Mayweather the Woman Beater

Okay, let's flip it around a bit - when do you think it's acceptable to hit a man?

 

On occasions where my personal safety, or the personal safety of those I'm with, is seriously threatened or has been compromised.

 

Cool.

Now, assuming that the person threatening said safety was a woman, what would you do?

 

to put back on topic, that "rowdy women" doesn't apply to mayweather. he assaulted his EX-GF who had kids with him, and also he allegedly stole her cellphone.

there are times that you want to hit a woman, there are times you really need to hit a woman(warzone anyone), but in mayweather's case, it's not justifiable.

 

While I would accept that as an explanation of how things became violent, I would still argue that that doesn't make it ok to assault someone.

Nancy Grace, and just about everyone in the media, uses this line of reasoning every time some unhappy housewife murders her husband. Consensus seems to be that if a man murders his wife, it's because he's scum. If a woman murders her husband, it's because he's scum.

And while we're at it, a woman is more likely to poison you than to physically kill you. So the lesson here is that you should do the cooking.

 

The answer to that question is obvious: defend myself. But I would not use the force/techniques I've used on men in similar situations.

I was taking umbrage with earlier posts where pseudo-sociological and pseudo-scientific excuses were being given in an effort to intellectualise why hitting women is acceptable and not hitting women is some hokey hippy rubbish.

 

I didn't suggest that it did, but the two threads have similar themes.

It doesn't take a war to qualify for needing to hit a woman, just a pub car park on a friday night and a gang of chavettes.

 

when it's markedly clear that he's either: intending to cause you grave bodily harm if you don't comply with his wishes OR he is in the process of of causing you grave bodily harm without your explicit consent.

now let's try that again:

fixed... or is it? :cry:

no your honor, I DO NOT FIND IT ACCEPTABLE!! I DO NOT FIND IT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL!!!!!!!

 

How much mental abuse could you endure before you lash out? Serious question.

I always do the cooking.

 

in those cases I'd rather push, trip and run.

 

Erm, like your posts then? in reverse? So if you had a 200 pound woman, off her head in a rage trying to pull your head off with a rear naked choke you would not use the same force as you would with a man? I think you may regret that when you wake up.

 

hmm.. al yankovich and bruno mars (that I know of) have songs about females being cruel to women, why is it that there are no songs for the other side of the fence?

 

not the one that your post is directed to, but where can we find a 200 lb woman who knows and can pull off a decent REAR NAKED CHOKE? :hat:

 

You have not met my sister then? :evil:

 

A sizeable proportion of this thread consists of young men finding justification for their views on violence against women.

I'll admit to the pseudo-social element in my posts. My first post in this thread more or less encapsulated that. But I don't remember offering any pseudo-science.

But if getting off on scenarios where you are permitted to be t3h d45dl33 with women is your thing, sure, why not? I'd beat her unconscious, breaking a few bones in my hand in the process, but really messing her face up along the way. Then I'd use my good hand on the gang of chavettes. I'd leave the prettiest one alone, if possible, because seeing such a righteous display of t3h d45dl33 would undoubtedly make her want to join my harem of concubines. If she was too dangerous to be left alone, I would use dim mak to cause her osteoperosis in later life. That'll teach her to threaten me.

There? That better?

 

My posts are fine just the way they are, thank you very much. :yeleyes:

And you've got guys lining up to hit on you, do you?

 

Not much, and I always try and leave before it gets to that point. I don't take a lot of crap from anyone, and once someone has crossed a line then they get cut out of my life.

There isn't really a lot to be gained by keeping some(insert TOS friendly word) around, and there is a lot to be lost by acting on your urges to cause physical harm. You could end up in jail, or dead if they are able to defend themselves. Neither of these really appeals to me.

 

You really are a massive nob. Who did offer any science, psuedo or not? Were there experiments i missed?

 

You've been here more than long enough to know about the asterisks and swearing deal. Sort it out.

 

Which is why i made the distinction from a stranger on the street to a spouse. Obviously if your spouse was always abusive it is easy to walk away before things get to serious. If however they were once loving and caring, you settle down and have children and then they start being an ****, it is a lot harder to just walk away.