This is female privilege:  men are not allowed to fight back

13 May



The incredible double standards around violence are not going to come as any surprise to regular readers, but I want to put the “Solange beats the crap out of Jay Z” incident in a broader cultural context.  The following quote has apparently been misattributed to Voltaire, but whoever actually said it was on to something, I think:




First, let’s flip the script and have Jay Z beat up Solange just to demonstrate how very different cultural, and in particular, feminist attitudes are towards women who are physically abusive to men.  Here is Tracie Egan Morrissey, writing at Jezebel about the assault.  Of course, her first question is “what the hell did Jay Z do to earn that beating?”, which is a totally appropriate reaction, right?  We’ll turn the assault around just to show what a piece of shit Morrissey really is.


Today’s leaked elevator surveillance video of Jay Z getting all Bad Boys Club on his sister-in-law  Solange Knowles provided the world with all the receipts it needs that shit is fucked up in the Knowles-Carter family. But the real tea isn’t the fight itself, but what could have possibly gone down between the two to make [emphasis mine] Jay Z kick his wife’s sister in the cunt. We explore three theories.


1.) Jay Z is a nasty drunk.


After the Met Gala it’s the after-party, and after the party it’s the hotel lobby—but first it’s a melee in the elevator. Could Jay Z have just been over-served? The fight did take place at the end of the night, which is when people are usually at their drunkest.


Considered a “feisty” one , Jay Z isn’t afraid to call people out, even if it burns bridges or leaves him looking like an asshole. Somebody with a quick temper could easily turn into a bad drunk.


With that being said, it doesn’t seem like Jay Z was that wasted. First of all, he had the presence of mind to wait and unleash on Solange until they were all in the elevator, and not in public in front of everyone. Plus, wild drunken beasts looking for a fight tend to get just as mad at the person holding them back from the fight as they do at their target. Jay Z didn’t go after Beyoncé’s bodyguard Julius for interfering. He seemed with it enough to know exactly at whom to direct his anger. He also regained his composure enough to quickly and quietly walk to his car outside of the hotel.


2.) Solange insulted him as a father.


The extended video of the elevator fight goes on for about four minutes, with Jay Z going back for seconds at one point. That’s a long time to be at peak anger to the point of physical violence.


If it was something that Solange said to him that set Jay Z off, it would have to be something that really cut to the bone. Something had to truly move him to risk ripping his tuxedo or losing a piece of his Lorraine Schwartz-borrowed jewelry or spitting on Beyoncé’s Givenchy.


One thing that’s guaranteed to set almost any father off is calling his parenting into question. Add in some alcohol and things could get really ugly. Perhaps Jay Z was a little bit tipsy or conducting himself in some manner to which Solange took exception. Maybe she said something like, “Nice way for a father to behave.”


Sure, that’s the kind of thing that could make a person lose their shit—but if that were really the case, wouldn’t it make more sense for Jay Z to just tell her to fuck off and stay at the after-party and continue to drink? Why leave with the person who is judging you?


3.) He was sticking up for his wife.


Beyoncé and Jay Z have both intimated in the past that Jay Z is the more outspoken of the two and he doesn’t mind going to bat for his wife. The most striking thing about the elevator video is how calm Beyoncé appears—as though this is something that has happened before.


Why didn’t she try to hold her husband back? Why did she step aside and let her husband high-kick her sister right in the chest? Why is she letting her husband scream at her sister without correcting him? Maybe because Beyoncé thinks Solange deserved Jay Z’s wrath.


Jay Z’s methods of attack are also interesting, and they indicate that Solange did something he felt was pretty reprehensible. He repeatedly tries to kick her in the crotch, he spits on her twice, he throws his bag at her and when she hands his shoe back to him, he tries to beat her with it.


This is the first time that there was proof of the violence that goes on behind closed doors within this family (it’s possibly hinted at in “Drunk in Love”), but there have been a number of blind items about it for years.


But we probably never will get the truth about what really went down in that elevator. Just moments after that traumatic family event, a pissed-off Jay Z got in one car and a confused Solange was ushered into another. Beyoncé posed and smiled for the cameras, like nothing had happened.


It’s pretty much impossible to imagine this version being written, much less published anywhere at all, had Jay Z been the one to kick Solange in the genitals and repeatedly assault her over a four minute period. Jay Z would be in jail and Solange would be the heroine of every front page in the nation.


Morrissey, who is no stranger to beating men and facing no consequences from either the man or the law, is not alone in treating the episode as unimportant and actually maybe even a little bit amusing.



What I find really interesting is how Jay Z reacts to the attack:  in a nutshell, he doesn’t.  He remains calm.  He pushes her away as she attacks him, but does not retaliate or hit her back.



Three is no shortage of conversations about supposed “male privileges”, but the world is curiously silent about female privileges, which apparently don’t exist.  But let’s stop for a moment to consider why Jay Z does not react to Solange attacking him.  One possibility is that he is man who doesn’t believe in using violence to solve any problems, period.


Oh dear.  Nope, that doesn’t appear to be the case.  Stabbing someone is pretty violent.


Well, maybe he just doesn’t believe in using violence against women?



Yikes!  He smacked that little girl pretty nicely.


Could it be that Jay Z knows damn well that he would lose, lose big time, if he even dared to fight back?  Solange Knowles is 27 years old and not exactly a teeming hulk of a woman.  Jay Z is 44 years old and 6’2.  He could knock Solange out with one punch.  Certainly he could slap her hard enough to knock her off her feet.


And what if the video footage showed him doing that? What if his wife’s nutbar little sister attacked him and he reacted by slapping or punching her back, with enough force to stop the attack?





This guy look familiar?  He tried fighting back after getting punched and slapped and ended up with a felony assault conviction.  And it wasn’t the first time Rihanna had slapped or hit him, either.


How the hell does this sentence even make sense:


“The first incident occurred in Europe about three months before the present offense,” the report said. “The victim [Rihanna] and the defendant [Brown] were involved in a verbal dispute and the victim [Rihanna] slapped the defendant [Brown]. He responded by shoving her into a wall.”


Rihanna slaps Chris and somehow she is still the victim?


Maybe, just maybe, Jay Z knows that if he fights back, his court documents will read identically.  The victim kicked him in the crotch, hit him repeatedly and threw her purse and shoes at him and therefore the defendant is guilty of felony assault.  There are serious consequences for felony convictions, including being disenfranchised and never being able to vote again!


Perhaps Jay Z does not wish to lose a fundamental right of citizenship? Granted, he’s already a convicted felon thanks to stabbing that guy. And the reality is that if he had fought back, that is just what would happen. Jay Z would be the felon and Solange would be the victim.


So let’s go back to that quote again.  to learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.  Let’s paraphrase it: to learn who rules over you, simply find out who is allowed to beat the shit out of you and still have you convicted of assault.


In my recent interview with domestic violence activist Erin Pizzey, she said the main opposition to acknowledging domestic violence against men stems from “jobs for girls”.  Domestic violence is a huge industry that pays women administrative salaries, and the only real interest those women have in “solving” domestic violence is to make sure there is an endless stream of “victims” that need administration.


But I think it’s more than that. Watching Jay Z very calmly accept being attacked by a woman is part of a larger cultural shift to force men into realizing they are impotent against women’s growing power to criminalize their very existence.  Men can be physically attacked and assaulted by women and then be stripped of their right to vote if they dare to fight back.


From a SAVE report on Domestic Violence Programs:


Ironically, not only do shelters discriminate against male victims, they also treat female batterers as victims. In one case a female abuser called wanted to get help with her anger management problem, but the local domestic violence center “tried to convince her that she was a victim and not a perpetrator.”


When a man as rich and powerful and talented as Jay Z has to take a beating from his sister-in-law while his wife stands by and watches, things have gotten out of control.




I just finished reading a wildly successful book called Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn.  It’s a story about a woman who [spoiler alert] exploits every cultural stereotype about men and violence to frame her husband for murder, actually kill another man in cold blood, make false accusations of rape, use paternity fraud – it’s all very clever and interesting and so utterly plausible it’s downright frightening.  But I fucking hate the way it ended. I genuinely wish I had not read the book, it makes me nauseous just to think about.


The psychopathic woman who does all these things gets away with it.


She doesn’t get punished or face any consequences.  She gets away with every single thing.


I hate books like that – guess I’m old-fashioned that way but if you are going to bring me into the mind of a truly twisted, evil person, I expect that evil to ultimately be condemned.  Naturally Flynn considers herself a feminist.



Is Gone Girl really the end game?  Women are free to be as psychotic as they want and get away with it? I’m beginning to agree that feminism really is Marxism in disguise, and not even a very good disguise.  Stalin. Lenin. Mao.


Somewhere between 85 and 100 million people died when Marxism was put into practice. Are we seriously insane enough to try that again?  But it looks like that is exactly where feminist/Marxist thinking is taking us.  Jay Z doesn’t dare fight back when a woman beats him.  How long will it be before it simply becomes legal to kill men?


Sound like hyperbole?  Elizabeth Sheehy is trying to make it legal in Canada. Legal for a woman to kill a person as long as he is male.


Who the hell wants to live in a world like that?


Jay Z?




Me neither.  That’s why I’ll be in Detroit.  This is the beginning of the push back.  And unlike Jay Z, we’ll be pushing back hard.




Oh the boys will be coming to the yard, alright.


Don’t count on being able to slap them without facing the consequences.



Lots of love,












47 Responses to “This is female privilege:  men are not allowed to fight back”

  1. hollychism May 13, 2014 at 16:57 #

    If one of my sisters assaulted my husband, I would be on her back pounding on her head before she landed the second blow. That is NOT okay, and if HE isn’t allowed to defend himself, then I damn sure will.


  2. caprizchka May 13, 2014 at 17:03 #

    “Domestic violence is a huge industry that pays women administrative salaries, and the only real interest those women have in “solving” domestic violence is to make sure there is an endless stream of “victims” that need administration.” I think the same thing applies to abused children and am terribly suspicious of those whose entire career depends on an endless stream of victims especially being that I am such but am no longer “cute” or perpetuating the ideology. Who says women are gifted with more “empathy” and that that’s a good thing? I am similarly suspicious of “charitable” efforts to impose cultural imperialism on the Third World for the same reason. By the way, if you hated, Gone Girl, you would probably also hate my rape-culture “fairy tale”


  3. reyeko May 13, 2014 at 17:11 #

    To add to the felons losing the right to vote thing, it’s a felony to not sign up for selective service. The states where felons lose the right to vote basically only extend the right to vote to women and people who have signed up for selective service, not men. Interesting isn’t it that all the talk about the history of voting rights and gender and in 2014 many men still don’t technically have that right. Female privilege at it’s finest.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. mike892 May 13, 2014 at 17:26 #

    “I just finished reading a wildly successful book called Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn. It’s a story about a woman who [spoiler alert] exploits every cultural stereotype about men and violence to frame her husband for murder, actually kill another man in cold blood, make false accusations of rape, use paternity fraud – it’s all very clever and interesting and so utterly plausible it’s downright frightening. But I fucking hate the way it ended. I genuinely wish I had not read the book, it makes me nauseous just to think about.

    The psychopathic woman who does all these things gets away with it.

    She doesn’t get punished or face any consequences. She gets away with every single thing.”

    My first reaction to the book was: ah finally, some feminist satire. As in, the author is making the point about how crazy it is that woman could get away with all of that. But then, nope, the author is being serious. Lol.


  5. Modern Drummer May 13, 2014 at 17:28 #

    Maybe Beyoncé didn’t defend her husband because he had called her sister ‘bossy’and therefore deserved an ass whooping.
    Feminist hypocrisy is only exceeded by feminist arrogance.
    There isn’t another group of ideologues more confident of their fallacies than they are.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Goober May 13, 2014 at 18:08 #

    I’m not a white knight. I never have been. I gave my female cousin a right hook to the jaw once when she punched me in the nose and bloodied it. I think I was about 17. I got in big trouble from the men in the family (3 of my uncles) because “you don’t hit a girl!” When I pointed out that she hit me first, they told me that it didn’t matter, that you just didn’t hit women.

    At 17 years old, I told every single one of my uncles that they were fucking retards, right to their faces, and walked away. I didn’t talk to a one of them for months afterwards.

    My Dad was proud of me. Love that guy. He punched his sister once under the same conditions. They were both adults. She never hit him again, and he never had to hit her back ever again as a result.

    Anyway, I tell you that story so that I can say this with authority and not look like a whinging sycophantic white knight:

    Chris Brown is still a woman-beating piece of shit.

    There is a huge difference between hitting a person who is hitting you, in order to defend yourself, and hitting that person until she is unrecognizable, putting her in the hospital, and choking her nearly to death.

    This has nothing to do with gender. If a guy hit me and I responded by beating him into a bloody hospital stay, I’d be charged and taken to jail. That’s the way the law works. Self-defense must be proportional, and it must be within the spectrum of what a reasonable person would see as being proportional. That’s why you can’t shoot a guy who punched you without going to jail, but you can shoot a guy who’s beating your head against a concrete curb without restraint, or who pulls a knife on you, because that’s deadly force for deadly force.

    The law also requires proportionality to ability, as much as that might suck for men/women relations. I’m 6’-4” tall, and weigh about 300 pounds, and am not doughey. I could crush most regular-sized men with one punch. If I were to put everything I had into a waif like Rihanna, I could reasonably expect to kill her. Therefore, I cannot punch a woman like Rihanna without showing some restraint, unless she is literally trying to kill me with a deadly weapon of some sort.

    If I ever got in a fight with a smaller guy, I would face liability in the ensuing proceedings that he might not face. That’s the way it works.

    When a big 44 year old man faces off with a tiny 28 year old woman who is assaulting him, he must show restraint. Jay Z probably showed too much. Maybe more than I would have shown. But either way, he acted like the civilized human being in a confrontation with an animal, and good on him for it.

    Chris Brown did not show any restraint. He has proven on multiple occasions that he has zero impulse control when it comes to things that anger him. Whether Rihanna hit him first or not, it does not justify what he did.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Goober May 13, 2014 at 18:11 #

    That’s something that occurred to me, too. What kind of wife would watch her sister abusing her husband, knowing that he isn’t defending himself out of due restraint, and not do anything to help?

    Shame on her. What a poor excuse for a wife


  8. Wilson May 13, 2014 at 19:29 #

    She hit him while he was driving, the proportional response is to render her unconscious. Clearly lacking the strength and surgical precision that you are capable of, it might have been better if he shot her once in the side of the head, though maybe he doesn’t have a talent for shooting either.


  9. feeriker May 13, 2014 at 20:05 #

    I was tempted to say that JayZ and Beeyotchce deserve each other, but I can’t find any evidence of anything so utterly vile that JayZ has ever done that he deserves enshacklement to Beeyotchce, to say nothing of the rest of the dysfunctional Knowles tribe. The man has my deepest and sincerest sympathy.


  10. feeriker May 13, 2014 at 20:10 #

    ” When I pointed out that she hit me first, they told me that it didn’t matter, that you just didn’t hit women.

    At which point you make the white knight put his constitution where his fat mouth is by saying “fine – then you take her medicine for her” and let fly with a fist to the mouth or jaw with sufficient force to do maximum damage.


  11. Luke May 13, 2014 at 20:27 #

    Not being said here is one obvious thing. That’s that if ONCE an adult (or near-adult, say, 14+) ever ONCE commits unprovoked violence upon you or yours, you instantly put them out of your life, forever. Consider them dead to you. There are billions of people on this planet; why spend a second avoidably interacting with those who have nothing net to offer you?

    Liked by 1 person

  12. numbcruncher May 13, 2014 at 21:07 #

    “you instantly put them out of your life forever”.
    This is excellent advice and one of the few practical ways for a man to deal with this kind of situation in the current climate. If it is at all possible, you shut them out and keep them out. Too many men accept this kind of violence without even thinking that they are entitled to do something about it.

    Thank you for this article, JB.


  13. Goober May 13, 2014 at 22:05 #

    Give me a break. You think getting slapped and punched warrants putting a person in the hospital and choking them until they pass out?

    Fine, let’s say you’re right. You say he was good to punch her until she was unconscious because he was driving, and her hitting him put him in mortal danger.

    How about when he stopped the car and dragged her semi-unconscious into the street and continued to punch and choke her?

    Still sound self-defensey enough for you?

    I don’t care what you say, or how you sugar coat it. Brown went way beyond the bounds of reasonable self-defense, and his actions are beyond the pale of reasonable, civilized human action.

    I’d feel this way whether Rihanna was a woman or a man.


  14. Goober May 13, 2014 at 22:07 #

    Good advice, but sadly not widely heeded.

    People that stay in abusive relationships do so because they are PART of the abuse cycle, not a victim of it.

    Sad but true.


  15. Goober May 13, 2014 at 22:13 #

    I was 17. Still a kid, really, and never really a violent person.

    Old me is proud of young me for just standing up to them and not cowing to their expectations, when faced with three male adults scolding me for what I did. Keep in mind one of them was the dad of the person I just hit.

    The fact that I told them off, i think, is enough.

    Young me, on the other hand, is wondering how the hell old me allowed himself to get this spare tire and all this gray hair. He’s pissed. It’s only been 17 years!


  16. judgybitch May 13, 2014 at 22:39 #

    I agree that Brown’s response was out of all proportion, but THAT’S WHY YOU DON’T HIT MEN! Maybe it was growing up with three brothers, but I assume any man I hit is going to give it back to me in spades. I do not count on men’s restraint or kindness or chivalry. I count on my own self-control.

    Do not hit men.

    They can seriously hurt you.


  17. Goober May 14, 2014 at 00:14 #

    Totally right. Just because I say Brown’s actions are not defensible doesn’t mean that Rihanna’s were.

    Or that they weren’t stupid.

    The Grizzly bears in Yellowstone aren’t supposed to eat tourists. If they eat a tourist, the park rangers will kill them for it.

    Small solace to the tourist, who is now a steaming pile of bear shit. My recommendation is that you don’t make a habit of pissing off the Grizzlies in Yellowstone. They’re bigger, stronger, and more ill-tempered than you.

    Same goes for any animal that is bigger and stronger than you are. Like, for instance, Chris Brown.


  18. Ferrum Itzal May 14, 2014 at 00:31 #

    I think the root of the issue is that women don’t respect men. They’ve been taught that men are a resource to be used and abused with impunity…. and watch as men keep taking the pain.

    The other side of that coin, though, is fear.

    Women are taught to not respect men from a very early age. But the laws and media are stacked in their favor so they don’t have to fear them, either. Do something “bad” to a woman and you’re eviscerated in court and on TV.

    That’s a dangerous combination because it effectively backs men, as a whole, into a corner.

    Men are incredible creatures capable of great things. If that isn’t enough to warrant respect, I would point out that you should at least be fearful of their ire. Every great “atrocity” in modern history was thought up and carried out by men. Chairman Mao slaughtered millions of his countrymen (men, women and children). Pol Pot literally decimated his nation in the mid-1970’s in what he admitted was a proud imitation of Mao’s rise to power. Again, millions of men, women and children were slaughtered. The Killing Fields were many and well-fed.

    Does that sound like something women in the west really think about? Suzanne Venker wrote, “It is a dangerous thing to create a society of angry men. Feminists have no idea what a can of worms they’ve created — and what it’s about to do to our nation.”

    Honestly, I don’t think Suzanne or any women take time to think about what it really means to make angry men; it’s not a train of thought filled with butterflies and ego-inflating platitudes.

    At the very least, every woman in the civilized world needs to think of men like you would a large dog. Respect or fear, the teeth and claws are still there and can still hurt if you push the wrong button.

    I like Bill Burr’s take on the issue of hitting women. Very funny and so true.


  19. Paul Murray May 14, 2014 at 00:54 #

    What would have happened, back in the old days, to a slave who hit back at his white master?


  20. Ferrum Itzal May 14, 2014 at 01:22 #

    More importantly, what did it take to end slavery? What societal ramifications are there because of the institution and all the media hype around it?

    If there is a parallel between the two, will that include the battlefields that led up to the emancipation? Are women prepared for that eventuality?


  21. kukuduxu May 14, 2014 at 03:31 #

    Feminism IS marxism in disguise, the same as multi-culturalism, the same as most of post-modernist bornt ideologies. A few weeks ago, Sweden, the feminist paradise, approved a law that prohibits “offensive” comments on internet. Any anonymous (or non-anonymous) comment or article considered offensive will be investigated and prosecuted.

    I recommend this article to see up to what point a social problem is created as a part of a “victim industry”


  22. Askerson May 14, 2014 at 05:08 #

    it’s a little known fact that the 80 million people killed in Stalinist Russia were actually slapped to death by Rihanna.


  23. kukuduxu May 14, 2014 at 05:27 #

    Btw, I forgot. A documentary about the business built in the current swedish feminism from 2005, The Gender War, by Evin Rubar, that led the chairman of the Organization for Womens Shelters to resign, and that one year later was prohibited in Sweden by the current Minister of Culture and former chairman in one Womens Shelter, Lena Adelsohn.


  24. JBfan May 14, 2014 at 09:33 #

    Like what Maggie McNeill said about what she calls “neofeminism” as a combination of ersatz-Marxism and a knee jerk reaction to the AIDS virus.

    Also reminds me of university when a girl made a joke about kicking me in the balls to see what I sounded like. My objections were drowned out, but I do not tolerate that sort of behaviour so I cut her off and told her that she was no longer my friend, amd that I never wanted to see her again.

    And the great thing is that even though I didn’t call her names, use abusive language, or verbally or physically assault or humiliate her, she’s still angry about that :p


  25. Chris Wedge May 14, 2014 at 10:23 #

    I disagree with Janet there. The villain protagonist SHOULD get away with her acts in–universe. The narrator ought to condemn her, however. And back that condemnation with real-life examples.


  26. patriarchal landmine May 14, 2014 at 10:59 #

    how many men out there have so little self respect?

    this is another perfect example of how equality is a lie.


  27. realityforever May 14, 2014 at 12:49 #

    No offense, but you are way, WAY behind the times. VAWA has been with us now for TWENTY YEARS. And under VAWA it is not only legal for a woman to assault a man, the man is then arrested for BEING THE VICTIM OF AN ASSAULT. I’m not really sure WHY all of this time no one has said anything (???) Was it that no one actually believed it was true? I don’t see how- you can watch 100 episodes of ‘Cops’ to see it in action.

    Would we tolerate pedophilia being legal, and then children going to prison for being molested? What’s next? Corpses being arrested for being murdered? How about rape being legal and then the rape victims going to prison FOR BEING RAPED. How is that any different? It’s not.

    If you are ‘OK’ with VAWA, then you are either serious mentally retarded or insane or you have no respect for any of the men in your life and despise them including your sons and see them as below human. VAWA is a complete violation of basic human rights – the most insane and hideous violation there is.

    But not so fast.. did you think that after TWENTY YEARS of just letting this go on that women were going to get to keep THEIR basic human rights? That’s right, women are now having their basic human rights violated in public as well and being treated the same way men have been treated by cops now for the last 20 years. Another

    Yea, most women were just having a good old time beating the crap out of their husbands and then having them arrested for it and then kicked out of the home when they grew bored of them. Did you actually expect to have ONE HALF of the population have their basic human rights stripped and YOU get to keep YOURS? HAHAHAHA. Not so funny NOW is it? Women have been taking FULL advantage of this insanity displaying a level of evil no one was aware of before.

    VAWA was the Trojan Horse for the stripping of all of our rights – hey, at least women will finally be ‘equal’ with men.


  28. realityforever May 14, 2014 at 13:07 #

    Virtually ALL of them, that is why you have no rights. Women aren’t going to do anything and if men aren’t going to speak up for themselves, then no one is. I worked with about 30 men in an office in 2005 – all of then blue pillers and all of them married. I was just shocked daily by the abuse they took from their wives via cell phone or they would talk about it! Then I would ask them why they tolerated it and they just acted like, “well that’s just how it is” and all snicker and laugh.

    WTF? It’s why I haven’t been married and never will be, and don’t even date anymore. I’m not going to be treated like a piece of garbage and then assaulted and even murdered (Mary Winkler) because there isn’t even any disincentive for women to murder men. All they have to do is claim they were abused.

    I would try to explain all of this to them and the laws and their only response was simply that I ‘hated women.’ Just INSANE. And that is the mainstream thinking! Go to a very mainstream site and you will see the same attitude. You do occasionally see topics like VAWA brought up, but the attitude seems to be that only ‘losers’ end up in jail over relationship problems. Forget that the laws are insane and anyone is subject at any time, and women have a blank check to do whatever evil they want legally, no, apparently you’re supposed to bear impossible odds and somehow survive marriage without being assaulted when it is 100% legal for your wife to do so. Something like that- it’s difficult for me to squash my intelligence down that far in stupidity to the average American male’s way of thinking.

    Of course there’s also the flip side of this- I recently talked to a couple of college educated young women who claimed they didn’t even know that under VAWA a man could be arrested for BEING assaulted. And I’ve ran into a lot of other women who claimed ignorance of it as well. (????) I don’t know if they’re lying or … I just don’t know – so much evil and so much Idiocracy, it’s difficult to navigate this sewer of a society we live in. COLLEGE EDUCATED. So that tells you a college degree is now worthless in U.S. now as well, if you hadn’t already noticed. Or it could just be the all around general stupidity of most U.S. women you meet now, I don’t know.


  29. judgybitch May 14, 2014 at 13:21 #

    It’s very likely ignorance. I’m pretty aware and I didn’t know the details of VAWA – and I certainly had no idea that men can be arrested for being assaulted.

    What’s amazing is how quietly the whole thing has played out. It appears to match our stereotypes, so we fail to notice how far the act really reaches.

    It’s disturbing and embarrassing at the same time.


  30. realityforever May 14, 2014 at 14:28 #

    Really?!? I’m honestly and sincerely shocked- I thought at least you would know this. I mean obviously the VAWA doesn’t state: “Men will be arrested for being assaulted,” because that would draw too much attention, but because of the ‘Primary Aggressor’ clause in VAWA, that is exactly how it plays out every single time.

    Whoever is the stronger and less ‘distressed’ is always going to be arrested and 99% of the time it is the man. Karen goes into detail about how the law transpired here:

    Another source:

    Any attorney will advise men to never call 911 when they are assaulted because most likely they will the one who goes to jail. Any attorney will also tell you that it is the one crime that you can be arrested for being the victim of. I just assumed that all women knew this (???) 14 years ago I was assaulted by a woman so badly I had to go to the hospital for head injuries and as I was sitting in the hospital bed, a police officer entered and informed me that I was going to jail immediately following treatment.

    I was arrested, sat in jail for 2 weeks and then railroaded through the court system because I was told by my attorney that I was going to need $50,000 for a full blown trail wherein if I was found guilty, I could then face 10 years in prison. I had neither $50,000 nor could risk going to prison, so I was forced to take the plea bargain. Only 10% of court cases go to trial because of these very reasons.

    It is the reason I never married again, have never lived with a woman ever again and never will. A woman can ever murder you and prob get away with it as in the most famous case- Mary Winkler. Jodi Arias and Adrea Yates messed up because they went far too overboard, plus the issue of race is also a factor- WHITE women almost always get away with murder, even of their children, whereas black and Hispanic women have the book thrown at them.

    You don’t have to be a legal expert to know any of this- just follow the news! Can’t find the story right now, but it was just in the news the other day a woman is now free after murdering her 2 children. Everyday is Backwards Day for women legally- up is down, right is wrong. Obviously some women do go to prison, but much of the time are released after just a few years as well.


  31. Paul Murray May 15, 2014 at 02:24 #

    What it took to end slavery was an industrial revolution – the replacement of slave power with machine power. Slavery was not ended by a civil war, it was (ultimately) ended by machine cotton-pickers and the cotton gin.


  32. The Beat Man May 15, 2014 at 02:33 #

    Reblogged this on Living in Anglo-America.


  33. C May 15, 2014 at 07:14 #

    Rihanna and Brown strike me as both coming from (and are still stuck in) a cycle of violence, particularly in the way that Rihanna is still friends with the guy.

    I think it’s rather unfortunate that nobody thinks any deeper than “Chris Brown is an asshole.” Clearly they BOTH need serious help breaking the cycle they seem to be in.


  34. Janet Morgenstern May 15, 2014 at 12:46 #

    I did happen upon an article that had even more stupid reasons why Jay-Z had it coming. Cafemom posited this morning that Jay-Z farted in the elevator. And yes, they were serious.


  35. distanceleft May 16, 2014 at 13:55 #

    Only religion is worse in sticking to fallacies and undeserved false privileges.


  36. Goober May 16, 2014 at 15:03 #

    Rihanna is an asshole, too. I have no doubt that there were times in her life where she would have beaten people into the hospital if she had been physically capable. You don’t go after a person with a high heeled shoe for getting a text message, and still get to claim that you aren’t a violent, stupid, irrational asshole with poor impulse control.

    But the fact is that there was a sort of defense of Chris Brown as if his doing what he did was okay, simply because Rihanna did it to him first, and that’s totally bogus.

    They are both shitty people, with shitty impulse control, and to be honest, they are perfect for one another. I only pray they never have children.


  37. Goober May 16, 2014 at 15:09 #

    Hold up there, gents.

    Nothing in this debate compares to slavery. Nothing. Not even close. The most abused father in our nation’s history doesn’t compare to the atrocity of slavery. Children taken from families, bought and sold like cattle. Men hung for having the temerity to disobey orders. Whipped for the smallest perceived transgression.

    Even a man who is completely ruined by the family courts is only under their thumb until his kids are 18. A slave was under the boot from the day he was born, until the day he died, often violently.

    Let’s keep this in perspective, shall we?


  38. Goober May 16, 2014 at 15:11 #

    Well said.

    A bit of biting satire to put this all into perspective.

    Mass-murder, slavery, nazis, Pol Pot…

    These things are all several large factors of ten worse than an unfair family court system. To deny that is to lose all perspective.


  39. Ferrum Itzal May 18, 2014 at 17:04 #

    Where do you think that stuff comes from? Little seeds grow into big trees!

    More to the point, though, is that sometimes we need to be careful to not take things literally. Look at the verbiage as more of a word-picture being used to illustrate a point.

    “Nothing in this debate compares to slavery.” Yet. But you’ve got to start somewhere. If we stay on this road, were will we end up in ten years, or twenty?


  40. Magnus May 19, 2014 at 13:35 #

    He’s got 100 problems now, and a bitch is one.


  41. JShaft May 20, 2014 at 07:05 #

    I love this style of piece, turning their own knife against them. It’s so often used by feminists as a tool, usually in circumstances where it doesn’t really work. My favorite are the wonderful ones used to show comic books as sexist, by swapping the men and women’s spandex costumes. Yeah, the guys look more like drag queens, but the gals still look like nekkid ladies, just more… evenly nekkid.

    This, however, really kicks that bullshit right in the dick. Anyone reading this who laughed their way through watching the video is gonna throw up into their mouth a little bit…

    Having been assaulted and abused by more than a few former girlfriends (Entirely because I made bad choices, and didn’t leave shitheads when their shit-headedness was proven), I’ve been at the front end of this… I once ended up in a streetfight with three guys, and the only person who had my back was my feminist girlfriend, for hilariously lamentable reasons. They entered the scene after she’d finally run out of steam and stopped swinging her bag (anyone who laughs at a handbag beating has never had to carry their lady’s handbag) at my head, and I was now verbally abusing her while concussed… So the hero boys of course see a damsel being bullied by a bad man, and come to tell me off… I end up fighting them (in all honesty) because, well, fuck, someone came up who was A) “okay” to punch and B) pissing me off, and at that point, I was truly grateful for the opportunity. Then she waded in because these guys dared to suggest that, as a woman, she needed help beating her boyfriend up…

    To be fair though, I did ask for it, what with my slut-shaming behavior… I was asking her to stop kissing my best friend in front of me…

    If you take the second F to stand for former, then FMFL… 🙂


  42. Luke May 21, 2014 at 23:22 #

    Goober May 16, 2014 at 15:09 #

    “Hold up there, gents.

    Nothing in this debate compares to slavery. Nothing. Not even close. The most abused father in our nation’s history doesn’t compare to the atrocity of slavery. Children taken from families, bought and sold like cattle. Men hung for having the temerity to disobey orders. Whipped for the smallest perceived transgression.

    Even a man who is completely ruined by the family courts is only under their thumb until his kids are 18. A slave was under the boot from the day he was born, until the day he died, often violently.”

    Not neccessarily accurate.
    First, more than a few men have had to pay CS to age 21, to age 26 (for law/grad school) in a few cases. If the kid’s at all “disabled” (can mean “does crummy in school” or “eats junk food in front of TV to point weighs 500 pounds”), there is NO end to it short of kid or man dying. Then, if the man ever got behind, arrears get major, compounding interest and fines added on. A man can get laid off from his job, get behind, get jailed for months (years can happen) for it, and all the while, the CS + interest + fines accumulate, with interest on the fines and interest on the interest. A low-wage worker can find himself officially owing hundreds of thousands of dollars, while a mere moderately upper-middle-class one can break the million mark. The kid can hit 30, even die, and STILL the state wants the CS they say the ex-dad owes.

    Really, once the gov’t says “pay CS” to a man, he should either emigrate to another country (NOT in NATO or English-speaking, else face extradition), live in the woods, or at least work for cash while moving frequently and NOT driving anything with a motor anymore. (Some just decide to kill the b*tch, understandable if not to be recommended.)


  43. JoWrites May 30, 2014 at 19:59 #

    I read the book and loved it because she got away with it and showed how easy it was for women TO get away with it. That was my take on the book at least.

    I can understand wanting happier endings, though. I just tend to write tragedies.



  1. This is female privilege:  men are not allowed to fight back | - May 13, 2014

    […] This is female privilege:  men are not allowed to fight back […]


  2. Female privilege #41: men aren’t allowed to fight back | - May 13, 2014

    […] […]


  3. Why I refuse to wear a white ribbon part 59. | Dark Brightness - May 24, 2014

    […] So let’s go back to that quote again. to learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize. Let’s paraphrase it: to learn who rules over you, simply find out who is allowed to beat the shit out of you and still have you convicted of assault. […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: