More sexist double standards

[ksen]

Is the power of the pussy so great that it rules the world?

Duh, of course it is. You don't think Menelaus went after Troy because he missed Helen's majestic penis do you?

 

[Bronzeage]

I do not think that would happen. In any case, Mixon wasn't a "heavy weight champion" and I have no idea how much the assailant in this case weighed. But in any case, she is the primary aggressor and should have been charged and convicted.

Would that make you feel better Derec?

It would still be wrong, but I do not think it would happen.

Oh when will this male on male anti-male sexism end?

When feminist women stop rewarding such sexism with free sex. That's the only explanation I have for holding such self-hating positions but perhaps the resident male anti-male sexists on this board can elucidate their motives further.

Self hatred is a topic which might be due for some introspective thought, but doesn't really apply here.

Free sex?

I will be the first to concede that sex with a woman is nice and in some instances, very nice, but you greatly overestimate the power it holds over men. There many time when a specific woman can influence a specific man to do something specific, but the sexuality of women have no general power over men, in general.

Cut to historical scenario:
Mein Fuhrer, If we invade Poland, it will start a war in Europe and French women will not have sex with us.
I never that of dat. Call the troops back!


If we are to use general terms in a realistic fashion, we can say, in general, men feel protective toward women. In a confrontation between an unarmed woman and a man, the man usually has an advantage in size and strength. Any threat she poses is very small compared to his ability to defend or retaliate. Her threat of withholding sex has very little power in this kind of situation. History shows men have the strength to force the woman to have sex, if it becomes an issue, so denying sex actually depends upon a man's decision not to rape her.

It's hardly a position of any strength or threat.

 

[bigfield]

When feminist women stop rewarding such sexism with free sex. That's the only explanation I have for holding such self-hating positions but perhaps the resident male anti-male sexists on this board can elucidate their motives further.

Feminists are not the problem, there.

The problem is traditionalists: Conservatives--both men and women--who believe in maintaining the gender roles laid out during the twentieth century. This manifests in the judiciary's favourable treatment of women in criminal cases and child custody cases, the favourable treatment of men in sexual assault cases, the government's lack of support for fathers fleeing domestic abuse with their children, and the failure of multiple public services to provide adequate support for women to protect themselves from violent partners.

Traditionalists did that. The system was already fucked up long before morons like Jessica Valenti or the denizens of tumblr came along. Their gynocentric and sometimes man-hating views did not bring about society's double-standards regarding men and women; they do not have nearly as much political sway as you think and really aren't worth grinding your teeth over.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Good thing this isn't Florida, or one of them would be dead at this point.

There is one minor question to be asked, did the man ask for charges to be pressed?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

 

[Derec]

The problem is traditionalists: Conservatives--both men and women--who believe in maintaining the gender roles laid out during the twentieth century. This manifests in the judiciary's favourable treatment of women in criminal cases and child custody cases, the favourable treatment of men in sexual assault cases, the government's lack of support for fathers fleeing domestic abuse with their children, and the failure of multiple public services to provide adequate support for women to protect themselves from violent partners.

Traditionalists did that. The system was already fucked up long before morons like Jessica Valenti or the denizens of tumblr came along. Their gynocentric and sometimes man-hating views did not bring about society's double-standards regarding men and women; they do not have nearly as much political sway as you think and really aren't worth grinding your teeth over.

At least the true traditionalists are consistent in that they want to maintain all traditional gender roles - sometimes they favor men, sometimes women, so there is some sort of balance. Not that I agree with this but it is preferable to the radical feminist position because of that balance.

The problem with radical feminists is that they support traditional gender roles when they benefit women but fight against them otherwise. Examples are military service vs. draft/selective service, divorce laws and lifelong alimony, double standard when it comes to use of violence ("violence against women act", Marissa Alexander, Mary Winkler, Nikki Redmond and this very case), double standards with sex - feminists want women to be able to be more free to engage in sex, but if she regrets a sexual encounter they blame the sex on men and retreat to traditional roles and calling for protections of a woman's sexuality. And many more.

- - - Updated - - -

Good thing this isn't Florida, or one of them would be dead at this point.

There is one minor question to be asked, did the man ask for charges to be pressed?

Whether or not he did, criminal charges are up to the prosecutor.

 

[bigfield]

At least the true traditionalists are consistent in that they want to maintain all traditional gender roles - sometimes they favor men, sometimes women, so there is some sort of balance. Not that I agree with this but it is preferable to the radical feminist position because of that balance.

The problem with radical feminists is that they support traditional gender roles when they benefit women but fight against them otherwise. Examples are military service vs. draft/selective service, divorce laws and lifelong alimony, double standard when it comes to use of violence ("violence against women act", Marissa Alexander, Mary Winkler, Nikki Redmond and this very case), double standards with sex - feminists want women to be able to be more free to engage in sex, but if she regrets a sexual encounter they blame the sex on men and retreat to traditional roles and calling for protections of a woman's sexuality. And many more.

That's all irrelevant to the fact that radfems are not the group one should hold responsible for the unfair gendered favouritism in society.

Disagreeing with their views and blaming them for society's problems are two different things.

 

[Derec]

That's all irrelevant to the fact that radfems are not the group one should hold responsible for the unfair gendered favouritism in society.

Disagreeing with their views and blaming them for society's problems are two different things.

The one sided double standard is clearly the fault of radical feminists, as the true traditionalists want all traditional roles (whether they favor men or women) whereas radical feminists embrace traditional roles that favor women. A true traditionalist might think that "men should not hit women" but would also be against women fighting at all. That second position moderates the first. A radfem thinks that "men should not hit women" but is in full favor or women fighting. They just think they deserve special protections when they attack men.

 

[Sarpedon]

C'mon, I want to hear this: Who really considers a woman slapping an overly forward man to be 'violence?' I've been slapped in my time, and my reaction was always 'I deserved that.' Never in a million years would I have thought 'I am the victim of violence, I need to defend myself using all the force at my disposal.'

All you people saying 'if a man does it, its different.' Well yes, because men are, on average bigger and stronger than women. People who don't think its different should consider the case of my going to my sisters house and being vigorously tackled by my four year old nephew. 'Assault! Assault!' some here would cry. But reasonable people would realize that there is neither the intent, nor ability to harm. Just as being toddler-tackled is part of the game, getting slapped is part of the game too. Being forward sometimes is rewarded, and sometimes it gets a slap. What we have here is a poor sport. You don't like the game? Fine, there is a lot of it that is stupid, I'll be the first to agree. Let's change the rules to make it better. But don't go pretending that the slap rule is somehow unfair to men, and that weak, pathetic, insecure men can use it as an excuse to commit real violence against women who reject their worthless, undesirable asses.

What we need is a system where men can be men and women can be women. Real men will recognize that mistreating women doesn't make them men. This bullshit suing culture of ours has turned everyone into victims, with the race to be the ultimate victim and ultimate weakling, who can always win the lawsuits.

If I've offended anyone here, I suggest they go and buy guns until they feel masculine again.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

What's worse is all those Asian kids blowing up the curve causing my children to study a little harder.

Such responses are a clear indication that people have no real arguments but still do not want to acknowledge the facts.

Or they don't think the issue is worthy of comment.



I also skate roller derby and play coed rugby and am knocked about by women all the time.

 

[laughing dog]

Of course not, as long as a woman does it.

Didn't write that. The notion that knocking someone out is a neccesarily appropriate self-defense response to a slap is ridiculous.

Just like when a woman shoots at you and your two small children that's not aggravated assault with a deadly weapon either and she is really the victim.

When did that happen?

Or just like when a woman shoots you in the back with a shotgun while you sleep and then cuts phone lines (because you didn't immediately die) that's only manslaughter warranting only 60 days.

When did that happen?

 

[Warpoet]

Or they don't think the issue is worthy of comment.

Or maybe it was worthy of comment the first 50 fucking times someone posted something like this, and then preceded to lament the endless, insufferable plight of the white male in 21st century America. Now it's just the same old shit eliciting the exact same responses from the exact same people, like most of the threads in PD.

 

[Derec]

C'mon, I want to hear this: Who really considers a woman slapping an overly forward man to be 'violence?' I've been slapped in my time, and my reaction was always 'I deserved that.' Never in a million years would I have thought 'I am the victim of violence, I need to defend myself using all the force at my disposal.'

First of all, he wasn't "overly forward". She is the one who initiated the interaction and she is the one who initiated the violence.
And even if he was forward, that does not justify violence.

All you people saying 'if a man does it, its different.' Well yes, because men are, on average bigger and stronger than women. People who don't think its different should consider the case of my going to my sisters house and being vigorously tackled by my four year old nephew. 'Assault! Assault!' some here would cry.

So women are like 4 year olds now? Ridiculous. But yours is the attitude that leads to women shooting their husbands/boyfriends in the back and get either 60 days or get off scot-free, respectively. You wouldn't try your 4 year old nephew as an adult either, right? So why would you try a woman using the same standards that you would a man, goes the radfem "logic".

What we need is a system where men can be men and women can be women.

And small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri can be small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri? What does "being women" have to do with allowing them to hit men with impunity?

Real men will recognize that mistreating women doesn't make them men.

Defending yourself is not "mistreating" except on the part of the person who instigated the violence.

This bullshit suing culture of ours has turned everyone into victims, with the race to be the ultimate victim and ultimate weakling, who can always win the lawsuits.

It is the aggressor who pressed charges and will probably file a lawsuit here. But that's ok, since she is a woman, and we must not criticize anything a woman does, otherwise we are "pussies", "cowards" and "sexists" or at least that's what radfems say.

If I've offended anyone here, I suggest they go and buy guns until they feel masculine again.

And stand my ground if I get slapped?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Didn't write that. The notion that knocking someone out is a neccesarily appropriate self-defense response to a slap is ridiculous.

Stand your bitchslap.

sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[Derec]

Didn't write that. The notion that knocking someone out is a neccesarily appropriate self-defense response to a slap is ridiculous.

He didn't exactly knock her out. She was able to get up and leave the scene under her own power. And whether or not his response was disproportionate doesn't change the fact that she was the primary aggressor and should have been charged and convicted.

When did that happen?

Remember Marissa Alexander? While she did get convicted, she was supported by the feminist Left, including many posters on here, who didn't think she was guilty of any crime at all.

When did that happen?

Remember Mary Winkler? A woman murdered her husband in cold blood by shooting him in the back while he was sleeping. Since he didn't die immediately she cut the phone lines so he could not call for help and then she let him bleed out. She was only convicted of manslaughter and served only 60 days and she had plenty of people supporting her on FRDB. Probably including you.

 

[Sarpedon]

So women are like 4 year olds now?

Being slapped for being forward is like being tackled by a four year old. Only a pathetic loser would mistake them for violence.

But yours is the attitude that leads to women shooting their husbands/boyfriends in the back and get either 60 days or get off scot-free

How do you make that leap of logic? How is a slap like a gunshot? Only an idiot or a coward would feel as threatened by a slap as a gunshot.

The reason that no one agrees with you is not because we think women are different than men, but that we think a slap in this context is different than violence. The reason we think that is because its a custom in our culture. Many have pointed out that it is silly, and perhaps it is. That doesn't mean that you have an excuse to ignore it.

I find it interesting that someone who argued so vigorously in favor of Zimmerman, despite his 'initiating the interaction' that he wasn't responsible for the violence now switches his tune here. My argument is always consistent. The one who has the greater power is the one most in control of and is most responsible for the situation. This is the position most reasonable people have.

Defending yourself is not "mistreating" except on the part of the person who instigated the violence.

And stand my ground if I get slapped?

Oh, you would just love to have an excuse, wouldn't you.

 

[laughing dog]

He didn't exactly knock her out. She was able to get up and leave the scene under her own power.

The article you posted says she did not move for about 30 seconds or so - sounds like she was knocked out to me. And according to the article, she suffered fractures of her jaw, cheek bone, sinus and orbital bone. So, the notion that sort of response is dictated by a slap is ridiculous.

Remember Marissa Alexander? While she did get convicted, she was supported by the feminist Left, including many posters on here, who didn't think she was guilty of any crime at all.

But she did get convicted. Doesn't sound like a double standard in the justice system. Hmmmm. And that disregards all the facts you conveniently omitted.

Remember Mary Winkler? A woman murdered her husband in cold blood by shooting him in the back while he was sleeping. Since he didn't die immediately she cut the phone lines so he could not call for help and then she let him bleed out. She was only convicted of manslaughter and served only 60 days and she had plenty of people supporting her on FRDB. Probably including you.

I recall that the judge (who presided over the trial and actually witnessed the creditability of all the witnesses and knows the law of the area, unlike you) gave that sentence because he thought there were mitigating circumstances that you conveniently omitted.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Legally, the woman has gotten off scot-free, which is wrong considering that she physically assaulted someone.

However, I'd say the multiple fractures in her face serve as more than enough punishment for her stupidity. Crude street justice.

No, the amount of damage done should be a key consideration in the seriousness of the charges. Along with that, the person who started the fight should be charged more seriously than the person who responded to the attack.

If the response is excessive in the extreme, then the responder would need to be charged more seriously.

In this case, responding to a shove and a slap with a knockout, bone-breaking blow is very excessive. People die from that kind of punch; nobody died from a shove and a slap.

OK yes, the response was excessive and he should go to jail for it - I hadn't looked closely enough at the article to see how hard he hit her. The main thrust of my point is that one shouldn't have a different standard in response to an attack from a woman as opposed to an attack from a man.

Street justice isn't a substitute for the legal system on only one side of the equation. If both parties want to let it lie then fine, but if she wants to bring the courts into it then both parties should be looked at equally. Picking a fight and then getting the other guy arrested after you lose is the true act of a coward.

 

[ksen]

That's right, the only proper and right way to end a fight your losing that you started is to pull out your gun shoot the other guy.

 

[Horatio Parker]

If he had shot her dead, should he be charged with a crime?