Poll: Is it sexist to think it's worse (as a man) to hit a woman than another man?
- Thread starter Charley
- Start date
Well, since Chivalry is nothing but benevolent sexism, yes it would be sexist to balk at hitting a woman over a man. You know why? Because women are just as valid targets, can start shit just as much as a man and their vaginas don't make them some sacred figure that is inviolate.
When I was a kid, I was raised almost solely by the women in my life and I figuredout that their gender were just as worthy of a smackdown as any other person. And then in elementary school, when everyone is the same size and a girl can hit as hard as a boy, I would get in fist fights with girls and think nothing of it other than it was a shame they couldn't just leave me alone.
Women are equal, or they want really hard to be, and part of that is learning that they can't get away with the shit they have in the past and not expect to get smacked.
When I was a kid, I was raised almost solely by the women in my life and I figuredout that their gender were just as worthy of a smackdown as any other person. And then in elementary school, when everyone is the same size and a girl can hit as hard as a boy, I would get in fist fights with girls and think nothing of it other than it was a shame they couldn't just leave me alone.
Women are equal, or they want really hard to be, and part of that is learning that they can't get away with the shit they have in the past and not expect to get smacked.
I don't use violence unless it's the only thing I can do to prevent something worse. I would be extremely repulsed by the idea of using it in vengence, I'd certainly try to attain justice in a much more rational and reasoned way first, I'd hate to think what would push me to attack anyone in nothing but fury. Don't misunderstand this, I do get angry, but I do pride myself on my ability to remain calm and think laterally and logically.
So, with that, I'd have to say I'd be just as inclined to hit a girl / woman as I would be a boy / man. I have been pissed off to the point I've thought about hitting both genders in life but I haven't, but I wouldn't have felt any worse if I'd hit say that smug stupid whore Chelsea than I would have hitting the egomanic moron carbonwaste Ashley. They were both as foul as one another.
So, with that, I'd have to say I'd be just as inclined to hit a girl / woman as I would be a boy / man. I have been pissed off to the point I've thought about hitting both genders in life but I haven't, but I wouldn't have felt any worse if I'd hit say that smug stupid whore Chelsea than I would have hitting the egomanic moron carbonwaste Ashley. They were both as foul as one another.
If we're going by 4chan standards, all you need to do is post a picture of yourself, a picture of you and your girlfriend, a 30 second video of penis going into the 4chan acceptable version of the female sexual organ, then a time-stamped version of you with your male '4chan'er' in her female 'non-anime-sexual-organ' and then a 'finishing scene'.Bloodstain said:
Assuming you don't mind atleast nine-thousand internet orgasms, you're relatively safe and charged. Sexually. forever.
I would like to defer to the illustrious Sir Sean Connery for this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FgMLROTqJ0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FgMLROTqJ0
I never even thought about it and I'm like that so I had to look it up before I could say anything. I grabbed the definition of wikipedia and I'll share it with you all.
"Sexism, a term coined in the mid-20th century,[1] is the belief or attitude that one sex is inherently superior to, more competent than, or more valuable than the other. It can also include this type of discrimination in regards to gender. Sexism primarily involves hatred of, or prejudice towards, either sex as a whole (see misogyny and misandry), or the application of stereotypes of masculinity in relation to men, or of femininity in relation to women.[2] It is also called male and female chauvinism."
This is just either the belief that one side is more superior or stereotyping the gender, that's what makes you sexist, but I'm neither of those.
My whole life I've been taught the tradition of a gentlemen like letting the females go first, clearing their path and what not. All this just automatically, I don't think that their inferior in anyway, in fact I hate that attitude.
To answer this poll I guess it depends in what you believe, I'm gonna say no.
"Sexism, a term coined in the mid-20th century,[1] is the belief or attitude that one sex is inherently superior to, more competent than, or more valuable than the other. It can also include this type of discrimination in regards to gender. Sexism primarily involves hatred of, or prejudice towards, either sex as a whole (see misogyny and misandry), or the application of stereotypes of masculinity in relation to men, or of femininity in relation to women.[2] It is also called male and female chauvinism."
This is just either the belief that one side is more superior or stereotyping the gender, that's what makes you sexist, but I'm neither of those.
My whole life I've been taught the tradition of a gentlemen like letting the females go first, clearing their path and what not. All this just automatically, I don't think that their inferior in anyway, in fact I hate that attitude.
To answer this poll I guess it depends in what you believe, I'm gonna say no.
And here, a further clarification:zehydra said:
It is sexist to do something negative to someone else based on their gender. Undeniably so.
It is sexist to legislate something negative to someone else based on their gender. Absolutely.
It is sexist to legislate something positive to someone else based on their gender, as this constitutes a negative legislation against the OTHER gender.
However, on this final point - to do something nice to someone else based on their gender, is where the question is drawn. I would find it a bit strange if a gal decided to be angry when I held the door open for them; do I think it's sexist to do so? Not in the way "sexist" is generally understood, as a negative label. By its most literal definition, perhaps - but I believe there's more to it than that.
I said this ealier in the thread but,Nazulu said:
Imagine that no white people bear any hatred towards black people,
Now imagine that black people still aren't allowed to drnk from the same fountains as white people.
Intent doesn't matter, It is still discriminatory, it implies that women are either more delacate than men, or that they are more important, it IS sexism, plain and simple, the reasons behind it do not change that.
Yes, it's sexist and you shouldn't pull punches just because they're women. In fact, the law states that men and women are in all ways equal, meaning not only CAN you hit a woman as you would a man, but it is your DUTY to do so otherwise they can file a lawsuit claiming that you treated them differently based on gender.
So I say punch them, punch them right in the face and knock the teeth right out of them. FOR AMERICA!
So I say punch them, punch them right in the face and knock the teeth right out of them. FOR AMERICA!
Charley said:
I think that, while not explicitly sexist, it is, at the very least, a little misogynistic (I said that it was sexist in the poll because of no other options. Sorry!). While you were taught not to raise your hand to a woman, I was taught not to rause my hand to anyone, or, rather, to only raise my hands in self-defense. Don't hit first, ever. Only hit second.
What I was taught, and I quote, is "If they hit you, hit back. It doesn't matter if it's a man, woman, or other; if they hit you, hit back. You have the right to defend yourself. If they hit you again, snap their arm; a third time, shatter their elbows and at least one knee." When I asked why I should shatter their elbows and not their wrists, I was told "Because the elbows are slow to heal, amd even when they do, they'll always hurt; the person who hit you will remember you for the rest of their life. They will never raise their hands to anyone ever again, both because it will hurt too much, and because of the fear of repurcussions. Also, it will end the fight very fast, and shattering their knee is to make sure they can't get back up to try something else." Later, my Uncle (a Lawyer), corroborated with my father (the one who taught me the above in small chunks over time), and explained the legality behind it, if I ever got into a fight, what I might have to expect, etc. I was taught that, while I might legally have the right to defend myself, people tend to be harsher against someone who defends themself against a woman, so make sure there are witnesses when she hits me first; hell, let her hit me twice, and warn her, without threat, that if she hits me a third time, I will retaliate in self-defense. if I make it clear, and have witnesses willing to back me up, it would help dramatically.
In the end, all things I learned created in me a complete lack of caring of gender; I don't care if you are physically a man or woman (or gender identity, etc, whatever); if you hit me, I will defend myself. I think that's how it should be, but, of course, I beleive that because of how I was raised, just as you believe your own ideals because of how you were raised.
Also, no, I feel no shame in hitting someone if they have hit me.
Hm. Both genders should avoid violence period, of course, but if they have good reason...I guess the thinking goes that men are more accustomed to physical fighting (because they're stronger), so hitting one wouldn't be as bad as hitting a woman, who is less accustomed to physical fighting and more used to, say, backbiting comments (because they're weaker). Personally, I would go with a previous answer that said it would depend on my assessment of my opponent's strength. I wouldn't hit a fragile-looking/diminutive girl OR guy. If they were tall and well-built, then I would be more likely to hit them.
Completely sexist, if you want everything to be equal then hitting women should mean nothing.
What is wrong is violence in the first place! If you hit anyone it's not good.
However if you think that women deserve special treatment, I'm hearing you say "get back in the kitchen". Chivalry is sexist, however being kind and courteous to a girl you like is just common sense in my mind. Giving special treatment to anyone of your choice is fine, it has nothing to do with sexism.
What is wrong is violence in the first place! If you hit anyone it's not good.
However if you think that women deserve special treatment, I'm hearing you say "get back in the kitchen". Chivalry is sexist, however being kind and courteous to a girl you like is just common sense in my mind. Giving special treatment to anyone of your choice is fine, it has nothing to do with sexism.
Intent is what this is about, it's just the way I showed how polite I am, not because I believe they are more important. Of course I reckon everybody should be treated equally but at the same time men should play the gentle-men. It's just a basic tradition and a good one that should stay forever.moretimethansense said:
I don't think it's neccessarily sexist on it's own, though I can easily understand how some people could take it that way. I look more at something like the reason a man hitting the woman in question or the reason you hold this opinion as to whether or not anything is sexist.
I would never strike a woman in anger or to prove my manliness. Like I said in another thread, man or woman, if they intend to do me harm and/or death, ill do what ever I can do to prevent that. and if that means hitting a woman, well, most likely thats what I will do.
Though in honesty, man or woman, I would most likely end up on the floor...
Though in honesty, man or woman, I would most likely end up on the floor...
Doing something nice, such as holding the door open for the gender alone is special treatment for that person because of his/her gender, regardless if they really need it or not. The only reason I could think of doing something like that for the opposite gender is not out of chivalry (which is a sexist philosophy that holds that women are weak), but because I'm trying to impress her.omicron1 said: