Hitting A Woman?

[XBoxWarrior]

I don't get the issue...if a woman hits me, I'll hit back. (simple, no sex involved)

I have owned a bar, and women/girls can be the worst of drunks to deal with...and yes, they tend to prefer litigation, ex post facto. That doesn't mean they prevail because they have vaginas, but they do get great (pro bono) lawyers.

 

[slingblade]

My first husband used to hit me.

That said, I can't imagine how to answer the question. Every time I think about it, and try to think critically about it, I just see the blood. There's got to be a logical, mature, rational answer.

Damned if I know what it is.

 

[Whiplash]

What are you, people from the dawn of time? Who leads the kind of life where people smack each other around? I've been hit exactly once since childhood, and it was by a crazy person who couldn't be blamed for her actions.

The civilized response to provocation is hissed anathemas, sneering remarks, vile invective, and puncturing of their self-esteem with your needlesharp tongue and its venomous eloquence. Sticks and stones, after all, leave wounds that heal eventually, but a properly turned nasty remark can fester in the mind and blight the very soul of the fool who dared arouse your malice.

Yes this is absolutely ideal but we are not Vulcan's. We are emotional creatures that can sometimes, when pushed to an extreme, react in a manner that we would normally never consider, and very much regret after the fact. It happens. It's not a very nice thing, but it's reality.

 

[Rairun]

My first husband used to hit me.

That said, I can't imagine how to answer the question. Every time I think about it, and try to think critically about it, I just see the blood. There's got to be a logical, mature, rational answer.

Damned if I know what it is.

I still think that the most logical answer is that your husband wasn't "hitting a woman." He was hitting you, an individual like everyone else. It's a horrible thing, and I'm sorry it happened. I don't think anyone here thinks abuse is okay.

I think a better question would be, "would it be okay for you to have reacted if you could?" I think it would. And that's exactly why I think it's justifiable for men to hit women sometimes. Women can be violent too, and it's not fair to expect a male victim to shut up and take it. No one should be expected to do that.

 

[MattC]

ETA: For future reference, reality is not an FPS game.

Then why is there so much delay when I'm drunk?

~ Matt

 

[arthwollipot]

I would, and have, hit women. In the head. With a sword.

 

[Roboramma]

I would, and have, hit women. In the head. With a sword.

You are the only person who could possibly get away with that post.

 

[Skeptic]

Men, being stronger and larger than women, are -- quite correctly -- usually taught that while violence in general is bad, hitting women (and children) is particularly to be frowned upon as a cowardly and unmanly act. There are of course exceptions, life and death situations -- say, a woman is going to attack you with a gun, etc. -- but I don't think that's the point of Eyeron's question.

His point is this, I think: there are many daily-occurring situations where a man probably would hit another man. Do you think that, in some of those situations, hitting a woman would be justifiable? The old gentlemany answer was, "no, never". I don't think that's bad. I think it is in fact better than the claimed "it won't matter to me if it's a man or a woman" indifference expressed by some people here. I don't think the people here who are shouting for "equality" in the treatment of men and women in this case thought it through.

Suppose you are a man, and a woman shouted at you with "fighting words", telling you what a worthless piece of scum you are. Or suppose a woman slapped, or attacked you with her fists, or threw her drink in your face. If a man did that, you'd hit them back, probably trying to knock them out. But if a woman did that, I hope and trust most men here would control themselves and not do that. They would perhaps try to restrain the woman from hitting them again (say, by holding her hands), but I trust they won't punch her in the face and knock her out.

What's more, I would be deeply suspicious of someone whom I see punching a woman and knocking her flat, and then saying, "well, she attacked me first, and if she were a man you wouldn't think it's wrong". Even if -- technically -- they are correct, I would think such a man as cowardly, of not acting like men should. Men should, within reason, prefer not hitting back women even if they are hit first, and should attempt to restrain, not hit back, their assailant.

(Again, there ARE of course exceptions and extreme cases -- I am presuming we are not dealing with extreme circumstances where punching the woman is the only way to avoid grave bodily harm to yourself or others, etc. I mean in the typical case.)

 

[Professor Yaffle]

I believe in using only as much violence as I have to, to defend myself, or another person. It wouldn't matter to me what the gender of the other person was.

Actually I'm quite amazed at some of the responses to this thread; I thought the vast majority of people would see it as a dumb question, like I did.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

Suppose you are a man, and a woman shouted at you with "fighting words", telling you what a worthless piece of scum you are. Or suppose a woman slapped, or attacked you with her fists, or threw her drink in your face. If a man did that, you'd hit them back, probably trying to knock them out. But if a woman did that, I hope and trust most men here would control themselves and not do that. They would perhaps try to restrain the woman from hitting them again (say, by holding her hands), but I trust they won't punch her in the face and knock her out.

Perhaps you might like to rephrase that. I'd suggest changing the you to an I. Wouldn't want to make any assumptions about how other people here would react in those situations, would you?

 

[shawmutt]

Actually I'm quite amazed at some of the responses to this thread; I thought the vast majority of people would see it as a dumb question, like I did.

I think most did, which explains all the silly answers.

 

[brodski]

Men, being stronger and larger than women, are -- quite correctly -- usually taught that while violence in general is bad, hitting women (and children) is particularly to be frowned upon as a cowardly and unmanly act.

If this is your argument then shurely the size/ strength of the other person is more important than their gender?

Or is it OK to hit someone who is smaller and weaker than you if you happen to have matching genitalia?

 

[TragicMonkey]

Yes this is absolutely ideal but we are not Vulcan's. We are emotional creatures that can sometimes, when pushed to an extreme, react in a manner that we would normally never consider, and very much regret after the fact. It happens. It's not a very nice thing, but it's reality.

Oh, I wasn't arguing against physical violence on the grounds that it's bad. I was arguing that it's less effective, in the long run, than verbal nastiness.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Then why is there so much delay when I'm drunk?

~ Matt

Upgrade to a FIOS connection

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Men, being stronger and larger than women, are -- quite correctly -- usually taught that while violence in general is bad, hitting women (and children) is particularly to be frowned upon as a cowardly and unmanly act. There are of course exceptions, life and death situations -- say, a woman is going to attack you with a gun, etc. -- but I don't think that's the point of Eyeron's question.

His point is this, I think: there are many daily-occurring situations where a man probably would hit another man. Do you think that, in some of those situations, hitting a woman would be justifiable? The old gentlemany answer was, "no, never". I don't think that's bad. I think it is in fact better than the claimed "it won't matter to me if it's a man or a woman" indifference expressed by some people here. I don't think the people here who are shouting for "equality" in the treatment of men and women in this case thought it through.

Suppose you are a man, and a woman shouted at you with "fighting words", telling you what a worthless piece of scum you are. Or suppose a woman slapped, or attacked you with her fists, or threw her drink in your face. If a man did that, you'd hit them back, probably trying to knock them out. But if a woman did that, I hope and trust most men here would control themselves and not do that. They would perhaps try to restrain the woman from hitting them again (say, by holding her hands), but I trust they won't punch her in the face and knock her out.

What's more, I would be deeply suspicious of someone whom I see punching a woman and knocking her flat, and then saying, "well, she attacked me first, and if she were a man you wouldn't think it's wrong". Even if -- technically -- they are correct, I would think such a man as cowardly, of not acting like men should. Men should, within reason, prefer not hitting back women even if they are hit first, and should attempt to restrain, not hit back, their assailant.

(Again, there ARE of course exceptions and extreme cases -- I am presuming we are not dealing with extreme circumstances where punching the woman is the only way to avoid grave bodily harm to yourself or others, etc. I mean in the typical case.)

And sexism rears it's ugly head yet again in this thread

If anyone (that's key) thinks he/she/it is man enough to step up and hit me, then he/she/it had better believe she/he/it's man enough (ETA: ahh, and there's more covert sexism... stereotyping men and so forth) to take a hit back.

Not saying I'm going to hit back (see my previous post), but don't think that because someone's smaller than me he/she/it has the right to hit me and get away with it.

Women either want to be equal, or they don't. None of this "equal sexes, but ours is more equal than yours" crap.

Men and women should not abuse others. Period.

The claim that using a vagina to get out of a physical situation she instigated is fair is hardly an enlightened response.

 

[qayak]

His point is this, I think: there are many daily-occurring situations where a man probably would hit another man.

Really? I have gone a couple of years without such an occurance. In whose life is this a "daily" thing?

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Men, being stronger and larger than women, are -- quite correctly -- usually taught that while violence in general is bad, hitting women (and children) is particularly to be frowned upon as a cowardly and unmanly act. There are of course exceptions, life and death situations -- say, a woman is going to attack you with a gun, etc. -- but I don't think that's the point of Eyeron's question.

His point is this, I think: there are many daily-occurring situations where a man probably would hit another man. Do you think that, in some of those situations, hitting a woman would be justifiable? The old gentlemany answer was, "no, never". I don't think that's bad. I think it is in fact better than the claimed "it won't matter to me if it's a man or a woman" indifference expressed by some people here. I don't think the people here who are shouting for "equality" in the treatment of men and women in this case thought it through.

Suppose you are a man, and a woman shouted at you with "fighting words", telling you what a worthless piece of scum you are. Or suppose a woman slapped, or attacked you with her fists, or threw her drink in your face. If a man did that, you'd hit them back, probably trying to knock them out. But if a woman did that, I hope and trust most men here would control themselves and not do that. They would perhaps try to restrain the woman from hitting them again (say, by holding her hands), but I trust they won't punch her in the face and knock her out.

What's more, I would be deeply suspicious of someone whom I see punching a woman and knocking her flat, and then saying, "well, she attacked me first, and if she were a man you wouldn't think it's wrong". Even if -- technically -- they are correct, I would think such a man as cowardly, of not acting like men should. Men should, within reason, prefer not hitting back women even if they are hit first, and should attempt to restrain, not hit back, their assailant.

(Again, there ARE of course exceptions and extreme cases -- I am presuming we are not dealing with extreme circumstances where punching the woman is the only way to avoid grave bodily harm to yourself or others, etc. I mean in the typical case.)

This is the correct answer.

 

[Thunder]

I would, and have, hit women. In the head. With a sword.

tridents are great for three on one action.

 

[qayak]

I work with a young guy who is attending court ordered anger management classes. His ex-girlfriend says he hit her, he says he didn't touch her, that she is just angry because he dumped her. Whatever the case, it isn't the point of this post.

The point is that he was at one class where a guy was going off about his GF pissing him off and that he felt it was completely reasonable to slap her around.

The counsellor's response was "You shouldn't do that because it is the type of behaviour that lands you here."

The young guy said to me, "And all this time I thought you weren't supposed to hit people because it was wrong when really, you aren't supposed to hit them because you will end up in anger management classes!"

I bet if you check the counsellor's credentials you would find a long history of violence followed by a brief course on counselling . . . and now they get to "teach" others!

 

[slingblade]

I still think that the most logical answer is that your husband wasn't "hitting a woman." He was hitting you, an individual like everyone else. It's a horrible thing, and I'm sorry it happened. I don't think anyone here thinks abuse is okay.

I think a better question would be, "would it be okay for you to have reacted if you could?" I think it would. And that's exactly why I think it's justifiable for men to hit women sometimes. Women can be violent too, and it's not fair to expect a male victim to shut up and take it. No one should be expected to do that.

I agree.

The way the question was phrased, I figured the OP wanted an answer of that nature, and since I can provide it, I did. I don't know why he or she would want such an answer, or would ask such a question, but there it is.

ETA: by the way, Eyeron, "just a slap" can fracture one's nose. Ask me how I know.