In a traditional sense, women are supposedly weaker then me, which is why there are always given the courtesy of being saved first and all the fact.

I don't like the whole "men can't hit women" since it seems so sexist to me! But is there a way for us women to defend ourselves from a biologically stronger men? In most cases, they can overpower us, so I guess you can be grateful to the rule, even if it's not very likeable in my opinion.

I think it is a sexiest excuse for a woman to get away with hitting a man. I get annoyed when I hear people yelling at a guy who was hit first by a women. It's unfair, and I know plenty of women who could be guys up.

I don't think it's okay for anyone to hit anyone unless they really deserve it.

I think it's one of those bullshit double standards women like to use... Oh, men have to pay for the meal, they can't go dutch. Oh, men have to open the door for the lady, because that's what gentlemen do.

It's... stupid. It's like, we want to be treated like little princesses on our little parade floats, but god forbid if a man says something like, "Lemme see that box, sweetheart, I think it's a little too heavy for you!" Because then all of a sudden it's a sexist comment. If you aren't catering to a woman's every whim, it's sexist. If you do, it's still sexist. It depends on the context, I suppose, but I can't stand this 'get my cake and eat it, too' mentality.

In a lot of ways, I feel sorry for men.

I think, if a woman is hard enough to give it then she can take definately take it. I'm always bullying my male friends and I find it funny when they try back and get all pissy when I just sit and giggle. <3

I don't agree when the woman hasn't done anything first tho. Like the whole wife beating crap. But I also wouldn't agree the other way round. Husband beating. xDDDD >>;

Originally Posted by Le Pomme

I believe that if you can dish it out, you should be prepared to take the same amount back.

Two cents:
Girls who sing about Equality shouldn't be hypocrites and say 'Well men can't hit women then'
I believe that a lot of Feminists are really just looking to be the better species, and not equal at all.

Go look up feminism in the dictionary.
Go read about its history.

Don't use words when you don't know what they're about.

I think if women want to fight with men, they better be able to face the consequence. Why is it okay for women to hit men but when men do it, it's abuse? Because they are weaker? You know, it's funny how we sit and ask for equality but when it comes down to strength, we are frail. "Don't hit me back because I am a girl! I'm weaker than you". Fine, I know men are capable of building more body mass and muscles than women but heck, I am pretty strong myself. If we want to be strong, we can be. And I know men are mostly stronger than us.

A lot of women hit guys because they automatically think that the guy won't hit them back because they are girls. That is disgusting. I'm sure there are men getting abused in relationships, not as much as women, but still. But he can't say anything about it because people will pick on him and laugh and say "impossible-you must be queer"

Women don't get special priveleges. I think that is exploiting ourselves. I am not a feminist though. If a guy wants to hold the door for me or help me with my bags, go ahead. It's not that I am weak and it's not about men thinking they are better. It is called chivalry or just plain being nice. I would hold the door open for a guy or help him with bags if he is struggling. I work at an office with a warehouse and sometimes, I'll go pick items from the warehouse that can be heavy. I'll help some of my co-workers with heavy boxes too.

Sorry for getting off topic but in general. People shouldn't hit each other period. And they other person isn't justified in hitting back whether that person is a woman or not. Violence is wrong.

Originally Posted by Tsukipon

I am not a feminist though. If a guy wants to hold the door for me or help me with my bags, go ahead. It's not that I am weak and it's not about men thinking they are better. It is called chivalry or just plain being nice. I would hold the door open for a guy or help him with bags if he is struggling. I work at an office with a warehouse and sometimes, I'll go pick items from the warehouse that can be heavy. I'll help some of my co-workers with heavy boxes too.

...What does any of that have to do with feminism? If it's equal, as in, you're doing it for men and men are doing it for you, why would that conflict with feminist principles? It's when men are expected to open the door for women and not men, and women are not expected to do it at all, that there's a problem.

Also, opening doors for women is not "chivalry". Chivalry is putting women on a pedestal, which seems nice, except it's based on the idea that women are weak and frail and delicate and easily corrupted and need to be protected like children, which leads to all sorts of fun things like oppression and being owned by whatever male happens to be most important in your life at the time.

Hitting is hitting.

You shouldn't do it.

Whether you're a girl or a boy.

I must admit I sorta feel bad when I do it because I know I'm hurting the other party. I never saw sex as a matter for if it's okay or not. But then sometimes I get too carried away and tend to randomly slap or hit people. >_> Go talk to my other half. He gets hit a lot.

However if hitting MUST happen, it should be done WITH GOOD reason.

>_>

Self defense is one.

Or if it's a parent trying to use the iron will discipline method with force, BUT NOT MUCH, then fine. >_> Sorry. I know some people are against this but nothing hurts a little flick on the hand or sort of smack on the bum at times. BUT NOT MUCH PLEASE.

But hitting for the sake of or just to get an ego trip?

HELL NO. GO FILE CIVIL CHARGES.

Who cares if it's a female hitting a man?

@_@

Well, in a sense, I don't think men should hit women, UNLESS the woman is really ready to fight. I know I wanted to whoop this one annoying kid, and he kept using "I don't hit girls" as an excuse. Well, whoop de freaking do. I have no problem with him hitting me, so I don't see what the big deal was.

Other than that, I don't think a guy should hit a girl. It's just rude. I think the rule was made out of respect, more than anything. Besides, what girl is going to like a guy who hits them?

I've seen a certain punk-rocking chick I know knock a rather large guy out cold with one punch. It definitely happens, it's just not quite the norm.

In my opinion, it's just generally not a good idea to hit other people, but I suppose I'd admit that it's slightly less morally repulsive if the person you're hitting is your physical match. It's pretty low to attack someone who can't be expected to fight back. Most men can physically overpower most women, and women - most of whom have been conditioned essentially since birth to respond passively - are particularly unlikely to stand up to their assailant.

Which is why we need to stop infantilizing the female youth, pronto, and why we need to encourage women to learn to fight if they find an interest in it.

Originally Posted by Philomel

...What does any of that have to do with feminism? If it's equal, as in, you're doing it for men and men are doing it for you, why would that conflict with feminist principles? It's when men are expected to open the door for women and not men, and women are not expected to do it at all, that there's a problem.

There are extreme feminists out there, which I have seen, who will practically bite off a man's head because he wanted to hold the door open for her or if they want to help her with her groceries. They go about how they are equal and just as stong as men and can carry on just fine. I am not saying a woman holding the door open for a man is a feminist act or whatever. I think a woman doing so makes them equal to men, then there is no problem. But just because they assume the man thinks them too weak, which maybe some do, doesn't mean they should through a fit when a man holds open a door.

Now it is true on how men are the ones who are expected to hold the door open. But that is how our society is. That is usually a moral passed on through families that deem this the act of being a gentleman. The fact that women are not expected to do it IS indeed a problem.

Originally Posted by Philomel

Also, opening doors for women is not "chivalry". Chivalry is putting women on a pedestal, which seems nice, except it's based on the idea that women are weak and frail and delicate and easily corrupted and need to be protected like children, which leads to all sorts of fun things like oppression and being owned by whatever male happens to be most important in your life at the time.

Maybe chivalry wasn't the proper term I should have used. I apologize for that. Maybe the proper term is just being a gentleman, which still orbits around that term.

I personally don't think that a man not holding the door open for a woman is wrong. I think a person not holding the door open for another person right behind them is wrong. I don't expect a man to go out of his way to open a door I am about to walk through, not should he. I am not going to wait outside a closed door until a man opens it either.

Originally Posted by The Cheshire Cat

Well, in a sense, I don't think men should hit women, UNLESS the woman is really ready to fight. I know I wanted to whoop this one annoying kid, and he kept using "I don't hit girls" as an excuse. Well, whoop de freaking do. I have no problem with him hitting me, so I don't see what the big deal was.

I don't think that should be an excuse either. In my idea, I think he is just being a chicken.

Originally Posted by The Cheshire Cat

Other than that, I don't think a guy should hit a girl. It's just rude. I think the rule was made out of respect, more than anything. Besides, what girl is going to like a guy who hits them?

It is true that the idea for a man not to hit a woman was made out of respect, I just don't think a person should hit another person no matter the gender. Violence is wrong. It's not a rule so much as it is a moral. Most mothers tell their son not to hit a woman and I think that is valiant and all. The big thing the mother is trying to do, I believe, is keep their son from beating on his future wife. There is too much domestic violence as it is. Some people should take it a step further to go against violence all together.

Originally Posted by Tsukipon

[COLOR="Blue"][I]There are extreme feminists out there, which I have seen, who will practically bite off a man's head because he wanted to hold the door open for her or if they want to help her with her groceries. They go about how they are equal and just as stong as men and can carry on just fine. I am not saying a woman holding the door open for a man is a feminist act or whatever. I think a woman doing so makes them equal to men, then there is no problem. But just because they assume the man thinks them too weak, which maybe some do, doesn't mean they should through a fit when a man holds open a door.

Except that you must look at the reasons behind every act, every societal norm. When a feminist "throws a fit", it's likely because she's examined the reasons behind something so prevalent in society and found them idiotic and offensive. You see it as an overreaction because you have not looked at these reasons. Also, it's usually quite easy to tell sexism from simple manners. Whenever I go anywhere with any of my male family members, we literally have a fight over who opens the door for whom. They act embarassed, for themselves and of me, when I hold a door open for them. If a man feels like you've shamed him by opening the door for him, what does that tell you about his feelings when he opens the door for you? Either he thinks that makes him seem weak, which is somewhat insane, or he's offended that you've put him in the place of a woman. And why would someone be offended at that, unless they believe women to be less?

Now it is true on how men are the ones who are expected to hold the door open. But that is how our society is. That is usually a moral passed on through families that deem this the act of being a gentleman. The fact that women are not expected to do it IS indeed a problem.

That doesn't excuse it. It used to be (and still is in some families) a "moral" passed down that if your wife doesn't know and keep "her place", a good beating is in order to get her acting right. You should examine your actions, ESPECIALLY those that have been taught to you from birth. If you don't and it turns out that they perpetuate hatred or oppression or discrimination, you are at fault.

I]Maybe chivalry wasn't the proper term I should have used. I apologize for that. Maybe the proper term is just being a gentleman, which still orbits around that term.

Maybe you should go with "polite". If it's truly not about sexism, why should the descriptor be gendered?

I personally don't think that a man not holding the door open for a woman is wrong. I think a person not holding the door open for another person right behind them is wrong. I don't expect a man to go out of his way to open a door I am about to walk through, not should he. I am not going to wait outside a closed door until a man opens it either.

And that's good. However, most in our culture are not like you. They either don't think it's rude to practically slam the door in someone's face regardless of gender, age, handicap, or what they may be carrying at the time, or they think men are expected to open the door for women (and only women) and women cannot open the door for men without figuratively taking their balls away from them. Even if they aren't willing to fight over it, it's an accepted norm and many are not willing to deviate from it themselves or let others do so without insulting them or treating them like freaks.

Originally Posted by Philomel

Whenever I go anywhere with any of my male family members, we literally have a fight over who opens the door for whom. They act embarassed, for themselves and of me, when I hold a door open for them. If a man feels like you've shamed him by opening the door for him, what does that tell you about his feelings when he opens the door for you? Either he thinks that makes him seem weak, which is somewhat insane, or he's offended that you've put him in the place of a woman. And why would someone be offended at that, unless they believe women to be less?

I know that is what they think and it is a shame. I am all for equality between the races. But simple things like holding open a door seem to be a problem. I don't think it should be, whether a man is expected to do someting or not.

Originally Posted by Philomel

That doesn't excuse it. It used to be (and still is in some families) a "moral" passed down that if your wife doesn't know and keep "her place", a good beating is in order to get her acting right. You should examine your actions, ESPECIALLY those that have been taught to you from birth. If you don't and it turns out that they perpetuate hatred or oppression or discrimination, you are at fault.

I never said anything about it being an excuse. I was only stating a fact. It's not about whether I support it or not, it is what it is.

Originally Posted by Philomel

Maybe you should go with "polite". If it's truly not about sexism, why should the descriptor be gendered?

THAT is the word. Thank you. You are right. It should not be gendered.

Originally Posted by Philomel

And that's good. However, most in our culture are not like you. They either don't think it's rude to practically slam the door in someone's face regardless of gender, age, handicap, or what they may be carrying at the time, or they think men are expected to open the door for women (and only women) and women cannot open the door for men without figuratively taking their balls away from them. Even if they aren't willing to fight over it, it's an accepted norm and many are not willing to deviate from it themselves or let others do so without insulting them or treating them like freaks.

I know. I also know, in order to change those thoughts, society has to change. We are not there at being equal yet and we might not ever be. It took so long to even get where we are. But who knows. The fact that women are allowed in the workplace and in the military or even to vote, is a HUGE step toward equality. That, I am proud of.

Originally Posted by Tsukipon

I know that is what they think and it is a shame. I am all for equality between the races. But simple things like holding open a door seem to be a problem. I don't think it should be, whether a man is expected to do someting or not.

Because it's not a "simple thing". It's sexism. It's not as offensive as denying reproductive rights or forcing a woman to give her paycheck over to her husband, but it is still sexism and I will not tolerate it. If you want to, that's fine. But you cannot expect those who see it for what it is to not say something, and to not force the issue.

And it's not like feminists are the only ones who notice it. I deal with anti-feminists quite a bit who know that it is an example of sexism and bring it up when arguing that feminists don't really want equality. And in that respect, they're right -- if you claim to be a feminist and all about equality, and then let something happen that you know is based in sexism because it benefits you, you're not supporting equality. I'm simply not going to give them that fuel, even if you find it distasteful or petty.

I never said anything about it being an excuse. I was only stating a fact. It's not about whether I support it or not, it is what it is.

It is what it is, and while it is an explanation for why it's so prevalent, one I'm fairly certain everyone knows already, it does not make men think it's okay. Them accepting what they're taught without questioning is what makes them think it's okay. Thank the gods I didn't just accept the gender roles my parents attempted to force onto me.

I know. I also know, in order to change those thoughts, society has to change. We are not there at being equal yet and we might not ever be. It took so long to even get where we are. But who knows. The fact that women are allowed in the workplace and in the military or even to vote, is a HUGE step toward equality. That, I am proud of.

I'm proud, too. I cannot imagine living in a world where I could not vote, could not choose to not get married, could not choose to not reproduce, could not work, and had no voice. However, the fight is not nearly over yet. We still cannot hold the same duties in the military as men, and if we're in the military at all and are gay, we're far more likely to be kicked out thanks to DADT. We still are paid less than men for the same jobs. We still are expected to not only be mothers, but to be perfect mothers, whereas men are excused for their lapses in parenting. We are called sluts and whores when we have multiple sexual partners or enjoy sex, whereas men are called "players" or, better yet, completely normal because that's what men are "supposed" to do. We are viewed as sex objects to be conquered, yet at the same time, our virginity or feigned virginity is fetishized. I'm not just going to set back and let things be, not when there is so much work left to be done.

It's difficult though, since so many people have developed strong opinions on this matter. There is a surprising number of men who still think women are dumber and less capable than them. I have also heard a lot of people that I know say that in a work situation, certain men have said "I don't do women's work".
I have heard the mention of chivalry from many women, and i don't hit girls from men. That does not sound equal to me. There is also the fact of many earlier generations (these people would be around ages 45-60 now) who refer to this sexism as being "old fashioned", when in fact, with no doubt it is sexism. Keep in mind I am speaking form an american perspective, s the "old fashioned" term is basically the same thing as chivalry: men pay for everything, women clean, etc.
It is also unfortunate that in some small ways we have to stick to gender roles because of our physical attributes. Like the fact that women are the ones who can get pregnant and therefore have to take some time from work, some need more time than others depending on how pregnancy affects them, so they are seen as weaker and less independent. Often times childbirth leads to the stay at home mom deal, which fortifies those outside opinions even more.
Men are naturally built physically stronger than women and have the ability to gain morte muscle mass. Then you have the "handy man" perspective. opening doors, bringing home the bread, lifting heavy objects, etc.

This gender-role thing actually became a huge problem at my work. I'm a supervisor at the mall for the janitor crew, so there are certain things that some of the women have a hard time agreeing to do. Things like the outside garbage. Before I worked there, they would always send a man to do the outside garbage because it gets dark outside and is hot during the summer:gonk:. I decided there was no reason for this and did the outside trash myself to prove how women are not incapable of this task. Now if any of them refuse to do it, they get a write-up. I also had one male employee who wouldn't clean the women's restroom because it was "women's work". It is simply rediculous, but at least i'm stopping this problem at my work.

Originally Posted by Philomel

It is what it is, and while it is an explanation for why it's so prevalent, one I'm fairly certain everyone knows already, it does not make men think it's okay. Them accepting what they're taught without questioning is what makes them think it's okay. Thank the gods I didn't just accept the gender roles my parents attempted to force onto me.

I was never forced gender roles, luckily. I was never told to be the stay at home wfie to take care of the family and household. My parents both told me, get an education, get a job, support yourself. You may not be with your husband forever, than what? You don't know how to take care of yourself. I know a few women in that predicament.

I have always felt that if a woman hits a man first, she should be prepared to be hit back. Just like when a man hits a man, or a woman hits a woman. If you hit anyone, you should expect to be hit back. Period.

On the other hand...a man hitting a woman first? Wrong. They have more upper body strength, and as such have more power to their punch, generally. Not always, of course. I know a few women who could beat the average man up easily, but most of my female friends are military. I wouldn't feel scared fighting the average man, neither would most of my friends. But there are women out there who aren't fighters or military, and it would be wrong to take advantage of their weakness. By weakness, I mean their diminished upper body strength when compared to the average male.

In any relationship you should not have fear of being 'hit' by your partner, rather you are a female or male. The old saying "rule of thumb" came from the rule that you couldn't hit your wife with anything larger than your thumb. Those days are over, the way we are raised is that a man shouldn't hit a women because she is the weaker sex. Although, this is not true it is common for them to use it as an excuse. Women have stronger muscles in the legs, and men have stronger muscles in their arms.
Personally, I would never hit a man unless he deserved it. I am a pretty easy going person, but I would expect that if I did hit a man that I would be retaliated upon. Meaning, that he would hit me back; and I would not have any harsh feelings for him to do so. Especially if I started the argument. Although petty fights are childish and stupid, hitting another person out of anger shows immaturity, then again we are all immature to a point.

As a woman, I see nothing wrong with a man hitting a woman as long as she hits him first. So, women deserve to have special privilages just because we are women? I think not. And they say we are all equal. The are putting women higher than men. Just like when you see commercials. You see men as the dumb ones or losers at some game and the women as the smart ones or winners. WTH!! There are dumb women and smart men out there.

i think the reason some say you shouldn't hit women is cuz men thought they were weaker. i don't think women are weaker than men. i don't really think a man should hit a woman for no reason at all, but if she hit him first, he should be entitled to hit her back. i'm not saying start a fight, or hitting back is right, but still...

Originally Posted by ichigo8504

and the women as the smart ones or winners.

Or the stupid, naive ones. Or sluts. Or prizes to be won. Or sex objects. Or weak. Or over-emotional. Or archetypes. Or cowardly.

What commercials are you talking about? It would be a nice change of pace from what I'm watching, apparently.

N/A

I'm a woman by all means if I hit you first, you can hit me back. If a woman is attacking a man he deserves every right to defend himself and should be allowed to claim self defense like any other person. And the same goes for men, they should grow to expect being hit back if they hit a woman, cause damnit you hit me I'm going to sucker punch you back. Eye for an eye.

That said violence begets violence and is a tatic that should be avoided unless necessary. I hate physical fighting but will resort to it to protect my loved ones and/or myself. Its never something I will instigate.

Originally Posted by Philomel

Or the stupid, naive ones. Or sluts. Or prizes to be won. Or sex objects. Or weak. Or over-emotional. Or archetypes. Or cowardly.

What commercials are you talking about? It would be a nice change of pace from what I'm watching, apparently.

I watch all kinds of commercials, but the one that really disturbs me, is the one about the yogurt. Where the woman is in the grocery store in the blue dress. And when she slurps down the yogurt, she makes some kind of sexual gesture with her tongue.

yeah and it also implies that women have no self control.