Letters to the Editor
-
@ Durian Joe
Ok, but lets talk data. The data in this study clearly show that no matter what women are capable of, when abuse occurs most of the time it is males who are leaving the bruises etc.
On average, most women are not trained in Kung Fu.
-
@ No Mr E, that is not my attitude toward sexual assault.
Being kicked in the testicles was no doubt traumatic for you as a child. I am sorry this physical assault happened to you. You cannot know the motives of the girls who did this. You can only speculate. I have no doubt that your pain, both psychological and physical is real. I hope that you heal from this pain. However, being kicked in the testicles constitutes a physical assault and not a sexual one generally, unless you want to claim that in a fight with a man if he kicks your balls he has sexually assaulted you. It is the nature of the assault and not the sex of the person that assaults you that determines these things.
BTW, we cross-posted. If you want to see my opinion on women hitting men, please read below.
-
stats, please?
"You do not need to be a strong or highly trained woman to grab a man by the head and plunge your thumbs into his eyes."
Here are some theories that have been tosed about on this thread:
1. women are just as (or nearly so) violent as men, and are just as likely to beat their male partners as men are likely to beat their wives/gfs.
2. Even men who are taller/heavier/stronger then women can be (and are) easily hurt by women.
3. It is "very easy" to poke out a someone's eyeball, even if you are a small woman and your opponent is a large man.
So, how many men are treated annually for attempted eyeball poking? How many for successful eyeball poking? The loss of (or damage to) an eye is not an injury easily covered up the way a slap to the face or even a foot to the crotch can be after the initial contact. Shouldn't there be thousands?
-
the right for women to hit, punch, slap and kick men in the nuts is and alwasy has been considered by women to be their birthright when men "behave badly"
the only thing that is different is that in the past a woman could be hit back if she exercised the "right" at the wrong time with the wrong person, whereas now the legal system and the culture have created a system where, (unless the man wants to go to jail, lose his house and kids or whatever) women are guaranteed that there will NEVER be a response. Yes in a REAL weaponless fight the man will more often than not get the better of the situation but that is about as relevant as whether George Bush or Saddam Hussein would win in a one on one cage fight.
-
What does it take to defend oneself -- besides training.
I once had a discussion with another woman about the lengths either of us would go to defend ourselves and/or our children. It turns out that we both believed strongly in a right to self-defense but we both had very different feelings (emotions) about our ability to carry out a defense. No NOT our physical ability but our psychological ability. I have long known that in certain circumstances that I would be willing to kill. She doubted that she could do this, even to protect her children.
We talked of guns. How many shots would you fire? She didn't know if she could shoot at all and she was a much better shot than I am. My answer: Fire until he stops coming.
Now let's look at the domestic situation. I believe that every woman knows that weapons equalize a fight. Most women believe that they are weaker than their male companions. Since my past male companion actually rode bulls and was awarded a championship for this ability, I had no doubt that he was stronger than I. Why, when weapons are available, do women not use them more often to protect themselves from spousal violence. I posit this reason: Precisely because women know that weapons can kill. Women will often not use retalitory violence against their violent spouses because they don't want to hurt them. Sometimes they will act in self-defense using their hands in a protective way, but I have met battered women and most often they are not being battered because they hit first but because dinner was cold when the guy trailed in the door three hours late or because dinner was dried out when she tried to keep it warm so he wouldn't hit her again -- or some other such lame or imaginary reason.
Some of you just don't understand what a truly battered spouse, male or female is like. If you did, you wouldn't make fun of male victims and you wouldn't assume either the male or the female victims did something to deserve it.
I think we need a new paradigm. We need to distinguish brawling couples -- who truly love that nightmare environment -- from DV victims who have lost much of their will and self-esteem do to ongoing abuse by a spouse/GF/BF. The reality of this is just so different from some of the fantasies of some people in this thread.
Women who are loathe to use weapons are not likely to gouge some guy's eyes out. Many women and some men who are consistently battered are often not going to lift a finger in proactive defense of themselves. That is why truly battered men and women need to take shelter and why such shelters need to be available.
-
I know a lot more brawling couples than I do true DV victims
but neither the legal system, the culture, nor the female half of the brawling couple appears to show the slightest interest in making the distinction you describe. In fact the female halves are all VERY DEVOTED to defending the current system.
-
Let's get some things straight.
I think men in general are more prone to violence than women, and that would account for the greater number of female victims of domestic abuse than male victims.
A small man who is a thug and an experienced streetfighter will like win a fight against a large man who is gentle and averse to violence.
Fighting can be taught to anyone. Women can learn to fight. If a woman learns to fight, and she is up against a man who does not know how to fight, I would bet on the woman.
AKA Smith, I enjoy your farmgirl wisdom, but I am an amateur zoologist and am not unfamaliar with what you've written.
Since you're all talking about balls here, and the effects thereon of a well-placed kick, here's a story that illustrates my points: just a few days ago the Washington Post reported on how a little girl got away from her attacker by kicking him in the balls (or "groin" as the paper delicately put it). 'Nuff said.