Poll: Is it sexist to think it's worse (as a man) to hit a woman than another man?

DPunch4

New member
May 6, 2009
184
0
0
LittleChone said:
No. It's morality, not sexism.
I would just like to ask you to read some of the statements made in this thread.

If you try to say it's moral to not hit women, you are in turn saying that women should be treated like delicate flowers. That is sexist.

Once you open up and understand arguments against your position you might discover you have a new position.
 

Irony's Acolyte

Back from the Depths
Mar 9, 2010
3,636
0
0
Discrimination is discrimination whether its positive or negative. Now I'm not going to go around hitting whoever I want to (regardless of gender), but I'm not going to hold back because the person getting in my face and asking for it doesn't have the same set of genitalia. I might hold back if my assailant has more bark then bite but I'm not going to do it based on gender.

And although some people may call me sexist for that, who's the one who is paying attention to gender more? Yeah, that's what I thought.
 

starwarsgeek

New member
Nov 30, 2009
982
0
0
I don't buy the argument that treating a lady with respect is sexist. To me, this applies to acts of violence and common courtesy. I'd be more shamed to hit a woman than a man (except in defense, of course)
 

Nazulu

They will not take our Fluids
Jun 5, 2008
6,242
0
0
DPunch4 said:
LittleChone said:
No. It's morality, not sexism.
I would just like to ask you to read some of the statements made in this thread.

If you try to say it's moral to not hit women, you are in turn saying that women should be treated like delicate flowers. That is sexist.

Once you open up and understand arguments against your position you might discover you have a new position.
This argument has hit needle point now and it's either you believe that the tradition is sexist or a certain moral. I personally believe that something positive and that makes real sense shouldn't be shaded in negative light such as sexism.

Can you imagine what this world would be like with out this tradition? I say it would be worse, far worse. Maybe you should open up as well.
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
Woooo! I spawned a spin-off thread! I helped!

OT: I don't think it's really "sexist" to think that it's worse to hit a woman than a man, but in today's society it could be seen as a bit old fashioned. Personally, while I believe in equality n' all that, I would never hit a woman (or anyone for that matter). I just don't think it's the polite or "proper" thing to do, and I believe I am above resorting to violence of any kind to remedy a situation.
 

TilMorrow

Diabolical Party Member
Jul 7, 2010
3,246
0
0
Wheres that chivarly image that I saw on the forums some time ago I want to post it in this thread.

OT: No its not sexist but its still really wrong you don't go around hitting women. It ain't gentleman like. *Doffs tophat and Monocle* I say old chap don't go around punching women instead box with men. *Sips from a cup of tea and punchs the ruffian down the street*. Tally Ho!
 

DPunch4

New member
May 6, 2009
184
0
0
Nazulu said:
DPunch4 said:
LittleChone said:
No. It's morality, not sexism.
I would just like to ask you to read some of the statements made in this thread.

If you try to say it's moral to not hit women, you are in turn saying that women should be treated like delicate flowers. That is sexist.

Once you open up and understand arguments against your position you might discover you have a new position.
This argument has hit needle point now and it's either you believe that the tradition is sexist or a certain moral. I personally believe that something positive and that makes real sense shouldn't be shaded in negative light such as sexism.

Can you imagine what this world would be like with out this tradition? I say it would be worse, far worse. Maybe you should open up as well.
I go more detail of my views in my earlier post here I'll show you:
DPunch4 said:
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.
Your tradition argument is flawed. Having some tradition is good but without progress you don't have... well progress. It was a tradition to treat people of different colour like dirt. It's a tradition in a specific Islamic sect(?) where you can stone a women to death if she dishonors her family.

(?)-I honestly don't know the correct terminology here, sorry(also not attacking Islam here, christians burned witches on the stake remember).

My point is, if women want equality it has to work both ways, or it wont work at all.

EDIT: Just realized, 'sexism' probably isn't the correct term. Still, people reading should understand the context.
 

Rhiehn

New member
Aug 16, 2010
84
0
0
It is absolutely sexist. It's no more acceptable to hit a man than a woman. Its just as bad to hit a man who's half your size as to hit a woman who's half your size.
 

Firefoxmccoy

New member
Feb 15, 2010
32
0
0
Yes and no. It depends on why you won't hit a women. If it's because you think that violence is wrong then you sir are wrong as well. If it is because you think women are weaker then men then you are WRONG. In conclusion you are wrong no matter what you do. But in my opinon I think it is perfectly fine to hit a women if you are a man. If its for the right reson then go ahead.
 

ecyor0

New member
Dec 7, 2010
43
0
0
Depends on your reasoning. Men are, in general, much heavier-built, with more upper body strength than women (for those who immediately say that's old-fashioned attitudes from when men did all the hard labour, the male body structure actually has more upper body strength than an equivalent female body structure. I'm talking about anatomy, not society). Men shouldn't hit women for the same reason older siblings shouldn't hit little siblings. It's not that the reverse isn't true, or that there is never any situation when defending oneself is justifiable, it's that you could very well cause more damage than you meant to, by pure dint of being stronger. And with physical violence, there's absolutely no use in regretting the action after the fact.
 

Merkavar

New member
Aug 21, 2010
2,429
0
0
Dys said:
Merkavar said:
also the whole men are stronger thing and shouldnt throw their weight around is so old fashion. Its like from back in the day were all men worked the fields and laboured all day and women did the laundry. Now a days men and women can be stronger and weaker than each other. men might be on average stonger than women but alot of women are stronger than men. so i think that arguement is invalid.
Are you serious? The average height for a man is something like 20 cm higher than a woman. It is possible for a woman to be stronger than a man, but it's uncommon and is the exception not the rule. Men also naturally develop considerably more muscle than women, again there are exceptions and some (very, very few) women feel the need to obsessively build muscle, but again the number of these women simply is not significant. It doesn't matter how much society decides men and women are equal, from a physical standpoint we are not and in terms of raw strength, men are always going to be dominant.
i basically said what you said in the bit i bolded.

but what i was getting at shouldnt this whole dont hit women just be expanded to dont hit people weaker than you? so a strong guy shouldnt hit women and a strong women shouldnt hit weaker guys?

i dont know where you live but around here men and women of the same age are about the same height. there are taller and shorter people but they on average seem about the same height. and guys might bulk up with muscles but that doesnt mean women cant hurt people with their less bulky muscles.
 

Scout Tactical

New member
Jun 23, 2010
404
0
0
The 'badness' of hitting someone should be based on how much more defenseless they are. If they are a walking tank and your strongest punch just makes them laugh, I doubt they'll press charges. If it's a small child or an elderly person, your punishment (in the US) carries the same penalty as murder, even if they survive.

Case in point, hitting a bodybuilder girl is different than hitting a valley girl.
 

Nazulu

They will not take our Fluids
Jun 5, 2008
6,242
0
0
DPunch4 said:
Nazulu said:
DPunch4 said:
LittleChone said:
No. It's morality, not sexism.
I would just like to ask you to read some of the statements made in this thread.

If you try to say it's moral to not hit women, you are in turn saying that women should be treated like delicate flowers. That is sexist.

Once you open up and understand arguments against your position you might discover you have a new position.
This argument has hit needle point now and it's either you believe that the tradition is sexist or a certain moral. I personally believe that something positive and that makes real sense shouldn't be shaded in negative light such as sexism.

Can you imagine what this world would be like with out this tradition? I say it would be worse, far worse. Maybe you should open up as well.
I go more detail of my views in my earlier post here I'll show you:
DPunch4 said:
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.
Your tradition argument is flawed. Having some tradition is good but without progress you don't have... well progress. It was a tradition to treat people of different colour like dirt. It's a tradition in a specific Islamic sect(?) where you can stone a women to death if she dishonors her family.

(?)-I honestly don't know the correct terminology here, sorry(also not attacking Islam here, christians burned witches on the stake remember).

My point is, if women want equality it has to work both ways, or it wont work at all.
My tradition argument isn't flawed at all. I agree that other old traditions were barbaric but this one in particular works perfectly in society. Men are usually stronger than women as we both know, so it makes sense that in a perfect society that men should be more careful. However, if the women is stronger or taller than the man then she should take it into consideration as well because she could do more damage. See, I'm looking at it both ways, that's fair isn't it?

Also Elbrandino makes another important point, if your calling the individual sexist I would say that is unfair since we are all raised in a culture were it is a morality.
 

DPunch4

New member
May 6, 2009
184
0
0
Hmmmm, I think we both got our point across, I can not agree with you because I strive for progress in society and find most traditions to be utterly retarded.

At least we can all agree that it's better to spend time beating up women in New Vegas, then to get beat up by women in real life.