Do Stephen A. Smith's words have any truth to them?

[LSN80]

Before anyone jumps down my throat, I'm not condoning or agreeing with what he said. For those out of the loop-of which I'm sure there are few- Smith is a Sportscaster on ESPN's First Take, their morning talk show that focuses on all the happenings in sports in the previous day. They were disussing the suspension of Ray Rice,-running back for the Baltimore Ravens-who was arrested and suspended by the NFL for two games for battery of his now-wife, then his fiancee. Rice struck Janay Palmer-nee-Rice so hard in an elevator in Atlantic City this past February that she fell, unconscious. Security footage shows Rice dragging Palmer, still unconscious, from the elevator. Rice plead not guilty but an agreement was reached between Rice's lawyers and prosecution that had him enter into a pre-trial intervention program that equaled community service, a heavy fine, probation, and anger management counseling.

So after the NFL announced the suspension, it was one of the headline topics on First Take. Rice's two day suspension and sentencing were discussed, and it was during this discussion where Smith made the following comments:

"Let's make sure we don't do anything to provoke wrong action ... we got to also make sure that you can do your part to do whatever you can do to make, to try to make sure it doesn't happen again."

The "we" Smith was referencing was the female, the one who was-and in a relationship, typically is assaulted. And I'm not here to defend Smith's comments, they're egregious. There is no excuse or rationale for domestic violence of any kind.

But I also think it's important for people to identify triggers, in other words, things in life that lead to anger or loss of control. It's important for our loved ones to know those triggers, to help said aggressor keep their anger under control.

I watched the TV mini-series Fargo in the late spring/early summer, and the first episode featured a character named Lester Nygard-played by the brilliant Martin Freeman-who was a pathetic individual. His wife constantly told him how pathetic he was, how he couldn't satisfy her, and how she should have married his brother instead. The show's early moments focused on her verbal abuse of him, telling him how he wasn't a real man. About 30 minutes into the show he was confronted by a high school classmate as he was walking to work, a man who had tormented him in high school. Nothing changed since then, and the short of it was that Lester left the confrontation with a broken nose. When Lester left the hospital and returned home, his wife went on a tirade of how he didn't stick up for himself, deserved the broken nose, and needed to fix the washing machine.

Lester worked on it for some time, and thought he got it to work. He called his wife down to show her, but when she tried it, it still didn't work. So she continued to belittle him, focusing again on his manhood. He picked up a hammer and looked at her with anger...and she laughed. She told him he wasn't man enough to hit her...until he did. He struck her in the head and did so over and over until she was beyond dead.

And a small part of me was happy for Lester, and glad he shut her up.

Let's face it, in the world we live in, if a man spoke to another man the way Lester's wife belittled him on a day to day basis, we as people would likely cheer. "Finally, the man grew a pair", or "I would have kicked his ass a long time ago." It's not excusing it, per se, it's showing understanding as to why the man acted as he did. But change the gender, and regardless of what is said or done, we shake our heads and point fingers at the terrible behavior and conduct of the man.

The only thing that is different is the gender. I've never hit my wife, but there have been times I've been trying to avoid an argument with her and have been unsuccessful, going from room to room in my house, only for her to follow me. This has gone on for as much as an hour at some points, and finally I've responded verbally with words I'm not proud of. These situations happen maybe once every three months, but I can't imagine what my reaction would be if they happened, say, every 3 days. It would be very hard to deal with.

This isn't to excuse Smith's words, it's almost as if he was justifying what Rice did. I don't know all the details, such as was alcohol involved, had she been yelling at him, or if she was questioning his manhood. None of those make what Rice did right.

But, using Smith's words, could she have done things "to avoid provoking" Rice's "wrong actions"?

Is there any truth to be found in Smith's words?

Should women 'watch their words' so as not to provoke physical violence from men?

Was Smith's suspension of one week enough? Too harsh?

Please remember, these are just questions and comments meant to provoke thought, they don't reflect my opinions on the matter. But any other thoughts or discussion here are welcome and encouraged.

 

[therockiswwf]

No. Absolutely not. You don't have to take verbal abuse You don't have to stay with that person (if it gets bad enough). You can leave. You can leave the house.

The victim is never at fault. Never. What Ray Rice did was wrong. He knocked her out. Not a self defense punch. Not trying to protect himself. HE KNOCKED HER OUT.

Beating someone up to shut them up or whatever is not manly. It's being a caveman. The mindset of beating people up to show you are a man is from the old days. Walking away is what a man should do. If you ever get to the point of wanting to hit the person you are with, you should leave them.

I was on a sports team once. A guy the entire time I was on the team (a few years) would make comments about me in a derogatory fashion (I honestly have no idea why, I never really even talked to him before he started saying stuff). I was known as the bruiser on the team (I had a physical style). Not once the entire time did I ever take advantage of that and try to hurt him. Instead I let him talk and just ignored him. I had plenty of opportunities to do a hard tackle, but I never did. I never stooped down to his level. He wasn't worth my time or energy.

If alcohol is involved, he should never be allowed to drink again.

Now, this is not to say Ray Rice can never be forgiven. We all make judgment errors. But it's going to take a long time and a lot of effort on his part before anyone should say anything positive about him.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

That truth is irrelevant in this situation. Smith probably thought he was being insightful but he was just stating something obvious and insensitive. Of course, women generally shouldn't say things that might provoke violence but what is the point in Smith saying that when that life lesson applies generally to both men and women. It just demeans the victim and women in general. Maybe in a few years when it becomes public knowledge that Ray Rice is cheating on his wife, Stephen A. Smith will be there to explain to us that Rice's wife did gain a little weight and women shouldn't do that or else men may be more likely to cheat on them.

But getting back to my main point is that we are too obsessed some times with truth and fairness. We try to drill down topics to minutiae when we will progress further by being parsimonious. There is so much media in 2014 and Smith does so much talking that no one should be surprised by his slip up. It was a stupid comment and the week suspension feels appropriate, far more appropriate than Rice's two weeks. If people can't see it as a slip up and forgive Smith maybe a harsher punishment is more appropriate.

 

[Slash-LN]

Is there any truth to be found in Smith's words?

Victim blaming is stupid. He doesn't even know the situation as neither do we. Maybe Ray Rice was being an asshole and she stood up for herself and he didn't like it.

Should women 'watch their words' so as not to provoke physical violence from men?

No. If you can't speak without fear of being hit then you're in a shitty relationship. That works both ways. Because all of us know that there are men out there who get physically and emotionally abused. I'm pretty sure there's a thread on here where we discussed that.

Was Smith's suspension of one week enough? Too harsh?

The guy is known for saying stupid things. I don't even know why they continue to bring him back.

Didn't something similar happen with Chael Sonnen with a similar topic?

 

[jmt225]

I don't understand how telling people to basically live by the Golden Rule is classified as "victim blaming" by hashtag activists these days. It's so dumb.

Personally, I didn't think there was anything to take exception with in what Stephen A. Smith said. He reiterated several times, that it is 100% wrong for a guy to beat a women. He specifically said that it's criminal and that Ray Rice deserved more punishment than what he received (which I agree with as well).

Outside of that, all he said was basically warning women that there are shitty guys out there that will beat them, so be careful not to provoke an attack, because even though it's illegal, once the assault has started the legal channels cannot take back a beating. Is the guy more wrong for attacking a woman period? OF COURSE! But still, be careful with what you say to people and never, ever put your hands on someone.

I think its good advice and if I was a father of a daughter I would hope she would listen to that advice. There's nothing wrong with telling ANYONE to be cautious of others. And that includes men as well. "Don't provoke someone to attack you" is good advice be it given to a man or a woman.

Of course there will be cases where women (and men) are attacked for absolutely no reason or for something like their money, and when that's the case, it sucks and there's not much that can be done about it. And in those situations, all you can do is feel horrible for the victim and hope she gets help afterward so she is not psychologically damaged from it.

In cases where someone mouths off and get punched, however, is different than that. Is it still wrong and should we still feel bad for the victim? Yes, absolutely, but there's nothing wrong with telling others that to avoid getting attacked like that, live by the Golden Rule... treat others how you yourself want to be treated.

 

[The Butcher]

I'd be more willing to give Smith the benefit of the doubt if I felt that he simply made his point poorly. Unfortunately, as detailed by Deadspin, this ordeal wasn't the first time he made questionable comments about a domestic violence situation. In both his prior and most recent comments, Smith brings up "provocation" but doesn't clarify what he means by that. A woman has every bit as much as responsibility to keep her hands to herself as a man, no doubt, but Smith doesn't specify whether he means physical or verbal provocation. He left his comments up for interpretation, and it certainly comes across as if he meant, "a woman had better watch her mouth." There may be something to the general idea at the heart of the matter, but Smith's comments were lousy. He's there to cover basketball for crying out loud; he shouldn't even have a television show to talk about real issues. Shut down First Take.

 

[Slash-LN]

I don't understand how telling people to basically live by the Golden Rule is classified as "victim blaming" by hashtag activists these days. It's so dumb.

Personally, I didn't think there was anything to take exception with in what Stephen A. Smith said. He reiterated several times, that it is 100% wrong for a guy to beat a women. He specifically said that it's criminal and that Ray Rice deserved more punishment than what he received (which I agree with as well).

Outside of that, all he said was basically warning women that there are shitty guys out there that will beat them, so be careful not to provoke an attack, because even though it's illegal, once the assault has started the legal channels cannot take back a beating. Is the guy more wrong for attacking a woman period? OF COURSE! But still, be careful with what you say to people and never, ever put your hands on someone.

I think its good advice and if I was a father of a daughter I would hope she would listen to that advice. There's nothing wrong with telling ANYONE to be cautious of others. And that includes men as well. "Don't provoke someone to attack you" is good advice be it given to a man or a woman.

Of course there will be cases where women (and men) are attacked for absolutely no reason or for something like their money, and when that's the case, it sucks and there's not much that can be done about it. And in those situations, all you can do is feel horrible for the victim and hope she gets help afterward so she is not psychologically damaged from it.

In cases where someone mouths off and get punched, however, is different than that. Is it still wrong and should we still feel bad for the victim? Yes, absolutely, but there's nothing wrong with telling others that to avoid getting attacked like that, live by the Golden Rule... treat others how you yourself want to be treated.

Because he was essentially saying if she didn't say anything then she wouldn't have been hit. Therefore he is blaming her.

He wasn't there. We weren't there. We have no idea what was going on.
But for him to automatically say she provoked it is ridiculous.

And to tell women that they need to be careful about what they say so they don't provoke violence is dumb.

Maybe people's spouses or whoever shouldn't be assholes and beat people. Maybe they should learn anger management skills and not allow the situation to get to that point.

And often times in abuse the person being abused may not even be who the abuser is mad at. It can take one little thing for the abuser to take their anger out on someone who has nothing to do with what the person is mad about. They may just be the closest person.

 

[jmt225]

And to tell women that they need to be careful about what they say so they don't provoke violence is dumb.

Not just women, but men too. Why is it such an dumb thing to say that people should be cordial and polite to one another, and that if you're not, you may set off the wrong person? That wrong person is of course a no good scumbag piece of shit, but still.. if you can avoid having to set someone like that off, then why not?

 

[lil steroid meat]

Before anyone jumps down my throat, I'm not condoning or agreeing with what he said.

Well I am, even though I'd prefer not to have anything down my throat.

Maybe provoke was the wrong word (because it doesn't necessarily infer physical violence on the females part), but all he said was that yes it is wrong for males to hit women, but females should not hit males. Not only because it's just the golden rule and the right thing to do as an adult who has all of their mental capacities working correctly, but whatever happens to the male afterwards as punishment, whether legal or your cousins/father/brother beating the shit out of dude, it still doesn't change the fact that you got unnecessary injury from not controlling your emotions.

And here comes this dumb bitch Michelle Beadle bringing up short dresses and rape and all that dumb shit getting people fake riled up on Twitter. Instead of confronting the man you work with face to face or in private, you make a big scene on Twitter and get him suspended and possibly fired.

I personally would never hit a female because

1. I wouldn't even allow the conversation to escalate to that point.

2. I don't need the headache from the legal ramifications.

But you can't blame someone for reciprocating the energy you give them. I'm sure there are a percentage of domestic abusers who just randomly beat females for no rhyme or reason. But I'm also sure that a large portion of domestic abusers are hit first by the female. Doesn't make it right, and of course I'm looking for heads if my mother or sister is a victim of domestic abuse, but I'm also going to look at them stupid if they hit the dude first.

We need to put as much effort into teaching women to keep their hands to themselves as much as we do males.

I just don't see how anyone can disagree that everyone should keep their hands to themselves. What gives a woman the right to hit a male just because she's mad?

Dudes let women get away with saying and doing a lot of stupid shit in hopes of getting their dong wet.

 

[therockiswwf]

Well I am, even though I'd prefer not to have anything down my throat.

Maybe provoke was the wrong word (because it doesn't necessarily infer physical violence on the females part), but all he said was that yes it is wrong for males to hit women, but females should not hit males. Not only because it's just the golden rule and the right thing to do as an adult who has all of their mental capacities working correctly, but whatever happens to the male afterwards as punishment, whether legal or your cousins/father/brother beating the shit out of dude, it still doesn't change the fact that you got unnecessary injury from not controlling your emotions.

And here comes this dumb bitch Michelle Beadle bringing up short dresses and rape and all that dumb shit getting people fake riled up on Twitter. Instead of confronting the man you work with face to face or in private, you make a big scene on Twitter and get him suspended and possibly fired.

I personally would never hit a female because

1. I wouldn't even allow the conversation to escalate to that point.

2. I don't need the headache from the legal ramifications.

But you can't blame someone for reciprocating the energy you give them. I'm sure there are a percentage of domestic abusers who just randomly beat females for no rhyme or reason. But I'm also sure that a large portion of domestic abusers are hit first by the female. Doesn't make it right, and of course I'm looking for heads if my mother or sister is a victim of domestic abuse, but I'm also going to look at them stupid if they hit the dude first.

We need to put as much effort into teaching women to keep their hands to themselves as much as we do males.

I just don't see how anyone can disagree that everyone should keep their hands to themselves. What gives a woman the right to hit a male just because she's mad?

Dudes let women get away with saying and doing a lot of stupid shit in hopes of getting their dong wet.

You actually missed the point of what Smith said. Smith was saying that the victim should not provoke the attacker. That the victim could be at fault because they knew what they were saying would make the attacker mad.

However, IT'S NEVER THE VICTIM'S FAULT. Never.

His point wasn't women can't hit men and vice versa. It was you shouldn't say things to provoke someone to attack. Which is putting blame on the victim. Which is wrong.

You wouldn't hit a women due to legal headaches? Not because it's wrong. But because of legal headaches. Meaning you would beat up women if you knew you could get away with it? Wow.

How dare Michelle Beadle point out how wrong Smith was. How dare she point out that views like that are unacceptable. What a dumb ****e standing up for not just women's rights but also human rights.

Plus if the women are the physical abuser, men are allowed to defend themselves. This isn't news to anyone. Studies show that abuse is around 60% from men/40% from women. This also isn't news to anyone. So I don't get what you are ranting about.

 

[Nate DaMac]

You actually missed the point of what Smith said. Smith was saying that the victim should not provoke the attacker. That the victim could be at fault because they knew what they were saying would make the attacker mad.

I've read the quotes and have yet to tumble across the word "fault" in any context other than saying it's never the victim's fault.

Both of you are just making assumptions about what he said. Your interpretation doesn't hold any more merit than his does.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Because he was essentially saying if she didn't say anything then she wouldn't have been hit. Therefore he is blaming her.

He actually didnt even say close to that at all. Saying something like this makes me wonder if you have even viewed the video you are speaking upon.

And to tell women that they need to be careful about what they say so they don't provoke violence is dumb.

Is it? It kind of sounds like common sense to me.



Stephen A was talking about domestic violence and extreme confrontation and rowdiness BOTH ways. If anyone bothered to listen to what he actually said, he made it clear that NO ONE approves of a man beating on a woman, thusly, regardless of what provoked the situation, the man is going to be arrested/in trouble/the ever loving shit beat out of them.....So, that being the case, please ensure you didnt initiate the physicality, or act in a provoking manner which caused things to go to another level....because REGARDLESS of what a woman may have done to warrant or provoke being roughed up, the man is gonna burn for it(which I feel is fucking ridiculous, but thats a conversation about my feelings on the situation, and this is a discussion of Stephen A Smith's remarks)


So while there was nothing wrong with what he said, he did a poor job of communicating it, and left himself totally open to what happened, which was a bunch of keyboard white knights blowing shit WAYYYYY out of perportion.


As far as if women should watch their mouths in order to not provoke violence, I think that is pretty fairly common sense to people of both sexes. Hello. Is it excusable to resort to violence over something verbal? No, but I would say the same thing about anyone, not just women. People need to make up their fucking minds on how this white knight feminism shit is supposed to work. Are they equal, or just equal on the fun stuff, and not accountability/ nasty stuff?

 

[Slash-LN]

Not just women, but men too. Why is it such an dumb thing to say that people should be cordial and polite to one another, and that if you're not, you may set off the wrong person? That wrong person is of course a no good scumbag piece of shit, but still.. if you can avoid having to set someone like that off, then why not?

Because you're only looking at provoke in the sense of intentionally trying to set the person off.

What I'm saying is you can unintentionally "provoke" someone.

Let's say I'm stressed out about stuff and my nephew is being loud or something so I yell at him. He's provoked me but not directly. That wasn't his motive. So in that situation he wouldn't be a fault. I would be with my misguided anger. It would be wrong for my nephew not to play or whatever the case may be because there's a chance he could indirectly set me off.

Again none of us know what happened in this situation. We're all just guessing.

 

[therockiswwf]

I've read the quotes and have yet to tumble across the word "fault" in any context other than saying it's never the victim's fault.

Both of you are just making assumptions about what he said. Your interpretation doesn't hold any more merit than his does.

Well that is because he implied it with this part. I'm not making assumptions.

...make sure that you can do your part to do whatever you can do to make, to try to make sure it doesn’t happen.

That's implying that women (or men) can do something that provokes the attacker. IT'S NEVER THE VITCIMS FAULT. There is no other way to interpret this.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

That's implying that women (or men) can do something that provokes the attacker. IT'S NEVER THE VITCIMS FAULT. There is no other way to interpret this.

You can sincerely sit and say that no domestic violence situation has EVER been brought on via a bit of drinking and someone running their mouth a bit too much, people losing their temper, and acting out of character?

 

[Slash-LN]

He actually didnt even say close to that at all. Saying something like this makes me wonder if you have even viewed the video you are speaking upon.

There's no video in the OP is there? No. There's a quote and some other information.

I replied based on the information presented to me.

Is it? It kind of sounds like common sense to me.
Stephen A was talking about domestic violence and extreme confrontation and rowdiness BOTH ways. If anyone bothered to listen to what he actually said, he made it clear that NO ONE approves of a man beating on a woman, thusly, regardless of what provoked the situation, the man is going to be arrested/in trouble/the ever loving shit beat out of them.....So, that being the case, please ensure you didnt initiate the physicality, or act in a provoking manner which caused things to go to another level....because REGARDLESS of what a woman may have done to warrant or provoke being roughed up, the man is gonna burn for it(which I feel is fucking ridiculous, but thats a conversation about my feelings on the situation, and this is a discussion of Stephen A Smith's remarks)
So while there was nothing wrong with what he said, he did a poor job of communicating it, and left himself totally open to what happened, which was a bunch of keyboard white knights blowing shit WAYYYYY out of perportion.


As far as if women should watch their mouths in order to not provoke violence, I think that is pretty fairly common sense to people of both sexes. Hello. Is it excusable to resort to violence over something verbal? No, but I would say the same thing about anyone, not just women. People need to make up their fucking minds on how this white knight feminism shit is supposed to work. Are they equal, or just equal on the fun stuff, and not accountability/ nasty stuff?

If only somewhere else in this thread I had already said that a person should learn anger management skills to avoid things getting that far.

If only I had posted that someone can indirectly provoke someone.

If only in this thread had I mentioned that none of us know what happened because we weren't there and maybe he was being an asshole and she stood up for herself and he didn't like it.

If only I had mentioned in this thread that it works both ways because men also get physically and emotionally abused.

Get the fuck out of here with your "white knight" "feminism" bullshit dude.

 

[lil steroid meat]

You actually missed the point of what Smith said. Smith was saying that the victim should not provoke the attacker. That the victim could be at fault because they knew what they were saying would make the attacker mad.

However, IT'S NEVER THE VICTIM'S FAULT. Never.

His point wasn't women can't hit men and vice versa. It was you shouldn't say things to provoke someone to attack. Which is putting blame on the victim. Which is wrong.

You wouldn't hit a women due to legal headaches? Not because it's wrong. But because of legal headaches. Meaning you would beat up women if you knew you could get away with it? Wow.

How dare Michelle Beadle point out how wrong Smith was. How dare she point out that views like that are unacceptable. What a dumb ****e standing up for not just women's rights but also human rights.

Plus if the women are the physical abuser, men are allowed to defend themselves. This isn't news to anyone. Studies show that abuse is around 60% from men/40% from women. This also isn't news to anyone. So I don't get what you are ranting about.

You just exhibited the same careless and ignorant lack of comprehension and jumping to conclusions that Beadle did, especially in the bolded statement lol. Where did I say I would walk around beating up women if it wasn't illegal? Show me where I posted that lol.That same type of slanderous talking and reckless accusing is what Beadle exhibited and it's a shame that Smith is out of a job right now because Beadle (and I guess you) never learned actual comprehension skills.

You conveniently left out the part where I said I don't hit women because I don't let the conversation even get to that point. Because unlike you and Michelle Beadle I know how to control my emotions and think before I allow myself to act or speak, like an adult is supposed to do. However even if a girl did raise her hand at me, I'd like to think that I'd restrain her, control her, put some space in between us for an hour or two, go for a drive or something and she'd respect me and be even more attracted to me because:

A.) I didn't bitch up like a wimp and let her control me.

B.) I didn't allow myself to become emotional and irrational and Sweet Chin Music the bitch's head off.

I kept control of my emotions and controlled the situation like a man is supposed to do.

However, not every male in the world is like me and women should not be surprised when a man gives you what you give to him.

You're right, it's never a "victim's" fault. If a dude legitimately is out here just hitting females whenever he gets mad, throw him under the jail and lose the key.

But an adult who hits another adult and gets the same treatment in return, is not a victim, it's someone who got the same treatment they put out.

Michelle Beadle isn't a dumb ****e for standing up for women's/human's rights, she's dumb (wouldn't call her a ****e, don't know her personal life) for:

A.) Not comprehending what Smith said in the first place. Which is excusable, you, nor Beadle are not the first nor last person the education system has failed.

B.) Not addressing her misunderstanding in private or face to face (since they work at the same damn place) rather than trying to start something on Twitter and put on a show for an audience.

C.) Bringing up short dresses "provoking" rape in her tweets. Like how do you even go from not understanding his domestic violence comments to now throwing the condoning of rape on him?! Where is that jump even made? Bitch is crazy lol.

Considering Smith himself said IN THE SAME DAMN VIDEO lol that he had family members that were victims of abuse, I think it's much more likely that by "provoke" he meant "do not hit males first" rather than "watch your mouth and know your role damnit you stupid bitch".

But I don't know, maybe I could be wrong and Smith thinks that his mom and sisters should just shut up and be submissive dumb bitches and you've figured out the art of mind reading. That is all entirely plausible.

I suggest some people posting in this thread go and watch the original video in question (and try really, really hard to correctly comprehend it) before they continue to make themselves look like they have no wrinkles in their brain.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

No.

Well that solves that.

If only somewhere else in this thread I had already said that a person should learn anger management skills to avoid things getting that far.

If only I had posted that someone can indirectly provoke someone.

If only in this thread had I mentioned that none of us know what happened because we weren't there and maybe he was being an asshole and she stood up for herself and he didn't like it.

If only I had mentioned in this thread that it works both ways because men also get physically and emotionally abused.

Cool story bro. Good job the rest of my post wasn't directed towards you.

Get the fuck out of here with your "white knight" "feminism" bullshit dude.

Have you fucking SEEN some of the posts in this thread?


Let the subject involve a vagina and everyone loses all form of common sense they can possibly posses.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Well that is because he implied it with this part. I'm not making assumptions.



That's implying that women (or men) can do something that provokes the attacker. IT'S NEVER THE VITCIMS FAULT. There is no other way to interpret this.

I envy this fairy tale world you live in.

So if walk up to group of young black men and shout the word "******", would I get my ass kicked? I'm not going to say that I will with 100% positivity, but I think the odds are good. Legally, did I do anything to incite the beating? Absolutely not. Those people will be charged with a crime unless I elect not to press charges. However, do you think anyone will feel sorry for me for what happened? Again, maybe some will but the majority will fell that it was my own fault.

Not everything is black and white.

What Stephan A said just came off as practical survival tactic advice to me. Not just for women, but for all people. You should never intentionally say something to someone that could cause them to harm you if you're not prepared to defend yourself. The legal ramifications aren't going to block that punch and your moral objections aren't going to stop that hand from wrapping around your throat. Rather than pretending that these people don't exist in the world, take steps toward protecting yourself.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

Maybe its just me, but I don't think hitting someone is ever just unless they hit you first.

I don't think any domestic violence is ever justified. I grew up watching my biological dad hit my mom on a fairly regular basis. Would she mouth off to him? You bet. Would she be passive aggressive and generally act like someone in an unhappy marriage would act? Yup. Did she ever deserve to get hit. No. Words should never drive someone to physical violence.

The whole "don't provoke an attack" is a bullshit argument, because to me there is no action you can take that deserves a physical attack, save my previous point of self defense. I'm not going to say the victim is never to blame, there are some situations where victims of heinous events do deserve it, but in a domestic violence situation, the victim is never to blame. The piece of shit who committed the act is to blame.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

The whole "don't provoke an attack" is a bullshit argument, because to me there is no action you can take that deserves a physical attack, save my previous point of self defense. I'm not going to say the victim is never to blame, there are some situations where victims of heinous events do deserve it, but in a domestic violence situation, the victim is never to blame. The piece of shit who committed the act is to blame.

It isnt though.....We all recognize that words, as a rule, generally do not warrant a physical reaction.

However, to expect this, and think it isn't going to happen, is fantasy camp at its finest. Just look around you, and why people fight every single day. Its rarely over anything that DOESNT start with verbal altercation.

and everyone is sort of just glazing over the fact that Stephen A, in part, was talking about women crossing the line of physicality first.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

C.) Bringing up short dresses "provoking" rape in her tweets. Like how do you even go from not understanding his domestic violence comments to now throwing the condoning of rape on him?! Where is that jump even made? Bitch is crazy lol.

Like that one lady from CNN rattling on about how some ex boyfriend used to whoop the fuck out of her on the daily and lock her in the closet and shit....Like what the flying fuck does that have to do with ANYTHING....I dont think any sane person on earth is implying that you getting locked in a closet every day was your fault in any way(besides the fact you remained in the relationship)

Come the fuck on. Get real, pull your head out of your ass.

 

[GI Cake]

As someone with a sister, I might be a bit biased, but I don't think I would ever be okay with someone telling me that my sister was knocked the fuck out and then subsequently dragged out of an elevator for the whole world to see because she "provoked the attack." I personally wouldn't be able to see what my sister could have said that would have deserved that kind of abuse. Then again, what do I know? I'm only a concerned sibling and not a total piece of shit like Stephen A. Smith.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

As someone with a sister, I might be a bit biased, but I don't think I would ever be okay with someone telling me that my sister was knocked the fuck out and then subsequently dragged out of an elevator for the whole world to see because she "provoked the attack." I personally wouldn't be able to see what my sister could have said that would have deserved that kind of abuse. Then again, what do I know? I'm only a concerned sibling and not a total piece of shit like Stephen A. Smith.

He in no way shape form or fashion said the girl deserved the treatment she recieved.

He made a general statement of the severity of which domestic violence is handled in regards to the male in the situation, so females have it up to them as fellow adult human beings to ensure they do not escalate situations past a point were violence may result, or make the move to cross the line into violence themselves, since even if a man is simply defending himself, he is damn sure going to jail or getting his ass beat by other men, at the very least.



This thread is a cauldron of complete ignorance.

 

[GI Cake]

He in no way shape form or fashion said the girl deserved the treatment she recieved.

He made a general statement of the severity of which domestic violence is handled in regards to the male in the situation, so females have it up to them as fellow adult human beings to ensure they do not escalate situations past a point were violence may result, or make the move to cross the line into violence themselves, since even if a man is simply defending himself, he is damn sure going to jail or getting his ass beat by other men, at the very least.



This thread is a cauldron of complete ignorance.

So NorCal, do you honestly believe that women should always be cautious of what they say, and how they say because if said in the wrong inflection it could provoke a man into a punch happy mood? Where do we draw between victim blaming and retribution? I would rather live in a world where people take responsibility for their own actions instead of a world where people ask "Did the victim deserve being knocked out by their spouse?"