stfusexists replied to your post: i hate to be THAT girl but i do believe in some cases it’s okay for a man to hit a woman. i say this only because my step dads ex girlfriend constantly physically abused him, to the point that he ended up in hospital (she was an ex army woman, so she was quite frankly a lot stronger than him) he let this happen for three years. i don’t think it’s right that she abused the fact that she was a woman and that “boys can’t hit girls.” he should have been able to defend himself.
Why is it more okay for him to hit her back than to get her ass arrested? Ridiculous logic is ridiculous.
I think that’s a good point but I think it’s also important to note that men are less likely to be believed when they call the police during a domestic violence situation and that needs to be fixed.
BUT I also think it is extremely important to recognize that there is a significant difference between attacking, assaulting, and abusing someone and defending yourself from that person. And I think this is why discussions about “mean should be able to hit women” and domestic violence against men tends to get so muddled.
The men who argue that feminism means they should be able to hit a woman and not face charges (because, let’s be real, that’s what they really want) are doing so because they think it’s acceptable to hit women in the first place. They are not arguing being able to hit a woman in self defense, they are arguing that they should be able to hit a woman whenever they feel a woman has gotten uppity and needs to be put back in her place and not face assault charges for it. None of these men ever stop to think that maybe instead of arguing FOR hitting a woman that maybe they should call the police and press assault charges. That’s never part of these ridiculous scenarios they come up with.
Men who push their abusive partner away so they can get away from them are not the same as men who want to use feminism as an excuse to hit a woman.