Physical violence against men in the Irish media...

Galvasean

Didn't you know? Men are supposed to be big tough neanderthals (not ragging on the neanderthals before Wibbs steps in to defend their honor!) who don't feel girly 'emotional pain'. We just take it on the chin and 'man up'.

SugarHigh

Galvasean wrote: »

Didn't you know? Men are supposed to be big tough neanderthals (not ragging on the neanderthals before Wibbs steps in to defend their honor!) who don't feel girly 'emotional pain'. We just take it on the chin and 'man up'.

I think windsocks comments is just a case of watching too much tv where violence is throw away and little emotional impact is shown. Anyone who really thinks getting assaulted is just a sore cheek and bruised ego obviously has no experience of violence and is completely out of their depth in this conversation.

The same thing was posted in the other thread about a guy being tortured as if being assaulted is just a mild nuisance of having a black eye. There really is a wide spread view that men are completely emotionless to violence and I think it has a lot to do with TV.

But then again you look at how soldiers who came back from world wars were just supposed to suck it up and get over it.

WindSock

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

There is no difference between the two for me. People talking about a stinging cheek and a ****ing damaged ego? No offense to Windsock, i normally see you speaking a lot of sense but whether you realise it or not that is pretty much a prime example of the difference in the perception of the assault by males of females and vice versa.

It's not a damaged ego, it's a betrayal of trust and an assault. Not trying to be argumentative, and definitely not trying to put words in your mouth...i just find it funny than in a thread about the perception of violence towards males the usage of words is still implying....ah **** it, he'll get over it.

Maybe i'm wrong, so once again, no offence. Just wondering if that particular combination of words would appear in a thread about male on female violence.

I've been in an abusive relationship in the past...a hurt ego has **** all to do with anything.

No, I know my comments might look like I am brushing off f to m violence, but really, I amn't and anyone who knows me knows I take violent abuse against men seriously.

I am not talking about an abusive situation, in a relationship where there's power and control over a partner via psychological, physical and emotional tactics are used.

I think it is mostly a hypothetical 'on any weekend night out' situation here that is mostly being used as examples in the thread. What goes on in a relationship between two people who are supposed to love and trust each other is different.

SugarHigh wrote: »

I think windsocks comments is just a case of watching too much tv where violence is throw away and little emotional impact is shown. Anyone who really thinks getting assaulted is just a sore cheek and bruised ego obviously has no experience of violence and is completely out of their depth in this conversation.

Sorry but do I have to list my experiences with physical violence to qualify for posting on this thread?

Ok, one of the times I got a punch in the face from another girl in a local pub. I had a sore chin and felt humiliated...not to mention people (mostly guys) were jeering 'fight, fight, fight' and laughing as it happened. How else should I have felt? Should I have headbutted her back?

Other times were different situations and far different things were going on so I experienced different emotions, with different impacts. I really don't think I should have to list them here so I display that I am not talking through my hole. The above example is enough to illustrate my previous point.

Headbutting or retaliating in kind after being slapped by a woman is very ungentlemanly behaviour.

Extenuating circumstances, like a frenzied or sustained attack would be a different matter as it would be in self-defense but a bout of Irish Stand-down with a girl isn't something I'd care to enter into myself.

Whatever the reasons for someone hitting you, just remember, as Charlie Brown or something once said: violence only begets violence.

Standman

If it happens in a public place you're likely to get the sh*t kicked out of you by other men. If you defended yourself against your girlfriend you'd be pretty much branded a wife beater.

It's got less to do with strength and more to do with gender. Have people never seen a skinny looking guy getting in a fight with a bigger looking fella on a night out or whatever? Do you see people enthusiastically dropping everything to go and save the poor skinny lad and beat the crap out of the bigger guy? No you don't.

If a man were to even restrain a woman either in self defence or to stop her from hitting someone else, he runs the serious risk of getting beaten up himself.

Otis Driftwood

Ive never been hit by a woman,not even close.If the day ever comes then then Id be fairly confident that Id be strong enough to defend myself*


*by that I mean I wouldnt have to resort to "knocking her out":rolleyes:

It doesnt matter what the context is but hitting a woman does not sit well with me.Most blokes would be able to over power most woman without having to resort to that.It was mentioned somewhere else on thread in the context of hitting someone that you are physically stronger than,I would view raising my hand to a bloke that is physically weaker than me in exactly the same way.

um7y1h83ge06nx

Women should not use their sex to their advantage and to aid them being a scumbag.

A few years back, a male friend of my brother got attacked by two female scumbags. My brother asked the obvious question of why didn't he defend himself. He said he couldn't hit a woman.

My brother and I came to the conclusion that if we were in that situation we would have no problem throwing one or two good punches to get them to back down. Not beat them senseless, just enough to leave them know we weren't push arounds.

um7y1h83ge06nx

Actually I remember a time when a bunch of teenage, female scumbags tried to publicly humiliate me.

I was in a McDonald's sitting alone eating upstairs and browsing some websites on my phone when some teenage girls saw two tables away from me. They seemed like real trouble makers but I took no notice.

All of a sudden they started throwing a chip or two at me. I let the first one or two go, but then they started laughing at me and flung more food and containers at me.

Enough was enough says I and I threw my tray at them, told them they were nothing but scum and to f**k off, and said if they tried it again I would put them out the window. Cue complete silence by everyone on the floor and the scumbags left straight away.

I followed this up by a formal complaint to McDonald's.

I wasn't going to allow myself be treated as a doormat and less than human by anyone, regardless of gender.

Maguined

Otis Driftwood wrote: »

Ive never been hit by a woman,not even close.If the day ever comes then then Id be fairly confident that Id be strong enough to defend myself*


*by that I mean I wouldnt have to resort to "knocking her out":rolleyes:

It doesnt matter what the context is but hitting a woman does not sit well with me.Most blokes would be able to over power most woman without having to resort to that.It was mentioned somewhere else on thread in the context of hitting someone that you are physically stronger than,I would view raising my hand to a bloke that is physically weaker than me in exactly the same way.

Would you feel the same abhorrence to hitting a much physically weaker man that attacked you though? would you feel the same urge to try and restrain them without hitting them like you would with a woman? or would you just punch them because they started it with you?

Genuinely interested would you feel the same way if it was a physically weaker man attacking you.

Even if you do try and overpower and restrain a woman attacking you this alone is easily seen as you being a brute and attacking a woman. I have seen it a couple of times on a night out where a woman attacks a man, the man tries to defend himself by holding her wrists so she cant him him any more and other men step in to attack the man to "defend" the woman being restrained.

goose2005

desertcircus wrote: »

Slapping your boyfriend isn't cool, but let's not pretend it's the same thing as punching your girlfriend. In 99+% of cases, a male partner will cause far more damage.

So it's OK to hit your partner, so long as you don't do any damage. Soap in a sock OK?

Also, I hated that "Carla? The blonde?" ad as well.

py2006

I recall a discussion I got involved in. I was the only man. They started talking about physical violence towards women. I was even asked directly would I beat up a woman. :rolleyes:

When I raised the issue of physical violence towards men, I was laughed at. 'It doesn't hurt men and they will get over it'. 'Men can protect themselves and woman can't' were the responses.

py2006

In work and in front of many people a female colleague thumped me so hard in the arm (playfully) that I seriously thought she had done damage. My face went red and I had to grit my teeth and pretend I felt nothing.

It was all done in jest and she was completely unaware that she really hurt me. Obviously I wouldn't hit her back and even if I did in equal measure I probably would have been fired.

It was interesting that 2 men approached me afterwards suggesting that I should not let her away with that. (non violently of course)

BrianD3

Just on the "heroes" who'll jump in to beat you up if you defend yourself from a female - when I was in my leaving cert year I got into an argument with a girl over something really stupid - I was occupying "her" seat on a bus :rolleyes: She was 100% in the wrong and when I say argument it'd be more accurate to say that she was screeching her head off at me calling me an ugly c*nt and queer etc.

I stood my ground but then a couple of heroes decided to intervene and threatened to beat me up if I didn't give up the seat. I continued to stand my ground and they were obviously more mouth than balls as they backed off without doing anything. But still, I thought it was utterly pathetic that they assumed I needed a beating because a female was screaming at me - and this was a purely verbal situation.

Galvasean

BrianD3 wrote: »

Just on the "heroes" who'll jump in to beat you up if you defend yourself from a female - when I was in my leaving cert year I got into an argument with a girl over something really stupid - I was occupying "her" seat on a bus :rolleyes: She was 100% in the wrong and when I say argument it'd be more accurate to say that she was screeching her head off at me calling me an ugly c*nt and queer etc.

I stood my ground but then a couple of heroes decided to intervene and threatened to beat me up if I didn't give up the seat. I continued to stand my ground and they were obviously more mouth than balls as they backed off without doing anything. But still, I thought it was utterly pathetic that they assumed I needed a beating because a female was screaming at me - and this was a purely verbal situation.

You'll find these 'have a go heroes' only side with the woman in the hope that she will reciprocate with sex. They aren't gents.

HellFireClub

Deleted User wrote: »

Headbutting or retaliating in kind after being slapped by a woman is very ungentlemanly behaviour.

I agree, but equally I think a woman raising her hand and walloping a man on the face, or anywhere for that matter, is the sign of an absolute slag.

Same for throwing a drink over a guy if you want to make a point, I saw it happening a mate of mine once, (along with the mandatory wallop on the face), and the assumption on the part of others seemed to be that he had somehow asked for it or had been caught cheating, when the actual offence he committed was coming down to the pub without informing her of his plans, but everyone assumed that he had been caught with another woman or something.

Even if he had been caught with someone else, dump him and get on with your life. Why make yourself look like a tramp by using physical violence?

gargleblaster

I agree with HFC (excepting terminology), using physical violence like that is just scumbag behavior, full stop.

Portraying it as jokey and humorous in the media is not helpful and definitely backs up the double standard, and most likely gives less thoughtful people the idea that it's perfectly acceptable.

Otis Driftwood

Maguined wrote: »

Would you feel the same abhorrence to hitting a much physically weaker man that attacked you though? would you feel the same urge to try and restrain them without hitting them like you would with a woman? or would you just punch them because they started it with you?

Genuinely interested would you feel the same way if it was a physically weaker man attacking you.

Even if you do try and overpower and restrain a woman attacking you this alone is easily seen as you being a brute and attacking a woman. I have seen it a couple of times on a night out where a woman attacks a man, the man tries to defend himself by holding her wrists so she cant him him any more and other men step in to attack the man to "defend" the woman being restrained.

Yep.

Im not a violent person,at all.Im lucky in that Ive only been in 2 physical altercations in my life,both of which were because my brother was being a dick.They ended up with a few slaps being thrown either side and both parties copping on before it got too hairy.

Any other (very rare) time someone has started getting lairy Ive been able to talk the other person down by not getting angry.

People might think thats the pussy option but I dont give a bollix.

Say I punch someone,male or female,and I get a lucky shot in and they end up being knocked out.Say this person collapses and smashes their head off a table or the ground and ends up in a coma or worse still,dead.

What do you do then?

Man slaughter charge (at best) and your life fúcked,ya,thats well worth punching someone for.

That possible outcome when punching someone you out weigh by 50 or 60 lbs increases exponentially.

So yes,I would have the same abhorrence to punching anyone,never mind someone that Im much physically stronger than/bigger than etc.

donfers

Galvasean wrote: »

You'll find these 'have a go heroes' only side with the woman in the hope that she will reciprocate with sex. They aren't gents.

exactly

most of those white knighters make me want to puke and I strongly question their motives

you'd never know it from my posting style but I can be quite opinionated at times and I have had my fair share of violent altercations, usually on nights out and none in the last year or two so I am improving.......but what enrages me more than anything is when there is a dispute and someone comes along who has no idea of the rights and wrongs of the dispute and just intervenes suddenly, jumping to the defense of whichever party is likely to enable them to look more chivalrous/macho/alpha male or whatever other bollox gets them off......this kind of person is usually the one that drives me over the edge and leads to things getting physical whereas previously I would have only been having an argument with somebody, they make the assumption that I am the evil aggressor (purely because I might be bigger or male or not have as soft a voice as the other or be dressed differently or whatever measurements they use to align themselves to the forces of good) so I reciprocate and make the assumption that they're an utter cretin and then there's a problem

Bouncers are usually terribly guilty of this, however in recent times I have noticed they are improving, police are also bad for it at least in the initial stages but then the evidence piles up and it is apparent their initial assumptions were typically moronic....the sad thing about all of this is that there will be times when the guy who appears stronger, angrier and more aggressive is the evil one but all the white knighter cases will lead to me not intervening in those cases unless the evidence is absolutely blatant

my advice to anyone who wants to appear to be noble and wants their intervention to reflect well upon them (and more importantly wants to do the right thing) is not to make any instant stereotypical assumptions about who is the goodie and the baddies and instead to just treat both parties equally and break up the dispute (if you can't help yourself from getting involved), just break it up, simple really and you still have your white knighter glow and the girl in the corner might still be impressed enough to go home with you

Wibbs

donfers wrote: »

my advice to anyone who wants to appear to be noble and wants their intervention to reflect well upon them (and more importantly wants to do the right thing) is not to make any instant stereotypical assumptions about who is the goodie and the baddies and instead to just treat both parties equally and break up the dispute (if you can't help yourself from getting involved), just break it up, simple really and you still have your white knighter glow and the girl in the corner might still be impressed enough to go home with you

+1 and there are usually way more options to cooling down a situation than coming across all fisty and macho.

Galvasean

Galvasean wrote: »

You'll find these 'have a go heroes' only side with the woman in the hope that she will reciprocate with sex. They aren't gents.

Have to say I found this statement ridiculous.

K-9

donfers wrote: »

most of those white knighters make me want to puke and I strongly question their motives

That really is a stupid term, it has been thrown at me a few times on this site and going on your definition, I'd be the complete opposite.

Marks it down with "pc liberal, bleeding heart" as a moronic, stupid, over used phrase.

Galvasean

Deleted User wrote: »

Have to say I found this statement ridiculous.

Care to elaborate? Would you not agree that when a woman and man are having an argument/row/fight some random bloke who comes in to the woman's aid (even if she is doing all the aggressive stuff) most likely has an ulterior motive?

Galvasean

Galvasean wrote: »

Care to elaborate? Would you not agree that when a woman and man are having an argument/row/fight some random bloke who comes in to the woman's aid (even if she is doing all the aggressive stuff) most likely has an ulterior motive?

Can't say I'd agree at all.

Seeing a girl getting hit is unacceptable behaviour to some guys. Breaking up a physical altercation between a guy and a girl doesn't have to have an end result other than stopping the row.

I think that passing by and doing nothing while a guy is being physically abusive to a girl is a lot worse than trying to break it up or calling the police.

micayla

I was working in a bar quite a few years back and one of my mates was hit by his friend's girlfriend. He stayed in his seat, turned his face and simply said would you like the other cheek. She stalked off while everyone who witnessed the event were bowled over by his calm attitude toward the whole thing.

Guy or girl, if someone hits you walk away. If they then follow you and proceed to get more violent I think you have every right to defend yourself regardless of who is attacking you and their sex. Defending yourself however, does not mean beating the living daylights out of the person. The fact that others will have witnessed you walking away until further provocation suggests they may be less likely to intervene.

Galvasean

Deleted User wrote: »

Can't say I'd agree at all.

Seeing a girl getting hit is unacceptable behaviour to some guys. Breaking up a physical altercation between a guy and a girl doesn't have to have an end result other than stopping the row.

I think that passing by and doing nothing while a guy is being physically abusive to a girl is a lot worse than trying to break it up or calling the police.

Okay that's a perfectly reasonable position to hold, but your going according to the situations where the guy is the aggressor. What I (and i think some others, correct me if I'm wrong) was referring to were those situations where the girl is clearly in the wrong and doing all the aggressive stuff, but lads wade in to help her out like she's the victim. In those cases I have little doubt that the lads aren't doing it out of genuine concern for anyone's well being or some sense of honor, but rather to see if they can get something out of it (ie: woo a lady). If I've seen it once on nights out I've seen it a hundred times.

micayla

Galvasean wrote: »

Okay that's a perfectly reasonable position to hold, but your going according to the situations where the guy is the aggressor. What I (and i think some others, correct me if I'm wrong) was referring to were those situations where the girl is clearly in the wrong and doing all the aggressive stuff, but lads wade in to help her out like she's the victim. In those cases I have little doubt that the lads aren't doing it out of genuine concern for anyone's well being or some sense of honor, but rather to see if they can get something out of it (ie: woo a lady). If I've seen it once on nights out I've seen it a hundred times.

I wouldn't say ALL lads would intervene simply to get the lady, I think most lads have been brought up to not only never hit a woman but also to protect them. Thus, I think they would interfere simply because it's been drilled into them to help a 'damsel in distress'. I think you're being overly cynical about why guys would help a woman out even if she instigated the dispute.

Galvasean

Galvasean wrote: »

Okay that's a perfectly reasonable position to hold, but your going according to the situations where the guy is the aggressor. What I (and i think some others, correct me if I'm wrong) was referring to were those situations where the girl is clearly in the wrong and doing all the aggressive stuff, but lads wade in to help her out like she's the victim. In those cases I have little doubt that the lads aren't doing it out of genuine concern for anyone's well being or some sense of honor, but rather to see if they can get something out of it (ie: woo a lady). If I've seen it once on nights out I've seen it a hundred times.

Regardless of who started the fight, or whomever is the aggressor, I would prefer to try and separate the two.

I really don't believe the majority of guys would be thinking that breaking up a couple fighting would end with them getting their hole. It can potentially end with both the guy and the girl turning on whomever is trying to help.

donfers

K-9 wrote: »

That really is a stupid term, it has been thrown at me a few times on this site and going on your definition, I'd be the complete opposite.

Marks it down with "pc liberal, bleeding heart" as a moronic, stupid, over used phrase.

I understand the appeal of deeming a term to be stupid and moronic when it has been applied to you but really we shouldn't get too hung up on semantics here, i hope the behaviour cited in the post made it clear of whom i was referring

may i also say there are many phrases/terms/buzzwords in the english language that i don't particularly like but I still choose to use them because they convey a meaning that I am trying to get across or that I think will best represent my meaning to the other, context of course is also key, spoken word can do pejorative better than the lean media that is posts/mails

another issue worth considering is that an internet "white knighter" and a real-life "white knighter" are not necessarily one and the same, completely different parameters at play as with all internet-reality comparisons

oh and for the record i don't believe you are a white knighter (i.e. always eager to support and back up the ladies no matter what their argument is), you've had your disagreements with people regardless of their gender......and i've had disagreements with you in the past but i have never doubted the sincerity in your arguments

K-9

The point is it's a stupid generic phrase that reflects on the poster far more than the intended recipient. The eyes glaze over if a poster uses meaningless phrases repeatedly.

Thanks for the compliment! Make your own mind up on each case, not on what some right wing or left wing site says or some men's rights robot says or indeed some feminazi because well they are, robots.

donfers

K-9 wrote: »

The point is it's a stupid generic phrase that reflects on the poster far more than the intended recipient. The eyes glaze over if a poster uses meaningless phrases repeatedly.

Thanks for the compliment! Make your own mind up on each case, not on what some right wing or left wing site says or some men's rights robot says or indeed some feminazi because well they are, robots.

I'm afraid I disagree on a couple of points

1. yes it's not the most elegant of phrases but it's not certainly not meaningless especially when contextualised

2. do you have an alternative noun phrase to describe these types of people? We are unfortunately limited by two things when expressing ourselves, language itself and time....so rather than saying something like "people who are eager to defend the honour of women at every possible opportuntity regardless of the rights and wrongs of the particular situation" we can instead invoke the economical yet imperfect phrases like "have a go heroes" or "white knighters", i would also contend that the latter term here is being picked on by you partly perhaps because it has been used against you in the past, the former phrase didn't incite any disapproval which is curious, I mean why is "white knighters" so moronic yet "have a go heroes" exempt from critical comment?

anyway i digress and we are being drawn into a semantical debate which is not likely to go anywhere beyond our own subjective interpetations of what constitutes meaning and well.......let's just say we are both right within the confines of our minds on that one


The second paragraph, I completely agree with you and again fair play to you for having the integrity to be issue-driven in terms of your views rather than shall we say party-driven (as in I am a member of Fianna Fail therefore I must agree with all their policies or I am a man therefore I must support all men's rights issues - I think a lot of us could do with making more effort to shake off the burden of clan bias - apart from Liverpool of course!).

Unfortunately the nature of boards with all its varied special interest forums and thanks system (and scores of opinion-givers queueing up to support or denounce an issue with virtual platform freely available to all no matter how deluded or radical) is that clans develop and sometimes loyalty to the clan overrides or silences someone's genuinely held view, I often suspect that if we met some of the people we often debate with on here in real life they would come across as far more civil and far less aggressive (including me) but the nature of the beast is towards radicalisation on here and that's fun too just as long as people don't get too enraged by the opinions of faceless strangers who they most likely will never encounter.

physical violence against men is condoned more by society at league partly because of the issues i have raised in this post (so not completely off-topic earlier i hope) as in most women aren't too bothered by it because it doesn't affect them and most men don't want to appear week or whiney in front of their peer group by raising the issue and looking for support and admitting they were hurt rather than making a gag out of it as usually happens in these cases.

As an individual I bleed and bruise and hurt just like an old man or a kid or a woman or an immigrant or a homosexual or a black person or whoever, so let me judge my own pain and let me be judged on that pain rather than the usual "I am a young Irish male superhero and above all that pain nonsense/he is a young Irish male superhero and above all that pain nonsense"

You would swear men are superheroes when you watch or read the news because they never die (for example,train crash, 23 dead including 6 women and 3 children) because every time we are badly hurt but don't look for help or support or every time we make a gag about a guy who had his penis cut off or even when we don't speak out against the gag we are contributing to the continuation of that damaging mindset that men are somehow fair game when it comes to having pain inflicted upon them.

I would like to think I am speaking out against this because it is wrong but I don't know, maybe I am just doing it merely because I am a man, I hope not.