"I don't hit women"

[communard resolution]

Is this statement sexist? As an anti-sexist man, should it be acceptable for me to smack a woman like I would smack a man?

How about 'friendly sexism', such as holding doors open for women, any 'ladies first' gestures, etc.

[Holden Caulfield]

i hold a 'chivalrous' view, i.e. walk my gf home, wouldnt hit a girl, be nicer to females,

if it makes me sexist, which it probably does, i am

i do not class women as any less than me and i get help off my GF all the time so i think it balances out,

[Bright Banana Beard]

If women attack you, you can defend yourself. I did try this by pushing her to the floor because she wouldn't stop slapping/hitting me. The thing is, I didn't punch her, but push her to the ground as the sign to chill the **** out already. For me, I think you just being gentlemen (noting sexist about it).

[Holden Caulfield]

same, ^^

[Module]

Is this statement sexist? As an anti-sexist man, should it be acceptable for me to smack a woman like I would smack a man?

How about 'friendly sexism', such as holding doors open for women, any 'ladies first' gestures, etc.
I hate the 'ladies first' gestures. Call me overly sensitive but I find them patronising, and altogether rude. I'd prefer to be treated like an equal than to have people go out of their way for me because of my sex.

In reference to 'I don't hit women', I think it depends.
First off, and this sounds really lame, but you shouldn't hit anyone (unless it's self defense). Regardless of whether they're a man or a woman.
If I wanted to beat the crap out of you, and you weren't fighting back because 'you don't hit women', I would, in all honesty, think you were a chauvinist jerk.
Again, call me overly sensitive. It's the principle of the thing. I really would prefer to be treated like an equal.

However, I don't think that you should be trying to hurt anybody who you knew wouldn't be able to stand up to you in a fight. The average woman going up against the average man would lose, so to going all out against the average woman as opposed to the average man wouldn't be the same thing.

The sporting thing to do when fighting against anybody who you know can't stand up to you in a fight is simply to fight in self defense.

[Holden Caulfield]

the point we were making was this, that, for some reason perhaps TV brainwashed me, i would try to restrain a female or push her away, where as i would just smack a guy and tell him to fuck off afterwards if they started on me and i though i could take them,

[Kami]

I hate the 'ladies first' gestures. Call me overly sensitive but I find them patronising, and altogether rude. I'd prefer to be treated like an equal than to have people go out of their way for me because of my sex.
Watch it with that attitude. I hold doors open for anyone, and often get caught in the crossfire, which is rather irritating to say the least.

In a situation where I'd hit anyone, I don't think I'd stop and think "oh no, this is a woman!". That, and I didn't have the best of times back when I was at school. Girls had a tendency to "hide" behind this cultural taboo when making my life a misery, so I outgrew it pretty quick.

[Module]

Watch it with that attitude. I hold doors open for anyone, and often get caught in the crossfire, which is rather irritating to say the least.

In a situation where I'd hit anyone, I don't think I'd stop and think "oh no, this is a woman!". That, and I didn't have the best of times back when I was at school. Girls had a tendency to "hide" behind this cultural taboo when making my life a misery, so I outgrew it pretty quick.
Holding the door open for somebody is different from 'ladies first'.

For instance, when I when to see 'The Orphanage' (scariest movie, I swear. Go see it.), my friend I was with (PTiT) tried to go in before us but the guy wouldn't rip his ticket and was like "ladies first".
He was trying to be gentlemanly, I know, but it just felt rude and sexist.

I hold the door open for people too, I think that's just common courtesy, but the whole chivalrous gentlemanly sexism thing isn't polite to me, it's outdated, it's sexist towards men in situations like the above and it's otherwise patronising towards us women.

[Holden Caulfield]

im the same with the door thing, but that is common courtesy tbh

but as i said before in a similar thread i would feel better myself to walk a female friends home at night (or if she asked) whereas if it was a male mate i would probably tell him to fuck off and laugh unless i knew he needed me there,

also i would like to add i on thursday broke up a girl fight at a party and threw the attacker out the house, i proper grabbed her and was like 'thats enough from you tonight', if it was a guy attacking my mate i would probs hit them rather than manhandle them to the door,

[communard resolution]

We were chasing a handful of nazi skinheads through town once when I was 16 or so. Unfortunately, they all managed to escape except for one girl whom they left behind. We wanted to hit her, but we just couldn't. We even ended up consoling her when she started to cry. Looking back, I think we were being really silly: she would have deserved to get smacked as much as her male friends.

What do you think of this type of situation?

[piet11111]

i would hit a woman if she was hitting me.
but i would use just enough force to stop the attack but that goes for both man and woman so i suppose that means i am not a sexist.

i never did any "friendly sexism" either though i was accused of doing so after asking a short woman if she needed help reached for groceries on the top shelf.

[Malakangga]

:confused::confused::confused:

[Tower of Bebel]

Well, through ages of male domination and inequality a certain sexist and sometimes oppressive gender relationship has been created. This gender relationship is reflected in language, religion, behavior and law and it still affects us (capitalism, du'h); which means it can also have an effect on those (men?) who don't want to be sexist at all. While some men today are against sexism or they're even feminist they still can't get rid of the old gender relations that dominated our behavior for years. Samples are "women first", chevalry, "don't hit a girl", ..., etc. Even if the use of these examples is meant to be friendly many women wont trust it at all, and I can understand that. The roots of this behavior are the same as that of today's sexism.

[Red_or_Dead]

What do you think of this type of situation?

Bash the fash.



On the door subject:


I hold doors open for anyone, and often get caught in the crossfire, which is rather irritating to say the least.


This. Although nobody ever said anything about it to me. Its just a common courtesy, like Holden said. Nothing sexist about it, unless you do it exclusively for women and with the chivalrous knight attitude.


As for hitting women...


In reference to 'I don't hit women', I think it depends.
First off, and this sounds really lame, but you shouldn't hit anyone (unless it's self defense). Regardless of whether they're a man or a woman.
If I wanted to beat the crap out of you, and you weren't fighting back because 'you don't hit women', I would, in all honesty, think you were a chauvinist jerk.
Again, call me overly sensitive. It's the principle of the thing. I really would prefer to be treated like an equal.


This.

[Dean]

I'll hit a woman just as fast as a man. I'm not sexist. However, I don't hit people unless they hit me or a loved one / close friend.

[Led Zeppelin]

For instance, when I when to see 'The Orphanage' (scariest movie, I swear. Go see it.)

That was indeed a scary movie, though the ending was fucked up.


my friend I was with (PTiT)

Are you still friends after the e-fight you had here? :p

[RaiseYourVoice]

We were chasing a handful of nazi skinheads through town once when I was 16 or so. Unfortunately, they all managed to escape except for one girl whom they left behind. We wanted to hit her, but we just couldn't. We even ended up consoling her when she started to cry. Looking back, I think we were being really silly: she would have deserved to get smacked as much as her male friends.

What do you think of this type of situation?
Um really I never chased someone down the street, since it could just be a crime in my country. But theoretically speaking, one person from a group left behind isn't the funniest target I imagine. Guy or Girl, fash or not. They got singled out by their friends, they know you could fuck them up, you showed them their borders. If the didn't do anything they deserve revenge for I would say that's enough.

As for hitting women, I guess I hit them as hard or weak as I hit anyone. It depends on what it takes to get rid of a dangerous situation really. That depends on weight, fighting skill, aggressiveness, maybe weapon etc. of the person you face.

Some of the examples here i find... rather strange.


also i would like to add i on thursday broke up a girl fight at a party and threw the attacker out the house, i proper grabbed her and was like 'thats enough from you tonight', if it was a guy attacking my mate i would probs hit them rather than manhandle them to the door,If there is a fight at a party you would just start punching one side? I mean fash yea, enemies yea, but people at a party? That usually just creates more mess than just grabbing one person and pushing him away.


Oh and about the restraining thing. Sure that can be just the best way, it depends on the restraining though. When I was young and didn't do much sports I really felt like being restrained while being angry, hurt and wanting to do something is about the worst situation. Feeling that the other person does not even have to hit you, can be pretty painful. So I would really think twice about restraining a women, because that can be degrading and make you feel inferior like nothing else. Loosing a fight isn't that bad.

[Holden Caulfield]

If there is a fight at a party you would just start punching one side? I mean fash yea, enemies yea, but people at a party? That usually just creates more mess than just grabbing one person and pushing him away

the girl i threw out totally deserved being threw out, as the 'extra guest' brought along to a party she started a fight by calling one of the groups names consistantly for little reason all night then pushing her, then trying to go crazy and attack,

plus when i asked her nicely to go home she told me i had 'no friends' and i was like yeah apart from all these party go-ers i have known for 7 years, then she tried yelling at me so i threw her out, at the behest of everbody else,

if it was the same situtation and a male 'extra guest' started to attack one of my mates in the same agressive/violent way he would get hit back and literally thrown out, its the strange ingrained mentality Raukinin was on about, just feel the need to act differently,

[communard resolution]

its the strange ingrained mentality Raukinin was on about, just feel the need to act differently

Yep. Come to think of it, if I were in the same situation again as the one I described (chasing nazi skins), I would probably still not be able to hit that girl. And I would probably regret it later.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I would like to say that i would hit a girl if she posed a threat or offended me deeply.
But thats a lie.


( the bellow presumes the girl is of equal strength to the man which they would be if i felt the urge to hit her )
If a man hit me and i broke his nose I would get the "your so cool" stuff
If a girl hit me and i broke her nose I would be labeled a woman beater and have the shit beaten out of me on a regular basis.

[Kami]

If a girl hit me and i broke her nose I would be labeled a woman beater and have the shit beaten out of me on a regular basis.This is fairly true. I once brushed a girls arm away, and ended up with a broken nose from a nearby crowd or arseholes.

Edit: Sorry, wrong injury, it was a broken jaw that time.

[Lector Malibu]

I don't hit anyone. If it is a self defense situation I will assess the threat level and my response will vary. However it depends on the situation and has nothing to do with whether the person is a female or male. Each situation is different.

[Module]

Are you still friends after the e-fight you had here? :p
Oh, it wasn't just on here, believe me. :lol:


This is fairly true. I once brushed a girls arm away, and ended up with a broken nose from a nearby crowd or arseholes.

Edit: Sorry, wrong injury, it was a broken jaw that time.
Yeah that was probably just a bunch of macho pricks wanting an excuse to exert physical force on anybody.
I can't imagine (at least around here) that if a guy hit a girl out of self defense...
Oh...
...Nah maybe he would... He wouldn't get beaten up but he'd still be looked down upon for it.

Like Flower Eater said I really think it should depend on the situation. There are going to be more men that are a threat than women, obviously, but in the situation where a woman is going after you and you'd have to fight back as to not get hurt then nobody should see anything wrong with it.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

but in the situation where a woman is going after you and you'd have to fight back as to not get hurt then nobody should see anything wrong with it.

but they do.

[F9]

i dont consider the "i dont hit women" a sexist phrase,it has some sexism but i cant really put it in the sexism category.It should be i dont hit people who dont attack me.Violence is not a solution ok,but if you are threatened and attacked or another person is getting bullying from other you may "forced" to use violence.If you have to defend of a woman that attacks you you will not hit her?what you will sit their and let her kill you?And there are women stronger than some men,i know some.Self-defence and helping others are emergency situations and you have to protecct yourself or others and what the "opponent" male or female or whatever plas no matter!

Fuserg9:star:

[nvm]

Lol i hit women and really badly!
My ex-gf had bruises all over her cuz i got mad one day and I kicked her ass
And I did it counciously , thinking that I am not sexist and I ll treat her like I treat a man.Although I don't like violence sometimes people need to get their ass kicked either they are men or women.
As about being nice to women I am, when I want something from them. Like I do with all people. So I am nice to my brother when I want his money and I am nice to women when I want to date them(this is not sexist!).
But if I dont consider a woman a friend or potential date I am an asshole to her:P
I guess I am a pretty bad person but hey! at least I am not sexist!
And yes not hitting women when they deserve to be beaten is sexist!
Of course women can beat men also when men deserve it.
As about being nice to women its not sexist. You want something from them and you are nice to them and that applies to men also so I dont think its sexist!

[YSR]

Honestly, with the rates of domestic violence against women as high as they are around the world, I don't really think chastising men who refuse to hit women should be on the top of our list of priorities.

[Module]

Lol i hit women and really badly!
My ex-gf had bruises all over her cuz i got mad one day and I kicked her ass
And I did it counciously , thinking that I am not sexist and I ll treat her like I treat a man.Although I don't like violence sometimes people need to get their ass kicked either they are men or women.
As about being nice to women I am, when I want something from them. Like I do with all people. So I am nice to my brother when I want his money and I am nice to women when I want to date them(this is not sexist!).
But if I dont consider a woman a friend or potential date I am an asshole to her:P
I guess I am a pretty bad person but hey! at least I am not sexist!
And yes not hitting women when they deserve to be beaten is sexist!
Of course women can beat men also when men deserve it.
As about being nice to women its not sexist. You want something from them and you are nice to them and that applies to men also so I dont think its sexist!
Right, and you think that's okay?
Yeah you are a fucking arsehole. Thank god she's your ex.
What do you mean "when they deserve to be beaten"?
Who the fuck deserves to be beaten? Nobody deserves to be beaten up by somebody who they can't fight back against.
You're complete and utter scum.
If anybody deserves to get their arses kicked it's people like you.

Especially people who are willing to inflict violence upon those who trust them, and presumably care about them, like somebody you're in a relationship with.

Do you think you're cool, or something?
Fucking prick.

[Herman]

My ex-gf had bruises all over her cuz i got mad one day and I kicked her ass
And I did it counciously , thinking that I am not sexist and I ll treat her like I treat a man.Although I don't like violence sometimes people need to get their ass kicked either they are men or women.

You relish on the idea that she had bruises all over?

That's utterly disgusting. Do you beat people up just because you're mad? Go vent your anger by kicking your own balls.

[RaiseYourVoice]

My ex-gf had bruises all over her cuz i got mad one day and I kicked her assDo you just beat people that can't defend themselves? Or do you actually beat people who could beat the shit out of you too?

Judging from your comment i highly doubt the later.

And i agree that whole comment is disgusting

[communard resolution]

Yeah you are a fucking arsehole. Thank god she's your ex.


I feel sorry for nvm's ex-girlfriend, but I'm kind of glad he posted the comment.

It made me wonder whether all historic and present oppression of women is not ultimately based on the simple fact that men tend to be physically stronger than women? I mean the fact that, when it comes to the crunch, a man could beat the shit out of a woman if he wanted to? Of course this doesn't apply to every single man and woman, but generally speaking we do have a stronger physique.

Is a wifebeater or girlfriend beater like nvm an anti-sexist who just happened to hit somebody weaker than himself? Or does he represent the purest, most basic essence of male sexism?

Sorry if I'm sending out conflicting messages in this thread, it's just that I'm really undecided on this issue myself.

[Mujer Libre]

Honestly, with the rates of domestic violence against women as high as they are around the world, I don't really think chastising men who refuse to hit women should be on the top of our list of priorities.
Indeed. Considering that generally when men hit women it's because they're misogynists, or just arseholes, rather than in self defence, men hitting women isn't really something that needs encouraging.

[Module]

I feel sorry for nvm's ex-girlfriend, but I'm kind of glad he posted the comment.

It made me wonder whether all historic and present oppression of women is not ultimately based on the simple fact that men tend to be physically stronger than women? I mean the fact that, when it comes to the crunch, a man could beat the shit out of a woman if he wanted to? Of course this doesn't apply to every single man and woman, but generally speaking we do have a stronger physique.

Is a wifebeater or girlfriend beater like nvm an anti-sexist who just happened to hit somebody weaker than himself? Or does he represent the purest, most basic essence of male sexism?

Sorry if I'm sending out conflicting messages in this thread, it's just that I'm really undecided on this issue myself.
Yes, I think that you're right. (the following is primarily taken (and edited) from an MSN conversation I had on the matter ...)
I know I said earlier if I was to try fight with a man and they wouldn't hit back because I was female I'd be offended,
However, the thought of a man he could go all out on the average woman simply because he was thinking 'I shouldn't treat her differently because she's a woman', is really not cool.
I think that what should be considered wrong instead of hitting women is hitting anybody who you know couldn't stand up to you in a fight.

And I think that's the thing, it's not simply about women being naturally 'weaker' than men, but also that men are socialised into thinking that it's okay to beat other people up, that it's a masculine thing to do, and if somebody is trying to hurt you then you should teach them a lesson

In that way I think that's unfair to say that men and women should be treated equally even simply on the basis of if they couldn't stand up to you
It's unfair for men to think they won't treat women differently to men because they're the ones who are socialised into thinking that it's a valid way to react to somebody who's hurting you, physically or otherwise.
It's a masculine form of power. It just asserts men's dominance as men, not simply as those who are physically stronger.

[RHIZOMES]

Lol i hit women and really badly!
My ex-gf had bruises all over her cuz i got mad one day and I kicked her ass
And I did it counciously , thinking that I am not sexist and I ll treat her like I treat a man.Although I don't like violence sometimes people need to get their ass kicked either they are men or women.
As about being nice to women I am, when I want something from them. Like I do with all people. So I am nice to my brother when I want his money and I am nice to women when I want to date them(this is not sexist!).
But if I dont consider a woman a friend or potential date I am an asshole to her:P
I guess I am a pretty bad person but hey! at least I am not sexist!
And yes not hitting women when they deserve to be beaten is sexist!
Of course women can beat men also when men deserve it.
As about being nice to women its not sexist. You want something from them and you are nice to them and that applies to men also so I dont think its sexist!

Kill yourself.

[Dimentio]

Fucking shit... this actually makes me quite angry.

nvm, you are not a man, you are an animal.

My ex girlfriend was unfaithful to me, but I would never ever have hurt her physically because of that.

Physical violence should A) only be condoned in self-defense situations, and B) be proportionate. If your girlfriend for example is attacking you with a kitchen knife (extreme example I know), you have the right to for example give a deflective blow and disarm her and push her on the floor, but not for example beat her up afterwards.

The same thing applies for women, but I understand over-violence there more since women tend to be physically weaker.

[Redmau5]

Lol i hit women and really badly!
My ex-gf had bruises all over her cuz i got mad one day and I kicked her ass
And I did it counciously , thinking that I am not sexist and I ll treat her like I treat a man.Although I don't like violence sometimes people need to get their ass kicked either they are men or women.
As about being nice to women I am, when I want something from them. Like I do with all people. So I am nice to my brother when I want his money and I am nice to women when I want to date them(this is not sexist!).
But if I dont consider a woman a friend or potential date I am an asshole to her:P
I guess I am a pretty bad person but hey! at least I am not sexist!
And yes not hitting women when they deserve to be beaten is sexist!
Of course women can beat men also when men deserve it.
As about being nice to women its not sexist. You want something from them and you are nice to them and that applies to men also so I dont think its sexist!

Dude, is there something wrong with your head?

[nvm]

Dudes I dont know why you are so shocked.
Unless you never lived a life, you understand that sometimes people make you so angry that you cannot control yourself.
You dont mean what you do but you get so mad that you cant control yourself.
And I never said that I do that often it only happened once.
Like I dont know what to think.
Do you live in a fucking bubble?

[eyedrop]

Dudes I dont know why you are so shocked.
Unless you never lived a life, you understand that sometimes people make you so angry that you cannot control yourself.
A part of being civilized is to not let your rage control yourself. In a postrevolutionary society I wouldn't deem it safe to let you walk around people. Part of society duties is to make it as likely as possible that everyone is safe from brutal unwarranted violence. I don't wanna have people who can't control their rage walking around.


You dont mean what you do but you get so mad that you cant control yourself.
And I never said that I do that often it only happened once.
Like I dont know what to think.
Do you live in a fucking bubble? I let my mind decide what I do, not my impulses. We don't get so mad that we can't control what we do, buhu she cheated on you or whatever she did, suck it up. You don't beat up people because the don't do what you want them to do. What do you achieve with such violence? Scare her into obeying your wishes? Violence without a meaningful purpose is bullshit.

[nvm]

as likely as possible that everyone is safe from brutal unwarranted violence.

I never said that I hit anyone for no reason.......


I let my mind decide what I do, not my impulses. We don't get so mad that we can't control what we do, buhu she cheated on you or whatever she did, suck it up. You don't beat up people because the don't do what you want them to do. What do you achieve with such violence? Scare her into obeying your wishes? Violence without a meaningful purpose is bullshit.
First of all I never said that she cheated.
I dont know though about you americans (without being racist) but we Greeks have feelings.
I find that people in North America are less spontaneous and less warm blooded than Greeks and people in the Mediteranean.
It is not unusual for a woman in Greece or other such countries to beat her husbant , for a husbant (not in the sense of domestic violence) to beat his wife, or for people to start punching eachother in the streets for a stupid reason. (Like for example if someone takes your parking spot or some other ridiculus reason ) .
It is the environment you live in.
That doesnt mean that we are uncivilized.
It means that we are not robots trying to control our temperament.
Domestic violence etc I am against that ,
But a guy beating his gf or wife or the oppossite , when there is a valid reason, well I am not against that.
And I find nothing wrong with it.
Its just natural.
And dont tell me that you never got in a fight and never used violence .

[Dean]

That doesnt mean that we are uncivilized.
It means that we are not robots trying to control our temperament.
Domestic violence etc I am against that ,
But a guy beating his gf or wife or the oppossite , when there is a valid reason, well I am not against that.
And I find nothing wrong with it.
Its just natural.
And dont tell me that you never got in a fight and never used violence .
This isn't the issue of civility and savagery. This is the difference between joyously accepting your own violent history or treating it like it is the sad thing that it is. Spontaneity has little to do with destructiveness.

[eyedrop]

I never said that I hit anyone for no reason....... Not that impopartant but I'm abit curious about your reason.



First of all I never said that she cheated. I didn't say that either.

I dont know though about you americans (without being racist) but we Greeks have feelings.
I find that people in North America are less spontaneous and less warm blooded than Greeks and people in the Mediteranean.
It is not unusual for a woman in Greece or other such countries to beat her husbant , for a husbant (not in the sense of domestic violence) to beat his wife, or for people to start punching eachother in the streets for a stupid reason. (Like for example if someone takes your parking spot or some other ridiculus reason ) .
It is the environment you live in.
That doesnt mean that we are uncivilized.
It means that we are not robots trying to control our temperament.Culture is not an excuse for lousy behaviour. Being in a fight or fighting about something is something completely different from beating someone up.

I've seen my fair share of couples flinging forks, knives and keramics after each other and there is nothing wrong with that, though quite funny to watch. I've even slapped my own girlfriend back a few times, but that is a completely different thing from beating someone up. I think it's perfectly fine to throw a slap back, it's not like a man shoul have to stand there and recieve punches. I've also once had slap a woman after she had pressed me into a corner and grouched after my groin, it would have been despicable to me to continue to hit her and beat her up then. Just like continuing to kick someone after they are lying on the ground is despicable. Slapping her then was just self-defence to prevent her from raping me, perfectly valid.

Domestic violence etc I am against that , What is then the difference between beating up your partner, as I read your post, and domestic violence?

But a guy beating his gf or wife or the oppossite , when there is a valid reason, well I am not against that.
And I find nothing wrong with it.
Its just natural. What is a valid reason to beat up your spouse if I may ask?

And dont tell me that you never got in a fight and never used violence .Using violence is perfectly fine, but most bar brawls around here consists of a group of 4-5 guys attacking a lone guy, preferably drunk. A fair fight between willing opponents is perfectly fine, but I've yet to see it.



Do you start beating your friends too when you are having disagreements?

[nvm]

Dude I ll respond once and for all.
with beating people up i didn't mean that i sent her to the hospital.
Just some slaps and some hitting and some bruises.
Like nothing special!
And it was only once!
It is the same thing with beating up a man , or getting beaten up by a woman(well that happened to me when I thought that hitting woman was immoral)
Like cmon now
You make a big deal out of nothing.
Anywayz go throw a knive at your wife now and leave me alone

[chimx]

leave me alone

No. You are arguably the most misogynistic person I have ever seen on this website.

[nvm]

No. You are arguably the most misogynistic person I have ever seen on this website.


I am not misogunistic....
I love women.

[chimx]

You don't just apologize for domestic violence, but you go so far as to advocate domestic violence. You do not belong on this website.

[nvm]

I never advocated for domestic violence and I specificaly said that I am against domestic violence! Look at my posts before you slander me baselessly!


Originately posted by ME :


Domestic violence etc I am against that ,


Now if you are too lazy to read my posts and my explanation then don't talk at all!


You do not belong on this website.

Why? Because I believe in equality of men and women on everything? Why because I said that I am AGAINST domestic violence?
Or because the things I say break your little bubble on what a revolutionary should REALLY be??

You are free to silence me using your authority as a moderator but that is not only authoritarian , but unjust, because I specificaly said that I am against sexism and domestic violence.
Shame!

[chimx]

You said people should hit their girlfriends or wives if they deserve it. What do you think domestic violence is?

[nvm]

You said people should hit their girlfriends or wives if they deserve it. What do you think domestic violence is?


Yes I said that bu I specificaly said that women can do so too . And I specificaly said also that when someone deserves to be beaten not every day. When one person has done something really wrong to another person( And not just men to women but women to men ) . Domestic violence occurs when a family member, partner or ex-partner attempts to physically or psychological dominate the other. I never advocated for that . I just said that in a big fight a man (or woman) cannot be blamed for hitting his/her partner. But this of course as I said on my previous threads should not happen all the time , not even occasionaly, but in special occassions. It is a pity that you misunderstood me.
It was pretty much a respnse to all those "saints" who never hit anyone and pretend that they are MAria Teresa. We are humans and violence can be justified, against men , women , kids or wtv. But again I emphasize that should not happen everyday or occasionaly but if its done once in a BIG while it is ok with me and all the other normal everyday people. Of course some saits will still disagree but wtv it seems that I cant convince them

[chimx]

Yes I said that bu I specificaly said that women can do so too

Both are domestic violence, and what you are doing is justifying domestic violence. I'm not misunderstanding anything.

[nvm]

Both are domestic violence, and what you are doing is justifying domestic violence. I'm not misunderstanding anything.

Domestic violence is violence against a spouce that happens on a frequent basis and it 's goal is the domination of one partner over the other .
I NEVER said that I advocate that.
So either we have a different perception of what domestic violence is , either you are misunderstanding me!
And no im not misogynistic, I support the equality of sexes

[chimx]

And no im not misogynistic, I support the equality of sexes

Physiologically speaking, men tend to have greater muscle mass than women. Your position apologizes for men's physical dominance in a relationship over women -- because you can just beat them into submission if you think they "really deserve it". The fact that you've already confessed to this kind of domestic violence is disgusting in itself, but for you to continue with your little misogynist rant justifying your abuse story by saying it was her fault or that she was asking for it is really a slap in the face.

I'm suggesting that your account be banned from this website for the same reasons we ban racist trash. (I wouldn't be at all surprised if you try to apologize for racial violence too using the same illogic)

[TC]

NVM I really hope you appreciate what a loser and what scum you are.

Domestic violence is violence committed against a sexual partner, thats just the definition; its not limited to spouses thats why its called 'domestic violence' not 'frequent spousal abuse.'

There is no conceivable legitimate reason for being violent against someone other than to prevent them from being violent. To hit someone who poses a true eminent physical threat to you (i.e. they're pulling back for a punch), who you have severed all civil and social relationships with, is one thing. To beat a girlfriend, to maintain a sexual relationship with someone when you think they've wronged you enough that you want to physically hurt them, but you still want to fuck them, you don't want to leave them (or let them go as the case my be) is a defacto relationship of sexual dominance.

When you regard someone as a person, the threshold for leaving a relationship is lower than the threshold for violence; to use violence while maintaining a relationship is to act as though you can separate your attitudes to what you want to do to her sexually to how you think of her as a person. That is to say, the use value of her body to you and the use value of her mind are held to be seperate (whereas people who regard their sexual partners as full persons relate to them sexually on a physical level largely in order to evoke a positive psychological and emotional reaction in them). This is the essence of reducing women to sexual property and the basis for patriarchal relations between husbands and wives and fathers and daughters. Of course this is sexist, its fundamentally dehumanizing in ways a bar fight is not.


If you really think "all the other normal everyday people" are okay with you beating up a girlfriend on "special occasions" why don't you go around bragging about it in real life instead of on the internet. You'd probably get your balls cut off that way.

[Mujer Libre]

To beat a girlfriend, to maintain a sexual relationship with someone when you think they've wronged you enough that you want to physically hurt them, but you still want to fuck them, you don't want to leave them (or let them go as the case my be) is a defacto relationship of sexual dominance.
That is an excellent point, and a rebuttal to all those on this board who think that domestic violence can be anything but sexism.

It's not just about physical beatings, and how often they happen, it's about the incredibly demoralising nature of the fact that it's someone who is supposed to be their partner who is abusing them, about how trapped they feel, about the emotional abuse and the systematic destruction of a woman's sense of self-worth.

As I said in the CC thread, I recently lost a loved one because of shit like this, and I'm completely disgusted that nvm hasn't been banned yet.

[nvm]

I'm suggesting that your account be banned from this website for the same reasons we ban racist trash. (I wouldn't be at all surprised if you try to apologize for racial violence too using the same illogic)
What?? !?!?! How can you link up an act of violence against a woman which just happened once and it was not because she is a woman but because she did something bad to me and the act of hitting someone because of his race(?!) .This connection is clearly irrational ,or to use a more precise word, idiotic!



Physiologically speaking, men tend to have greater muscle mass than women. Your position apologizes for men's physical dominance in a relationship over women -- because you can just beat them into submission if you think they "really deserve it".

It is not a question of strength. It is a question of subkective moral right before using violence. If I did something bad to my girlfireind I would not react if she punched me or beat me with a stick or anything like that. I would deserve it. So it all reduces itself to my subjective sense of morality that violence is moral when someone deserves to be beaten. You cannot impose your subjective sense of morality on me , just like I cannot do the same thing to you


Domestic violence is violence committed against a sexual partner, thats just the definition; its not limited to spouses thats why its called 'domestic violence' not 'frequent spousal abuse.'


There is no conceivable legitimate reason for being violent against someone other than to prevent them from being violent. To hit someone who poses a true eminent physical threat to you (i.e. they're pulling back for a punch), who you have severed all civil and social relationships with, is one thing. To beat a girlfriend, to maintain a sexual relationship with someone when you think they've wronged you enough that you want to physically hurt them, but you still want to fuck them, you don't want to leave them (or let them go as the case my be) is a defacto relationship of sexual dominance.
We have different definitions for morality and domestic abuse. So stop trying to impose yours to me, just like I dont impose mines to yours. I think that domestic violence is something frequent and for no reason. while my situation happened just once and with a valid enough reason for me for someone to use violence. I subjectively think that violence can be used not just for self defence .



When you regard someone as a person, the threshold for leaving a relationship is lower than the threshold for violence; to use violence while maintaining a relationship is to act as though you can separate your attitudes to what you want to do to her sexually to how you think of her as a person. That is to say, the use value of her body to you and the use value of her mind are held to be seperate (whereas people who regard their sexual partners as full persons relate to them sexually on a physical level largely in order to evoke a positive psychological and emotional reaction in them). This is the essence of reducing women to sexual property and the basis for patriarchal relations between husbands and wives and fathers and daughters. Of course this is sexist, its fundamentally dehumanizing in ways a bar fight is not.

This is clearly paraphrazing me and putting things on the wrong context.
I didt hit her for dominance I felt that she fucked me over and it was an explosion of anger . Of course we broke up right after that so what you said does not fit in the situation! And those thersholds are not static and determined beforehand theoreticaly by some "expert". In this situation the thresholds collided.
So I clearly did not use the physical abuse as a form of domination but as an explosion of anger. So your argument is prety useless.




I'm suggesting that your account be banned from this website

I suggest that you become an anarchist on action not just words.
I agree that capitalists, religious freaks and racists (inc. sexists)should be banned.
But since I never talked about discrimination against women and it is only you subjectively (along with other people with the same conciousness) that regard my action as sexist and of domestic violence , I clearly think that this is authoritarianism and conflicts with your so -called anarchistic thought . Shame again .

[nvm]

That is an excellent point,

This is a stupid point when it is used in my situation because I did not continue the relationship. Its a lie, a slander and taking things out of context.

[Lector Malibu]

nvm

I think it's pretty sad that you got caught with your pants down once again and now are ferociously trying to back peddle and what not.

We had problems with you when you used to post under the name Lollipop

You have been given chances. I'm now asking for your ban as well.

[nvm]

You have been given chances. I'm now asking for your ban as well

Ok so be it .
Vote on banning me or wtv. I hold my positions as they are.
It matters a little for me if you ban me or not.
I still think though that such decision would be authoritarian and idiotic.

[chimx]

Beating your girlfriend is "authoritarian" and "idiotic"

[nvm]

Beating your girlfriend is "authoritarian" and "idiotic"

No it is not authoritarian because I never tried to impose anything on her it was just an explosion of anger.
It is idiotic for you but for me at the heat of the moment it was just. And since I proved all of your guys arguments ridiculus now ban me because you cannot answer to my response. Prove that you are bureaucrats that cant handle being proved wrong by someone else.
You have no difference with Stalin. He exiled Trotsky because he could not beat him in the field of theory and ideas just like you chimx cannot beat my argument.
So if that is the quality of the moderators of this forum I ll leave by myself no need to ban me.
Now go and read Bakunin and Malatesta and feel that you are an anarchist at least in theory.

[Lost In Translation]

Lol i hit women and really badly!
My ex-gf had bruises all over her cuz i got mad one day and I kicked her ass
And I did it counciously , thinking that I am not sexist and I ll treat her like I treat a man.Although I don't like violence sometimes people need to get their ass kicked either they are men or women.
As about being nice to women I am, when I want something from them. Like I do with all people. So I am nice to my brother when I want his money and I am nice to women when I want to date them(this is not sexist!).
But if I dont consider a woman a friend or potential date I am an asshole to her:P
I guess I am a pretty bad person but hey! at least I am not sexist!
And yes not hitting women when they deserve to be beaten is sexist!
Of course women can beat men also when men deserve it.
As about being nice to women its not sexist. You want something from them and you are nice to them and that applies to men also so I dont think its sexist!
Wow...that was just not right. If that is your definition of sexism, then I really am confused at the moment. You have to take into consideration the physical advantage men have over women. That is the truth. But what you said really gave me goosebumps. I've heard of people losing themselves in the heat of the moment, but this is indescribably barbaric.

[nvm]

Wow...that was just not right. If that is your definition of sexism, then I really am confused at the moment. You have to take into consideration the physical advantage men have over women. That is the truth. But what you said really gave me goosebumps. I've heard of people losing themselves in the heat of the moment, but this is indescribably barbaric.
Read the whole series of my responses and then make an opinion

PS:IF you give a shit!

[TC]

It is not a question of strength. It is a question of subkective moral right before using violence. If I did something bad to my girlfireind I would not react if she punched me or beat me with a stick or anything like that. I would deserve it. So it all reduces itself to my subjective sense of morality that violence is moral when someone deserves to be beaten. You cannot impose your subjective sense of morality on me , just like I cannot do the same thing to you

So stop trying to impose yours to me, just like I dont impose mines to yours.

How pathetic and hypocritical: using violence because you think someone subjectively morally deserved it is imposing your subjective sense of morality onto them.

I'm not trying to 'impose' my sense of morality onto you with physical force as you do, I'm simply showing how objectively/structually sexist you are.


I think that domestic violence is something frequent and for no reason. while my situation happened just once and with a valid enough reason for me for someone to use violence. I subjectively think that violence can be used not just for self defence .

Do you honestly think that anyone who uses violence does so without having "a reason." Every violent act has a motive or the person wouldn't be doing it.
[/quote]

[nvm]

How pathetic and hypocritical: using violence because you think someone subjectively morally deserved it is imposing your subjective sense of morality onto them.
The mischief is objective. Only the using violence part is subjective. And it is on the heat on the moment dont forget. So I fail to understand how it is hypocritical what I said.


Do you honestly think that anyone who uses violence does so without having "a reason." Every violent act has a motive or the person wouldn't be doing it.
Not an objective reason. The wrong in my situation was objective . To hit a black man for example because of his race that is not an objective reason and should be condemned.

[Lost In Translation]

Yes, I've seen your defence for your position nvm. You covered the bases well, but the first impression is the most enduring. The fact that you even posted something like your initial statement is cause for concern.

[R_P_A_S]

I think this thread is a waste of time.. analyzing if holding a door open for a lady is sexist or not? are you kidding me?

I think it has to do with what kind of men you are dealing with. if is one of us of course.. you'd think we aren't sexist or doing it to be "patronizing" but as a kind act, a gesture, etc. if you are a some chauvinist that thinks she is weak and its your job to protect her then fuck you, you are sexist. end of story

[nvm]

The fact that you even posted something like your initial statement is cause for concern.
Ok so lets all be hypocrites and liars

[professorchaos]

nvm

I think it's pretty sad that you got caught with your pants down once again and now are ferociously trying to back peddle and what not.

We had problems with you when you used to post under the name Lollipop

You have been given chances. I'm now asking for your ban as well.
I would argue for at least restriction. Coming in here as a domestic violence apologist and then trying to defend oneself from a position of moral subjectivity is like coming in here as a capitalist and then saying "I happen to believe that the exploitation of the proletariat is not immoral and shame on you for trying to impose your beliefs on me, fascist!"
You don't hit the people you love. It's fucking simple.

[Redmau5]

How pathetic and hypocritical: using violence because you think someone subjectively morally deserved it is imposing your subjective sense of morality onto them.

This. ^^^

nvm, I really can't understand how you're trying to defend this. Everyone loses their temper with other people, but we don't automatically beat them and leave them with bruises for fuck's sake.

I honestly think you need help, based on what I've read.

[Lector Malibu]

I would argue for at least restriction. Coming in here as a domestic violence apologist and then trying to defend oneself from a position of moral subjectivity is like coming in here as a capitalist and then saying "I happen to believe that the exploitation of the proletariat is not immoral and shame on you for trying to impose your beliefs on me, fascist!"
You don't hit the people you love. It's fucking simple.

That ship sailed long ago...

[Natasha Gonzalez]

This is just awful!

[Dimentio]

No it is not authoritarian because I never tried to impose anything on her it was just an explosion of anger.
It is idiotic for you but for me at the heat of the moment it was just. And since I proved all of your guys arguments ridiculus now ban me because you cannot answer to my response. Prove that you are bureaucrats that cant handle being proved wrong by someone else.
You have no difference with Stalin. He exiled Trotsky because he could not beat him in the field of theory and ideas just like you chimx cannot beat my argument.
So if that is the quality of the moderators of this forum I ll leave by myself no need to ban me.
Now go and read Bakunin and Malatesta and feel that you are an anarchist at least in theory.

Trotsky. Was. Not. Banned. For. Beating. His. Wife.

You are pathetic. Truly.

[Dimentio]

We were chasing a handful of nazi skinheads through town once when I was 16 or so. Unfortunately, they all managed to escape except for one girl whom they left behind. We wanted to hit her, but we just couldn't. We even ended up consoling her when she started to cry. Looking back, I think we were being really silly: she would have deserved to get smacked as much as her male friends.

What do you think of this type of situation?

I don't think you should have beaten her up. *changing subject*

she gave up and surrendered, and the honorable thing to do is to treat surrendering enemies valiantly.

I know that skinheads often have a tendency to do the contrary stuff, like kicking the heads of persons who lie down, beating up children, and so on. I know about a case in Stockholm where a skinhead kicked a ten year old Palestinian girl in her head just for happening to stand nearby a nazi rally.

That is dishonourable and completely awful, but we left an "eye for an eye" a long time ago.

If you have to strike, strike for the love of those who you are defending, and not for the hate of thsoe you are opposing.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

In fairness a lot of people on this website believe in strict formal equality, effectively disregarding the history of domestic spousal relationships. I think it can be traced back to the tendency of the far-left to completely misunderstand society and how it works.

[Jeanette]

I must say that I don't feel patronized when a guy holds up the door when I walk by. But I do feel that when I go out dancing and I suddenly have some guy holding his arm around my waist, I don't feel to comfortable being a woman.

nvm, I can't really understand why you changed your opinion so quickly. First, you seemed to be proud of having hit a woman until she was bruised and all. Then, when you had seen some of the reactions, you changed your point and began to apologize for what you had said.
To me, that seems suspicious. I mean, why pretend to be proud of something and then realize that people are against you and flee?

[Dimentio]

He just don't wanna get banned.

[eyedrop]

You make a big deal out of nothing.
Anywayz go throw a knive at your wife now and leave me alone

I personally don't see the need for throwing furniture around when arguing, I just let them live the rest of their life without me.


I am not making a big deal out of nothing, I've seen 1 too many empty shells of a woman left with many years to heal before being able to be be intimate again, just because of behaviour like yours. Women which couldn't feel comfortable even being touched by men. Being beaten up once, by your partner, leaves big psychological scars and it's hard for very many women (in the most usual case) to ever completely trust a partner again. This is something I feel very strongly about, it's hard enough to get a regular woman, who has not been subject to physical abuse, to embrace her sexuality.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

I personally don't see the need for throwing furniture around when arguing, I just let them live the rest of their life without me.


I am not making a big deal out of nothing, I've seen 1 too many empty shells of a woman left with many years to heal before being able to be be intimate again, just because of behaviour like yours. Women which couldn't feel comfortable even being touched by men. Being beaten up once, by your partner, leaves big psychological scars and it's hard for very many women (in the most usual case) to ever completely trust a partner again. This is something I feel very strongly about, it's hard enough to get a regular woman, who has not been subject to physical abuse, to embrace her sexuality.
:laugh:

[eyedrop]

There are too much victorian values being pushed on a lot of women through their upbringing. Why do you think so many women are unable to orgasm for example? Or have sex for their own pleasure and not the pleasure of their partner.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

There are too much victorian values being pushed on a lot of women through their upbringing. Why do you think so many women are unable to orgasm for example? Or have sex for their own pleasure and not the pleasure of their partner.
Why do your feminist beliefs seem to centre entirely around sex? In your previous post you made it sound as if the problem with domestic violence leaving women as broken, empty shells is that it makes it harder for you to get some.

[eyedrop]

Why do your feminist beliefs seem to centre entirely around sex? In your previous post you made it sound as if the problem with domestic violence leaving women as broken, empty shells is that it makes it harder for you to get some.

In my previous post I didn't just mean intimacy as in sex, also as just being able touch a male in a friendly way. Patriarchy has also focused on portraying the females as sex objects, beings which sex are done upon. Not as sexual protagonists, it's important to combat that belief. The stereotypical norm now is the woman as as the one allowing males to have sex with her, not with the woman being the one seeking sex for her own pleasure.

Besides sex is mostly psycology, (though many just think it's about trusting long enough) one can't have a proper sex life with a destroyed psyke. That is where the results of abuse is the most visible, in not being able to have a real relationship. It is not an equal society before women are sexual actors as men are. Not maidens put on a pedestal.

Women need to be more empowered in other positions too, but sexual empowerment is not to be underestimated. It's a big part of living life for oneself and not for others.

[Module]

Why do your feminist beliefs seem to centre entirely around sex? In your previous post you made it sound as if the problem with domestic violence leaving women as broken, empty shells is that it makes it harder for you to get some.
No, he didn't. Just because he mentions, once, women being unable to embrace their sexuality, which is true, does not mean his entire feminist beliefs are focused around it.


In fairness a lot of people on this website believe in strict formal equality, effectively disregarding the history of domestic spousal relationships. I think it can be traced back to the tendency of the far-left to completely misunderstand society and how it works.
I agree with this, completely.
There are a lot of people who think it's okay to engage in "gentlemanly" behaviour, because it's 'polite'.
Really, this either translates to 'I'm trying to be polite so how dare you suggest I could be doing anything wrong!' or ... 'I'm going to be pretentious at the expense of the acknowledging sexism!'. Either one could be true.
(But this is a bit of a tangent.)

[communard resolution]

I don't think you should have beaten her up. *changing subject*

she gave up and surrendered, and the honorable thing to do is to treat surrendering enemies valiantly.

I know that skinheads often have a tendency to do the contrary stuff, like kicking the heads of persons who lie down, beating up children, and so on. I know about a case in Stockholm where a skinhead kicked a ten year old Palestinian girl in her head just for happening to stand nearby a nazi rally.

That is dishonourable and completely awful, but we left an "eye for an eye" a long time ago.

If you have to strike, strike for the love of those who you are defending, and not for the hate of thsoe you are opposing.

In regards to "eye for an eye": it was absolutely necessary at that point. They were terrorizing the town where I lived and hospitalized quite a few people. We wanted to change that. At some point they got the message and stayed out of the city centre, which massively improved the quality of life for us and a lot of other people. We weren't chasing those guys for the fun of it.

You've got a point saying we shouldn't have beat up that nazi girl. We didn't, and I'm pretty sure I would still not be able to do it, although my sole, questionable reason was her gender. It's not like those nazi girls were never involved in skinhead attacks.

As for my orginal thread, I guess nvm's 'contribution' was a good reality check and answered my question through sheer shock therapy.

[Dimentio]

In regards to "eye for an eye": it was absolutely necessary at that point. They were terrorizing the town where I lived and hospitalized quite a few people. We wanted to change that. At some point they got the message and stayed out of the city centre, which massively improved the quality of life for us and a lot of other people. We weren't chasing those guys for the fun of it.

You've got a point saying we shouldn't have beat up that nazi girl. We didn't, and I'm pretty sure I would still not be able to do it, although my sole, questionable reason was her gender. It's not like those nazi girls were never involved in skinhead attacks.

As for my orginal thread, I guess nvm's 'contribution' was a good reality check and answered my question through sheer shock therapy.

Of course they were involved in attacks against innocents. But that is not enough of a motivaton to beat up a person who is begging for mercy. If an enemy, no matter how vile and morally perverted, is giving up and surrendering, which that girl undoubtly did, they should not be kicked after giving up.

With a little luck, you could turn a nazi. Remember that Marx called antisemitism "the communism of the fool".

Genghis Khan for example, spared all cities which opened their gates, while the Japanese under WW2 tortured prisoners of war who had given up voluntarily to death for being "weak". That actually increased the resistance from the Japanese.

[communard resolution]

Of course they were involved in attacks against innocents. But that is not enough of a motivaton to beat up a person who is begging for mercy. If an enemy, no matter how vile and morally perverted, is giving up and surrendering, which that girl undoubtly did, they should not be kicked after giving up.As I already stated, we didn't touch her.


With a little luck, you could turn a nazi. I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Are you suggesting I'm almost as bad as a Nazi because we chased them out of the city centre to put an end to their terror?

[eyedrop]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Are you suggesting I'm almost as bad as a Nazi because we chased them out of the city centre to put an end to their terror?

Interesting thoughts Nero (liked your old nick better:blushing:) I don't think that was what he meant. I think he was more thinking of what one should do when you are in a position with a beaten enemy.

You where perfectly justified in taking back the city centre in my opinion. I too think I wouldn't be able to beat up a girl, well, after she is captured. I'm not really sure if I would beat up a guy either in such circumstances. I still see your problem as I also have more reservations to hitting a female than a male. I'm not stoked about hitting anyone in cold blood.

In the heat of a street fight itmay would have been different, I don't really know as I haven't been put in such a situation. The nazi's in my hometown were never really visible, we knew that they were there but no one was openly nazi. There were Vigrid ceremonies in the woods, but they were good at keeping at keeping themselfes undercover.


PS! Thanks for support Des

[Dimentio]

As I already stated, we didn't touch her.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Are you suggesting I'm almost as bad as a Nazi because we chased them out of the city centre to put an end to their terror?

You only did your duty.

What I said was/is a bad thing and I stand for, is more force than is necessary.

[Redmau5]

I think it can be traced back to the tendency of the far-left to completely misunderstand society and how it works.

Then why are you here?

[shuuk]

This subject always bothered me for a few reasons, the major one being the hitting a girl topic. if you fight a girl normaly you lose eather way

( at least in the U.S ) if you win you just beat up a girl and if you lose you just lost to a girl * that being a very sexist statement to begin with

so i just desided im not going to fight any female, obviously restrictions aply to this i.e life death.

and the other is actualy clump of taboo words that you 'CANT' say

(sexist racial other) for example slut, fag, gay, homo, of course there are more but i cant belive wat i cant say in school for example

i faild a got a detention last quarter and it was during passing time i exclamed 'THIS IS SO FUCKING GAY!!!' pretty loud and ended up getting another detention.

what do you think bout this.

[Holden Caulfield]

i used to use the word gay and didnt mean to or to be derogatory, i blame TV,

im not homophobic at all, and i do have (only 2 but still) gay friends,

but i often came out calling an inanimate object gay because it isnt working, when i really meant 'shit' or something similar,

it is an issue i have cut down on alot though, i just shout fuck now-a-days

its is something you should work to stop, it seems 'harmless' as you dont mean offence but just think what if you said 'black' or 'jew' in a similar way? it makes you sound as bad as the nutzis

[Foldered]

its is something you should work to stop, it seems 'harmless' as you dont mean offence but just think what if you said 'black' or 'jew' in a similar way? it makes you sound as bad as the nutzis
Definitely. If someone says "This is gay," I'm not surprised they handed out a detention for it (it really is something that should be punishable). Getting in the habit of saying things like that is definitely a problem; you become detached to the strength of the words you're using.

[shuuk]

well speaking of that i have some friend that did used to say nigger in place of fuck shit or damn and i made them stop that for a more personal reason of haveing black friends (not that is would be ok if i didnt)

i do call some things jewish tho and im trying to stop :(

[Foldered]

well speaking of that i have some friend that did used to say nigger in place of fuck shit or damn and i made them stop that for a more personal reason of haveing black friends (not that is would be ok if i didnt)

i do call some things jewish tho and im trying to stop :(
That's definitely something to try and pay attention to. I recently just got out of the habit of calling things "retarded." Which is pretty brutal.

[Decolonize The Left]

I agree with this, completely.
There are a lot of people who think it's okay to engage in "gentlemanly" behaviour, because it's 'polite'.
Really, this either translates to 'I'm trying to be polite so how dare you suggest I could be doing anything wrong!' or ... 'I'm going to be pretentious at the expense of the acknowledging sexism!'. Either one could be true.
(But this is a bit of a tangent.)

"Gentlemanly behavior" does not necessarily mean behavior directly solely at females. I hold doors open for women and men, sometimes none at all, it depends on my mood. Would I like a door held open for me? Absolutely - and I'm happy to thank whoever holds it open. Why? Because it shows that this person has taken a brief moment out of their lives to pay attention to the inter-personal setting we all inhabit. In other words, it's nice.

- August

[Module]

"Gentlemanly behavior" does not necessarily mean behavior directly solely at females. I hold doors open for women and men, sometimes none at all, it depends on my mood. Would I like a door held open for me? Absolutely - and I'm happy to thank whoever holds it open. Why? Because it shows that this person has taken a brief moment out of their lives to pay attention to the inter-personal setting we all inhabit. In other words, it's nice.

- August
Calling somebody a 'gentleman' refers to something more specific than just being 'polite'. More traditional, chivalric etiquette.

This point has been discussed before, here: Is "being a gentleman" sexist? (http://www.revleft.com/vb/being-gentleman-sexist-t74223/index.html?t=74223)
(And maybe by the end of reading it you'll be able to understand why I definately do not want to get into this discussion again :p)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentleman#Modern_usage

In another sense, being a gentleman means treating others, especially women (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women), in a respectful manner, and not taking advantage or pushing others into doing things they choose not to do. The exception, of course, is to push one into something they need to do for their own good, as in a visit to the hospital, or pursuing a dream one has suppressed.

[bridget]

A man should never hit a woman, for a start men are naturally stronger than a woman, if a woman hits a man you aren't even going to feel it unless they use some sort of weapon. The sexist argument is very worrying, are you saying it's sexist not to hit a woman?

[Foldered]

A man should never hit a woman, for a start men are naturally stronger than a woman, if a woman hits a man you aren't even going to feel it unless they use some sort of weapon. The sexist argument is very worrying, are you saying it's sexist not to hit a woman?
A person should never hit another person. That's what I live by.

Also, I'd like to mention that an ex girlfriend of mine punched me in the face at a bar (because I told her I didn't want to talk to her). I didn't hit her back. I definitely felt her hit though and my lip was bloody and swollen for a week. She hit almost as hard as the few men that have punched me in the face, also of whom I didn't hit back.

[Decolonize The Left]

Calling somebody a 'gentleman' refers to something more specific than just being 'polite'. More traditional, chivalric etiquette.

This point has been discussed before, here: Is "being a gentleman" sexist? (http://www.revleft.com/vb/being-gentleman-sexist-t74223/index.html?t=74223)
(And maybe by the end of reading it you'll be able to understand why I definately do not want to get into this discussion again :p)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentleman#Modern_usage

I have read almost the entire thread, though I got tired towards the end as I felt the two of you were repeated previous points over and over again... :D

I would agree with you that the notion of 'gentlemanly behavior' has sexist intonations to it due to the fact that it is primarily derived and directed towards the female sex. I also agree that an act which could be qualified as 'gentlemanly' is not necessarily sexist, though the motivations for said act can vary according to the individual.

But I would like to raise the following question to you:
Do you feel as though there is equal risk in the following two situations, (1) a woman of age 25 walking home alone at midnight over the distance of one mile in a large city, (2) a man of same age, walking alone at the same time, over the same distance in the same city?

- August

[Module]

I have read almost the entire thread, though I got tired towards the end as I felt the two of you were repeated previous points over and over again... :D

I would agree with you that the notion of 'gentlemanly behavior' has sexist intonations to it due to the fact that it is primarily derived and directed towards the female sex. I also agree that an act which could be qualified as 'gentlemanly' is not necessarily sexist, though the motivations for said act can vary according to the individual.

But I would like to raise the following question to you:
Do you feel as though there is equal risk in the following two situations, (1) a woman of age 25 walking home alone at midnight over the distance of one mile in a large city, (2) a man of same age, walking alone at the same time, over the same distance in the same city?

- August
No, I don't.
According to these (http://www.aic.gov.au/topics/violence/stats/assault/victims.html) statistics, men are more likely to be assaulted.
Though I can't find any specifically addressing this, I remember reading somewhere that men are more likely to be assaulted by a stranger in the street, and women are more likely to be assaulted by somebody they know in their home. (But again, it's only a memory, so take it or leave it ;))
So no, there's not the same amount of risk - it's riskier for the man in the situation.

And, a point I remember bringing up in that thread - a woman being more likely to be subject to sexual assault is no reason for a man to feel obliged to walk her home, in the same way that a man being more likely to be involved in a car accident is no reason for a woman to feel obliged to hold his hand when he's crossing the road, or to drive him home.
(And as I said in the thread, I seem to remember, given that the vast majority of sexual assaults happen within the victim or the offender's home, that again makes that difference between the likelihood of sexual assaults between genders that much more trivial)
:)

[Decolonize The Left]

Des:

No, I don't.
According to these (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.aic.gov.au/topics/violence/stats/assault/victims.html) statistics, men are more likely to be assaulted.
Though I can't find any specifically addressing this, I remember reading somewhere that men are more likely to be assaulted by a stranger in the street, and women are more likely to be assaulted by somebody they know in their home. (But again, it's only a memory, so take it or leave it ;))
So no, there's not the same amount of risk - it's riskier for the man in the situation.

I see your point. Despite the larger risk associated with males walking alone, it seems to me that a woman (generalizing here) would be less likely to adequately defend herself/flee the scene from an attacker than a male. Perhaps this is how deep the sexist social conditioning runs? But in all honesty, it seems that way to me. What do you think?


And, a point I remember bringing up in that thread - a woman being more likely to be subject to sexual assault is no reason for a man to feel obliged to walk her home, in the same way that a man being more likely to be involved in a car accident is no reason for a woman to feel obliged to hold his hand when he's crossing the road, or to drive him home.

Having dealt with women (very close friends of mine) who were sexually assaulted by others at various times in the past, I can say that these experiences have led me to be very aware of this danger. It may not be as extreme as a male being assaulted (in terms of probability), but as far as I understand it is far more harmful psychologically and physically. Rape is perhaps the worst possible act that could be perpetrated against another. Given this, I would rather take my chances alone (I'm a fast runner, ;)) than even consider this possibly happening to a female friend when I may have been helpful by walking them home.

- August

[Leo]

An interesting statistic, in the country that I live in, which is an officially Muslim country, the number of male rape victims is the same with the number of female rape victims.

Back to the general point, I think women are as good in fighting as men are. Fighting is not about how muscular people are, it's rather about punching & kicking in the right place at the right time and using the stuff that is around (beer bottles, cigarettes, chairs).

The bourgeoisie generally says that the differences in status between men and women occurred because men are stronger than women. I find this to be bullshit, and to be something that needs to be refuted because as a marxist I see the roots of patriarchy in the institution of family, and thus in property.

So when a husband beats a wife, or when a boyfriend beats a girlfriend, it is more than a fight, it is the man's effort to impose the patriarchal property relation between the man and the woman, and the man forcing the woman to submit to this relation. So in cases of domestic violence, it is not just the man hitting the women, the spirit of patriarchy is hitting the woman as well, through the man.

[Module]

Des:


I see your point. Despite the larger risk associated with males walking alone, it seems to me that a woman (generalizing here) would be less likely to adequately defend herself/flee the scene from an attacker than a male. Perhaps this is how deep the sexist social conditioning runs? But in all honesty, it seems that way to me. What do you think?
No, you're right.
Women are less likely to be able to defend themselves or flee from an attacker. Though these differences exist, one should also think about the realistic probability of a friend, male or female, getting into trouble on their way home.
I think it's important to recognise that just because somebody is a woman does not mean that a.) they will be attacked, or b.) they will be unable to defend themselves.
Likewise it's equally important to recognise that just because somebody is a man does not mean that they will be safe walking home alone.
I think it all depends on the situation. If somebody lives, lets say, in an area where assault on the street is common, it's a good thing to do to walk your friend home no matter what their gender is.
It comes down to weighing up the situation to see if it's appropriate, I suppose.


Having dealt with women (very close friends of mine) who were sexually assaulted by others at various times in the past, I can say that these experiences have led me to be very aware of this danger. It may not be as extreme as a male being assaulted (in terms of probability), but as far as I understand it is far more harmful psychologically and physically. Rape is perhaps the worst possible act that could be perpetrated against another. Given this, I would rather take my chances alone (I'm a fast runner, ;)) than even consider this possibly happening to a female friend when I may have been helpful by walking them home.

- August
That is fair enough.
Though, sexual assault on the street is extremely unlikely. The vast majority of sexual assaults, as I said, occour within the victim or offender's home between people that know eachother.
The stereotype of a rapist lurking behind the bushes at 1 in the morning is really very unrealistic. :lol:

[Decolonize The Left]

Des:
I believe that we can agree and reach a conclusion on the following, which you stated.

It comes down to weighing up the situation to see if it's appropriate, I suppose.
One other thing, which may have failed to have been mentioned, is simply asking the person if they would like the company. :) I guess I would trust their understanding of their own situation better than my suppositions on their behalf...

- August