|
Post by HMARK Center on May 26, 2014 15:28:56 GMT -5
Is it majority of cases are male on female or is it majority of REPORTED cases/cases the cops actually investigated that are male on female? Because I've heard tonnes of stories about cops not taking female on male violence seriously There are certainly cases of the latter, but there are just as many, and frankly simply more, cases of women who don't report men who beat or otherwise abuse them.
|
|
ToyfareMark
Vegeta
A WINNER IS YOU!
In Hutch I trust!
Posts: 9,605
|
Post by ToyfareMark on May 26, 2014 16:22:36 GMT -5
So you don't believe you can injure someone by grabbing them or trying to hold them when they're thrashing about? Particularly if you're a lot bigger than them? Really? It's possible certainly, and if it's the case where you can do damage just by doing that, yeah, just escape the situation. If you can really hurt someone by holding them back, then it gets really unfair. Whats truly the only fair thing is that if you play with fire, and then get burned, you only have yourself to blame, regardless of who you are.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on May 26, 2014 16:24:40 GMT -5
It's possible certainly, and if it's the case where you can do damage just by doing that, yeah, just escape the situation. If you can really hurt someone by holding them back, then it gets really unfair. Whats truly the only fair thing is that if you play with fire, and then get burned, you only have yourself to blame, regardless of who you are. So again, you get a scratch, but it's completely fair to put the boots to her, especially if you're bigger and have the ability to do so.
|
|
AdamAFL was sooooo wrong
Hank Scorpio
note to all: he's a pants-less heathen
I Survived The Impact Spoilers 7/22/15-7/30/15
Posts: 7,097
|
Post by AdamAFL was sooooo wrong on May 26, 2014 17:25:05 GMT -5
The problem with saying "we need to be gender neutral on this" is that it ignores basic biology and statistics. No, woman-on-man domestic violence isn't justified, and people laughing at it because "he wasn't enough of a man" is bullshit, no argument whatsoever. But you can't ignore the simple biological reality of men being, on the whole, larger and/or stronger than women, with some exceptions here and there. This makes a difference in terms of the impact of a blow from a man vs. a hit from a woman. Statistically, we also can't ignore that the majority of domestic violence cases are man-on-woman. This does not negate the opposite kind, or minimize it, but man-on-woman is so much more prevalent and much more systemic within society, and thus must be treated as more of a systemic problem. Women may be more often victims than men and they may often smaller than men due to biological facts of life but that doesn't mean we can't be gender neutral on this. Domestic violence is f***ed up (violence of any kind really) and as I said earlier, whether it's man on man, woman on woman, woman on man or man on woman we should treat it with the same level of concern. It should just not be tolerated, regardless of who is involved.
|
|
ToyfareMark
Vegeta
A WINNER IS YOU!
In Hutch I trust!
Posts: 9,605
|
Post by ToyfareMark on May 26, 2014 17:44:41 GMT -5
Whats truly the only fair thing is that if you play with fire, and then get burned, you only have yourself to blame, regardless of who you are. So again, you get a scratch, but it's completely fair to put the boots to her, especially if you're bigger and have the ability to do so. I said regardless of who you are. If you slug someone out of nowhere, and they give a shot back that knocks you on your ass, you straight up asked for it. I wasn't speaking of "putting the boots" to anyone. There's a big difference between playing with fire, and burning yourself, and playing with fire, and getting immolated.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,359
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on May 26, 2014 18:00:31 GMT -5
A good example of alleged domestic violence that a lot of people on the board can relate to happened between Taryn Terrell and Drew McIntyre a few years back, where Taryn I think was arrested for domestic violence. Drew is a very large, professional athlete, and if he fought back, would have done some major damage to Taryn, and thankfully according to everything, he didn't and it was just Taryn. And as other people have mentioned, people do talk about female on male domestic violence and take it seriously. That's messed up. If I saw a woman doing that to a man in public, I would absolutely call the cops; the bystanders' reactions are awful. (And I was also surprised by how long they took to respond to the man abusing the woman, for that matter.) Good old Bystander Effect en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effectA more recent event was the recent arrests of Matt Hardy and his wife Reby. From what I could tell from various stories about the event, Matt came back absolutely s***faced from partying yet again and it apparently was one time too many for Reby and she started a physical confrontation over it. Obviously Matt fought back some, but fortunately either he was far too s***faced to fight back well or he held back since he took the brunt of damage from the fight, but considering that Matt is literally over twice her size it could have ended very, very badly (or not, as I personally don't know Matt so I don't know if he would ever actually assault a woman like that or not. As a fan, I would not have thought Benoit was capable of what he did so I won't conjecture on this).
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on May 26, 2014 18:14:55 GMT -5
The problem with saying "we need to be gender neutral on this" is that it ignores basic biology and statistics. No, woman-on-man domestic violence isn't justified, and people laughing at it because "he wasn't enough of a man" is bullshit, no argument whatsoever. But you can't ignore the simple biological reality of men being, on the whole, larger and/or stronger than women, with some exceptions here and there. This makes a difference in terms of the impact of a blow from a man vs. a hit from a woman. Statistically, we also can't ignore that the majority of domestic violence cases are man-on-woman. This does not negate the opposite kind, or minimize it, but man-on-woman is so much more prevalent and much more systemic within society, and thus must be treated as more of a systemic problem. Women may be more often victims than men and they may often smaller than men due to biological facts of life but that doesn't mean we can't be gender neutral on this. Domestic violence is f***ed up (violence of any kind really) and as I said earlier, whether it's man on man, woman on woman, woman on man or man on woman we should treat it with the same level of concern. It should just not be tolerated, regardless of who is involved. If we're discussing the legal system, I'm on board. Domestic abuse is domestic abuse, no matter what form it comes in. My argument goes more against the idea that overwhelming violent retaliation by a physically larger/stronger party is justified in most cases when the smaller/weaker party attacks. If we want to put together a hypothetical of the weaker party using a weapon or something like that that's a different story, but again, a court will want to know sometimes if the physically stronger party took measures to remove themselves from the situation before doing something potentially irreversible.
|
|
Crimson
Hank Scorpio
Thank you DWade
Posts: 6,511
|
Post by Crimson on May 26, 2014 18:16:52 GMT -5
It actually reminds me of the SNL sketch over Tiger Woods Ex-Wife beating him and any criticism towards the sketch was shut down with "you're ruining our fun!"
|
|
AdamAFL was sooooo wrong
Hank Scorpio
note to all: he's a pants-less heathen
I Survived The Impact Spoilers 7/22/15-7/30/15
Posts: 7,097
|
Post by AdamAFL was sooooo wrong on May 26, 2014 19:06:10 GMT -5
Women may be more often victims than men and they may often smaller than men due to biological facts of life but that doesn't mean we can't be gender neutral on this. Domestic violence is f***ed up (violence of any kind really) and as I said earlier, whether it's man on man, woman on woman, woman on man or man on woman we should treat it with the same level of concern. It should just not be tolerated, regardless of who is involved. If we're discussing the legal system, I'm on board. Domestic abuse is domestic abuse, no matter what form it comes in. My argument goes more against the idea that overwhelming violent retaliation by a physically larger/stronger party is justified in most cases when the smaller/weaker party attacks. If we want to put together a hypothetical of the weaker party using a weapon or something like that that's a different story, but again, a court will want to know sometimes if the physically stronger party took measures to remove themselves from the situation before doing something potentially irreversible. I understand what you're saying. But it's difficult for me to tell people they can't defend themselves. For example, once when I was on a night out I was walking with a friend to the next club when we spotted a man and a woman across the street. The man had the woman pinned against a wall and was punching her. We immediately ran across and grabbed the man to stop him. He hit me, I went down and my friend punched him and held him down. The next thing I know, the woman who had been punched was hitting my friend with her stiletto heel whilst screaming "Get off my boyfriend". My friend, obviously surprised, shoved her off and we just walked off. That was a very impressive way of dealing with it I thought. But I would not, under any circumstance, have blamed him if he had retaliated more forcefully. Being attacked by someone, regardless of their size, gender or anything else can be an incredibly disturbing experience and I find it difficult to condemn someone who was acting in self defence.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on May 26, 2014 19:14:06 GMT -5
Correction in that women actually have been shown in tests to very often have higher threshold for pain, at least certain kinds of pain, than men. I don't know. I am able to sit through the Bachelorette with my girlfriend and somehow resist the urge to commit suicide. I don't think physicians took into consideration the toleration and extreme physical and mental duress of painfully scripted reality TV when declaring childbirth the worst natural pain. I kid.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on May 26, 2014 19:27:39 GMT -5
If we're discussing the legal system, I'm on board. Domestic abuse is domestic abuse, no matter what form it comes in. My argument goes more against the idea that overwhelming violent retaliation by a physically larger/stronger party is justified in most cases when the smaller/weaker party attacks. If we want to put together a hypothetical of the weaker party using a weapon or something like that that's a different story, but again, a court will want to know sometimes if the physically stronger party took measures to remove themselves from the situation before doing something potentially irreversible. I understand what you're saying. But it's difficult for me to tell people they can't defend themselves. For example, once when I was on a night out I was walking with a friend to the next club when we spotted a man and a woman across the street. The man had the woman pinned against a wall and was punching her. We immediately ran across and grabbed the man to stop him. He hit me, I went down and my friend punched him and held him down. The next thing I know, the woman who had been punched was hitting my friend with her stiletto heel whilst screaming "Get off my boyfriend". My friend, obviously surprised, shoved her off and we just walked off. That was a very impressive way of dealing with it I thought. But I would not, under any circumstance, have blamed him if he had retaliated more forcefully. Being attacked by someone, regardless of their size, gender or anything else can be an incredibly disturbing experience and I find it difficult to condemn someone who was acting in self defence. When it comes to self-defense, appropriate reaction is taken into consideration. It may be hard to discern in heat of the moment situations, but if you're being threatened with lethal force, responding with lethal force in kind will qualify as justifiable self-defense. Meanwhile if guy punches you in the face and your response is to pull out a gun and shoot him a few times, not so much. Usually the most effective way to practice self-defense is to disable the attacker as quickly as possible. Punches and kicks are actually pretty lousy ways to defend yourself in a real fight. The most effective way to disable an attacker is with a submission hold, which is a big part of why holds and grabs are so popular in MMA fighting styles.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on May 26, 2014 21:19:38 GMT -5
It's natural for people to find it amusing when a smaller creature attacks a larger one. Not condoning it, but that's how it is. That's not natural at all..... YOU'RE SICK I'm amused by the idea of a giant three headed kaiju being repeatedly kicked in the foot by Rockstar Spud.
|
|
|
Post by RI Richmark on May 26, 2014 21:25:39 GMT -5
Alicia Fox has to be in the next commercial.
|
|
Glitch
King Koopa
Not Going To Die; Childs, we're goin' out to give Blair the test. If he tries to make it back here and we're not with him... burn him.
Watching you.
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by Glitch on May 27, 2014 3:34:56 GMT -5
Looks like MRA fapping material.
|
|
|
Post by SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman on May 27, 2014 3:54:44 GMT -5
Looks like MRA fapping material. How? It's just showing that sexism goes both ways and ignoring one aspect of it is still sexism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 7:01:42 GMT -5
Looks like MRA fapping material. How? It's just showing that sexism goes both ways and ignoring one aspect of it is still sexism. Reverse sexism isn't a thing when it's largely a programmed response by media/social structures kept up by male owned things. Not saying that it's fine for a woman to hit a man, but the culture of "hit by woman? You weak pathetic cretin, we'll mock you" was put there by men in power in social terms which is what the video's showing in no uncertain terms.
|
|
|
Post by SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman on May 27, 2014 7:28:02 GMT -5
How? It's just showing that sexism goes both ways and ignoring one aspect of it is still sexism. Reverse sexism isn't a thing when it's largely a programmed response by media/social structures kept up by male owned things. Not saying that it's fine for a woman to hit a man, but the culture of "hit by woman? You weak pathetic cretin, we'll mock you" was put there by men in power in social terms which is what the video's showing in no uncertain terms. Maybe so but there are a lot of women who agree that mindset. And even if encouraged by men, I don't see how saying that one gender should have rights over the other isn't sexism. I will agree that reverse sexism isn't a thing though. Sexism is sexism no matter which way it goes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 7:31:49 GMT -5
Reverse sexism isn't a thing when it's largely a programmed response by media/social structures kept up by male owned things. Not saying that it's fine for a woman to hit a man, but the culture of "hit by woman? You weak pathetic cretin, we'll mock you" was put there by men in power in social terms which is what the video's showing in no uncertain terms. Maybe so but there are a lot of women who agree that mindset. And even if encouraged by men, I don't see how saying that one gender should have rights over the other isn't sexism. I will agree that reverse sexism isn't a thing though. Sexism is sexism no matter which way it goes. Yeah, when a male run society forces men and women to think the same horrible things it is pretty awful.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on May 27, 2014 7:34:27 GMT -5
The idea that somehow defending yourself from being attacked =then pulverizing the other person, is dumb.
That's regardless of gender; you can stop someone from assaulting you without beating them to a pulp. Hell, if they're smaller and weaker than you, it'd be just that much easier to defend yourself WITHOUT damaging the other person.
The conceit that somehow you're gonna go from 'stop this person from hitting me' to 'cave their face in', is ludicrous.
That said, I don't advocate adults attacking anyone, if they can avoid it
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 7:47:14 GMT -5
Man, this is why I advocate some level of grappling for EVERYBODY. At the very least, take a little wrestling or some basic BJJ. Grappling proponents always talk about the advantage the big guy has over the small guy, but for me the single biggest advantage it's given me is the ability to defuse a situation with a smaller opponent without getting into any legal liability.
|
|