Domestic violence rustling of teh jimjims

Here's a thing: so Floyd Mayweather has a history of domestic violence. He's been to court a bunch and served some time in jail because of it. But women keep dating him. To a lot of people it makes sense to blame the women for dating him when it should be the most obvious thing in the world that he will abuse them. But then, that's blaming the victim. Floyd is the person who should bear the responsibility of his abuse, not those who date him. But that neglects the fact that the women should bear the responsibility of their own actions i.e. choosing to date an abusive asshole. The perception seems to be that if Floyd is abusive, these women can just take him to court and get money out of them, and I think that causes a lot of disdain from observers for the whole scenario. I propose that instead of being able to take him to court, if a woman chooses to date Floyd and he abuses her, she should hit him with a fucking frying pan. That'll stop his abuse lickety split. Or she should leave. But instead we have a scenario where all parties are hogtied by legal sensibilities and the women who date Floyd have an expectation of not having to bear the responsibility of their own decisions

So hey maybe the idea of responsibility would go a long way to solve issues like abuse or misogyny. If a woman who dates Floyd knew that the only thing that stands between her and his fists is herself or her friends, maybe she would decide against dating him. But since a woman who dates Floyd knows that she will be protected by the law and get a shitload of money out of it, she is free to make terrible decisions and do her little part in perpetuating a shitty society

I wouldn't like to blame the victim. I would like to empower women to not date assholes who beat them. It seems the current setup doesn't do that so well, especially when he's rich and famous

I'm not sure that I would try to get women to not date men who beat them in the first place. They have every right to make that choice, and they will often be attracted to men who are more likely to beat them (<3 science <3).

The concept of victim-blaming being a bad thing is taken entirely too far. Yes, it is the fault of the person who commits the crime when the crime happens. However, there is some responsibility on a person in a lot of cases for putting themselves in a situation that they know to be dangerous.

Removing legal protection for these woman would give abusers free reign to abuse.

It may be true that Fame and Fortune attracts predators who want quick paydays. But are you really saying that we should feel sorry for someone because he just cant help when women run into his fists?

If floyd is concerned that every woman he abuses is gonna go after his money, maybe he shouldnt leave himself so open to that avenue and just stop abusing women.

I'm not defending Floyd

Maybe I shouldn't have made the thread, because it ultimately boils down to an anti-government thing. I have no desire to blame the victim, but when I look around my society, all I see are people claiming to be victims and taking zero responsibility for any part they play in anything that ultimately victimized them

If little Timmy pokes a dog in the eye and gets bit, they put the dog down. But nobody tells the parents they're fucking useless cunts who didn't teach little Timmy to not poke dogs in the eye

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

If little Timmy pokes a dog in the eye and gets bit, they put the dog down. But nobody tells the parents they're fucking useless cunts who didn't teach little Timmy to not poke dogs in the eye

---

I would like to add that there's no fixing this situation with laws. We have figured out pretty well how to deal with aggressive animals, but we have not come close to figuring out a legal structure that incentivizes good parenting or good dog training. I think if we tried to tackle these problems with the law, it would just create a juggernaut of a disaster through moral hazards and everything would be far worse

Ultimately, this is why I brought up Floyd. I saw a story about an ex taking him to court, and I'm wondering why the fuck this issue is even in court since courts can't solve it. All the law can do here is overly victimize the victims or protect the perpetrators or even sometimes victimize the perpetrators. This dysfunction of the law creates a multitude of unintended consequences like incentivizing bad behavior and galvanizing the opinions of onlookers

Law is an important thing to have, but for decades our society has been too happy to use the law to reward our idiocy. Everybody remembers the chick who sued McDonalds for hot coffee, and frankly the cause of that problem hasn't yet been fixed

Ding ding ding

Victim blaming has been expanding to include a lot of shit that isn't victim blaming

I think it's even deeper than that in that the framing of abuse causes a lot of problems for women. For example, Vox has an article today explaining how hard it is for women to leave abusers. Well, so what? Of course it's hard, but discussing how hard it is solves a fat nothing. Instead, the media should be talking about all the reasons why abused women should leave their abusers, no matter what. We should empower victims to no longer be victims

I was once the person who couldn't tell a friend that she needed to leave her boyfriend because he was hurting her, because I was afraid that it would just push her closer to him. But what if the main message she got from the media and her culture was that when you're abused, you have to fucking leave? Maybe then it would have been easier for her to finally leave. Maybe I could have helped her leave

There is irony in that the way to reduce status of victimhood is to take matters into your own hands and make yourself no longer the victim. As an analogy, I think this explains why being African American is much harder than being Asian American, even though the racism to both historically has been about equal. The former community got caught up in victimization while the latter eschewed the idea and moved on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

I think it's even deeper than that in that the framing of abuse causes a lot of problems for women. For example, Vox has an article today explaining how hard it is for women to leave abusers. Well, so what? Of course it's hard, but discussing how hard it is solves a fat nothing. Instead, the media should be talking about all the reasons why abused women should leave their abusers, no matter what. We should empower victims to no longer be victims

I was once the person who couldn't tell a friend that she needed to leave her boyfriend because he was hurting her, because I was afraid that it would just push her closer to him. But what if the main message she got from the media and her culture was that when you're abused, you have to fucking leave? Maybe then it would have been easier for her to finally leave. Maybe I could have helped her leave

There is irony in that the way to reduce status of victimhood is to take matters into your own hands and make yourself no longer the victim. As an analogy, I think this explains why being African American is much harder than being Asian American, even though the racism to both historically has been about equal. The former community got caught up in victimization while the latter eschewed the idea and moved on.

---

The problem with all of this (regarding women and abusive men specifically) is twofold. First, a media message isn't going to be enough to combat their biology which is telling them to stay because of (and not in spite of) the abusive behaviors. Second, about as many men are physically abused in relationships as women, so it's not a sex-specific topic on the whole. On a semi-related note, any movement that encourages women to leave abusive men should also call for abusive women to be treated equally under law.

I'm not convinced biology plays much role. What biology? Where are the cells that are doing the thing that make women gravitate towards abuse? Time and time again, we've found that what we thought is biological is really just cultural.

If I had to guess at it, the biology of the matter is tiny (in a suggestive but not determinative way), and women are the victims because culture expects and teaches them that they're the victims. There was once a time when everybody thought women weren't sexual, but now we know they're just as sexual as men. We've come to realize it was cultural conditioning that made the sexes seem so biologically different

I think the claim that men are abused just as much as women (which is probably true) shows the cultural nature of this, because men don't feel or act like they're abused. Even when we are abused, we tend to act like we're not because we live in a society that says we're not.

Im not really sure what you're arguing anymore.

But, the Mcdonald's case you used as an example of rewarding stupid people actually did the opposite and punished a stupid company. That Mcdonalds heated its coffee to 190 degrees, 50 degrees greater than the industry standard, and 60 degrees greater than what would burn the skin. When the coffee spilled it instantly scalded the girl and created 3rd degree burns. If you dont recall, 3rd degree is one of the most severe kinds of burns one can get (only 4th is worse). Its not too much of an exaggeration to say it was akin to having her skin set on fire.

To say it was entirely her fault for spilling is silly, because spills happen. This was incredible recklessness by the company, and they were penalized for both their behavior and the injury their coffee caused.

As for the African american thing, im not willing to say they had it as bad as Asian Americans. Yeah, there were japanese internment camps and such...but slavery tho.

You're probably right about the coffee thing. Sometimes I don't check my sources until called on it

As for the African American thing, it's very difficult to back up since almost nobody wants to make the case that Asians suffered as much racism as blacks, but I'd argue that they did. Internment shouldn't be taken lightly, but the majority of the racism came before that. During the 19th Century, Asian Americans were treated as subhuman labor chattel, but we have all but forgotten about it since all race issues in America are focused on Deep South slavery

Derail...

Quote:

---

If little Timmy pokes a dog in the eye and gets bit, they put the dog down. But nobody tells the parents they're fucking useless cunts who didn't teach little Timmy to not poke dogs in the eye

---

The dog taught little Timmy not to poke it in the eye. Meanwhile, the parents should teach the dog not to bite little Timmy. You do that by beating it, not putting it down. ffs why the fuck do people have dogs if they are incapable of looking after it or their fucking children.

/derail

ontopic - womens are attracted to men who have lots of testosterone coursing through them. Also money and/or success.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

ontopic - womens are attracted to men who have lots of testosterone coursing through them. Also money and/or success.

---

All of those help in their own way but none are needed for success with the ladies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Ding ding ding

---

women who dated mayweather were warned not to say this out loud

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luco

women who dated mayweather were warned not to say this out loud

---

bam

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxMuISEIYAAvTfs.png

he was even removed from madden '15 through an online update, lol. I mean that's just insult to injury. Take my livelihood, my reputation, but for the love of god don't touch my madden legacy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renton

he was even removed from madden '15 through an online update, lol. I mean that's just insult to injury. Take my livelihood, my reputation, but for the love of god don't touch my madden legacy.

---

lol goddamn

He got off easy. Call me old fashioned, but capital punishment is the only appropriate punishment for perpetrators of violence. It sounds like I'm joking, but really I'm not. I'm kidding in how blunt I am about it, but the bottom line is that by far the biggest hindrance to a healthy society is people who create violence.

That applies to women as well. I just hope that when people notice the huge gender double standard, they don't accidentally ease up on the male side. It would be a bad idea to equalize the genders by being softer on male perps

FWIW I think chimp data on violence strongly suggests it's a cultural thing, not something they're born with. So really the onus is on us to make a society where people are raised right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

FWIW I think chimp data on violence strongly suggests it's a cultural thing, not something they're born with. So really the onus is on us to make a society where people are raised right

---

Not sure if racist

^^^^^ looolllllllll

In case you're wondering, I'm referring to something Sapolsky said in the greatest lecture of all time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWZA...ailpage#t=2077

timestamp 34:30. Wasn't sure if it was chimps or baboons. Was baboons.

If roles were reversed in the Rice elevator video and it was a chick who knocked out her BF, consensus would be (1) dude is a total joke for getting KO'd so easily, (2) dude deserved it for getting aggressive after her initial "love tap", and (3) she musta had a good reason to hit him

lol you're welcome

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

If roles were reversed in the Rice elevator video and it was a chick who knocked out her BF, consensus would be (1) dude is a total joke for getting KO'd so easily, (2) dude deserved it for getting aggressive after her initial "love tap", and (3) she musta had a good reason to hit him

---

I completely agree, and since I like to mock the idea that men and women are equal, I'm going to stand by all of this with the roles reversed.

First of all, this woman is a fucking joke for getting KO'd so easily. Second, she obviously deserved it for bucking after he gave her some warning shots. Finally, he clearly had a good reason for dropping her ass in an elevator because who would do that without a good reason?