men are at far greater risk of Voilence than women.

The thread is about people’s assumptions (including those about willingness to accommodate). It’s those assumptions I’m challenging.

I can only hope for the right reasons, the aim is moving towards a situation which is fairer and safer for everybody.

Your statistics are about violent crimes. Where 78% is men vs men.

We are taking about inviting people into our homes.

My statistics reflect that. Your statistics DO NOT "

Violence is voilence. For a male victim the gender of the perpetrator is irrelevant. If a man goes to a woman’s home he may be the victim of violence from that woman or from another man there. That’s what I said everybody should be vigilant. The stats therefore say women should be safer accommodating where they can control the situation.