Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Men can now if it's self defense. But it must be "reasonable" just like the standard for cops. If a 340 pound NFL offensive lineman punches a 100 lb woman and knocks her out because she slapped him....that's not self defense. But...her slapping him IS ASSAULT and she should be charged if he wants to press charges.
In reality this shouldn't even be a question. It comes down to situational evidence, human against human, and not about gender. Why should a woman have a "right" to hit a man but not visa versa?
Morally it's different, as has been mentioned above real men don't hit woman. I agree with this simply on the overall standard of a man's general physical ability to overpower a female. But of course if I went to hit Ronda Rousey I'd just end up in the hospital and that man over woman theory would be dispelled.
If a women slaps or punches a man, should he be allowed to hit her back? I personally think that he should be able to because he has every right to defend himself from getting hurt. He should not get arrested for hitting a girl back. Do you see a girls getting arrested when they hit a guy? Probably not, right?
Women are not above the law when it comes to assaulting a man. If there is ample evidence that a man acted in self-defense, the man is not likely to be arrested in such a scenario. In fact, if a woman is the aggressor and physically attacks the man, not only is the man legally justified in responding with an appropriate amount of force, but moreover, he can have her arrested, at least in theory.
This said, as a woman, the men in my life will never hit (like punch, kick, pull their hair, etc) a woman physically under any circumstances. If the woman had a gun pointing at them, that is another story. If the woman just being a biotch, these men just walk away. If this is double standard, oh well..
Everybody has a right to defend themselves against anyone. But, if a man is attacked by a woman, he should be careful to not use more force than absolutely necessary -- think restraining hold rather than striking -- or he may find himself cast as the bad guy. That could also happen in the case of two men fighting if one hits harder than the other; but in a male/female fight most people will immediately assume the male is the aggressor. Not fair, but that's how it is.
If government should be allowed to use violence, aggression, and coercion against both men and women, why should it be different for anyone in society? We live in a system of initiations of force by thug government to impose the will of one upon another. So "legally" sure, why not? Violence, aggression, and coercion are the foundation of our "society".
Personally, I only believe that retaliatory force is just. And that retaliatory force should only applied enough to stop an act of aggression and to return the victim to the state prior to the aggression if possible. And that standard should apply to both women, men, AND government. No person, group, or government ever has a right to initiate force upon any person, group, or government for any reason.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
