laws and policies are changing, but it isn't uncommon for men to just get laughed at for calling the police over D.V. from their wife.
That wasn't being discussed.
Situation: Woman is attacking man, BNW is a bystander/good samaritan, with no prior contact to either person.
What is the evidence for the assumption that her word would be held in higher regard than his in a court room?
|
While I don't take public transport I have been in similair siturations before...though most during my school years...I did often intervene but I did not use viloence as my first resort...just getting in between the two I find often works well.I, with the help of another guy, just wrestled down a man who was, very openly, groping a girl in the bus and called the cops on him. They just finished taking our statements, personal info and took him with them.
I'm horrified that such people still exist.
I am even more horrified that the guy who helped me and I were the only two people who reacted in a bus full of passengers (and I'm certain we were not the only ones who noticed).
Also I am annoyed at the girl for not kicking him in his privates and calling the cops on him herself, but hey, if she can't, there's someone who can.Have you encountered stuff like this in public transport before? How did you react?
Sorry I'm a firm believer in action/consequences. Harras a woman sexually? You go to jail.
|
Honestly? I'm deeply sympathetic to women who have to deal with this s%** (and dealing with this problem specifically is very much an example of the problems women need to deal with)...but Hama's got a distinct point, too.
Not about any gender thing. But the core of the subject being discussed isn't a gender thing. Or at least not entirely so. I've met men, even larger ones, who were every bit as scared of confrontation as the woman being discussed, and I've met women who aren't and never have been. This is a fear thing.
What is, to me, a surprising number of people live so much of their lives in fear. And it's the fear that paralyzes them when people victimize them. This happens to women more often than men, because of the aforementioned physical differences, but it's a facet of general human behavior, not either gender specifically...and it's one I, personally, find both weak and, to be entirely frank, tragic.
I'd never dream of blaming the victim...but so many people let themselves be victims simply because they lack the courage to not be. They choose to live in fear rather than finding it within themselves to stand up and do something about it. And I don't know about anyone else, but I find that enormously frustrating. I want to stand up and scream "Do something! Buy a taser, or a gun, or take martial arts lessons, or get therapy, or whatever you need to do to feel confident enough to not give in to fear! Reclaim your life!"
I'm not saying you should ignore the possibility of danger...but you shouldn't let fear rule your life either, y'know? There's a difference between rational assessments of danger and fear, and the first is good to listen to, while the second is poison. Learn the difference and only pay attention to the first...and not always even that. Cost/benefit analysis should play a part as well: What are the consequences of not fighting back now? What are the consequences of fighting back? Which are worse and which would you rather deal with?
I think a lot of the time, if people thought through those two options, they'd rather fight than give in, given the price of living in constant fear. But they don't even think about it...they just react in that same unthinking fear. And that's both a tragedy and incredibly frustrating for people of good will who don't live that way, for all the same reasons that watching people behave stupidly is frustrating for smart people.
The problem is for a lot of women it isn't just fear, it's experience. Fight back, and you get hurt more. Yell and people blame you. Complain and people make excuses...surely you were dressed provocatively, or came on to him, or really you're just over reacting. The problem is that women aren't just afraid of there attacker, but everyone else around them supporting the attack.
Can you honestly say you'd always stand up for yourself if, your entire life, society told you it's wrong to do so? That if you fight back you're overreacting, or led him on, or it's somehow else your fault? I'm not sure I could. I like to think I don't bow to social pressure much - but I'm really not sure I could.
What needs to change is societies view on this stuff. Even in the thread there's people saying the woman should have done something. Obviously, she felt she couldn't, that it was the best and safest thing to let it happen, and most of the bus confirmed that by sitting and watching. We need to drop blaming the victim, at all, and work on letting guys like this one know it's not acceptable.
|
|
The problem is for a lot of women it isn't just fear, it's experience. Fight back, and you get hurt more. Yell and people blame you. Complain and people make excuses...surely you were dressed provocatively, or came on to him, or really you're just over reacting. The problem is that women aren't just afraid of there attacker, but everyone else around them supporting the attack.
This is pretty much entirely true, and deeply and profoundly messed up. Doesn't change the basic point I'm making, just makes it potentially quite a bit harder for women than men.
Can you honestly say you'd always stand up for yourself if, your entire life, society told you it's wrong to do so? That if you fight back you're overreacting, or led him on, or it's somehow else your fault? I'm not sure I could. I like to think I don't bow to social pressure much - but I'm really not sure I could.
I think I probably could, though I obviously don't know. I've certainly never cared to follow any of the masculine stereotypes...
And I know my mother can and does. I know several of my female friends do. None of that makes sexism and this kind of conduct any less of a problem, but it does mean it's possible to overcome such things.
What needs to change is societies view on this stuff. Even in the thread there's people saying the woman should have done something. Obviously, she felt she couldn't, that it was the best and safest thing to let it happen, and most of the bus confirmed that by sitting and watching. We need to drop blaming the victim, at all, and work on letting guys like this one know it's not acceptable.
Again, not blaming the victim here, just crying out for everyone, including the victim, to have the courage to stand up and do something about this kind of behavior. I'm all for anything and everything that makes it clear to people who pull this s@!+ that it's not okay...but there are always going to be bad people who do bad things, it'll never be perfect, and having the courage to stand up for yourself and others is so important in all aspects of life that I'm always horrified when I find it lacking.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is, to me, a surprising number of people live so much of their lives in fear. And it's the fear that paralyzes them when people victimize them. This happens to women more often than men, because of the aforementioned physical differences, but it's a facet of general human behavior, not either gender specifically...and it's one I, personally, find both weak and, to be entirely frank, tragic.
I think that it's just a lot easier to ignore the other side of that coin. Men have the fear that no matter what they do, they will be wrong. They help out, and they are wrong for making the woman a powerless victim. They don't help out and they are further displaying the power inequality.
If they do act, than they are put into a position where they basically can not defend themselves, and if they do then they are probably going to be arrested for some sort of assault even if they are just trying to prevent someone else from getting assaulted. This is doubly true if they are themselves the actual target. If they fight back, then it is a fight, not them defending themselves or inproportionately reacting (because women are not aggressive or abusive).
When a man does get sexually assaulted, say kicked in the groin, it's basically accepted that he did something to deserve it, even if all witness saw nothing except the result, and there's nothing he can do about it. Even any further attempts to defend themselves or say their point of view is going to be seen as him lying or showing further his manly-wrongness.
There's also this assumption that somehow all men are strong, powerful, and in control, lacking in the risks of danger or physical threats, can not be scared or be victims, while all women are also assumed to be at a huge disadvantage, victims, always fearful, unable to protect themselves or speak up, unable to instigate or cause anything, and undeserving.
|
|
I tend to personally think it's not ok to hit anyone in general, and for the most part, being a woman has nothing to do with, well anything. In my opinion, if someone does something that requires me to hit them, or I feel that that is the best was to end whatever threat, then I'm also considering that the man or woman that is putting me into that position has already acted in a way has set yourself outside of the "but I'm a woman" defense. If a woman is threatening my wife or daughters, has, is threatening to target my privates (for sexual assault, pleasure, or mutilation), has a gun anywhere near my direction, or is acting/saying that they are a fighter and trying to instigate a fight I don't feel I can reasonably avoid, then I see absolutely no validation in why I should hold back because they have a vagina rather than a penis. Granted, this doesn't seem like a likely case to happen (male or female), and it really depends on the specific circumstances.
That being said, I also believe that violence is usually, (but far from always) the last resort, and if it does come to that, it needs to be swift and effective.
Here's a predicament: When is it ok to hit a woman? I know some people will cry out in anger "NEVVERRRRR!"
...but what if you got punched by current UFC female champion Ronda Rousey in the face? You can't be expected to just stand there and take those tough punches. I gaurantee you that even at 135 lbs those things hurt.
What if a woman is holding you at gunpoint and she leaves an opening to make a move?
What if your wife is trying to drown your kids?
Obviously there are only a few rare circumstances to question the norm that we all hold that you should never do it...but what would YOU do in these above circumstances?
I'm confused, who is suggesting doing nothing in those situations? Links would be appreciated.
If you can't provide any, why are you asking those questions?
|
|
They are probably referring to the common belief/tradition that a real man will never hit a woman, for any reason.
They are probably asking the question because it was part of the discussion earlier, about how is it different if the aggressor is a woman rather than a man, and trying to establish a common idea of what is acceptable as right/wrong.
Go ahead and provide links for where you think people are advocating doing nothing in those, or similar, situations.
|
|
I think it depends on your local laws, to be honest.
Sexual Assualt is defined as "Sexual assault is any involuntary sexual act in which a person is threatened, coerced, or forced to engage against their will, or any sexual touching of a person who has not consented. This includes rape (such as forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration), inappropriate touching, forced kissing, child sexual abuse, or the torture of the victim in a sexual manner.
In legal terms, sexual assault is a statutory offence in various jurisdictions, including United States, Canada, England and Wales, Ireland, and Scotland. The legal definition of the crime of sexual assault is determined by each jurisdiction. Specific legal jurisdictions and research often use highly technical or detailed definitions of the term. In some places, such as New South Wales, the crime of sexual assault has replaced the traditional crime of rape, and is being defined as non-consensual penetrative sex. By contrast, in other jurisdictions, the crime deals with non-penetrative sexual contact", by Wikipedia, and does include Groping, likewise defined as "The term "groping" is used to define the touching or fondling of another person in a sexual way (including through clothing), using the hands, without that other person's consent".
Personally, I'd be hard pressed to see "kicked in the groin" in most cases not involving a serious threat to one's self (such as to prevent rape or death) somehow not sexual assault do to the possibility of real permanent harm it can do aside from the massive pain? Why do you ask?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because it's assault, not sexual? Or more technically "battery".
Kicking someone in the groin is not "sexual touching" or torture "in a sexual manner".
It's just violence.
I disagree, and I personally know women that have made sport of it for no other reason than to see people fall in pain for their own humor/power trip. But, what's the point of arguing this in the first place?
|
Here's a predicament: When is it ok to hit a woman? I know some people will cry out in anger "NEVVERRRRR!"
...but what if you got punched by current UFC female champion Ronda Rousey in the face? You can't be expected to just stand there and take those tough punches. I gaurantee you that even at 135 lbs those things hurt.
What if a woman is holding you at gunpoint and she leaves an opening to make a move?
What if your wife is trying to drown your kids?
Obviously there are only a few rare circumstances to question the norm that we all hold that you should never do it...but what would YOU do in these above circumstances?
Part of why i call BS on the claim women want EQUALITY. equality means suffering the same consequences as a ma., so my answer is if you would hit a man, you hit a woman. that is equality.
|
|
I think that it's just a lot easier to ignore the other side of that coin. Men have the fear that no matter what they do, they will be wrong. They help out, and they are wrong for making the woman a powerless victim. They don't help out and they are further displaying the power inequality.
If they do act, than they are put into a position where they basically can not defend themselves, and if they do then they are probably going to be arrested for some sort of assault even if they are just trying to prevent someone else from getting assaulted. This is doubly true if they are themselves the actual target. If they fight back, then it is a fight, not them defending themselves or inproportionately reacting (because women are not aggressive or abusive).
This isn't universally true, but it is true enough to be a serious problem...though not as big of one as women need to deal with in our society.
When a man does get sexually assaulted, say kicked in the groin, it's basically accepted that he did something to deserve it, even if all witness saw nothing except the result, and there's nothing he can do about it. Even any further attempts to defend themselves or say their point of view is going to be seen as him lying or showing further his manly-wrongness.
Ignoring the question of whether getting kicked in the groin is sexual assault (I'd say it's not), this is indeed a very real problem when and if men are sexually assaulted.
There's also this assumption that somehow all men are strong, powerful, and in control, lacking in the risks of danger or physical threats, can not be scared or be victims, while all women are also assumed to be at a huge disadvantage, victims, always fearful, unable to protect themselves or speak up, unable to instigate or cause anything, and undeserving.
This is indeed a lot of the problem, yeah.
Part of why i call BS on the claim women want EQUALITY. equality means suffering the same consequences as a ma., so my answer is if you would hit a man, you hit a woman. that is equality.
Uh...all the women I know who want equality are cool with the fact that I'd hit a woman under the same circumstances I'd hit a man (which mostly come down to self-defense or defense of others, ftr). And that's most of the women I know, including several medium-hardcore feminists. So...stop making straw-man arguments, 'kay?
This is the correct attitude to take, though, I agree on that.
It's acceptable to hit a woman under the same circumstances in which it's acceptable to hit a man: that is, if you believe there is an imminent risk of death or injury to yourself or another and the only way to prevent it is through force, or if someone is restraining you and it's the only way to get free.
|
|
This isn't universally true, but it is true enough to be a serious problem...though not as big of one as women need to deal with in our society
I think it's a lot more true than you think, but that doesn't really matter. Its the threat of it, or the belief that causes the fear. I'm not sure why you say it's less important than women's problems though?
|
|
Except socially (in many circles) it's acceptable to hit a man in the circumstance of if he gets in your face and starts cussing you out, calls you a b**** and pushes you.
This is true...but it either shouldn't be be okay to hit men under these circumstances or it should be okay to hit women if they do the same. That's what equality means.
Which way you want that to go will vary by person (and I, for one, have mixed feelings on that) but either way, it should be the same regardless of the gender of the person cussing you out or pushing you (though I suppose having different reactions based on the size or physical toughness of the person doing it seems reasonable enough).
There are some circumstances where I'd think its more acceptable to hit a man than a woman.
Socially? Sure, that's how it is. But morally? That's not how it should be.
I think it's a lot more true than you think, but that doesn't really matter. Its the threat of it, or the belief that causes the fear.
True enough...though I'm unclear on how you're coming to any conclusion regarding how true I think that is.
I'm not sure why you say it's less important than women's problems though?
Because it is? I mean, it's bad, but the problems women have are worse and keeping that in mind seems relevant to keeping a balanced perspective.
Except socially (in many circles) it's acceptable to hit a man in the circumstance of if he gets in your face and starts cussing you out, calls you a b**** and pushes you.
There are some circumstances where I'd think its more acceptable to hit a man than a woman.
I wouldn't consider that acceptable. You don't assault people for what they say.
|
|
You're talking about equality across the board when, in fact, men and women are not equal or the same in many circumstances, whereas say a black and white man are.
Much of the discussion about equality usually revolves around equal access to work and equal pay for equal work. There's nothing inherently "manly" about many of today's professions as using a fax machine or running a board meeting isn't something a women can't do equally well.
I don't know about you or the people you talk to, but when I say 'equality' I mean in just about everything. So do most of the people I like and regularly associate with. Certainly in regards to societal treatment and expectations, which is what we're talking about here. Hell, how society treats women and expects them to behave is a much bigger issue than wage differences, IMO.
Will women ever be fully equal to men in the job market? Probably not because unless we start developing super-amazons, most women will never be able to meet the physical criteria that men can for jobs like firefighting, manual labor, or infantry.
Okay, first off, we may well eventually get cybernetic or genetic enhancements that make these differences nonexistent...but more importantly, they're already not set in stone. There are women who meet the physical requirements for those jobs you list, as well as men who do not. There may be more men who meet them, but that's utterly irrelevant when dealing with any individual who does meet them (or any who doesn't, for that matter). So women who can do the job should be allowed to...and treated the same as men who do it.
Wanting equal opportunity for things that require an office chair doesn't mean you now should join the "I can get punched in the face club"
I'm actually, morally speaking, fine with having some sort of 'combatant' vs. 'non-combatant' distinction regarding things of this nature...but basing it purely on gender is both sexist and stupid. Some women are badass, and some men are no physical threat at all. The degree of physical capability should be the factor in question in a decision of this nature if using this logic, not the gender of the person invoved.
Sorry I'm a firm believer in action/consequences. Harras a woman sexually? You go to jail.While I don't take public transport I have been in similair siturations before...though most during my school years...I did often intervene but I did not use viloence as my first resort...just getting in between the two I find often works well.I, with the help of another guy, just wrestled down a man who was, very openly, groping a girl in the bus and called the cops on him. They just finished taking our statements, personal info and took him with them.
I'm horrified that such people still exist.
I am even more horrified that the guy who helped me and I were the only two people who reacted in a bus full of passengers (and I'm certain we were not the only ones who noticed).
Also I am annoyed at the girl for not kicking him in his privates and calling the cops on him herself, but hey, if she can't, there's someone who can.Have you encountered stuff like this in public transport before? How did you react?
What are you sorry for? Or where did I say I disagreed? I just think most situration can be settled without violence. If the woman wants to report it to the polive I have no problems being a whitness....but I am very careful when I use violence for serveral reasons....the most important one is I don't want to kill someone.
|
|
Loosing an eye isn't trivial, getting kicked in the groin however usually doesn't cause any lasting injuries (physical or psychological), it sucks when it happens but it's not comparable to loosing an eye or sexual assault.
Except well, it easily can. It's not to terribly uncommon for the physical trauma to rupture one (or both) testicles. It can also really mess of the hormonal production in a guy. In extreme cases, it can lead to death, either from internal bleeding, or basically the shock to the system. There's a fair chance for sterility, and various psychological issues. It can also cause epididymis to rupture or be severed, which will likely lead to infection or necrosis, again probably lethal.
It's also not uncommon for the nerves to become damage or pinched which will probably lead to pain the rest of their lives, if not other complications. You might think it's a joke, but it can be very serious. So I completely disagree that it is a trivial thing, and I personally think it's pretty insensitive towards those that have been had it happen, particularly for no reason.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My summation of this thread:
"Hey guys, I saved a woman from being groped and assaulted."
"That's not important, we should only talk about guys being kicked in the groin."
|
|
How exactly do you test these individual distinctions? Do you punch a girl in the face and when she crumples down and cries you go "well I guess we found out you're a non-combatant!"
Honestly? I wouldn't make that distinction. If I feel the need to hurt somebody I'll hurt them, regardless of whether I think they're any good in a fight (a situation that, for the record, hasn't come up in the last decade since I was 16, and probably necessitates either self defense or the kind of provocation seldom seen in real life).
I was just saying that, theoretically, such a distinction seems reasonable. Someone with martial arts training and experience might well be able to make such determinations regarding their skill quite easily based on how they moved and similar things. That seems a reasonable principle to follow. Someone who's a good judge of character might judge it based on how crazy and likely to really try and hurt them the person is. That too seems reasonable. And so on and so forth.
But judging based on whether they happen to be a woman? Both stupid and sexist.
And notice I qualified by saying MOST women won't meet the criteria. There will always be exceptions to every rule.
It's...really not even a rule. It's a statistical trend, a category of things that are basically meaningless in dealing with individuals.
I've been kicked in the jewels. I also umpire baseball and have taken a couple of shots to the cup. It sucks. It's not fun. But it's not sexual assault. Permanent damage is pretty rare and not likely to happen from a single kick. I don't doubt that the human body could produce enough power to cause permanent damage but unless you've got your little buddies against something solid the body is capable of absorbing shock impact.
Personally I find it embarrassing and demeaning, if someone is targeting my groin purposefully to mock me and make me buckle over in agony it is at least as much sexual assault as walking over to a woman and punch her in the boob for lols. If you feel threatened and outmatched by someone stronger than you in a (potentially) physical threat it is a different situation entirely.
I am not advocating that an accidental hit in the groin or touching of the boob is sexual assault but I feel that people think much too lightly on the subject, I also think such biased thinking is at least partially counterproductive.