Will someone please explain why hitting a girl is bad but hitting a guy is fine?

Freeze_L

New member
Feb 17, 2010
235
0
0
Girls have a higher pain threshold, but men are more physically stronger. High pain threshold does not help you if your jaw gets broken by some jackass. Men, even weaker men, don't bruise or break as easily as a female of the same fitness level. In general if i hit a woman as hard as i possibly could i would break something, if i hit a man it would drop him to the ground.
Lunar Shadow said:
I go by the rule of "Never hit someone weaker than me". I tend to go for joint locks to resolve a violent situation, so if the person is stronger than me and I can't get a lock because of it, then the striking starts, namely an open hand strike to teh the throat. I am technically a pacifist, but when I am in that kind of situation I try to end it as quickly as possible. And just to clarify if it reaches this point, shit has hit the fan as I try to at least solve situations peacefully.
WOW i met someone with the same policy! If i get into a fight i generally go for light throws away from me (not great at locks, no akido training) and if i have to i go for breaks or the throat. I am a "pacifist" in that i do not like fighting and prefer a peaceful solution unless there is no viable solution available. To be honest i am a big guy and could probably stop a fight with a punch or two, but i don't start fights and if you swing at me i am putting you on the ground nicely the first time, and when someone does that it usually means you have lost, and if you straight up punch you get hit and that is never fun. Deflect, neutralize, and counter, it works on any attack and for a fight in general, to avoid or win it.
 

Tdc2182

New member
May 21, 2009
3,623
0
0
Grand_Arcana said:
How well do you think it would go for me in court, if I said I beat the shit out of my girlfriend because "she deserved it" because she cheated on me? So women can get away with physically assaulting a man because he "deserved" it, and he can't defend himself?
No. I never came close to saying anything like that.

If a man had physical injury to show the judge and jury then he would probably get the girl in a good bit of trouble. The same would go for if a female had been beaten up and could prove it.
 

Tdc2182

New member
May 21, 2009
3,623
0
0
lee1287 said:
all these women saying "Equal rights" then complain about men hitting them. Fuck right off, you want the perks of equal rights? Then take the shit too.
Congratulations.

You have just made the stupidest comment on the escapist.
 

londelen

New member
Apr 15, 2009
408
0
0
Most people are stupid and don't realize they're selective in what's sexism and what's the right thing to do.

What I do? If somebody hits me, I hit them back harder, I don't care who they are.
 

Danny Ocean

Master Archivist
Jun 28, 2008
4,148
0
0
Let's see them include emotional abuse within domestic abuse, and watch all the men flood in.

But my general rule of thumb is never to hit someone if they're only hitting you out of distress/shock (You scared them, after a car crash, after their relative has died, alcohol), or otherwise unable to control themselves. Hot-blooded aggression incurs a cold response with locks and pushes and things. If they hit me in cold blood, however, I will hit back. Or, more likely, run away.

Freeze_L said:
Girls have a higher pain threshold
I used to think that after being repeatedly told as such by various females, but apparently it's not true. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4641567.stm] It wouldn't really make sense for the original hunters to have a lower pain threshold than those who were never meant to get injured, really. Sure, there's childbirth, but during that period they're so doped up on adrenaline, morphine, and hormonal pain suppressants it's not representative of the pattern.

WanderFreak said:
I love how the arguments FOR generally include things like "men are physically stronger than women" or "woman have less upper body strength."

So you're saying ALL women are weaker than men?

Oh, you're not? Some are stronger?

Well then you don't have an argument.

If hitting one is fine, hitting the other is fine. I'm not advocating going around hitting people for no reason, but if you give me a reason, male or female, I will put you down.
The majority of men are stronger than the majority of women,
I am an average man,
Therefore I am stronger than most women.
Is a better argument than:

The minority of men are weaker than the minority of women
I am an average man,
Therefore I am weaker than the majority of women.
If you are going to render any argument void due to the use of (Justifiable) generalisations then I'll wager that you don't get very far in any arguments. Generalisations are fine as long as they are justified, which this one is.

Emily Boogades said:
Your username is awesome (Danny Ocean).
Thanks. :D
 

lee1287

New member
Apr 7, 2009
1,495
0
0
Tdc2182 said:
lee1287 said:
all these women saying "Equal rights" then complain about men hitting them. Fuck right off, you want the perks of equal rights? Then take the shit too.
Congratulations.

You have just made the stupidest comment on the escapist.
How? Women complain about equal rights for pay, jobs and for loads of other things. But they want to be able to hit men and not to be hit back? Then that's not equal.
 

Stone Wera

New member
Feb 13, 2010
1,816
0
0
Hitting anyone is fine in my books, as long as you have a good reason, and they can fight back.
 

Snarky Username

Elite Member
Apr 4, 2010
1,528
0
41
Men are, by nature, stronger and, by nature, can do more damage hitting a girl than a girl can do hitting a boy. If a 5 year old kicked you, would you punch his lights out? No, you would tell him not to do that. Well it's the same with girls. If a girl ever hits you, it's obviously a mismatch, therefore it's considered better if you just back off. With men you're at least fighting someone your own size.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
eggy32 said:
For some reason people seem shocked by the fact that I'm as willing to hit a girl as I am to hit a boy, why is this?

Is it not sexist to say that girls cannot be hit by us guys? After all, males and females are apparently equals, so why does this not apply to violence.
eggy32 said:
For some reason people seem shocked by the fact that I'm as willing to hit a girl as I am to hit a boy, why is this?

Is it not sexist to say that girls cannot be hit by us guys? After all, males and females are apparently equals, so why does this not apply to violence.
Actually men and women are not equals despite the wording. Socially women are superior as they get equal rights but also for all intents and purposes compensation and special treatment for their physical inferiority. Men and women are equal mentally, as has been proven time and again, but men will always peak out higher in terms of physical performance. A girl in really great shape can easily be stronger and faster than a guy who has put nowhere near as much time into personal development, but given an equal amount of work men will always have better practical results. A male powerlifter at the absolute peak will lift more than a female powerlifter at her absolute peak, and so on. This is why sports and such remain segregated. There have been various attempts made by women over the years to prove that they can compete with men physically, but they have invariably lead to diaster. It must be over 15 or 20 years ago now, but some might remember a big thing on ESPN where a female martial arts champion who was ranked 2nd in her league made demands to be able to fight men in their leagues who didn't want to let her in. Eventually they consented to give her a shot if she could beat one of their "gatekeepers" who was ranked like 30th in an exibition match. Promotions were made, fighting game comparisons were made, and a lot of people expected her to win easily. She was not only destroyed, but humiliated where the guy pretty much let her try and do whatever she wanted, countered it like a joke, and then destroyed her.

Physical performance has also lead to contreversies like whether or not police and special forces units should lower requirements to let women in because of the "prestige" involved. Many businesses do indeed create seperate standards, but in some cases there are safety issues involved and so on. In general I tend to feel the requirements should be left as they are, but women should not be prohibited if they can meet them (they simply should not be lowered based on gender), which to many makes me a sexist or misogynist by the standards
of many. The lower bar for women in many cases as well as affrimitive action (so many women having to fill jobs of X level in proportion to men) does however provide a bit of a societal edge, as do various unofficial "rules" for treating women based on their relative abillitis and protectiveness (like what your talking about).

*THAT* said, when it comes to violence in paticular I do think when "Generation X" and "Generation Y" come into their own more solidly things will change as far as some kinds of violence are concerned. Peak performance aside, more and more women are training themselves and learning how to fight and so on, as well as being increasingly willing to get physical with men. Getting "beat up by a girl" isn't quite the humorous occurance it was for The Baby Boomers (even in heroic fantasy), and you do see increasing cases of women exploiting their "protection" to do some increasingly nasty things. Violent crimes inflicted by women are also on the rise according to some (less than popular) statistics, as well as more women being in prison for violent crimes than ever before. Society has been slow to catch up on this.

It is likely never to be "okay" to just beat up girls, or attack one for the same reasons a guy might get into it with another guy. At least not until genetic engineering resolves intristic physical performance issues and creates true overall equality. But by the same token I think standards of defense, and what a guy is expected to take are going to change societally. We live in a world currently where there are girls who would beat your head in with a pipe to steal your money like any other mugger, and that was virtuallly unheard of (though not entirely non-existant) when most of the Boomers grew up. Not to mention an increasing awareness of atrocities committed overseas and so on due to the power of media, you have kids and girls participating in a lot of those massacres in Africa and such. Guns being what they are, women entering militaries, and things like this, in times and places of conflict women and children being generally "dishonorable" targets is changing with awareness. People are becoming somewhat used to the "shock" of such things compared to how they used to be seen in yesteryear, Generation X and Y have grown up/are growing up with such examples... in say "World War II" things like the "Hitler Youth" and their disappearance are/were kind of kept quiet, in "Veitnam" and "Korea" this like this happened and were mentioned but were not really spread around to a huge degree. Kids today are seeing pictures of little kids training with the Taliban, or women and children rolling with Warlords in other regions as a way of making ot clear how borked things are.


A lot of rambling, but the bottom line is that right now it's a social wrong to hit a girl, even when she hits you in most cases. It's just how it is. I think treaing women more gently will remain until some scientific miracle, but in 20 years or so the standard will probably be a bit differant.
 

burningdragoon

Warrior without Weapons
Jul 27, 2009
1,935
0
0
Czargent Sane said:
burningdragoon said:
Dahni said:
-stuff I quoted-
Boldness for emphasis. That should be the goto answer for questions like this.
dont I owe them the respect of treating them as an equal? I do not care if we have different strengths and weaknesses, shouldn't I treat them as though they are just as valuable as I am? more? then why on earth would I hesitate to fight them?
I think people should treating others "as equal as possible" while respecting their differences. I can't define "as equal as possible" and it is going to mean different things to different people. To you, it may mean completely equal, and that's fine with me. If you want to treat girls as 100% equals then good for you. And I don't mean that in a sarcastic way or anything. And I don't mean that in a sarcastic way either, and so on. Personally, I feel if you are physically superior (strength or skill, w/e) than it is wrong for you to merely respond to violence with equal violence. You should use your superior ability to subdue or something before resorting to fight back in the same way they are fighting you.

That is only how I feel in terms of the general physical aspect of men and woman. Even if the fighting grounds were basically equal, I still wouldn't say it's ok. It's a double standard sure, but it's a double standard I more than ok with. There are plenty that I am not.
 

Tdc2182

New member
May 21, 2009
3,623
0
0
lee1287 said:
Tdc2182 said:
lee1287 said:
all these women saying "Equal rights" then complain about men hitting them. Fuck right off, you want the perks of equal rights? Then take the shit too.
Congratulations.

You have just made the stupidest comment on the escapist.
How? Women complain about equal rights for pay, jobs and for loads of other things. But they want to be able to hit men and not to be hit back? Then that's not equal.
The ones "Complaining" about equal rights are the ones who dont fucking hit men. The reason you barely ever hear about husbands being beaten is because it never fucking happens. Jesus I can only take so much stupid in one day
 

Helmutye

New member
Sep 5, 2009
161
0
0
Czargent Sane said:
Helmutye said:
Men aren't supposed to hit women because we're trying to have a civilized society here. There was a time when the world really was Might makes Right--if you were strong enough to beat up or kill someone, then you were right and they were wrong. That's the whole idea behind duels and things like that--rather than relying on the law or evidence or testimony, truth is decided by physical confrontation. That sort of attitude lead to a lot of violence on Earth, and a lot of suffering.

Men are almost universally stronger physically than women, and even if there are exceptions pretty much all men are capable of being physically stronger than women with very little work (it is extremely easy for guys to put on muscle after hitting puberty, so even if you're a scrawny nerd you would probably be stronger than almost any woman after a week or two of doing 20 push-ups a day). This is simply a fact of our species. That means that if the way of the world is Might makes Right, men will always be right and, judging by how many guys on here have posted that they have no problem hitting women, there will be plenty of guys who will eagerly use this advantage. And both men and women lose out on a lot of good things because of this. Indeed, that is how it was for a very long time.

Women cannot compete with men in terms of physical strength. But physical strength is not the only thing to be valued in a person. There is intelligence, creativity, cunning, and all kinds of other traits that women can easily compete with men in. If a woman has to live knowing that, no matter how smart or correct she is according to the law and logic, a man can simply beat her into submission, then how valuable can anything besides physical strength be? Civilization values intelligence, creativity, and these other virtues, and in order for them to be valuable you have to remove the trump card of physical strength.

For you guys out there who are still scoffing, imagine if one of your housemates was a martial arts master who, if he chose, could kill you or beat you to a pulp in seconds with his bare hands. You would be completely helpless against him physically. How would you feel if he started threatening you, either overtly or covertly, with that fact? He could take your food, your possessions, your money, and anything he wanted, and no matter what you said it would not change the fact that he could kill you at any time. What if he threatened you every time you said something he didn't like? You would never be able to convince him to do his share of the chores, to wash his dishes. He could stop paying his part of the rent, and no matter how good your arguments that he should pay, you could not make him and if you annoyed him to a certain point he would take you out. Would you want to live in a house like that? The only way such a house could function is if you could be reasonably sure he would not use his superior physical skill to trounce you.
you seem to mistake strength for skill in battle. a female warrior can be just as deadly as a male, not even taking weapons into account.

your hypothetical situation?
1. just because he can kill me does not make me helpless
2. if he acted in such a manner, then clearly he is not as great a master as he thinks.
3. let him try to take my possessions. let him try to use his strength against me. if there is any truth to his threats then he will kill me. he will have to, I will settle for nothing less. we could fight a hundred times, and if I lost each one I would be no less determined to beat him as I was the first time. you can stop me dead, you can get out of my way, but there is no obstacle that will make me move one inch out of my path.

how would I feel? I would feel excited!
I do not want to make any assumptions about you, but I wonder how much experience you actually have with fighting and physical violence? Video games, movies, and even lots of folk stories always emphasize that a small person can beat a larger opponent with skill and cleverness. But in a real fight size and strength mean a whole lot more than fiction describes. If someone is twice as strong as you, you will generally need to be about 4 times more skilled than they are. I've had fighting instruction, and generally speaking fights go to the one who is bigger and stronger unless there is a large skill difference, because no matter how good you are once the big guy gets a hold of you and lifts you off the ground there's not very much you can do.

A male warrior vs a female warrior is a very different question than a normal guy vs a normal girl. Normal people do not have any fight training. And unless you have a LOT of fight training and have gone through surprise conditioning, there is a good chance that you will forget it all and be unable to do much more than simple, instinctual movements. That is why some of the more successful fighting styles build off of simple, instinctual movements, and why even a black belt in karate will probably fall victim to some thug on the street if he is attacked suddenly and overwhelmed. And rarely will you be expecting violence when it finds you.

Your defiant attitude is admirable, but in Might makes Right it will be all you have left when you meet someone stronger than you.

1. You're not helpless? Then what would you do? It requires factor beyond yourself to offset a physical advantage--that is, it requires civilized society. It requires people who value something other than physical superiority. That is my whole point!

2. Whether or not he is as great a master as he thinks, if he is good enough to beat YOU then that's good enough. Unless there is something that will make him care, if he gets his way all the time then that is all the greatness he needs. That is how it used to be--the greatest rulers were the ones that nobody else could beat and who killed all of their opponents. That is it. It took civilized concepts like law and honor and the like to offset this.

3. If you said that inspiring speech to him, and he killed you, where would you be? You would be dead. You would never say anything ever again, and if nobody else heard you he could go right on doing the same thing to others as if you never existed. He might someday meet someone who could beat him, but that doesn't change the fact that you are dead. And again, I do not want to make any assumptions about you, but you might not be so brave when actually faced with a threat on your life. It's easy to imagine yourself as fearless and uncompromising, but the vast majority of people would back down when faced with the credible threat of death or physical harm. That is why it is important that we remove those things from a civilized society--with the threat of physical violence removed, you can focus on the actual merits of ideas, and if your ideas are good and if you are persuasive and say things that people agree with, then you will find success. What you say will matter. But with Might makes Right, the only thing that matters is who says it.
 

Platti

New member
Nov 16, 2009
27
0
0
If a girl hit me then I'd hit them back, unless I deserved being hit in the first place. The argument that "Men can hit harder" is entirely moot. If anything; hitting someone back harder will teach them not to pick fights with people physically stronger than them.

But still, hitting anyone isn't good.

That's how I see it.
 

SUPA FRANKY

New member
Aug 18, 2009
1,889
0
0
There are a lot of double standards in the world. If your hitting a man, then hitting another man is ok, but f you hit a woman, shit hits the fan. But at the same time, a man who sleeps with lots of women is considered a player, while a woman who does the same thing is considered a cum drinking whore.

I just think you just shouldn't hit people who are obviously weaker than you. If they use lethal force, then you use lethal force too! But unless there are kicking you in the balls 24-7, then you can obviously shrug of anything they can get at you.
 

Edorf

New member
May 30, 2010
505
0
0
To all the people saying "Men can take more pain"

I chose to believe that giving birth is more painful than a punch in the face.

PS: I'm a man and have never given birth to a child :p
 

Helmutye

New member
Sep 5, 2009
161
0
0
Here is another way to visualize why it's wrong for a man to hit a woman:

Say you and a guy on the street get into an argument and you end up "winning" (to the extent that a random argument on the street can be won). Let's say that you are arguing over a dollar that you dropped--you pick it up and claim it's yours, but the other guy insists that it's his. You know you're right, and you deliver plenty of evidence why you're right, and then put the dollar in your pocket and move on. A few minutes later the guy shows up with five of his friends, who proceed to beat you down and take the dollar from you, leaving your bleeding, barely conscious carcass on the pavement.

It is unfair for a man to hit a woman for the same reason it is unfair for a group of guys to gang up on one person, male or female. If you have to resort to these things, then it just shows how inept you are at everything else besides thuggery.

That being said, reacting in self-defense is always justified, but you have to temper your defense based on the threat you are facing. Like a poster said earlier, if a five year old attacked you it would not be acceptable for an adult to treat an aggressive five year old the way he would treat another adult acting the same way. There are cases where women attack men violently and with intent to kill. I don't think anyone would dispute that you can fight back in those cases. But if a woman slaps you in the face because you just said something really nasty and insensitive, you are not entitled to knock her lights out. If a woman says something mean to you, you should not deck her even if you would deck a guy who said something similar, because you will probably hurt her far worse than she could ever hurt you. Be a man and walk away!
 

Czargent Sane

New member
May 31, 2010
604
0
0
Helmutye said:
Czargent Sane said:
Helmutye said:
I do not want to make any assumptions about you, but I wonder how much experience you actually have with fighting and physical violence? Video games, movies, and even lots of folk stories always emphasize that a small person can beat a larger opponent with skill and cleverness. But in a real fight size and strength mean a whole lot more than fiction describes. If someone is twice as strong as you, you will generally need to be about 4 times more skilled than they are. I've had fighting instruction, and generally speaking fights go to the one who is bigger and stronger unless there is a large skill difference, because no matter how good you are once the big guy gets a hold of you and lifts you off the ground there's not very much you can do.

A male warrior vs a female warrior is a very different question than a normal guy vs a normal girl. Normal people do not have any fight training. And unless you have a LOT of fight training and have gone through surprise conditioning, there is a good chance that you will forget it all and be unable to do much more than simple, instinctual movements. That is why some of the more successful fighting styles build off of simple, instinctual movements, and why even a black belt in karate will probably fall victim to some thug on the street if he is attacked suddenly and overwhelmed. And rarely will you be expecting violence when it finds you.

Your defiant attitude is admirable, but in Might makes Right it will be all you have left when you meet someone stronger than you.

1. You're not helpless? Then what would you do? It requires factor beyond yourself to offset a physical advantage--that is, it requires civilized society. It requires people who value something other than physical superiority. That is my whole point!

2. Whether or not he is as great a master as he thinks, if he is good enough to beat YOU then that's good enough. Unless there is something that will make him care, if he gets his way all the time then that is all the greatness he needs. That is how it used to be--the greatest rulers were the ones that nobody else could beat and who killed all of their opponents. That is it. It took civilized concepts like law and honor and the like to offset this.

3. If you said that inspiring speech to him, and he killed you, where would you be? You would be dead. You would never say anything ever again, and if nobody else heard you he could go right on doing the same thing to others as if you never existed. He might someday meet someone who could beat him, but that doesn't change the fact that you are dead. And again, I do not want to make any assumptions about you, but you might not be so brave when actually faced with a threat on your life. It's easy to imagine yourself as fearless and uncompromising, but the vast majority of people would back down when faced with the credible threat of death or physical harm. That is why it is important that we remove those things from a civilized society--with the threat of physical violence removed, you can focus on the actual merits of ideas, and if your ideas are good and if you are persuasive and say things that people agree with, then you will find success. What you say will matter. But with Might makes Right, the only thing that matters is who says it.
wrong. strength and size mean a lot less than what people believe. strength helps, there is no denying that, but skill, determination, cleverness, and though I personally distain it, brutality, make much more of a difference. in regards to brutality, no matter how much muscle a guy packs on, his eyes and groin dont get much more resilient.

its not my fault if one chooses to be unable to fight. If you cant fight, learn to fight or just dont fight. because if you fight, I will treat you as a warrior

1. no. I would fight and die. what else is there? why would I want to offset his advantage? I want to beat him at his best! with no handicap or obstruction! there would be no other recourse. I would not want the help of anyone else. you can tell me i cannot defeat him, but there is only one way to determine that. I beat him, or I die. there is nothing else.

2. he will not win forever. more men like me will challenge him. there will be a man or woman standing in his path everywhere he goes. anywhere he seeks to subjugate others. those men you speak of led cursed lives, ever were there knives waiting for them in the hands of the defiant, or other men like them

3. and? we all die. my death is of no concern. I will never allow death to be a deterrent in itself. I am not fearless, far from it. but I am absolutely uncompromising. if I come upon that situation, then i am going to face the challenge. my death, my victory, it does not matter. the fight is important. the fight is what matters. I dont care what happens, I face an obstacle, attack it with all the strength I have for as long as it takes, and move on.

does this mean that if I ever meet an evil master martial artist who feels like pushing me around, I will die? if I cant beat them. I wouldnt have it any other way.
 

Czargent Sane

New member
May 31, 2010
604
0
0
Helmutye said:
Here is another way to visualize why it's wrong for a man to hit a woman:

Say you and a guy on the street get into an argument and you end up "winning" (to the extent that a random argument on the street can be won). Let's say that you are arguing over a dollar that you dropped--you pick it up and claim it's yours, but the other guy insists that it's his. You know you're right, and you deliver plenty of evidence why you're right, and then put the dollar in your pocket and move on. A few minutes later the guy shows up with five of his friends, who proceed to beat you down and take the dollar from you, leaving your bleeding, barely conscious carcass on the pavement.

It is unfair for a man to hit a woman for the same reason it is unfair for a group of guys to gang up on one person, male or female. If you have to resort to these things, then it just shows how inept you are at everything else besides thuggery.

That being said, reacting in self-defense is always justified, but you have to temper your defense based on the threat you are facing. Like a poster said earlier, if a five year old attacked you it would not be acceptable for an adult to treat an aggressive five year old the way he would treat another adult acting the same way. There are cases where women attack men violently and with intent to kill. I don't think anyone would dispute that you can fight back in those cases. But if a woman slaps you in the face because you just said something really nasty and insensitive, you are not entitled to knock her lights out. If a woman says something mean to you, you should not deck her even if you would deck a guy who said something similar, because you will probably hurt her far worse than she could ever hurt you. Be a man and walk away!
hitting ANYONE for saying something "mean" is stupid. I dont consider a slap to the face combat. if no one is in danger I dont fight.

if the difference between me and six men was the difference between a man and a woman, then I should have little problem with the thugs