Whoopi Goldberg under fire for saying men have the right to fight back

Status
Not open for further replies.
If she's trying to kill me, I'm going to knock her out at the very least.

If she's trying to hit me, I'll just judo her and call it a day.

I think you can't go wrong doing it that way, fellas.
 
happypup said:
There is an ethical code called the rules of engagement that work just as well in a fist fight as they do on a battlefield. That is to subdue with necessary force, that should be allowed, and it has nothing to do with gender. You have the right to defend yourself, but that right stops at necessary force. It would require far greater force to subdue a larger more muscled assailant than a smaller less muscled assailant. Your right to hit somebody weaker than you ends when it is excessive. That line does not need to be nor should it be different based on sex.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to imply you should bust a 90lb guy's skull in for a light tap on the jaw... just that the sexes demand different actions.
I mean, if a women attacked me, I think I'd try to restrain her until she calmed down, grab her by the wrists or something. But honestly, even if it's nicer, wouldn't that same response shame a man? Personally, I'd rather a guy deck me, if I made such a mistake.
 
Liu Kang Baking A Pie said:
Ideally, but we have a pretty sad history of domestic abuse and oppression to deal with when it comes to women.

I also think we all look down just as much on a larger man attacking a smaller man unnecessarily, too, so this whole tangent doesn't really fly for me.
Click to expand...

This isn't about history. I don't think anyone can argue with that. It's about it being acceptable to defend yourself regardless of the gender of your assailant. Responding in a proportionate manner to the threat you face. Not 300lbs men battering 90lbs women for slapping them.

There are men in this very thread who say they would be ok with hitting a smaller man, but not an equally small woman. This is discrimination. It's not the biggest issue, but it's hard to disagree with that fact.
 
Hamster Plugin said:
Because they WOULD hit a man with similar strength. That is sexist.
Click to expand...
The reasoning behind it is wrong, but if it prevents a little bit of violence, I don't see it as a BAD principle, per se. Of course everyone should act like that no matter if it's a man or a woman, but if some men decide to restrain women instead of starting to whail on them after getting hit, that's a win for somewhat reasonable behaviour. Violence is bad and you should always try to reason with the aggressive person instead of immediately going physical.

Of course this excludes instances where it's some kind of abusive relationship between a man a woman where it happens all the time and the man doesn't do anything about it (i.e. break up with the woman if there's no hope for their relationship, call the police if it gets real bad, try to get some anger management help for the woman if he thinks she might be able to control the aggressive behaviour) because he's ashamed or something.
 
AndyH said:
This isn't about history. I don't think anyone can argue with that. It's about it being acceptable to defend yourself regardless of the gender of your assailant. Responding in a proportionate manner to the threat you face. Not 300lbs men battering 90lbs women for slapping them.

There are men in this very thread who say they would be ok with hitting a smaller man, but not an equally small woman. This is discrimination. It's not the biggest issue, but it's hard to disagree with that fact.
Click to expand...
It comes from the history you're trying to ignore.
 
"Hitting back" does not necessarily equal "beating the shit out of her", which I'm sure is how a lot of people are taking this. Okay, so men are stronger than women... so don't hit full force. Not that hard to do.

I agree wholeheartedly. If you're physically assaulting me, don't expect me to just sit there and do nothing.. I will make you stop. Hitting back is an intermediate step to stop an annoyance or simply to prevent whatever pain you're inflicting. I'm not doing it because I consider you a threat... if I consider someone a true threat to me, I'm going to shoot them, not hit them.
 
Liu Kang Baking A Pie said:
I can see your logic in it, but at least for me, it's coming off as a disingenuous appropriation of feminist ideals to score a win in an argument rather than a real stance you've always had and defend. There's been too many attempts to try and trap people into answering wrong for me to buy into it.
Click to expand...

I am a feminist, I have been for the last decade at least, and assure you that when I say that the "never hit a woman"-stance is sexist, I am genuine.

It's not the worst stance out there, at most measuring as maybe 2-3 pico-hitlers on the hitler scale, but it is one of many pieces making up the patriarchy puzzle. In a thread about a celebrity that has said "This is the thing: If anybody hits you, you have the right", I think shooting down exceptions of the "never hit a woman"-stance is pretty appropriate.

As has been pointed out, the discussion of whether physical violence is an acceptable response to someone who hits, is an altogether different discussion. I am focusing primarily on Whoopi's argument of not treating aggressors different based on their gender.
 
diaspora said:
Not defending yourself with strikes if necessary because the person is a woman is doing the wrong thing for the wrong reason.
Click to expand...

It wasn't necessary in the situation that sparked Whoopi's comment though. So I don't know why she opened her mouth.

She's basically saying Jay should have hit her when the situation was resolved without a brawl.

And this is part of the problem, you've placed women as a group lesser to men.
Click to expand...

No. I'm saying that if this was a thread about a larger man beating a smaller man, and you guys came into that thread asking people who agreed with how the larger man handled the situation by asking "Would you hit a woman for this?" I'd agree with you.

but instead you're coming into a thread about a man who didn't hit a woman and asking people who agree with that outcome "would you hit a man for this?".

and to me that's ass backwards in the face of the real results.

I'm justifying violence as self defense regardless of the attacker's sex or gender. Perpetuating the idea that one sex and gender is too weak to ever strike is insane.
Click to expand...

You're doing this. Ignoring the CONTEXT OF THE THREAD

that's my problem with your argument.

She's stating that hitting someone that's attacking you is morally okay regardless of whether they're a man or woman, and she's right.
Click to expand...

In response to a situation where a man didn't hit a woman and the situation was resolved without anyone being seriously injured.

So basically she's saying that instead of having it go down like that, Jay should have hit her back.

because she's an idiot. This is Whoopi "It wasn't "rape" rape." Goldberg here.
 
I have to agree. To make the assumption "women are weak/inferior" to men and that's why we can't hit them is ridiculous.

I've met many a woman who could kick my ass.
 
Retro_ said:
It wasn't necessary in the situation that sparked Whoopi's comment though. So I don't know why she opened her mouth.

She's basically saying Jay should have hit her when the situation was resolved without a brawl.



No. I'm saying that if this was a thread about a larger man beating a smaller man, and you guys came into that thread asking people who agreed with how the larger man handled the situation by asking "Would you hit a woman for this?" I'd agree with you.

but instead you're coming into a thread about a man who didn't hit a woman and asking people who agree with that outcome "would you hit a man for this?".

and to me that's ass backwards in the face of the real results.



You're doing this. Ignoring the CONTEXT OF THE THREAD

that's my problem with your argument.



In response to a situation where a man didn't hit a woman and the situation was resolved without anyone being seriously injured.

So basically she's saying that instead of having it go down like that, Jay should have hit her back.

because she's an idiot. This is Whoopi "It wasn't "rape" rape." Goldberg here.
Click to expand...

She's not saying he should have hit her, but that he would have been in the moral right to do it.
 
Romars202129 said:
I didn't mean to imply you should bust a 90lb guy's skull in for a light tap on the jaw... just that the sexes demand different actions.
I mean, if a women attacked me, I think I'd try to restrain her until she calmed down, grab her by the wrists or something. But honestly, even if it's nicer, wouldn't that same response shame a man? Personally, I'd rather a guy deck me, if I made such a mistake.
Click to expand...

I would rather shame the man then knock him out (this is a patriarchal mindset that should be put to pasture). And no the sexes do not demand different actions, it is just that an average female assailant will require less force than an average male assailant (sexual dimorphism does exist), however there is a large overlap between the sexes, and an equal threat should always be treated equally.
 
diaspora said:
She's not saying he should have hit her, but that he would have been in the moral right to do it.
Click to expand...

Why?

Why on earth would you say that in response to a situation like this?

Why would you mount your crusade against sexist norms on a case where an altercation was resolved in the best possible way possibly as a result of that norm.

That's idiotic
 
jiji said:
In before "equality means we can hit women."

Or am I too late?
Click to expand...

This contributed absolutely nothing to the discussion and basically exists as either trollbait or your way of being on your high horse because you expect others to say something terrible.

Right at the top of the thread, a major shitpost. Congrats.
 
I think for most girls you would probably be ok doing grabs instead of a full-on strike unless she has a weapon. But of course a lot of physical altercations don't happen when we expect them to so it's hard to make decisions like that then and there when instinct becomes the driving force.
 
Retro_ said:
Why?

Why on earth would you say that in response to a situation like this?

Why would you mount your crusade against sexist norms on a case where an altercation was resolved in the best possible way possibly as a result of that norm.

That's idiotic
Click to expand...

SMH, she's responding to the idea that men can't hit women because they're women- people are talking about how sexist that idea is because it's what a good chunk of people here are discussing- can you not read what's happening? The situation for Jay-Z was resolved because his bodyguard was there to resolve it for him, but outright perpetuating the idea women can't ever be hit is more harmful in general than if Jay had struck.
 
TeethMummy said:
This contributed absolutely nothing to the discussion and basically exists as either trollbait or your way of being on your high horse because you expect others to say something terrible.

Right at the top of the thread, a major shitpost. Congrats.
Click to expand...

Thanks! What I expected to happen pretty much did happen. Sorry for not having more optimism about how this subject would be discussed.
 
I'm with Whoopi on this. From experience when I was married, during heated arguments, my ex wife would throw a few slaps/punches, push me, and block me from leaving the room. Literally. What the hell can a guy do in that situation? I mean I wouldn't cold-clock a girl but if I actually felt I was physically threatened and being abused, hell yeah she's at least getting shoved back a few feet to know she can't just beat me like a punching bag...
 
happypup said:
I would rather shame the man then knock him out (this is a patriarchal mindset that should be put to pasture). And no the sexes do not demand different actions, it is just that an average female assailant will require less force than an average male assailant (sexual dimorphism does exist), however there is a large overlap between the sexes, and an equal threat should always be treated equally.
Click to expand...

That's not realistic from where I'm standing. Even if you're restraining them, you gonna put a little girl into a headlock, or clasp a grown man by the wrists and tell them to relax?
Their might be situations where weight and size determines the response more than gender, but typically, men know more about fighting, and are more dangerous.
Of course there are exceptions, female mma fighters and such... but the social stigma of hurting a women is still in strong effect, whereas there ain't many who would begrudge you hitting a man for attacking you, no matter his size.
 
Women are perfectly capable of killing men and vice versa.
The only right thing to do is not start a fight in the first place.
Otherwise, it's self defense.
 
diaspora said:
SMH, she's responding to the idea that men can't hit women because they're women- people are talking about how sexist that idea is because it's what a good chunk of people here are discussing- can you not read what's happening? The situation for Jay-Z was resolved because his bodyguard was there to resolve it for him, .
Click to expand...

Hence there was no real threat

Which is why Whoopi's comments are idiotic given the circumstances.

but outright perpetuating the idea women can't ever be hit is more harmful in general than if Jay had struck
Click to expand...

Am I missing something? Did this video spark some huge debate about this social norm prior to Goldberg's comments?

Because otherwise I don't understand how you could say this. That the real potential physical damage that Jay could have caused Solange is less harmful than the imaginary perceptions you're attaching to the situation.

Especially given how the situation turned out when he did nothing.
 
Jedi2016 said:
if I consider someone a true threat to me, I'm going to shoot them, not hit them.
Click to expand...
That's just sick. That's not a stance that makes you look like a reasonable human being. At that point you'd be a murderer and you deserve jail.

The first step in these kinds of situations is always to try to keep your head clear and not get sucked into the violence. Try to talk your way out of the situation, repeat to the assailant that you have no interest in fist fights or attacking the person, that you just want to continue doing whatever you were doing and leave things be. Keep your distance if the person tries to get closer and keep trying to reason with him or her. Some macho assholes might try to provoke you by being all "why you being such a sissy bitch, fight like a man", but you shouldn't let that get to you, try to not get mad at any of the insults that the throw at you, they are just words and do not make it ok to attack a person.

The second step is to just simply trying to leave the situation behind, if possible. If it's a party/bar, just leave. I doubt you'd miss anything super awesome that night by calling it a quit at that point. Even if the assailant has hit one of your friends or something, if the situation has calmed down enough so that no one is actively fighting someone and there's just some shit talking going on at that moment, just pick up your friend and leave.

The third step will happen if the person still acts aggressively, doesn't let you leave (either blocks your way out of a room/building/whatever or starts following you around) and there's some shoving & maybe even a few tries to hit you. Try to evade the hits (since getting hit is painful and might not help keeping a level head in the situation) and find a way to restrain them, if the assailant isn't bigger than you.

The fourth step is probably the one where fists will fly and hits will happen. If he/she is hitting you, then you might want to have one final "I don't want to fight you" attempt, but then, yeah, it's ok to not just take it all without trying to protect/defend yourself.

This has helped me get through all threatening situations without more than some shoving around instead of going for the stupid and taking out your gun or some other shit, excluding this one time when three people attacked me all at once, but in that situation one of the guys is a total lunatic, I heard he's beaten people with metal pipes later on (luckily we were just teenagers at that point and no weapons were used).



Remember, defense != physical violence immediately, the best defense is the kind where no one gets hurt.
 
Retro_ said:
Hence there was no real threat

Which is why Whoopi's comments are idiotic given the circumstances.



Am I missing something? Did this video spark some huge debate about this social norm prior to Goldberg's comments?

Because otherwise I don't understand how you could say this. That the real potential physical damage that Jay could have caused Solange is less harmful than the imaginary perceptions you're attaching to the situation.

Especially given how the situation turned out when he did nothing.
Click to expand...

Perpetuating harmful sexist norms is significantly more harmful to more people than a single bloody nose for someone trying to assault someone else. Thinking that they're imaginary is really fucked up.
 
Retro_ said:
He wasn't wrong though
Click to expand...

I never said he was wrong.

"in before____" is on the same tier as "First!" in terms of shitty posting that adds nothing, especially at the top of a thread with few or no responses.

And in this case, he was going out of his way to talk down to people before anything had even been said, making it twice as shit. I don't want to enter a thread and immediately be told how shitty its going to be. Why not try to post something meaningful, or change the mind of someone you disagree with in a civil, or at least more mature manner?

I thought it was pretentious and stupid, and again, added nothing to the discussion, just gives you a bad taste before you can even read the responses in the thread. Not helping.
 
How many people have actually been assaulted by a woman? How did you react? There have been a few stories in this thread, and they're way more interesting than arguing endlessly heightened hypotheticals or binary trains of thought.
 
jiji said:
Not actually a strawman, though!
Click to expand...

No it is, this is why.

you are saying that equality means we have the right to hit women, when we are saying that you have the right to hit a person who is assaulting you. It is not a justification for misogyny, but dealing with equal threats equally.
 
I was raised to never hit a woman, that's just not something you do. However, I did slap a woman once. She was relentless and restraining her did nothing but make her worse, biting, scratching, etc. so I finally slapped her. Her expression was priceless, this glossy bugged eyed stare that said, "you're not supposed to be able to do that to me". Basically, she knew I wouldn't do anything to her because she was a woman, and it was ok for her to act like that to me and that nothing would happen. She was wrong, Whoopi is right. At a certain point you have a right to defend yourself, and when I reached that point she got slapped. Not a face destroying punch, just a slap hard enough for her to feel and for her to know I was done playing her game. I felt bad about it, but it stopped her. Bottom line, if someone is attacking you, you have the right to defend yourself, man or woman.
 
For those that dont consider the gender difference to be anything more than the strength component does that mean if I come across a guy who is equal amounts stronger than me that he shouldnt fight back? Ive always wondered this.

Personally I wouldnt know how I would react. I tend to avoid physical conflict. Just because its been droned into me I guess first reaction subdue not hit with opposite sex. But my not wanting to hit anybody has more to do with it than anything. In a life or death situation I dont see what gender has to do with anything. Im not so foolish to think woman cant kick my ass.
 
waxer said:
For those that dont consider the gender difference to be anything more than the strength component does that mean if I come across a guy who is equal amounts stronger than me that he shouldnt fight back? Ive always wondered this.
Click to expand...

They've already said it's fine to hit guys.
 
diaspora said:
Perpetuating harmful sexist norms is significantly more harmful to more people than a single bloody nose for someone trying to assault someone else. Thinking that they're imaginary is really fucked up.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? This situation was resolved with a single bloody nose. It is the optimal resolution to this.
 
Famassu said:
That's just sick. That's not a stance that makes you look like a reasonable human being. At that point you'd be a murderer and you deserve jail.
Click to expand...
You clearly misunderstand the meaning of the word "threat". Did you even read what I wrote? Because I could have sworn I stated very clearly that someone hitting me is not a threat, it's an annoyance. Someone talking shit or acting "threatening" is not a threat. Someone coming at me with a knife or a baseball bat... that's a threat. Learn the difference before you open your mouth next time.
 
diaspora said:
Perpetuating harmful sexist norms is significantly more harmful to more people than a single bloody nose for someone trying to assault someone else. Thinking that they're imaginary is really fucked up.
Click to expand...

I call them imaginary because I can't recall anyone attaching that meaning to this situation before Goldburg's comments.

You're coloring the situation to fit your argument.
 
diaspora said:
They've already said it's fine to hit guys.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Look at my first post in this thread.

Retro_ said:
Nah Whoopi

If you hit anyone who weighs half as much as you do soaking wet you're an asshole. Whether they're male or female.

That's what police are for. I can't think of any justifiable reason for someone to beat up someone physically weaker than them.
Click to expand...

and no one responded to you or Squiddy's loaded questions iirc
 
Retro_ said:
Wrong.

Look at my first post in this thread.



and no one responded to you or Squiddy's loaded questions iirc
Click to expand...

Are you capable of reading? There are pages of people admitting they're willing to hit men but not women all other things equal.

Retro_ said:
I call them imaginary because I can't recall anyone attaching that meaning to this situation before Goldburg's comments.

You're coloring the situation to fit your argument.
Click to expand...

smh
 
Retro_ said:
Wrong.

Look at my first post in this thread.



and no one responded to you or Squiddy's loaded questions iirc
Click to expand...

"Would you punch a smaller dude?" isn't a loaded question, it's just an attempt to highlight their innate sexist stances.

Yes, I'm aware of the reason most people believe it is acceptable to resort to violence between men but not women and men, just as I am aware of the reason most people used to believe that women shouldn't be allowed to vote as a result of their temperament and intellectual deficiencies.

Something being a social norm does not excuse sexism.
Never.
 
Liu Kang Baking A Pie said:
How many people have actually been assaulted by a woman? How did you react? There have been a few stories in this thread, and they're way more interesting than arguing endlessly heightened hypotheticals or binary trains of thought.
Click to expand...

Just once in grade school. Got into a argument with a girl and said something she didn't like very much. She hit me a few times with half slaps/half punches. I was able to pin her against the wall until the teachers came. Apparently I was being sexist dick for not slugging her back but I'm cool with that.
 
Nokagi said:
Just once in grade school. Got into a argument with a girl and said something she didn't like very much. She hit me a few times with half slaps/half punches. I was able to pin her against the wall until the teachers came. Apparently I was being sexist dick for not slugging her back but I'm cool with that.
Click to expand...

No, you'd be a sexist dick for not treating both genders the same way.
 
Rafterman said:
I was raised to never hit a woman, that's just not something you do. However, I did slap a woman once. She was relentless and restraining her did nothing but make her worse, biting, scratching, etc. so I finally slapped her. Her expression was priceless, this glossy bugged eyed stare that said, "you're not supposed to be able to do that to me". Basically, she knew I wouldn't do anything to her because she was a woman, and it was ok for her to act like that to me and that nothing would happen. She was wrong, Whoopi is right. At a certain point you have a right to defend yourself, and when I reached that point she got slapped. Not a face destroying punch, just a slap hard enough for her to feel and for her to know I was done playing her game. I felt bad about it, but it stopped her. Bottom line, if someone is attacking you, you have the right to defend yourself, man or woman.
Click to expand...

The situation would have been best resolved had you just let her scratch and bite you. She would have eventually gotten tired or your body guard would have restrained her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The search for MH370 is back
18
1K
Hookshot replied
Did those old ships (Master and Commander, The Bounty) have trolling lines on the back?
15
263
Doom85 replied
Going back to Afghanistan…
2
56
4K
Jsisto replied
Asterix & Obelix: The Big Fight | April 30 on Netflix
24
573
Dazrael replied
These MLB hats are FIRE!
28
2K
ManaByte replied
Top Bottom