A little off topic here but did you people know Navjot Singh Sidhu has killed a person with a punch??
Fair enough - sorry to get so pi$$ed off. But some of the hyperbole (why, oh why, do we on the left abuse the term misogyny so badly???) directed at Richard was OTT, in my opinion. Even though I disagree that a one-off slap necessitates a physical response, I do think that we have strange blanket notions of what's understandable and what isn't, and I think many of these arguments are based on prejudicial ideas and yes, non-sequiturs. For example, "I'd never hit a woman, under any circumstances" or PY's acknowledgement that there are exceptions to the rule, but he wouldn't make any exceptions for the exceptions. It's irrational.Originally Posted by BoyBrumby
For the record though, if the above comments were directed towards me, I don't think I accused you of advocating violence towards men by women. I do think many people afford it little seriousness though, and an attempt by a man to actually seek action for physical abuse by a woman (no matter what the circumstances) would often likely be met with chortles.
I also think that some of what's going on in this thread is repeated chasing of Richard from thread to thread (not by you, and the following comments aren't directed towards you) and I find it annoying. Though I find many of Richard's theories about the game bizarre, I think there are way, WAY more offensive people posting at this forum who don't get constantly harrassed in the same way, and if I disliked someone that much, I'd probably ignore them.
"Youre known for having a liking for men who look like women."
"FFS I'm sick and tired of having to see a bloke bend over to pick something up or lean over and see their arse crack. For christ's sake pull your pants up or buy some underpants you bogan because nobody want's to see it. And this is a boat building shed (well one of them) not a porn studio."
Originally Posted by Slow Love™
I don't have a problem with Richard at all. He's obviously a clever lad; he does remain dogmatically attached to certain views that I don't think can be justified, but that's his prerogative. I hope in time he'll come to appreciate the other fellow's viewpoint a tad more.
However, it was his original comment of
that I took umbrage at. I bit my cyber-tongue for a while, but couldn't leave it. It may simply be a poor choice of phrase (and to be fair to Rich he did edit his post), but I think it at least deserved comment. He'd had a pop @ Lucky Eddie for making a very slightly-off colour gag (but one that I actually laughed out loud at, horrible sinner that I am) & then opined he'd punched folk for making iffy jokes. Swervy (correctly in my opinion) pointed out the inappropriateness of this response & it all spiralled from there.Originally Posted by Richard
Anyway, I'm home, have opened a bevvy and am now more or less fit to rejoin polite society!
- As featured in The Independent.
"Even when England lost 5-0 in 2006-07 I don't remember them folding like this. This is as bad as I have seen from an England side."
- Mick Vaughan on the 2013/14 tourists' efforts
what if a female martial arts expert hit a regular guy?Originally Posted by BoyBrumby
yours is a very general statement, especially in this day and age, there are ample scenarios where this isn't the case...to have some sort of unwritten rule that beating a woman is wrong whatever be the situation doesn't make any sense...rather, a fairer rule is that you shouldn't beat up on people who are physically weaker than you unless there is some sort of extreme provocation like a life-threatening situation or something...
Wow..i went to sleep and work and this thread just exploded....
I agree with Richard and Slow Love in almost everything....
And it is interesting case study in cultural indoctrination : BoyBrumbie and PY have views that they have not justified logically but have only repeated the paragons of their cultural indoctrination : men hitting women is much much worse than men hitting men in almsot any circumstance.
After considering both parties' arguments, I have reached a verdict...
The argument against Brumby seems to be that hitting a man or a woman with equal absolute strength is equally inappropriate. I think that is perhaps oversimplifying the issue in failing to consider the cultural implications. Brumby said that 95% of men are stronger than 95% of women, which sounds like a fair estimation to me. Because of perception, it is inherent in western society that hitting a woman is always wrong, regardless of relative or absolute strength.
Last edited by Mr Casson; 17-03-2005 at 06:41 PM.
'Copperfield,' said Mr. Micawber, 'farewell! Every happiness and prosperity! If, in the progress of revolving years, I could persuade myself that my blighted destiny had been a warning to you, I should feel that I had not occupied another man's place in existence altogether in vain.
- Wilkins Micawber
Yes...equally inappropriate or appropriate, given the circumstances.C_C, you seem to be arguing that hitting a man or a woman with equal absolute strength is equally inappropriate.
Thats precisely what i am saying.
Culture has nothing to do with facts and truth. It is merely something thats there and developed outta what people THINK is right or wrong.I think you've perhaps oversimplified the issue in failing to consider the cultural implications
Trust me it isnt.Brumby said that 95% of men are stronger than 95% of women, which sounds like a fair estimation to me
Not only is the number far more inaccurate than it actually is ( from what i've seen-and i certainly have seen a LOT of scuffles it is around 70-30 in favour of males) it is directly a product of culture.
You will find that the number of women practicing in strength training is a negligibly small fraction of the number of males practicing it.
Why ? because of cultural indoctrination- it has nothing to do with what women and men are/are not capable of, it is merely a reflection of what society perceives. Women are intersted more in just getting a toned body that will show off their curves because in our society,women are far more of a sex object than males and societerial perception is that a beautiful woman is a toned woman. Since beauty counts for so much, thats what happens.
That is completely irrelevant of whether women are capable of matching men strength for strength.
Not to mention, i have oft mentioned that strength is AT BEST the minor directive in fighting. I can tell that not many of the commentators on this thread have actually had anything more than a highschool brawl for i assure you in real life street fights/bar fights etc., knowing how to fight is 90% of the deal.
I have personally taken down men who have atleast 50 pounds more muscle mass than me and i have been taken down by guys AND a few girls who barely reach 5 feet.
That is true but perception is no excuse for a logically flawed standpoint. If perception is proven false, its best for that perception to change- and that is fundamentally documented in human history. Not too long ago there was a perception that black people cannot be as smart as white people...when that was proven wrong, it changed...i see no reason as to why this cant.Because of perception, it is inherent in western society that hitting a woman is always wrong, regardless of relative or absolute strength.
No, it isnt. Do you mean to say that if a weaker person attacked you, you wouldnt retaliate? Strength has zilch to do with in such circumstances, degree of provocation is the relevant issue here.Originally Posted by BoyBrumby
A guy equally strong as me pushes me aside in a drunken state, I may not feel the need to react.
A weaker woman pushes a knife in my face , I certainly might retaliate strongly.
What irritates me is your easy willingness to use the word "misogynist" here. So a woman attacking a man makes her aggressive and unpleasant as you put it, but a man giving it back in self defence automatically qualifies him as a misogynist?Originally Posted by BoyBrumby
Karthik_moo@hotmail.comMillhouse: you know when your dog ate my goldfish bart and you told me i never had a goldfish, then why did i have the bowl bart! why did i have the bowl!!!!
Member of the MSC and the AAAS
Wanna Search ?
Waughney : We are well taken care of here at the Rehab centre.
Ok, my absolutely final post in this thread.Originally Posted by Deja moo
I am not suggesting that it is appropriate for women to attack men, nor have I suggested it is wrong in any given circumstance for a man to hit a woman. In my very first post in this benighted little thread I said
And I stick by that.Originally Posted by BoyBrumby
What angered me is Richard's use of the expression "happy to hit females". I am arguing for appropriateness of response. I'm not suggesting it is right to hit weak, puny or enfeebled men. I would argue that it is far easier to recognise a person's gender than their physical capabilities. It is my contention that it is then far worse morally speaking to punch back a female who hits you than a weak or puny man who hits you. You do so in the knowledge you are striking someone who is, is all probability, weaker than you.
Suggesting, as C_C & Richard seem to be doing, that no difference in response is appropriate regarding male & female assailants is simply wrong. I've heard nothing to convince me otherwise.
I think we are all getting a bit too deep here...Originally Posted by C_C
CC, if a girl(shall we say of weight 8 and a half stone, 5ft 3,an average woman who doesnt go wieght trianing etc)went up to you in a pub or club and punched you in the face once and walked away (for an unknown reason), would you go after her an deck her?(So no self defense in this situation, this would be a simple act of revenge).
Would you be imclined to refrain from hitting her back?
or would you be inclined to go after her and give her as good as she gave (ie one punch in the face, by you a bloke I will assume is an average 12stone, 5 ft 10)?
A fairly simple answer is required!!!!!
rave down, hit the ground
My exact words being:Originally Posted by Slow Love™
What I was saying is that to be honest, there is only the odd exception where I'd find a woman more danger to my physical safety (no mention of mental ) and they are almost all when a woman is armed with something other than her fists/handbag. Nothing to do with hitting a women exceptions, just my personal safety.Originally Posted by PY
I guess the main thing is the second part of my post which says I couldn't find it in myself to smack a lady. Call it sexist, call it stupid, call it what you will.
A True Champion - Bob. Rest in peace. 15/04/06
"People today have too big a devil and too small a God"
- Stephen Currie
"The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?" Psalm 27:1
does anyone know when filming might start?
Robert Key has a lot on his plate (Sky Sports News,sun 24 apr)
N.S.Sidhu had hit a person and he died. It was not intention to kill and not thus murder accoding to law. The case went for around 10 years and was resolved 2-4 years ago. Sidhu is still apologetic and more than sorry for the mishap and helps out the man's family as he can.Originally Posted by 12th Man
Irrepairable damage done though.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)