We all know the justice system is broken when it comes to protecting male victims, the fact that men are generally stronger honestly only makes the fact worse that woman often walk free when the man is the only one of the two with any marks, and even in some cases that same victim may end up charged instead against all logic, despite how absurd the odds of any mutual violence between the two happening and the woman walking away with no signs. That I am in utter and full agreement with.

​

What I do often see, not necessarily by men's right's advocates themselves is often the idea that if they hit you, you should have full moral license to hit them back as hard as you can, or even treat it like if you were punched in a bar give them a beat down for it. While a small part of me loves seeing stupid choices get rewarded appropriately, I don't necessarily agree with either of those two things in most situations. I fully agree you should have all the moral and legal right to defend yourself to whatever level is necessary. And I've done quite a bit of sparring against men and woman, I can attest first hand that the right size trained woman can hit a hell of a lot harder than many untrained men, but I still feel like the larger and much stronger partner, regardless of gender, though it's usually men for obvious reasons probably shouldn't use the opportunity to hospitalize the other person as retaliation for something that was inherently much less capable of causing them harm.

I've never been struck by a woman outside of training, though I have been threatened a couple times with violence in absolutely absurd circumstances by woman who'd probably have a higher risk of hurting themselves than me if they even tried. And as much as some woman who will use the fact that men won't retaliate as a guarantee when making threats or lashing out. The thought of hitting back with even a decent portion of what I'm capable of against someone who may have absolutely no idea I could hospitalize them with far less than I'm capable of just doesn't sit well.

​

So in short of course I'm fully in support of whatever the level of self defense needed in the situation, but I can't agree with knowingly using the excuse of being struck to hurt someone far worse as a form of payback or retaliation. Perhaps I'm a bit hypocritical because If I'm punched by a dude 80lbs lighter than me I'm punching back with 100% and they're going to sleep or will be in the next few, but apart from them still being far more capable of hurting me than at least the majority of woman, I'm also not dating the person, and I guess that's where it's most uncomfortable, just as woman should NEVER abuse the fact they can often get away with it to abuse their partner who is the absolute last person you should be able to be violent with. I question the man who could without hesitation strike their girlfriend or wife other than with the minimum needed to protect themselves.

​

So sound off, agree, disagree, I'm not trying to stir the pot I'm just curious where most people stand on the issue.