off topic Buffalo Bills 2015

[TrueBlueGED]

Yes and yes. I can understand the scenario of a girl slaps a guy and a guy slaps her back. Imo both are in the wrong.

 

That's not the case here though at all

To be honest, I think men (mostly due to the typical size and strength differential) have an additional responsibility to exercise restraint even if they are slapped, so that wouldn't excise this incident. Provocation, even of the physical nature, does not justify assault. But I stand by my general point about how this stuff is viewed differently depending upon the gender of the victim.

 

Edit: this is not a conversation to engage in while otherwise occupied. I'm quite far behind now. Will rejoin while eating lunch.

Edited July 7, 2015 by TrueBluePhD

[The Dominator]

No, you're pretty spot on here aside from using Stephen A. Smith as a quote machine here. He lost the benefit of the doubt long ago when he insulted those that insinuated that Floyd Mayweather is a domestic abuser. Floyd Mayweather deserves to be knocked off this pedestal but won't be. Along with many other athletes that we do or don't know about.

 

I mostly used him since he is a prominent figure who was suspended from his job for making the same argument I just made (maybe he could have worded it better, I don't know). I figured other posters know him and the incident that occurred with him on this topic. There's no doubt that Mayweather is pond scum 

[That Aud Smell]

The conversation needs to happen. It's funny, I think back to what Stephen A. Smith said on First Take about domestic violence in general and how badly his words were altered...

 

He goes on to reiterate it is never right to put your hands on a female for any reason. I think there is a valid point in his words that people turned into "It's alright to hit women if they start an argument".  What I got from his commentary was 1. It's never ok to hit a female. Ever. 2. Females, PROTECT YOURSELF. I don't want to get injured in a car accident so I wear a seat belt. I don't want to fall off a cliff so I keep my distance from the edge. Male or female, if I don't want to start a physical altercation, I don't put my hand in someone's face or push them or throw my drink on them. I wear a seat belt, I stay clear of cliff edges, and I use my words if a verbal altercation arises. Am I wrong in my line of thinking?

 

Stephen A. Smith is a bloviating idiot who speaks non-stop in the 24-hour news cycle, and in so doing, once said that part of the story in the Ray Rice scandal was the under-reported fact that there are women who provoke men into acts of violence. No one altered his words. He said it. I won't cut and paste his stream of consciousness logorrhoea here because I don't think those words warrant re-publishing. 

 

Did anyone watch the video?  I did.  

 

I just won't.

[The Dominator]

Stephen A. Smith is a bloviating idiot who speaks non-stop in the 24-hour news cycle, and in so doing, once said that part of the story in the Ray Rice scandal was the under-reported fact that there are women who provoke men into acts of violence. No one altered his words. He said it. I won't cut and paste his stream of consciousness logorrhoea here because I don't think those words warrant re-publishing. 

 

 

I just won't.

 

I didn't think he was speaking to the Ray Rice case specifically when I watched the show initially. I thought he was speaking towards domestic violence in general after the Ray Rice case came to the public's attention. I could be wrong and maybe I morphed his words to coincide with my own argument (it very well may be the case). Of course, there's no defending Ray Rice or the FSU QB. I sure am not trying to defend them or any other offender. 

[TrueBlueGED]

Maybe this should move to the politics thread, but I disagree. The fact of the matter is that men are, in almost every case, the physically dominant "opponent." Men need to show restraint.

The only situation where there is a need to retaliate is when there is a legitimate fear of physical danger or death. A slap or even a punch does not present this. Either move away and call the police and/or attempt to restrain the woman. If weapons are involved it changes, but a simple use of the hands is nothing and does not call for retaliation.

 

Note that I did not say that there should not be consequences when a woman attacks or hits a man. I'm saying that the consequence shouldn't be the man resulting to physical harm in return. The law should be more competent in handling these situations.

Agreed on all counts. The last little bit is what I was trying to get, only from a media/social perspective rather than a legal one (I'm not knowledgeable enough about the law here to know if it's a problem, or if people are the problem).

[Johnny DangerFace]

Maybe this should move to the politics thread, but I disagree. The fact of the matter is that men are, in almost every case, the physically dominant "opponent." Men need to show restraint.

The only situation where there is a need to retaliate is when there is a legitimate fear of physical danger or death. A slap or even a punch does not present this. Either move away and call the police and/or attempt to restrain the woman. If weapons are involved it changes, but a simple use of the hands is nothing and does not call for retaliation.

 

Note that I did not say that there should not be consequences when a woman attacks or hits a man. I'm saying that the consequence shouldn't be the man resulting to physical harm in return. The law should be more competent in handling these situations.

I don't think either are okay or warranted. A slap or pinch that does harm is especially wrong. My opinion though is if a girl slaps a guy, and the guy slaps her back equally hard, it's not the craziest event, and I don't think the guy is any more culpable. I'm on my phone and busy but want to type more after because it's an interesting topic for sure.

[TrueBlueGED]

Any such conversation would require real delicacy and depth of thought. Off the cuff, I'm thinking of stuff like how one side of the gender equation has a history of subjugation that the other does not; how, for every 100 deaths arising from domestic violence, something like 95 of them will involve a woman as the victim. I don't know that a gender-neutral approach to the matter is one I would endorse.

 

But, it is an interesting issue.

I don't disagree with any of this. I'm not entirely sure how to express in typed words what I'm trying to get at in general terms, so I'll use an example and hope the point comes through. Slava Voynov gets suspended for the year to allow the legal process to play out and facts to come to light (right decision by the NHL) and when the Kings let him skate with the team, they were heavily criticized (rightfully so, I might add). Hope Solo, meanwhile, is welcomed with open arms as the starting goaltender for the World Cup team, and no real attention is drawn to her domestic abuse case. Aside from an Outside the Lines report, has there been even a murmur of this? If she were a man, I have a pretty hard time believing it wouldn't have been a subject of conversation. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't see it. She's being celebrated now, and may very well have beaten a teenage boy. I think that's a problem. Here's a link to the story: http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12976615/detailed-look-hope-solo-domestic-violence-case-includes-reports-being-belligerent-jail

 

Circling back to what Hoss said, I think were really bad at dealing with instances where the aggressor is a woman. I think the Hope Solo thing has been totally swept under the rug because of it, and I really not comfortable with it. Thinking through it the question I end up having is this: is media coverage and apparent societal concern so minimal because instances such as this are so rare, or do we (perhaps unknowingly) psychologically think of it differently or less seriously because of the gender of the offender? If it's the former that's certainly understandable (though not entirely justifiable), but if it's the latter, then I think it has to be addressed. I just don't know.

I didn't think he was speaking to the Ray Rice case specifically when I watched the show initially. I thought he was speaking towards domestic violence in general after the Ray Rice case came to the public's attention. I could be wrong and maybe I morphed his words to coincide with my own argument (it very well may be the case). Of course, there's no defending Ray Rice or the FSU QB. I sure am not trying to defend them or any other offender.

When I saw what Stephen A. Smith said, I thought the implication was clear and went beyond the literal words: sometimes women have it coming. He was socially conscious enough to know he couldn't actually say that so he adamantly repeated it's never okay to hit a woman, but I thought he was clearly blaming the victim. Maybe my low opinion of him and that show colored my interpretation of this, but I thought it was obvious. It's sort of like the crazy guy on Ancient Aliens who always days "I'm not saying aliens did it" when everything he says points to him believing aliens did it.

 

Edit: exuse the numerous typos, I hate making long posts from my phone.

Edited July 7, 2015 by TrueBluePhD

[Hoss]

I don't think either are okay or warranted. A slap or pinch that does harm is especially wrong. My opinion though is if a girl slaps a guy, and the guy slaps her back equally hard, it's not the craziest event, and I don't think the guy is any more culpable. I'm on my phone and busy but want to type more after because it's an interesting topic for sure.

I'm never in favor of an eye for an eye. Add in the fact that your every day man is most likely incapable of properly estimating their strength and the damage their slap could do compared to a woman's. It's be more like an eye for an arm in comparison.

 

The most physical I'm willing to agree with is possibly shoving a woman away from you when they are attacking you, but it needs to be controlled and aware of your surroundings. Which again brings up the issue of men not being able to estimate themselves.

[The Dominator]

When I saw what Stephen A. Smith said, I thought the implication was clear and went beyond the literal words: sometimes women have it coming. He was socially conscious enough to know he couldn't actually say that so he adamantly repeated it's never okay to hit a woman, but I thought he was clearly blaming the victim. Maybe my low opinion of him and that show colored my interpretation of this, but I thought it was obvious. It's sort of like the crazy guy on Ancient Aliens who always days "I'm not saying aliens did it" when everything he says points to him believing aliens did it.

 

Like I said, I probably interpreted it in the way I wanted it to be convened. He very well could have, and probably was, pushing the agenda you mentioned above. I like having this conversation (not that I like the topic) because it needs to be had.

[Johnny DangerFace]

I'm never in favor of an eye for an eye. Add in the fact that your every day man is most likely incapable of properly estimating their strength and the damage their slap could do compared to a woman's. It's be more like an eye for an arm in comparison.

 

The most physical I'm willing to agree with is possibly shoving a woman away from you when they are attacking you, but it needs to be controlled and aware of your surroundings. Which again brings up the issue of men not being able to estimate themselves.

Hmm I don't think I'm really arguing my point. I'm not for slapping someone back as punishment, or as an acceptable thing to do. My point is that I understand a couple who both slap each other and I can chalk that up to a domestic situation where both parties are in the wrong and the male doesn't need to be crucified.

 

I think female on male violence isn't talked about in the same way because it's so rare. I think it should be talked about in a better way, but I think it's low priority. Also if the male ever hits her back harder than she did, then this defense goes out the window.

 

I think hitting anyone is wrong, and retaliating is a tough impulsive situation. If it's a girl, your best bet is to walk away, push them off, or try to restrain them. Slapping or punching is no bueno.

 

and this video is none of those situations. That guy is an asshat

 

 

Edit: it's a touchy subject, and a point to argue. My main original point was if a girl slaps a guy, and the guy slaps her back, then I won't be quick to judge the guy necessarily. It's not that the girl deserves it, it's that it can be a situation.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Johnny DangerFace

[shrader]

I've got random thoughts to add but I really do think this whole thing needs to be moved out of this thread.

[Johnny DangerFace]

I've got random thoughts to add but I really do think this whole thing needs to be moved out of this thread.

Mods can split it if they want. No biggie

[LGR4GM]

Ronald Darby:

""What I want to know is whats happening to the girl that clearly hit De'andre first? It's never right to hit a girl at all," the former Seminole said in the first of a series of tweets Tuesday. 

"But they have to get some kind of consequence as well . Yall can't keep letting females provoke guys in all ways then walk free. Like ?" Darby tweeted two minutes later. The tweets were later deleted.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13215142/ronald-darby-buffalo-bills-sounds-incident-related-deandre-johnson

[That Aud Smell]

Ronald Darby:

""What I want to know is whats happening to the girl that clearly hit De'andre first? It's never right to hit a girl at all," the former Seminole said in the first of a series of tweets Tuesday. 

"But they have to get some kind of consequence as well . Yall can't keep letting females provoke guys in all ways then walk free. Like ?" Darby tweeted two minutes later. The tweets were later deleted.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13215142/ronald-darby-buffalo-bills-sounds-incident-related-deandre-johnson

 

[shrader]

This whole thing is stupid.  Why do we need to generalize all of these situations.  It's not ok to hit a woman.  It's not ok to hit a man.  It's not ok to hit a Luke Adam.  It's not ok to hit a robot Richard Simmons.  It's not ok to hit anyone.

[That Aud Smell]

This whole thing is stupid.  Why do we need to generalize all of these situations.  It's not ok to hit a woman.  It's not ok to hit a man.  It's not ok to hit a Luke Adam.  It's not ok to hit a robot Richard Simmons.  It's not ok to hit anyone.

 

No YOU'RE stupid.

 

More seriously: Hitting isn't okay. But some hitting is less okay than other hitting. Some of it is a LOT less okay.

[shrader]

No YOU'RE stupid.

 

More seriously: Hitting isn't okay. But some hitting is less okay than other hitting. Some of it is a LOT less okay.

 

Whether that was a man or a woman in that video, it is no different to me (go ahead and watch it, it's tame).  Either way, both people are in the wrong.  In this day in age where everyone is pushing for equality, these things can be judged selectively.  We all need to live by the same standards.

 

And as for the earlier stuff about how we don't quite know how to handle situations where it isn't a man hitting a woman, public opinion is also going to have to figure out how to deal male on male and female on female domestic abuse.  I know there's currently a WNBA domestic abuse story out there that most probably aren't even aware of since it isn't a ratings driving scenario.

[LastPommerFan]

I don't disagree with any of this. I'm not entirely sure how to express in typed words what I'm trying to get at in general terms, so I'll use an example and hope the point comes through. Slava Voynov gets suspended for the year to allow the legal process to play out and facts to come to light (right decision by the NHL) and when the Kings let him skate with the team, they were heavily criticized (rightfully so, I might add). Hope Solo, meanwhile, is welcomed with open arms as the starting goaltender for the World Cup team, and no real attention is drawn to her domestic abuse case. Aside from an Outside the Lines report, has there been even a murmur of this? If she were a man, I have a pretty hard time believing it wouldn't have been a subject of conversation. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't see it. She's being celebrated now, and may very well have beaten a teenage boy. I think that's a problem. Here's a link to the story: http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12976615/detailed-look-hope-solo-domestic-violence-case-includes-reports-being-belligerent-jail

 

 

I have a theory that we minimize these instances because we are unwilling to grant that women have the power to do damage to men. Same theory applies to teacher-student sex crimes. 

 

(we = patriarchal society in general)

[That Aud Smell]

Thinking through it the question I end up having is this: is media coverage and apparent societal concern so minimal because instances such as this are so rare, or do we (perhaps unknowingly) psychologically think of it differently or less seriously because of the gender of the offender? If it's the former that's certainly understandable (though not entirely justifiable), but if it's the latter, then I think it has to be addressed. I just don't know.

 

I think it's both, and there's more to it than those two factors. Woman-on-man D.V. is less common than man-on-woman, and the former variety tends to strike most people as a different and less pressing problem than the sort of domestic violence that men, as a group, inflict on women, as a group.

 

I don't know the details of what went down with Hope Solo - I read a little bit about it, but didn't retain any memory of anything other than an impression that she needs to lay off the sauce and get some counseling.

 

Fact of the matter is: Hope launching some sort of hay-maker on a male high school aged cousin (uncle? brother? half-brother?) does not get viewed against the same backdrop that a male-on-female scenario would. That's because the incidents have different backdrops. They do.  

 

Whether that was a man or a woman in that video, it is no different to me (go ahead and watch it, it's tame).  Either way, both people are in the wrong.  In this day in age where everyone is pushing for equality, these things can be judged selectively.  We all need to live by the same standards.

 

And as for the earlier stuff about how we don't quite know how to handle situations where it isn't a man hitting a woman, public opinion is also going to have to figure out how to deal male on male and female on female domestic abuse.  I know there's currently a WNBA domestic abuse story out there that most probably aren't even aware of since it isn't a ratings driving scenario.

 

I did watch it - someone put it somewhere else as a .GIF that was just playing automatically. Awful.

 

I respect your view on the matter. For my part, I don't see this sort of violence in a gender neutral vacuum.

 

Also, I now appreciate the extent to which this was not domestic violence of any kind -- this was barroom violence. Stupid and sloppy and terrible.

 

 

I have a theory that we minimize these instances because we are unwilling to grant that women have the power to do damage to men. Same theory applies to teacher-student sex crimes. 

 

I have a theory that we tend to minimize female-on-male incidents of violence because they don't happen nearly as often, tend not to inflict the same level of corporal harm, and don't proceed from a history of treating men as chattel property for 1000s of years.

[shrader]

You're right smell (oh wait, I thought o was going to start calling you The). There's a whole lot of stupid going on in that video.

[spndnchz]

U hit me and I'm pulling my black belt on ur ass

[Robviously]

This whole thing is stupid.  Why do we need to generalize all of these situations.  It's not ok to hit a woman.  It's not ok to hit a man.  It's not ok to hit a Luke Adam.  It's not ok to hit a robot Richard Simmons.  It's not ok to hit anyone.

It's DEFINITELY OK to hit robot Richard Simmons. I don't want to live in a country where these Richard Simmons robots are walking around stealing our jobs and just taking over with jazzercise. that.

[IKnowPhysics]

No jazzercisebot is going to steal my jerb.

 

Smash all the compu

[That Aud Smell]

Ha-HA!

[shrader]

It's DEFINITELY OK to hit robot Richard Simmons. I don't want to live in a country where these ###### Richard Simmons robots are walking around stealing our jobs and just taking over with jazzercise. ###### that.

 

What about a robot Joan Rivers?

 

Yes, all of you now know what I watched this weekend.