What's new here?
Anyone who has seen "ladies" teams in an American university playing Lacross can only smile at this article.
Crack boffins in Kansas have exposed a new scourge sweeping US universities: that of male students being routinely handed savage thrashings by their co-ed girlfriends, and not in a cheery consensual S&M-hijinks sort of way, either. "In our growing-up years, we teach boys not hit their sister, but we don't teach girls not to …
Anyone who has seen "ladies" teams in an American university playing Lacross can only smile at this article.
our local pub's Wednesday 'ladies' dart players (I doubt if even one of them was below 18 stone)
This sounds very unlikely to me. I'll believe it when I see it... depicted in playmobil.
Barbie and the three musketeers actually exists? I think I just got a new favourite bizarre movie name to beat Santa Claus Conquers The Martians.
behind the beaded curtain at the movie rental house. I imagine it's right ahead of "Behind the Green Door" as you go down the shelf... Unless they list movies like books, alphabetically by author or some such nonsense.
What about "Hitler Meets Christ", "I Was a Zombie for the F.B.I." or "Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones"?
I thought it was an 'adult' film.
It's no laughing matter, girls are mean and dirty fighters, they go for the groin, the eyes, definitely expect some tugging on the hair. Like AC said, watch some "Ladies'" Lacrosse... or Hockey or better yet, Rugby.
Paris wants to know, do they still call the crotch the "squirrel" in ladies rugby? Or is it the Beav?
of the number of times playing mixed hockey at school I'd be charging down the wing only to be pulled up short by one of the opposing "female" players with a hockey stick rammed between my legs and yanked back.
They were bitches in the 70's, seems they haven't changed.
Badgers? Well, there's no "beavers" icon.
I recall playing against the girls at hockey... it would be fair to say they were all trying to "play the ball" unfortunately it wasn't the same ball we boys were playing :-S
We here on the left side of the pond know that this cannot be true. We're taught that women are incapable of violence, unless they've been abused. But, in such cases, knowing that only men are capable of abuse, their violence is still the fault of a man.
Christ. This isn't going to end well, is it?
Please try and keep the hatred/enormous sweeping statements to a minimum. Mind you, I'm off tomorrow and don't have to look at this so you can fill your boots as far as I'm concerned. Wahey!
I was raised with the understanding that Women Can’t Ever Be Wrong. This may sound like complaining or whining, but I make this statement as someone who has taken years to assess this objectively. The idea that women are always correct is not merely the influence of parents or even of major media; but was the ideology taught repeatedly in our school system. We were raised with the understanding that if there was ever an issue between individuals of both genders, (in a relationship or not,) the man was at fault.
I am not talking about social programming such as “hold the door for a lady,” or “always pick up the tab.” I am talking about honest-to-god break-out-in-sweat fear about discussing custody concerns, “positive discrimination (read: affirmative action),” marginalisation of violence against men, paternity leave and many other topics. A group of teenaged girls physically beat one of their (male) classmates. The boy threw an offhand insult about the cleanliness of a girl’s shoes, and he ended up with stiches. The boy was suspended from school for two weeks; no action at all was taken against any of the girls involved. It was considered so normal and irrelevant that not only was the decision considered unappealable, the local media were completely uninterested.
In metros of my province, the outright chauvinism of our rural areas has made addressing true gender equality absolutely taboo. It is socially acceptable, even encouraged to throw gobs of money, time and activism at feminist issues. It is absolutely verboten to even mention masculist concerns. An entire generation of men raised in the metros of our province were raised to reflexively think that we are the source of the entire world’s ills, and if we dare to raise our voices to talk about this...we are very quickly ostracised, in some cases even accused of hate speech. (This accusation was actually levied against someone who dared question gender-specific education grants.) So long as there remains one “oppressed woman” in our province, discussion (let alone addressing) the negative effects of modern feminism simply can’t be allowed.
Please understand that I in no way defend or prefer traditional gender roles. I simply believe that regardless of gender, race, religion or a host of other items that make us all unique, we should be treated equally. My experience thus far has shown this simply isn’t the case.
Jim Noeth raised (fairly crudely) a much shorter version of the issues I just mentioned above, and you accused him of hate speech. Am I to be accused of the same thing?
I was raised to be ashamed to be a man and in the metros of my province a generation of men, (and we are working on another,) have been raised to be ashamed of their gender. Do you honestly believe that this is okay, or that attempting to talk about these issues is tantamount to hate speech?
Lacrosse, or softball, or rugby (or ice hockey for those of us exiled up north) are not good sports to watch if you're looking for eye candy. So, don't judge them all by those lot.
You had me at 'US Sorority girls in booze-fueled orgy', anyway.
The problem is a sexist judicial system.
Woman hits man and gets reprimand/probation. Man hits woman and goes directly to jail.
In some jurisdictions their alternate policy to this is:
Man hits woman and goes directly to jail.
Woman hits man and he goes directly to jail.
Oh well, at least we get to sign up for selective service, pay for the date, and hold the door, right?
"Woman hits man and gets reprimand/probation. Man hits woman and goes directly to jail."
Yes, but if man *kills* woman, he gets a slap on the wrist and is back out on the streets in a couple of years or less (at least here in the U.S.).
Whereas if woman kills man, they throw the book at her, try to make an example of her as if the courts think it's much worse for women to kill men, than for men to kill women.
The thing is (and this may sound sexist to some people who haven't been around this stuff very much) the majority of women who kill men, she was probably pushed to the limit and the bastard bloody well deserved it (he was probably a long-term wife-beater or rapist or child-molester or something). Her only mistake was that she didn't plan it well enough and got caught.
Whereas men kill people for stupid reasons that don't even warrant such extreme behavior, like someone stole his parking space, or - more often and far too commonly - men kill their girlfriend or wife because she tries to leave/divorce him. That happens a *lot*. It's so common it's barely even newsworthy anymore, which is a sad commentary on human behavior.
Men don't seem able to handle their own emotions very well. They freak out over little things and get all violent and have to go bash something, kill something, whatever. It's too bad that men are so ruled by their own hormones.
AC for obvious reasons.
... More alcohol fueled violence. Why do I get pacified when I'm drunk? They don't seemed to have pinned down why it affects people differently.
It brings out your true nature.
'Their own thirsty, aggressive habits are characterised as "just partying and participating in normal college life", but if an older adult behaved in the same way they would be seen as having problems.'
Umm, yes. That's why people go to college / University - to do the things you won't be able to do in later life (one would hope!). And the qualification at the end of it, of course.
There's supposed to be a qualification at the end of it?! Ah, dammit.
"That's why people go to college / University - to do the things you won't be able to do in later life (one would hope!)"
Fools. Wasting parents' (or taxpayers') hard-earned money on frivolous 'education'.
Although it does help to explain why there are so many useless and over-educated shit-heads running around contributing little of value to society.
AC because I do have a public image to maintain ;) after all.
I'm a strong believer in equality. If a woman physically attacks me, I'll react the same way I would if she was a man -- try to talk the person to stop first, and then hit as hard as possible if that does not work. Or so I think, because that has never actually happened. :-)
'"In our growing-up years, we teach boys not hit their sister, but we don't teach girls not to hit their brother," said Sandra Stith'
Speak for yourself.
I have taught both my children (one boy, one girl, daughter one year older than son) that what matters is not to hit first.
But if one hits the other the game changes, as I always tell them "for every action there is a reaction" :-)
How can we say everyone is equal then change the rules on some things. Sounds a bit "Animal Farm" to me. We are all equal regardless of any crap spouted by people with an agenda to push.
I used to hire Engineers regardless of sex/colour/religion, then get some cretin from Personnel calling saying I had more Female/Black Engineers than any other department and would I like anything. Reply was always the same you get good/bad engineers, nothing else counts.
Going to get my coat now as I am sure someone will take offense. I have been asked to leave Parents group for daring to argue against the accepted norm.
So blame it on movies like the Wizard of Oz!
Video games and violent movies are to blame? On the issue of video games, have they seen how few females actually play video games? I am one of the few female members of my uni's games club . Most of the girls that participate, play guitar hero or wii sport . I have not seen anyone other than myself play "violent video games" . Surprisingly I have noticed that the females that play wii sport have not had the urge to go and play golf or tennis when drunk, nor do they desire to play "Eye of the Tiger" on guitar. Okay they will sing incoherently to any backing track but that moves into the realm of karaoke. I will admit that I would consider hitting a Zombie with an axe if I ever met one but I am sure that I would do that anyway.
On blaming Violent movies for violence in the young folk, the same argument was used in the mid 1950s against comics ......easy place for bad parents to point the finger of blame.
Paris ....because she is always a good girl when drunk
I think you failed the basic humour check.
This is a Register article written by Lewis Page, there might have been a touch of sarcasm involved in the violent games/movies -> violent behaviour link.
Just possibly, Ok?
I suspect the video games paragraph was more than a little tongue-in-cheek. Also, I disagree, you should see the speed and accuracy with which I sweep for mines after a few ;)
Are you mad? EVERYONE desires to play "Eye of the Tiger" when drunk.
> Please try and keep the hatred/enormous sweeping statements to a minimum.
Ha ha. El Reg posts an article with a headline like this one and you want "nice" comments only?
Perhaps you ought to moderate some of your own headlines!
It's kept a deep dark secret, but careful investigations have shown that violence toward a spouse is roughly equal boy-on-girl and girl-on-boy. The harrridans and anti-sex squads of the radical feminist movement ("all intercourse is rape") have effectively suppressed this, by outrightly lying about it if necessary.
Here's a delightful link to prove the point:
And for a related discussion from the ever-reliable Craigslist m4m forum:
Why is there no icon depicting a penis in a state of acute arousal?
"Why is there no icon depicting a penis in a state of acute arousal?" - Good point, actually. After all, we already have four icons of twats.
Go back 50 or so years ago in the US, the highest spousal/significant other murder rate was black women killing their husbands or boyfriends. It was much higher than black men killing their wives or girlfriends and about 4X the rate in the white community. OTOH, there was nothing said about the motives for the killings.
I for one welcome our new grog-swillin' bitchslappin' cheerleadin' underachievin' female undergraduates.
Who takes advice on violence from a Sith anyway?
When a violent person is faced or has faced a greater degree of violence due to their reaction, it hardly begs a question beyond their inability to learn from their own actions.
think you got trolled by the reg..
my kids(one of each model) both know judo and are looking at akido next.. so they both know how to hit each other and that the other person can do exactly the same back.
entente discordail rules.
we get to see Steve J. being abused by Carly F.
Paris cos she knows its a winner to get girl on boy action on tape to make a mint on the royalties...
maybe the answer lies in the first two words of the main text. CRACK BOFFINS, never heard that phrase before, are they akin to crack whores?.
perhaps this whole thing is a halucination of a cocktail of drugs and alcohol and too much spare time.
I tried searching youtube for:
"US sorority girls in booze-fuelled orgy of violence"
Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Regarding war, "don't let them give you to the women".
Or in other words, women can be just as bloody vicious as men.
They've been blaming computer games for years, its about time they stopped. If it isn't computer games it is TV and films, if it isn't TV it was D&D. What about rolling dice is going to make someone more likely to commit violence? If we get down to the nitty gritty isn't chess a violent game? Or how about Cluedo? Pop up pirate? Mouse trap? Water pistols?
We're getting progressively less violent as a society despite what people would have you think, so we are actually being *sensitised* to violence. It isn't the perpetrators being *desensitised*. Hell apparently there was a major problem with knife carrying in the 50's here in Britain, and a lot of teddy boys were people roaming round in gangs for the simple purpose of looking for a scrap. No purpose to it, no territory or personal gain, just wanting a scrap because they enjoyed getting in fights. Knives, chains, you name it. They made hoodies look like samaritans.
"What about rolling dice is going to make someone more likely to commit violence?"
Well, if you've ever rolled half a dozen natural ones in a row...
What? My Mum says I'm cool!
how much damage a well thrown d20 can cause to a GM... and rock falls... and level drain.
I'm of the old world kinda theory. If you expect equal rites, you get treated equally when you pick a fight. Want to give me a black eye? Better be faster than me, coz I'm not a gentleman.
Paris. She ain't no gentlelady either.
are, it seems, not what I was thinking they might be.
If you swung the first punch, don't be surprised to get punched back. It's not rocket science.
These arguments are a lot like the tall-vs-short in the playground. As a kid I learned the hard way.. I'm tall, so every time a shortstack came over and started picking on me - I got into trouble.
When I started hitting back, I still got into trouble (and not the little sheet that started it) - but at least they started backing off.
It works the same way here. I don't care what your deal is, if you pick a fight with someone stronger, bigger and possibly meaner than you; don't go crying to mommy coz you get your arse handed to you.
Paris. Everyone gets to hand her ass around..
... how many violent incidents are started by short-arses? In my entire life I've never been assaulted by anyone taller than me. Could it be that tall blokes are generally more peaceable, or that I was always the tallest in my class, and I'm now a bit over two metres tall?
In US society, we find it more acceptable for males to show aggressiveness against one another, and encourage repression of this human trait in females.
As with anything that is repressed, rage can build up and all it takes is a lowering of inhibition I.E. alcohol or other drug intoxication along with a group mentality that it's acceptable behavior.
I can't help but suspect there is also some frustration from the males jerking off to internet porn instead of catering to the female's desires, and by that I don't just mean sexual desires but rather the entire manipulative aspect of young male-female relationships. A young adult male that isn't as eager for sexual gratification isn't willing to jump through so many hoops to woo a female as one would in the pre-porn-internet era.
Paris, because there's always been a double standard.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017