Central London mob attacks people in Hyde park

Discussion in 'London and the South East' started by The Black Hand, Aug 3, 2008.

  1. Jessiedog

    Jessiedog Keeping the faith.


    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.


  2. cesare

    cesare don't mourn, organise!

    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.
  3. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    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.

    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.

    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?
  4. cesare

    cesare don't mourn, organise!

    You may have meant 'disentangle' there, teuchter :D
  5. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

    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. :)
  6. quimcunx

    quimcunx protestant traybake

    I think you'll find that's what he said (if you give him a minute).


    Or possibly untangle. Definitely one of the two.
  7. ymu

    ymu Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet

    Funny. I nearly used that quote instead of the macho posturing line.

    It was referring to you as well as the cunt who hit me, btw.
  8. cesare

    cesare don't mourn, organise!

    He made it 'untangle' ... I think my 'disentangle' wins though :cool:
  9. cesare

    cesare don't mourn, organise!

    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?
  10. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

    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 :)
  11. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    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.
  12. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

    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.
  13. cesare

    cesare don't mourn, organise!

    I'm confused now :D

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

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    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?
  15. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    Chico enrico:

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

  16. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

  17. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.


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

    not so cool :rolleyes:
  18. quimcunx

    quimcunx protestant traybake

    chico, you are Attica and I claim my £5.

    Also please answer my questions to you in post 447.
  19. ymu

    ymu Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet

    Back up that statement with a direct quote from Teuchter please.
  20. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

    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.
  21. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

    go fuck yourself please
  22. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

    yes, i have answered it. perhaps read this thread instead of paraphrasing Graham Greene? :)
  23. ymu

    ymu Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet

    More macho posturing? Quelle surprise.

    I'll assume your comments re: Teuchter's position are withdrawn, as you are unwilling to back them up.
  24. editor

    editor hiraethified

    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.
  25. ymu

    ymu Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet

    But would you hit a woman if you absolutely had to?
  26. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

    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:
  27. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

    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.
  28. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    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.
  29. chico enrico

    chico enrico No hair shows you care.

    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. :)
  30. teuchter

    teuchter je suis teuchter

    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.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice