24 Sep 07
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexMaybe it was just the way I was raised, hitting a woman is never acceptable. If a woman were to hit me, with say her fists, then restraining her might be an option, striking her ..absolutely not.
This can be quite a controversial issue but I feel that in the modern day, women are not as weak and reclusive as they once were and sometimes flaunt the archaic unspoken rule of not hitting women.
For example, in a case I heard about, a gang of kids attacked some guy in the street, he fended off the male members but was too chivalrous to hit th ...[text shortened]... o receive no retalliation because men 'cant' hit women then the old rules should be rethought.
24 Sep 07
Originally posted by AThousandYoungwell for starters, if this was a joke it doesn't excuse him in the least.
I think you're being overly dramatic. This will be quickly forgotten, and even if not, it can easily be passed off as a joke.
and i am not being that dramatic(well maybe a little). pawn queen searched what other threads he was making and found this gem. if she hadn't did that we would all have debated hitting women and be don in 10 posts. now is it unreasonable to think some other people would search for his threads every time he makes one?
24 Sep 07
Originally posted by SMSBear716you are thinking of course about the delicate shtick figure models. in that case restraining is an option. but with the butch types and that coupled with the man being a shtick figure himself(like me) a lucky punch in the jaw and then run like hell is the only option.(or just run)
Maybe it was just the way I was raised, hitting a woman is never acceptable. If a woman were to hit me, with say her fists, then restraining her might be an option, striking her ..absolutely not.
or maybe the woman has a knife or a tazer. then restraining her is complicated. what separates gentlemen from animals is where you stop with the punches. if you throw a woman to the ground and you keep punching her then you are an animal(this applies to a male combatant as well)
24 Sep 07
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexIt makes me laugh when forum users try to gauge the validity of someone's post from their RHP rating.
Some good points there, others not so good. Perhaps we should look at your credentials, I dont know much about you but your chess record is hardly one that screams out that you are a high quality thinker.
Anyway, less of the debate of my rodeo topic here, lets try and stick to this matter.
24 Sep 07
Originally posted by SMSBear716what if there were 5 of them, and they weren't dainty types either? What if she had a knife?
Maybe it was just the way I was raised, hitting a woman is never acceptable. If a woman were to hit me, with say her fists, then restraining her might be an option, striking her ..absolutely not.
I don't agree with hitting anyone unless I have to. It's more likely I'd have to hit a guy in order to control him (rather than bring him under control without hitting him), but if I needed to to defend myself forcefully from an aggressor then frankly - they started it, regardless of gender.
24 Sep 07
1 edit
Originally posted by ZahlanziCan I make it clear that I did NOT 'search' through any of his postings. I had been in the General forum anyway before I came to this one.
well for starters, if this was a joke it doesn't excuse him in the least.
and i am not being that dramatic(well maybe a little). pawn queen searched what other threads he was making and found this gem. if she hadn't did that we would all have debated hitting women and be don in 10 posts. now is it unreasonable to think some other people would search for his threads every time he makes one?
I wouldn't think to look through the threads and postings of anyone before I make my posts, this was a coincidence. 🙂
The subject I raised is now closed, thankyou.
24 Sep 07
Originally posted by Pawn QweenYes, we have come to a dignified conclusion over that issue. It would be nice if all debates could be solved in such a way.
Can I make it clear that I did NOT 'search' through any of his postings. I had been in the General forum anyway before I came to this one.
I wouldn't think to look through the threads and postings of anyone before I make my posts, this was a coincidence. 🙂
The subject I raised is now closed, thankyou.
24 Sep 07
Originally posted by Pawn Qweenwell since you did raised the rodeo thread issue, it does has a lot to do with the issue at hand. gives you a better picture of what he thinks of women in general and gives you pointers on how to argue your point of view. of course searching through other peoples previous posts is a bit much and i am too lazy to do that. but at some times it can be interesting research(if you have the time)
Can I make it clear that I did NOT 'search' through any of his postings. I had been in the General forum anyway before I came to this one.
I wouldn't think to look through the threads and postings of anyone before I make my posts, this was a coincidence. 🙂
The subject I raised is now closed, thankyou.
24 Sep 07
Originally posted by Tyrannosauruschexdo you even regret that colossal blunder or are you just happy pawnqueen decided to slip it under the rug?
Yes, we have come to a dignified conclusion over that issue. It would be nice if all debates could be solved in such a way.
24 Sep 07
Originally posted by ZahlanziI dont say anything without thinking of the implications beforehand, so no I dont regret that a comedy post has been taken to be an actual representation of what I think.
do you even regret that colossal blunder or are you just happy pawnqueen decided to slip it under the rug?
While we are on the subject of colossal blunders, take a look at move 27 Game 3426253
24 Sep 07
1 edit
Originally posted by SMSBear716And if she was a 6 foot 5 kickboxer?
Maybe it was just the way I was raised, hitting a woman is never acceptable. If a woman were to hit me, with say her fists, then restraining her might be an option, striking her ..absolutely not.
Or how about Muhammed Ali's daughter, the boxer?
24 Sep 07
2 edits
Originally posted by ZahlanziIf he develops a pattern of such nastiness, that's one thing. A single post doesn't mean anything.
well for starters, if this was a joke it doesn't excuse him in the least.
and i am not being that dramatic(well maybe a little). pawn queen searched what other threads he was making and found this gem. if she hadn't did that we would all have debated hitting women and be don in 10 posts. now is it unreasonable to think some other people would search for his threads every time he makes one?