Interfering in a row

Funny story of a lad stepping in to stop a fight:

http://boston.barstoolsports.com/m/random-thoughts/the-night-a-hero-was-born/

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

hold on .... you are saying to me I dont know... even tho I was there and you werent there Does that make sense?

You made out that him shouting at her ("probably for something she did" as opposed to him being an asshole) was all that he was doing, when you don't know for certain that he could be putting her through worse, seeing as she did whisper to you to help her.

But I guess the "right" thing to do (you did mention how christian of me) was to pull my belt up and say leave the girl alone mate (even tho he didnt lay one hand her) So I get into a brawl with him - I get a black eye or i give him a black eye, etc etc. And for what? for her and him to potentially make up later like what happened with the op?

Why are you ignoring where I said nobody should feel pressured into intervening on a fight but should call the guards if it's dangerous-looking? Shouting doesn't warrant calling the guards, her whispering "Help" to you does though.

It's almost like you are reading the events like he was beating the crap out of her and cowardly me walked by. I'd get you then. That would be wrong and cowardly of me to walk by.

I was only struck by your indifference to her saying "Help me" to you - and with how smugly proud you seemed of it.

But stepping into an argument to be someones white-knight ... pass. But enough about me. What would you do?

I'd call the guards.
It's ok, you got the "white knight" jibe in already. Helping anyone, male or female, by anyone male or female, is white-knighting apparently.

I've intervened on more than one occasion and while it went well you need to be careful. Even the guards say that its tricky for them as the female's injury's can be blamed on them once the dust settles and "she" doesn't want "him" in trouble.

this is even in cases where "she" has called for their help.

you go with your gut and be realistic about your abilities to handle things or escape.

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Come on femme_fatale, you really gonna twist words? seriously?
We all know the difference between helping someone (being decent) and being a white knight and sticking your nose in where it doesnt belong.

You know that. But I think it fits your side of the argument to play ignorant on this one.

But you and another person are the ones not distinguishing between the two. If you had done as that woman asked (which you didn't have to btw) you wouldn't be white-knighting, you'd just be helping her.
Someone else said what the OP did was white-knighting - again, no reason to say it other than act a bit of an asshole

"White-knighting" is guys being heroic to women but having an agenda - it's a term that's unfairly used by people who'd simultaneously be giving out about objections to chivalry.

Nothing in the OP suggests white-knight, just helping someone out, which I've no reason to believe the OP would not have done had the victim been a guy.

I have read all the replies on this thread so far and to be honest I am shocked at some of them.
I was brought up in the era where moral values and community were very important. People looked out for one another - maybe the younger posters could ask their mam's and dad's. I remember hearing stories of men giving a good trimming (or worse) to wife beating feckers etc.
Those days are fading fast with the exception of some individuals who would rather risk personal injury as opposed to others who ignore situations and bury their heads deeply in the ground preferring to have a good nights sleep :mad:

Rho b wrote: »

I have read all the replies on this thread so far and to be honest I am shocked at some of them.
I was brought up in the era where moral values and community were very important. People looked out for one another - maybe the younger posters could ask their mam's and dad's. I remember hearing stories of men giving a good trimming (or worse) to wife beating feckers etc.
Those days are fading fast with the exception of some individuals who would rather risk personal injury as opposed to others who ignore situations and bury their heads deeply in the ground preferring to have a good nights sleep :mad:

What if they got beaten to a pulp or knifed for taking them on? It's too much of a risk if you're not built for it. If you are and you do go for it, fair play - it takes balls. Nothing wrong with just calling the cops though or alerting bouncers/security guards.
The scenarios you refer to back in the day seem like a bunch of fellas getting together to administer a vigilante style punishment - that's totally different to randomly encountering a fight on the street when you're on your own or with just one other person.

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

What if they got beaten to a pulp or knifed for taking them on? It's too much of a risk if you're not built for it. If you are and you do go for it, fair play - it takes balls. Nothing wrong with just calling the cops though or alerting bouncers/security guards.
The scenarios you refer to back in the day seem like a bunch of fellas getting together to administer a vigilante style punishment - that's totally different to randomly encountering a fight on the street when you're on your own or with just one other person.

Call the cops - what cops? Most of the rural Garda stations are now closed and you can wait for hours for the Garda to arrive to a "situation" in most cities.
From experience bounders/security seldom get involved and that is presuming an incident happens in a town/city and I doubt the majority of them do. Stand corrected however.
Regarding vigilante style punishment - I have read a lot of posts on this thread recounting incidences in very public places (Cities/Towns outside pubs/nightclubs etc) were people/onlookers stood by and did nothing - pity that those onlookers didn't have the gumption to unite
Nowdays it seems to me that everyone is trying to pass moral/community responsibility to some unknown identity :mad:

Rho b wrote: »

onlookers stood by and did nothing - pity that those onlookers didn't have the gumption to unite
Nowdays it seems to me that everyone is trying to pass moral/community responsibility to some unknown identity :mad:

As opposed to what era now would you be talking about, the 40's, 50's and 60's when people passed moral/community responsibility to some unknown identity?


Certain Institutions spring to mind...

RoverZT wrote: »

So you were much bigger than the other guy?

If he had been 6'4 and built like a heavyweight boxer would you have stepped in then?

It wouldn't have been advisable to do so, but still fair play to him for weighing in in this case. A hypothetical alternative scenario isn't relevant.

Rho b wrote: »

I can only talk about my own era - I was born in 60's - however I only speak for myself and do not represent EVERYONE who was born in the same decade or thereafter. Those people can make their own statements here.
My reference to people/community responsibility been passed on - also refers to the biggest feckers in the RCC as you insinuated too.
However I honestly believe that I would prefer to rot in prison/lay on a bed in hospital/ be 6' under looking down on my kids/family, than walk past a girl/lady/women that was been beaten by a male of any age/stature.
Sorry if that does not sit well with you but that is who I am.

I agree, but the reality is the couple will probably turn on you, with predictable monotony. I've had stiletto heels buried in my back from the female when I stopped boyfriends beating girlfriends when I worked doors. My view now, I'd probably intervene, but i would deffo not be expecting thanks from the gf and I wouldn't be turning my back on her either. Odd, but folk are odd.

Rho b wrote: »

I can only talk about my own era - I was born in 60's - however I only speak for myself and do not represent EVERYONE who was born in the same decade or thereafter. Those people can make their own statements here.
My reference to people/community responsibility been passed on - also refers to the biggest feckers in the RCC as you insinuated too.

Ahh it just got on my tits Rho tbh the way your post came across all rose tinted and dancing at the crossroads / neighbours never had to lock their doors type stuff when that same sense of "community" and "moral values" meant that people ignored, excluded the most vulnerable people in society for fear of what the neighbours might say.

However I honestly believe that I would prefer to rot in prison/lay on a bed in hospital/ be 6' under looking down on my kids/family, than walk past a girl/lady/women that was been beaten by a male of any age/stature.
Sorry if that does not sit well with you but that is who I am.

I completely agree with you here though, and for me personally it wouldn't matter whether the person was male or female, I'd do what I can to prevent them from being assaulted. That means being smart about it and using my brains before my brawn - sometimes I'll step in, sometimes I'll call the Gardai, it all depends on the situation.

If you're six foot under, you're not going to be of much use if God forbid one of your children are the victim of an assault some day. The world will still go on, people will still assault other people, and you can't save everybody.

That's what my wife said to me last night when I tried to convince a 24 year old drunk female heroin addict to come home with me and let me help her rather than go to a hotel where only minutes before a guy pulled up in a car and offered her €100 to have sex with him. We chatted for nearly an hour and I almost had her persuaded, walking home with me, when she "left her bag of gear back there", "had to go for a piss", I waited for another half hour before I figured she'd done a dodge and duck out job, so I walked home.

Chances are I won't ever meet that girl again, and every possibility that she never saw that €100 she was promised either.

Rho b wrote: »

I think I could sleep better at night after "intervening".

If you're not badly injured yourself.