I honestly don’t care. Men have been putting their hands on women first for over a hundred years now when we had little to no rights and were viewed as property. Maybe this will cause women to group up and be more supporting of each other. The males that said this are saying that if women get equal rights men and women should fight equally as well, a guy hitting a girl first if they were arguing would be fine to them.
I agree
I disagree
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Please select your age
Updates
+1 y
Y’all are not answering the question smh
Updates
+1 y
Wow there is a lot of sexist guys on this site
“Equal Rights Equal Fights”. Do You Agree Or Disagree With This Statement?
Ofcoarse not. We don't need to go backwards in time.
Hitting people is bad, do people still do it? Yes, those are bad people.
Are a group of men guilty of something? Sure.
Should we be allowed to do what they did because it's apparently fair that way? NO! Hitting people is bad, it doesn't matter what minority or majority gets away with it. It doesn't change it from being bad. People think suicide is good, doesn't mean we should all go jump into traffic.
What we should keep on keeping on is this separate good people from bad people and characterize between according to their merits and deeds in relation to what is good and bad. We should almost always be condemning that behaviour and we should also be condemning the hysteria that would promulgate such a sarcastic and bitter attitude. This question included, but at the same time we still have to be nice enough so we don't backfire the whole thing.
Thankfully, I don't have violent people in my life, be them men or women. The only who got verbally abusive with me, my best female friend, got immediately cut off of my life.
I see. I don't agree with the statement, seems to me an excuse to physically attack women. A right statement would be "Equal rights, equal duties", the same that's in my country's costiturion.
I don’t think anyone should hit unless in drug degrade. And certainly not someone smaller than you regardless of your or their sex. It’s not worse for 250 pound man to hit a 90 pound woman than it is for a 250 pound woman to hit a 90 pound man. But I think violence is bad and used for incredibly dumb reasons. Self defense is swift degree not violence. People use violence and use self defense as excuse. She / he slapped me so I beat the shit out if her/ him. I was protecting myself 🙄
Unfortunately I do think women need to carry defense even if they are strong bc you can’t take down a gang rape even with a black belt in gymnastics tai Kwon do
Fuck it, I’ll say it. I believe that if a woman is gonna start swinging at a man then the man she’s attacking should be well within this rights to fight back with reasonable force, if she doesn’t stop unless he knocks her out then he shouldn’t get in trouble for knocking her out and legally it should be seen as self defence just like it would be if the roles were reversed.
I got picked on a lot at school and got into a lot of fights I didn’t start. While most of the aggressors were male my two most violent and dangerous were both females. One in fifth grade attacked me and when she realised that she wasn’t gonna win a fistfight with me she pulled out a box cutter (where the hell does a fifth grade kid even get one of those at a school?) and the other one was when I was in year 8 a girl in the grade below me attacked me at lunch time with a triangular metal ruler and because I refused to hit her back I instead ended up with scratches and bruises all over my legs and marks and bruises all over my arms from protecting my head. If there was no double standard about hitting women back I’d have been unlucky to come out with a couple of bruises but because of that double standard I was covered in marks and it hurt to walk for the next two days. All because some girl decided she didn’t like me and I didn’t put up with her crap.
If I ever start a fit with a woman and she puts me on my ass, that’s fine too but that’s already socially acceptable but if a woman comes up and sucker punches me and then keeps swinging and I even dare to do anything other than block and dodge as best I can and hope for someone with authority to intervene and get them off me then I’m some kind of abusive monster even though if a man did the same thing and I put him on his ass that’s socially acceptable.
I’ve seen a lot of your other posts and it really seems like you have something against men so I’ll end with this: not every man is a monster and I was taught to fight by my mother and later her and my step father. She herself once said to me that she would understand if I knocked out or broke the arm of a woman that pulled a knife on me in an alley. She told me in any situation where I’ve been attacked I should do whatever I need to to end that fight as quickly as possible to minimise my chance of getting hurt and if I get in trouble she’d have my back. And to address the end of your question no I don’t think it’s ok for a guy to just hit a woman in an argument but if she slaps him cause she didn’t like a point he made and he slaps her back he shouldn’t be the only one to have that stigma on him, either neither of them should or they both should.
You asked if I agreed with the statement, I’m explaining why I do. Yes I believe that both genders should fight equally because right now a man can fight back against a violent woman without being stigmatised if this doesn’t answer your question then maybe it needs to be worded more concisely because it is quite easy to misinterpret.
I’m sorry where exactly is it clearly explained all it says is some of the men who say this think it’s ok for a man to hit a woman during an argument which is definitely not what it means. So if that isn’t what you meant could you explain again? Because what you’re actually trying to ask isn’t as clear as you think given I’m not the first reply you’ve made to people saying “that’s not the question” and after looking at some more comments and whatnot it’s quite clear you’re not a very open minded person and seem to think you know all about how the world works at the age of 19, refusing to admit you’re wrong about something. I’m well aware of the fact I’m only 18 myself but I’m definitely more open minded than you are.
As a southern gentleman I don't believe in hitting a woman. However, if she starts coming at me with the intention to do harm I will push her away, put a barrier between us or give her some coffee to save myself. If she has a weapon and intends to end my life, I might have to hit her then. It's self defense of my own life after all.
Coffee would make them more hyper, but I want to know something, how do you think the world would change if men started back hitting women first like they did in the old days? Would it change at all to you?
Honestly people today and people from years ago haven't changed a bit. Some men would hit woman back then and you'd still have men who would punch the daylights out of them for hitting. Same today. There are still millions of men who hit women and there's millions who would stand up for her. Back then, they were raised better than kids today. Discipline was strict and they still grew up hitting. Nothing has changed.
They say history repeats itself. It could be that one day all the men get fed up with the feminist wearing vagina hats and wanting to be treated equally, but not wanting to get hit and then go on a Nationwide beat down frenzy. #sarcasm 😜
Yes there is a side of feminism that is actually man-hating while using feminism as an excuse for that. I agree with the true feminist ideology, but not with those hypocrites, who simply turned sexism around
@Janna only idiots who don’t like feminism would group them together with real feminists it’s a plot to destroy feminism entirely. Plus I understand where feminists from the East are coming from. If I was treated like that I would feel some type of way too, even tho they don’t do anything
Well they are grouping themselves together with feminism, and have in a way stolen the word. I used to be a feminist, but I don’t want to be associated with those hateful people, so I call myself an equalist now. It is basically the same ideology, only without specific gender pronouns (and thus more inclusive), and without the negative associations.
You just finding out there is a lot of sexism here? Guess what? There is a lot of racism as well.
As for a woman or man defending themselves, violence is never the answer. But too many guys here are fine with it, as long as they are the winner. They don't like it too much if they end up losing.
That's not the most masculine of positions, but whatever.
It isn't that I agree or disagree. I just don't like the premise. I think the way this forum is tilted, you are kind of letting these trolls push you into a corner. We all know that women can learn how to shoot a gun and become just as violent as any man. But if we get to a point where all we can express to each other is violence based upon politics, sex, or race, we are done.
"... violence is never the answer." Says no student of history ever. Historically, violence and the threat of violence is the PRIMARY way of settling disputes. Sorry...
@RobertCuthbert "Really, so if you are killed in a dispute, that would be cool with you, your family, your friends, etc?" This is what's commonly called a "straw man" argument; where you put words I never said into my mouth. But yes, the dead don't care about being dead...
"Violence is a path to death. These are facts." But they are irrelevant facts. Because I was in the twenty years, and been in many, many violent situations even before then, but I'm NOT dead. So while violence IS a path to death, it almost never actually get's there. that's what makes it a straw man, despite your denial. Violence is a common, successful tool in resolving disputes; that is a historical fact.
"So the you admit the reason why you support violence is because you have come out on the "winning" side, right?" Another straw man argument. How about you actually address the points I make, instead of arguing about points I DIDN'T make? The reason why I "support" the use of violence in resolving some disputes is because it has historically been an effective choice. You DO know something about history, don't you?
@taleswapper Why are you getting upset? I responded to your point with nothing but logic.
Violence is a successful tool in resolving disputes, this is your supposed position. If violence resulted in the the death of your loved ones, would that be a "successful resolution"?
Its like you are pretending to be stupid now.
Many members of families of those who were victims of violence do not feel it was a "successful resolution".
" I responded to your point with nothing but logic. " The three logical errors suggest otherwise.
"Violence is a successful tool in resolving disputes, this is your supposed position. If violence resulted in the the death of your loved ones, would that be a "successful resolution"?
No. In fact, in my personal experience, it NEVER results in harm to my loved ones. So your insistence that that is the inevitable result of my position is a strawman. Four logical errors.
@taleswapper "No. In fact, in my personal experience, it NEVER results in harm to my loved ones."
You see, I predicted this and then you told me I was wrong and that I created a strawman. I already knew violence did not result in the death of your loved ones. And I already know that you think it will save them.
I don't dispute your warped view. Obviously, you feel strongly.
As do those who have lost their loved ones to violence. So obviously, for them, violence was not a successful resolution. And you are the one with issues with logic, by suggesting that violence was useful in cases where those involved did not think so.
Maybe it is just useful to you.
Violence valid for you in the way you communicate, and those in your proximity need to know that.
It's not personal, though. It's an historical fact, applied over time. So trying to MAKE it personal doesn't work. Violence is a tool to making the world conform to your will.
Your original assertion that "violence is never the answer" is demonstrated as false, in fact a dangerous lie. It's why people who think that way are usually the victims of violence, too.
@taleswapper You keep talking about historical fact. History tells the tale that violence has taken the lives of million upon millions. That violence is responsible for abuses so grotesques that we could not even show the photos here at GaG. And in every one of those instances, you can beat the loved ones of those victims were absolutely horrified. Many psychological damaged for the rest of their lives simply because of what they had seen or the loss they had experienced.
Surely, violence can be used to make others do your bidding. And those who are your victims will according to the laws of common sense dislike the violence you directed towards them.
And if violence is successfully visited upon you and yours, you will dislike it immensely.. .
well, that is unless you are mentally disabled or damaged in some fashion.
Then perhaps you might, because of whatever mental impairment, perceive some type of joy or feeling of satisfaction.
@taleswapper Nah, you don't get it. in all these situations, every single person who was the victim of violence had loved one who were grieving. And in some situations, scarred for the rest of their lives because of seeing their loved ones dead, dismembered, marred, disfigured. . .
But I get it, perhaps you do not possess these types of emotions. It's possible. Maybe you are a sociopath or something similar.
I get it.
But many human beings are not sociopaths. They possess emotions. And if they see violence visited upon their loved ones, they experience an extreme form of anguish and grief.
It may be difficult for you to understand.
And I must note that many people who are here today, have their freedoms not because of some violent act. But because of a choice not to be violent.
"But again, my freedoms were won, because of a choice not to be violent." Uh huh. sure. And I have a bridge in Arizona I want to sell you. Whatever. you're locked onto your position, and any attempt to correct your thinking is ignored. Cheers, mate!
If you truly are 56 years old, then you would remember a time when this nation had a choice to remain being a free nation or become an authoritarian regime.
It choose to be free. And the side fighting for freedom, refused to fire a single shot.
That is exactly how they won.
So you can continue to pretend that did not happen.
That's what I thought. Your claim is seen as false, and your "argument" merely an extended ad hominem. Violence is almost always an answer. maybe not the "best" one, but nevertheless, it's historically an effective one..
The only people who say this really have an urge to hit women back. No one should be hitting anyone but if a woman hits you, then you charge her with physical assault, not go all out and punch her in the face.
Let’s not act like all women are weak little shits ok. There are women who do want to fight guys for whatever crap that they did and if she hits a guy he should hit back so they can fight
I don't think it's okay to lay hands on someone because of something they said, but if someone lays hands on you and hits first, then why shouldn't one be allowed to defend themselves.
Gender isn't an excuse to get away with violence or take away someone's right to defend themselves.
Are women the ones that go around say men shouldn't hit them? What is the question then? You can't take away someone's right to defend themselves and use gender as an excuse.
Do you think it's wrong for a man to defend themselves from a woman? Just because there are things that affect women, doesn't mean there aren't things that affect men.
I agree and disagree. First of all, I’m sure there were plenty of men who took care of their woman. Back in the day. I mean wasn’t there a time we were just suppose to sit there and look pretty? I’m not a feminist lol. But yeah, women didn’t have a lot of opportunity and social standards were different over time.
NATURALLY, men are stronger than women. Something about their testosterone helps. When I say that, I mean just that. Men are phsically a little more stronger. bit today a women can kick a scronny guys butt.
So I think it could most definitley help someone improve their skills in fighting... but also there should be standard on how two people are determined to fight.
This is just my proposal though. My science could be flawed for all I know 💁🏻♀️
No back in the day women were supposed to stay in the house and be ready to have sex with their guy and what does that have to do with being a feminist? They are for women duh and not all of them are stronger but a lot of women don’t work out and are weak so yea but even with testosterone lots of guys are still weak and skinny
Well regardless it only supports what I say that women haven’t necessarily built themselves to fight. But also even think about it waaaaay back. Women are the nurturers. They care for the child and raise them while the husband protects the home and hunts for food. I only imply the feminist part because of the irrational people that jump to say “you must be a feminist.”
Today we are not hunting or trying our best to survive. But all I’m saying is that for a girl and a guy who do the same exact workout for the same exact time... it may or may not provide different results. That’s what I’m talking about. They will have a different muscle mass or something. That is scientifically supported. Look it up. “Should men and women exercise the same.” It doesn’t mean you can’t. You can. Just depends on a lot.
I’m a 100lb, 20 year old girl. I took a boxing class. But when I fought my brother, my ass flew to the ground and my hands had bruises 😂 I’m sure people would want a fair fight ya know?
Also I’m sorta weak but I was 105lbs with muscle. A girl in my boxing class told me I was buff for being able to do push ups which wasn’t the case at all haha
Take advantage of what? That’s how it’s been for a long time lmao it was even worse from before with the lack of rights and not being viewed as another human being so whatever
Are you Implying that all guys want to hit a girl? cause if so, girl you have the wrong picture in your head. You’re not making your point clear? So what if it’s been like that for a long time? Exactly. That. We. are not. Built. For. That.
Yes it’s fine to fight in competition based on certain standard so the fight is equal. But if you mean girls start school fights with guys and so on. Or just pick a fight that is caused by anger or something, that will cause damage.
Some people are literally stupid enough to think “hmm I want to hit this person just because.” Haven’t you seen how people reacted when they were against cops? People were hitting a cops car with a baseball bat and they were grouped together.
People follow rules but some will unleash once that’s been uplifted. Girl it’s crazy.
Fight to defend. Yes. Fight in general on either side of the gender? No. Feel me?
The societal structure or how people will react to fighting girls equally, some guys who have never touched a woman before, will touch a woman with harmful intentions. I’m saying people will start to actually fight, with reason or not. Girls who do not want to fight... are gonna get their butts beat. It might cause some people trauma.
The same thing can be said in opposite with guys who don’t want to fight back both things are happening right now so I don’t see what you are trying to say
You right. But see what I mean? It would only cause somethine negative.
Fight back to defend yourself is fine. That’s my point. Fighting to hurt someone for whatever other reason is dumb. Don’t make this a big thing basically cause people will do stupid decisions. Like tide pods. It was a joke but people actually died from it.
It wouldn't be okay if men hit women first because; 1) Men generally have stronger upper body strength (like it says in "Are Women the Stronger Sex?" free from obooko) and 2) Assault and battery are illegal, regardless of who hits first. #ERA
Im a supporter of doing the same thing women do to men. Men should carry some kind of cheap self defense weapon instead of using their own strength and then gender doesn't matter any more. But I know there would still be complaints and accusations if I tazed a girl that attacked me so I've willed myself to just eat the damage and ignore her after
Well men have been doing damage to women all the time so you are a supporter of something none existent. Plus no I think all women should carry a weapon like a knife or something since we have to worry about y’all sexually assaulting us as well.
Okay but if women are carrying around weapons and being paranoid then we should as well in theory. But since so many women have the "some men rape and assault women = most men rape and assault women" mentality I'm just going to do nothing if a woman attacks me. If she wants to kill me then go ahead. I'd rather lose my health than lose in court 👌🏻
Lmao it’s not being paranoid it’s the truth guys are always doing shit to women so, that’s why a lot of people don’t think women should go outside by themselves at night while it’s ok for a guy to. Which is dumb but we are carrying weapons to protect ourselves from y’all, if y’all are so much stronger why should y’all have to? Hmm?
Because if a man uses his bare hands its assault no matter what and y'all complain its not fair because men are sooo much stronger. So why not even the playing field? Also no, most men do not assault women. I go to college in a city infamous for sex trafficking and guess how many women end up being assaulted or kidnapped for "going out at night"? We had 5 in the whole 4 years I've been here and my school has easily over 30,000 students that go here. It's definitely paranoia
But of course facts aren't going to change anything here. Thats why I think the logical thing is to just let women have their moment and abuse/harass men if they want to because eventually y'all will get over it and start seeing things logically too.
Yea that would be assault as 9 times out of 10 the guy is attacking the girl first. Also yea a lot of you do sexually assault and abuse women why would you try to deny that fact I don’t know
No you're completely right. We're predators and sex offenders. I think women should carry around fn five-sevens and open fire at the men they think look suspicious.
You do realize that in the US, less than 1% of the population are sex offenders. Out of sexual assaults only 24% are committed by people the victim doesn't know and 7% are complete strangers. This is.007% of the male population so you think this.007% warrants suspicion on all of us. Duly noted. If this is actually how women think im never going outside. If I look at a woman wrong I might get tazed.
Okay dont believe it if you want to but theyre statistics. there's more people in the world than you think. You can't bottleneck people into one category just because its convenient to you. But its okay, men are whatever you want them to be :)
For several decades now, it has been seen as socially acceptable, How women were treated hundreds of years ago has no more to do with the modern day than slavery. Putting your hands on anyone is wrong, but how men feel is if that a woman is willing to put her hands on a man just because she feels like it, then she should be willing to get hit back.
Some girls need to be taken down a notch, just how it is. Don't expect special treatment just because women have been, allegedly, mistreated in the past.
There are men, sorry Trans people joining women's sports and are killing it. A women that trained there whole life to be number one and some dude with small titties and long hair comes in and destroys their dreams. I do not agree with this. It's one of those be careful what you wish for type of things
Oh yes, that's one thing I forgot to mention in my response is that sports are a completely different matter due to men and women being biologically different. On average, men have more muscle mass and are stronger than women, and will typically be faster, stronger and more capable than women in most sporting events because of human biology. This is why you have a mans division and a womans division in i think all sporting events.
Welp, if they decide to put all women and men in a single division, men will be dominiate in almost all sporting events and then the olympics or whatever will be called sexist and then men will probably be banned from being allowed to compete in many sports.
Good then most of us would turn against y’all tho. The me too movement would evolve into murderous women, plus there would be a whole bunch of lesbians.
Most Helpful Opinions