ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Don't EVER hit a woman, try not to hit a man

Updated on September 19, 2014

What happened to equal treatment?

The so-called war on women is so disgustingly shortsighted and partisan that it even extends to hypocrisy with physical violence. You would be hard pressed to find anyone openly being in favor of violence against women. Of course it would be wrong to hit a woman outside of self defense, but why would anyone limit themselves to just women? It would be just as wrong to hit a man outside of self defense, yet this gets little to no attention. If we really are all supposed to be equals and expect equal treatment, then only addressing one gender as untouchable in this anti violence crusade is abysmally hypocritical. Don't hit anyone should be where it starts and ends, yet in this society we have to divide ourselves into groups and take on narratives to pit people against one another in an attempt to perpetuate victimization paradigms which is in turn a power grab. It is depressing and eye opening that such a simple concept as equal gender pacifism is not what's being pushed for.

Scary rationalizations

It's bad enough that male victims are not nearly equally talked about with regard to being physically struck, but it sinks to another level when the double standard is downplayed, defended, or even encouraged. I remember seeing a hidden camera segment on 20/20 that showed a staged couple in a public park where the man would be shoving, hitting, and yelling at the women. The passersby would quickly approach to the aid of the women and showed a high degree of concern for her well being. Then the roles were reversed and the woman did the same to the man, yet the people in the vicinity showed little concern for the man, indicating a stark contrast with what's deeply ingrained in our thought processes. They then showed interviews with the real people in the park and asked why they did what they did. The answers were startling. At least one woman thought the man must have somehow deserved it and another man said he was just raised to never hit a woman but couldn't explain why he didn't apply that to the man in the same situation. Sure, this is only a small sample, but there's no way this is a totally isolated incident. We actually have people admitting they have a personal double standard and then rationalizing why it's kind of okay. That's wrong on every singly level.

Different path, same conclusion

I see a political divide on the reasons, but still having the same goal of never hitting a woman. Liberals are usually activists that are going to completely defend women and be totally against hitting them, while conservatives are not usually activists, yet have old fashioned views that women should be treated like queens. I disagree with both of them on how they got there, however, I do agree with their conclusion of not hitting women. But, both political ideologies completely derail and later implode from this point on. Liberals are determined to pass more and more legislation solely aimed at protecting women. While conservative seem less likely to want government interference, they still perpetuate the old stereotype of women being treated special. Neither of these groups of people seem to apply that very same standard they just appied to one gender, to the other. I don't hear about any legislation for male victims, and I don't hear about treating men as kings equal to their queen counterparts. It's extra shocking on how simple this issue should be, don't hit anyone, period. There's no need for special laws or lame rationalizations, just don't strike someone.

How far does it go?

Women are much more often portrayed as victims, so therefore it must be universally true and there is of course no need to look at the other side, right? Male victims are indeed out there in larger numbers than attention paid, but it's not covered as much as it's not as sexy to hear about a man being a victim so we tend to drown it out. Another aspect to this is I hear that men are physically stronger than women, so it's not as bad if they get hit. While more often, but not all the time, men may be stronger, that does not mean there can be an open double standard while simultaneously crying about equal treatment. Even in self defense, do these people really expect men to just take a beating? What about if the man is small and the woman is big? What if the woman has a weapon? What if there is a group of women? Where does it end with this inane notion of never hitting a woman under any circumstances and not applying that to a man at nearly the same capacity? Equality can't be about who is the bigger victim and having old stereotypes drive social attitudes and public policy. Rather, it has to be about applying the same principles to what happened regardless of who it happened to. No matter how small a group is, if the victims are women, there will surely be way more coverage out there. Why can't this imbalance be taken more seriously?

Your View

Do you agree or disagree?

See results


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.