[Deep sigh] There is no right or easy way to say this but I used to support men hitting women.
I didn’t go around like Celie telling Harpo to beat Miss Sofia (watch the Color Purple if that reference stumps you) but there were many cases where I felt a man should hit a woman. I called it the self defence clause. As my female cousin puts it, “some bitches need to get slapped.”
And I wholeheartedly agreed with her until hearing about Tiger Wood’s situation and then I recanted my DV is okay statement.
People are calling Tiger a punk for running from his wife. But I'm thinking, “what should he have done? Hit her back and become a Chris Brown?” Tiger has way too much to lose and it’s funny that the same people who crucified Brown for his actions are laughing at Tiger instead of praising him for “being a man” and walking [read: driving recklessly] away.
If Tiger had struck back, even with his wife was beating him with his own 3 iron, he would have completely destroyed his reputation. Forget being known as an adulterer, because almost every pro athlete is, Tiger would be known as a wife beater and I doubt if Nike would create a line of Tiger wife-beaters while continuing to endorse him. Shoot, CoverGirl almost dropped Rihanna for going back to Chris after the beating. Big money companies can’t get behind something as taboo as a man hitting a woman even if a lot of us feel it would be okay in self defence.
But even if it’s self defence or a reflex to her hitting him, I no longer feel right about supporting men hitting women not because it’s an unfair fight but because of how much they could lose. Even if you’re Joe Schmoe, one DV case can get locked up and screw up your life too. However, I put the asterisk in the title because there are still a few cases where I think a man hitting a woman is justified.
My female friend’s theory is if a woman hits a man he has the right o hit her back. So I asked her, what if the man is the heavyweight champion of the world, like say a Mike Tyson, and the woman is a tiny little thing, like say a Robin Givens, it is still okay? “Tough luck, she hit first,” she said without hesitation. And I understand her point.
So was Tiger a punk? What should a man do if they are caught like Tiger and a woman is beating up on them?
My opinion is he, a multimillionaire professional athlete, did the right thing and at least his beat down wasn’t as bad as Lionel’s...
"what if the man is the heavyweight champion of the world, like say a Mike Tyson, and the woman is a tiny little thing, like say a Robin Givens, it is still okay? “Tough luck, she hit first,” she said without hesitation. And I understand her point."
First, someone like Mike Tyson can take a punch from guys like Evander Holyfield, I think he can handle a little slap from Robin Givens.
Second, he lays one hand on Givens, she's gonna get knocked unconscious. He's MIKE TYSON! There's no self-defense justification you can give to excuse that.
I'm sorry, but male-on-female violence is soooooo much worse than female-on-male violence. Today is National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women for a reason. Twenty years ago, a psycho named Marc Lepine murdered 14 women BECAUSE they were women. Women's shelters continue to house hundreds of women every year who are escaping abuse from their violent asshole husbands and boyfriends. I doubt any of them would agree that their spouses only hit them in "self-defense."
yeah, the mike beating on a robin thing is one of the reasons why its hard to be like its okay for a man to hit back...but what if she is really beating up on him and he gets upset and as a reflex he hits back?
I know today is one of the worse days to condone violence against women...
and remember..the 'self defense' clause has more to do with a man hitting back when he is hit first NOT with a man just hitting a woman just because...i don't think anyone would support that, however a lot of people nowadays are blaming the victim, saying that she has so many places she can go to get help blah blah blah...but that's a whole different situation
Men should never hit a women and women should not hit her men. As adults we have to find better and more positive ways of communicating with each other. There has been times when I get so mad that I just want to slap the spit of out someone, however I didn't make that person so I have no right to hit them. Just slap them around in your mind or 'play fight'.
Guys are physically stronger than women on average. A punch by a guy can cause more damage than by a woman. I'm not saying a guy can't defend himself. If a woman hits a guy, he can do one of two things: block her punch or restrain her. He doesn't need to lay a hand on her.
Agreed with Colin.
It was so shocking to hear, and you're not the first Michelle, that some of my female friends supported men hitting women in some instances like the Chris Brown-Rhianna dispute, just because they felt that the woman must have done something to provoke the man... REGARDLESS, a man should never hit a woman. I grew up thinking that hitting a woman was like the worst thing on earth no matter what the circumstances. When females start to allow exceptions to that ideology, it starts to make it "ok", which is just out of the question for me. I do not condone it, partially, for the following reasons:
- men have greater bone density
- men have more muscle mass
- men have more testosterone
Thus, we have a predisposition to easily and seriously harm a female. We are already at the advantage. ALL kinds of abusive violence (be it man on man, woman on man, etc.) is unfair, unethical, and immoral.
good points michael, but what if the woman is bigger than the man?
http://www.spike.com/video/beat-down/2698418
Lol, sorry to laugh but that's a scary girl in that spike tv link.
But this is why at the end of my previous comment I expressed that ALL kinds of abusive violence should not be condoned, be it woman on man, man on man, etc. because there are non-typical instances like the demonstrated in the video clip following the link. All in all, it's unfair, unethical, and immoral.
there are always exceptions to every rule... so yes, if a woman is coming after you with a chainsaw, it might be okay for a guy to toss a jab or two in self-defense.
but as a general rule, the 'man should never hit a woman' rule is pretty solid, and applies 99% of the time.
Wow. This is a serious issue. It was serious long before Chris Brown or Tiger Woods were household names. I whole heartedly agree with Michael. ANY VIOLENCE IS WRONG. It wasn't right in the 1970s when it was considered "just a part of certain cultures" and it's not right now. Do you know how many women have been killed because this type of behaviour was thought of as okay? It just boggles my mind to think that so many men and women feel that this type of behaviour is justifyable. The bottom line if this ~ if one is in a relationship where it resorts to violence the relationship is toxic from the bottom up. Somewhere during the relationship, it went south. Really south. And for the most part it's very difficult to come back to a healthy relationship after it's gone there. NOTE - I might be contradicting myself, but avp. also has a good point. While I don't condone anyone attacking anyone else I certainly don't expect someone to stand there and be physically abused either. I mean, one does have the right to defend themselves if there really is the possibility of serious bodily harm. Don't you think?
Question. I hate to ask but I wonder... Would Chris Brown have been as vilified if Rhianna left some bruises on him? Would 2009 have been as tough a year as it has been for him? Considering how many young ladies feel like she must have been guilty of something to make him go off like that, if Rhianna left 2 big cocoas on his forhead (like the ones she ended up with) or left a mark on his light-skinned backside (the way I would have if he came at me like that--REAL TALK), would the issue of domestic violence be such a hot topic right now? I Something to make you say hmmmm.
Good points Q, again the self-defense clause comes up and bottom-line, any type of violence no matter who is beating on who is wrong.
and i do wonder if things would be different for Chris if Rihanna did hit him? It annoys me that so many people (Chris supporters) think that she provoked him. So what if she did? does that warrant the buss ass she got or the death threat?
Male and females have been compared to one another like apples and oranges have; that is, they are very different from one another in certain aspects, yet similar in others. Apples and oranges differ from one another for obvious reasons (such as color, shape, size, smell, taste, nutrient value, etc.), however, they do have one thing in common: each one is a fruit.
Now, having just said that, to the degree that neither an apple or an orange have anything to do with morality, male nor female have anything to do with 'what is right and what is wrong'. "Hitting" is a matter of right v.s wrong, not male v.s female (or apple v.s orange).
So for the sake of solving this problem, let us change "Male v.s Female" into "Person v.s Person".
Therefore the question goes from "Should a man hit a woman?" into "Should a person hit another person?".
The answer is more clear now, however the process to solve the problem becomes much larger. E.g.: What is right? What is wrong? How do we tell the difference between the two?
Agreed. In the end, it's just not worth hitting back, even if its one of those soft, "go get 'em champ" hits. Who knows what the media can turn that into now-a-days. I'd do what Tiger did, take it out on reckless driving or by beating up my pillow, u know something like that.