I witnessed an incident yesterday that made me ponder this concept. It was a minor traffic accident and the woman was at fault. She had backed up into someone but was upset and blaming them (guy was in aisle and had right of way). She was screaming at him and getting into face. Incident settled though with no actual violence.
Had she been a male, I had a feeling she probably would have gotten struck. She was in the guys face screaming pointing and even poked him with her finger. So I'm wondering? Is it sexist not to hit a woman in an incident like this? Assuming that if she was a man...she would get hit?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
First, reality: Yes, a man doing this to another man would be more likely to eat a fist than when a woman acts that way, because reasons.
Legal analysis: a physical response to in-face-yelling and poking falls into a grey area. Assault occurs when a credible threat of imminent harm exists and requires the three components of ability, opportunity and intent (the latter formally called Jeopardy in recent years). Verbal threats combined with aggressive entering of your personal space could fulfill opportunity and intent, leaving Ability as a question mark.
This is where the question mark comes in, and the differences that will be considered (in most legal venues) between the aggressor being a 120 lb woman, a 200 lb man, or a 300 lb woman, all of which have different connotations of "Ability". Weapons would factor in if any were visibly present.
Assuming an average sized man and an average sized woman, and no weapons, Ability becomes iffy and without that third leg to the triangle claiming Assault to justify Self-Defense becomes iffy. Not impossible, just iffy.
If the aggressor were a man of similar size and physicality the matter would still be somewhat in question depending on the totality of circumstances. What verbal threats were made could factor in... ie whether threats were made verbally, and whether they were credible or indicated intent to inflict severe harm.
The level of physical response would be a factor. Reasonably sure you could get away with pushing the subject's poky-hand away, or pushing the subject away. Putting the subject into a restraining hold without medical injury would be more likely to pass muster than punching them. Your chances of getting away with a single punch would be somewhat greater than if you beat the subject unmercifully and put them in hospital.
Legally, a better immediate response would be to attempt to safely exit the scene while warning the subject that they should keep back.
Personally...
Act like a lady and I'll treat you like one. Act like a threat and I will assess the threat and calculate my response with little regard for gender considerations, just legalities and tactics.
Addendum: I'm not a Vulcan. Provoke me too much and I can't promise a reasoned reaction.
