Print

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

I'd want my SO to be willing to fight to the death for me

5 (11.9%)

I'd want my SO to get into huge fights

2 (4.8%)

Sometimes my SO should just hit someone

9 (21.4%)

I'd prefer my SO not to fight just to alleviate my feelings.

26 (61.9%)

Total Members Voted: 42

[alexandertnt]

No, I would want no one physically hurt over something like name calling, including the person doing the name calling.

[Max™]

No, she has very dense bones and poor form despite my efforts, so at best she'd miss or smack them harmlessly, at worst she'd jab an elbow of doom into an eye socket* and kill someone, I am the one doing the fighting for us, so I couldn't answer the poll.

*This happened once when we were uh, busy, and she accidentally elbowed me in the brain, I got a mild concussion, and would prefer that be reserved for like if she's being kidnapped and I'm not present, not mild insults.

[RedKing]

I would rather have a SO who would be my Natasha with a lullaby to calm me down.

To keep you from fighting moose and squirrel?

[Max™]

Damn moose and squirrel with their ruining of plans!

[Eric Blank]

Sometimes it would be appreciated if my SO would punch people when I'm not around to punch them. Assuming there are no repercussions, and it was something worth punching them for.

I have no honor and no SO anyway, so I guess that's not going to happen vOv

[Owlga]

I kinda wish she wouldn't, but GC kinda has anger issues still.

For the most part it doesn't happen usually anyway, since she kind of scares people.

[martinuzz]

If people would just stop having honour, there'd be a whole lot less death, torture and suffering on this planet. Honour is a bad thing.

[scriver]

I would want her to be willing to fight for me, whether physically or verbally, but that doesn't mean I'd want her to get in fights. I'd want the same from my friends and family too, to be honest.

Of course getting into fights over petty things is stupid. But the question is too general to get a firm "no" response.

If people would just stop having honour, there'd be a whole lot less death, torture and suffering on this planet. Honour is a bad thing.

There'd also be a lot more corruption, cheating, and general spinelessness. Honour is not an inherently bad thing. It has bad consequences, yes. But it's also a good thing that keeps people self respect as well as respecting others. It comes down to what a person or culture considers honourable more than honour itself.

[Tack]

Firstly:

-someone your dating.

You're.

Secondly:
As a member of the B12BGSG, I have to say that rigid gender roles and the convoluted rule system behind them have this all laid out for me.
Therefore I can act specifically within defined limits based entirely on the physiology of the offending party.
Ergo, there's very few situations in which I'd be the one whom my hypothetical hetero-normative female SO is fighting for the honor of.

But in the event somehow in which I'm so horribly slandered that it's beyond being justified, but for some reason it'd be inappropriate for me to hit them myself;
I'm gonna join Yoink in voting for the not-a-poll-option-somehow

No, but I'd be okay with them fighting for my honour.

Edit:

If people would just stop having honour, there'd be a whole lot less death, torture and suffering on this planet. Honour is a bad thing.

Honour is awesome. You're thinking of pride.

[Loud Whispers]

>not wanting your SO to bury your greatest enemies alive
>not wanting your SO to trick your wisest enemies into thinking they're walking into a marriage invitation, when actually she's setting them on fire
>not wanting your SO to invite your most numerous enemies to your funeral, get them drunk, then slaughter thousands of them with her soldiers
>not wanting your SO to besiege your enemies, then deliver reasonable surrender terms of three pigeons and three sparrows
>not wanting your SO to attach sulphurous cloth to each of the birds, ordering them to be released so that they return to their homes, so that she may set the entire town alight instantaneously in such intensity that attempts at fire control are impossible
>not wanting your SO massacring or enslaving the survivors, leaving only enough scarred free villagers to pay tribute

do you even olga of kiev

[Baffler]

I said no, but it's a no stemming from pride rather than pacifism. I suppose if I can't then yes I would, and I'd do the same for them too as the situation demands.

If people would just stop having honour, there'd be a whole lot less death, torture and suffering on this planet. Honour is a bad thing.

Some people are incapable of recognizing boundaries that aren't established with (not necessarily physical) force and it's better for everyone, them included, that those boundaries are clearly defined. I think in a lot of cases, being roughed up by the person you've insulted is far preferable, or at least more proportional, than the stiff fines and/or imprisonment some places are moving toward.

[mainiac]

I would rather have a SO who would be my Natasha with a lullaby to calm me down.

To keep you from fighting moose and squirrel?

Black Widow/Hulk reference.

[Flying Dice]

I would be terribly offended if my SO didn't decapitate anyone who impugned my honor, doubly so if they refused to bathe in the blood after or give the skulls a nice acid wash before adding them to the pile.

[mainiac]

You are thinking of orcs.

[Frumple]

That sounds more like khornate fundamentalists, actually. Orcs tend to use methods besides an acid wash.