Woman Beaters=Cowards

Off Topic
161

[quote]djrobins wrote:
SWR,

Do you have any comments pertaining to “Chivalry” and “Gentleman” behavior in todays environment?[/quote]

I think all people, men and women alike, should treat eachother with respect and be courteous with eachother.

I think the word “gentleman” and “chivalry” suggests the men should be expected to be more respectful in general than a woman should, and I don’t like using those terms.

I see many different people in many different cities and towns with my job, and it’s easy to spot who is a disrespectful, selfish ass and who is a decent person, regardless of their sex. It’s also easy to spot good and bad behavior on the road, with as many hours I spend driving.

And having a bad day is no excuse to be a douche to other people. I’ve been in plenty of bad moods and don’t take it out on other people, and have felt much better after interacting with decent, polite people when I’m in a bad mood. I expect the same from others.

162

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
Westclock wrote:
SWR wrote:
Westclock wrote:
The “defending yourself” is a moot point, just restrain her if she does anything crazy like pulling a knife or something…

Men should never need to assert their dominance physically, it should NEVER be questioned.
Only weaker/small guys hit girls, because they have to actually prove to them that they are stronger.

Restraining someone is physically asserting your dominance…

But not purely for the sake of doing so. Its a purely defensive action. Your restraining her because shes TRYING to hurt you, not because you want to assert yourself as stronger.

Any court, no matter how conservative, would call that “reasonable force” as applied to the laws of self-defense.

Yes, because hitting a woman who is trying to stab you is asserting your physical dominance.
However, if you restrain her, it’s not.

R-E-T-A-R-D-E-D.
[/quote]

What ? Seriously ?

Your completely looking at it backwards. A child can grasp this concept.

Asserting your physical dominance just to intimidate is completely different IN PURPOSE AND INTENT, than restraining her so she doesn’t stab you.

Sure either way your still asserting yourself as superior physically, but in the first instance your doing it merely to bully her into being quiet, you have no reason to do so besides to scare her and show her that you can.

In the second instance your doing it out of necessity so you don’t get STABBED, just because at the same time you coincidentally prove yourself stronger doesn’t change the fact that “asserting yourself physically” is only a byproduct of NOT WANTING TO BE STABBED.

They both assert physical dominance, but in the second instance it is not your actual INTENTION to do so, you don’t want metal to be inside you, so your holding her knife wielding arm away from your insides.

Just because your technically asserting your physical dominance at the same time doesn’t change anything.

Asserting physical dominance purely for the sake of doing so is what I was speaking about.

Either your just trying to be funny or you are mentally handicapped in someway, in which case I apologize for talking down to you in this manner.

163

A quick google search didn’t bring up the names and situation I wanted, so forgive me if this is vague.

I’ll generalize that most people (acknowledging that most people are physically and mentally weak) would ignore a situation where a man was beating a woman, whether or not she was attempting to defend herself.

The situation I looked for? A woman gets raped and murdered while several her apartment complex watched, afraid to do something, anything, about it.

It doesn’t matter whether you say you would, or wouldn’t. It doesn’t matter what you’ve already been through, or what kind of crazy asshole you’ve already dated.

If that woman in her apartment complex being raped, then murdered, was YOUR mother, wife, sister, daughter, girlfriend… what would you have wanted a stranger to do?

I see no need for interwebz name and character assassination, so I shan’t comment on anyone elses individual posts. I’m just ashamed at the amount of "Hell no!"s this thread has produced, and consider myself lucky to be surrounded by men who would, one way or another, attempt to stop something like that from happening. Even risking their own physical detriment.

164

[quote]CBear84 wrote:
A quick google search didn’t bring up the names and situation I wanted, so forgive me if this is vague.

I’ll generalize that most people (acknowledging that most people are physically and mentally weak) would ignore a situation where a man was beating a woman, whether or not she was attempting to defend herself.

The situation I looked for? A woman gets raped and murdered while several her apartment complex watched, afraid to do something, anything, about it.

It doesn’t matter whether you say you would, or wouldn’t. It doesn’t matter what you’ve already been through, or what kind of crazy asshole you’ve already dated.

If that woman in her apartment complex being raped, then murdered, was YOUR mother, wife, sister, daughter, girlfriend… what would you have wanted a stranger to do?

I see no need for interwebz name and character assassination, so I shan’t comment on anyone elses individual posts. I’m just ashamed at the amount of "Hell no!"s this thread has produced, and consider myself lucky to be surrounded by men who would, one way or another, attempt to stop something like that from happening. Even risking their own physical detriment.

[/quote]

That is actually a commonly used case in psychology to demonstrate the problem with groups of people.

Ive read that exact case.

Its not that NO ONE wanted to help, its just that everyone assumed SOMEONE ELSE WOULD. No one even CALLED THE POLICE, they all assumed someone else had already.

Her attacker actually LEFT, she screamed for help, everyone just watched from their windows, thinking someone else would help her, or that the police were on their way… he comes back and finishes killing her.

Its a weird collective action concept that kinda fucks up humans under specific situations.

Ideally if you were attacked you WOULD NOT want to be in a huge crowd.

Ironically enough, everyone assumes everyone else will act, and no one does anything, its a strange concept that applies to humans in groups.

If it were you and your attacker, and just some other random guy, he feels DIRECT responsibility to act, and would act immediately.

If there is too many people it paralyzes the placement of responsibility, and the group cant act quickly, they cant DECIDE who is most qualified to act, to help, to defend, they cant decide whether or not it should be them.

They just sit there paralyzed trying to account for the situation and their role in it, its confusion, complete confusion, not fear that paralyzes them.

Usually members of the group will act, but it takes MUCH longer than you would think, minutes instead of seconds for them to reason through the situation, realize no one else is helping, and act.

Fire fighters, police officers, Soldiers, etc. Usually burst from the crowd almost IMMEDIATELY regardless of the situation.

Even though a firefighter isn’t trained to take on an attacker, he is still TRAINED, and CONDITIONED mentally to ACT immediately in an emergency.

Therefor his brain immediately tells him to act, they are conditioned to immediately equate an emergency as their RESPONSIBILITY because of their training, regardless of the emergency type, and are therefor not paralyzed trying to decide if they are responsible for helping.

Every wonder why so many veterans and off-duty cops/firefighters/EMTs/etc always seem to be pulling people out of burning wrecks and stopping robberies and rapes and shit, its not that others nearby couldn’t physically perform the act, its that they were paralyzed trying to reason out whats going on.

165

cbear i do know of the incedent your’re talkiing about kitty genovese back in the 60’s and her name is
in pysch books as well. the guy who mudered her is still in prison and hasnt show any remorse for the crime
after 44 yrs.

166

[quote]CBear84 wrote:
A quick google search didn’t bring up the names and situation I wanted, so forgive me if this is vague.

I’ll generalize that most people (acknowledging that most people are physically and mentally weak) would ignore a situation where a man was beating a woman, whether or not she was attempting to defend herself.

The situation I looked for? A woman gets raped and murdered while several her apartment complex watched, afraid to do something, anything, about it.

It doesn’t matter whether you say you would, or wouldn’t. It doesn’t matter what you’ve already been through, or what kind of crazy asshole you’ve already dated.

If that woman in her apartment complex being raped, then murdered, was YOUR mother, wife, sister, daughter, girlfriend… what would you have wanted a stranger to do?

I see no need for interwebz name and character assassination, so I shan’t comment on anyone elses individual posts. I’m just ashamed at the amount of "Hell no!"s this thread has produced, and consider myself lucky to be surrounded by men who would, one way or another, attempt to stop something like that from happening. Even risking their own physical detriment.

[/quote]

You are thinking of the Kitty Genovese murder. It is included in most intro psychology textbooks and some crim law texts. However, the story is bullshit. Kitty Genovese was raped and stabbed in Kew gardens, but the events surrounding it were extrapolated by the press. For a good understanding read this paper. It is full of the usual empty sentences that perpetuate psychology and it drags on at the beginning but it does eventually get to the lack of facts for the common account of the murder:

http://www.psych.lancs.ac.uk/people/uploads/MarkLevine20070604T095238.pdf

For anybody too lazy to read the paper, here is the condensed version:
Woman is attacked once in Kew gardens and the attack is seen (vaguely) by a few witnesses. One man yells at the attacker and the guy runs off. The woman staggers around the corner toward her apartment and is attacked a second time on the stairwell. Here she was raped and stabbed. None of the witnesses from their apartments could have seen this second attack.

Also, there were reports that police were called by several witnesses and the police did arrive whilst the victim was still alive. At the trial of the murderer only five or six witnesses were called and none of them testified to seeing anything that could be considered a murder.

Finally, the police considered the area a bad neighbourhood due to a bar down the road. I’ll go out on a limb here and say that people in the neighbourhood and the police would be familiar with rowdy late night behaviour and would ignore most of it.

It is sad that false stories like this keep circulating as truth.

167

This discussion has fallen into one of the usual would you hit woman/wouldn’t you hit woman tangents. Bugger that. Here’s something more interesting:

Think of women like Rhianna who go back to abusive boy friends. Its their decision, should we be telling them that they don’t know whats in their own best interests or should we accept that they want to hang around those sort of guys and its not our business to interfere?

Discuss.

168

[quote]CBear84 wrote:
It doesn’t matter whether you say you would, or wouldn’t. It doesn’t matter what you’ve already been through, or what kind of crazy asshole you’ve already dated.

If that woman in her apartment complex being raped, then murdered, was YOUR mother, wife, sister, daughter, girlfriend… what would you have wanted a stranger to do?

I see no need for interwebz name and character assassination, so I shan’t comment on anyone elses individual posts. I’m just ashamed at the amount of "Hell no!"s this thread has produced, and consider myself lucky to be surrounded by men who would, one way or another, attempt to stop something like that from happening. Even risking their own physical detriment.

Bunyip wrote:
It is sad that false stories like this keep circulating as truth.

[/quote]
My apologies that I picked a bad example to make my point.

Rather than focusing on the example, I’ll condense the idea I was trying to get across in my first post.

If it were a woman I cared about being beaten, I would hope that someone would try to interfere. In some way.

169

[quote]CBear84 wrote:
CBear84 wrote:
It doesn’t matter whether you say you would, or wouldn’t. It doesn’t matter what you’ve already been through, or what kind of crazy asshole you’ve already dated.

If that woman in her apartment complex being raped, then murdered, was YOUR mother, wife, sister, daughter, girlfriend… what would you have wanted a stranger to do?

I see no need for interwebz name and character assassination, so I shan’t comment on anyone elses individual posts. I’m just ashamed at the amount of "Hell no!"s this thread has produced, and consider myself lucky to be surrounded by men who would, one way or another, attempt to stop something like that from happening. Even risking their own physical detriment.

Bunyip wrote:
It is sad that false stories like this keep circulating as truth.

My apologies that I picked a bad example to make my point.

Rather than focusing on the example, I’ll condense the idea I was trying to get across in my first post.

If it were a woman I cared about being beaten, I would hope that someone would try to interfere. In some way.

[/quote]

Its not your fault. Everyone buys that bad example, as I did when I first heard it. Its the same as the rule of thumb to beat woman myth. Everyone believes it and thinks of it as fact. I was just trying to point out the falsity that everyone now believes.

If it were a woman I cared about being beaten then I hope someone would help. However most male on female violence isn’t random attacks but is between two people in a relationship. If some random attacked my sister I’d kill him. But what if she keeps going back to abusive boyfriends. Not only would I spend my time beating them senseless but she would hate me for it. And I would essentially be running her life. I would be asserting my morals over her and saying that I knew what was in her best interests.
But how do I know whats in her best interests? How do I know I am right and she is wrong? I don’t have any greater knowledge or divine wisdom. I love my sister and I could use that as justification for not wanting to see her hurt.
Yet often women love the men who beat them. And if my sister loved her abuser does not that make her position as strong as mine?

So how can I justify my position other than by tyranny and moral arrogance?

However, when it comes to my family I am the eldest and very over protective and would certainly not stop to think all this through. Thankfully though my sister may hate me for beating her abusive senseless she would not take it any further.

But what about a random woman on the street? Sure she is somebody’s daughter. But what if I intervene and she calls the cops on me for beating up her abuser, whom she loves? Why risk it?

I am reminded of a story a friend told where he tried one day to intervene in such a situation and the woman attacked him for trying to defend her against her abuser.

To my way of thinking, when it comes to relationship violence (the majority of male on female violence) then I believe in two things:

  • If she is with him let her reap what she has sown.
  • Only help people who want to be helped.

Its a sad state of mind for someone who raised old fashioned and used to believe in white knight principles. But I believe very strongly in liberty and letting people make their own choices and deal with their consequences.

170

[quote]Bunyip wrote:
CBear84 wrote:
CBear84 wrote:
It doesn’t matter whether you say you would, or wouldn’t. It doesn’t matter what you’ve already been through, or what kind of crazy asshole you’ve already dated.

If that woman in her apartment complex being raped, then murdered, was YOUR mother, wife, sister, daughter, girlfriend… what would you have wanted a stranger to do?

I see no need for interwebz name and character assassination, so I shan’t comment on anyone elses individual posts. I’m just ashamed at the amount of "Hell no!"s this thread has produced, and consider myself lucky to be surrounded by men who would, one way or another, attempt to stop something like that from happening. Even risking their own physical detriment.

Bunyip wrote:
It is sad that false stories like this keep circulating as truth.

My apologies that I picked a bad example to make my point.

Rather than focusing on the example, I’ll condense the idea I was trying to get across in my first post.

If it were a woman I cared about being beaten, I would hope that someone would try to interfere. In some way.

Its not your fault. Everyone buys that bad example, as I did when I first heard it. Its the same as the rule of thumb to beat woman myth. Everyone believes it and thinks of it as fact. I was just trying to point out the falsity that everyone now believes.

If it were a woman I cared about being beaten then I hope someone would help. However most male on female violence isn’t random attacks but is between two people in a relationship. If some random attacked my sister I’d kill him. But what if she keeps going back to abusive boyfriends. Not only would I spend my time beating them senseless but she would hate me for it. And I would essentially be running her life. I would be asserting my morals over her and saying that I knew what was in her best interests.
But how do I know whats in her best interests? How do I know I am right and she is wrong? I don’t have any greater knowledge or divine wisdom. I love my sister and I could use that as justification for not wanting to see her hurt.
Yet often women love the men who beat them. And if my sister loved her abuser does not that make her position as strong as mine?

So how can I justify my position other than by tyranny and moral arrogance?

However, when it comes to my family I am the eldest and very over protective and would certainly not stop to think all this through. Thankfully though my sister may hate me for beating her abusive senseless she would not take it any further.

But what about a random woman on the street? Sure she is somebody’s daughter. But what if I intervene and she calls the cops on me for beating up her abuser, whom she loves? Why risk it?

I am reminded of a story a friend told where he tried one day to intervene in such a situation and the woman attacked him for trying to defend her against her abuser.

To my way of thinking, when it comes to relationship violence (the majority of male on female violence) then I believe in two things:

  • If she is with him let her reap what she has sown.
  • Only help people who want to be helped.

Its a sad state of mind for someone who raised old fashioned and used to believe in white knight principles. But I believe very strongly in liberty and letting people make their own choices and deal with their consequences.[/quote]

Thats why you wait for her to call for help or scream.

If someone calls for help your legal liability for assault goes right out the window.

Even if shes being beaten, but doesn’t scream or call for help, you beat her boyfriend and she/he then tries to press charges on you as you described, your still LEGALLY covered by “defense of another”, whether SHE WANTED your defense is irrelevant.

Your not legally liable.

171

[quote]Westclock wrote:
Bunyip wrote:
CBear84 wrote:
CBear84 wrote:
It doesn’t matter whether you say you would, or wouldn’t. It doesn’t matter what you’ve already been through, or what kind of crazy asshole you’ve already dated.

If that woman in her apartment complex being raped, then murdered, was YOUR mother, wife, sister, daughter, girlfriend… what would you have wanted a stranger to do?

I see no need for interwebz name and character assassination, so I shan’t comment on anyone elses individual posts. I’m just ashamed at the amount of "Hell no!"s this thread has produced, and consider myself lucky to be surrounded by men who would, one way or another, attempt to stop something like that from happening. Even risking their own physical detriment.

Bunyip wrote:
It is sad that false stories like this keep circulating as truth.

My apologies that I picked a bad example to make my point.

Rather than focusing on the example, I’ll condense the idea I was trying to get across in my first post.

If it were a woman I cared about being beaten, I would hope that someone would try to interfere. In some way.

Its not your fault. Everyone buys that bad example, as I did when I first heard it. Its the same as the rule of thumb to beat woman myth. Everyone believes it and thinks of it as fact. I was just trying to point out the falsity that everyone now believes.

If it were a woman I cared about being beaten then I hope someone would help. However most male on female violence isn’t random attacks but is between two people in a relationship. If some random attacked my sister I’d kill him. But what if she keeps going back to abusive boyfriends. Not only would I spend my time beating them senseless but she would hate me for it. And I would essentially be running her life. I would be asserting my morals over her and saying that I knew what was in her best interests.
But how do I know whats in her best interests? How do I know I am right and she is wrong? I don’t have any greater knowledge or divine wisdom. I love my sister and I could use that as justification for not wanting to see her hurt.
Yet often women love the men who beat them. And if my sister loved her abuser does not that make her position as strong as mine?

So how can I justify my position other than by tyranny and moral arrogance?

However, when it comes to my family I am the eldest and very over protective and would certainly not stop to think all this through. Thankfully though my sister may hate me for beating her abusive senseless she would not take it any further.

But what about a random woman on the street? Sure she is somebody’s daughter. But what if I intervene and she calls the cops on me for beating up her abuser, whom she loves? Why risk it?

I am reminded of a story a friend told where he tried one day to intervene in such a situation and the woman attacked him for trying to defend her against her abuser.

To my way of thinking, when it comes to relationship violence (the majority of male on female violence) then I believe in two things:

  • If she is with him let her reap what she has sown.
  • Only help people who want to be helped.

Its a sad state of mind for someone who raised old fashioned and used to believe in white knight principles. But I believe very strongly in liberty and letting people make their own choices and deal with their consequences.

Thats why you wait for her to call for help or scream.

If someone calls for help your legal liability for assault goes right out the window.

Even if shes being beaten, but doesn’t scream or call for help, you beat her boyfriend and she/he then tries to press charges on you as you described, your still LEGALLY covered by “defense of another”, whether SHE WANTED your defense is irrelevant.

Your not legally liable.
[/quote]

In theory yes, in practice, yeah right.

Law comes down to evidence or lack thereof. Legal theory sounds grand on paper but you try proving that you were defending a woman from being abused when she is saying the exact opposite and her abuser is backing her up. Real life isn’t law and order. Innocent people are found guilty. Run the risk at your own peril.

On an unrelated note:

“According to Hilbert and Hilbert (1984) and Strube (1998), an estimated half of women who have been involved in an abusive relationship will at some point return to the batterer (as cited in Martin, Berenson, Griffing, Sage, Madry, Bingham, & Primm, 2000).”

Taken from http://www.uwstout.edu/rs/2007/Abusive%20Relationships.pdf

Which, as I am trying to get across, means women make a conscious return to be with that person in the first place. Who are you to interfere with her choices?

The paper itself I linked to is shit and not worth reading. All that matters is that number fifty percent. If you do bother reading the link, here’s a few things for consideration:

  • Research done by Schutte et al (1987) is baised because sample was taken from women’s shelter hence the results are skewed in favour of financial reasons as a motive for returning to abusers. It is probable that only poorer women would need shelters anyway. Financially secure women would be elsewhere (expensive hotel if I were one) and thus are probably not adequately represented in the study.

-Griffing et al (2002) - From the sounds of it the same criteria apply as above.

-The paper itself is bullshit. All it does is ask a random sample of college women how well they believe the current theories as to why women return to their abusers. It does not actually tackle the truth or falsity of those theories.

In short, the paper is a waste of time and the only reason I link to its the best source for proving my point I could find off hand.

172

Damn, I was wondering when one of these threads was going to pop up. It had been a while since the last one.

173

Idk if this was said already cuz I didn’t read the whole thread but:
I fucking HATE the stupid double standard that a man is not allowed to hit a woman under no circumstances. Following the “logic” of this double standard, then no guy can beat up another guy because the other guy is weaker. The assumption here is based on the fact that people say that women can’t be hit because they’re weaker than men.
If someone would care enough to give me another LOGICAL “reason” for why a man can’t hit a woman, please do so. I am ready to change my view on this whole thing, but I can’t seem to find a good reason.

That being said, I don’t like when shit like this happens. And I’m not talking about only man beating up a woman, but beating someone up in general. Cuz most of the time there is no legit reason to do so.

174

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
LiftingOne25 wrote:

You do make a good point, there are cases of men being abused by women as well, but its well below 2-5%. That’s the problem, if this was a question, irregardless of gender doing the hitting, it would be considered an assault in most cases.

That’s how twisted the system is, and in fact, the SYSTEM does not favor the woman over the man by any means. Women try to leave more then once from their perpetrators, easier said then done. We are talking about life and death,… survival, the worst case scenario. Defending oneself in an isolated incident of assault is much different then systematic abuse.

Haha, actually men are guessed to be abused more than women, but since men do not report a large majority of the incidents they can not say what the numbers would be. The numbers are much higher than 2-5%, maybe put some zero’s on that number. Men just do not report it, because either we don’t have a vagina, or we do have a vagina and do not want people to know we are reporting a woman for hitting us.

I actually do not give a fuck, I’ll put my boot up a woman’s ass if she gets out of line. I do not deal with that shit, I have dealt with hot headed women, I still won’t let someone treat me like that. Learned it from my mammy, who ironically hit me for no reason as well.

I’ve dealt with everything from sitting in the living room watching television and had shit thrown at me because of something I “supposedly” said, being blind sided by foreign objects. I’ve had woman be pissed off at me for no apparent reason and as Professor X said, come at me with a knife in the middle of the night while getting a drink. But, shit life ain’t fair. So a woman can hit a man and a man cannot hit a man. Deal with it otherwise, do not complain about the rules, learn to play by the rules or learn to play around them. Kick a woman in the ass (literally) and try see how she proves you abused her. Won’t happen.

Just remember life isn’t fair, so stop saying it should be. Women won’t be equal to men, they won’t be paid as much, they will never be stronger. They will always be viewed as the weaker sex, that is dainty as the flower and shouldn’t be abused. Doesn’t matter if that flower wields a kitchen knife or an aluminum bat.

Stop bitchin’ about the rules and play the game.[/quote]

Ironic

175

I disagree. Women beaters are brave. I beat women, and I am like he-man.

176

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
I disagree. Women beaters are brave. I beat women, and I am like he-man.[/quote]

Instead of posting, you could have spent your time watching porn. Time management, sir.

177

why do you guys jump an wiggle to Clip11 when you know he starts all these types of crappy threads?

Really, do none of you fellas know any normal women? Do you really need to jump on the “it’s okay to hit women” bandwagon"?

come on guys… I can see all the newbie 2009 guys jumping on saying how they would punch a bitch… what a bunch of idiots.

but then all of you responding to this thread look a little silly if you know anything about the pedophiliac misogynistic Clip.

178

I like his threads. I can’t tell whether he’s a dumb young kid who doesn’t know any better or a evil genius who loves controversy. Either way, I like his threads.

I don’t think anyone is saying they would enjoy hitting a woman. But when they get out of line and try to physically harm you with a weapon or start aiming for your face or genitals, words won’t be enough to stop her.

Just grab her and shake her. Or leave the room.

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

why do you guys jump an wiggle to Clip11 when you know he starts all these types of crappy threads?

Really, do none of you fellas know any normal women? Do you really need to jump on the “it’s okay to hit women” bandwagon"?

come on guys… I can see all the newbie 2009 guys jumping on saying how they would punch a bitch… what a bunch of idiots.

but then all of you responding to this thread look a little silly if you know anything about the pedophiliac misogynistic Clip.

[/quote]

179

well how sad you “LIKE HIS THREAD” about beating women

what a fucked up world. Guess we deserve it.

[quote]WolBarret wrote:
I like his threads. I can’t tell whether he’s a dumb young kid who doesn’t know any better or a evil genius who loves controversy. Either way, I like his threads.

I don’t think anyone is saying they would enjoy hitting a woman. But when they get out of line and try to physically harm you with a weapon or start aiming for your face or genitals, words won’t be enough to stop her.

Just grab her and shake her. Or leave the room.

OctoberGirl wrote:

why do you guys jump an wiggle to Clip11 when you know he starts all these types of crappy threads?

Really, do none of you fellas know any normal women? Do you really need to jump on the “it’s okay to hit women” bandwagon"?

come on guys… I can see all the newbie 2009 guys jumping on saying how they would punch a bitch… what a bunch of idiots.

but then all of you responding to this thread look a little silly if you know anything about the pedophiliac misogynistic Clip.
[/quote]

180

I’m not saying I agree with the concept of women being beat or whatever Pedophile threads he comes up with. I like his threads because it reflects what he’s about. He’s either a young kid who knows nothing or a troll who likes starting controversial threads.

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

well how sad you “LIKE HIS THREAD” about beating women

what a fucked up world. Guess we deserve it.

WolBarret wrote:
I like his threads. I can’t tell whether he’s a dumb young kid who doesn’t know any better or a evil genius who loves controversy. Either way, I like his threads.

I don’t think anyone is saying they would enjoy hitting a woman. But when they get out of line and try to physically harm you with a weapon or start aiming for your face or genitals, words won’t be enough to stop her.

Just grab her and shake her. Or leave the room.

OctoberGirl wrote:

why do you guys jump an wiggle to Clip11 when you know he starts all these types of crappy threads?

Really, do none of you fellas know any normal women? Do you really need to jump on the “it’s okay to hit women” bandwagon"?

come on guys… I can see all the newbie 2009 guys jumping on saying how they would punch a bitch… what a bunch of idiots.

but then all of you responding to this thread look a little silly if you know anything about the pedophiliac misogynistic Clip.

[/quote]