Turn on thread page Beta

Fight with boyfriend - he got physical watch

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Oh lord, we're getting into 'small man' 'big man' scenarios now, I wondered when that would come...how ridiculous! You obviously didn't notice but I purposely put the word 'generally' to indicate that I was not assuming that every man is stronger than every woman. I must get some sleep now... thanks for the laugh anyway!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Of course I am not scared of her, in fact I found it hilarious but that is not the issue. In an era where women want to be equal to men in just about everything and want to try to get rid of established gender roles, they are going to have to accept that they are going to lose the privileges they previously had. You can blame feminism for promoting the idea that women and men are the same and not taking into account the fact that we are actually quite different. I will keep coming back to the same phrase- if women want to be equal to men and to try to claim that they can do everything men do, they are going to have to play by the same rules as men no matter how strong or weak they are.

    So overall you may be right that men and women are generally physically different and that the double-standard is not black and white, but is still very much a double-standard and I’m afraid you lost your rights to claim ‘being women’ as an excuse for anything when you decided that you wanted to chuck gender roles out of the window and be ‘equal’.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think you might need to clarify what you mean when you use the broad term of equality - there seems to be some confusion here. The situation at hand is not someone using "being a woman" as an excuse. On moral grounds I completely agree that there should be no violence period - but this is not a perfect world and there is violence. But, in a practical sense (which is how we must view it since this so obviously isn't a perfect world), this is different from your girlfriend shoving you. You were not threatened or hurt or scared - in fact, you laughed. You did exactly what you accused other women of doing when contemplating a woman being violent towards her boyfriend, way back when I first posted.

    Because it is physically different, it has to be viewed as practically different. It is (generally speaking, of course) not an excuse that is the result of pseudo-feminism gone wrong. A woman shoving her boyfriend is not as big of a deal than a man shoving his girlfriend because it isn't. Not morally, but practically.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zoea85)
    Guys, It's not anything to do with feminism or sexism, the fact is, an average girl trying to be physical violent against a guy is a very different scenario to a guy using physical violence girl. Guys are physically stronger and consequently, girls have a much less of a chance of defending themselves. I've never been able to get out of an arm lock or win a physical game against a guy. Guys being violent to a girl is viewed as much more serious because hes much more likely to cause her harm, whereas on the whole, girls are weaker and much less likely to cause a guy harm, so your 'this is sexist, visa versa' argument is very weak.
    Not always relevant; what if we are to consider acts of equal force? Trust me, an act of physical force against a woman from a man, is always viewed with much more seriousness than vice versa; even if there are no long-term implications (i.e. even if, say, the man and woman did not know one another, and were never going to see each other again, and hence there was no fear of future 'attacks', in either case). In such cases, is it logical to take the man's attack more seriously, simply because he was the stronger one, and could have caused more harm? No, it isn't, but people still would.

    What if a guy had been grabbed by his neck by his girlfriend, equally as hard, as this girl had her neck, by her boyfriend? Is it necessarily relevant that the guy would've been the stronger one? I know there is something in the 'guys can cause more damage' argument, but it is not a logical explanation as to why hits of equal force are seen as worse when dealt by men to women, then vice versa. There's a difference between the relative differences of a spur-of-the-moment, angry, one-off hit/grab, in a mixed gender situation, between the genders, and a man squaring up to a woman, challenging her to a fight, and vice versa (i.e. while the latter could perhaps fairly be seen as worse, in that the man could do a lot more harm to the woman than vice versa, the one-off hits could even be of equal force).

    And, at any rate, Amnesia's point still stands; even taking the consideration of potential to cause harm out of the equation, there is the moral issue. Is it really any less immoral for a woman to hit out at a man, than vice versa? Are the intentions, and sometimes even the implications, not still more-or-less the same? Are all women who do so really thinking "I won't cause much damage, because I'm weaker, as a woman, than him, so it's OK; I wouldn't do this if I was stronger than him"? Given half the chance, such women probably would cause every bit as much harm as such men.

    Men have the potential to cause more damage, and, in some cases, in some ways, I can see why acts of violence against men might be viewed with more seriousness (i.e. if a woman lays into a man, in the street, it may be taken more seriously by onlookers, than vice versa, as the man would probably be far more likely to be able defend himself, than a woman being attacked by a man). However, it is not always fair to chastise men more heavily for acts of violence against women, than vice versa, simply because of their relative strength; morally, it does not mean it is any worse, and it isn't always a relevant factor, as I've said; the force of such attacks is what is relevant, which might not always be greater when perpetrated by a man.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    These kind of things can escalate though...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think it depends on if you feel you can live your life in fear i guess. Do you think you will be okay fearing the next time he will lash out? I went out with a guy once who had a temper on him and it only once turned physical... and trust me, i paid the price for staying with him. They just get worse. He should have never, ever grabbed your neck, and i don't believe these things are one off's. If he has done it once, its possible he will do it again. You don't know when it will be, or if he will do it again, but living in fear is not good. Get out now, before things get worse.

    Lou
    xxx
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by generalebriety)
    Firstly, it wasn't strangulation if he didn't strangle you.

    Secondly, "imperfect" is a loaded word. I'd watch it around your boyfriend. No one has a "perfect" relationship in anyone's eyes but their own.


    You seem very aggressive. Why don't you just state your point of view on the situation instead of asking people to find it constantly when you quite clearly haven't given it? In fact you've actively refused to address exactly the same issue with the sexes reversed, when under law and common practice men and women are now exactly the same thing. It can easily be said "men are normally stronger" but would you make an exception for a strong woman? Please give us your opinion on this instead of just ordering us to find it when it's not here, that's just plain annoying of you.
    Violence is violence, regardless of the physical makeup of the perpetrator. A woman who attacks her partner should face the same consequences as her male counterpart. That has always been my view and always will be. Happy now?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BellaCat)
    Violence is violence, regardless of the physical makeup of the perpetrator. A woman who attacks her partner should face the same consequences as her male counterpart. That has always been my view and always will be. Happy now?
    Ah, but this happens whenever accusation of sexism come up. It's like when you're arguing about the use of the word '****' and girls get annoyed at the double standards and then men claim they would just as easily call a man a **** as a women. It's blatantly untrue though.

    The fact is there are different attitudes in society towards domestic violence. Any man who lashes out in anger can instantly be suspected of being a wife-beater. Now I'm not defending men who are violent against women, because statistically far more domestic violence is carried out by men than women. But did you know 30 men a year die as a result of domestic violence also? However, had a female lashed out at a man, say slapping and kicking at him, as women sometimes do in heated arguments, would you expect so many people to warn the man to dump her before she gets worse? I doubt it.

    Still though if you ever do suffer violence, just be cautious that it doesn't happen again. But it probably happens in the heat of the moment more often that you would expect unless you've been in a relationship.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm sorry, I haven't read quite the whole of this thread as it has gotten very long, but I'd like to ask a question, without being on one side or the other.

    Have any girls had a boyfriend who used violence on them, and found it really was a one-off situation? We've had numerous posts from people who've had bfs saying they wouldn't do it again but then continuing to be violent. I want to know if there's anyone who's actually had the opposite experience.

    So girls, have any of you had boyfriends who acted violent in an argument, but really did never do it again?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hermajesty)
    I'm sorry, I haven't read quite the whole of this thread as it has gotten very long, but I'd like to ask a question, without being on one side or the other.

    Have any girls had a boyfriend who used violence on them, and found it really was a one-off situation? We've had numerous posts from people who've had bfs saying they wouldn't do it again but then continuing to be violent. I want to know if there's anyone who's actually had the opposite experience.

    So girls, have any of you had boyfriends who acted violent in an argument, but really did never do it again?
    Don't you mean not done it again since the first hit? How can you be sure that they would never hit again? It's like a waiting game. They turn violent once and then you are constantly wondering when he will lash out again. It's not a way for anyone to live their life.

    Lou
    xxx
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=Anonymous]
    I have decided to wait for him, but I have telephoned a mate and arranged to stay there this weekend, if necessary. Problem is, I live with my boyfriend, so he has to come back and it could be very uncomfortable.
    QUOTE]
    so, leaving the house is bad. if you leave the house, he'll see it as you avoiding him. perhaps he just went out to clear his head? then he'll come back and find you gone. if hes never acted like that before, chances are he might not do it again, chances are he might-
    does he have any brothers at all?
    if a male has brothers, they're more likely to lash out when they get angry. its just habit, i guess.
    my ex hit me once, and only once and even then it was because i hit him first. he'd never acted that way before either,...until we were engaged. then he used to threaten me and even attacked me with a knife.
    now, there is of course the chance he might be a girl-beater, in which case, get out now. HOWEVER, it might not surface until later, or it might just have been a fluke occaision.
    ...
    sorry if this doesnt make much sense!
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    You are in a bar and you are punched by someone in the nose causing your nose to bleed. You don't know whether they are going to lash out again. Do you hit back or do you take the risk of being hit again? Personally, I would not care if it was a man or a woman and treat the situation in the same way; I would hit either one of them back. The lack of a penis, and the stereotypical idea of a woman being 'dainty' or 'fair' is nullified by the physical abuse and I feel that if a woman hits out I should be able to strike back in defence irregardless of how strong or weak she is, the person ran the risk by resorting to physical violence. No-one should have to suffer physical torment without being able to reciprocate in some way. If you are cool enough to restrain yourself and not hit back, then I think it should be looked down as irreprehensible as though a man hit a woman. Otherwise stereotypical images lead to injustices.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Spikerocker)
    You are in a bar and you are punched by someone in the nose causing your nose to bleed. You don't know whether they are going to lash out again. Do you hit back or do you take the risk of being hit again? Personally, I would not care if it was a man or a woman and treat the situation in the same way; I would hit either one of them back. The lack of a penis, and the stereotypical idea of a woman being 'dainty' or 'fair' is nullified by the physical abuse and I feel that if a woman hits out I should be able to strike back in defence irregardless of how strong or weak she is, the person ran the risk by resorting to physical violence. No-one should have to suffer physical torment without being able to reciprocate in some way. If you are cool enough to restrain yourself and not hit back, then I think it should be looked down as irreprehensible as though a man hit a woman. Otherwise stereotypical images lead to injustices.
    As in this thread. I was quite shocked by the lack of empathy shown towards the thread starter.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hermajesty)
    I'm sorry, I haven't read quite the whole of this thread as it has gotten very long, but I'd like to ask a question, without being on one side or the other.

    Have any girls had a boyfriend who used violence on them, and found it really was a one-off situation? We've had numerous posts from people who've had bfs saying they wouldn't do it again but then continuing to be violent. I want to know if there's anyone who's actually had the opposite experience.

    So girls, have any of you had boyfriends who acted violent in an argument, but really did never do it again?
    My father was violent. He was also an alcoholic. The alcoholism was dealt with and he is no longer violent. I have a v. good (male) friend who was prone to violent outbursts. This was a result of a mental illness and when that was dealt with the violence ceased. Some people are prone to dissociative episodes. These can also be dealt with. It is vital, however, (Imho) that the person acknowledges they have a problem before they can deal with its causes.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 9, 2006
Poll
Do you like exams?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.