Is it ever acceptable to hit a woman?

[Richard Friedman]

Hypothetical question. Man discovers wife has been lying about paternity of their child. It's not his(actually happens in 10 percent of cases),. Is he justified in giving the wife a thrashing?

[rafallus]

Same as most men would be terribly put off by a woman that slept with 100 men in her past but it's different when a man does it (he's called a stud or some of his guy friends praise him).

Thus why I call myself an anti-feminist.

By whom? Envious idiots who want to be like him? Yeah, I'd certainly value their opinion much...

 

Hypothetical question. Man discovers wife has been lying about paternity of their child. It's not his(actually happens in 10 percent of cases),. Is he justified in giving the wife a thrashing?

No, unless she attacked him first, and he is defending himself. Then yes, it may include hitting. Edited September 15, 2011 by rafallus

[nofool4u]

It seems the OP is waiting for many aprovals from people sharing his point of view. Unfortunately, I know of no woman in my workplace or female friends that would be happy nor comfortable with a man that proves he can lose self-control.

 

but the woman can lose self control and the man just has to take it.

 

not that a man would or should hit back, depending on the situation.

 

Its just more double standard bs.

 

So likewise, I don't know many men that want a woman that thinks its perfectly ok to resort to violence and start hitting them. Sorry, those kind of women need and deserve to be alone.

[nofool4u]

Is it ever acceptable ... no but here's why:

 

Do they ever deserve it? YES.

 

Should you, then, hit them? No. You should just end the relationship if you are with a woman that does whatever it is that made you so angry.

 

Likewise you should leave a woman if she thinks hitting a man is acceptable.

[nofool4u]

Hypothetical question. Man discovers wife has been lying about paternity of their child. It's not his(actually happens in 10 percent of cases),. Is he justified in giving the wife a thrashing?

 

absolutely not.

 

You can thrash her verbally and call her what she is, and then dump her sorry butt.

[Taramere]

Hypothetical question. Man discovers wife has been lying about paternity of their child. It's not his(actually happens in 10 percent of cases),. Is he justified in giving the wife a thrashing?

 

In the case of FW v. Her Majesty's Advocate (The High Court of Justiciary Scotland ) [2007] UKPC D1 (22 May 1998), the accused (Wit) had attacked his wife to her severe and permanent injury. In his defence he stated that a sort of crimson mist of rage had obliterated his vision shortly before the attack - rendering him entirely irresponsible for what then ensued.

 

In his judgement, Lord Hopeless of Dickhead quoted Hume.

 

"We may next attend to the case of those unfortunate persons, who have plead the miserable defence of idiocy or insanity. Which condition, if it is not an assumed or imperfect, but a genuine and thorough insanity, and is proved by the testimony of intelligent witnesses, makes the act like that of an infant, and equally bestows the privilege of an entire exemption from any manner of pain; 'Cum alterum innocentia concilii tuetur, alterum fati infelicitas excusat.' I say, where the insanity is absolute, and is duly proved: For if reason and humanity enforce the plea in these circumstances, it is no less necessary to observe a caution and reserve in applying the law, as shall hinder it from being understood, that there is any privilege in a case of mere weakness of intellect, or a strange and moody humour, or a crazy and capricious or irritable temper. In none of these situations does or can the law excuse the offender. Because such constitutions are not exclusive of a competent understanding of the true state of the circumstances in which the deed is done, nor of the subsistence of some steady and evil passion, grounded in those circumstances, and directed to a certain object. To serve the purpose of a defence in law, the disorder must therefore amount to an absolute alienation of reason, 'ut continua mentis alienatione, omni intellectu careat' - such a disease as deprives the patient of the knowledge of the true aspect and position of things about him – hinders him from distinguishing friend from foe - and gives him up to the impulse of his own distempered fancy." "

 

I'll cut that down into simple language that will strike a chord with an imbecile.

 

If you're one around whom the crimson mist is prone to settling in a vision-obscuring way...and if these red mist moments tend to lead you into irrational bouts of violent rage, you might well be one of these unfortunates. What Hume would term an idiot with a miserable defence. One whose mental capacity is equal to or less than that of an infant. On account of which the court might decide that you didn't really mean to thrash your wife into a state of crippledom or death...but only if you tend to be like that on a regular basis in which you should be locked in a psychiatric hospital for everybody's sake. Otherwise, prison would be good enough.

 

As to whether being certifiably insane is justifiable...well, I'm sure a court could be entertained for hours with philosophical monologues on the rationality of irrationality. However, it would be quicker to just say "he's mad. Lock him up for his own good and everybody else's. Bind and gag him whenever there's a fair haired nurse on shift in case he gets testy. His wife was a blonde.."

Edited September 15, 2011 by Taramere

[mark982]

my ex tried to stab me once. had me up against the wall with a knife at my throat, i was on my tip toes with nowhere to escape to. she moved the knife for a second, and i punched her square in the face. went into the bathroom and had blood running down my neck, from the point of the butcher knife. don't believe in hitting women, but had to save my own skin.

[KR10N]

In self defense it is, and that's why black and white thinking just doesn't work.

lol. I never said self defense was wrong. Either way, I'm not going to be petty & lash out at others unless my life or someone elses were in danger.

[somedude81]

my ex tried to stab me once. had me up against the wall with a knife at my throat, i was on my tip toes with nowhere to escape to. she moved the knife for a second, and i punched her square in the face. went into the bathroom and had blood running down my neck, from the point of the butcher knife. don't believe in hitting women, but had to save my own skin.

That is scary sh*t. Did she get arrested?

[FrustratedStandards]

The guys who white knight and let them get away with it are even worse.

 

Not even. Those are the ones who end up happily married. Men who are too "macho" end up being single their whole lives, and when asked why, they simply say "I just haven't found anyone good enough yet" or "i'm picky".

 

Not saying "be a womans bitch" but being too macho is worse.

Edited September 15, 2011 by FrustratedStandards

[FrustratedStandards]

Should you, then, hit them? No. You should just end the relationship if you are with a woman that does whatever it is that made you so angry.

 

Exactly. Men who need to resort to hitting, just as women who resort to complete f*cking clingyness and insecurity, are both pathetic.

 

Hypothetical question. Man discovers wife has been lying about paternity of their child. It's not his(actually happens in 10 percent of cases),. Is he justified in giving the wife a thrashing?

 

Hypothetical question. You are happily married with children and you find out your husband has been cheating on you with another woman and just got her pregnant.

 

Is she justified in giving him a thrashing?

[samsungxoxo]

my ex tried to stab me once. had me up against the wall with a knife at my throat, i was on my tip toes with nowhere to escape to. she moved the knife for a second, and i punched her square in the face. went into the bathroom and had blood running down my neck, from the point of the butcher knife. don't believe in hitting women, but had to save my own skin.

That is different and is an exceptional case. I would say she deserved it because you had no where to go, she has a knife and you could have die if you had done nothing.

 

That's really what I was trying to explain the whole time and it appears some people still don't get it. Retaliation because she hit first once isn't self-defense (that's really ''Oh my poor ego got bruised, now I'm gonna teach her a lesson''... typical chauvinist that makes excuses for hitting women). What you did was indeed self-defense.

Edited September 15, 2011 by samsungxoxo

[samsungxoxo]

but the woman can lose self control and the man just has to take it.

 

not that a man would or should hit back, depending on the situation.

 

Its just more double standard bs.

 

So likewise, I don't know many men that want a woman that thinks its perfectly ok to resort to violence and start hitting them. Sorry, those kind of women need and deserve to be alone.

No he can report it after leaving.

There is a difference between retaliation and self-defense. If it's a non-life threatening case, he can leave and file assault charges against her. If it's a ''I'm goona die if I do nothing'' like in Mark's case then yes he can use force to get her off him and still report it.

[Woggle]

A man does not have to just take it. He can tell her to get lost.

[The Outlaw]

Nope. Never.

[mark982]

no, she didn't get arrested. this all happened in the early 80's, cops back then just considered it a family squabble, and just told you to settle down. now adays she would be up on charges of attempted murder.