women more violent than men?

Do women turn to violence more often than men?

FOXNews.com - Police Say New York Woman Stabbed Man With Kitchen Knife for Calling Her 'Ugly' - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News

While there is no arguement as to men being stronger than most women and have the greater chance of doing great harm to women when they get violent, I believe women turn to violent actions faster then men, and more often. This violence tends to not be reported because men are pressured to be tough and take the abuse without complaint.


I cannot tell you how many times I have seen women strike men in public for things like looking at another woman but nobody ever says anything about their violence.


Are men just pet lions with woman as the trainers putting their heads into the lions mouth?

 

I have not checked out the links, nor have I checked the facts on this but this was posted by someone on another site and somewhat relates.

 

Violence is not gender bias but I would say men are far more violent than women. You can hold the same argument that women don?t report violence inflicted on them because of repercussions, such as more violence. Or they can also have mentality that they either deserved it or he was sorry and won?t do it again.

 

Idk, I feel it's pretty even. I feel like men are more naturally violent, but I feel that we have learned to curb that some. Women do not have the same stimuli that men have, they seem to be more naturally calm, and learn to be violent... meh.

 

So why is it all the studies show women turn to violence faster then men?


Clearly old saying like "hell hath no fury like a woman scorn" have their basis in fact. We have all seen women react in a violent way in public against men at one time or another but the concept is that men must have done something to deserve it.


This goes to the double standard of who women are given the benefit of the doubt while men are not. We have been conditioned to believe men are the bad side and women are the innocent and kind ones when that is not the case.


I will give you an example from my own life. My ex-wife uses a belt on my children at least once a week while I have never had to spank my kids (other then a little pat on the diaper). My kids do get out of control sometimes but while I turn to sitting in the corner, writing lines, go to bed early, trim grass with hand clippers, etc...... her only option is to beat them with a belt.

 

That's kind of what I meant... Nature v. Nurture, Men, by nature, are more violent. Testosterone and all that.

There was a study (I read it in my physcology book in college, if I can find it on the net, I'll post a link to it) that showed how young boys reacted differently to toys without prompting than young girls did. The young boys punched the punching toy, sword fought, and launched cars off of the doll house roof, where the little girls had tea parties and played calmly with the doll and dollhouse.

On the other hand, women, are nurtured by society and brought up to think that they are entitled. They feel that they have the right to be violent because they are women and they are supressed by men. Plus, they think men can take it. We're bigger, stronger, and meaner. And we deserve it anyway.

Definite double standard. Equal rights my ass.
.
.
.

 

You let her get away with that? Report her ass.

 

Nothing I can do, it is legal in Florida, hell even the schools still give "swats".

Don't get me wrong, I see nothing wrong with spanking a child "who needs it" but I just rarely find a situation where a kid needs it.


We are the adults, and if your imagination and creativity cannot deal with regular needed discipline without turning to violence, you have serious issues.



An interesting observation is that while she is the one who shows the trend to violence, my kids behave better for me than her, there have even been times she has called me and put them on the phone with me so I can tell them to behave for her, lol.

 

Floridas' laws are behind the times. If anyone ever hit my child with a belt, they would regret it bigtime. Your kids behave better for you because they respect you.

 

Well, certainly some situations are beyond our control. My showing my behind or worse would only result in me being permanently separated from my children, a thing I would be very hurt by.

After divorce, fathers have no real say in the raising of their children any more because society has devalued us to little more than a nuisance getting in the way of what women want.


If I want to have any real involvement in my children's lives at this point, I must toe the line.

Their mother is only interested in the money, she does not truly love our kids the way I love them.

My kids respect me more because they know without doubt how much I care about them. Most parents plop their kids in front of the television and forget them, I don't.

At any rate, I am not perfect, but my love for them is above all other things, and as far as I'm concerned, that is the way it should be.

 

That is sad. I know it can be true. I've met alot of women who only keep the children for the welfare benefits, then desert them every chance they get when it comes to their party time.

It is harder on men as far as the children are concerned. My only advice would be to document everything you could if negligence or abuse were involved.

 

Well, certainly women have changed a lot in the areas of morals and taking care of children from when I was young. Women were the rocks that tought the kids and kept the homes safe and secure for raising children. Most importantly, they showed by example what was right and wrong.

These days, women seem to be doing everything in their power to show they can out do men in every way, and being immoral and selfish is taking the top of the list on their agenda.

I do keep a record of things but like I said, she could beat the kids with a belt every day and the court would not care. In most states, it is almost impossible to get custody of kids away from mothers because of the old and very outdated notion that women are genetically better parents.

I know a man who has tried to get custody of his kids several times and has proof their mother is a drug addict (busted on possession charges several times, over 12 failed drug screenings during her time on probation, neighbors calling children's services while she was stoned out of her mind passed out in her front yard, etc...) and every time they get to court, she just tells the judge that her kids are the only thing keeping her alive so the judge refuses to take custody away from her.

 

I'm sorry but I don't believe that for 2 seconds.. that judge would be disbarred. And every judge, everytime? Hubby must be a real winner...

 

Believe me I know firsthand the gender bias in courtrooms when it comes to child custody, but I'd say either the guy has some issues, or skeletons in his closet too, or he has horrible legal representation.

When it is this obvious, based on your information, you can appeal rulings and judgements in civil court and there are even organizations around the country that will check into obvious gender bias.

 

Like I care what you believe or don't believe, why must you keep chasing me around the forum calling me a lier?

He has appealed and the judge quoted the Florida law requiring "significant change in circumstances" to cause a change in custody from an existing ruling. His response to the many appeals is that this woman had drug problems including legal problems at the time of the original order of custody and if that was not good enough reason then, it is not a good enough reason now.



It seems some of you may not know just how bad the legal systems can get against men so let me enlighten you just a tad:

In many states, you can get freed from a murder charge using DNA evidence 10 years later, but you can never be freed from paying child support if you prove your not the father using the same evidence:

Dad wasn't dad after all, but still owes child support | csmonitor.com

 

I'd say this goes back to the poor legal representation. The original ruling should have been appealed. If his attorney knew of the "significant change of circumstances" law exsists, he should have advised for the appeal at that time, if the attorney did advise the guy, it looks like he missed the boat and better contact his state representative to change the law, try to get his kids made state wards, and hope they get placed with him or accept the way things are.

Child support and custody are two different things, but I do know of some of these stupid laws. Until about 7 years ago, here in Nebraska, if your wife gets pregnant while you are married, regardless of who science proves to be the actual father, in the eyes of the state, it's your kid. I knew a few people who's wives cheated on them, got pregnant from their lover, the lover's name was placed on the birth certificate, but a few years later when they got divorced, even though DNA proved it wasn't his biological child, he had to pay child support. Like I said, I know first hand of the gender bias. I was on the short end of it myself. I just think that they guy in your scenerio didn't exhaust all of his options, or failed to take action when it was needed.

 

Sorry, I'm forbidden from playing role reversal anymore..

 

No, that time passed when they started holding you accountable for your excesses, and I'm loving it.

Please stop posting to me unless you have something constructive to add to the conversation.

 

Like you and eddo with the zzzzzzzzzzzz's.

 

If that was our honest opinion of the posted videos then yes, it is constructive, but feel free to delete our opinions as you see fit sir.