I read "comes with the territory".AzrealMaximillion said:Did I once say that a violent beating was the logical response of infidelity? No, what I said was that it runs the risk of happening. When you sleep with someone's partner, you're more likely going to get into a conflict with that person. That conflict may be physical. What about that statement comes off as me saying that its ok? You just seem to be drawing conclusions.
Seriously, read what I type.
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/come+with+the+territory
Ergo, if I commit an act of infidelity, or if someone commits an act of infidelity on me, it "comes with the territory" that swift and violent reprisal is an inevitably or a necessary result. You then go on to intimate that the individual delivering the beating has "good reason". The law would disagree, but whatever. Then you flitter about, establishing that it wasn't really 15 on 1, it was 1 on 1, with a 14 person cheering squad/backup. When I suggested THAT was plenty intimidating/cowardly in its own right, you hand waved THAT as an inevitably as well with some robble about how that's the way we roll in high school, dawg....to be expected under circumstances like this...
...if you say that something comes with the territory, you mean that you have to accept it as a necessary part or result of a particular situation...
...included as a regular part of a job or activity...
Can you appreciate why, upon reading what you type, one might come to the conclusion that you endorse beatings of this nature? If you don't want to come off like a hypocrite, you might want to reconsider your idioms, or at least argue a little less vehemently in the defense of a girl who took 14 of her closest chums to go beat someone up for home-wrecking her high school romance.