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.
So, ESPN's Stephen Smith made some controversial comments on domestic violence. As a victim advocate, and one who has little faith in the media to report the facts as they stand, I read as many articles on the matter as I could. He made valid points, but it is a sensitive topic and, sometimes, people only hear what they want to hear. Still, he seems to have a history of inappropriate comments on the matter. So, it's really hard to determine where he really stands. I still think there is value to what he said, after reading his now deleted tweets, along with the his original statements. ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith deletes tweets on domestic abuse and ‘provoking the wrong actions’ | Twitchy . But it strays from the point.
Whoopi took it up a notch, but she's not really in tune with what abuse actually means, it seems, either. 1) Prevention - we shouldn't assume a man won't hit us back. So it's best not to hit them. Makes sense, but it's really not the issue. 2) If you know a man has a propensity for violence, don't do anything to enrage him. Truth. And some women will. But, by and large, abusers don't require us to verbally, emotionally or physically assault them in order to do the same. That is what makes it abuse. And that is why the word "provoke", in this arena, sets so many people off.
There are scumbags out there that hit women and abuse.
Then there are overly aggressive women who hit their men and verbally and emotionally abuse them and cry victim when the cops show up. It's a shame that the men still get strung up in these situations for minor self defense.
His premise though was correct he wasn't condoning hitting women he was saying to women that If you provoke the wrong dude the consequences could be severe so don't assume that no man will attack you no matter what you do..
His premise though was correct he wasn't condoning hitting women he was saying to women that If you provoke the wrong dude the consequences could be severe so don't assume that no man will attack you no matter what you do..
Huh? Janay Rice is alive and well. And at the end of the video, she was getting up. Certainly not "lifeless".
So, ESPN's Stephen Smith made some controversial comments on domestic violence. As a victim advocate, and one who has little faith in the media to report the facts as they stand, I read as many articles on the matter as I could. He made valid points, but it is a sensitive topic and, sometimes, people only hear what they want to hear. Still, he seems to have a history of inappropriate comments on the matter. So, it's really hard to determine where he really stands. I still think there is value to what he said, after reading his now deleted tweets, along with the his original statements. ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith deletes tweets on domestic abuse and ‘provoking the wrong actions’ | Twitchy . But it strays from the point.
Whoopi took it up a notch, but she's not really in tune with what abuse actually means, it seems, either. 1) Prevention - we shouldn't assume a man won't hit us back. So it's best not to hit them. Makes sense, but it's really not the issue. 2) If you know a man has a propensity for violence, don't do anything to enrage him. Truth. And some women will. But, by and large, abusers don't require us to verbally, emotionally or physically assault them in order to do the same. That is what makes it abuse. And that is why the word "provoke", in this arena, sets so many people off.
Thoughts?
Hard to decipher knowing that what's said in mass media can easily be misconstrued when taken out of context.
IMO, I think this was the case. Sorta like public smearing, anyone can say anything and omit any kind of evidence and twist words around.
Then there are overly aggressive women who hit their men and verbally and emotionally abuse them and cry victim when the cops show up. It's a shame that the men still get strung up in these situations for minor self defense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyTrippn
This.
Too many women think there is this invisible shield around them. Having a vagina does not give you the right to throw drinks in peoples faces, hit men, and abuse men without consequence.
This is true. But it strays from the point. It seems Whoopi and Stephen, while correct in their assertions, don't seem to get that they don't apply to abuse. As rational people, we tend to want to make sense of it all, find some reasonable explanation, offer up a rational solution. Abuse simply doesn't make sense.
Don't hit anyone and you won't have to worry about them hitting you back. Duh. It doesn't apply to the man/woman who hits his/her partner just because they can.
Don't provoke an abusive man by hitting him. Duh. I can assure you that a batterer is not likely to be with a woman who would. And a woman who is truly afraid of her abuser wouldn't. So, this is offensive to those who have actually endured abuse.
Sure, there are people in relationships where they are both abusive and feed off of one another. Those are not really the norm.
Quote:
For everyone's saftey, we need to stop brushing off violent women as nothing. Hell there was a recent thread about some woman smacking and punching her boyfriend and instead of addressing that, most posters either blamed the man or wanted to look at the underlying issues. If he wasn't a better person, that woman could have been messed up pretty good. It would have been her fault and he would have went to jail.
I don't know which thread you're referring to, but what is wrong with wanting to look at the underlying issues? Why wouldn't you want all the information you could possibly get so you can make an informed judgment/decision?
Ongoing emotional and verbal abuse can make people snap. Not sure that this was or wasn't the case. Just putting that out there.
Quote:
I honestly think if more men weren't afraid to report violent wives and girlfriends, we'd actually see less violence against women. As more women get in trouble for being violent, I think less will provoke the wrong guy by hitting them and abusing them thinking they are immune to punishment.
Hmmmm, I dunno. We might see more violence against men in the data, and we should. But I doubt that violence against women would decrease because of it. A lot of women don't report it either.
My crazy ex GF used to freely hit me. One time I was sleeping in my bed and she slapped the **** out of my face. Instinctively, I almost lost it on her. Once I gathered my wits about what was going on, I cooled down and asked her to leave. Terrible, terrible experience with her.
Abuse should not be tolerated with either party (male or female), but I also believe that it should not be retaliated against with more violence. Get the police involved if need be, because any scum who's willing to hit you (an alleged loved one) is not worth going to jail for.
The fact that there is so much out rage and politically correct pressure against these types of statements does women a disservice. It discourages them having to be vigilant about their own safety. Nobody is "condoning" anything.
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.
