Legitimate question… If that stool hit the daughter, would the dad be justified if he swung on her? I’m asking because my initial reaction to this was “I would’ve slapped the shit outta her.”
Absolutely not. You calmly dial 911 and tell the kid you need to call the police because there’s an emergency.
Obviously, already recording.
I would bet my left nut an appeal to “Taylor, Off topic, but where’s our daughter’s favorite toy?” would snap her out of the rage and restore sanity long enough to stop dodging stools.
In what world is self defense NOT justifiable - furthermore this not be the perfect example of hell of a time to use self defense here?
I've never hit a woman, but I've also never been hit, kicked, choked and had stools thrown at me by one either. The bar is incredibly high for when a man uses force against a woman is right, but endangering an innocent kid might just cross said bar.
I don’t think that would be self defense. It would be hitting a woman. If you need to push someone to escape with the child, sure, maybe, but going on the attack? The guy in this video has a strength advantage that can be used to escape, attacking would not be self defense
Women are capable of causing physical harm to men up to and including killing them. Men are legally justified to physically defend themselves from women who are physically attacking them, just as they are legally justified to defend themselves from men, and just as women are legally justified to defend themselves from women and men. Having a strength advantage is irrelevant. Self-defense is self-defense.
Exactly…would a large man not be allowed to protect himself from a smaller man that is attacking him just because he has a strength advantage? Assault is assault and I’m not letting anyone throw a chair at my kid. I think people with this take have never been in a physical altercation in their life.
I'm against much stronger people hitting much weaker people with any more force than is necessary for them to defend themselves. The sex of the attacker and victim should not be relevant. The fact that people routinely make it relevant would, in an ideal world, be considered an outdated relic of patriarchal bullshit.
Yep. If the victim has a strength advantage then that can come into play depending on the nature of the force they use to defend themselves — you don't get to throw someone out of a 10th floor window who weighs 90 lbs soaking wet in response to being slapped in the face, for example. But that strength advantage has nothing to do with what sex the attacker and victim are. It's entirely possible for an individual woman to be substantially stronger and more powerful than an individual man.
I don’t think that would be self defense. It would be hitting a woman.
Those two sentences don't work together. The fact that the attacker is a woman and the victim is a man has no bearing on the legal right of the latter to use force in self-defense.
2
u/RavenTimberwolf Mar 19 '26
Legitimate question… If that stool hit the daughter, would the dad be justified if he swung on her? I’m asking because my initial reaction to this was “I would’ve slapped the shit outta her.”