NationStates Jolt Archive

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running. I have been advised to apologize, but I think when a person looks pretty dang out of it and is trying to mind their own business you should not go screwing around with people like that. So I go to NSG to see if my ‘situation’ is enough not constitute an apology to the guy or should I apologize out of the good of my heart. So what should I do.

Do what you feel like I guess. I mean if you don't feel sorry , then don't apologize. And how does someone bleed from their arm with a punch? Did he fall down or something?

When the person is wearing a braclet on their arm.

Did he fall down or something?To answer that he did not, though if I really wanted to I could have easily done it and had the person land on the solid tile floor, which would have been a bad thing to do.

If it was a girl, would you have hit her?

There was no need to hit him like that. You simply could have told him you were not gay and left it at that.

If you are in the States, you might want to apologize. Many schools have zero tolerance policies for violence.

if a girl slapped a guy for feeling her ass would she apologies i think not.

if you fell bad say i'm sorry if you don't then tell them to Harden up.

To answer that he did not, though if I really wanted to I could have easily done it and had the person land on the solid tile floor, which would have been a bad thing to do.

Sorry, a bracelet on the arm didn't even cross my mind... must've been studded or something? .. and .. I'm asking questions to things that don't matter. lol
IMO a punch in the arm ..man to man is no big deal.. but it obviously was to the folks you were hanging out with. If it's going to come down to him pressing charges or something if you do not apologize, then you probably should.

if a girl slapped a guy for feeling her ass would she apologies i think not.

if you fell bad say i'm sorry if you don't then tell them to Harden up.

That's what I was thinking... I mean wouldn't grabbing someone on the ass while they were sleeping qualify as sexual harasment?

if a girl slapped a guy for feeling her ass would she apologies i think not.

if you fell bad say i'm sorry if you don't then tell them to Harden up.

I agree tell him that you didn't appreciate being touched like that but you didn't intend to hurt him so bad.

if a girl slapped a guy for feeling her ass would she apologies i think not.

if you fell bad say i'm sorry if you don't then tell them to Harden up.

Whatever.

I question how you can hit some one in the arm such that they can bleed.

EDIT: Even with a bracelet.

Sorry, a bracelet on the arm didn't even cross my mind... must've been studded or something? .. and .. I'm asking questions to things that don't matter. lol
IMO a punch in the arm ..man to man is no big deal.. but it obviously was to the folks you were hanging out with. If it's going to come down to him pressing charges or something if you do not apologize, then you probably should.

He couldn’t press charges, Scandinavians was defending himself from sexual assault and a punch in the arm is within the bounds of reasonable force.

I’m sure even schools in the US have a policy against sexual assault

if a girl slapped a guy for feeling her ass would she apologies i think not.

if you fell bad say i'm sorry if you don't then tell them to Harden up.

Indeed, if someone inappropriately touches you they're practically asking for it. I would think your average homosexual would agree with you. I can't speak for the homosexual community, but I would think even they would have to side with you on this. After all, "folks is just folks" and most people are highly offended when unsolicited touching in a private area takes place.

I question how you can hit some one in the arm such that they can bleed.

EDIT: Even with a bracelet.When a few of braclet has flint on it, at least I think.

Sorry, a bracelet on the arm didn't even cross my mind... must've been studded or something? .. and .. I'm asking questions to things that don't matter. lol
IMO a punch in the arm ..man to man is no big deal.. but it obviously was to the folks you were hanging out with. If it's going to come down to him pressing charges or something if you do not apologize, then you probably should.No, the people who I was hanging out with proably would have beat the guy up if they had seen him do that, the ones who want me to apologize are a few others I know.

Acutally, I could press charges against him far more then he could do so to me.

I question how you can hit some one in the arm such that they can bleed.

EDIT: Even with a bracelet.

because Scandinvans is one tough dude, trust me you dont wann f%#K with him.

He couldn’t press charges, Scandinavians was defending himself from sexual assault and a punch in the arm is within the bounds of reasonable force.

I’m sure even schools in the US have a policy against sexual assaultFirst statment even if I had knocked him with a hit a pressure point I would have circumstances on my side as I was physcoilgocially inept at the time, due to be exhausted, and also due to a possible sexual assualt chargwe.

With the last thing though how did you know I live in the US?;)

Yet, to serious US schools will always find a way, espcially at a fairly left college.

because Scandinvans is one tough dude, trust me you dont wann f%#K with him.You flatter me.:p

Yet, in to say I do box Vikings, Man Eating Hamsters, and Gaint Killer Monkeys.

You should just pretend that it did not happen.

With the last thing though how did you know I live in the US?;)
.

i was just responding to black forest statment-
If you are in the States, you might want to apologize. Many schools have zero tolerance policies for violence.

Oh, hell no, no apologies! It was sexual harrassment!

if a girl slapped a guy for feeling her ass would she apologies i think not.Exactly.

Although I doubt I'd "slap" him. Guys like that usually expect slaps. A punch would be less expected, plus it'd hurt more and be a more effective deterrant against any further grabbiness.

People who go around groping strangers have basically signed themselves up for at least one good blow. It would be different if you'd beat the shit out of him, but you didn't, you punched him once. If anything, he should be apologizing to you (not to mention to the gay community, since shit like this is one of the reasons straight folks tend not to like us.)

You have a right to not be sexually molested.

A slap is more humiliating tho lol the mere sound of it *CrAAcKK* .. and the sting.

You should just pretend that it did not happen.That is what beer and pills are for.;)

That is what beer and pills are for.;)
Besides, he did worse on you, than you did on him.

i was just responding to black forest statment-I am alright considering I know the campus cops and I know the loopholes in the policy enough for my school to not screw with me.

If it was a girl, would you have hit her?

There was no need to hit him like that. You simply could have told him you were not gay and left it at that.

If you are in the States, you might want to apologize. Many schools have zero tolerance policies for violence.
Why wouldn't you hit her? I mean if it was an unwanted touch, then it is sexual assault plain and simple. You should be able to defend yourself from it as necessary.

If anything, he should be apologizing to you (not to mention to the gay community, since shit like this is one of the reasons straight folks tend not to like us.)I concur with you there, though I am Catholic, I just believe that homosexual people are good people who just chose, or were born, to be homosexual so no problems as long as they remain happy couples, raise kids to take everything with a grain of salt, and do not touch others illegal no problem and in fact I would rather talk to a gay person then to some of the popular straight people at my Church, they is some uber Christains.

Besides, he did worse on you, than you did on him.Beer makes everything bad go away. *Throws beer bottles to everyone infinetly*

Why wouldn't you hit her? I mean if it was an unwanted touch, then it is sexual assault plain and simple. You should be able to defend yourself from it as necessary.

You wouldn't hit a woman because

A: you're more likely to seriously hurt her.

and
B: a man hitting a woman, under any circumstances, is easily associated with domestic abuse, which is something no real man ever wants to be associated with.

Fergi America;12297936']Oh, hell no, no apologies! It was sexual harrassment!

Exactly.

Although I doubt I'd "slap" him. Guys like that usually expect slaps. A punch would be less expected, plus it'd hurt more and be a more effective deterrant against any further grabbiness.A pretty femine guy tried to slap me after a joke about I made about drunks and I just basically grabbed his wrist and made the guy yield, though what I did would cause no more then a small headache worth of pain.

I don't think you should apologize, the guy sexually harassed you and you were within your boundaries to defend yourself. All you did was give him a hard punch in the arm, and that is the correct amount of force, so you did not use excessive force. If the guy tries to sue you for assault, then I would counter sue for sexual harassment.

People who go around groping strangers have basically signed themselves up for at least one good blow. It would be different if you'd beat the shit out of him, but you didn't, you punched him once. If anything, he should be apologizing to you (not to mention to the gay community, since shit like this is one of the reasons straight folks tend not to like us.)

You have a right to not be sexually molested.

there you have it the verdict from a homosexual, cyrian is exactly right, homophobia in men any way mostly comes from an unjustified fear of sexual assault, this guy is exacerbating the problem

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running. I have been advised to apologize, but I think when a person looks pretty dang out of it and is trying to mind their own business you should not go screwing around with people like that. So I go to NSG to see if my ‘situation’ is enough not constitute an apology to the guy or should I apologize out of the good of my heart. So what should I do.

Hey if you were a woman and a straight guy did that you'd have a right to hurt him, I believe the same goes for guys who are being sexually harassed by homosexuals, homophobia is out of the question. Everyone has natural rights including privacy and the right not to be molested or taken advantage of sexually by people. And judging from what I've read in NSG articles most gay people who just come up to you without getting to know you, that start doing stuff like that immediately plan on raping you afterward.

Everyone has a right to defend themselves and ovoid getting raped.

Hey if you were a woman and a straight guy did that you'd have a right to hurt him, I believe the same goes for guys who are being sexually harassed by homosexuals, homophobia is out of the question. Everyone has natural rights including privacy and the right not to be molested or taken advantage of sexually by people. And judging from what I've read in NSG articles most gay people who just come up to you without getting to know you, that start doing stuff like that immediately plan on raping you afterward.

Everyone has a right to defend themselves and ovoid getting raped.

not necessarily true. He more likely thought that the OP was gay and thought he was being "cute." Obviously, he was wrong.

You wouldn't hit a woman because

A: you're more likely to seriously hurt her.

and
B: a man hitting a woman, under any circumstances, is easily associated with domestic abuse, which is something no real man ever wants to be associated with.
A: She has it coming. If she doesn't want to get hurt, she should have played within the law. Had this been the other way around, it'd be fine, no?

B: No real man would let himself be taken advantage of to uphold pointless gender roles.

A: She has it coming. If she doesn't want to get hurt, she should have played within the law. Had this been the other way around, it'd be fine, no?

B: No real man would let himself be taken advantage of to uphold pointless gender roles.

no i have to agree with cyrian on this one you should really avoid any kind of violence against women, its a bad road.

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running. I have been advised to apologize, but I think when a person looks pretty dang out of it and is trying to mind their own business you should not go screwing around with people like that. So I go to NSG to see if my ‘situation’ is enough not constitute an apology to the guy or should I apologize out of the good of my heart. So what should I do.

How did he grab your ass when you were sitting down?

How did he grab your ass when you were sitting down?Folding chair with a hole in the back of it near the bottom.

Folding chair with a hole in the back of it near the bottom.

If you are str8:

"Dude, I'm sorry about that day, I was kinda down. But please dont grab my ass again..."

Otherwise:

"Dude, I'm sorry about that day, I was kinda down. But let's stay as friends..."

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running. I have been advised to apologize, but I think when a person looks pretty dang out of it and is trying to mind their own business you should not go screwing around with people like that. So I go to NSG to see if my ‘situation’ is enough not constitute an apology to the guy or should I apologize out of the good of my heart. So what should I do.

I'd apologize. You overreacted and committed a violent crime. If he gets sore about it he could sue you. Best to placate lawyers before they are birthed from the pits of hell to take your money, yes?

I'd apologize. You overreacted and committed a violent crime. If he gets sore about it he could sue you. Best to placate lawyers before they are birthed from the pits of hell to take your money, yes?

this guy hasent read through the forums, self defence against sexual assaul/harrasment, there's no ground for this guy to sue as Scandinvans used only resanoble force when he could have beaten the crap out of the guy if he wanted to.

this guy hasent read through the forums, self defence against sexual assaul/harrasment, there's no ground for this guy to sue as Scandinvans used only resanoble force when he could have beaten the crap out of the guy if he wanted to.

If there's a trial. Does he want a trial to happen? I wouldn't.

Yeah, he could argue that he was sexually harassed an defending himself. And get witnesses. Hear testimony. The other guy could then argue that he was beat up for being gay. Hear testimony. The jurors could go either way. But the point is, if I have a choice between a) apologizing to someone and b) getting in a lengthy legal battle, I choose a).

as i see it, it someone wants to mess with a sleeping or drunk person then they also have to accept anything that happens to them while doing/in response to such actions.

If there's a trial. Does he want a trial to happen? I wouldn't.

Yeah, he could argue that he was sexually harassed an defending himself. And get witnesses. Hear testimony. The other guy could then argue that he was beat up for being gay. Hear testimony. The jurors could go either way. But the point is, if I have a choice between a) apologizing to someone and b) getting in a lengthy legal battle, I choose a).

a punch in the arm would be luaghed out of any sane court where as sexual harasment is serious.

I think you overdid it a little, but I'd have done the same if a guy did that to me and I found him unattractive. No need to use that much force though...

Given how much you damaged him, you could apologise. When girls get harassed they (usually) don't inflict that much suffering, hence they needn't apologise. If a girl broke a guy's arm that way though, then I'd say she should apologise - same with a guy. :p

A: She has it coming. If she doesn't want to get hurt, she should have played within the law. Had this been the other way around, it'd be fine, no?

B: No real man would let himself be taken advantage of to uphold pointless gender roles.
I am averse to hitting women. Sure, some can handle it and have no problem using force, but it still irks me to do so.

If (generally) a woman simply slaps you though and you punch her in the face, I'd rightly call you a boor, with absolutely no breeding. Proportionality is important.

If there's a trial. Does he want a trial to happen? I wouldn't.

Yeah, he could argue that he was sexually harassed an defending himself. And get witnesses. Hear testimony. The other guy could then argue that he was beat up for being gay. Hear testimony. The jurors could go either way. But the point is, if I have a choice between a) apologizing to someone and b) getting in a lengthy legal battle, I choose a).No in the area I am in now people tend to not take the gay hate crime thing unless the person, in this case the person responding to sexual assault, has a history hate crimes or particpating in far out there groups.

No in the area I am in now people tend to not take the gay hate crime thing unless the person, in this case the person responding to sexual assault, has a history hate crimes or particpating in far out there groups.
Where are you anyway?

Happened in a moderate area of Illionis.
For some reason I thought you were Swedish all this time. :p Must be your nick.

Where are you anyway?Happened in a moderate area of Illionis.

For some reason I thought you were Swedish all this time. :p Must be your nick.

no thats just his fighting alias,
in the blue corner we have The Scandinvan!! in the red corner the Killer Monkies!!

For some reason I thought you were Swedish all this time. :p Must be your nick.Norwegian by ancestry though and do some know some acutal Old Norse.

no thats just his fighting alias,
in the blue corner we have The Scandinvan!! in the red corner the Killer Monkies!!*Puts on gloves wrapped with barbed wire and filled with rat posion*

*Puts on gloves wrapped with barbed wire and filled with rat posion*

aha!! now the truth comes out, thats how you got his arm to bleed!!
you hadn't taken of you anit-killer monkey gloves!!!

aha!! now the truth comes out, thats how you got his arm to bleed!!
you hadn't taken of you anit-killer monkey gloves!!!You figured me otu.:eek:

If a guy was asleep and a girl grabbed his ass, would the guy be right to punch her?

If a girl was asleep and a guy grabbed her ass, would the girl be right to punch him?

These questions are only moderately related to what actually happened, the stories the same, but the starring roles are what really matters.

You were perfectly justified in hitting him, he harassed you and you were alarmed. Now that you've had a chance to think about it, rather than the split instant this thing took place in, do you regret it? If you do maybe you should apologize, if you think that you were being reasonable and don't want to apologize, I think that's fine as well. Why should you be the one to go to him anyways, why isn't he apologizing to you? If he does do that you should apologize back, but I'm sure you would in that situation. You know the scenario better than anyone, and you;ll have to decide whether an apology is right.

BTW, so you are an Illinois man eh, I go to school in UIUC.

did you warn him about the rat poison at least?:eek:

did you warn him about the rat poison at least?:eek:Nope.;)

BTW, so you are an Illinois man eh, I go to school in UIUC.Guess if you can, but will never find out be I am the greased up deaf man (for the love of God please someone know what I am talking about)

I'd apologize. You overreacted and committed a violent crime. If he gets sore about it he could sue you. Best to placate lawyers before they are birthed from the pits of hell to take your money, yes?

OH comon, the guy sexually harassed him! Why the hell should HE apologize to the guy that harassed him when all he did was let the guy know that it wasn't wanted? God knows if this was a woman, and a guy slap her on the ass, and she slap him back, you would be going "Yea, you go girl!" Frickin' double standards.

Guess if you can, but will never find out be I am the greased up deaf man (for the love of God please someone know what I am talking about)

I'm starting to understand why this guy grabbed your arse.

Guess if you can, but will never find out be I am the greased up deaf man (for the love of God please someone know what I am talking about)

yup family guy

yup family guy*Gives a cookie*

*Gives a cookie*

"yay a cookie, but it'd better not have sprinkles, for every sprinkle i find i wil kill you"

"yay a cookie, but it'd better not have sprinkles, for every sprinkle i find i wil kill you"*Puts one million sprinkles on cookie*

*Puts one million sprinkles on cookie*

"ohh you think that's funny, lets see how funny you think it is spending the next 5000 years in frozen carbonite" *zzzaaccct*

"ohh you think that's funny, lets see how funny you think it is spending the next 5000 years in frozen carbonite" *zzzaaccct**Releases ravenous Ooampa-Loompas.*

*Releases ravenous Ooampa-Loompas.*

Victory will be mine!! *makes a tactical retreat*

I wouldn't apologise. Him accusing you of homophobia is like a psychotic black murderer yelling "Racial abuse!" as the police subdue him. Had you been gay, the above would still apply. Had he been straight, and you female, the above would still apply. Had he been female, the above would still apply.

People need to understand that the vast majority of the human race has very similar reaction to being arse-grabbed in their sleep whilst drunk.

Now, some people have been saying that it's wrong for a guy to do it to a girl. This is simultaneously implying that girls are weak and that "manly man" sit by and get harrassed. Let's all give a cheer for universal sexism! Hating the entire human race is masculine!

A: She has it coming. If she doesn't want to get hurt, she should have played within the law. Had this been the other way around, it'd be fine, no?

B: No real man would let himself be taken advantage of to uphold pointless gender roles.

A: I don't think you understand. If I just hauled off and punched a girl, I could really, really hurt her. Most women are fairly fragile. most men have the muscle mass to absorb a punch, women usually don't.

B: It's not about gender roles, its about stigma. If I hurt a girl, even if she deserved it, pretty much everyone would think I was an ass, and quite a few might think me abusive. She'd basically have to be threatening my life before society wouldn't come down on me for it.

Victory will be mine!! *makes a tactical retreat**Evil laugh and then the Oompa-Loompas hungry, as I did not feed them in a couple years, come and devour me.*

OH comon, the guy sexually harassed him! Why the hell should HE apologize to the guy that harassed him when all he did was let the guy know that it wasn't wanted?

He didn't just let him know it wasn't wanted. He physically assaulted him and made him bleed.

Now, whether this will get laughed out of court or not is up for debate. I'm just thinking it's best not to GO to court in the first place; an apology could help things along.

God knows if this was a woman, and a guy slap her on the ass, and she slap him back, you would be going "Yea, you go girl!" Frickin' double standards.

And if it was a woman who grabbed my ass, and I punch her and make her bleed, will you be cheering me on? No you'd be any one of the ten drunk guys stomping me for being an abusive bastard.

And if it was a woman who grabbed my ass, and I punch her and make her bleed, will you be cheering me on? No you'd be any one of the ten drunk guys stomping me for being an abusive bastard.

Well actually I would be saying "What is the matter with you, she totally wanted you!"

Of course, if you weren't into that, then yea I would've supported your right to defend yourself.

*shrugs* That's equality for ya.

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running. I have been advised to apologize, but I think when a person looks pretty dang out of it and is trying to mind their own business you should not go screwing around with people like that. So I go to NSG to see if my ‘situation’ is enough not constitute an apology to the guy or should I apologize out of the good of my heart. So what should I do.

DO NOT APPOLOGIZE! IT WAS HIS OWN ****ING FAULT! I WOULDN'T BLAME YOU IF YOU SHOT HIM...SERIOUSLY!

My personal opinion.

He didn't just let him know it wasn't wanted. He physically assaulted him and made him bleed.

Which is proportionate in this case. If the gay guy would have asked "hey, I think you're hot - may I touch your ass ?" instead of just grabbing it, then it would have been very wrong. But he didn't.

Well actually I would be saying "What is the matter with you, she totally wanted you!"

Of course, if you weren't into that, then yea I would've supported your right to defend yourself.

*shrugs* That's equality for ya.

There's a level of self defense that is acceptable to the threat presented. Some girl touching my ass is not a threat that warrants immediate violence. Or what, if I had a gun, would it be cool for me to blow her head off? Self-defense, she touched my butt!

I wouldn't apologise. Him accusing you of homophobia is like a psychotic black murderer yelling "Racial abuse!" as the police subdue him. Had you been gay, the above would still apply. Had he been straight, and you female, the above would still apply. Had he been female, the above would still apply.

People need to understand that the vast majority of the human race has very similar reaction to being arse-grabbed in their sleep whilst drunk.

Now, some people have been saying that it's wrong for a guy to do it to a girl. This is simultaneously implying that girls are weak and that "manly man" sit by and get harrassed. Let's all give a cheer for universal sexism! Hating the entire human race is masculine!
QFT

He didn't just let him know it wasn't wanted. He physically assaulted him and made him bleed.

Wrong. The Scandinvans was sexually assaulted, and he defended himself with a single punch. It was an appropriate amount of self defense for the situation.

Now, whether this will get laughed out of court or not is up for debate. I'm just thinking it's best not to GO to court in the first place; an apology could help things along.

No sane lawyer would take this case, after hearing the facts. Oh wait, no lawyer is truly sane. :eek: :D

And if it was a woman who grabbed my ass, and I punch her and make her bleed, will you be cheering me on? No you'd be any one of the ten drunk guys stomping me for being an abusive bastard.

Personally, I wouldn't have hit the guy in this situation (I would have made a smartass comment like, "Do that again, and you'll pull back a stump"), however, it didn't happen to me and I also feel it's a matter of what roles were played by what genders. A man punching another man for grabbing his ass is understandable. A woman punching another woman for grabbing her ass is also understandable.

A woman punching a man for grabbing her ass isn't probably wise, in case the man retaliates. A man punching a woman for grabbing his ass is similarly unwise, because it could look like the man is a woman beater (and cause the situation you described). For these 2 examples, it's best to take the matter up with the owner of the establishment/house/etc to get that person removed, or leave the party/social function/etc.

There's a level of self defense that is acceptable to the threat presented. Some girl touching my ass is not a threat that warrants immediate violence. Or what, if I had a gun, would it be cool for me to blow her head off? Self-defense, she touched my butt!

Nice straw-man argument there. You're right that there is a level of acceptable self defense, and The Scandinvans used that level.

Wrong. The Scandinvans was sexually assaulted, and he defended himself with a single punch. It was an appropriate amount of self defense for the situation.

He could have "defended" himself with words and that would have worked. If that didn't work, THEN force is necessary and appropriate.

Nice straw-man argument there. You're right that there is a level of acceptable self defense, and The Scandinvans used that level.

Obviously I question the acceptability of his reaction in the same way that anyone would question the acceptability of the reaction in my argument. It just doesn't match up. Whether his situation matches up or not is still up for debate... I guess I'd just rather it stay in a debate here, than in a trial ya know. That's just me, I hate lawyers and legality and the sue/countersue culture, but they are a reality and so I do my best to avoid them.

So what should I do.

Have make-up sex?

He could have "defended" himself with words and that would have worked. If that didn't work, THEN force is necessary and appropriate.

As The Scandinvans said in the first post:

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, ....


He was half asleep when this happened. If I was half asleep and this happened, I don't think I'd be able to tell if an ass grab was ALL that was going to happen. Therefore, a punch was understandable.


Obviously I question the acceptability of his reaction in the same way that anyone would question the acceptability of the reaction in my argument. It just doesn't match up. Whether his situation matches up or not is still up for debate... I guess I'd just rather it stay in a debate here, than in a trial ya know. That's just me, I hate lawyers and legality and the sue/countersue culture, but they are a reality and so I do my best to avoid them.

I think most people hate lawyers (that's why there's so many lawyer jokes), but as I said before, after hearing the facts, no lawyer would touch this case. The man that sexually assaulted The Scandinvans was the instigator of this problem, and there's no permanent injury, so there's no money in it for the lawyer. That, and the court would probably reject the filing based on the other person instigating the incident.

What he did was obviously out of line, but it sounds as if you didn't mean to punch him as hard as you did. So tell him both of those things. A lot of the posters in this thread seem to have created a false dichotomy, and suggested that apologizing for hitting him necessarily means accepting or justifying his behavior. It doesn't. You can think he acted like a complete ass, and tell him so, while still being sorry you injured him.

What he did was obviously out of line, but it sounds as if you didn't mean to punch him as hard as you did. So tell him both of those things. A lot of the posters in this thread seem to have created a false dichotomy, and suggested that apologizing for hitting him necessarily means accepting or justifying his behavior. It doesn't. You can think he acted like a complete ass, and tell him so, while still being sorry you injured him.

No, what it is, is that saying sorry would be saying you wish you didn't hit him, which I am agaist.

No, what it is, is that saying sorry would be saying you wish you didn't hit him, which I am agaist.

Why? I've had drunk guys try to grope me, and I never hit any of them for it. I simply told them to back the hell off. I'm not sure why any reasonable adult would be proud of hitting someone. Was lashing out understandable under the circumstances? Sure. Was it the most sensible possible reaction? Of course not.

Besides, grown-ups often apologize for things that they are not particularly ashamed of. For example, my mother and I have a very strained relationship. Recently, in an argument, I told her that she was acting like a self-centered bitch. There is no doubt that it was an entirely fair descriptor, and that that is exactly what she was acting like, but I still apologized, because it was a rude thing to say and only exacerbated the situation.

Why? I've had drunk guys try to grope me, and I never hit any of them for it. I simply told them to back the hell off. I'm not sure why any reasonable adult would be proud of hitting someone. Was lashing out understandable under the circumstances? Sure. Was it the most sensible possible reaction? Of course not.

Besides, grown-ups often apologize for things that they are not particularly ashamed of. For example, my mother and I have a very strained relationship. Recently, in an argument, I told her that she was acting like a self-centered bitch. There is no doubt that it was an entirely fair descriptor, and that that is exactly what she was acting like, but I still apologized, because it was a rude thing to say and only exacerbated the situation.

Yeah, but she was a woman...

Yeah, but she was a woman...

...huh? :confused:

...huh? :confused:

I think he meant your mother... but then again - I'm also having a hard time following this.

I think he meant your mother... but then again - I'm also having a hard time following this.

I think he did, too. I'm just a bit baffled as to how the fact that my mother is a woman negates my point that sometimes people should apologize for things even when they weren't entirely in the wrong. I'm pretty sure I would have acted the same way even if my mother had a penis. (Admittedly, my mother having a penis would create some obstacles, not the least of which would have been my nonexistence, but you get the point.) :p

I think he did, too. I'm just a bit baffled as to how the fact that my mother is a woman negates my point that sometimes people should apologize for things even when they weren't entirely in the wrong. I'm pretty sure I would have acted the same way even if my mother had a penis. (Admittedly, my mother having a penis would create some obstacles, not the least of which would have been my nonexistence, but you get the point.) :p

No, no, no, no BIG difference. Men generally don't hold grudges like women, and can get over things better.

No, no, no, no BIG difference. Men generally don't hold grudges like women, and can get over things better.

So, wait.

You are honestly and seriously stating that the reason that you see it as wrong to even suggest by your actions that maybe this guy didn't deserve to be punched is that guys like you "get over things better," whereas women like me are capable of swallowing our pride and apologizing even when we feel our behavior was at least somewhat justified because we can't "get over things."

You don't see anything just an itty wee bit off about that idea? :p

*Evil laugh and then the Oompa-Loompas hungry, as I did not feed them in a couple years, come and devour me.*

Why is every one still posting, havent you hear our poor Scandinavians has been eaten by a pack of starved Oompa-loompas!!

Why is every one still posting, havent you hear our poor Scandinavians has been eaten by a pack of starved Oompa-loompas!!

Not true. He has decided to compensate his assault victim by allowing him a 5 minute free arse grope. Then the loompas.

He couldn’t press charges, Scandinavians was defending himself from sexual assault and a punch in the arm is within the bounds of reasonable force.
No it doesnt. The first means at Scandinavians disposal was to simply ask the person to desist, having not availed himself of those means, but instead having moved to a rather aggressive assault, he most certainly went beyond reasonable force.

I’m sure even schools in the US have a policy against sexual assault
Usually if it goes official, 2 wrongs dont tend to make it all right.

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running. I have been advised to apologize, but I think when a person looks pretty dang out of it and is trying to mind their own business you should not go screwing around with people like that. So I go to NSG to see if my ‘situation’ is enough not constitute an apology to the guy or should I apologize out of the good of my heart. So what should I do.
If you slapped pinched a girls arse she very well may slap you.
I say that is fine.
But if you say...
'I'm sorry for hitting you as hard as i did.'
It wouldn't hurt nobody.

If he apologizes for grabbing your ass, you should apologize for hitting him. otherwise, no.

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running. I have been advised to apologize, but I think when a person looks pretty dang out of it and is trying to mind their own business you should not go screwing around with people like that. So I go to NSG to see if my ‘situation’ is enough not constitute an apology to the guy or should I apologize out of the good of my heart. So what should I do.

Fuck what the?

Look what would you suggest your sister do, if it happend to her, and it was a straight man?

Kick him right in the nuts right? Unwanted sexual comes are still unwanted wether gay or straight right, so treat it that way. Applogise, naaaa.

Fuck what the?

Look what would you suggest your sister do, if it happend to her, and it was a straight man?

Kick him right in the nuts right? Unwanted sexual comes are still unwanted wether gay or straight right, so treat it that way. Applogise, naaaa.
How about trying it from your own perspective, though?

Would you want to receive a kick to the nuts for engaging in an "unwanted sexual come-on"? Would you feel comfortable living in a world where getting kicked in the nuts was viewed as the appropriate penalty for hitting on somebody when they didn't want it?

There was a thread a while back about a woman who beat up a guy for REPEATEDLY physically harassing her, and it quickly filled up with boys whining about how it was totally inappropriate and wrong for her to do so. And this was a case where she had clearly and repeatedly told the dude in question to knock it off, not some case where one grope was met with a left to the jaw.

Maybe it's because I'm female and I have to deal with unwanted advances and touching all the damn time, but I think it's hilarious to see big strong manly-men flipping out over having their bums touched. You guys dish this crap out all the damn time, and girls are just supposed to "take it as a compliment" and be good sports, but heaven forbid you have to experience it yourselves!

Now, let me be clear, I don't see anything wrong with slugging somebody if they touch you against your wishes. I, personally, would love to live in a world where everybody knew that unwanted sexual touching gets you an immediate punch to the face. I just find it funny that so many heteroboys make such a fucking stink about it, either when they are on the receiving end of the slugging or when they are on the receiving end of the unwanted bum-touching. Get over yourselves. Helpless little damsels like myself deal with this crap every time we go to the pub. Quit being such cry-babies.

How about trying it from your own perspective, though?

Would you want to receive a kick to the nuts for engaging in an "unwanted sexual come-on"? Would you feel comfortable living in a world where getting kicked in the nuts was viewed as the appropriate penalty for hitting on somebody when they didn't want it?

Maybe it's because I'm female and I have to deal with unwanted advances and touching all the damn time, but I think it's hilarious to see big strong manly-men flipping out over having their bums touched. You guys dish this crap out all the damn time, and girls are just supposed to "take it as a compliment" and be good sports, but heaven forbid you have to experience it yourselves!

Now, let me be clear, I don't see anything wrong with slugging somebody if they touch you against your wishes. I, personally, would love to live in a world where everybody knew that unwanted sexual touching gets you an immediate punch to the face. I just find it funny that so many heteroboys make such a fucking stink about it, either when they are on the receiving end of the slugging or when they are on the receiving end of the unwanted bum-touching. Get over yourselves. Helpless little damsels like myself deal with this crap every time we go to the pub. Quit being such cry-babies.


Heheh shit where do you think I get the idea from. Mispent(never did figure that one out, it's got to be an oxymoron right?) youth and all that.

You shouldn't suffer unwanted sexual advances, I say kick them square in the nuts.

How about trying it from your own perspective, though?

Would you want to receive a kick to the nuts for engaging in an "unwanted sexual come-on"? Would you feel comfortable living in a world where getting kicked in the nuts was viewed as the appropriate penalty for hitting on somebody when they didn't want it?

There was a thread a while back about a woman who beat up a guy for REPEATEDLY physically harassing her, and it quickly filled up with boys whining about how it was totally inappropriate and wrong for her to do so. And this was a case where she had clearly and repeatedly told the dude in question to knock it off, not some case where one grope was met with a left to the jaw.

Maybe it's because I'm female and I have to deal with unwanted advances and touching all the damn time, but I think it's hilarious to see big strong manly-men flipping out over having their bums touched. You guys dish this crap out all the damn time, and girls are just supposed to "take it as a compliment" and be good sports, but heaven forbid you have to experience it yourselves!

Now, let me be clear, I don't see anything wrong with slugging somebody if they touch you against your wishes. I, personally, would love to live in a world where everybody knew that unwanted sexual touching gets you an immediate punch to the face. I just find it funny that so many heteroboys make such a fucking stink about it, either when they are on the receiving end of the slugging or when they are on the receiving end of the unwanted bum-touching. Get over yourselves. Helpless little damsels like myself deal with this crap every time we go to the pub. Quit being such cry-babies.

if that happens the sale of cups would go through the roof

No, no, no, no BIG difference. Men generally don't hold grudges like women, and can get over things better.
Yeah, like by punching each other.

I really don't know where this bullshit about men not holding grudges comes from. Probably the same place as the bullshit about how men don't gossip. Gimme a break.

Men are just as capable of behaving like adults as women are. Poli was making the perfectly sound point that adults are able to recognize when giving an apology may be the right thing to do, even if you don't necessarily believe that your behavior was unjustified. Sometimes you can do something that was totally understandable at the time, but you still regret that you didn't handle the situation differently.

Ah the great NSG tendency to kneejerk...dontchya love it? :rolleyes:

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running.

You know what they say about sleep walkers and not waking them? Well if you wake someone in that manner (fondling the blokes arse) you are going to get a response. It might be a swing of the arm or a whole body shrug before becoming completely conscious.

It depends on the person....if you want to fondle someone who is asleep you will need to take the consequence....in this case a punch to the arm.

Would the OP have punched the bloke if he was fully awake? That is the question you need to ask him before you rag on him.

As for apology...no. Just leave it. If anything the fondler ought to apologise for at one thing...waking the OP up.

i don't think you need to apologise really. unsolicited groping is just not on. i used to get groped all the time at my old job by drunken customers, mostly female, some male. i was seriously on the verge of just knocking them senseless so many times it just wasn't funny. although i'd have lost my job if i did actually punch them, a sly elbow in the ribs or foot in the back of the knee could generally be got away with without repercussions. for some reason, to a drunk person, "fuck off" sounds like "oo, that feels good". basically it's sexual assault and it should not be tolerated. although violence is not the best course of action it does not need to be apologised for. if it ever happens again just tell the person to fuck off, at least at first.

if you fell bad say i'm sorry if you don't then tell them to Harden up.
Telling him to 'harden up' after punching him is sending the conflicting messages here.
I think the gay guy had 'hardened up' already, hence the arse-grabbing.

Yeah, like by punching each other.

I really don't know where this bullshit about men not holding grudges comes from. Probably the same place as the bullshit about how men don't gossip. Gimme a break.

Men are just as capable of behaving like adults as women are. Poli was making the perfectly sound point that adults are able to recognize when giving an apology may be the right thing to do, even if you don't necessarily believe that your behavior was unjustified. Sometimes you can do something that was totally understandable at the time, but you still regret that you didn't handle the situation differently.


I think Bottle that you have inadvertantly hit the nail right on the head her.

There are differances between the sexes, we do handle things in a differant way, and the truth is that it is perfectly fine for two blokes, easpecily if they are friends to have at it, and then behave as if the problem has been resolved.

That is because the act of physicaly having it out, for us blokes is remarkable similar to the act of you wimmin folx talking about it.

I mean come on, we blokes see a problem, evisgae a fix for the problem, apply the fix, end of problem.

Whilst you wimmin, get upset, have a talk, feelbetter.

There are indeed differances between us.

I think Bottle that you have inadvertantly hit the nail right on the head her.

There are differances between the sexes, we do handle things in a differant way, and the truth is that it is perfectly fine for two blokes, easpecily if they are friends to have at it, and then behave as if the problem has been resolved.

That is because the act of physicaly having it out, for us blokes is remarkable similar to the act of you wimmin folx talking about it.

I mean come on, we blokes see a problem, evisgae a fix for the problem, apply the fix, end of problem.

Whilst you wimmin, get upset, have a talk, feelbetter.

There are indeed differances between us.

Indeed. The sexes are different, but equal.

Telling him to 'harden up' after punching him is sending the conflicting messages here.
I think the gay guy had 'hardened up' already, hence the arse-grabbing.

LOLOLOLOL!!!!! Oh man...good one!

I think Bottle that you have inadvertantly hit the nail right on the head her.

There are differances between the sexes, we do handle things in a differant way, and the truth is that it is perfectly fine for two blokes, easpecily if they are friends to have at it, and then behave as if the problem has been resolved.

That is because the act of physicaly having it out, for us blokes is remarkable similar to the act of you wimmin folx talking about it.

I mean come on, we blokes see a problem, evisgae a fix for the problem, apply the fix, end of problem.

Whilst you wimmin, get upset, have a talk, feelbetter.

There are indeed differances between us.
i dunno, the last time i had a fight with a friend we weren't friends after it. and it was only a misunderstanding too. i just didn't have any time for him after that. fighting to me is what you do with people you don't like if it get's beyond slagging matches. talking things over is for friends.

I think Bottle that you have inadvertantly hit the nail right on the head her.

There are differances between the sexes, we do handle things in a differant way, and the truth is that it is perfectly fine for two blokes, easpecily if they are friends to have at it, and then behave as if the problem has been resolved.

That is because the act of physicaly having it out, for us blokes is remarkable similar to the act of you wimmin folx talking about it.

I mean come on, we blokes see a problem, evisgae a fix for the problem, apply the fix, end of problem.

Whilst you wimmin, get upset, have a talk, feelbetter.

There are indeed differances between us.
Funny, but "blokes" who handle disputes the way you describe are viewed as silly little boys by the men where I live. Fellas who use hitting to fix relationship problems are viewed as no different from fellas who "fix" household appliances by hitting them with rocks.

Perhaps this is why I have a higher opinion of men than you do. Every single man in my life shows responsibility, maturity, and the ability to control his own actions. If you are choosing to associate with the kind of childish morons who routinely solve their arguments with thwapping each other, then I can't really blame you for assuming that all men are equally lame.

Oh wait. Yes, I can blame you. You need to stop hanging out with dumbasses. :D

You also need to stop blaming your personal lack of self-control on your penis. Just because you can't behave yourself doesn't mean you get to blame maleness for your problems, and it certainly doesn't make it okay for you to insult all men by implying that they are equally infantile. Quit being such a baby and take responsibility for your own behavior.

i dunno, the last time i had a fight with a friend we weren't friends after it. and it was only a misunderstanding too. i just didn't have any time for him after that. fighting to me is what you do with people you don't like if it get's beyond slagging matches. talking things over is for friends.



And there is the exception to the rule. My thanks to you for turing up early.:)

Indeed. The sexes are different, but equal.
Men and women are socialized to behave differently. Males are often told (by people like many on this thread) that it is normal and appropriate for them to behave like children for their entire lives. Men are often taught that it is "manly" and appropriate for them to resolve disputes by hitting each other and then drinking too much.

Women, on the other hand, are mocked and chided for physical violence. They are either "catty" and "bitchy," or they are just cute and silly when they hit somebody. Gee, what a surprise that men and women end up behaving differently! :rolleyes:

Quit blaming biology for what society creates. Yes, men and women are socialized differently. And that means we can just as easily expect men to show the same level of responsibility and maturity as women. Men aren't any less able to do so, and we do them a disservice by treating them like stupid children who don't know any better.

Men and women are socialized to behave differently. Males are often told (by people like many on this thread) that it is normal and appropriate for them to behave like children for their entire lives. Men are often taught that it is "manly" and appropriate for them to resolve disputes by hitting each other and then drinking too much.

Women, on the other hand, are mocked and chided for physical violence. They are either "catty" and "bitchy," or they are just cute and silly when they hit somebody. Gee, what a surprise that men and women end up behaving differently! :rolleyes:

Quit blaming biology for what society creates. Yes, men and women are socialized differently. And that means we can just as easily expect men to show the same level of responsibility and maturity as women. Men aren't any less able to do so, and we do them a disservice by treating them like stupid children who don't know any better.

You need a nice hot cuppa mate.... ;)

You need a nice hot cuppa mate.... ;)
?

?

After all the typing you've done today...

/tis a joke

Men and women are socialized to behave differently. Males are often told (by people like many on this thread) that it is normal and appropriate for them to behave like children for their entire lives. Men are often taught that it is "manly" and appropriate for them to resolve disputes by hitting each other and then drinking too much.

Women, on the other hand, are mocked and chided for physical violence. They are either "catty" and "bitchy," or they are just cute and silly when they hit somebody. Gee, what a surprise that men and women end up behaving differently! :rolleyes:

Quit blaming biology for what society creates. Yes, men and women are socialized differently. And that means we can just as easily expect men to show the same level of responsibility and maturity as women. Men aren't any less able to do so, and we do them a disservice by treating them like stupid children who don't know any better.

You do the disservice to men right here. Men are taught it's "appropriate for them to behave like children" my ass. I'll have to inform all the people I work with. I'm sure many of the attorneys I work with will be happy to know they can fuck around because it's just fine to be like children, "normal and appropriate" after all.

You say men are "socialized to be children" yet at the same time talk about doing a "disservice" to men, without recognizing that such a massively myopic view about men in this society, and your assumption that we will blindly follow such nonsensical socialization is the real disservice here.

I find it massively telling that in the other thread, on the topic of "feminazis" you went out of your way to shout "there are jackasses in every group, so what?" when it came to a negative position about women. Where's the same standard of "hey, there are immature people in EVERY group, men and women?" No no, I guess for you only women are allowed to be given the privlidge of the recognition that the idiots do not represent the whole.

We men are just grunting children, after all. We can't help it.

We're socialized that way.

Funny, but "blokes" who handle disputes the way you describe are viewed as silly little boys by the men where I live. Fellas who use hitting to fix relationship problems are viewed as no different from fellas who "fix" household appliances by hitting them with rocks.

Perhaps this is why I have a higher opinion of men than you do. Every single man in my life shows responsibility, maturity, and the ability to control his own actions. If you are choosing to associate with the kind of childish morons who routinely solve their arguments with thwapping each other, then I can't really blame you for assuming that all men are equally lame.

Oh wait. Yes, I can blame you. You need to stop hanging out with dumbasses. :D

You also need to stop blaming your personal lack of self-control on your penis. Just because you can't behave yourself doesn't mean you get to blame maleness for your problems, and it certainly doesn't make it okay for you to insult all men by implying that they are equally infantile. Quit being such a baby and take responsibility for your own behavior.

:) Bottle is my hero.

Funny, but "blokes" who handle disputes the way you describe are viewed as silly little boys by the men where I live.

Perhaps this is why I have a higher opinion of men than you do. Every single man in my life shows responsibility, maturity, and the ability to control his own actions. If you are choosing to associate with the kind of childish morons who routinely solve their arguments with thwapping each other, then I can't really blame you for assuming that all men are equally lame.

Oh wait. Yes, I can blame you. You need to stop hanging out with dumbasses. :D

You also need to stop blaming your personal lack of self-control on your penis. Just because you can't behave yourself doesn't mean you get to blame maleness for your problems, and it certainly doesn't make it okay for you to insult all men by implying that they are equally infantile. Quit being such a baby and take responsibility for your own behavior.


Ohhhh really! Now that's fighhting talk from where I come from missy!:p

Lets get this straight though. My post was just to say that there are indeed differances in men and women, and to suggest otherwise ignorse a whole slew of litrature on the subject.

Cultural differances not withstanding, I bet that you will find, if you ask them, that males of all ages consider it perfectly normal and natural behviour to settle minor disputesw amongst friends physicaly.

Again I feel this to be perfect natural and normal. Rest assured I have perfect self control, and blame nobody but me for my thoughts and actions.

I realise that you are anti violent Bottle, I actualy appluade you for such an outlook onlife. However you infer that I am imature for my outlook on life, in truth violence occours naturaly in nature, and is also natural as a species, it seems then that your failure to realise this makes your outlook on this aspect of life, niave if not imature also.


Still people are people, differant strokes and all that.

I'd of hit him.

You do the disservice to men right here. Men are taught it's "appropriate for them to behave like children" my ass. I'll have to inform all the people I work with. I'm sure many of the attorneys I work with can fuck around because it's just fine to be like children

You say men are "socialized to be children" yet at the same time talk about doing a "disservice" to men, without recognizing that such a massively myopic view about men in this society, and your assumption that we will blindly follow such nonsensical socialization is the real disservice here.

You need to take a deep breath and re-read my post more carefully. I specifically and clearly state that men DO NOT "blindly follow such nonsensical socialization." I specifically and clearly mention that EVERY MAN IN MY LIFE rejects the bullshit about how manly-men hit things to solve problems.

Seriously. Chill.

My point is that our culture is full of messages encouraging men to act like children. Hell, look at the recent ad campaigns that revolve entirely around the idea that "real men" will eat shitty food, drink too much, and engage in extremely dangerous and stupid behaviors all the time. "Masculine" is far too often defined as "doing stupid shit that hurts somebody."

Now, there are plenty of people who call bullshit on that. There are several on this thread. These are people who recognize that men are every bit as capable of being thinking, responsible adults as women are.


I find it massively telling that in the other thread, on the topic of "feminazis" you went out of your way to shout "there are jackasses in every group, so what?" when it came to a negative position about women. Where's the same standard of "hey, there are immature people in EVERY group, men and women?" No no, I guess for you only women are allowed to be given the privlidge of the recognition that the idiots do not represent the whole.

Read more carefully.

Where, exactly, do I say that there are no immature females?

The particularly form of immaturity we are talking about (solving problems by hitting people) is a form that is encouraged in males far more often than in females. If it were the other way around, then I would be saying exactly the same shit with more female pronouns.

Women face plenty of bullshit socialization. I mention it on this very thread, as a matter of fact. Women are discouraged from being aggressive, both verbally and physically, and are encouraged to placate others even when they really should be standing firm.

Does this mean all women give in to such BS? Fuck no. Just like plenty of men don't give in to the hit-things-with-rock BS. But some do. I happen to think we'd all be better off if we did away with the BS in the first place.


We men are just grunting children, after all. We can't help it.

We're socialized that way.
Seriously, READ MORE CAREFULLY. You are arguing against the OPPOSITE of the point I was making.

I'm the one telling guys that they have the ability to ignore all that shit. I'm the one arguing that no, in fact, being a guy doesn't require you to act like a tool. My entire point is that guys ARE capable of rejecting socialization and "hypermasculine" bullshit. You appear to have totally and completely inverted my point, and are now arguing with me as if I were saying the opposite of what I'm actually saying.

Some guys are CHOOSING to use biology as an excuse for their own behavior, when they are perfectly able to show self-control and maturity instead.

I first point out that actually it's not their biology at all, it's socialization. If it were biologically mandated that all men be morons, there would be no explanation for the majority of men who are not morons. I cite my own male friends and family members as examples.

I then add that socialization is something you don't have to obey blindly, and that you don't have to act like a moron just because the beer commercials say so. Yes, men are frequently encouraged to be dumbasses. Yes, lots of men find that they will make friends and impress other dudes by acting like a dumbass. So what? If you hang out with dumbasses, it's likely that they will be impressed by dumbassery. So don't hang with dumbasses. There are plenty of non-dumbass males (and females) to be friends with.

There are differances between the sexes, we do handle things in a differant way, and the truth is that it is perfectly fine for two blokes, easpecily if they are friends to have at it, and then behave as if the problem has been resolved.

No, it isn't. Because this never actually resolves the problem. In fact, it's an incredibly stupid way of doing practically anything.

That is because the act of physicaly having it out, for us blokes is remarkable similar to the act of you wimmin folx talking about it.

Speak for yourself, thanks. Maybe it is for you and your friends; personally, despite being male, I don't think "having it out" would resolve anything at all.

I mean come on, we blokes see a problem, evisgae a fix for the problem, apply the fix, end of problem.

Um... that's how most people behave, if the problem actually has an easy fix.

Unfortunately, that's always the case.

Cultural differances not withstanding, I bet that you will find, if you ask them, that males of all ages consider it perfectly normal and natural behviour to settle minor disputesw amongst friends physicaly.

Hi, I'm a male of some age.

I utterly reject that line of thinking.

You need to take a deep breath and re-read my post more carefully. I specifically and clearly state that men DO NOT "blindly follow such nonsensical socialization." I specifically and clearly mention that EVERY MAN IN MY LIFE rejects the bullshit about how manly-men hit things to solve problems.

Seriously. Chill.

My point is that our culture is full of messages encouraging men to act like children. Hell, look at the recent ad campaigns that revolve entirely around the idea that "real men" will eat shitty food, drink too much, and engage in extremely dangerous and stupid behaviors all the time. "Masculine" is far too often defined as "doing stupid shit that hurts somebody."

Now, there are plenty of people who call bullshit on that. There are several on this thread. These are people who recognize that men are every bit as capable of being thinking, responsible adults as women are.


Read more carefully.

Where, exactly, do I say that there are no immature females?

The particularly form of immaturity we are talking about (solving problems by hitting people) is a form that is encouraged in males far more often than in females. If it were the other way around, then I would be saying exactly the same shit with more female pronouns.

Women face plenty of bullshit socialization. I mention it on this very thread, as a matter of fact. Women are discouraged from being aggressive, both verbally and physically, and are encouraged to placate others even when they really should be standing firm.

Does this mean all women give in to such BS? Fuck no. Just like plenty of men don't give in to the hit-things-with-rock BS. But some do. I happen to think we'd all be better off if we did away with the BS in the first place.


Seriously, READ MORE CAREFULLY. You are arguing against the OPPOSITE of the point I was making.

I'm the one telling guys that they have the ability to ignore all that shit. I'm the one arguing that no, in fact, being a guy doesn't require you to act like a tool. My entire point is that guys ARE capable of rejecting socialization and "hypermasculine" bullshit. You appear to have totally and completely inverted my point, and are now arguing with me as if I were saying the opposite of what I'm actually saying.

Some guys are CHOOSING to use biology as an excuse for their own behavior, when they are perfectly able to show self-control and maturity instead.

I first point out that actually it's not their biology at all, it's socialization. If it were biologically mandated that all men be morons, there would be no explanation for the majority of men who are not morons. I cite my own male friends and family members as examples.

I then add that socialization is something you don't have to obey blindly, and that you don't have to act like a moron just because the beer commercials say so. Yes, men are frequently encouraged to be dumbasses. Yes, lots of men find that they will make friends and impress other dudes by acting like a dumbass. So what? If you hang out with dumbasses, it's likely that they will be impressed by dumbassery. So don't hang with dumbasses. There are plenty of non-dumbass males (and females) to be friends with.

And at the very same time, you expect that this "socialization" is having such a powerful force that most men can't just see it for what it is.

Bullshit.

You think my outlook on life is going to be shaped, molded, and determined by a fucking Burger King commercial You're here "he one telling guys that they have the ability to ignore all that shit"? What makes you think that the vast majority of us need to hear a thing from you? What makes you think that you, Bottle, know enough to educate us, to educate me? How fucking stupid do you think I am?

You don't see that as insulting? You talk about "exceptions" like they're special. Like the vast bulk of men are sitting vapidly in front of the tv soaking up everything about how men "should be" from hamburger chain adds. You assume the bulk of us are so weak minded as to fall for it. And you don't call that a disservice?

Ohhhh really! Now that's fighhting talk from where I come from missy!:p

Lets get this straight though. My post was just to say that there are indeed differances in men and women, and to suggest otherwise ignorse a whole slew of litrature on the subject.

Cultural differances not withstanding, I bet that you will find, if you ask them, that males of all ages consider it perfectly normal and natural behviour to settle minor disputesw amongst friends physicaly.

Again I feel this to be perfect natural and normal. Rest assured I have perfect self control, and blame nobody but me for my thoughts and actions.

My point is that none of this has to do with actual maleness and femaleness, it's about how males and females are TAUGHT to relate to other people.

And, since it is taught, it is also possible to teach something else.

Now, if you think it is good to teach people to solve problems by hitting people, then I'm sure you will agree that it's good to teach this to girls as well as boys, right? I mean, wouldn't it be better if everybody used the best possible method to solve problems? Why stop at having only 50% of the population use the best possible method?

If, on the other hand, you think it's not good to teach this method, then shouldn't we teach everybody the best alternative? Why stop at having only 50% of the population taught effective methods for resolving disputes?


I realise that you are anti violent Bottle, I actualy appluade you for such an outlook onlife.

You people really just don't bother reading before you respond, huh?

I specifically state, on this very thread, that I would like to live in a world where unwanted sexual touching was always met with a punch to the face.

Non-violent my ass. I simply believe effectiveness. I think there are situations where punching is stupid. I also think there are situations where punching is smart, funny, awesome, appropriate, or entertaining. The ability to distinguish between these situations is, in my opinion, part of being a grown-up.


However you infer that I am imature for my outlook on life, in truth violence occours naturaly in nature, and is also natural as a species, it seems then that your failure to realise this makes your outlook on this aspect of life, niave if not imature also.

Yeah, violence occurs in nature. So does rape, murder, theft, and eating of one's young. If you honestly think that "occurring in nature" = "hunky-dorey for human civilizations," then I really don't think you should be going around calling anybody else "niave."

And at the very same time, you expect that this "socialization" is having such a powerful force that most men can't just see it for what it is.

Some men don't see it for what it is. I happen to believe that they can, which is why I also think it's bullshit when they don't. If I honestly believed men couldn't do any better, I wouldn't argue that they should be held to this standard.

It's like how I don't argue that mentally disabled children should be expected to perform as well as non-disabled children in school; if men really are unable to behave themselves, biologically, then I wouldn't be pissed at them for failing to behave themselves. However, I DON'T THINK MEN ARE MENTALLY DISABLED. I think men CAN see through the bullshit, which is why I call them on it when they CHOOSE not to, or when they CHOOSE to use the bullshit as justification for their own bad behavior.

I have said this clearly and repeatedly. You are choosing to ignore what I am saying in favor of attacking a straw man.


Bullshit.
You think my outlook on life is going to be shaped, molded, and determined by a fucking Burger King commercial You're here "he one telling guys that they have the ability to ignore all that shit"? What makes you think that the vast majority of us need to hear a thing from you?

I have said, clearly and repeatedly, that I don't think the majority of men need to hear this. I think the majority of men aren't morons, and know this already. I think a minority of immature/lazy/insecure boys need to be hit with the Clue Bat (how's that for "non-violent"?). Anybody can do this. I happen to feel like bothering with it right now, but it's perfectly possible for somebody else to step in and do the same. Several other people have done so on this very thread. It doesn't require any special genius to recognize bullshit when it's right in front of you.


What makes you think that you, Bottle, know enough to educate us, to educate me?

I don't know you, and I really don't care about educating you. That's not my job.

I'm on an internet forum for recreation. I'm posting my opinions and calling bullshit when I see it. If you, or anybody else, happen to learn something from that then I consider it a terrific bonus. If not, I'm not gonna be crying myself to sleep at night. :D


How fucking stupid do you think I am? You don't see that as insulting? You talk about "exceptions" like they're special. Like the vast bulk of men are sitting vapidly in front of the tv soaking up everything about how men "should be" from hamburger chain adds. You assume the bulk of us are so weak minded as to fall for it. And you don't call that a disservice?
At this point I have to assume that you are just projecting. I have clearly and specifically said the opposite of what you are arguing against, here, and yet you continue to assume that I'm the one claiming that the majority of men are vacant-eyed idiots.

Maybe you have that low an opinion of men. I don't. My personal experience had led me to believe that most men, like most women, are thinking beings who are capable of mature, reasonable, responsible behavior. Most men, like most women, are able to see and evaluate and think for themselves.

Some men, like some women, fail to do this, for one of any number of reasons. Mainstream culture provides lots of excuses for people who don't want to bother exercising self-control. I think that's lazy and pathetic, for men as much as for women, because I hold people to a certain minimum standard of behavior. I hold men to the same standard as women, because I don't believe there is anything about maleness that makes somebody less able to function as an adult.

And that's the last time I'm going to repeat that for you. From now on, if you'd like to continue arguing about how I think men are stupid or whatever, I'm just going to refer to this post number and ask that you read it carefully again.

People who are so cock-sure about nurture trumping nature need to raise some newborns for a few months in social isolation.

It's a bit scary what kinds of things turn out not to be social conditioning.

Hi, I'm a male of some age.

I utterly reject that line of thinking.
Oh, but you're just another "exception." :rolleyes:

People who are so cock-sure about nurture trumping nature need to raise some newborns for a few months in social isolation.

It's a bit scary what kinds of things turn out not to be social conditioning.
I'd love to see sources on this. Honestly, no sarcasm at all. Do you have citations of cases where human children have been reared in total social isolation and then compared behaviorally to children who were reared in various societies? Because I have looked for that kind of data, and I haven't been able to find it. (Probably because of the ethical restrictions governing psychological research of this sort.)

Maybe you have that low an opinion of men. I don't. My personal experience had led me to believe that most men, like most women, are thinking beings who are capable of mature, reasonable, responsible behavior. Most men, like most women, are able to see and evaluate and think for themselves.

Some men, like some women, fail to do this, for one of any number of reasons. Mainstream culture provides lots of excuses for people who don't want to bother exercising self-control. I think that's lazy and pathetic, for men as much as for women, because I hold people to a certain minimum standard of behavior. I hold men to the same standard as women, because I don't believe there is anything about maleness that makes somebody less able to function as an adult.

There's one problem with this.

You're lying. I've seen enough of your posts and general viewpoints to know that you're lying. You say you hold both genders to the same standards, and same levels, but you don't.

You throw in the buzzwords to prevent being called a bigot well enough. You can talk at length about male socialization, how men are taught to be violent, pig headed, stubborn, and childish. You can talk about it at length, and then at the end throw in a little (oh, women are socialized badly too). Like I said, just enough to not make it overtly obvious that you're a bigot.

But I don't care so much about what you say, it's when you choose to say it. You, again, throw in enough just to make it seem like you're trying to be fair and balanced, but it seems you ONLY show up when there's the opportunity to bash "that stupid male". Funny that you don't really show up when it's the other way around. Violent women? Oh, well they're just jackasses. Violent men? Time for bottle's analysis on culture and socialization, and a plea for those poor poor men to just reject the bonds of socialization (oh, but women are socialized too, see, see how I recognize it? I'm not sexist, really!)

You are lying. People who genuinly consider the genders to be fully equal, equally capable, equally vulnerable, equally capable to see through, or not see through, the bullshit, are equal opportunity attackers.

You...are not. You disregard discussion on one half but take extra special care to discuss the other. So as much as your little throw in lines are a nice attempt to counter it, frankly, I think the lady doth protest a tad too much

And now, that's MY last word on the subject here.

I'd love to see sources on this. Honestly, no sarcasm at all. Do you have citations of cases where human children have been reared in total social isolation and then compared behaviorally to children who were reared in various societies? Because I have looked for that kind of data, and I haven't been able to find it. (Probably because of the ethical restrictions governing psychological research of this sort.)

No Bottle, I'm talking about anecdotal evidence and opinions...you know, what you insert into every conversation, that we get to accept or fuck off. I was very sure about my position on nurture versus nature until I had kids. There are things those kids do that they have never been exposed to, but are EXACTLY like things relatives have done. I wasn't much of a believer in genetics, but I've had my mind changed.

There are a lot of things you'll have strong opinions on that will be challenged actually living in a certain situation. And that's all I'm saying. Because I have seen it time and time again (in myself and others)...what you believe, and what you find to be true tend to shift somewhat when you actually go through a particular experience. I'm not dismissing you because "oh look I have kids and you don't". But I do have to say...I'm glad I kept my big mouth shut when it came to my friend's kids and their parenting practices, because I'd be eating some serious crow right now.

No, it isn't. Because this never actually resolves the problem. In fact, it's an incredibly stupid way of doing practically anything.


What never, it never actualy resolves the problem, never? Are you sure?


Speak for yourself, thanks. Maybe it is for you and your friends; personally, despite being male, I don't think "having it out" would resolve anything at all.

And again, there is the exception to the rule.


Um... that's how most people behave, if the problem actually has an easy fix.
Unfortunately, that's always the case.

Naaa not really. Go out and read some stuff. What I was getting at is one of the major differances is the way in which males and females approach a problem.

The man will see the problem, and go fix it.
The woman will not even see it as a problem(and here is the important bit are you ready?) and indeed there may not be a problem, but will feel better by talking about it.

An example.

Sue has the hump coz mary blanked her in the que at the bank this morning.

Sue's husband see's it as a problem to be fixed and so says 'Why don't you talk to her about it'. Man see's problem, comes up with fix.

Sue decides to go and see her mum, they both bitch about how rude Mary has been, and Sue feels better. The woman does not see it as a problem(as such) but feels better having talked about it.

Gedit now?

Hi, I'm a male of some age.

I utterly reject that line of thinking.


So you have never had a punch up with one of your friends, and afterwards it has all been fine?

My point is that none of this has to do with actual maleness and femaleness, it's about how males and females are TAUGHT to relate to other people.

And, since it is taught, it is also possible to teach something else.

Now, if you think it is good to teach people to solve problems by hitting people, then I'm sure you will agree that it's good to teach this to girls as well as boys, right? I mean, wouldn't it be better if everybody used the best possible method to solve problems? Why stop at having only 50% of the population use the best possible method?

If, on the other hand, you think it's not good to teach this method, then shouldn't we teach everybody the best alternative? Why stop at having only 50% of the population taught effective methods for resolving disputes?


You people really just don't bother reading before you respond, huh?

I specifically state, on this very thread, that I would like to live in a world where unwanted sexual touching was always met with a punch to the face.

Non-violent my ass. I simply believe effectiveness. I think there are situations where punching is stupid. I also think there are situations where punching is smart, funny, awesome, appropriate, or entertaining. The ability to distinguish between these situations is, in my opinion, part of being a grown-up.


Yeah, violence occurs in nature. So does rape, murder, theft, and eating of one's young. If you honestly think that "occurring in nature" = "hunky-dorey for human civilizations," then I really don't think you should be going around calling anybody else "niave."


Heheh it's strange isn't it how we can all chant read before you responed.

My post was not on the merits or otherwise of the diferances, nor was it to condone violence nor teach that problems can or should be solved by using violent means.

I merely pointed out the fact that within male groupings ity is perfectly normal to settle minor disupts with your friends in a physical manor, and that after this things quickly get back to normal.

I made no vaule judgements on this, only called it how I see it.

You can of course dispute that what I say is not correct, as I dispute you claim that all of this is because of social conditioning. No the differances between us, man and woman are purley biological, in your crude langaue in a very real sense yes my penis does make me markedly differant from a woman.

Not only because I have one, but because of the way in which our brians work, the huge amount of differancse between the sexes are NOT as a result of social conidtioning, and it really is naive to think that they are.

As to nature, I think you place too much importance on the humanity of humanity. We are after all nowt but reasonbly intellegent animals, and are subject to the same instinctive actions and reactions.

Again I make no judgement call on this, I'm just saying what I see.

Ok, so this guy was sitting in a folding chair and very sleepy. A guy grabs his ass through the hole in the folding chair. He turns around and punches his arm (on a bracelet) so hard that it bleeds?

I'm trying to picture this happening, and so far it's not working very well. I guess all that's beside the point anyway.

Be the bigger person and apologise. You can also take the opportunity to tell this fellow that it's not the best idea to grab strangers butts without prior consent.

If it was a girl, would you have hit her?

There was no need to hit him like that. You simply could have told him you were not gay and left it at that.

If you are in the States, you might want to apologize. Many schools have zero tolerance policies for violence.

Grabbing someone's ass without his/her permission is technically assault. Punching your assailant is a good way to respond to being assaulted.

http://pointlessbanter.net/blog/2005/05/31/this-answers-the-question-yes-you-can-get-arrested-for-grabbing-someones-ass/

Grabbing someone's ass without his/her permission is technically assault. Punching your assailant is a good way to respond to being assaulted.

While the punchline is not nearly as funny, in reality, grabbing someone's ass without his/her permission is technically battery.

Not assault.

So you have never had a punch up with one of your friends, and afterwards it has all been fine?

Never. Ever. Not once.

What never, it never actualy resolves the problem, never? Are you sure?

How on Earth could it ever resolve anything?

And again, there is the exception to the rule.

Yeah. Me, and all my friends, and most of the male members of my family.

All "exceptions," of course. :rolleyes:

Now, tell me - if these things are really "natural" tendencies imbedded in masculinity, why are there so many exceptions?

Are we "exceptions" just not "real men"?

The woman will not even see it as a problem(and here is the important bit are you ready?) and indeed there may not be a problem, but will feel better by talking about it.

Feel better about what?

If there is no "problem," why does she need to feel better about anything?

Man see's problem, comes up with fix.

Believe it or not, men and women are both perfectly capable of problem-solving.

Sue decides to go and see her mum, they both bitch about how rude Mary has been, and Sue feels better. The woman does not see it as a problem(as such) but feels better having talked about it.

Gedit now?

No, not really... because while what you've described are indeed two different ways of dealing with a problem, they're hardly gender-specific.

Indeed, they are more likely to be contingent on the nature of the problem. When the person in question, male or female, perceives that talking would not actually solve the problem, or would feel embarassed or awkward about talking about it, or simply wants to cool off, he or she is likely to talk to his or her friends or family about it; when, on the other hand, talking something over with the problematic person would be easy, or is clearly the only way that the problem will ever be resolved, he or she is likely to do so.

That's not how "males" or "females" behave; it's how human beings behave.

While the punchline is not nearly as funny, in reality, grabbing someone's ass without his/her permission is technically battery.

Not assault.

Killjoy! You're furthering the stereotype of the dour, humourless lawyer here...

[/cuts to the heart of the issue]

:fluffle: :fluffle:

Killjoy! You're furthering the stereotype of the dour, humourless lawyer here...

Please file form 12E and make sure you complete sections 1 through 5. You will need the form notorized. Once I receive the necessary paperwork I will file for a new sense of humor.

That will be $400.

Please file form 12E and make sure you complete sections 1 through 5. You will need the form notorized. Once I receive the necessary paperwork I will file for a new sense of humor.

That will be $400.

Sheesh, I can only imagine how much paperwork would be involved in having you sex me up! *shudders*

Not to mention having to take out a second mortgage to pay your fees...

Sheesh, I can only imagine how much paperwork would be involved in having you sex me up! *shudders*

If you start now we should be going at it by June.

Never. Ever. Not once.

Well then I'm happy for you, I think it a little strange, but i'm happy for you.
I was though talking in general, not just you. You really cannot think of one time not one time?



How on Earth could it ever resolve anything?


What Violence, really, you are really asking that question? War my friend, they have had their uses you know.


Yeah. Me, and all my friends, and most of the male members of my family.

All "exceptions," of course. :rolleyes:

Now, tell me - if these things are really "natural" tendencies imbedded in masculinity, why are there so many exceptions?

Are we "exceptions" just not "real men"?

No you are all exceptions.

Although I would love to hear what you know objectivly makes a man real?



Feel better about what?
If there is no "problem," why does she need to feel better about anything?
Believe it or not, men and women are both perfectly capable of problem-solving


Sheesh I don't know, I'm a man, I have no idea why some woman get upset over seemingly nowt, ahhh but then I'm a man, I think like one, not a woman.
Yes of course they do, what are you getting at, did you actualy read what I wrote?



No, not really... because while what you've described are indeed two different ways of dealing with a problem, they're hardly gender-specific.

Indeed, they are more likely to be contingent on the nature of the problem. When the person in question, male or female, perceives that talking would not actually solve the problem, or would feel embarassed or awkward about talking about it, or simply wants to cool off, he or she is likely to talk to his or her friends or family about it; when, on the other hand, talking something over with the problematic person would be easy, or is clearly the only way that the problem will ever be resolved, he or she is likely to do so.

Nope you are wrong.
Lets turn it on it's head and I'll asume that you are old enough to be married, and are indeed married?

Have you never had you wife come to you with a problem or worry that you really didn't see as a problem or worry, yet because she has come to you, the first thing you think(conciously or not) is how can I help her, and by that I mean read, how can I solve this problem.

When all that your wife wanted in reality was just to talk about it. It is a well known and documented comfert vs problem solving, it is wholey a gender specific thing, and has nowt to do with differant way in which to solve a problem and everything to do with the differant way in which we, males and females percive things. Go out and google it.

So you have never had a punch up with one of your friends, and afterwards it has all been fine?
I have. Does that mean I'm male, now?

Just wait until I tell the trans community that having a sex change is just that easy! I'll make MILLIONS off my instant sex-swap program!

Sheesh I don't know, I'm a man, I have no idea why some woman get upset over seemingly nowt, ahhh but then I'm a man, I think like one, not a woman.

Have you ever tried, erm, talking to a woman? Instead of assuming that they're all "upset over nowt," have you tried interacting with them as if they were real-live human beings with brains of their very own?

Because, based on your beliefs on men and women, I kinda get the impression that you haven't.

You start with the assumption that a person is upset over nothing, and you're going to have a hard time getting anywhere. Instead, try assuming that female human beings are sane and rational beings (I know, it's radical, but just try it) who might actually have reasons and motivations.


Nope you are wrong.
Lets turn it on it's head and I'll asume that you are old enough to be married, and are indeed married?

Have you never had you wife come to you with a problem or worry that you really didn't see as a problem or worry, yet because she has come to you, the first thing you think(conciously or not) is how can I help her, and by that I mean read, how can I solve this problem.

When all that your wife wanted in reality was just to talk about it. It is a well known and documented comfert vs problem solving, it is wholey a gender specific thing,

Really? Because my (male) lover has come to me plenty of times just wanting to talk over a problem. We actually had a couple of fights back in the day because I assumed he wanted me to give him my critical opinion of something, when what he was really looking for was reassurance and support.

And he's definitely male. Like, really, for sure. I've checked.

My male friends have done this plenty of times, too. Sometimes you just need somebody to listen and to help you sort out your own thoughts about something. Sometimes you really need somebody to say what you kinda suspect is the truth anyhow. Sometimes you know the right thing to do, but you need to hear it from somebody else.

This is not 'gender specific.' It's something that some people do some times. Some of those people are male. Some are female. Some are neither or both. :D


and has nowt to do with differant way in which to solve a problem and everything to do with the differant way in which we, males and females percive things. Go out and google it.
Actually, it sounds exactly like it is a way to solve a problem. The problem is that the person is upset. The way that it can be solved is by talking about it with somebody they care about and trust.

You may not find this to be helpful in solving your problems. That's okay. I don't do it much, either. But that's about your individual personality and mine, not about some supposed gender difference in how people "percive things."

People who are so cock-sure about nurture trumping nature need to raise some newborns for a few months in social isolation.

It's a bit scary what kinds of things turn out not to be social conditioning.

I do not believe that this experiment has ever been tried thoroughly. I know of one study where they started to do it with infants, not touching them more than was absolutely necessary, but they stopped very quickly when their health suffered.

They have done more thorough tests with monkeys: http://whyfiles.org/087mother/4.html and I believe with other animals as well.

Further down in that link you will see the affects of children that grew up with crappy care in Romanian foster homes. Their condition is blamed, in this article, for the lack of nurturing they have recieved. However giving the standard of care they had I am willing to bet that other things, such as diet, may also be to blame. (especially considering how short they were) Although it is possible that they had great care in every other aspect other than Nurturing.

So no, there haven't been any studies like you and Bottle were referring to, because isloation like that is much to damaging to the children involved.

You really cannot think of one time not one time?

Nope.

What Violence, really, you are really asking that question?

No, not violence. Hitting your friends to resolve minor disputes.

No you are all exceptions.

Answer the question, please:

Now, tell me - if these things are really "natural" tendencies imbedded in masculinity, why are there so many exceptions?

Although I would love to hear what you know objectivly makes a man real?

What?

Sheesh I don't know, I'm a man, I have no idea why some woman get upset over seemingly nowt, ahhh but then I'm a man, I think like one, not a woman.

Ah, of course. The last refuge - "it's not my fault they're incomprehensible!"

No... but it IS your fault if you let sexist stereotypes get in the way of comprehending them.

Yes of course they do, what are you getting at, did you actualy read what I wrote?

Yes, I did. I still cannot make sense of the rest of this bit.

Nope you are wrong.
Lets turn it on it's head and I'll asume that you are old enough to be married, and are indeed married?

I'm not married.

Have you never had you wife come to you with a problem or worry that you really didn't see as a problem or worry, yet because she has come to you, the first thing you think(conciously or not) is how can I help her, and by that I mean read, how can I solve this problem.

When all that your wife wanted in reality was just to talk about it. It is a well known and documented comfert vs problem solving, it is wholey a gender specific thing, and has nowt to do with differant way in which to solve a problem and everything to do with the differant way in which we, males and females percive things.

What you refer to has indeed happened to me... IN BOTH ROLES. I've had friends - yes, even male friends - come to me with problems, and have tried to offer solutions... only to realize that they weren't really looking for solutions, but for comfort. And I've gone to people for comfort, rather than solutions - especially when I've perceived that there are no clear solutions - only to be offered solutions. And some of the people I've gone to in those cases have been females.

This is NOT GENDER-SPECIFIC. Again, this is just HUMAN - two different approaches to solving problems.

Now, what I'll give you is that, from what I can tell, it generally tends to be harder for males to accept and offer comfort, especially from and to other males... but this is almost entirely due to the social construction of "real, tough" masculinity.

If you value his friendship/company, then apologize. If not, then don't.

Men and women are socialized to behave differently. Males are often told (by people like many on this thread) that it is normal and appropriate for them to behave like children for their entire lives. Men are often taught that it is "manly" and appropriate for them to resolve disputes by hitting each other and then drinking too much.
Correct, although biology does play a role too.

Women face plenty of bullshit socialization. I mention it on this very thread, as a matter of fact. Women are discouraged from being aggressive, both verbally and physically, and are encouraged to placate others even when they really should be standing firm.
It's quite frightening to think just how severely women are inculcated, to the point of being unable to even engage in physical self-defence. Very sad.

Cultural differances not withstanding, I bet that you will find, if you ask them, that males of all ages consider it perfectly normal and natural behviour to settle minor disputesw amongst friends physicaly.
Habitual behaviour =/= natural behaviour. Furthermore, if you want to act like an unreasonable animal and forfeit your rational faculty, go ahead.

War my friend, they have had their uses you know.
Hyperinflation followed by spirals into depression, as well as massive body counts. Modern wars are hardly the contained pastimes of the medieval nobility that they once were.

Hi, I'm a male of some age.

I utterly reject that line of thinking.
As do I.

People who are so cock-sure about nurture trumping nature need to raise some newborns for a few months in social isolation.

It's a bit scary what kinds of things turn out not to be social conditioning.
Yep, I agree with this. Nurture has its place, but it cannot override nature in quite a few cases. For those interested in reading on the matter, Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate" is a fairly easy-to-read volume on the matter.

You punched him in the arm? Are you sure your not gay? Most straight guys would have punched him in the face.

You punched him in the arm? Are you sure your not gay? Most straight guys would have punched him in the face.

:rolleyes:

You punched him in the arm? Are you sure your not gay? Most straight guys would have punched him in the face.

Presumably, if he were laying down or reclining, it would be a lot harder to hit the guy in the face than in the arm.

Presumably, if he were laying down or reclining, it would be a lot harder to hit the guy in the face than in the arm.

Apparently you have missed the memo.

Not only do real, properly masculine men naturally dominate women, respond brutally to insults, hit their friends to resolve problems, never ask for help or show concern, and never fuck or desire to fuck other men, but they are also capable of superhuman violations of the laws of physics.

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running. I have been advised to apologize, but I think when a person looks pretty dang out of it and is trying to mind their own business you should not go screwing around with people like that. So I go to NSG to see if my ‘situation’ is enough not constitute an apology to the guy or should I apologize out of the good of my heart. So what should I do.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but one should not assault someone by playing grab-ass and then have any expectation of not getting slapped or punched.

You punched him in the arm? Are you sure your not gay? Most straight guys would have punched him in the face.
Do you actually expend any cerebral energy when typing beyond what is required for the actual activity?

Apparently you have missed the memo.

Not only do real, properly masculine men naturally dominate women, respond brutally to insults, hit their friends to resolve problems, never ask for help or show concern, and never fuck or desire to fuck other men, but they are also capable of superhuman violations of the laws of physics.

Oh, I must've missed that one...I guess I'm happy I'm not masculine according to that definition.

Btw, this was a genuinely amusing post. Excellent writing.

No it doesnt. The first means at Scandinavians disposal was to simply ask the person to desist, having not availed himself of those means, but instead having moved to a rather aggressive assault, he most certainly went beyond reasonable force.

Mitigating circumstance: surprised while asleep.

Correct, although biology does play a role too.
Biology plays a role in every living system. Living humans will, obviously, be influenced by biology.

However, unless you've got the evidence to back up any particular assertion, it's bollock to blame biology for what may just as easily be socially-constructed phenomena.


It's quite frightening to think just how severely women are inculcated, to the point of being unable to even engage in physical self-defence. Very sad.

Yep. Working in a domestic abuse center really shocked me, because of the number of women who said that they honestly didn't feel like they were "supposed" to fight back against men who beat them. Him hitting her was standard practice; her hitting him back was unthinkable. I never would have believed that so many people bought into those ideas in this day and age, until I encountered it for myself.

Yep, I agree with this. Nurture has its place, but it cannot override nature in quite a few cases. For those interested in reading on the matter, Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate" is a fairly easy-to-read volume on the matter.
I study the neurological development of embryos for a living. Believe me, I am well informed about the importance of "nature" versus "nurture." I am not saying this to brag, but simply to let everybody know that I honestly do not in any way intend to devalue or ignore the importance of biology and innate traits. I have chosen to study these elements for my career...I do think they're important!

What bugs me is that the people who tend to most strongly advocate a "nature"-based view of human relations are also people who pick totally bullshit elements to fixate on. For instance, they choose supposed "natural" gender differences that are quite obviously NOT biologically innately linked to gender because we have plenty of men and women who do NOT fit those roles already! Clearly it is not "maleness" or "femaleness" which cause these supposedly-innate characteristics to shine.

Even in a society where we push some pretty rigid gender roles, we still have a huge number of people who reject what is supposed to be the "natural" male or female behaviors. I'd say that's a far better argument for "nature" being opposed to those roles, since people overcome all these social pressures and are willing to face significant social penalties in order to reject those roles! There must be some pretty strong internal drive to overcome the social inertia.

As a biologist, I have been trained to approach topics like this one with a cautious and critical eye for the differences between correlations and causation. Perhaps males are more likely than females to display a given trait. Ok. But not all males display it, and many females do! So maleness/femaleness IS NOT sufficient to explain the phenomenon. So let's figure out what actually is at the root of the trait. Saying that it's more common among males and therefore is caused by maleness will earn you a failing grade.

Perhaps males tend to have higher systemic levels of a given transmitter or hormone. Well, then it's not maleness that causes that trait, is it? It's the hormone. You're not showing a given trait because you're a man, since plenty of men DON'T show that trait. So stop trying to blame it on your maleness, because that's not what's causing it. Correlation is not causation, and it's dishonest and sloppy to equate the two.

A homosexual guy deliberately grabbed my arse when I was half a sleep, sitting down away from everybody, and I and since I had no common sense at the time to not do this I responded by punching him in the arm pretty dang hard, enough to cause some bleeding, and the guy running. I have been advised to apologize, but I think when a person looks pretty dang out of it and is trying to mind their own business you should not go screwing around with people like that. So I go to NSG to see if my ‘situation’ is enough not constitute an apology to the guy or should I apologize out of the good of my heart. So what should I do.

You should apologize for hitting him but explain why you were so pissed off. He has no right to touch you in that way and should apologize himself.

You punched him in the arm? Are you sure your not gay? Most straight guys would have punched him in the face.

QFpartialT

Second part...not the first...

You punched him in the arm? Are you sure your not gay? Most straight guys would have punched him in the face.
To be fair, closet-cases would probably be even more likely to react strongly in such a situation.

Have you ever tried, erm, talking to a woman? Instead of assuming that they're all "upset over nowt," have you tried interacting with them as if they were real-live human beings with brains of their very own?

Because, based on your beliefs on men and women, I kinda get the impression that you haven't.

Jesus! Have you ever tried to actualy understand the point I'm trying to make instead of ramming sensless accusations down peoples throats.

Your impression is 100% wrong BTW.

Lets start again, all I am saying is that there are differances between the sexes, and these differances are not just social conditioning, but more fundemental diffrances in the way we percibe things.

This whole upset over nowt is actualy agreat indicater of one of these differances. Where I say she is upset over nowt, this is because my male brain sees it as nothing to be upset over.

Of course I know that she does not feel this wa, of course I am sensitive to her needs and of course I talk to her, what are you trying to imply here?

I gave you an example of how we differ, and in the way you have missunderstood it, and in the way you have tired to make it a personal attack you have just proved it be true.

Jesus! Have you ever tried to actualy understand the point I'm trying to make instead of ramming sensless accusations down peoples throats.

When you yourself refer to women's personal problems as being "upset over nowt," I hardly think it is "senseless" for somebody to assume that you are, at best, insensitive and slightly clueless.


Lets start again, all I am saying is that there are differances between the sexes, and these differances are not just social conditioning, but more fundemental diffrances in the way we percibe things.

And you have provided precisely zero evidence of any of this. You have simply stated that you yourself don't understand women, which kind of leads me to wonder why you think anybody should trust your opinions regarding men and women.


This whole upset over nowt is actualy agreat indicater of one of these differances. Where I say she is upset over nowt, this is because my male brain sees it as nothing to be upset over.

So you are saying that your brain is unable to grasp why another person is upset, yet you think that same brain is somehow able to identify fundamental differences between male and female perception that years of neuroscience research have been unable to successfully define?

Sorry, but when you admit that you can't successfully communicate with the women in your own life, I'm not really inclined to regard you as an authority on human perception.

If YOU cannot understand somebody, don't blame it on your "male brain." Plenty of men are able to communicate successfully with women. The fact that you, apparently, cannot do so is not caused by your maleness. It is caused by some other problem that you have. If you are at all interested in being able to communicate well, you should stop trying to blame your problems on the fact that you are male, and start taking a critical look at what might actually be underlying those problems.


Of course I know that she does not feel this wa, of course I am sensitive to her needs and of course I talk to her, what are you trying to imply here?

I'm not implying anything. I'm saying, quite explicitly, that you are being lazy and insulting. You insult women when you say that they have some kooky female brains that make issues out of nowt, and you insult men when you say that they are incapable of understanding things like talking and conversing as adults. You have personal failings that you are then projecting onto all people. You are making baseless assertions and blaming biological sex for your personal cognitive/emotional problems. I'm not "implying" any of this. I'm saying it, quite clearly.


I gave you an example of how we differ, and in the way you have missunderstood it, and in the way you have tired to make it a personal attack you have just proved it be true.
I'm not attacking you as a human being. If I thought you were actually stupid or whatever then I wouldn't expect you to behave any better than your abilities. The thing is, I think you are capable of rational adult thought.

For some reason, you are making the lousy choice to blame your own problems on irrelevant features. That's lazy and unworthy of you. It is not helpful to you or to anybody in your life. I think you, and those you interact with, would be much better off if you quit making excuses and started taking responsibility for your own behavior and your own choices.

We all will have times when we just don't get where another person is coming from. This isn't anything to do with men or women, it's just human. The way you deal with this is to talk with other people and try to understand them. You don't get anywhere by whimpering about how your poor male brain just can't perceive the world the way their brain does. That's a lame cop-out. Grow up.

What bugs me is that the people who tend to most strongly advocate a "nature"-based view of human relations are also people who pick totally bullshit elements to fixate on. For instance, they choose supposed "natural" gender differences that are quite obviously NOT biologically innately linked to gender because we have plenty of men and women who do NOT fit those roles already! Clearly it is not "maleness" or "femaleness" which cause these supposedly-innate characteristics to shine.
Hey, you'll find no argument from me on that. If one thing annoys me it's how people believe that women should stick to "what they're good at," which invariably according to such individuals translates to being a housewife, a secretary or something of that sort. A CEO, military officer, firewoman? Not on your life... Unfortunately, many women believe this as much as men do.

Even in a society where we push some pretty rigid gender roles, we still have a huge number of people who reject what is supposed to be the "natural" male or female behaviors. I'd say that's a far better argument for "nature" being opposed to those roles, since people overcome all these social pressures and are willing to face significant social penalties in order to reject those roles! There must be some pretty strong internal drive to overcome the social inertia.
I'd say with the variety of gender-roles extant in nature (ranging from matriarchal mammals to pure loners, such as tigers), not to say within human societies themselves, that it's pretty naive to label any gender-role assignment as "natural". In fact, in terms of natural development gender-roles can be counterproductive and inefficient (industrial societies, for instance, benefit from women working - antiquated beliefs on their role as housewife go counter to this).

As a biologist, I have been trained to approach topics like this one with a cautious and critical eye for the differences between correlations and causation. Perhaps males are more likely than females to display a given trait. Ok. But not all males display it, and many females do! So maleness/femaleness IS NOT sufficient to explain the phenomenon. So let's figure out what actually is at the root of the trait. Saying that it's more common among males and therefore is caused by maleness will earn you a failing grade.
Meh, I'm a living example of that - most of my mental characteristics are what'd traditionally be referred to as feminine.

Biology plays a role in every living system. Living humans will, obviously, be influenced by biology.

However, unless you've got the evidence to back up any particular assertion, it's bollock to blame biology for what may just as easily be socially-constructed phenomena.
I'm not making the assertion - just wanted to see whether you're one of those individuals who believes "nature" doesn't exist, and that it's all "nurture".

Yep. Working in a domestic abuse center really shocked me, because of the number of women who said that they honestly didn't feel like they were "supposed" to fight back against men who beat them. Him hitting her was standard practice; her hitting him back was unthinkable. I never would have believed that so many people bought into those ideas in this day and age, until I encountered it for myself.
I haven't had to go very far to see this. I witness it within my own family. Most women I'm related with are highly driven and liberated from antiquated gender nonsense, but one of my cousins is still taught to be a "perfect" lady, and never fight back when force is used against her, and to hold her silence at all times, unless spoken to. It's sad to see because it destroys any personality she might have. Her brother? He's encouraged to be as much of a brat as he pleases.

Sounds like bullshit to me, maybe you should get a life and not graffiti the forum with this garbage?

Sounds like bullshit to me, maybe you should get a life and not graffiti the forum with this garbage?
Who are you referring to?

When you yourself refer to women's personal problems as being "upset over nowt," I hardly think it is "senseless" for somebody to assume that you are, at best, insensitive and slightly clueless.

Wow Bottle you actualy astound me. Lets try again huh.

It was an example, and if you go back and re-read it you find it went something like this:

Sue is upset because Mary blanked her in the que for the bank.

Note: My wife's name is neither Sue nor Mary, so I give an anology, not an episode from my own personal life.

Sue goes home and tells her husband about it. He suggests that Sue talks to Mary about it.

Note: This indicates that Sue's husband see's a problem and wants to fix it.

Sue instead goe to talk to her mum, they sit and bitch about Mary for a while and Sue feels better.

Note: This indicates that the man sees a problem, and wants to fix it while the woman, is upset and feels better after talking.

All in all it was meant as an example to show the differance between the ways male and females think about any given subject.

If you want to take issue with this, then do that, but please stop attacking ME on a personal level.



And you have provided precisely zero evidence of any of this. You have simply stated that you yourself don't understand women, which kind of leads me to wonder why you think anybody should trust your opinions regarding men and women.

I don't remeber seeing your evidance for your stance either, just your insitance that I stop blaming my faults on my sex, not that I have tried to blame anything on any body, again my stance is simply that the differances between the sexes are not purely socical conditioning. Again if you want to discuss this, then lets do that.


So you are saying that your brain is unable to grasp why another person is upset, yet you think that same brain is somehow able to identify fundamental differences between male and female perception that years of neuroscience research have been unable to successfully define?

No what I said that part of the fundemental differances is the way in which we percive things. For example in my experiance it is true to say that I have seen many women get upset over what I or other males may think of as trivail things. Note that is not the same as thinking stupid women, why are you crying. I am certianly not like that. The differances I percive help me to be a better person, and to treat everybody in an equal manor.



Sorry, but when you admit that you can't successfully communicate with the women in your own life, I'm not really inclined to regard you as an authority on human perception.

Again I admited no such thing, because it just is not true. it was an example, read it as such, and stop implying things about me personaly that are false.



If YOU cannot understand somebody, don't blame it on your "male brain." Plenty of men are able to communicate successfully with women. The fact that you, apparently, cannot do so is not caused by your maleness. It is caused by some other problem that you have. If you are at all interested in being able to communicate well, you should stop trying to blame your problems on the fact that you are male, and start taking a critical look at what might actually be underlying those problems.

And again, I don't know where you picked this up from, that is not what I said, please show me where I did. I quite dispise this arrogant attitude that you take Bottle, and I have seen you take it lots of times. Which suggest to me, that you have certian problems, maybe commuincating with the opposite sex.


I'm not implying anything. I'm saying, quite explicitly, that you are being lazy and insulting. You insult women when you say that they have some kooky female brains that make issues out of nowt, and you insult men when you say that they are incapable of understanding things like talking and conversing as adults. You have personal failings that you are then projecting onto all people. You are making baseless assertions and blaming biological sex for your personal cognitive/emotional problems. I'm not "implying" any of this. I'm saying it, quite clearly.

Ohh really? Then please go back and cut and paste for me where I insulted women in the manor that you say I did, and where I insulted men in the manor that you say I did.

You can't because I didn't.

Furthermore, how can you some random person on the internet know who, or what I am basedpurley on YOUR missunderstanding, or misrepresentaion of my words on a single forum?

I belive that you 'big yourself' up too much love. Which in my opinion is an indicatition of some self esteem issues.

Is that true, or like you have I got it completely wrong?


I'm not attacking you as a human being. If I thought you were actually stupid or whatever then I wouldn't expect you to behave any better than your abilities. The thing is, I think you are capable of rational adult thought.

And now the sugar to sweeten the shit?


For some reason, you are making the lousy choice to blame your own problems on irrelevant features. That's lazy and unworthy of you. It is not helpful to you or to anybody in your life. I think you, and those you interact with, would be much better off if you quit making excuses and started taking responsibility for your own behavior and your own choices.

What I read into this is that you really can't intelgantly counter my argument so you go for the personal attacks. Classic deflection.

How dare you pressume to know about me and mine, you actualy prove your self an ass. Responsiblity for my own actions? Show me where you got that twaddle from or just admit that you are fighting an lossing battle and so you turn to dirty tatics.

We all will have times when we just don't get where another person is coming from. This isn't anything to do with men or women, it's just human. The way you deal with this is to talk with other people and try to understand them. You don't get anywhere by whimpering about how your poor male brain just can't perceive the world the way their brain does. That's a lame cop-out. Grow up.

And again I insist that you show me where I have blamed my sex, or talked about any of the problems I may have.

If you do not agree with my stance, then do me the curtesy of argueing in a rational manor with me, stop the personal attacks and debate.

I think you are the cop out, and that indeed you have a lot of growing up to do.

Hey, you'll find no argument from me on that. If one thing annoys me it's how people believe that women should stick to "what they're good at," which invariably according to such individuals translates to being a housewife, a secretary or something of that sort. A CEO, military officer, firewoman? Not on your life... Unfortunately, many women believe this as much as men do.

Exactly.

It really bugs me because there probably ARE important neurological and behavioral trends that are related to biological sex, but everybody gets worked up and distracted with trying to justify the bullshit roles they have already decided to adhere to. That's completely backwards!!!


I'd say with the variety of gender-roles extant in nature (ranging from matriarchal mammals to pure loners, such as tigers), not to say within human societies themselves, that it's pretty naive to label any gender-role assignment as "natural". In fact, in terms of natural development gender-roles can be counterproductive and inefficient (industrial societies, for instance, benefit from women working - antiquated beliefs on their role as housewife go counter to this).
Bingo.


Meh, I'm a living example of that - most of my mental characteristics are what'd traditionally be referred to as feminine.

Yep, me too, only the opposite way around. :D


I'm not making the assertion - just wanted to see whether you're one of those individuals who believes "nature" doesn't exist, and that it's all "nurture".

Oh lord no. I absolutely do believe that biological forces play a very significant role in human behavior patterns. That's actually why the supposedly "nature"-supporting camp really pisses me off...they actually AREN'T focusing on any of the real data or the actual information out there at all! They are focusing on their own preconceptions to the exclusion of real data and real information. They are ignoring the REAL biology that we know about, in favor of pushing ideas that are actually 100% "nurture" at their core.


I haven't had to go very far to see this. I witness it within my own family. Most women I'm related with are highly driven and liberated from antiquated gender nonsense, but one of my cousins is still taught to be a "perfect" lady, and never fight back when force is used against her, and to hold her silence at all times, unless spoken to. It's sad to see because it destroys any personality she might have. Her brother? He's encouraged to be as much of a brat as he pleases.
Yeah, I see it depressingly often as well. It horrifies me how it is considered normal to start "gendering" children from birth. Kids are barely out of the womb and they are being color-coded and stereotyped.

My folks did an amazing job with my brother and I, when it comes to that stuff. As it turns out, they kind of ended up with two "masculine" children. Both my brother and I prefer "boy" games and toys and hobbies, both of us tend to behave in more classically "masculine" ways, and both of us have tended to gravitate toward male friends and role models. I happen to think it's just a matter of our individual personalities, and I'm really glad my parents didn't try to squash either of us by forcing us to "conform" to our genders.

It really bugs me because there probably ARE important neurological and behavioral trends that are related to biological sex, but everybody gets worked up and distracted with trying to justify the bullshit roles they have already decided to adhere to. That's completely backwards!!!
Indeed. I loathe the sort of people who see a female CEO, and then ask "I wonder who she slept with?", thinking they've made a witty remark. Does it never occur to them that she might simply be fit for the part?

Yep, me too, only the opposite way around. :D
It's confusing for me sometimes, because when I say feminine traits I mean more like those associated with a rather dominant woman than the typical frail stereotype. Think Edie from Desperate Housewives. :p

Yeah, I see it depressingly often as well. It horrifies me how it is considered normal to start "gendering" children from birth. Kids are barely out of the womb and they are being color-coded and stereotyped.

My guess is that most parents know no better. Parenting is largely a black box for most people - the problem is, instead of raising the child according to its own needs and personality (and learning in the process), perhaps out of fear of failure, they try and employ ready-to-use formulae in order to rear it, and force them upon the child when these fail. Sure, a child needs to learn to respect others etc., but is instructing it not to play with cars (if it's a girl) really constructive parenting? I'd say no.

My folks did an amazing job with my brother and I, when it comes to that stuff. As it turns out, they kind of ended up with two "masculine" children. Both my brother and I prefer "boy" games and toys and hobbies, both of us tend to behave in more classically "masculine" ways, and both of us have tended to gravitate toward male friends and role models. I happen to think it's just a matter of our individual personalities, and I'm really glad my parents didn't try to squash either of us by forcing us to "conform" to our genders.
I can tell. I think your parents probably managed to identify what kind of upbringing suited you as individuals. Needless to say both they and you did a good job in forming your persona. :)