men involved with domestic violence

Recommended Videos

Chris Tian

New member
May 5, 2012
421
0
0
barbzilla said:
Getting an infection on the nerve cluster behind the eye that leads directly to the cortex of the brain, will likely lead to death, thus the manslaughter cases I was talking about. There is a very real risk when applying maneuvers such as these, and why they are only meant to be used in life or death situations (as it may save your life at the cost of your assailant's, which isn't necessarily bad, just messy).
Well that really depends on how fast they get medical treatment and other circumstances, but I'm no doctor so I only know what I was told by that crazy israeli guy.

Of course there is a risk when using harmful maneuvers like this, but if there is someone trying to kill you or rape you, which is what the women in the courses are mostly afraid of, or both, than you should deal with one problem after another. First eliminate the attacker, than deal with the possible repercussions, if you hold back you might give up the slight edge that would have saved your hide.
 

Stu35

New member
Aug 1, 2011
594
0
0
barbzilla said:
I agree with absolutely everything you said. My original post was actually a criticism of pretty much anybody on the internet who comes along and says "oh, if it was me I would totally just kick their asses" or any variation of that.

Not just when it comes to abuse, but pretty much everything from bullying to your parents being dicks, it's the same the internet over - a lot of people who are all fucking nails trying to insist that they know some amazing technique which can get even the physically weakest, psychologically most damaged child, out of any kind of physical or psychological abuse.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,538
4,128
118
barbzilla said:
As someone else said earlier, it has nothing to do with how brave the person may be, or how skilled they are. Most people have many psychological barriers they have constructed over the course of their life time that dictates what is right and what is wrong. Generally speaking, the target of domestic abuse has the right barriers up to put up a strange type of defense. While it really isn't any type of defense at all, the brain thinks that this is the proper path because of (many reasons really, but most prominently) conditioning. This defense defends the abuser in the victim's own mind, causing the victim to feel sympathetic and responsible for the current state of affairs (when in reality it is the assailant's fault 100% of the time). So to their psychology they are being brave by not standing up for themselves, and all the skill in the world doesn't matter if you won't use it.
On a related note, victims will sometimes take the abusers sides when they are criticised, and not want to leave them for fear that the abuser won't cope.

An abuser cannot be a successful abuser unless they are able to mentally and psychological abuse their victim.
 

manic_depressive13

New member
Dec 28, 2008
2,617
0
0
Of course it looks ridiculous, the guy's a foot taller than her and clearly looks stronger. I wonder what would happen if they would repeat this experiment with a man who actually looks physically weaker than the woman for once. There's a big difference between not wanting to hit someone because you know they're weaker than you and you don't want to hurt them, and not wanting to hit someone because you know they're stronger than you and you're terrified of what they'll do in retaliation.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
Smilomaniac said:
I feel that today, society seems far more sexist and divided than ever. Awareness is no longer about being informed, it's about picking sides.
really?

separate drinking fountains was just..you know....a perfectly reasonable thing?
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,538
4,128
118
Smilomaniac said:
What a nice kneejerk reaction. Thank you for perfectly demonstrating how anyone can't say anything, before someone lashes out against them and assumes the worst about them.
What, that you're totally and obviously wrong?

Yes, bigotry hasn't gone away, but there has been big and important reductions to it. We shouldn't stop moving forwards, but we shouldn't pretend we haven't either.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
Smilomaniac said:
What a nice kneejerk reaction. Thank you for perfectly demonstrating how anyone can't say anything, before someone lashes out against them and assumes the worst about them.
projecting much?

it was (if not a bit snarky) a genuine question

or as the ex Australian Politician Pauline Hanson said [i/]"please explain?[/i]
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
Smilomaniac said:
If the absence of actual debate has gone unnoticed, might I point out that this is exactly what I referred to?
what? you said something and I felt it needed explanation

you took my drinking fountain comment as an accusation of being whatever [footnote/]hence "projection" not necessarily the thing itself but of the "being attacked" thing[/footnote]

nobody's telling you what to think..we want to know what you think, and if your that bothered by people disagreeing with you then thats your problem
 

Grahav

New member
Mar 13, 2009
1,129
0
0
shootthebandit said:
Colour Scientist said:
It's also nice to see that it is very much centred on male victims, as opposed to men vs women.
I like the whole violence is violence tag line. Its not pointing the finger at any specific gender

Ive noticed the youtube comment section has went all anti-feminist but im sure youve got enough internet smarts to know that the youtube comments section is a hive of trolls and uninformed yet strongly opinionated arseholes.
When feminists like Andrea Dworkin says: "Seduction is often difficult to distinguish from rape. In seduction, the rapist often bothers to buy a bottle of wine."

And another: "No woman needs intercourse; few women escape it."

Makes it difficult not to respond.

Johnny Novgorod said:
ultratog1028 said:
If it can happen to one group of people, it can happen to almost any.
This is all USA figures, but apparently:

20% of all women suffered rape or attempted rape sometime in their life.

4.8% of all men were forced to penetrate someone else, usually a woman; had been the victim of an attempt to force penetration; or had been made to receive oral sex.
Be careful with those statistics.

http://communityvoices.post-gazette.com/opinion/the-radical-middle/27667--one-in-one-thousand-eight-hundred-seventy-seven
 

PoolCleaningRobot

New member
Mar 18, 2012
1,237
0
0
Chris Tian said:
That obviously depends on the exact situation but lets assume this:

A women of around 50kg gets attacked by a much stronger man, lets say around 80kg. He has one hand at her throat and forces one hand down her pants. If she than executes the technique(I will describe it in a bit) fast and with all her might she will most likely do serious damage to his eye before he can stop her.

Proper eye gauging technique: You place your palm on your attackers cheeck like you slapped him and just left the hand where it landed. Next you place your thumb (of the same hand of course) between his nose and eyeball and stab the eyeball with it, but not in the middle, keep your thumb next to the nose. This way you can stab with all your might without the risk off slipping of his eye ad the side of his face.

This technique is very effective in situations like the above mentioned. In most cases men will try to control a women similar to what i described instead of trying to deal immediate damge, like just punshing or kicking her.

If he is actually beating here without holding her down or anything or just standing infront of her this technique is obviusly much harder to do.
Ah, that makes sense. Given that there probably a lot of situations where the abusers hands are "tied" I can see how effective this technique would be

barbzilla said:
..... I said I wasn't going to respond to this thread, then I saw this question...
I can't really blame you. But threads like these should be fine if you don't respond to anything flame worthy
and I can't help but write it as I already knew the answer and it is now nagging at me. A person's eye's can become dislodged in less than a second with the proper technique. It won't destroy the eye, and there is no damage (provided they are put back in by professionals) and doesn't become infected (as infection here is a bad bad thing, and will likely end up in a manslaughter case with a self defense plea). Done improperly, it can take only seconds to permanently blind someone by puncturing the eye and damaging the nerves inside and behind the eye, and will also likely lead to a manslaughter case with a self defense plea.

Edit with a quick note: The proper eye gouging technique relies on vacuum principals and uses your finger to rotate and dislodge, however, there is a good chance of damaging the nerve cluster behind the eye with this technique too, which will leave permanent blindness. While blindness may not be as bad as the possible manslaughter case with a self defense plea, in some cases live assailants who were grievously wounded managed to level suits against their victims and win with sympathetic juries (that isn't to say this happens all the time, it is rare, but it could be a worse situation to stumble onto unprepared).
Thank you both. That answers my question. But barbzilla, are you saying people should avoid doing it if they can't do it right?
 

PoolCleaningRobot

New member
Mar 18, 2012
1,237
0
0
Asita said:
Ideally, yes. Unfortunately there's some real world precedence to the contrary among some loons (Largely confined to second wave but seeing a bit of a resurgence in what I've occasionally seen referred to as 'fourth wave' feminism...you know, the "if it's sex with men, it's rape" wackos), some very unfortunate choices and a bit of an unfortunate tendency even among the more levelheaded to think of these issues entirely in female-centric terms.

For the sake of example with that last bit, you might remember a "Don't be that Guy" poster campaign? Well the group responsible has its own site, which greets you with an image of a boy with a bloody nose pointing out the problem with telling young boys to "man up" and be tough...namely that - and I quote - it's "a crisis in masculinity that causes violence against women and girls". That's the problem they saw and focused on. Not that the kid was effectively being encouraged to be violent, not that the mindset might put him in danger, not that it encourages him to be a bully and hurt other people, the specific possibility that he might grow up and hurt women. The very thing they refer to as a male crisis is identified exclusively in terms of how it affects women.[footnote]As you might have guessed, this poster irks me something fierce.[/footnote] While yes, feminism is supposed to be about equality between the sexes - and continues to be so in many cases - there have been a fair amount of things cropping up that lend themselves to the idea that only part of the story is being told, so I'm not sure it's entirely fair to fault those who say as much.
I saw this comment and had to say absolutely yes. People talk about how Barbie is a harmful stereotype for women but then ignore all the shitty male role models that boys grow up looking at and call them "power fantasies". I don't care if a character like Kratos is shown sexing lots of women and being powerful. Barbie is shown being happy and beautiful two things people want to be but that doesn't make what she represents any more healthy. Characters like Kratos convey the idea that being a man means you can't show any emotion besides being angry, you need to have lots of sex rather than a meaningful partnership, obviously you can't be gay, you have to be the "dominant" male, and you have to solve your problems with rage and violence. How many male "role models", especially in video games, respond to tragedy in an emotionally healthy way, rather than vows of revenge and angry yelling? This whole mentality is also probably related to the huge divorce rate among couples. Men are encouraged to show no emotion and instead women are "supposed" to be the emotional support for the whole relationship. That kind of behavior is too stressful for both parties and can't last. Hell, its even getting to the point where girls can say they want to be a doctor, a scientist, or a construction worker and get support from their parents but if a boy says he wants to be a nurse, a ballet dancer, or god forbid a stay at home dad suddenly parents become concerned that their boys might "look gay" to other people
 

barbzilla

He who speaks words from mouth!
Dec 6, 2010
1,465
0
0
PoolCleaningRobot said:
Chris Tian said:
That obviously depends on the exact situation but lets assume this:

A women of around 50kg gets attacked by a much stronger man, lets say around 80kg. He has one hand at her throat and forces one hand down her pants. If she than executes the technique(I will describe it in a bit) fast and with all her might she will most likely do serious damage to his eye before he can stop her.

Proper eye gauging technique: You place your palm on your attackers cheeck like you slapped him and just left the hand where it landed. Next you place your thumb (of the same hand of course) between his nose and eyeball and stab the eyeball with it, but not in the middle, keep your thumb next to the nose. This way you can stab with all your might without the risk off slipping of his eye ad the side of his face.

This technique is very effective in situations like the above mentioned. In most cases men will try to control a women similar to what i described instead of trying to deal immediate damge, like just punshing or kicking her.

If he is actually beating here without holding her down or anything or just standing infront of her this technique is obviusly much harder to do.
Ah, that makes sense. Given that there probably a lot of situations where the abusers hands are "tied" I can see how effective this technique would be

barbzilla said:
..... I said I wasn't going to respond to this thread, then I saw this question...
I can't really blame you. But threads like these should be fine if you don't respond to anything flame worthy
and I can't help but write it as I already knew the answer and it is now nagging at me. A person's eye's can become dislodged in less than a second with the proper technique. It won't destroy the eye, and there is no damage (provided they are put back in by professionals) and doesn't become infected (as infection here is a bad bad thing, and will likely end up in a manslaughter case with a self defense plea). Done improperly, it can take only seconds to permanently blind someone by puncturing the eye and damaging the nerves inside and behind the eye, and will also likely lead to a manslaughter case with a self defense plea.

Edit with a quick note: The proper eye gouging technique relies on vacuum principals and uses your finger to rotate and dislodge, however, there is a good chance of damaging the nerve cluster behind the eye with this technique too, which will leave permanent blindness. While blindness may not be as bad as the possible manslaughter case with a self defense plea, in some cases live assailants who were grievously wounded managed to level suits against their victims and win with sympathetic juries (that isn't to say this happens all the time, it is rare, but it could be a worse situation to stumble onto unprepared).
Thank you both. That answers my question. But barbzilla, are you saying people should avoid doing it if they can't do it right?
If you are in a life or death situation, I'd advise you to do what is necessary to stay alive as priority number 1, anything that doesn't fall under priority number 1, I don't think you should use it, even if you were able to do it 100%.
 

Saetha

New member
Jan 19, 2014
824
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
ultratog1028 said:
If it can happen to one group of people, it can happen to almost any.
This is all USA figures, but apparently:

20% of all women suffered rape or attempted rape sometime in their life.

4.8% of all men were forced to penetrate someone else, usually a woman; had been the victim of an attempt to force penetration; or had been made to receive oral sex.
Err... wasn't the "One in Five" study debunked? It had bad methodology. Here's some stuff on that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNsJ1DhqQ-s

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2013/10/24/statistics-dont-back-up-claims-about-rape-culture

Not sure about the male figure though... all though Insanity Requiem posted an interesting study on that. Not sure how valid it is, however...

Anyway, cool. It's nice to see a discussion being had about this.
 

PhiMed

New member
Nov 26, 2008
1,483
0
0
Elfgore" post="18.850952.21030550 said:
I always love when I read through the comments and I see "Checkmate Feminist" like they just caught the movement with their pants down. Then they get torn a new one by people telling them what feminism actually is. Kinda makes me laugh every time.


Feminism is a movement that is dedicated to securing rights and opportunities for women which are equal to those of men.

That's all it is. Anything else you say it is is something it is not.

While feminist writers may have some other ideas which include the protection of male victims of domestic violence, those ideas are not inherently feminist just because your favorite feminist writer says they are.

Sorry.

I don't think that this film negates feminism in any way, and I don't think that feminists necessarily hate men. I just see the notion that feminists are somehow for everybody's rights advertised on here quite often, as if universal justice is somehow the goal of feminism, and that's just not true. I know that there are a quite a few feminist authors who make that claim, and I wish some of their colleagues would come around to their mindset when it comes to backing that up, but it's a pretty divided movement.

There are those authors who say feminism means equality for all, and the squashing of inequity, wherever it exists. There are other authors, in the past and present, who actively promote the complete eradication of males. It's hard to imagine someone who writes something like, "I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them (Robin Morgan)", feeling sympathy for the guy in this case.
 

Elfgore

Your friendly local nihilist
Legacy
Dec 6, 2010
5,655
24
13
PhiMed said:
Elfgore said:
I always love when I read through the comments and I see "Checkmate Feminist" like they just caught the movement with their pants down. Then they get torn a new one by people telling them what feminism actually is. Kinda makes me laugh every time.


Feminism is a movement that is dedicated to securing rights and opportunities for women which are equal to those of men.

That's all it is. Anything else you say it is is something it is not.

While feminist writers may have some other ideas which include the protection of male victims of domestic violence, those ideas are not inherently feminist just because your favorite feminist writer says they are.

Sorry.

I don't think that this film negates feminism in any way, and I don't think that feminists necessarily hate men. I just see the notion that feminists are somehow for everybody's rights advertised on here quite often, as if universal justice is somehow the goal of feminism, and that's just not true. I know that there are a quite a few feminist authors who make that claim, and I wish some of their colleagues would come around to their mindset when it comes to backing that up, but it's a pretty divided movement.

There are those authors who say feminism means equality for all, and the squashing of inequity, wherever it exists. There are other authors, in the past and present, who actively promote the complete eradication of males. It's hard to imagine someone who writes something like, "I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them (Robin Morgan)", feeling sympathy for the guy in this case.
First off, I'm not a feminist, I know absolutely no feminist writers, nor do I follow the movement. I get my idea about feminism from this site, since multiple users go by feminist and push for equal rights. Maybe it's some kind of new wave of feminism or something. I think they should no longer go by feminist, because the word does sound like women over men. Change it up to equalist or something. The writers who you refer to are radical feminist, or femnazis. Just like any radical group, the majority doesn't take them seriously and they are hated. They are the vocal minority.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
Elfgore said:
Change it up to equalist or something.
we can sit around the campfire of equality singing Kumbya all we want, but we all know who has the guitar and who's singing loudest. Thats why having your own campfire isn't "reverse whatever"
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Aaron Sylvester said:

Defend himself and...run away. Mm...Y'know, if they weren't actors and were a real couple, he'd have had to go home to her at some point. Maybe he already asked someone what he should do. Maybe he went to his dear old da' and asked him how he should deal with his abusive spouse, and maybe his dad told him to 'stop being a ******' for being affected by it. Maybe he genuinely loves her and he just takes the beatings with the affection.

Just like women have done in that situation. Not too different, the sexes, you know.

My partners never beat me. Okay, yeah, one of them did, another enjoyed digging nails in whenever she wanted to iron out her point in an argument. With the former, every time it was played for laughs. I thought nothing of it. Still think nothing of it. What's your plan for that situation, dude? Defend myself and run away? God, yeah, that would work. Y'know, till I have to return to her.