Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

I saw one game where the scene where the woman needs to be killed because she is possessed happens.

But what happens is that the main character not only knew she was being controlled, but he manages to kill her possession without harming her, and the one thing she did for you the entire game (teleport you around) he reveals he never needed her for as he does it himself.

I wonder if that would count as more sexist or less sexist.

[Vector]

I think the problem here is the point of view that women deserve violence because they annoyed someone.

Annoying someone is not a justification for violence.  Period.

[Glowcat]

Rather than portray an example of totally unjustified male aggression, your link shows that the writer has actually observed women taunting their spouse (who has been put into anger management) into blowing their temper. That writer, at least, accepts there's some truth in the men's complaints.

This is a very incendiary thing to say. The author also says...

So back to the woman who is 'baiting her man'; driven by an intense fear of abandonment she may be manifesting herself in what indeed appears to be an "asking for it" kind of manner. But does this justify it's deliverance? Of course it does not.

[Vector]

I'm also going to add that if she's been beaten before, she may be trying to find out if she is actually safe or not this time before she lets down her guard again.  I realize that this sort of thing is, well, irritating, but it's not just irrational behavior.

[Neonivek]

I think the problem here is the point of view that women deserve violence because they annoyed someone.

Annoying someone is not a justification for violence.  Period.

Mind you I've seen that not survive gender switching. There is this weird fascination with violence in the united states to the point where there is a strong belief that once in a while someone deserves a really nice right hook.

[Reelya]

Verbal abuse is a form of domestic abuse, right? If we're accepting the common understanding that verbal / psychological are both serious forms of abuse.

Labeling it mere "annoying" behavior is white-washing that such behavior would be labeled a form of abuse if I mentioned a man doing it. It's a rationalization based on gender of the perpetrator.

Women who lash out - I'm sure your ok with the idea that they might have snapped and lashed out because of psychological abuse, right? Then why do you scoff that such a scenario could play out with the gender's reversed?

"Losing one's temper" isn't a rational decision. I've had a crazy girlfriend physically lock me in her house while she screamed at me for hours about what a worthless person I was. I would have left, but I would have had to break a window to get out. i'm a generally calm person, but this obviously sent me up the wall. If I was a more impulsive type, yeah that could have been messy. although I've never connected to another person as bad as she was, I'm sure she's not the only psycho in existence (she comes across pretty normal to most people). She seemed to think constantly belittling me and ridiculing everything I enjoyed would be a good way of "holding onto" me.

Some women are actually psychological abusers who drive other people insane.

[Neonivek]

Verbal abuse is a form of domestic abuse, right?

Indeed.

Mind you in television women are the most terrible people imaginable, but are treated like angels.

[Vector]

Yup.  However, verbal abuse is not grounds for physical assault.  In fact, emotional abuse is not even a crime.

Here's why I'm leaning on this point.  My first boyfriend had this thing where once his younger brother wouldn't leave his bedroom.  The younger brother was tired of being dismissed like a dog, you see.  So the older boyfriend dragged him around by the hair until he bled and snarled: "If I wouldn't have to pay for it, I'd throw you out the window!"  Well, they worked things out eventually that evening.  But as I walked home and asked whether he'd do the same to me, he informed me that he imagined I'd "be more obedient than that."

All this.  For annoyance.

I'm going to add that I've had boyfriends say "I guess I deserve to be slapped for that" and I replied "Don't even joke about that.  I'm not going to hit you unless it's absolutely necessary for my self-defense, and I trust that won't be happening."  So yeah.  No accusations that I take violence against men lightly, either.

Screw violence in relationships.  So boring.

Anyway, I get panicky when I annoy people now.

Labeling it mere "annoying" behavior is white-washing that such behavior would be labeled a form of abuse if I mentioned a man doing it. It's a rationalization based on gender of the perpetrator.

See, you didn't quote the part where you explained that she was screaming at him and cursing him.  Maybe she did his eggs wrong on purpose.  Or got in his face a bit.

Folks need to stop accusing me of being secretly sexist.  It's driving me up the wall.

And "losing one's temper" isn't a rational decision. I've had a crazy girlfriend physically lock me in her house while she screamed at me for hours about what a worthless person I was. I would have left, but I would have had to break a window to get out. i'm a generally calm person, but this obviously sent me up the wall. If I was a more impulsive type, yeah that could have been messy.

I'm not sure why your impulse wouldn't have been breaking the window rather than breaking the jerk's face.

[Neonivek]

he informed me that he imagined I'd "be more obedient than that."

That should have been the sign.

[Vector]

It should have been.

He'd already cut me off from friends and family and done a lot of removing me from humanity at large, too.  I was depressed, miserable, glad for a little attention, not very good at thinking my way out of his logic that felt wrong but hey, he was more rational than I and had already convinced me that feelings-based reasoning was inherently faulty.  And all of his misogyny was backed up by science (bad science, but I hadn't figured out that whole "hey, I can look this up on the internet or demand sources" thing).  And he was a college graduate, and I fresh out of high school.  And I was in love with perfect, clear thought, so I sat by and let him pour poison in my ear.

*shrug*

That was a very bad time for me.

[Reelya]

Yup.  However, verbal abuse is not grounds for physical assault.  In fact, emotional abuse is not even a crime.

It's certainly enough grounds to get an assault conviction quashed - if it's a female who threw the punch. I base this assertion on the much higher acquittal rate for female spousal murders vs male spousal murders. If a woman can get away with murder because the man hit her, she can certainly get away with assault because he belittled her.

I find it interested that the "shoe is on the other foot" when gender is swapped in the examples. Suddenly, things that people would normally be crying out "abuse! abuse!" are justified away.

If I tried to rationalize male psychological abuse with "but it's not even a crime", or "he's just being annoying", i would be (rightfully) lynched.

[Vector]

Nota bene: "Female" as a noun is the word we use for cattle and other animals.  When talking about adult female humans we say "women."

If a woman can get away with murder because the man hit her, she can certainly get away with assault because he belittled her.

Citation needed.

If I tried to rationalize male psychological abuse with "but it's not even a crime", or "he's just being annoying," i would be (rightfully) lynched.

If so--then wrongfully.

I'm not rationalizing it.  I'm saying that it's not a justification for violence.  Period.  You don't physically injure or kill someone even if they pretty much helped destroy your entire personality and cow you for their own pleasure.

That would be where I'm coming from.  By the way.

As for the "annoying" thing, you seem to not understand that some male violence happens because of annoyance.  Not because he was verbally abused.  Because he was annoyed.  Do you understand the purpose of that above story I told?  The little brother didn't psychologically abuse the big brother.  He annoyed him.

[Neonivek]

If I tried to rationalize male psychological abuse with "but it's not even a crime", or "he's just being annoying", i would be (rightfully) lynched

The general belief is that because a male can fight back, they are not subject to unwanted verbal or physical abuse. That they ARE asking for it and letting it happen.

[Reelya]

I already linked it before in the thread, but i'll reiterate the citation.

 women who murder their husbands make up 40% of spousal murders, so the overall rate of killing isn't much different, but the legal outcome, is: The chance of acquittal is almost 10 times higher for female husband killers as for male wife killers, if convicted, women get one third the sentence, and they're 10 times as likely to get parole.

Now, this disparity is actually far larger than the justice system bias against blacks who've been convicted, and we clearly see the legal system is biased against blacks. But people will seek to justify away the difference here.

http://www.uiowa.edu/~030116/158/articles/dershowitz3.htm

Wives Also Kill Husbands--Quite Often
by Alan M. Dershowitz
[...]
To put the issue in context, women in general account for only about 10 percent of defendants charged with all murders. But for all spousal murders, women accounted for more than 40 percent of defendants. And "among black marital partners, wives were just about as likely to kill their husbands as husbands were to kill their wives." Not surprisingly, when it comes to parents who kill their children, mothers kill more often than fathers.
[...]
Despite this hard data, the myths persist that spousal murders consist almost exclusively of husbands who kill their wives and are then treated leniently by the criminal-justice system. Indeed, there is one figure that is strikingly missing from this otherwise thorough report: namely, whether women who murder their husbands are treated more leniently than husbands who murder their wives. I phoned the author of the report and asked if that data was available. He told me that it was but that it had not been compiled. I asked him if he would compile it and he did, faxing me new tables that compared the outcome of prosecution based on the gender of the victim and the accused. This previously unpublished data dramatically undercuts the myth that husbands who kill their wives are treated more leniently than wives who kill their husbands. The available evidence points overwhelmingly in the opposite direction, Wives who kill their husbands were acquitted in 12.9 percent of the cases studied, while husbands who kill their wives were acquitted in only 1.4 percent of the cases. Women who were convicted of killing their husbands were sentenced to an average of six years in prison, while men received an average of seventeen years for killing their wives, Sixteen percent of female spousal killers get probation, compared to 1.6 percent for males. By almost every other measure as well, female spousal killers are treated more leniently than male spousal killers. To be sure, some of the differences may be attributable to gender-neutral factors such as prior record, provocation, or mental illness. But there is absolutely no support in this data for the claim that husbands who kill their wives are systematically treated with kid gloves by the justice system.

Despite the unexpected data produced by this justice Department study--that wives kill husbands much more frequently than media accounts suggest and that they are treated more leniently than husbands who kill--the press release issued by the justice Department to accompany the report buried this politically incorrect data under the following politically correct headline: "Wives are the most frequent victims in family murders." But even that conclusion obscures the real picture: that for all family murders--which includes killing of parents and children as well as spouses--55.5 percent of the victims were males and 44.5 percent females, and "female defendants were more likely than male defendants to have murdered a person of the opposite sex.

[Neonivek]

Female is BOTH a noun AND adjective.

In fact Woman is apparently a Noun, Verb, and Adjective. Though I don't know how you can woman someone.