More sexist double standards

[Tom Sawyer]

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

Hard to say. The article didn't mention whether or not she was black.

 

[Ford]

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

Hard to say. The article didn't mention whether or not she was black.

I'd read the article, but I'm too busy sorting through all the "free sex" coupons I got from supporting radical feminist causes. Gotta use up the oldest ones before they expire! (coupons, not the women)

 

[Derec]

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

Hard to say. The article didn't mention whether or not she was black.

She's white and blonde. Although I am not sure whether the latter matters in the racial calculus of the Left.

 

[Derec]

I'd read the article, but I'm too busy sorting through all the "free sex" coupons I got from supporting radical feminist causes. Gotta use up the oldest ones before they expire! (coupons, not the women)

Wouldn't the older coupons tend to be, on average, from older women as well? If you're still hanging onto some coupons from the 80s (prime Dworkin era) the women aren't going to exactly be spring chickens any more.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Hard to say. The article didn't mention whether or not she was black.

She's white and blonde. Although I am not sure whether the latter matters in the racial calculus of the Left.

Well, lucky she was just punched in the face then. If he'd flown her to a Carribbean island and kidnapped her, the guy would have broken CNN and then we'd miss out on in-depth reporting on the lack of any updates about the latest missing plane.

 

[ZiprHead]

Where can I meet some of these free sex feminist women? Because, damn, I'm horny and broke.

 

[Sarpedon]

First you must fill the punch card: 2,000 counts of oppressing Derec with feminist propaganda is worth 1 coupon.

 

[Derec]

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.

Not dictated but it is certainly the case that she carries the primary responsibility for the events as they unfolded. If we apply the "but for" standard, but for her attack none of this would have happened. And if he was criminally charged for disproportionate defense she should be charged for the original attack.

But she did get convicted. Doesn't sound like a double standard in the justice system. Hmmmm.

Luckily she was convicted. But then a judge set aside the conviction and a plea deal was reached. So yeah, things are probably getting somewhat better. That doesn't change the fact that there was much hysteria from the feminist Left over this case.

And that disregards all the facts you conveniently omitted.

You mean like the fact that she, while out on bail, attacked her victim again?

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.

All evidence is matter of public record. This is not some sort of secret tribunal. And there simply wasn't any mitigating evidence that justifies giving 5 months + 60 days for such a brutal, clearly premeditated murder. Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that this was a clear case of sexist miscarriage of justice?

 

[Derec]

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

A four year old doesn't really know what he's doing. A woman does. As such I am going to hold her to account in a much different way than I would a 4 year old.
And it's people who try to justify violent behavior by women with references to 4 year olds that are "pathetic losers".

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.

When you compare grown-ass women to preschoolers you are liable to start defending women when they do things much more serious than slapping.

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.

So sexist double standards that benefit women are to be accepted because they are "custom in our culture". Of course, many sexist double standards that were to detriment of women were equally "custom in our culture". So why were all these double standards wrong but the double standard that allows women to slap men with impunity is somehow right and anybody who is against it is being insulted as a "coward" and "pussy"?

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.

I am not switching my tune here. With Zimmermann v. Martin it mattered not who initiated the interaction but who initiated violence. Same here. What matters here is that she initiated violence by pushing and slapping him. I only mentioned that she also initiated the interaction itself was to debunk your ridiculous claim that she slapped him because he was "overtly forward" (as if that would have justified it).

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.

That is not a reasonable position at all. "But for" her pushing and slapping him none of this would have happened. She is the one who caused all this and thus the bulk of responsibility is on her. Power doesn't enter into this calculus.

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

Not particularly. However, I do not think I should not be allowed to defend myself at all from attack just because the attacker has a vagina. That's a pretty messed up cultural norm.

 

[TSwizzle]

Sucker punching anybody is a douche bag move no matter what way you look at it. It doesn't sound like he was defending himself but without seeing the actual CCTV you can't be sure.

 

[ZiprHead]

First you must fill the punch card: 2,000 counts of oppressing Derec with feminist propaganda is worth 1 coupon.

Since it's going to Derec and he thinks feminists are ten times more oppressive than they are, I would think 200 counts would be sufficient.

It'll still take a little time. Where's that hand lotion?

 

[J842P]

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.

Behold: the traditionalist viewpoint in all it's glory, arguing the "pro-feminist" position.
I think Derec has a point. I think bigfield covered it better, though.

 

[laughing dog]

Not dictated but it is certainly the case that she carries the primary responsibility for the events as they unfolded.

No. Under no reasonable interpretation does she bear primary responsibility for a vastly disproportionate response. This fellow is lucky he is not charged with a felony.

If we apply the "but for" standard, but for her attack none of this would have happened.

You don't know that.

And if he was criminally charged for disproportionate defense she should be charged for the original attack.

Mixon is charged with a misdemeanor. What would this woman be charged with?

All evidence is matter of public record. This is not some sort of secret tribunal. And there simply wasn't any mitigating evidence that justifies giving 5 months + 60 days for such a brutal, clearly premeditated murder.

Clearly there was mitigating evidence since that is not the usual sentence for manslaughter.

Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that this was a clear case of sexist miscarriage of justice?

Because it isn't.

 

[Toni]

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.

Since the video showing the incident is not released, it is impossible for you or for any of us to 'know' that she is the aggressor. In fact, journalists in the video clip from your OP describe:

The woman was talking to some people sitting at a table. She makes a motion for someone (unknown who) to come over.
Mixon comes over and there is a verbal exchange. We don't know the contents of that exchange but it seems that it was contentious according to journalists who report the incident.
She pushes him away. Why? We don't know why. There is no audio. Maybe she is just a nasty person. Maybe he made lewd comments. Maybe he threatened her. Maybe he refused to pay back the $5 she loaned him. We don't know the contents of that conversation. In a later report, she says he threatened her friends.
After she pushes him away he lunges at her. She slaps at him and makes contact with his neck.
He punches her and she drops to the floor, losing consciousness.

The above was what the journalists who have viewed the tape describe.

A police report describes her as bleeding. It is reported that her nose and other bones in her face were broken.

Everything else you've said about the case is just stuff you've made up.

He was suspended by OU. He was charged with a misdemeanor which is a joke: broken bones should merit felony charges.

As far as Mixon not being a heavy weight champion, he is a football player and indeed the star running back. His official stats list him at 6'2, 216 lbs. He is in excellent physical shape. It would indeed be a rare woman who would match him in size and strength. On the other hand, Molitor was arrested earlier on minor consumption charges. Her stats list her at 5'7, 130 lbs, assuming it is the same woman. So, he's got 7 inches and 86 pounds and a whole lotta weight training on her. If she had been a white dude instead of a woman of any size, shape or color, you'd be demanding felony charges and the max sentence.

He was suspended but only for a little while.

 

[Metaphor]

C'mon, I want to hear this: Who really considers a woman slapping an overly forward man to be 'violence?'

Anyone who understands what words mean.

 

[J842P]

To be fair, one should say "anyone who understands what English words mean."

 

[Metaphor]

To be fair, one should say "anyone who understands what English words mean."

Frankly, I'm not surprised people no longer know what the word 'violence' means. But the usual treatment has been to characterise things that are not violent as 'violent', not the other way around.

E.g. I've often heard people who see flashers and public masturbators described as victims of sexual violence. They're victims of a crime, certainly, victims of a sexual crime, but not sexual violence.

It's a strange world where a flasher is 'violent' but a slapper isn't.

 

[Toni]

To be fair, one should say "anyone who understands what English words mean."

Frankly, I'm not surprised people no longer know what the word 'violence' means. But the usual treatment has been to characterise things that are not violent as 'violent', not the other way around.

E.g. I've often heard people who see flashers and public masturbators described as victims of sexual violence. They're victims of a crime, certainly, victims of a sexual crime, but not sexual violence.

It's a strange world where a flasher is 'violent' but a slapper isn't.

In this particular case, according to journalists who viewed the exchange, it is certainly possible that Molitor was defending herself.

During what is apparently a contentious exchange of words, Molitor pushes Mixon away. We don't know why: there is no audio on the videotape. It is possible that she is the aggressor in pushing Mixon. It is also possible that he says something threatening to her and she pushes him away, defending herself. Mixon turns and lunges at her. Was it reasonable for her to feel his lunging was a physical threat? In other words, was she justified in slapping him to defend herself? The slap did not hit his face but rather his neck. He punches her hard enough that she drops to the floor and is unconscious and bleeding. He is 6'2, 216 lbs and extremely muscular and fit. She (if I have the right person) weighs more than 85 lbs less than he does and is 7 inches shorter. To the best of my knowledge, she is not an athlete.

The comments/tweets made by the journalists who were allowed to view the video tape is that the punch was really stunning, hard, shocking, etc.


Reading this, even if I remove gender, it is hard for me to say that the person who pushed/slapped at the other person was not justifiably trying to defend themselves. A lot would hinge on audio. There were lots of witnesses but I haven't found any testimony about what was said. The push/slapper could have been the aggressor or could have been defending themselves, as far as what we actually know. The person punching the other person seems, according to viewers of the video, to be acting far out of scale of what would be a reasonable response. Perhaps they are wrong. Perhaps she said she had a gun and would shoot him. That might be ample justification. But other wise, I cannot see how there was justification in the punch.

 

[repoman]

This guy had a good level of patience:

 

[laughing dog]

C'mon, I want to hear this: Who really considers a woman slapping an overly forward man to be 'violence?'

Anyone who understands what words mean.

Apparently not.