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.
I would also say I cant think of any circumstance where you should go on the offence with a woman, even in a bar with some floozy and other chodes standing around if you go on the offence the chodes are likely to white knight on you even if its your own woman arguing about a personal matter in a public place.
There is no upside to hitting a woman.
I suppose the only exception would be if you have reasonable suspicion that she will produce a leathal weapon to escalate the violence. If I see someone run to their glove box or reach in their purse then the game changes, I may even draw myself and now things just got really ugly and someone is likely going to die.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BD1978
Yes I agree, but it must be self defense. Once you've restrained the other person, if you go on the offensive and start hitting them, you're in the wrong.
She didn't say that
You have a very annoying habit of putting words into other people's mouths. Other than being annoying, it makes you appear as though you lack basic comprehension skills.
That's exactly what she is implying though, whether you want to see it or not
My point is that not all people are equally as strong. I'm not discounting the fact that there are some women out there that can kick some serious butt. However, I do not think that slapping someone twice your size is the same as punching someone in the fact that is half your size. That's all I'm saying.
This logic is silly and holds no water if both persons are men.
If a smaller man walked up to a bouncer and slapped the crap out of him, then got his face smashed, everyone would say he had it coming.
I don't even know why men continue to go to clubs, it is extremely antagonistic to men and in my state you cant have a consealed weapon in a bar or club. Plus if you shoot someone who is unarmed but significantly bigger than you who comes at you, you are in a legal grey area with tons of witnesses.
Liberals don't need to ban guns they just need to make the self defense laws draconian enough so that its a liability to carry one. All that will do is reduce the shootings that are reported and result in more unregistered silencers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anoninternetguy
This logic is silly and holds no water if both persons are men.
If a smaller man walked up to a bouncer and slapped the crap out of him, then got his face smashed, everyone would say he had it coming.
This logic is silly and holds no water if both persons are men.
If a smaller man walked up to a bouncer and slapped the crap out of him, then got his face smashed, everyone would say he had it coming.
My point is that a man going up to another man and hitting him KNOWS that he is going to have a fight on his hands. I think that some of the women that slap or hit men do not expect a fight. So I would say that it is probably a rarer occurrence for a small man to walk up to someone twice his size and hit him because he knows he's probably going to get his butt kicked.
I'm not addressing whether or not someone "has it coming" to them.
My point is that a man going up to another man and hitting him KNOWS that he is going to have a fight on his hands. I think that some of the women that slap or hit men do not expect a fight. So I would say that it is probably a rarer occurrence for a small man to walk up to someone twice his size and hit him because he knows he's probably going to get his butt kicked.
I'm not addressing whether or not someone "has it coming" to them.
Personally, I think this is a problem. Anybody who strikes someone else should expect retaliation, regardless of gender. Even if you're willing to overlook "cultural correctness", this is a safety issue. Striking someone larger that you is dumb. I mean, striking anyone is dumb, but the magnitude of stupidity escalates when the threat of the other person is increased (by being larger, for example)
Personally, I think this is a problem. Anybody who strikes someone else should expect retaliation, regardless of gender. Even if you're willing to overlook "cultural correctness", this is a safety issue. Striking someone larger that you is dumb. I mean, striking anyone is dumb, but the magnitude of stupidity escalates when the threat of the other person is increased (by being larger, for example)
I don't think ANYONE should hit ANYONE. I think I made that clear in my first post.
I never suggested otherwise. I think I made that clear in my post.
No, you didn't. And I felt the need to point that out again. I hate any sort of violence and never think that striking someone is okay. By explaining why I think things occur - I'm in no way endorsing anything.
Before you go on about our semantics - I felt the need to point this out for other posters. We don't need to go on and on about this.
There comes a point in time when we have to go beyond "acceptable or not". We have to understand the root and the varying factors that contribute to these actions- not whether or not it is acceptable.
But now, it comes to a point where we go no further because most people discussing don't have social/psychological analysis backgrounds, which is understandable. And even so, those with such backgrounds mostly live on paper based on what they've read, not real world.
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.
