First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply Double Standards?
51419 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 7/7/15 , edited 7/7/15
It's not like violence was the guy's first response. The girl was being aggressive and yelling at him. She was about to punch him and so he restrained her. Obviously it didn't work and she punched him with her other hand. I've seen some people say she also kicked him, aiming for the groin but it's hard to tell from that angle. The guy only fought back after he was hit.

Was hitting her wrong? Yes. Especially with that much force. Should the girl be let off the hook for starting the fight? Of course not! If the guy got punished, so should the girl. They both messed up.
405 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / NC
Offline
Posted 7/7/15

dotsforlife wrote:

So, being a bit of a college football sports guy, I came across this little gem in an article.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=61&v=hGGdlL5U61U

Now, before you go off spouting assumptious nonsense, watch the video please. It's easy to see what goes down in the video to anyone paying attention to detail. So then, after watching the video, what do you think?

The kid was charged and dismissed from his team because of this. Do you think he was in the wrong for what he did? And what about the girl getting off scott free after being the initial instigator/agressor?

I don't have an issue with someone punching anyone, regardless of gender. (if you assault me, it won't mean anything to me) What I do have an issue with is lack of common sense. Who the hell immediately acts like that when someone is just trying to get to the bar? Also, why didn't the guy simply restrain her and have her thrown out of the bar? He was clearly stronger and this would have been a non issue had he used some common sense.

Both are to blame in my opinion.


Edit: So apparently she was throwing racial slurs his way as well when she turned around.


I saw the video twice on different websites (one of them is from an sports website). I agree with you, man. My opinion on this subject is this: the young man was dead wrong & deserved to be kicked off of the FSU football team. They had to deal with Jameis Winston last year. As for the young woman, why isn't anybody talking about how wrong the way she acted as well? It's one sided & unfair. Let's not forget the fact she knee the guy in the ding-ding area. Unless that guy inappropriately touched her, it's an good reason to do that.
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 7/7/15 , edited 7/7/15

Stay_Night wrote: I don't understand what you're trying to say but a 12 year old male and the woman in the vid would probably have similar strength and ability to fend off the college football player. So what's the difference?

And what did she start? Watch the video. The guy is the one who was already pushing his way to get to the bar. He was in the wrong before anything started. And she obviously didn't swing until HE grabbed her. So unless you are saying her threatening to punch him if he doesn't move (when he was already the once starting it by pushing to get to the bar) is worthy enough to grab her, I don't see your point. And even if it was worthy, that was obviously not a grab of self defense. He meant to hurt her when he grabbed her and it's quite obvious.

And yes he is the bad one for punching her extremely hard. That wasn't self defense.

Who the in the other world would say its self defense?!... only payback (a real hard one)

So your logic is to beat every guy that tries to press through a crowded area to get some where? (or atleast thats what they deserve you mean?) and if you take a look at her, she didn't want to give him space (move to the open area) and he tried to ask to come pass while she knew he was passing behind her (she looked and did register what he wanted by I guess she was so wasted that she took it as an insult insted of him jusy being a bit too close) "personal space move 10m that way!"
Also He didn't want anything bad happened before she went a bit nuts.

a 12 year young boy could be more civil then her (even though not all but atleast quite the amount I know if they where in some cind of wasted mood)

Yes, He did hit her quite hard and runned off with his tale behind his legs damn him for that.
11618 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/7/15
I love how people downplay her raising her arm with a balled up fist like she had no intentions of causing him harm.... I mean try doing that to a police officer..... that's what I thought....
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 7/7/15 , edited 7/7/15

Wrathfulram wrote:
I love how people downplay her raising her arm with a balled up fist like she had no intentions of causing him harm.... I mean try doing that to a police officer..... that's what I thought....

Or cracking nuts oh wait it most be done by your muscles!
Posted 7/7/15 , edited 7/7/15
Literary Squirrel commented, "Buy a Red Bull"
lol
Frankly, it looks like she got a good look at his face, recognized him and intentionally stuck out her butt haha. Forget that he was touching her beforehand, she obviously didn't mind touching the dude with the glasses. Grabbing her hand was wrong, he showed fear there. Correct action was to look her dead in the eye and dare her to swing.
30791 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Fraxinus
Offline
Posted 7/8/15
So why is the guy wrong, here? I get that girls are biologically weaker than men, but really?

If she was stupid enough to try and start something, she better have been able to finish it. I don't think I'd hit a woman, but if one started spouting racial slurs and even tried to take a punch at me, then yeah, fuck it, I probably will, and I don't care. Although it takes a lot to make me resort to violence, if someone took a swing a me, in a bar, after I'd probably been drinking a bit, I imagine I'd probably hit back.

The way some people are trying to just shift all the blame onto the guy, as if all women are these super pure flowers that have to be very delicately handled at all times, makes me question just how much a woman would be able to get away with before you'd say, "Yeah... She probably deserved that." I don't think it's sexist to say that at all, when it's true.

Seriously, though, even if I'm not the most violent guy around, if a woman pissed me the hell off (and I have a pretty high tolerance for bullshit against myself) and coupled that with violence, then I'd respond appropriately and hit her, too. Just once, though, because, of course, women are super fragile.

It kind of pisses me off that she got away with being an asshole, just because she started crying, but there we are.
47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 7/8/15
Don't really feel like commenting on the "who started it, whose fault is it, what should the punishments be, etc." However, on double standards:

For those of you saying both, "never hit a girl" and "if someone punches me, I'm punching back," I have a few thoughts. For those of you saying "if someone punches me, I'm punching back," would you do so to a 5-year-old? In my mind it's not so much that they're girls that will stop me from defending myself, but that girls are generally weaker than me. I am capable of far more destruction than most girls, and because of that, when I see that someone is far less capable of hurting me, I'll hold back as much as I can. It's a difference in strength that's important here. If she starts running at me in rage, perhaps it's a different story, but anyone looking at the weak "punch" she gave can see that the difference in strength here is comparable to a child from the athlete's perspective.

For those of you saying "never hit a girl," I can say that, even at 6'4," 210 lbs., there are many women who could beat the shit out of me, and more than enough that are comparable in strength. I've exactly no problem hitting a girl if she's as strong as I am. The only reason hitting a female is usually a bad call is because females are usually weaker. There are plenty that aren't, however, and if that's the case, what possible reason could you have for not defending yourself as you would against a comparable male? The maxim here is not "don't fight girls" but "don't fight those much weaker than you are." I'd generally prefer "don't fight at all," but I've no complaints against self-defense either. Anyway, those're my thoughts. Take them as you will.
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 7/8/15 , edited 7/8/15

severticas wrote: Grabbing her hand was wrong, he showed fear there. Correct action was to look her dead in the eye and dare her to swing.

She still had her feets that went a bit wild (blame the hips...) He was a bit at fault but he was scared (by her thearning him and the sudden movement when they both turn around at eachother making his reaction to take the hand and then into hold down as he wanted to talk she responed with a kick to the nuts I believe)

The punch do seem worse then what it should or so I believe it could be that many see the punch worse then what it was (I don't know if she was badly wounded if it was only a little nose bleed, then I thinks its "fine")
30791 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Fraxinus
Offline
Posted 7/8/15

theYchromosome wrote:

Don't really feel like commenting on the "who started it, whose fault is it, what should the punishments be, etc." However, on double standards:

For those of you saying both, "never hit a girl" and "if someone punches me, I'm punching back," I have a few thoughts. For those of you saying "if someone punches me, I'm punching back," would you do so to a 5-year-old? In my mind it's not so much that they're girls that will stop me from defending myself, but that girls are generally weaker than me. I am capable of far more destruction than most girls, and because of that, when I see that someone is far less capable of hurting me, I'll hold back as much as I can. It's a difference in strength that's important here. If she starts running at me in rage, perhaps it's a different story, but anyone looking at the weak "punch" she gave can see that the difference in strength here is comparable to a child from the athlete's perspective.

For those of you saying "never hit a girl," I can say that, even at 6'4," 210 lbs., there are many women who could beat the shit out of me, and more than enough that are comparable in strength. I've exactly no problem hitting a girl if she's as strong as I am. The only reason hitting a female is usually a bad call is because females are usually weaker. There are plenty that aren't, however, and if that's the case, what possible reason could you have for not defending yourself as you would against a comparable male? The maxim here is not "don't fight girls" but "don't fight those much weaker than you are." I'd generally prefer "don't fight at all," but I've no complaints against self-defense either. Anyway, those're my thoughts. Take them as you will.


Well, you'd sort of expect a five-year-old to be annoying on some level. The fact that they're little children who probably won't know any better than to use some form of violence to express themselves makes your point moot. This is a fully grown, adult woman we're talking about. So, I'll concede only as far as fighting back against a child being wrong. But if a fully grown adult intentionally tries to piss me off, and succeeds in doing so (hard as that may be), with the addition of violence, then even if it's a weedy man who's clearly weaker than me, he should know a beating is coming.

Where my view differs with women is that because we've been so conditioned that hitting women is wrong in any circumstances, even in a pissed off state, I'd likely restrain from beating a much weaker woman, and probably settle for a restrained punch. I can shrug off a lot, especially unintentionally offensive stuff. So, in order to get under my skin to the point where I would resort to violence, a person would need to intentionally be getting on my last nerve, and really be going at it, at which point, regardless of their strength, they'll be responsible for their own bruises. That being said, I don't think anyone can truly say how they'd react in such a situation without being in it. I mean, my last fight was over five years ago.
4012 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 7/8/15
She pushes into bar past him. Then it looks like he asks other person to move so he can get in too but because it is so packed this person cannot move very far and not much space is created. He tries to move in. She feels someone pushing her more than just once. Turns around to 'some jerk' pushing her. One can only assume that he is obviously sexually driven and is pushy about it. She gets insta-pissed, while you can almost see the WTF in his movements. It all escalated from there.

A simple rule of arguments that most people don't seem to understand. If you start here and the other person is also here things usually end up here. But is one person starts here it is very likely in defence the other person will go from here to here even if that wasn't there intention. You can see as the bar raises both people raise the bar to match the other. Although each time the bar got raised the other went too far. Ending with that.

It has to be looked at as a role model point of view as well. He is a sports icon (I guess), "you should know better". It is like a play pen with alcohol in the place of milk. Just don't hit and don't assume that if you do you won't get hit back.

Assume, make an Ass out of U and Me.
47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 7/8/15 , edited 7/8/15

Frenzify wrote:

Well, you'd sort of expect a five-year-old to be annoying on some level. The fact that they're little children who probably won't know any better than to use some form of violence to express themselves makes your point moot. This is a fully grown, adult woman we're talking about. So, I'll concede only as far as fighting back against a child being wrong. But if a fully grown adult intentionally tries to piss me off, and succeeds in doing so (hard as that may be), with the addition of violence, then even if it's a weedy man who's clearly weaker than me, he should know a beating is coming.

Where my view differs with women is that because we've been so conditioned that hitting women is wrong in any circumstances, even in a pissed off state, I'd likely restrain from beating a much weaker woman, and probably settle for a restrained punch. I can shrug off a lot, especially unintentionally offensive stuff. So, in order to get under my skin to the point where I would resort to violence, a person would need to intentionally be getting on my last nerve, and really be going at it, at which point, regardless of their strength, they'll be responsible for their own bruises. That being said, I don't think anyone can truly say how they'd react in such a situation without being in it. I mean, my last fight was over five years ago.


That's a fair point. I'm tempted to concede a bit there. However, now I'm considering whether it would be OK if, *somehow*, a 5-year-old were as strong as I was. I'm still tempted to say that I would fight back, and for me, it's still a matter of relative strength. To use a bit of a different example, perhaps we could think of, say, something like a hospitalized fully-grown adult with the relative strength of a child? For me, it's not a matter of "knowing a beating is coming." I'm completely fine with punching back a schizophrenic, or drugged up, or in some other way psychologically inhibited person if they're as strong as me, but something just kind of seems off with fighting someone markedly weaker than you, regardless of whether "they knew better."

Keep in mind I'm not arguing on any sort of legal ground here. One should be able to defend oneself without fear of legality, and she clearly punched first. All I'm really talking about here is how I think one should act. And to a certain extent, I'm very OK with the idea that if someone knowingly picks a fight with you, they ought to expect and accept the possibility that you can return the favor, and that they may have the shit beaten out of them. So I'm not in firm disagreement with you, it's more just me thinking out loud about how I might act or think in a similar situation.
49109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/8/15 , edited 7/8/15
Alcohol , hormones,and 6 million years of sexual dimorphism .Trying to sort out an alcohol fueled fight between intimates is just a no win situation.When one partner resorts to violence ,except co consensual,then it would seem the relationship is over. I would suggest that both parties should find a better approach towards relationship closure.As far as this individual being removed from the team it's the old French army "esprit de corps".You've lost a battle so one man from every unit "volunteer" and then 15 are shot at dawn.Honor is served.It doesn't matter which individual is right or wrong in this situation.As a member of the team the perception is you've embarrassed the team.So now you must exit for the honor of the team.In team sports the team comes first.
49109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/8/15

PhantomGundam wrote:

It's not like violence was the guy's first response. The girl was being aggressive and yelling at him. She was about to punch him and so he restrained her. Obviously it didn't work and she punched him with her other hand. I've seen some people say she also kicked him, aiming for the groin but it's hard to tell from that angle. The guy only fought back after he was hit.

Was hitting her wrong? Yes. Especially with that much force. Should the girl be let off the hook for starting the fight? Of course not! If the guy got punished, so should the girl. They both messed up.


In my city both parties in domestic violence are automatically charged.
49109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/8/15

Stay_Night wrote:

They were both in the wrong but the guy was in the wrong 10x more than she was.

1. The guy definitely started it. I don't care what he or she said, but in the video you can see him all over her trying to get to the bar. Yes she threw the first punch and probably said the first words, but he was all over her and that alone should get you kicked out of the bar. She probably told him to back up, and he should have.

2. That was not self defense by any means. Self defense is defending yourself, not that. Defending yourself in this case would be like pushing her away or keeping her from punching you. For example, if I pushed you, and you pulled out a gun and shot me, that would not be self defense. That's murder. That's obviously an extreme example but the idea is there that you defend yourself in the appropriate way for each situation. He did not need to punch anybody over that, man or woman.

3. Lets replace the woman with a 12 year old boy. A 12 year old boy vs a college football player from an elite football organization. Does that sound right? I bet the majority of us here would be up in arms because it's obvious that the boy would get his ass kicked. So what changes when it's a grown woman? Not much, and it wouldn't surprise me if a 12 year old boy could be as strong or stronger than that woman.
If people would be enraged over a college football player hitting a kid, then they should also be enraged over the same person hitting that woman. Just as most 12 year old kids are not as strong as adult men, women are also not as strong as men. If we all agree that he should control himself from hitting a 12 year old, then he should also control himself over hitting a woman.

So in conclusion, the guy is an asshole.


12 year old boys don't hang out in bars.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.