If someone is beating on you, you should take the minnimal required action to make the beating stop which normally is just leaving but sometimes can including hitting or stabbing or shooting back.
But you never “get to” hit them just like you never “get to” be rescued from a burning car. It’s not a privilege, it’s a last resort you hope you never need and the day that you do need it is a sad, dark day.
The essential point is simply that what counts as minimal or reasonable force is entirely, and completely differently judged by society at large, including other women, when a woman does it to a man or vice versa.
Yes, use minimal. But also, be consistent about what you consider minimal. A bunch of people, feminists even, would be totally fine with a woman physically assaulting (slapping) a man if he says something bad to her. The same people would never allow a man to do the same, no matter what the woman says.
would be totally fine with a woman physically assaulting (slapping) a man if he says something bad to her
Yeah well those people are idiots. And also this feels like a strawman. It is obvious that walking away is a lesser action than hitting someone, and it is obvious that walking away would cause the verbal abuse to ‘stop’ in the sense that you would no longer hear it.
A bunch of people, feminists even, would be totally fine with a woman physically assaulting (slapping) a man if he says something bad to her. The same people would never allow a man to do the same, no matter what the woman says.
What a lovely strawman you’ve constructed to bash feminists.
Look at the general Internet. The fact that you don’t personally believe it doesn’t make it a straw man. Go find any video of a woman slapping a man for speaking disrespectfully and read the comments under it. The person you replied to is describing a real thing that many people really clearly believe,even if theyd never agree with it when phrased the way they said it.
Nope. They literally referred to a very common phenomenon that you choose to believe is a straw man because that doesn’t require you to examine your belief in a popular narrative.
I’ll say again: you not believing it doesn’t make it imaginary.
There’s a difference between what some people think of as self defense.
The most obvious is to act in a way that prevents harm to one self - which would only involve violence as a last resort - but many guys seem to want to see it as “an eye for an eye”, which is a very different thing.
If someone is beating on you, you should take the minnimal required action to make the beating stop which normally is just leaving but sometimes can including hitting or stabbing or shooting back.
But you never “get to” hit them just like you never “get to” be rescued from a burning car. It’s not a privilege, it’s a last resort you hope you never need and the day that you do need it is a sad, dark day.
The essential point is simply that what counts as minimal or reasonable force is entirely, and completely differently judged by society at large, including other women, when a woman does it to a man or vice versa.
Yes, use minimal. But also, be consistent about what you consider minimal. A bunch of people, feminists even, would be totally fine with a woman physically assaulting (slapping) a man if he says something bad to her. The same people would never allow a man to do the same, no matter what the woman says.
Yeah well those people are idiots. And also this feels like a strawman. It is obvious that walking away is a lesser action than hitting someone, and it is obvious that walking away would cause the verbal abuse to ‘stop’ in the sense that you would no longer hear it.
What a lovely strawman you’ve constructed to bash feminists.
Look at the general Internet. The fact that you don’t personally believe it doesn’t make it a straw man. Go find any video of a woman slapping a man for speaking disrespectfully and read the comments under it. The person you replied to is describing a real thing that many people really clearly believe,even if theyd never agree with it when phrased the way they said it.
They literally conjured up imaginary groups of people that are supposedly fine with it and then attacked feminists using that argument.
It’s a perfect example of a strawman argument.
Nope. They literally referred to a very common phenomenon that you choose to believe is a straw man because that doesn’t require you to examine your belief in a popular narrative.
I’ll say again: you not believing it doesn’t make it imaginary.
Ultimately the issue is there’s two things people are talking about:
And people just talking past each other without being clear about which theyre talking about or disguising one as the other
There’s a difference between what some people think of as self defense.
The most obvious is to act in a way that prevents harm to one self - which would only involve violence as a last resort - but many guys seem to want to see it as “an eye for an eye”, which is a very different thing.
deleted by creator