• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Women gain happiness from seeing their partner upset

Hawkeye10 said:
Or maybe "We now understand why women provoke men into hitting them".
Click to expand...

Do you have any personal experience in this regard?




Psychology does recognize verbal abuse as a type of abuse, but I fail to see why punching someone in the face is a valid response. I'm fairly certain that nobody relevant takes the position that the appropriate response to abuse is counter-abuse, especially if we're talking about a man using physical violence in response to verbal abuse from someone a fraction of his size/strength.
 
Last edited:
SCitizen said:
No -- but 999/1000 law breakers are wrong.
Click to expand...

As a professional who deals with criminal law, I have to say: not that often, given all the problems with so-called "forensic" evidence, eyewitness testimony, over-charging, etc etc etc.



Then there are situations where the law is simply wrong and unjustly enforced, like marijuana laws.
 
This thread is a prime example of inventing aspects of the lives of others.
The joke is one I would think of. I approach it from the angle that all things are explained by their relationships in mechanical systems.
The mechanisms by which things work do not worry about morality or what 'should be'.

Question. How certain are you of the notion that there is something specifically deranged in someone who would say what Hawkeye said?

Mr Person said:
Psychology does recognize verbal abuse as a type of abuse, but I fail to see why punching someone in the face is a valid response.
Click to expand...
Please attempt to answer this.
 
Mr Person said:
Do you have any personal experience in this regard?




Psychology does recognize verbal abuse as a type of abuse, but I fail to see why punching someone in the face is a valid response. I'm fairly certain that nobody relevant takes the position that the appropriate response to abuse is counter-abuse, especially if we're talking about a man using physical violence in response to verbal abuse from someone a fraction of his size/strength.
Click to expand...

Depends on how long it is going on. If you're dealing with that **** for a long time you might just lose your temper and handle the situation with violence.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Or maybe "We now understand why women provoke men into hitting them".
Click to expand...

Mr Person said:
Do you have any personal experience in this regard?

Psychology does recognize verbal abuse as a type of abuse, but I fail to see why punching someone in the face is a valid response. I'm fairly certain that nobody relevant takes the position that the appropriate response to abuse is counter-abuse, especially if we're talking about a man using physical violence in response to verbal abuse from someone a fraction of his size/strength.
Click to expand...

Henrin said:
Depends on how long it is going on. If you're dealing with that **** for a long time you might just lose your temper and handle the situation with violence.
Click to expand...



Would you apply that same reasoning as a basis for acquitting a gang member for beating up a rival gang member?
 
Envoy said:
This thread is a prime example of inventing aspects of the lives of others.
The joke is one I would think of. I approach it from the angle that all things are explained by their relationships in mechanical systems.
The mechanisms by which things work do not worry about morality or what 'should be'.

Question. How certain are you of the notion that there is something specifically deranged in someone who would say what Hawkeye said?
Click to expand...

Mr Person said:
Do you have any personal experience in this regard?

Psychology does recognize verbal abuse as a type of abuse, but I fail to see why punching someone in the face is a valid response. I'm fairly certain that nobody relevant takes the position that the appropriate response to abuse is counter-abuse, especially if we're talking about a man using physical violence in response to verbal abuse from someone a fraction of his size/strength.
Click to expand...

Envoy said:
Please attempt to answer this.
Click to expand...

I said that physical violence in response to verbal abuse is not acceptable. You asked me about specific derangement.

What?

I also do not understand what you were trying to say in the rest of your post.
 
Mr Person said:
Would you apply that same reasoning as a basis for acquitting a gang member for beating up a rival gang member?
Click to expand...

I'm just saying when you're deal with something for years on end it will start to dig deeper as time goes on. For some people if they don't eventually remove themselves from that situation they will crack and bad things will happen.
 
Mr Person said:
I said that physical violence in response to verbal abuse is not acceptable. You asked me about specific derangement.

What?

I also do not understand what you were trying to say in the rest of your post.
Click to expand...
First part of my post was directed at everyone so no it would not make sense in direct response to you. A disturbing number of people ITT invent the evils they *know* must exist in the mind of someone who make a beaten woman joke. Or in the mind of anyone who transgresses the Obviously Righteous Thing.

On my post to you, I interpret "valid response" as a result of 'how things work', much like an equation. To me it is obvious why people hit other people. I never endorsed it.
 
SCitizen said:
No -- but 999/1000 law breakers are wrong.
Click to expand...

nope, you cannot make that claim. Many laws are malum prohibitum and may well be stupid laws. Take some of the blue laws that might still remain because people don't enforce them and as a result no one has wasted their time and money destroying the law with a first amendment lawsuit.

some laws are clearly in violation of our constitution even if the courts are complicit with the violation
 
TurtleDude said:
nope, you cannot make that claim. Many laws are malum prohibitum and may well be stupid laws. Take some of the blue laws that might still remain because people don't enforce them and as a result no one has wasted their time and money destroying the law with a first amendment lawsuit.

some laws are clearly in violation of our constitution even if the courts are complicit with the violation
Click to expand...

Perhaps you are right. But many people who break laws believe that the laws they are breaking should not exist. Like some radical Leftists believe assaulting strong Conservatives is ethical.
 
Bucky said:
Woman in 2017 have far more resources today than the past. Any woman in DV relationship can easily get out of it. Far easier than a man in a DV relationship.
Click to expand...

Astounding ignorance. Do you have any ideas why women sometimes don't leave abusers? Men have none of those concerns.
 
ecofarm said:
Astounding ignorance. Do you have any ideas why women sometimes don't leave abusers? Men have none of those concerns.
Click to expand...

That is simply faulty wiring.
 
Bucky said:
That is simply faulty wiring.
Click to expand...

AKA they want what they are not supposed to want and according to some should not be allowed to want so the state should step in.

Women only have rights so long as they want what they are supposed to want just as with the men as it turns out.

If a woman wants to stay for her own reasons which are none of our business we shred her rights.

Feminism was never supposed to turn this way.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
AKA they want what they are not supposed to want and according to some should not be allowed to want so the state should step in.

Women only have rights so long as they want what they are supposed to want just as with the men as it turns out.

If a woman wants to stay for her own reasons which are none of our business we shred her rights.

Feminism was never supposed to turn this way.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed. In another thread, you have liberals praising a woman who raped a man repeatedly as a form of female empowerment.
.
 
Bucky said:
Woman in 2017 have far more resources today than the past. Any woman in DV relationship can easily get out of it. Far easier than a man in a DV relationship.
Click to expand...

Really? What if they have little kids?
 
Bucky said:
Woman in 2017 have far more resources today than the past. Any woman in DV relationship can easily get out of it. Far easier than a man in a DV relationship.
Click to expand...

Why is it harder for a man to leave?
 
Bucky said:
Yes indeed. In another thread, you have liberals praising a woman who raped a man repeatedly as a form of female empowerment.
.
Click to expand...

Everything a woman does these days it's female empowerment. It's been that way for a least five decades now.
 
ecofarm said:
Astounding ignorance. Do you have any ideas why women sometimes don't leave abusers? Men have none of those concerns.
Click to expand...

Feel free to list them.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Or maybe "We now understand why women provoke men into hitting them".
Click to expand...

Henrin said:
People on DP will never admit to that.
Click to expand...

Holy crap.

What was the provocation for domestic violence?

"Can I help you with that unibrow?"

Seriously how does a woman provoke a man to hit them?
 
What a ****ed-up thread!

IRL the only men I've known that condone hitting women ... hit women!

One can take from that they want.
 
Chomsky said:
What a ****ed-up thread!

IRL the only men I've known that condone hitting women ... hit women!

One can take from that they want.
Click to expand...

No one condoned violence in this thread.
 
Celebrity said:
This type of study is one that goes against my gut instinct. My instinct was to reject its findings simply because I find it hard to believe that women enjoy male pain. Well, after about 10 seconds more of reading I found that the premise was a little more palatable. Science is tasty like that.



So my thoughts are as follows, if women really can't bear to be disconnected for even the smallest amount of time, that could lead to some problems in relationships. Women feel there is an incentive to expose men, and men do not want to be exposed, and thus men feel violated by prying women. This is especially true when men are held to a higher standard than women, or expected to perform.

For example, if a woman wants her partner to earn more money, the issue may double if her partner is not open to discussing money. Money is a sensitive issue for a lot of men and women.

On the other hand, women who are not granted access face a different problem. They must either coerce an insincere relationship, or cultivate a stagnant relationship. In the long term, that might mean she risks over-committing to a non-functional relationship in order to compensate.

It is ironic that women expect men to perform to a certain degree over a longer period of time than, say intercourse. Thus, a man should not force a woman to sexually perform, and the two partners may go their separate ways. But in some situations it is acceptable (according to women) for a woman to cause a man emotional distress if it is in the best interest of the relationship. In the short term, there is less at stake, but we still treat bodily autonomy (i.e. personal space) as more important than social autonomy (i.e. social space). His partner having a headache might be an immediately accepted reason to cease sexual relations, yet her partner having a headache might cast doubt on the nature of the relationship.

What Women Really Want in a Relationship | TIME.com

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/fam-26-2-236.pdf
Click to expand...

Well said and very important. The "masculine" man image being a very hard thing to counter. The stoic mentality. I find myself falling into the trap. Not wanting to show weakness. I know it drives my girlfriend bonkers. Usually I try to talk about stuff because of that though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom