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:
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.
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.