(no subject)

[threeplusfire]

Reading through the internet in the wake of the insanity yesterday, I've found myself frequently upset to the point of incandescent rage by many of the comments I've seen. Most of those comments happen to be from men. As someone who has spent most of my life "running with the boys," it is so disheartening.

A comment I read this morning:

"Except that espousing violence or the suggestion of violence in the face of what amounts to nothing more than irritation or uncomfortableness (sic) is more morally contemptible than anything these socially-retarded boob-honkers could come up with." Shades of the 19th century, when women were deemed to be such fragile moral creatures that they shouldn't be allowed outside the house.

Now. I understand the argument of turning the other cheek, or being the better person. But I find it repulsive to suggest that self defense is viewed in the same light as gratuitous violence. That's fucking bullshit. I also find the idea that this sort of behavior is dismissed as something that results in nothing more than "irritation." Again, fucking bullshit.

I am so angry about this attitude, and permutations of it, that I can barely stand to form a coherent response.

It took until 5:30am to fall asleep. My head is pounding and my throat hurts.

Comments

[sammka.livejournal.com]

What kind of violence is he talking about here? "If you honk my boob I'll smack you?" Joking about kicking men in the nuts? Or threatening to stalk theferrett and kill him?

Because I can understand the comment only if he's talking about the third.

[meallanmouse.livejournal.com]

It was in respose to "If anyone tries to grab my breast, they will get a knuckle sandwich and that is all there is to it.".

[sammka.livejournal.com]

OMGWTF. Knuckle sandwich = completely appropriate here.

[meallanmouse.livejournal.com]

I concur. Oh, do I concur. It's why I said it in the first place, and why I stand by the statement.

(And were my husband present, I'd be doing any idiot having tried or done this a favor of epic proportions. But I digress.)

[sammka.livejournal.com]

Really you're doing them a favor whether or not your husband is present. Some people really need to be punched, and I am saying this as a Quaker. A little punching in response to objectively bad behavior never seriously hurt anyone, at least if it's by someone who's not in much of a position to seriously harm the punchee or make them reasonably afraid for their safety, and someone who's not in a group that has a history of violently dominating the punchee's group.

[meallanmouse.livejournal.com]

See - you make sense. And your corollaries make sense as well. So, yes. This equation works for me.

I sometimes wish for people who insist on speaking for women (not all men - never that - just those who think they know better and then brush away the realities many/all women are faced with in all societies in light of what they know is better ) could be stuffed in a woman's body, a small, physically non-imposing woman, and be made to live what life is like in such a setting, for a year or so. To learn what it means to not have the inherent safety which is predominantly active for a (white) male. (The white is in parenthesis, because there's also color/religion/sexual orientation that are factors, but that's like, ten posts or a study and a book, and this isn't where it's gonna happen nor am I qualified to go that deep into it).

Then I remember how unusual and cruel it would be, to rip away someone's sense of safety that way because I would never ever wish that feeling on anyone else. Because I hate feeling like that and I've not even seen the worse of it, not even close.

[sammka.livejournal.com]

So true.

who says WoW isn't useful

[tsarina.livejournal.com]

< random jerk >: *attempts to inappropriately swipe*

< Firewillow >: *stunlocks*

< Riverwolf >: *unleashes hungry pet and arrows*

I just have this mental image of epic PVP if something like this happened in your life. It is perhaps the most humorous thought I've had all day. :P

I really should have an ice lance....

Re: who says WoW isn&#39;t useful

[meallanmouse.livejournal.com]

I adore you.

:: still laughing like a loon at work desk ::

[sammka.livejournal.com]

Also is the "shades of the 19th century" part from them too? If so, BULLSHIT. Apparently "violating our personal space actually bothers us" makes us out as "weak" and "fragile"??? WTF.

[tsarina.livejournal.com]

No, that's just my observation. I was recently reading about the 19th century and Victorian moral reform movements and the idea that women should be confined to their proper "sphere" of influence, ie the home and religion.

[sammka.livejournal.com]

ah, as opposed to punching people?

[meallanmouse.livejournal.com]

You are right to be angry. I'd make myself a "morally contemptible" icon, if I weren't determined not to dignify that bludgeon disguised as an argument with the total absence of merit which is all it deserves.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

I'm guilty of saying that ferret needs to be killed, but I was not being as literal as one would think. I often say " well just shoot 'em " as a frustrated response to a clueless person doing something to amazingly stupid that any attempt to explain sense to them would be lost.

It's one of my trigger points when I see a male of the species saying/doing something so blatantly dumb that it casts a negative shadow on all of us. People like ferret are the reason why so many women generically fear/hate all men - even the ones who do not deserve it. If no one takes action to curb this brand of stupid then it will continue to perpetuate. If this sort of ignorance towards women is allowed to continue then fear and hatred will continue to not only poision inter-human relations but it will also support the unjust prejudice held against men by many women.

As a society we need to move away from ignorant and outdated schools of thought that seperate the rights , abilities, and freedoms of an individual based on their gender. We have come a long way, but we have a long long way to go.

[violetisblue.livejournal.com]

There are days I thank God, Zeus, Loki and/or Ford for making me a lesbian, and this is definitely one of them. (And no, Ferrettdick or whatever your name is, you CANNOT ask if you can watch so as heal your pweshus fwagile high-school-trammeled ego.)

[delchi.livejournal.com]

Ford?

[violetisblue.livejournal.com]

Brave New World reference--the characters worship Henry Ford as a god, giving thanks to "our Ford" and making signs of the Model-T instead of the cross.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

Thanks. I wasn't sure of the refrence.

[wonderlandkat.livejournal.com]

someone I don't know asks to touch my breasts? is going to get slapped. Period (unless there is some sort of extreme weird context in which it makes sense which this is not). I don't care if people think that violence is worse, but that is the appropriate reaction in my life. And that is why random strangers DON'T ask to touch my breasts.

[kevinblanchard.livejournal.com]

The only problem I might have with advocating this reaction is not from how the women should act but based not he same guys you are probably mad at. I'd probably advocate the woman slap the man very hard and/or yell at him to let him know what he did was wrong. The reason I advocate the slap and not the hit is once a woman hits a man the rules change (though please note I would never personally hit a woman).

Most men are raised knowing that you never raise a hand to a woman. But what many women don't realize is the reasoning behind it. Not being raised as a man they don't know what is going on in a man's head (understandably). Men are taught not to hit women because "women are weaker and can not defend themselves and need to be protected". "We" are not taught to not do it because it's a universal wrong. The wrong comes along with the reasoning behind it. The problem is there. It's why men who might never hit a women are more likely to hit a women if she hits him first. By hitting him she is sending a very clear message that she can stand up for her self and is not weak. The same message can be sent with a slap with far less fear of retaliation. When a women retaliates with a punch she is basically voiding the only reasoning a man has to keep himself from defending himself with an equal measure.

Please note I don't advocate hitting women even in self defense, nor was I raised to think like that BUT I know a lot of men who were raised to not hit woman for that reason above. So I warn my female friends to slap as needed but don't swing unless they can handle themselves in a fight because in many many cases when a women actually hits a guy closed fist she's now taken away the only reason keeping the guy from not swinging back like if a guy hit him.

[aplomada.livejournal.com]

I would argue that if a man gropes a woman, and the woman slaps/punches/sidehands him in response, it is the man who started it. Groping is violence, and here's how:

When a person (man, woman, child) accidentally brushes, touches, or bumps into a woman's breast, it is nothing more than a minor irritation (if even that). When a medical professional examines or manipulates a woman's breast in an appropriate clinical context, it is nothing more than discomfort. When a grown man intentionally grabs a woman's breast (outside consensual intimacy), it carries the the statement "I have control over your body." This is definitely an act of threat, intimidation, and violence.

So yeah, hitting a guy who gropes you is appropriate. It's self-defense. No jury I'm on would convict her.

[kevinblanchard.livejournal.com]

I had a longer reply but it got too wordy. My short answer is I agree on all points. Yes the touch is a violent act of itself (breast touching). Yes a jury would side with the woman if he did strike back. But my point was to prevent it even having to go to a jury. My suggestion was only to shed some insight and to allow the woman to use a method (slapping) to physically let the guy know it was an unwanted touch without putting the woman in additional danger to be beaten. To me, right and wrong seem trivial if one can just avoid a situation escalating to that level to begin with. In this context or just events that may lead to violence in general.