Intelligent Chat 2:

woa, woa, woa
in no way shape or form should women be restricted to desk work. That is insulting.

true, i suppose you would know better than i that women "slow down" the marches and some require men to carry their kits, which is just pathetic. But as I stated before, women who cannot carry their own slack have no place being there. THIS IS NOT DIRECTED TO ALL WOMEN

My dad has served in the military for 30 years and just recently retired. i have met many of his combat buddies from desert storm, and there were two women that i met who had incredible war stories and impressive ability to carry on themselves without the help of the men.
True, they were slower and had more trouble, but they didn't slow down the men. They had a much more difficult time doing it, but absolutly refused to have dependence on male soldiers and relied on eachother to get through it.

Why is it insulting? Women are not physically cut out for fighting along side men in the modern theatre of war. There are a few exceptions, granted, but physical standards are lowered so that women can join up.

I would have happily fought alongside any woman who passed the same fitness tests that I did. Unfortunately that reduces the number to zero.

It's not an insult, it's the truth.

There is also a hormonal issue. Menstrual cycles affect women's behaviour on a physical, mental and emotional level. If a woman could pass the same fitness tests and do 72 hours of OP duty whilst at the height of her delightful few days without cause for complaint or conessions and considerations then sure, let 'em join up.

Hey, menstrual cycles hardly effect a women's attitude.
True alot of women get really emotional and off-beat sometimes during that time of the month, but most women only tend to get annoyed easily or pissed off at small things, but if a woman is serious about being in combat, she is most likely smart and strong enough to contain those emotions so they won't effect her contribution to the assigned task.
As for physical level, pshh. hardly. cramps n head aches, big deal. If they're tough enough they'll get over it.

but yea, I guess your points back up your opinion as to "women should be restricted to desk work" but i guess it was the "restricted" that i found insulting.

restricted:Kept within certain limits; limited
which doesn't make sense to your comment, but i get your point so whatever.

she is most likely smart and strong enough to contain those emotions so they won't effect her contribution to the assigned task.
As for physical level, pshh. hardly. cramps n head aches, big deal. If they're tough enough they'll get over it.

How many women do you know that take half days or whole days off because things upset them emotionally or because of cramps and head aches and migranes? I know plenty myself. Soldiering is a 24 hour job, no time outs or breaks to cool down when you're in the field. One mistake or lapse in concentration can and has cost lives.

but yea, I guess your points back up your opinion as to "women should be restricted to desk work" but i guess it was the "restricted" that i found insulting.

Ok, I welcome women to take all desk jobs in the army. Unrestricted desk space for all.

restricted:Kept within certain limits; limited
which doesn't make sense to your comment, but i get your point so whatever.

Whatever what? I don't get the 'whatever'. It makes perfect sense. Women in the army should be restricted to desk jobs as in they shouldn't be allowed to fill any position that requires a fitness test. Restricted makes perfect sense to me.

Bret...ok, let me try to explain this to you without getting frustrated.

Yes, there are women who get really emotional and off-beat during their "toms" as I stated. and yes I know plenty of girls who take days off for those reasons, but as I said before, if the woman is strong enough she will GET OVER IT. I personally have never taken a day off to cool down because of my "ahem" cycle, and I've never been effected emotionally by it and as far as headaches and cramps go, tylenol makes it all better. And I'm hardly as strong as other girls are, so doesn't that make a statement?
o yes, and fyi usually cycles aren't half as bad as we say they are, we just claim this for an excuse to stay home:)
So, now that I'm done discussing my tom with you...

"Ok, I welcome women to take all desk jobs in the army. Unrestricted desk space for all."
Now your just trying to piss me off. stop with the insulting comments.

and as to "limits" no, it doesn't make sense at all. I wrote the definition right there. to restrict is to hold back from what one is capable to do...so if your saying that women aren't capable of being in combat, than that makes no sense at all.

Alright, alright, time for another young ladies opinion.

When it comes to menstruel cycle affecting a womans physical, mental, and emotional performance and endurance, I must agree with Bret. I dont know one woman who I can say is UNAFFECTED on all levels when her hormones are going crazy. Granted- some have it worse than others, but if I were a soldier, on my period and with a gun, I think a few of my own fellow soldiers would be at my mercy, let alone the enemy. That's just me- you may be different, but just look at how jumpy you got with this topic alone, "but i get your point so whatever." and again, "Bret...ok, let me try to explain this to you without getting frustrated." That is a typical womans response. Women "fly off the handle" much easier than men and will most always give an emotional reaction just as much as a mental or physical reaction to anything they are facing. Women are comperably weaker than men in most all physical areas, that is a given, so why should other soldiers have to concede for the sake of "equal rights?" We dont bring equal skill to the table.

So, Pink, what about the psychological affects that women in combat have on the MEN? So far you have only addressed the womens side, how they would FEEL, how some of them can perform at the levels of men, address the males side.

...The men don't need the addressing Kaitlin, thats the whole point.

Anyway

I have to disagree with you when you say
"Women "fly off the handle" much easier than men and will most always give an emotional reaction just as much as a mental or physical reaction to anything they are facing. "
In my opinion and reasearch, men have a much harder time controlling their tempers in heated situations. Yes women tend to cry and get all emotional in certain situations, but i hardly think that men can compare with their tempers.

As for me lashing out, i just happen to take an interest in standing up for my gender. And you can't base all women's actions just on one of my comments.
(O yes and "but I get your point so whatever" wasn't meant as a rude comment. i was saying his word choice didn't make sense, but i got what he was saying anyway)

"Women are comperably weaker than men in most all physical areas"
We've already been through that argument and i discussed that issue earlier.

"I dont know one woman who I can say is UNAFFECTED"
Me niether, i never said there was, but I personally have never had incredibly painful physical effects which kept me from physical activites, and yes I get bitchy but I am never effected enough to insult a superior, and as I stated before I'm not nearly as strong as other girls, sooo I'm sure others handle it as well.

Why doesnt the mens side need addressing, are you saying that women do not change any dynamics whatsoever? Bret (who was a soldier) disagrees.

Just take the clothing and privacy thing into consideration, you said that some women were fine with bathing in front of men and fighting topless, but what about the men? Is that not an important consideration? It is distracting in a multitude of various facets. Think about the different pressures that are added by combining the sexes, of course it affects the men.

I disagree, the mens side does need addressing.

I never said anything about temper, men have hotter tempers, but in my opinion women lose their ability to think rationally much faster than men do.

Before I talk about the men I wil make one point and leave my women argument to rest in peace.

Would you as a woman happily undertake a 20k tab (force march) with 50lbs plus whilst on your period?

Men: I think half the men in the British army should be booted out because they cannot remain calm in all situations. Being a soldier is about having controlled aggression and a I knew plenty who couldn't control theirs.

Apart from that I have no issues.

I wouldnt.

99.9% of women would bitch their way to the moon if they had to do that.

Despite their saying, "some women are tough, some can do it," it's easy to say so when you arent doing it (and I dont know a woman that I could credit with the accomplishment).

As I stated earlier Kailtin, I DO know women who I can credit with those accomplishments. As for all your comments about how bitchy and irrational us women are (I don't know if you've got personal issues or what considering you speak of your own gender so negatively) maybe you and the women you're surrounded by just happen to act that way.
Not an insult, just an explenation.

And, Bret, I wouldn't want to perfrom that physical activity, but not as a girl. Just as a person who hasn't trained or devoted their work towards that patricular task.

"99.9% of women would bitch their way to the moon if they had to do that."
Kailtin.... if they've joined the army and expect to do just that, I highly doubt they would be "bitchen to the moon"
Maybe you need to spend more time with stronger more independent women.

You know women who HAVE done what Bret asked and know for a fact that they did not bitch at all?

That is what "crediting with [that] accomplishment" is, meaning they have DONE it.

"Would you as a woman happily undertake a 20k tab (force march) with 50lbs plus whilst on your period?"

Women that are capable of it? Possibly, I have not yet met one who HAS done it and I know very few who I think COULD, that having been said, IF a woman could perform to the standards of a man and meet the requirements for fighting, I dont have a problem. That is with NO concessions whatsoever.

But wait... I still do have a problem, because it makes the men respond and perform differently, which you refuse to address.

I know very strong and very independent women. I still dont know any that have the physical performance of a man in that type of situation, nor do I know one who has the emotional and mental stability required. Again, if there WAS one out there (and I'm sure there are a few somewhere), then more power to them, yet I still think the affect it has on the men and the moral is an issue to be taken into account, and it DOES matter.

I am not speaking negatively about women, I am a realist, not a feminist. I am often dissapointed in my gender, but I am often dissapointed in the male gender as well. The generalizations and stereotypes are not based upon no reason and are all planted with at least a seed of truth. Sadly, I have found most of them to be correct. In this case, womens traits deeply affect performance. Women are not physically cut out for battle like men are, nor emotionally.

That is what "crediting with [that] accomplishment" is, meaning they have DONE it. "

...yes Kaitlin, I am aware, thank you for explaning it to me.

"You know women who HAVE done what Bret asked and know for a fact that they did not bitch at all?"

Yes...as I stated earlier my father was in the military for 30 years and I met many of his training and combat buddies, two of which were women and participated in what the men did. I explained that earlier, scroll-up.

And I never said they didn't bitch, I don't know if they did, but I happen to know men bitch just as well, so you can't really measure that as a factor.

"Women that are capable of it? Possibly, I have not yet met one who HAS done it "
Well you've made that obvious

"But wait... I still do have a problem, because it makes the men respond and perform differently, which you refuse to address."
I have not studied that subject at all, therefore I cannot argue for it.

"I still dont know any that have the physical performance of a man in that type of situation, nor do I know one who has the emotional and mental stability required. "
Theres pretty much no such thing as a woman with the physical ability of a man. Thats evolution. But I do know PLENTY of women with the emotional and mental stability required.

"yet I still think the affect it has on the men and the moral is an issue to be taken into account, and it DOES matter."
I never said it doesn't

"I am often dissapointed in my gender"
...how sad for you

"The generalizations and stereotypes are not based upon no reason and are all planted with at least a seed of truth."
Depends on what generalizations. Physical, of course those are based on truth.
Emotional and mental, those can definetly be argued.

"Women are not physically cut out for battle like men are, nor emotionally."

True women are not cut out like men are, doesn't mean they're not cut out for it at all (physically)
emotionally, if were strong enough, we can handle it. end of story.

Not end of story, we have established that IF a woman can meet the physical, mental, and emotional standards that they should technically be allowed to fight, but you still will not address the mens side, which is imperative.

That was, in fact, the original question. The other physical limitations are a given. Now lets address the psychological, shall we?

And the fact that I am frequently dissapointed in both genders, not sad for me, sad for humanity.

Generalization based upon truth: Women bitch far more than men.

"Women bitch far more than men."
Alright, you're obviously surrounded and taught by much different people, sooo maybe you should consider not all women bitch as much as the ones you've been encountered...(?)
just a thought.

"we have established that IF a woman can meet the physical, mental, and emotional standards that they should technically be allowed to fight,

yes....exactly....end of story.

"but you still will not address the mens side, which is imperative."
I just stated earlier kaitlin, you cannot ask that of me because I have not studied it

I never read you say that, sorry to inquire again.

I will have to ask people who they think bitch more, women or men, because as far as I have known (and experianed) women are much more vocal about their plights than men, it's not that all of them bitch a lot, it's that they bitch MORE. Men are generally pretty good about sucking it up, because societally there are stigmas about them complaining about emotional, mental, and physical pain. For that reason alone, obviousy women bitch more, they are freer to do so (in stigmatic society).

The mens side is worth looking into before the "end of story" comes into play. I have not experianced it, so hopefully Bret will come and share his piece, but it would seem logical to me that having women on the front lines with them would not only be distracting, but would mess with their fighting and killing instincts (as their instincts are not to kill women, but to protect women), then you have "feelings" and intermingling of the sexes, I think that both genders would lose focus.

"Men are generally pretty good about sucking it up, because societally there are stigmas about them complaining about emotional, mental, and physical pain. For that reason alone, obviousy women bitch more, they are freer to do so (in stigmatic society)."
Interesting points, I didn't consider that.

All right I'll level with you. I never really considered women bitched more (at least the more intelligent and well mannered) but I suppose your statements are true. Women are more open about when something bothers them. (usually) but I don't think that should be generalized because you'd be surprised how incredibly women can hide certain emotions. otherwised though, good points.

"but would mess with their fighting and killing instincts (as their instincts are not to kill women, but to protect women), then you have "feelings" and intermingling of the sexes, I think that both genders would lose focus."
Very interesting.
Those were excellent points I must say I never considered those.
They were good, and true, but I still don't think they justify the women being restricted from honoring their country if they had worked, trained, and were worthy of combat.

I do agree that women are very good at hiding certain things, including emotions, but it is generally alright for them to bitch in public- even about personal things. A great example was that today at work, one of the ladies I work with announced to 4 or 5 co workers (including her boss, my father) that she was having a bad day because of her period and she had terrible cramps... I mean, sure, it was a joke, but was it really necessary information? I could never imagine a guy saying something even remotely like that (not that they have periods, but something to that effect).

My opinion is unformulated, I dont think women should NOT be able to fight, I just started the topic to see what people thought. I do, however, dont think that intermingling the sexes is the best idea because of the psychological and subconscious impact, taking physical performance out of the equation. I think that they should be able to serve their countries, but I dont see where they fit into the battle scenery. It just doesnt seem like it would work all that well, women are not made to kill, they are made to give life and nurture.

You have five men and one woman in a unit. You get engaged and you rely on and trust those six people with your lives. There's just one little problem though, all six men are thinking of protecting the woman more than anyone else in their unit.

I would have hated to have a seen a woman charging at me, simply because we're brought up thoughout our childhood with the knowledge that hurting and hitting (let alone killing) women is WRONG. Advocate not hitting women whilst allowing them on the front line at the same time please.

Soldiers are competitive. We thrived on boxing, football, cricket, athletics and the like. It made us gel and become a team. A woman isn't a llowed to box, play football or cricket for their battery or regiment though. That is opnly counter productive to teamwork seeing the girls on the sidelines not being part of the action.

Then you have social aspects. Soldiers are very confident, they have to be as a matter of course just to get the job done. Add that ultra confidence to a battery dinner and wind up with sex... lots and lots of sex. When you mix that emotions that come from a post dinner romp and then add it to field conditions you wind up being comprimised sooner rather than later. Why do think the Royal Navy, Army and Air Force banned homosexuals for all this time? Nothing to do with the fact that they are uncomfortable and homophobic, it's about being able to do your job in a life or death situation without thinking. If you're shagging a man or woman you create emotional feelings for them, it comprimises your ability to treat that person as an individual in times of ultimate need.

I have no problem with women fighting as singular units however. The Russians were masters of employing female infantry and air force regiments during WW2, and they were effective.

Now, Putting this subject to bed Im much more interested in Pink's instinctive reaction to defend her 'gender' before anything else.

My recently deleted quote was "Black, white, rich or poor, an arsehole's an arsehole." I am ammending this to "Black, white, girl or boy, an arsehole's an arsehole."

I firmly believe that feminists are just as wrongly motivated as racists.

I, personally, believe feminists are a scary lot.

Tying it into racism- it is like reverse racism.

Reverse racism is when the oppressed party (previously oppressed, as the blacks were) lashes out and then makes the barrier larger between the two groups. Growing up, the only separation that I ever felt between the whites and the blacks was created BY THE BLACKS, I was never taught by white people to dislike them or to treat them differently, the attitude that the blacks had about the whites was what I noticed, not the other way around.

The same thing is going on with the feminists in my opinion, they are so concerned fighting for equality that they are losing sight of the way that the world works or the way that chemistry has created us. Most men (at least in West America) are not against women having equal rights or equal pay for equal work, etc. it is the WOMEN who are now pushing things too far, making men "pay" for their past actions, when often times it isn’t even the same men who were doing the oppressing in the first place.

Now these feminists are instilling these ideals and almost "resentment" of men in their daughters- when they would never have to face that treatment regardless if people stopped focusing on it so much. Exactly like many black parents and grandparents still instill those beliefs into their children and grandchildren.

Women's feministic reactions crack me up, because they lose ability to think logically with the facts right in front of their faces about certain issues, and they cannot see past their feministic views, for instance:

"...The men don't need the addressing Kaitlin, thats the whole point."

When in actuality, the whole basis of the argument was not about womens abilities, that is easy to see, if the women can meet the same standards of men, what's the problem? Well, there still was a problem, a BIG problem, and it lied in the psychology of the men, yet I still had to press the issue over and over again before we could move on from this being an equal rights issue and notice that it is a psychological issue, which is interesting.

Most men that I know have no doubt of womens abillities, and they are totally open to equality, hell, many men even put women on a pedestal, it is now WOMEN who are causing the divide.

What do other people think?

I musty apologize Kaitlin for I was too tired to read your post, but I just wanted to say something about us feminists first before i get involved in this.

Bret I noticed earlier your quote and your guys' comparisons to racism, (forgive me if I'm getting this wrong, I'm homeworking at the moment and I'm not good at multitasking) and i wanted to point out a few things...

Feminists are not “man haters” or anything related to that, I fully respect most men and do not think all of them “corrupt” as a lot of people might think.
Feminists exist and argue because to tell you the truth, women need them. It is a man’s world, and women hardly gain respect in it. Are you aware that 1 out of every 3 women are emotionally, physically, or sexually abused by their husbands/boyfriends in the United States alone? I merely point this out because this is where the disrespect and low status of women contribute to violence and abuse. A woman should not be treated as a lesser being because she has less physical strength. We are provided with the same intellectual and mental traits as man, and they are often overlooked or disregarded because of the male dominance.
Sorry this isn’t very thorough. I’ll contribute more later.

I think that raising men not to be assholes is one thing, doing it on the basis of feminism is another.

I must also say that I dont necessarily think it is a "mans world," because women have so much influence behind the scenes that you cannot possibly say that they have no input. I have hardly known of a relationship between a man and woman that the man did not give in to whatever she wanted in the end (of any issue) most of the time.

I will admit, however, that the fastest way to the top is in a mans pants. They are for the most part shallow creatures, and are so easy to manipulate. That is why I believe that most men have a woman standing behind them that are secretly running their own agendas. Men think they are in control- fine, let them think that, but for every man who thinks he is in control and dominating a woman there is a woman who is manipulating him in return.

I grew up with my dad beating my mom, is that right? Absolutely not. However, my dad is all for equal rights!!! He is not a chauvinist in any way, so feminism does not affect him.

I believe in raising boys to respect EVERYONE, not just women, and that you never hit someone as a means to solving any problem. You teach them how to control their anger and teach them what is appropriate. You dont pick a fight with someone who cannot defend themselves comparatively.

I also know many men who get emotionally, psychologically, and mentally abused in relationships. It is a two way street.

" think that raising men not to be assholes is one thing, doing it on the basis of feminism is another."
I never said all men were assholes, I do not think that way.

"I must also say that I dont necessarily think it is a "mans world,"
i have to disagree with this, considering
"women have so much influence behind the scenes"
key words: BEHIND the scenes.
My point is not that women are not capable of running the show Kaitlin, everything i am made up of believes in that. you have to forgive my post for not being thorough, because I wouldhave been able to explain my point better, but let me try again.
the reason why i say key words BEHIND the scenes is because it's the respect that women are not getting. By this I mean in the leadership and buisness world.
Of course when the woman is really running the show, she is in fact behind the scenes, because what building of employees or country's citizens are going to actually listen to a woman and take them seriously?
There are many women who have done just that, but my point is, they are a minority. A HUGE difference in the number of men who take the title of a leader or president of a company.

"I believe in raising boys to respect EVERYONE, not just women, and that you never hit someone as a means to solving any problem."
I respect your beliefs Kaitlin, and i too believe that that's how everyone should be treated. however, my main point was because since it is a man's world (by that I mean what I discussed earlier about leadership and buisness, if I didn't really get my point thoroughly across let me know and I'll write another post, I'm not sure if I'm putting this in the best format.)
that men are taught they are indeed the dominant gender, and sometimes feel as if they are justified to display this power when caught in a bad temper (and so on).

"I also know many men who get emotionally, psychologically, and mentally abused in relationships. It is a two way street."
Yes Kaitlin true, but it's not necessarly a two way street. When men are abused in that manner they are usually not near as affected as when women are. Have you ever heard of a man who was terrified to the point of tears because his girlfriend was controlling what he wore, where he slept, or who he hung out with? not likely. (note: by that I don't mean the woman telling him he looks better in certain items therefor has to wear them, i mean telling the guy to do it...or else.)
Also have you ever heard of a man who has been so emotionally scarred by an abusive relationship that he changed his lifestyle, personality, and refused to participate in any other romantic relationships until he had serious therapy? not likely.
True, there are men who go through this abuse, sometimes even to the extreme that women do. But the point is, it doesn't effect them that much near as often as the women.

1 in 3 women are abused in some way huh?

(http://home.ican.net/~goid/q&a.html)

A large and growing number of university research reports is indicating that men are about as likely as women to suffer from relationship violence. One study by the renowned University of Calgary researcher Eugen Lupri, reported that while 17.8% of husbands had admitted to abusing their female partners, 23.3% of the wives admitted to abusing their male partners. While similar studies show slightly different results, there is a consistent trend of about one in five women and one in five men suffering from domestic violence.

End quote.

Using the statistics shown here, it's a level playing ground. even if things are as unbalanced as you suggest feminism (and any other ism) is only going to make matters worse.

Men get much more screwed up in relationships than they will freely admit. It is a societal stigma for them to share their plights and feelings, but I think that women can have them just as screwed over and abused as the other way around. They just cannot talk about it, which can make it even worse.

I know plenty of men that are abused in varrying ways and still dont say anything, which can be even harder because when women talk to their friends or seek therapy it helps them, while men cannot really do that.

Women can be just as controlling, domineering, and downright abusive as men can. I actually know more men that I would consider "battered" than women.

It is 100% a two way street, people just dont talk about it.

A large and growing number of university research reports is indicating that men are about as likely as women to suffer from relationship violence. One study by the renowned University of Calgary researcher Eugen Lupri, reported that while 17.8% of husbands had admitted to abusing their female partners, 23.3% of the wives admitted to abusing their male partners. While similar studies show slightly different results, there is a consistent trend of about one in five women and one in five men suffering from domestic violence."

alright Bret, did you ever consider that only 17.8% of the men ADMITTED to the crime? Seriously, not many men are actually going to admit to that.
And Bret, considering earlier we were argueing about the physical differences in gender, you cannot say that when women "physically abuse" their husbands, it is the same as if the husband was doing it to the wife. When a man hits a woman with half of his strength, it's going to be a hell of alot more of a blow than if the woman hit him with all of her strength that she could possibly bring up.

And Kaitlin, perhaps guys do get more effected in relationships than what is shown, but if they don't talk about it, then how do you know? (just a question)

"Women can be just as controlling, domineering, and downright abusive as men can. "
I have no doubt that they CAN be as controlling and abusive, (not physically though, that's just impossible) but seriously it happens not near as much as when it does to women. Part of this is because of the male dominance, and their egos which convince them they need to be the one controlling in the relationship.

"I actually know more men that I would consider "battered" than women."
mmmm...that sounds highly unlikely to me, but i don't have any proof it's not true, so ok. It also depends on your definition of abuse. Some people categorize it as just any verbal insult or slap across the face, what I'm talking about is on a much higher scale.
i also think that alot of you are getting abuse mixed up with manipulation. I have to admit, women are generally better than men at manipulating people, but that's not what I classify as abuse.

"It is 100% a two way street, people just dont talk about it."
Again, if they don't talk about it, how would you know?

When I said "battered" I meant abused in any way.

Many men that I know are abused mentally, verbally, emotionally, or psychologically, and do nothing about it in return because they feel they should suck it up, I have seen it, I think it's innapropriate, and it is the "reverse racism" thing I addressed before. It is alright for women to do that to their husbands because women were oppressed before.... NOT. If women want to be treated equally they need to treat their husbands/ boyfriends with just as much respect as they expect to be and want to be treated with. Sadly, it is becoming more and more apparent that women are taking their priveledge too far.

Obviously, most women cannot do as much physical damage to a man as a man can to a woman, but many men are still physically abused, as the statistics show. If a woman hits a man, throws things, or uses things besides her hands (my mom used to throw things and stab with scissors and needlepoint needles for instance), then the man is still being physically abused. Many men will NOT hit or do anything back. Men are between a rock and a hard place, just like the whites are. If they do anything, they are the heartless and disrespectful people that they were before, and if they dont do anything they get taken advantage of.

If we want equality lets be equal... lets not bitch about every little thing when they dont do the same, lets not be disrespectful and not expect it back.

"When I said "battered" I meant abused in any way."
Well perhaps that's where our arguments differ. I classify abuse as an extreme action violently taken upon someone that can cause physical, mental, and emotional scarring.

"It is alright for women to do that to their husbands because women were oppressed before.... NOT"
Mmmm see I disagree here, probably because of our different ideas of abuse, but: the reason why I think that it's considered ok to 'abuse' a husband or boyfriend rather than vice-versa is because women don't tend to cause such incredible damage. For example, haven't you noticed that most men who are 'abused' by their wives/girlfriends consider it humerous and joke about it oft? I know you might say that's a cover up for pain, but the way I see it, they see it as a funny concept that they're usually controlled by their wives.

"If women want to be treated equally they need to treat their husbands/ boyfriends with just as much respect as they expect to be and want to be treated with. "
Yes, I completely agree with that statement 100%. Unfortunetly, our world doesn't process that way.

"Sadly, it is becoming more and more apparent that women are taking their priveledge too far."
mmmm that MAY be true, but for the most part I think men take the majority number.

"but many men are still physically abused, as the statistics show."
Again this is where our ideas differ. The definition of abuse is really light, and pretty much states that just touching the other person in a slightly violent manner is qualified. Most of these women are guilty of abusing their husbands with slaps across the face, which I don't really consider violent abuse.

"uses things besides her hands"
yes I agree with that, when objects are used they can cause greater damage.

"Many men will NOT hit or do anything back. Men are between a rock and a hard place, just like the whites are. "
Yes that's true, it is the honorable and obligated thing to do for a man not to strike back to a woman. I'm not sure if I agree about the whites statement though, it depends on what type of defense your talking about (like if your talking about a white making a racist comment but a different race making a racist comment about whites, I don't necessarily agree)

"If they do anything, they are the heartless and disrespectful people that they were before,"
Well if the guys is doing it in self defense then of course he's not considered heartless. But honestly unless the woman is using some sort of device to harm him with, she's not really gonna be a threat.

"If we want equality lets be equal... lets not bitch about every little thing when they dont do the same, lets not be disrespectful and not expect it back."
Well my point is that when women are disrespectful to men, it's hardly taken seriously.

but: the reason why I think that it's considered ok to 'abuse' a husband or boyfriend rather than vice-versa is because women don't tend to cause such incredible damage. For example, haven't you noticed that most men who are 'abused' by their wives/girlfriends consider it humerous and joke about it oft?

Ok, you back up, stop, think about what you're saying and come up with a new plan... seriously.

When I was at school.. 8 or 9 years old, my mate Matt's mum put his dad in hospital with MULTIPLE stab wounds. If you think that is "OK" then you go girl, fight the good fight.

I think you seriously need to take of the rose tinted glasses and look at ALL of the facts before you reply.

Husband abuse is just as serious, dangerous and needless as wife abuse. They call it spousal abuse for a reason. Some men will not, under any circumstance hit a woman. If they are being hit by her does it matter how much physical pain is being dealt out? Also abuse is not just physical but size and gender counts for very little either... my wife is 5' 2", weighs not a lot at all and yet she can hit harder than most men I know. I would not like to be hit by her... not one little bit. (I am a little over 6' and over 200lbs)

Seriously, Pink, please look at all the facts, accept them for what they are and apply your prejudices to both sides of every argument you make.

http://www.menstuff.org/issues/byissue/husbandabuse.html

The first few lines of the article:

Menstuff® has compiled the following information on Husband Abuse.

Last week, I began my column by observing that "one woman is battered every 15 seconds."

What I neglected to mention was that the same study found that "one man is battered every 14 seconds." In fact, most studies reveal that men are attacked, clawed, beaten, shot and generally abused at equal - if not slightly greater - rates than women.

Pink, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE read the article linked before you reply.

Disrepsect between both sexes is unnacceptable, and they should both be taken seriously.

I am claiming that there should be equality, no abuse whatsoever between men or women, are you saying that it's alright for women to abuse men, even mildly, just because it doesnt APPEAR to affect them as much? That seems absurd. If we dont want to be disrespected or abused, we dont get to do it. Simple as that.

Women want equality but they seem to also be very cozy with the double standards that permit them to do as they wish, when men cannot. They pick and choose the issues they want to push, which only works because the men are between a rock and a hard place.

And what I mean by the racism comments was that if whites treated blacks the way that they treat the whites, it would be considered racist, for instance, you dont see white people with their own network like BET, "White Entertainment Television," we dont make racist comments in our music, calling them "niggers" (I hate using that word by the way, but it's kind of necessary right now), yet they can call us "crackers" or whatever else suites them. The only distance I have ever felt from black people was created by THEIR attitudes towards me, I never have been taught by white people to disrespect them or that they are less than me, and the same thing is going on with the feminism movement.

Give an inch, take a mile. Mothers are instilling their resentment of men in their daughters, but the sons are being raised to think nothing less of women than being equal creatures who should be honored (in most cases), how does that fit together? Not well.

Oh...my...gosh
I am really shocked right now.

Bret, is it just me, or did I discuss and point out EVERY argument you tried to make against me?

you obviously weren't paying attention. Here, let me try to explain it to you..,

"When I was at school.. 8 or 9 years old, my mate Matt's mum put his dad in hospital with MULTIPLE stab wounds. If you think that is "OK" then you go girl, fight the good fight."

Hmmm well Bret I actually said specifaclly that wasn't ok considering that i wrote, "yes I agree with that, when objects are used they can cause greater damage."

annd lets see what else did you overlook, (everything)
"I think you seriously need to take of the rose tinted glasses and look at ALL of the facts before you reply."
Hmmm well Bret I think you need to take the tint off of your glasses because it seems I DID look at all the facts and I addressed EVERY ONE OF THEM you stated.

"Some men will not, under any circumstance hit a woman. "
Yes... I said that
""Many men will NOT hit or do anything back. Men are between a rock and a hard place, just like the whites are. "
Yes that's true, it is the honorable and obligated thing to do for a man not to strike back to a woman. "
(were you paying attention at all bret?)

". If they are being hit by her does it matter how much physical pain is being dealt out?"
Yes...that was my whole point. I never said that women abusing their husbands was ok Bret, I said MEN CAN DO MORE DAMAGE

"Also abuse is not just physical but size and gender counts for very little either... my wife is 5' 2", weighs not a lot at all and yet she can hit harder than most men I know. I would not like to be hit by her... not one little bit. (I am a little over 6' and over 200lbs)"
See now Bret, i had to laugh at this considering we were argueing earlier about the physical differences in physical strength, and you repeated, over and over, how a women couldn't carry the 70 and bla bla bla...so seriously, you cannot even try to make that argument.

"Seriously, Pink, please look at all the facts, accept them for what they are and apply your prejudices to both sides of every argument you make."
Well...Bret...In case you didn't notice, I DID apply prejudices for both sides, I directed comments to the men and how they are abused and how it is wrong PLENTY of times
Maybe your the one who should look at all the facts before you make an argument.

"See now Bret, i had to laugh at this considering we were argueing earlier about the physical differences in physical strength, and you repeated, over and over, how a women couldn't carry the 70 and bla bla bla...so seriously, you cannot even try to make that argument."

My wife is an ex-south of England karate champ. She has training and doesn't need 70lb on her back to kick my arse. Being able to hurt a man and being able to be an effective soldier are two very different things, Pink.

"Well...Bret...In case you didn't notice, I DID apply prejudices for both sides, I directed comments to the men and how they are abused and how it is wrong PLENTY of times
Maybe your the one who should look at all the facts before you make an argument."

You do happily shrug off any view that implies men have it just as bad as women in the abuse stakes and then press your claim that women have the raw deal and deserve the lime light everytime.

Did you read the link as I asked?

"You do happily shrug off any view that implies men have it just as bad as women in the abuse stakes and then press your claim that women have the raw deal and deserve the lime light everytime."

Bret, it's a known fact that women are abused more often than men. get over it.
i'm not saying men aren't abused, it's rarely heard of but it does go on, but truth is it happens to women alot more frequently.

I will go to the site now Bret but honestly there are going to be numbers of sites that i could find that argue with that one or state completely different facts, so i don't think either of us could use internet articles as evidence.

"Maybe your the one who should look at all the facts before you make an argument."
you said i was trying to shrug it off, not, that's not what I meant Bret. I meant maybe you should re-read my statement, because everything you tried to argue with me for was covered.

"My wife is an ex-south of England karate champ. She has training and doesn't need 70lb on her back to kick my arse. Being able to hurt someone and being able to be a soldier are two very different things, Pink."
Alright good point, i didn't think of that. but honestly how many of these men who are considered abused have wives who karate champs from England?

Missed a bit as I am still running a lovely fever, apologies for any mistakes in accuracy. Attention has been lost a bit as I've been ill since before easter and can't shake my bout of 'flu.

But...

I distinctly see you saying it's perfectly ok to abuse a husband:

"but: the reason why I think that it's considered ok to 'abuse' a husband or boyfriend rather than vice-versa is because women don't tend to cause such incredible damage. For example, haven't you noticed that most men who are 'abused' by their wives/girlfriends consider it humerous and joke about it oft? I know you might say that's a cover up for pain, but the way I see it, they see it as a funny concept that they're usually controlled by their wives."

This is why I made the comment about my old mate's dad.

" "but many men are still physically abused, as the statistics show."
Again this is where our ideas differ. The definition of abuse is really light, and pretty much states that just touching the other person in a slightly violent manner is qualified. Most of these women are guilty of abusing their husbands with slaps across the face, which I don't really consider violent abuse."

Hmmm abuse is abuse regardless of how you want to define it and you still condone it for women on men and not men on women. A women slapping her husband is clear cut abuse. Whether you consider it violent or not is irrelevant. I suggest you get your bloke to beat you across the face as hard as you can him and see how long you can last before you say it is violent.

I think that if you asked anyone here their opinion of my outlook and opinion they would generally say it is pretty open and generic (with the exception of Kev who is my arch nemesis and magnetic opposite) as I look at every situation as a whole and will not stand up for anything just because I fall into one group or another.

More later, I need sleep and LOTS of tablets!

Again, apologies if I am not 100% coherent.

B

"I distinctly see you saying it's perfectly ok to abuse a husband:"

the quote that I stated after that Bret, nonononno, Apologies because I can see how anyone could mix up what I said. When I said its "considered ok for women to abuse their husbands" I didn't mean I think it's ok, i meant how the world views it and how it's looked on as a humerous rather than serious deal. I in no manner think it's justified for a woman to abuse her husband.

"Hmmm abuse is abuse regardless of how you want to define it and you still condone it for women on men and not men on women. A women slapping her husband is clear cut abuse."
I can't argue with that Bret because our ideas obviosly differ, but I just don't think that a slap across the face can cause emotional scarring, so I can't argue with you about that.

"I suggest you get your bloke to beat you across the face as hard as you can him and see how long you can last before you say it is violent."
I realize you have a fever Bret so i'm giving you credit, but before I answer that you need to rephrase it because you said "you" in places where "he" and vice versa should have been placed, and i really don't know if your asking that I think about a guy slapping me, or me slapping the guy

"I think that if you asked anyone here their opinion of my outlook and opinion they would generally say it is pretty open and generic (with the exception of Kev who is my arch nemesis and magnetic opposite) as I look at every situation as a whole and will not stand up for anything just because I fall into one group or another."

See Bret that may be true, but I'm sorry I cannot argue that men are abused as much as women. Theres just not enough proof.
If it were really as serious as you guys all say it is, then why are there no safe houses for men hiding from their wives, why do husbands not take their kids and try to save their families from their wives and go into hiding, why do husbands not go into the witness protection program to escape from their wives?
Because when women abuse their husbands, though it is terrible and wrong, it's just not as frequent or even on the same scale as when men abuse women.
(for the exception of when objects are used and such, but I still can't picture a man finding it hard to sleep at night or waking from nightmars because he's terrified of a woman.)

"I can't argue with that Bret because our ideas obviosly differ, but I just don't think that a slap across the face can cause emotional scarring, so I can't argue with you about that."

Problem is that isn't just the slap that does the emotional scarring, it's what comes with the package.

" "I suggest you get your bloke to beat you across the face as hard as you can him and see how long you can last before you say it is violent."
I realize you have a fever Bret so i'm giving you credit, but before I answer that you need to rephrase it because you said "you" in places where "he" and vice versa should have been placed, and i really don't know if your asking that I think about a guy slapping me, or me slapping the guy "

Phrased perfectly. If you think that women don't do as much damage then get someone to beat you across the face as hard as you can hit them.

"See Bret that may be true, but I'm sorry I cannot argue that men are abused as much as women. Theres just not enough proof."

WRONG WRONG WRONG.

When it comes to assault - kid whacking, spouse hitting - women are more likely to be the bad guys. The media and the Ad Council may have helped create the myth of the malevolent male, but this is how the hitters really stack up.
First Punch
% of the time that wives admitted to hitting first: 53
- Physical Assaults by Wives, 1993

Going for the Knife
% of women knifed by their spouse or partner: 4.1
% of men knifed by their spouse or partner: 11.0
- The Risk of Serious Physical Injury from Assault by a Woman Intimate, 1999

Losing It
Number of wives/husbands who hit or tried to hit their spouse with something:
30 wives per 1,000
17 husbands per 1,000
- National Family Violence Survey, 1985

Totally Losing It
Number of wives/husbands who engaged in severe violence against their spouse:
46 wives per 1,000
30 husbands per 1,000
- National Family Violence Survey, 1985

Coed Violence
% of college women who admitted to initiating violence against their
boyfriend: 32
% who said it was because their boyfriend wasn't sensitive to their needs: 46
% who said it was because their boyfriend wasn't listening: 43
- College Women Who Initiate Assaults on Their Male Partners and the Reasons Offered for Such Behavior, 1997

Retaliation
% of women who hit back when hit by their partner: 24
% of men who hit back when hit by their partner: 15
- National Family Violence Survey, 1985

Kid Abuse
% of all child abuse committed by mothers: 61
% of all child abuse committed by fathers: 38
- Child Maltreatment 1995: Reports from the States to the National Child

Abuse and Neglect Data System
Termination of Childhood
% of murdered kids killed by their mothers: 55
- Murder in Families 1994, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Blind Justice???
In a survey of 6,002 people, % of incidents in which women were arrested after their husbands called the police: 0
% of incidents in which men were arrested after their wives called the police: 15
% of incidents in which men were arrested after they called the police: 12
- National Family Violence Survey, 1985

Domestic Homicide
% of female murderers who killed an intimate or family member: 60
% of male murderers who killed an intimate or family member: 20
- Women Offenders 1999, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Sentencing Stats
% of women receiving prison sentences for murdering their spouse: 81
% of men receiving prison sentences: 94
- Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban Counties 1995, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Prison Terms
Length of prison sentences given to women convicted of spousal abuse compared to those given to men: 10 years shorter
- Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban Counties 1995, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Dumb Justice
% of women acquitted by a jury in a spouse murder trial: 27
% of men acquitted: 0
- Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban Counties 1995, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Calls from the Brach
% of women acquitted by a judge in a spouse murder trial: 37
% of men acquitted: 17
- Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban Counties 1995, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Capital Punishment
% of all domestic homicides committed by women: 33
% of all the inmates on Death Row who are women: 1
- Capital Punishment 1998, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Women on Women 1
Number of violent crimes committed by women each year in the United States: 2.1 million
% that are simple assaults on other women: 75
- Women Offenders 1999, Bureau of Justice Statistics

Women on Women II
% of lesbians abused by their current or most recent partners: 40
% of gay men abused by their current or most recent partners: 18
- Lesbians in Currently Aggressive Relationships: How Frequently Do They Report Aggressive Past Relationships? 1991

Instinct to Swing
During one survey of corporal punishment of children, % of mothers who hit their child during the interview: 6.2
- Corporal Punishment by Mothers and Child's Cognitive Development, 1998

"If it were really as serious as you guys all say it is, then why are there no safe houses for men hiding from their wives, why do husbands not take their kids and try to save their families from their wives and go into hiding, why do husbands not go into the witness protection program to escape from their wives?"

I know of men that have taken their kids away to escape thier wife. Witness protection for people in domestic situations does not exist, at least not in the UK (Whacky and non-sensicle for it to happen anywhere in my opinion.) As for safe houses... we get the joy of bedsits and YMCAs. We're men, we're expected to deal with everything. Culture has preconceptions on everything. Misconceptions handed down from generation to generation too.

Because when women abuse their husbands, though it is terrible and wrong, it's just not as frequent or even on the same scale as when men abuse women.
(for the exception of when objects are used and such, but I still can't picture a man finding it hard to sleep at night or waking from nightmars because he's terrified of a woman.)`"

It is the same, exect men are supposed to deal with it because they are men. Men do not get the same the treatment because we're supposed to suck it up. Simple as that.

Sorry to burst your bubble, Pink but I know Im right. I checked and double checked everything here.

Women get it better in every light.

Women get away with more.

We are the bad guys more of the time, I believe that from the bottom of my heart.

I also dont think that this is a "mans" world, strictly because most women have men "played" so perfectly. Despite what feminisits may think, women have been running much of the world for a long time, one way or the other. Granted, a man may get credit, but the mastermind is the female.

We play weak, we get treated like we are weak, but we use it to our advantage. It is subconscious if not conscious, and I gaurantee you do it as well. That is how the world operates.

I am not saying women dont get victimized, they obviously do, and it's not all our own doing, but you cannot ignore the mens side strictly because it's not talked about.

The mens side gets overlooked, but it is important information.

And throwing around quotes isnt helping anyone here, guys lol.

Say something original, dont just quote. It's an excuse for not having valid points that stand by themselves when you only comment on someone elses quote trying to prove them wrong.

Sorry Bret, but, your completely wrong.

I seriously don't care about any proof that you try to give me. Because, even if women did hit their husbands more often, it's because THEY CAN'T CAUSE THAT MUCH DAMAGE and they know it.

Again, this is where our ideas differ. You say abuse is any sort of slight act of violence taken upon someone, I say it's an extreme act that can cause trama and disorder.

You asked what I would do if a guy was hitting me and say how i would feel...
Bret, that makes absolutly no sense. We both know very well that when a man hits a woman it is totally different because:
1. When a man hits a woman, he's most likely going to be stronger and heavier which will cause much more of a bruise than any that a woman could provide. Did you know that there have been men who actually KILLED thei wives from a single blow to the face?? I've never heard of a woman doing that without an object.

2. When a man hits woman, because he is stronger, the woman has the feeling of helplessness and weakness. A woman cannot have that effect on a man, because he knows that he's stronger than her (yes I know your going to try to make the argument that he won't hit her back) and if he really felt as if he were in danger, he knows that he could take control at any time. A woman couldn't do that.

" I suggest you get your bloke to beat you across the face as hard as you can him and see how long you can last before you say it is violent."

No...Bret...that was not correctly phrased. What you should have said was
"I suggest you get your 'bloke' to beat you across the face as hard as he can and see how long you can last before you say it is violent."

If you meant the opposite you should have said

"I suggest you beat your 'bloke' across the face as hard as you can and see how long it takes before he says it is violent."

What you said makes no sense grammatically.

Anyway

"I know of men that have taken their kids away to escape thier wife."
Yes actually that is true, I was wrong about that. But it doesn't happen near as frequent.

"Witness protection for people in domestic situations does not exist, at least not in the UK (Whacky and non-sensicle for it to happen anywhere in my opinion.)"
Well it does exist in the U.S

"As for safe houses... we get the joy of bedsits and YMCAs."
Interesting, I didn't know that. So I was wrong about that too.
HOWEVER, wonder why I didn't know that? because it's HARDLY EVER HEARD OF

"We're men, we're expected to deal with everything. Culture has preconceptions on everything. Misconceptions handed down from generation to generation too."

See, I had to laugh about this because again back to the military argument, you stated that men have stronger mental and emotional stability, sooo that doesn't really make sense in your argument considering that you said your expected to deal with these things, yet first you said you CAN deal with these things.

and again here,
"It is the same, exect men are supposed to deal with it because they are men. Men do not get the same the treatment because we're supposed to suck it up. Simple as that."

True, women get more support and sympathy. But, yet again, that's because when it happens to them it's a hell of alot more brutal.

True also that women tend to "get it better" in the light (not EVERY light Bret) but we also have a hard time gaining respect. So it's not like were living the high life here