Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Central London mob attacks people in Hyde park

Jessiedog

Keeping the faith.
The only guy I've known to make a huuuuuge fuss about a man hitting a woman hit me minutes later when I tried to stop him hitting the guy.

A smokescreen for a bit of macho posturing.
Indeed.

It always amazes me how it seems that the most violent of macho men-thugs are also invariably the first to spout the "never hit a woman" bollocks - despite their general attitudes towards women being far from equality-based.

To me, this just reinforces the sexist nature of this anachronistic mantra.

:(


Woof
 

cesare

don't mourn, organise!
No. that would not make sense.

and to be fair i'd imagine it is a very, very small percentage of the posters here and even then i'd expect only those who have experience of political groups during the 80s who would ever have come across the bizarre phenomena.

but anyway, my experience of 'women beaters' outwith political circles is (to the best of my knowledge, i hasten to add) absolutely zero. Obviously it would be patently absurd to base an empirical data model on that but in my experience it is true that the only folk i have personally ever found out to beat up their girlfriends have been those amongst anarchist groups who would describe themselves as 'non sexist men' and been most vocal in denouncing others for being 'sexists' or 'macho'.

i don't want to even have to meet people like that now so i'm afraid i can't comment, thus my hypotheis cannot be supported.

still think any man who would describe himself as 'non-sexist' is a definite wrong-un tho.
My experience of anarcho groups is extremely limited (and non existent in the 80s) and I don't know of anyone in that limited range of people that hits women, although some of them seem to be non-sexist although I don't know if they'd describe themselves as such. I'll ask the b/f later, that'll give me a sample size of one :D

Unfortunately I have known a number of men that hit their wives/partners but none of them described themselves (to my knowledge) as non-sexist, in fact they were quite avidly sexist/macho. I also knew a woman that used to be very violent towards her husband and she was very much ostensibly into equal rights. I'm not sure there's any correlation tbh.
 

teuchter

je suis teuchter
yes. and what's wrong with that? Lots of folk deserve a smack.
OK. So your criteria for hitting someone are fairly wide.

It would make everyone's life easier if you could try to get your thoughts in an orderly fashion before letting your fingers loose on the keyboard.

Nonetheless I will attempt to untangle what you are saying.

if i was harder and there wasn't the risk of getting nicked i'd probably hit someone every week. usually for being an ignorant prick (ie folk who barge into you and don't apologise) and stuff like that.

but obviously i'm not some sort of nut job so i don't do stuff like that. generally folk who do are fairly unhinged.
So... if you could you would hit people every week, for barging into you. But actually you wouldn't because that would make you a nut job. Which apparently you aren't. So in conclusion, you would, but you wouldn't. Or, looking at it the other way around, you wouldn't but you would. But even if you would, you can't, because you're not hard enough and you'd get nicked. Phew.

last time i had a go was at some wanker on the tube who was abusing a beggar. not big or clever and felt well shaky afterwards but sometimes you just lose your temper. doesn't everyone? sometimes it just happens in a split second and obviolusly you wouldnt do it if you had time to reflect.
Oh, but actually, even though you wouldn't / couldn't, you did.

But it wasn't big or clever and you wouldn't have done it if you hadn't have lost your temper. But, lots of people deserve a smack. But not this one, even though he was abusing a beggar, because in that case it wasn't big or clever. You thought he deserved a smack, but then it turned out he didn't after all. But it was too late by then.

But, the guy who hit the girl in the park, he deserves a smack, in fact he deserves a good kicking (in the head), and you could do this without that making you a nut job / unhinged. So somewhere in between abusing the beggar and hitting the girl in the park, a line has been crossed where the appropriate action changes from nothing to kicking someone's head in.

I'm sorry chico enrico but I'm left a little confused about your criteria. All I want to know is: when is it OK to hit a man? Is it possible for you to answer that question?
 

chico enrico

No hair shows you care.
My experience of anarcho groups is extremely limited (and non existent in the 80s) and I don't know of anyone in that limited range of people that hits women, although some of them seem to be non-sexist although I don't know if they'd describe themselves as such. I'll ask the b/f later, that'll give me a sample size of one :D

Unfortunately I have known a number of men that hit their wives/partners but none of them described themselves (to my knowledge) as non-sexist, in fact they were quite avidly sexist/macho. I also knew a woman that used to be very violent towards her husband and she was very much ostensibly into equal rights. I'm not sure there's any correlation tbh.
well, my mum worked in raploch community centre which is a very 'deprived' area of central scotland. the same building she worked in housed the stirling womens refuge. she told me lots of tales of the state some women were in when they approached them and also of their fuck-head partners trying every vile tactic from attacking staff to the predictable tearful apologies to get them back out. I doubt any of those scumbags would ever have heard the term 'anti sexist man' let alone claim to be one, so, no there is no quantifiable comparison.

i am merely talking from my experience which is that men who proclaim themselves to be 'anti-sexist' may often have more 'issues' in that department than those who don't feel any need to 'wear the badge'.

self proclaimed 'non sexist men' types usually look a bit like charlie manson n'all and look what he got up to. yup...wrong 'uns. :)
 

cesare

don't mourn, organise!
i am merely talking from my experience which is that men who proclaim themselves to be 'anti-sexist' may often have more 'issues' in that department than those who don't feel any need to 'wear the badge'.

self proclaimed 'non sexist men' types usually look a bit like charlie manson n'all and look what he got up to. yup...wrong 'uns. :)
There are loads of men that are pro-feminism/equal rights/anti-sexist - you're not alleging that all of them are covert women beaters are you?
 

chico enrico

No hair shows you care.
but then it turned out he didn't after all. But it was too late by then.
no, you're wrong. he did most certainly deserve it. and i would have been more than happy if he had got a fuck of a sight worse.


But, the guy who hit the girl in the park, he deserves a smack, in fact he deserves a good kicking

yea, if he hit the girl in the park he deserves a kicking, why not?

so there ya go, teuchter, not one but two examples of when IMO someone would deserve a punch :)
 

teuchter

je suis teuchter
I used to know a bloke who liked to think of himself as a bit of a right-on type, he was always very very quick to accuse people of racism, sexism or any other -ism you care to mention. But he was an absolute bastard to his wife, not to the extent of slapping her about (that I'm aware of) but he was very controlling, a right bully. Totally at odds with the sort of persona he projected to the outside world.

Not that it proves anything of course, it's just my experience of one person.
No, it doesn't prove anything. Even if you could prove that he "doth protest too much" does apply to certain people, it's a complete red herring in terms of what we are discussing on this thread, thrown in there by chico enrico (he of much indignance about my non-answering of a question which in fact I already had) in an attempt to avoid properly answering the various questions he has been asked over the past couple of pages.

I don't believe I've accused anyone of any -isms on this thread, with the exception of myself.
 

chico enrico

No hair shows you care.
There are loads of men that are pro-feminism/equal rights/anti-sexist - you're not alleging that all of them are covert women beaters are you?

no. you know i'm not :)

and , sorry, but i never said anything about men who would claim to be "pro-feminism/equal rights" - i would myself and would think you'd be a fucking cro-mag not to be.
 

cesare

don't mourn, organise!
no. you know i'm not :)

and , sorry, but i never said anything about men who would claim to be "pro-feminism/equal rights" - i would myself and would think you'd be a fucking cro-mag not to be.
I'm confused now :D

Do you mean just the anti-sexist/non sexist term?
 

teuchter

je suis teuchter
no, you're wrong. he did most certainly deserve it. and i would have been more than happy if he had got a fuck of a sight worse.





yea, if he hit the girl in the park he deserves a kicking, why not?

so there ya go, teuchter, not one but two examples of when IMO someone would deserve a punch :)
Right, OK then. Not criteria as such but some examples, which will do for now.

Let's take the example of the "wanker" abusing the beggar in the tube. Let's not worry about whether punching him was a useful response for the time being. I think we might disagree about that but the point is, it is what you decided was appropriate.

Let's say the "wanker" was in fact a woman, of about the same apparent size and strength as the man you hit, and she was abusing the beggar in exactly the same way.

Am I right in assuming that you would not have hit her? If so, what would you have done instead?

Now can you please explain why that course of action would not have been an appropriate way to deal with the man?
 

teuchter

je suis teuchter
no. you know i'm not :)

and , sorry, but i never said anything about men who would claim to be "pro-feminism/equal rights" - i would myself and would think you'd be a fucking cro-mag not to be.
Chico enrico:

"Fighting for pro-feminism, equal rights, and anti-non-sexism!"

Cool!
 

ymu

Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
teuchter:

"fighting for the right to hit women as an emancipatatory act in refutation of
patriarchially inculated attitudes"

not so cool :rolleyes:
Back up that statement with a direct quote from Teuchter please.
 

chico enrico

No hair shows you care.
Am I right in assuming that you would not have hit her? If so, what would you have done instead?

Now can you please explain why that course of action would not have been an appropriate way to deal with the man?
if it had been a woman i'd probably have just given her a load of abuse.

someone bumps into me on the tube and doesn't apologise i'm going to go "watch where you're going ya fucking prick/cow" and leave it at that.

but this particular incident and the wanker who gave the beggar abuse (he actually let off some sort of alarm thing directly beside his ear which made the beggar drop his cup in shock which he thought was well funny, despite the fact he had half-deafened and pissed off the other folk in the carriage) just got to me so i cracked him on the side of the temple just as i was stepping off. a very out-of-character act i hasten to add, but i got 'the mist'.

really mate, i couldn't care less what you think about that. if you're a pacifist, fair enough and i rspect your ethical conviction but i disagree with your misguided attitude to hitting women. end of.
 

editor

hiraethified
Question:

When is it appropriate to hit a man?

Answer:

When it is appropriate.

Um...
Christ, you can be a patronising arse at times.

I've already stated about 200 posts ago that I'd only hit a man "if I absolutely had to," and I imagine that's the same response you'd get from most well balanced adults.

But if you think I'm going to trouble myself to pre-compile a comprehensive list of every possible and improbable circumstance that may perhaps merit a violent response for your titillation, you're very much mistaken.

However, on the highly unlikely occasion of a situation arising where I feel a violent response was the only appropriate one, you'll be the first to know all about it.

And then perhaps you might finally unveil your Massive Big Argument-Crushing Point, whatever it is.
 

chico enrico

No hair shows you care.
But would you hit a woman if you absolutely had to?
i would probably hit my mother if i absolutely had to but as it is highly unlikely i would absolutely have to may i just say that is an absolutely fucking moronic question to ask.

FFS :rolleyes:
 

chico enrico

No hair shows you care.
More macho posturing? Quelle surprise.

I'll assume your comments re: Teuchter's position are withdrawn, as you are unwilling to back them up.
oh just fuck off , reread teuchter's fuckin stupid comments about such attutudes being rooted in a time we should have left behind or whatever fanny-batter he was waffling and you'll see. ive got better things to do than pander to morons like you. and no, i 'withdraw' nothing.
 

teuchter

je suis teuchter
last time i had a go was at some wanker on the tube who was abusing a beggar. not big or clever and felt well shaky afterwards but sometimes you just lose your temper. doesn't everyone? sometimes it just happens in a split second and obviolusly you wouldnt do it if you had time to reflect.


no, you're wrong. he did most certainly deserve it. and i would have been more than happy if he had got a fuck of a sight worse.

just got to me so i cracked him on the side of the temple just as i was stepping off. a very out-of-character act i hasten to add, but i got 'the mist'.
Make your mind up for gawd's sake.

really mate, i couldn't care less what you think about that. if you're a pacifist, fair enough and i rspect your ethical conviction but i disagree with your misguided attitude to hitting women. end of.
I'm not sure where I actually committed myself to being a "pacifist".

I think we realise you "disagree with with my misguided attitude to hitting women" but it would be kind of interesting if you could manage to gather your head together enough to explain why.


Now can you please explain why that course of action would not have been an appropriate way to deal with the man?
You seem to have conveniently forgotten to make any attempt whatsoever to answer this question.


Oh and no, you haven't answered quimcunx's questions in post 447. Must have been an administrative oversight on your part. Maybe you forgot to press the "submit reply" button, or something like that.

Here are the questions in case you've forgotten what they are:

Why do you take it that he has hit a man? Are you under the assumption that all men have hit a man? Why? Do you believe that all normal, balanced men have? Have you? Was he bigger or smaller than you? Stronger? Weaker? Did hitting a man make you feel more manly? I’m assuming you think hitting a woman would make you feel less manly? Does not having hit a man make you less manly?
I think you've got quite a lot of answering work to do if you want to make yourself look faintly credible.
 

chico enrico

No hair shows you care.
Make your mind up for gawd's sake.



I'm not sure where I actually committed myself to being a "pacifist".

I think we realise you "disagree with with my misguided attitude to hitting women" but it would be kind of interesting if you could manage to gather your head together enough to explain why.




You seem to have conveniently forgotten to make any attempt whatsoever to answer this question.


Oh and no, you haven't answered quimcunx's questions in post 447. Must have been an administrative oversight on your part. Maybe you forgot to press the "submit reply" button, or something like that.

Here are the questions in case you've forgotten what they are:



I think you've got quite a lot of answering work to do if you want to make yourself look faintly credible.
yes. credible to a dickdrip like you? aye fuckin sure mate.

and my apologies, if you had been a committed pacifist, a quaker or buddhist or something i'd have rspected your convictions.

as it is , seems you're just a wanker. :)
 

teuchter

je suis teuchter
I've already stated about 200 posts ago that I'd only hit a man "if I absolutely had to," and I imagine that's the same response you'd get from most well balanced adults.
So you would only hit a man when there was absolutely no other option. You would only hit a man when it was actually not possible to not hit the man.

If you were in a situation where it was not possible to not hit a woman, would you hit her? You don't need to answer that because the answer is clearly yes.

Therefore you apply precisely the same criteria to hitting a man as to hitting a woman.

So we agree after all.
 
Top