“Hit her back, she gets to vote.” More wisdom from Reddit.
What the fuck is wrong with Reddit these days? Today, the denizens of AskReddit are debating the topic: Is it wrong to hit a woman? You can probably figure out what the consensus is. (Hint: Two letter word, starts with N.) What’s especially striking is how, well, gleeful the discussion is. Redditor after Redditor weighs in with the exact same opinion on the subject; others reply with jokey assent; everybody gets upvotes, sometimes hundreds of them. This exchange captures some of the flavor of the, er, “discussion” there:
From AskReddit.
These aren’t people arguing dispassionately that in the interest of equality we should treat hitting women the same as hitting men, and that ideally no one should be hitting anyone at all. These are guys (mostly) using the topic as an excuse to complain about “bitches” and their rights.
Others, meanwhile, decided to use the topic as masturbation fantasy fodder, suggesting that the original poster had missed his chance for some hot sex with the woman he slapped. As toothsayer put it:
The single slap is disrespectful, shows that you are pissy bitch, and will not get you laid. However, catching up to her as she is walking away, scooping her up, bending her over the knee and repeatedly spanking that ass would have led to some seriously hard core sex.
47 upvotes for that hilarious suggestion.
Perhaps all of the commenters should simply up and move to Topeka, Kansas, where the city council is considering decriminalizing domestic violence in order to save a few bucks. Seriously.
Note: Once again, I have the fine folks (no sarcasm here; they actually are fine) at ShitRedditSays for pointing this discussion out to me. Here’s the SRS discussion of the whole stinky mess.
I pledge: my next post will have nothing to do with Reddit.
Posted on October 7, 2011, in antifeminism, misogyny, rapey, reddit, that's not funny!, violence against men/women, woman's suffrage. Bookmark the permalink. 533 Comments.
MRA’s, always coming out in defense of violence, when it is done against women.
Buhh what?? I can’t even formulate a comment about this. Seriously wtf
You’d have to either be a coward or well trained not to hit a woman back.
Of course, NWO, escalating instead of walking away is always the solution!
Until I got to the end of your post, I was about to provide that same link regarding Topeka. I am so sickened by it, and people need to make their outrage known.
And you could always move to Topeka now, it is legal to beat someone up as long as they are your significant other.
It sounds just up your alley.
All you have to do is hook up with a haggard 16 year old and you can beat her to your heart’s content if she gets out of line.
Regardless of gender the best response to being hit is to walk away. Men should walk away, women should walk away – everyone should walk away. If it is possible, if it is feasible, pick up your keys, your coat, your hat, your bag, etc. and walk the fuck out.
I think that men still have the right to self-defense against women. I think that women and men both have the right to consensually hit each other (in kink, martial arts, whatever). I don’t think it should be gendered, you know? Hitting is wrong in general for everyone.
Seriously, how is “don’t hit people” (unless it’s necessary to defend yourself) such a hard concept to grasp?
And why would spanking a woman without her consent lead to hot sexy tiems?
What if she actually prefers doing the spanking?
And, as ozy said, it’s also okay if the hitting is consensual, of course.
I forgot to add that *slaps self, consensually*
Protip: escalation is a crime whether committed against a man or a woman.
Yay gender equality.
I don’t think we need to buy into the flimsy fiction that these guys are talking about hitting a woman *back*.
Oh boy, Topeka, Kansas. I don’t know which claim to fame is worse, being the home of the Westboro Baptist Church or their position on domestic violence. The first comment after the article brings up a good point that the city can afford to prosecute many victimless drug offenses but apparently domestic violence is too costly. Maybe the police in Topeka want to go back to “the good old days” when a battered wife was told that she should just stop nagging if she wants to be safe at home. I want to know something, though. A person can’t go out in public and beat up a stranger. Why, then do so many people think it’s okay for someone to beat up a family member in the home?
Anyway, it’s true that hitting anyone is wrong, regardless of the gender. I think the MRA’s tend to take that truth, though, and try to justify battery with it. They want to portray all cases of wife beating as a man hitting back, and there are many cases when that isn’t true. They need to admit that not all battered women are equally culpable for domestic violence. They also ignore the fact that if someone hits you, you’re not supposed to hit back with disproportionate force. If someone slaps you in the face, you are not entitled to throw them down the stairs.
@Nobinayamu
“Regardless of gender the best response to being hit is to walk away. Men should walk away, women should walk away – everyone should walk away. If it is possible, if it is feasible, pick up your keys, your coat, your hat, your bag, etc. and walk the fuck out.”
Speaking of violence, here’s a peach of a story.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/07/nyregion/barbara-sheehan-who-killed-husband-is-found-not-guilty-of-murder.html
This is a lovely tale of a woman pumping 11 shots into the now dead hubby. Now she could’ve walked away but didn’t. She claims DV of course. Maybe it happened, maybe it didn’t. The only thing we know for sure is there’s a dead man, and she was cleared of her murder charge.
Now a few things from the story stand out.
#1) “Her supporters, adorned in purple in solidarity with victims of domestic violence, began cheering.”
Isn’t purple the color of lesbianism in the blessed rainbow coalition? How nice to have unconditional support.
#2 “The case had also divided the jury: a day before the verdict was reached, the jurors said they were hopelessly deadlocked.”
“Nonetheless, the jury of nine women and three men unexpectedly reached a consensus on Thursday, in their third day of deliberations”
“In an interview, the jury forewoman, Barbara Fleisher, said jurors ultimately decided to exonerate Ms. Sheehan of murder because the family’s accounts of chronic and vicious abuse had rung true.”
It seems the “forewoman” must’ve done some fine convincing, since she said the jurors had found the story to ring true. It would appear her mind was already made up, no?
#3) ” Legal experts said the verdict was a vindication for the so-called battered-woman defense. Under this strategy the battered woman chronicles her abuse in intimate and graphic detail with the aim of convincing the jury that she reasonably feared for her life based on her abuser’s past behavior. ”
One would think in an equality based Government the law would read, battered spouse, not battered-woman. Also anyone can “chronical” anything they like and recite or write down lies and nonsense. I would think coroborated evidence would be the only evidence admissible.
#4) “The case is a good marker of the willingness of jurors to realize that a history of abuse can inform a woman’s sense of the need to act in self-defense,” said Holly Maguigan, a law professor at New York University”
A good ole gal proclaiming a womans need for self defense. Again not very gender neutral. Unfortunately, dead men tell no tales. Pretty tough to put up any defense when you’re dead.
Ask yourselves, would a man have been cleared if the situation were reversed? I know, it’s the patriarchy that allows a woman to murder a man. Funny how the patriarchy always seems to favor women over men. What a poor choice of names.
But that’s how they’d treat a man so it’d be sexist not to do it to a woman herp derp.
It’s important to recognize this as an argument against gender equality–the argumentative equivalent of “oh yeah?!” but still an argument.
What, no one made the obligatory “what’s the matter with Kansas” joke yet?
Anyway, yeah. This has nothing to do with equality, or voting, these guys just really want to hit women.
This is type of stuff that makes one want to say The Professor’s famous line, “I don’t want to live on this planet anymore” in utter seriousness.
Also, NWO’s justifying being a dick. Wow, he is certainly a crusader for Men’s Rights.
*barf*
MRAs really didn’t internalize kindergarten very well, did they? I bet they also push in line and don’t eat their vegetables.
Apparently Owly wants to re-try this trial at Manboobz. And somehow the real verdict is about gender disparity rather than whether Sheehan was justifiably defending her life.
Owly, it’s an informal term, not a law. Note the “so-called.” There’s no “Battered Woman Defense Law” that says women and only women get to have past abuse factored into their defense.
According to her, she was trying to walk away. If you want to use this as evidence of evul matriarchy or whatever you should at least look like you’ve read the article.
Indeed, the article is not gender neutral. Feminists warn against this kind of thing all the time. So you’re with us, right?
Why don’t you find us a similar case wherein the woman had a history of doing things like slamming her spouse’s head against a cinder-block wall and we’ll see.
I guess the reason Owlyslave gets such simple things wrong is because he thinks he’s reason Cyrillic.
FWIW, the incident the original poster on Reddit was talking about wasnt’ one where the woman had hit the man. For some drunken reason she had decided to pull the buttons off his shirt. And then she’d walked off. So it was a situation where she’d behaved obnoxiously, but not one in which the OP hit her in self-defense.
Well golly, I know sexualised assault always turns ME on. Jesus wept, that whole comment was a special level of offensively creepy.
NWO, if you can’t be bothered to read for comprehension before you post an article, then run along. The grown-ups are talking.
Can the NWO-types come in here JUST ONCE and address the issue at hand instead of trying to derail the conversation? JUST. FUCKING. ONCE?
From the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in their press release about homicide rates. One trend that has held since the 1970’s is crystal clear: as the issue of domestic violence is taken more seriously by the public and women have more opportunities to leave their abusers, fewer men are killed by their female partners. Per the FBI’s 2010 UCR stats on homicides, 110 husbands were killed while 603 wives were killed, and 131 boyfriends were killed while 492 girlfriends are killed.
I’m not arguing that murder is okay. I’m saying that people like NWO love to cherry pick cases like the Sheehan case and try to apply broad generalizations of malevolent female intent while ignoring the fact that far more women are killed by their partners than men.
I also saw this in the New York Times article from earlier this week:
Women who employ this defense are not acquitted with any more frequency than any other accused killer.
BTW, I want to add that I think escalation is a bad idea. A really bad idea. Because if you hit me and I can’t fight back–and who knows what I’ll be able to do if there’s enough adrenaline pumping through my body–I’ll probably go for a weapon. And then you’re really fucked. So, the whole gleeful attitude about hitting women because they actually want to be treated like human beings? Probably a bad idea.
Also, I think women who hit men, depending on some sort of archaic notion of chivalry to save them…or think hitting men is cute or funny… are fucking assholes and idiots.
@David Futrelle
“For some drunken reason she had decided to pull the buttons off his shirt. And then she’d walked off. So it was a situation where she’d behaved obnoxiously, but not one in which the OP hit her in self-defense.”
Dave, if a man pulled the buttons off a womans shirt and she slapped him in retaliation, not only would da crew endorse her behavior as justified, (see how da crew is justifying above husband killer). The guy who pulled the buttons off a womans shirt whould be arrested for assault, attempted rape, sexual assault, numerous other violations, and probably a hate crime of sorts.
A woman gets a slap in the face for pulling the buttons off a mans shirt and she can have him arrested. A man gets a slap in the face for pulling the buttons off a womans shirt, and he gets arrested. Hell, he might even do some hard time. Equality before the law?
Is that even possible? I think the standard troll response to anything is “Yeah, well VAWA, Title IX, false rape allegations, female batterers. Take that!” The only exception I’ve seen lately was when David K. Meller commented on a kittens thread and agreed that hamsters and kittens are cute. I’m still in shock that he actually said something I agree with. Thankfully, on all other threads he said hateful crap and now all is right in the universe again.
Pulling buttons off man shirt exactly the same as pulling buttons off a woman’s shirt? Hmmmm.
Is there an epidemic of people pulling buttons off each other’s shirts that I’m unaware of?
Also, straight white man in chains! Feel the oppression! Sorry, that icon still cracks me up every time I see it.
Escalation is a bad idea. Escalation (as opposed to actual defense) is a crime. One of the things cops hear all the time is, “I was defending myself”.
This is often said just before the cuffs are put on both parties. “He started it” only works if the response made was to do no more than needed to finish it.
Also, Amanda Marcotte and Andrea Dworkin are totally Holocausting them to death…or something.
The MRA types are weird. Upon hearing that a group of people had been treated shabbily (or at least not as equals…which is pretty shabby if you think about it) since we came into existence, I would think “My god, that’s bad. What can I do to make it better?” But MRA-types are like “BUT WHAT ABOUT UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUS?!!!!!!” *stamping of feet*
It’s like racists who’ll point to instances of black on white crime and claim racism isn’t a problem.
I know that as someone who is white, straight, cis (I think is the proper term?), upper-middle-class, and not entirely disgusting-looking, I live my life with a certain amount of privilege. Does that make me a bad person? ABSOLUTELY NOT. But I think having an awareness of that, and trying to, you know, not be a COMPLETE FUCKING DICK to everyone who’s not exactly like me is probably a good idea.
I digressed a bit. Meh.
I know. Plus—and I acknowledge it’s because I’m not terrifically familiar with the scene–it always brings to mind BDSM-related stuff. But, really, it’s just strikes me as incredibly silly and overwrought.
@vacuumslayer
“Can the NWO-types come in here JUST ONCE and address the issue at hand instead of trying to derail the conversation? JUST. FUCKING. ONCE?”
There. In my above post I addressed Dave.
——————
@blitzgal
“I’m saying that people like NWO love to cherry pick cases like the Sheehan case and try to apply broad generalizations of malevolent female intent while ignoring the fact that far more women are killed by their partners than men.”
Feminists like yourself never use a broad brush to paint men in a bad light while painting women as innocent victims. Do they? And besides, where do you think I learned how to paint women with a broad brush in a bad light? Where does one go to master the techniques of the strawman arguement or ad hominem? You go to the pro’s and learn from the best, feminists. Schrodingers rapist anyone?
——————
@vacuumslayer
“Also, I think women who hit men, depending on some sort of archaic notion of chivalry to save them…or think hitting men is cute or funny… are fucking assholes and idiots.”
Yet the laws you endorse say the exact opposite. What kind of a person says one thing to make others view them as fair, equitible and compassionate, while endorsing the opposite?
Erm, what laws do I endorse? BE SPECIFIC. Also, can you read my mind?
vacuumslayer: He doesn’t need to read your mind. He tells you what you think. Then you think it. Just ask him, he’ll tell you.
But, doesn’t NWO think that women who show skin or the shape of their bodies are sexually assaulting the men around them? Surely if someone rips of the buttons of a man’s shirt, that’s not going to send any men nearby into a blind panic of sexual frustration, but a woman’s shirt? With her having BREASTS and everything? Surely the man should be held accountable for his part in sexually assaulting all of the men around him by ripping a shirt and making a woman’s body more visible.
Nah, he’ll just say women shouldn’t wear shirts
@Pecunium
“This is often said just before the cuffs are put on both parties. “He started it” only works if the response made was to do no more than needed to finish it.”
Nuh-uh white knight. The days of dual arrests in DV are long gone. We got primary aggressor model now a days. I wonder who is crying like a baby when the cops arrive and exhibits “fear” reguardless of injuries? I wonder who can turn on the tears and weep hysterically at the drop of a hat?
“And the Illuminati and the Rothchilds and the fluoride!”
NWO, the point of this post and a good life guideline in general is “don’t hit.” Stop your derailing horseshit.
NWO: citation needed.
Are women responsible for mitigating their risks of being raped?
@vacuumslayer
“Erm, what laws do I endorse? BE SPECIFIC. Also, can you read my mind?”
You endorse VAWA, primary aggressor laws. Everyone here prattles on about me personally as if my mind and actions are an open book. But that’s to be expected since everyone here is top notch genius material.
” of dual arrests in DV are long gone. We got primary aggressor model now a days. I wonder who is crying like a baby when the cops arrive and exhibits “fear” reguardless of injuries? I wonder who can turn on the tears and weep hysterically at the drop of a hat?”
Good point! Men never fake emotions.
Not everyone NWO. You do post here.
I don’t know about “straight.” What cracks me up is that the pic is probably from a BDSM site, and shit, they have all kinds of men on there.
(Lots of submissive guys are straight, of course, but I know how NWO’s unwavering support for men magically wavers when confronted with the wrong sort of man, and so it ought to tweak him to consider the possibility.)
You repeat the same four or five points ad nauseum. We’ve picked up the pattern.
@hellkell
“NWO: citation needed.”
Yaay, citation needed. I gave ya one for a woman gunning down her husband. Everyone says to walk away from violence. Well, she had 17 years to walk. My citation was worthless, and we moved on to Illuminati, Rothchilds, fluoride, mind-reading, citations, BDSM-related stuff, trolls, and it’s only a matter of time before we move onto elephant hating.
————————–
@hellkell
“And the Illuminati and the Rothchilds and the fluoride!”
There was never a group known as the Illuminati. The Rothchilds are poor vagabonds opposed to the banking system, and drinking flouride increases your life expectancy, intelligence and fertility.
Holly: I think, from some clues, it’s religious iconography.
@blitzgal
“You repeat the same four or five points ad nauseum. We’ve picked up the pattern.”
And what do you do?
I think if a woman pulls a gun on a man he is entitled to do whatever is necessary to defend his life.
I think if a woman pulls a man’s buttons off he is entitled to go “what the fuck?!?” and that’s about the end of it.
And I think that the Redditors are mostly salivating about the thought of hitting women, period, with “we mean hitting them back!” as the flimsiest of pretexts.
NWO, you’re being positively adorbs this evening. Good day on the milk line?
@Holly Pervocracy
“Lots of submissive guys are straight”
Hoorah for submissive guys! But wait. If a girl is submissive she’s a doormat and feminism can save her.
—————————-
@Pecunium
“Holly: I think, from some clues, it’s religious iconography.”
Wow you are smart. When I’m a mind reader it’s bad. When you’re a mind reader is funny and good.
“needed. I gave ya one for a woman gunning down her husband. Everyone says to walk away from violence. Well, she had 17 years to walk.”
Many women don’t walk because theyre afraid of being beaten or murdered. Also: Battered Women Syndrome–read up on it.
Also, which SPECIFIC law do I support that is unfair or oppressive to men?
Is it bad that I actually zeroed in on the guy who said “Hey just because he can vote doesn’t mean you can hit him” about his grandfather and thought “Hey maybe this guy gets it”?
“Hoorah for submissive guys! But wait. If a girl is submissive she’s a doormat and feminism can save her.
—————————”
You’re an idiot. Most feminists are supportive of sexual submission, unless I’m mistaken.
@hellkell
“NWO, you’re being positively adorbs this evening.”
Adorbs? I gotta look that up, I wanna be wiki smart as well. “A common way of abbreviating adorable.” Oh, oh, oh. I can’t wait to use that in a sentence.
Rutee – I liked that comment too.
I also think we need to challenge the implication that it’s okay to hit a healthy young guy, for that matter. Identifying as male shouldn’t mean signing up for the Thunderdome.
All I can do here is chuckle.
Again, Owly loves to just ignore me. Perhaps he thinks his dignity is affronted by being called Owly or Owlyslave. Trust me, dude. Dignity is not something you need to worry about anymore. I wrote this poem for you, NWOslave. I hope you lieks it:
Do you lieks it yes [ ] no [ ]
@vacuumslayer
“You’re an idiot. Most feminists are supportive of sexual submission, unless I’m mistaken.”
You’re a feminist, idiocy and mistaken is your guiding light.
Yeah, I’m not really happy with anyone saying “You shouldn’t hit a girl” in my presence for it. I try to correct them to “You shouldn’t hit ANYONE”. Because really people, it’s the 21st century. Self defense is one thing but if it’s not necessary, don’t hit someone.
“Hoorah for submissive guys! But wait. If a girl is submissive she’s a doormat and feminism can save her.”
Well, I guess that answers our question about whether or not Slave has any actual contact with the BSDM community. (Unless he’s a Gorean.)
@Holly Pervocracy
“I also think we need to challenge the implication that it’s okay to hit a healthy young guy, for that matter. Identifying as male shouldn’t mean signing up for the Thunderdome.”
You’d have to get rid of VAWA, primary aggressor laws, Title IX and a whole wack of female centric laws for that to happen. And no one needs to indentify as male or female, you’re born one or the other, except in rare hermaphrodites. Can you believe how backward I am? Thinking people are born male or female. What crazy conspiracy will I come up with next?
I am amused how NWO says that feminism hates submissive women… to a feminist submissive woman. D’oh.
“You’re a feminist, idiocy and mistaken is your guiding light.”
That is WEAK SAUCE so far as comebacks go.
This is pretty empty trolling from the fake engineer who sucks at math.
@ozymandias42
Whoa! Ozy deigns to converse about the slave. I’m touched. How’s the Ivory Tower now that acedemia is back in session? Are ya learnin good stuff? Just outta curiosity, what’s your major? My guess would be political science, maybe a bit of English lit, no doubt womens studies and a tish of social science.
NWO, if you said this shit to my face, I wouldn’t hit you.
I can’t be honest here and pretend I wouldn’t think about it, but I wouldn’t lay a finger on you.
Can you say the same to me?
(Please, feel free to rant about unrelated shit and how you hate everybody who isn’t like you and frankly most people who are like you and there’s no marginalized group you wouldn’t like to double marginalize while calling them your evil overlords. For God’s sake, don’t just say “no, I wouldn’t hit someone who hadn’t touched me,” because if you admit to being even a little bit of a decent fucking human being, the Rothchilds win.)