McBell
Unbound
Ah.
I disagree.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Men Should Not Hit Women?
- Thread starter The Neo Nerd
- Start date
I disagree.
Gender is irrelevant.
Self-defense should always be appropriate to the situation, be your attacker male, female, or other.
But any guy who wants to give women a free pass to assault him is free to do so.
Self-defense should always be appropriate to the situation, be your attacker male, female, or other.
But any guy who wants to give women a free pass to assault him is free to do so.
McBell
Unbound
Exactly.
SLAMH
Active Member
McBell
Unbound
My apologies.So u still find it irrelevant.
I thought that my saying "ah" was sufficient to indicate that I understand how it is relevant. I forget that on the internet not everyone is familiar with local nuances.
SLAMH
Active Member
what if you can defend without causing any damage for the attacker ?.
McBell
Unbound
Hence the "should always be appropriate to the situation" part.
Here in my neck of the woods you are only allowed to use what force is needed to subdue your attacker.
Anything more is considered assault.
That would often be appropriate.
SLAMH
Active Member
McBell
Unbound
Not the part I disagree with.
SLAMH
Active Member
which part ?
McBell
Unbound
That there is no circumstance in which a real man would hit a woman.
SLAMH
Active Member
Ok, fine it is dependable upon circumstances.
Last edited:
The Neo Nerd
Well-Known Member
I do have to agree with slamh on this one. In most cases there is no need actually hit someone in self defense.
- There are many pressure points that can be used to inflict large amounts of pain on some one.
- There are many arm locks that can both restrain a person and cause them pain.
However what is the difference ? You can cause someone a greater amount of pain by using pressure points and arm locks than by punching them.
eg
- A tap to the kidneys will drop someone to the ground, sure they'll be in a lot of pain for a bit but it wont leave any bruises.
- Giving someone two dead legs will render them unable to stand for a minute or two.
If a women is hell bent on hurting you, you most probably will have to cause her some pain to get get her to stop. A LIGHT blow to the nose will both stun her and get a message across that you will not be messed with and will mean less pain than some other methods.
I guess it comes down to using the minimal amount of force to get the job done.
- There are many pressure points that can be used to inflict large amounts of pain on some one.
- There are many arm locks that can both restrain a person and cause them pain.
However what is the difference ? You can cause someone a greater amount of pain by using pressure points and arm locks than by punching them.
eg
- A tap to the kidneys will drop someone to the ground, sure they'll be in a lot of pain for a bit but it wont leave any bruises.
- Giving someone two dead legs will render them unable to stand for a minute or two.
If a women is hell bent on hurting you, you most probably will have to cause her some pain to get get her to stop. A LIGHT blow to the nose will both stun her and get a message across that you will not be messed with and will mean less pain than some other methods.
I guess it comes down to using the minimal amount of force to get the job done.
Last edited:
Most is the keyword, as it still means in some cases you might need to strike, or be justified to strike, which was the entire problem. So striking a woman doesn't necessarily mean you're not a real man.
I agree, it might be safer and less painful in some cases to actually strike.
What i'm wondering though does this mean that if a woman slaps me just once, i'm obliged to not slap her back? I mean i do think its better not too, and i prefer not to do so in most cases in anytime that someone i see as physically less powerful than me hits me. However i don't think i'm obliged to, or that i should be considered a bad person if in some situations i strike back.
One difference that is important also for me is What Father Heathen referred to in the beginning of the thread, if i felt that the woman is doing so because she thinks i'm not going to strike back, in that case i will strike back.
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
The Neo Nerd
Well-Known Member
Indeed, IMHO it's the chauvinism inherent in most societies that this "real men don't hit women" idea comes from. In a society where both sexes are equal it is entirely acceptable to hit a women back. But i qualify this by saying that you should response should be equal in intensity.
Honestly i've never hit a girl back for slapping me. I have however restrained her to make sure it doesn't happen again.
In this case i would probably use an arm lock or a pressure point and inflict a considerable amount of pain. This way you are proving that you where capable of retaliation with very little effort despite her attack. That would be demoralising.
I may also if she was light enough grab by the front of her shirt and lift her off her feet. An overt display of strength like that could have the same effect.
I actually got into an argument with a house mate once which resulted in him punching me a couple of times. All i had to do was hold him by the throat against the wall and push him up so his feet left the floor. This was enough to ensure he never hit me or even threatened to hit me ever again.
I guess it all depends on how much control you have over your anger, if you are the type who can't control their anger then i suggest walking away as soon as you feel your anger building. This way you don't run the risk of going too far.
Last edited:
Two problems here.
1) When a person is in combat, they loose fine motor control, and typically experience tunnel vision. A lot of the techniques which use pressure point manipulation in martial arts (e.g. chin na techniques, pressure point strikes in kenpo, atemi-waza in jujitsu, ninpo, etc, and so forth) require the kind of coordination, timing, and accuracy that usually isn't possible under duress. There is a reason why military and paramilitary forces train to fight in ways that mimic natural movements which don't require fine motor control.
2) The kind of techniques which work in a dojo or in sparring often don't work against someone flowing with adrenaline. You can be shot or stabbed and not even realize it. The pressure point strikes which hurt so much in practice might not even be felt.
It's also a lot harder. If you are stronger, bigger, and the person doesn't have a weapon and doesn't know what they are doing, sure you might well be able to restrain them. Applying an arm lock to someone who your size and is already throwing punches, especially if you have already been hit, isn't as easy.
eg
No it usually won't. Not unless it's with a knife, or if you do it before the person is really revved up.
Again, it's all a question of what's going on. I've had my nose broken and didn't realize it until later. Didn't affect me at all. I've also been accidently hit in the nose training. Usually my eyes will water up and I'll have to stop for a minute because it stuns me and hurts like hell. Adrenaline makes all the difference.
On the other hand, trying to do minimal damage to someone attempting to seriously injure you can really get you in trouble. Martial arts/combat styles oriented towards real world situations (e.g. krav maga) don't typically take this approach.
I agree, the response should be appropriate to the attack.
Me neither, but i've never been in this situation.
Good point, and this is what its basically all about for me; getting the message across. I'm not interested in particularly doing the exact same thing that was done to me, as much as to send this message to the person attacking.
In the case which i mentioned of the woman doing this because she thinks i'm not gonna hit back, my control over my anger will be almost non-existent. Because the way i see it, its pretty close to the idea of a man abusing a woman. The reason he does this so non reluctantly is because he thinks there are no consequences. He is not afraid of her, and he's pretty sure he is stronger.
In the woman's case, she thinks there are no consequences too, and she abuses that position she's in, which is extremely provoking. I guess the best reaction is like you said to get the message across, in the least harmful way.