If a woman was with a guy and he kept trying to go in her purse, everyone would be outraged, incensed. "HE DID WHAT?!" would be the general outcry.
No one would ask where the woman was when the guy tried to get in her purse. It wouldn't matter. Whether in a restaurant or a car or in her house or in his house, going for her wallet would be seen as crossing the line.
People wouldn't even ask if she said no when the guy went for her wallet. You don't have to say no when it's property. People are expected to know they can't just help themselves to your property.
Sure, down the line in a relationship you may share resources, but everyone knows you can't help yourself to people's wallets before everyone's on board.
We're taught to respect property in a way we're not taught to respect women's bodies.
The most depressing part of community intervention is how often people, especially men, "don't understand" harms of entitlement against women or don't think it's a big deal until a property crime is involved or the harm is explained by substituting "her body" with "her money."
And one last thing:
I am not the first person to make this comparison. If you find useful this juxtaposing of our entitlement to women's bodies with our respect for property, read this thread by @thatxxv:
