I didn't mean to "dilute ongoing brutality against women" ....!
I was just reminded of that man I met, with his bruised face. And I thought it was possible to acknowledge the existence of abuse against men, without diluting the much larger and more severe problem of abuse against women. I didn't realize our attention to different forms of domestic violence was a strictly zero-sum game.
well, it's not you who brought up the "double standard" originally, so maybe don't take it to heart too much. and no, it's not a zero sum game, but people are SO prone for these cute little ways out, like "the others do it too, (let's not talk about that they do it a thousand times less)", and I'm allergic to that.
mind you that I don't think it's a subject worth bashing islam over, either. the ten commandments include the wife being property, so, whatev0r... in the kingdom of the blind, why pick on one blind guy out of many, right?
and looking at actual statistics, religion doesn't matter. it just doesn't. violence against women is not a religious problem (it's just that religion often isn't very helpful either, it's an accomplice).
not nom I think you are getting a little carried away here. Of course there was something to be shocked about, the guy had a bruised face and he was talking about his wife hitting him. Maybe his wife has even more terrible bruises, I don't know, it's sad and shocking in any case.
yeah I am. I don't mean to belittle the situation of that guy, but generally, I think it's warranted to make sure the message is loud and clear. this topic DOES **** me off, and why not! yes, men and women can both be brutal to each other, but when it comes to physical violence, I think in the hands of a man it's actually a weapon, in the hands of a woman not so much. it's more psychological warfare (which I'd never belittle in its own right, I just don't think it's comparable to beating someone into submission, raping or killing them) spilling over. again, I say usually. one anecdote, in this context, what does it mean? that it's possible for a man to be abused by a woman?
you replied that to someone who asked if I meant to say it's not, which was such a bollocks strawman I totally skipped conversing there and latched onto you, that's all. of course it's *possible*, but since nobody claimed it's not, why bring that up? can't you see I consider that diluting the subject? though it's actually a step up from "women slap men on TV" <--- wtf wtf wtf.