> You're saying the other examples are clear because people actually do these things, but the date example isn't clear because men don't retaliate against women who refuse a request for a date?
I'm not saying that men don't regularly do that. I'm saying I have absolutely zero evidence of men doing that. It might happen, but right now I am much more sure that policemen arrest people for refusing to pull over nearly 100% of the time than I am that male employers retaliate against women employees/candidates who refuse a date.
Again, I'm not sure what to tell you besides yes, this happens, all the time. Maybe ask some of the women in your life how careful they have to be when turning down men who ask them out. Maybe google "fired for rejecting a date" (but beware, there's a lot of noise in the results). Women (and men) absolutely suffer retaliation in the workplace for rejecting advances.
My point is that the claim that policemen routinely arrest people who refuse to pull over is far less uncertain or controversial than the claim that male employers routinely ask women on dates and make their employment contingent on their response.
I don't see anything uncertain or controversial about it. You appear to disagree, but I have a hard time seeing why. I gave you a couple of places where you might find the stuff I'm talking about.
I'm not saying that men don't regularly do that. I'm saying I have absolutely zero evidence of men doing that. It might happen, but right now I am much more sure that policemen arrest people for refusing to pull over nearly 100% of the time than I am that male employers retaliate against women employees/candidates who refuse a date.