Prove that men *as a group* go through what I've outlined above.
So, unless you can prove that men as a group have to put up with street harassment in the same way, then stop saying that men can relate to women on that, because they can't.
Why should we examine men as a unitary group if we are talking about whether individual men can relate to individual women?
Also, what people can experience in their minds is not limited to what they directly experience with their senses. People have this thing called imagination with which they can postulate things they have not directly experienced with their senses. It's a pretty important part of understanding other people because we can't look directly inside their minds. If we have experienced something vaguely similar, we can make an enlightened guess on what other, slightly different experiences feel like.
You said earlier:
There are certain things that you can olny relate to if you have gone through them.
But how could you possibly know this? If you can't look inside people's minds, how did you verify whether they can relate or not? Indirectly through people's description? But if people's descriptions are accurate, then why would men saying, "I can understand what women are going through," be less reliable than women saying the same thing?
This is particularly ridiculous considering that you said men can't truly understand through description what women experience. Then how did you as a man come to learn that women understand what other women experience? There are two ways I can see.
You observed women and their descriptions. You understood their experiences and ways of understanding. Then you compared their experiences and ways of understanding and noticed that women accurately understand what other women experience.
But this is impossible according to you because you are a man and men can't understand.
You heard women say that they can understand the experiences of other women.
But how do you know they are not mistaken? Only by assuming that women can understand what other women experience, but this is what you set out to verify in the first place, so it is circular reasoning.
Women understand what other women experience. → The testimony of women on other women's experience is reliable.
The testimony of women on other women's experience is reliable. → Women understand what other women experience.
In summary, you are just dogmatically assuming that women experience things similarly while men always experience things differently than women.
If a woman says, "I can understand what women are going through," you automatically assume it is correct.
If a man says, "I can understand what women are going through," you automatically assume it is incorrect.
But where's the proof of that? What is your empirical methodology for verifying it?
And I'm not talking about your pseudo-philosophical "Well men could go through it too. Every ones experiences are either completely unique with no similarities or completely identical."
I never said they are either completely different or completely identical. I said that the similarities and differences depend on a wide variety of factors, not just physical gender. They need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
You're the one who said that women always experience things similarly, while men never experience things like women. That is an incredibly strict statement with a heavy burden of proof. Have you really checked the minds of every man and woman for this? What is your empirical methodology for verifying it?
If you think that women don't face constant street harassment, look it up on google
I never said women don't face street harassment. Whether it is constant depends on the criteria.