If men should not hit women because men are stronger, does that mean nerds should purposely fail exams and let jocks pass because nerds are smarter?

new-man2 · 2014-09-24T00:50:37+00:00

The analogy breaks down. We're expected to compete in exams; it is a moral action to "win" at exams. We are not expected to hit one another; it is an immoral action to hit another person.

A better question would be if we treat women differently (ie, exposure to violence is treated differently), should women be allowed to continue to fight in the military? Either we treat people equally in regards to violence, or we don't.

SupremeAuthority · 2014-09-24T04:55:32+00:00

It means men should purposely fail exams and let women pass.

skidles · 2014-09-24T10:18:00+00:00

Women shouldn't hit men because men are stronger. You can't pick fights with people bigger than you and then complain when you lose.

For the record, I strongly believe people shouldn't hit each other in the first place.

ThePigmanAgain · 2014-09-24T02:29:08+00:00

I thought you were going to ask if nerds should go around hitting jocks and expecting to get away with it. The answer to that one is obvious -- only if it's a female nerd and a male jock.

SupremeAuthority · 2014-09-24T04:18:40+00:00

Society would react the exact same way if a skinny nerd hit a female MMA fighter.

Its just one of many elements of "patriarchy" that feminists are not so keen on smashing.

MRSPArchiver · 2014-09-24T00:20:45+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

bloodshot_eyes · 2014-09-24T15:40:29+00:00

Wrong.

Excelling at exams does not deprive anything from anyone. There aren't a limited number of A's to be given out: everyone in the class could get 100% if they were willing and able.

Physically assaulting another person elevates you by beating down another. It is not appropriate.

You've come close to a relevant point though. Men's innate advantages over women are criminalized and prohibited. However, women's superior socialization and group-think lend them a natural advantage in many settings. Watch a woman argue with a man in a group setting. She will look about the group, trading on her status as a beleaguered woman and demanding assistance and support. "I'm a woman and this mean man is making me sad/angry/upset!". If women feel wronged, they are the first to enlist the support of the community at large to vilify her opponent. Look at that slag that's carrying around the mattress at Columbia University! Could there be any more obvious attempt to use her social status as a woman to support her crusade? The "rapist" list at Chicago U. is another example of women using their social power to batter down their opponents.

Look, I despise the word "privilege". But if it's inappropriate for a man to use his "physical privilege" to "oppress" people, then it is inappropriate for women to use their "social privilege" to shame, belittle, and ostracise those who do not have access to the resources that they do.

2014-09-24T10:38:24+00:00

You have one post, and it is a stupid analogy. I am guessing a feminist troll.

2014-09-24T14:40:22+00:00

What the fuck kind of thinking is this?

Comments