Counter-Currents
Albrecht Dürer, Femme battant son mari
1,556 words
Women say they want equality — unless you hit them back. In that case, they suddenly become weak, frail, shuddering kittens with no personal agency who must be protected by the all-powerful state from physically superior males.
It’s a biological fact — remember biological facts? — that men are physically stronger and more likely to inflict physical damage in an altercation than women are, but if you know that, why would a woman hit a man unless she knows she can destroy his life if he hits her back?
You’re mocked as an emasculated pussy if you don’t hit them back, and you’re ostracized as a monster if you do. There’s no winning for men either way in this equation. In the grand scheme of things, which causes more demonstrable harm: a black eye that lasts for a week (along with eternal public sympathy), or three years in prison (along with lifelong pariah status)?
The idea that men hitting women is never acceptable under any circumstances is one of the few things on which the Left and Right tend to agree in lockstep, although for different reasons. The Left depicts women as helpless victims of patriarchy, whereas the Right depicts women as weak little orchids who need the patriarchy’s protection. Either way, both sides believe that we live under a patriarchy, which couldn’t be further from the truth. If we did, men would live longer than women and have the presumption of innocence in all legal disputes with women.
Dana White
Dana White is a mixed martial arts promoter who’s been the head of the UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship) since 2001. His business is to oversee men smashing in each other’s brains, which is taken as entertainment. (A tiny quotient of UFC fighters are women, but they generate roughly as much interest as female basketball players do.) White’s net worth is estimated at $500 million.
His position as the UFC’s president, as well as his personal fortune, were placed in jeopardy on New Year’s Eve after video emerged of White and his wife and childhood sweetheart Anne slapping one another at the Squid Roe nightclub in Cabo San Lucas. She slapped him first, he slapped her back, and the grainy footage shows a few mutual shoves and attempted slaps before others intervene.
As is the unspoken cultural commandment, all of the news reports mention Dana White hitting his wife. But hardly any of them note that his wife instigated the violence by slapping him first.
Sensing a looming public-relations and possibly financial disaster, White rushed to the press to apologize:
I’m one of the guys, you heard me say for years: There’s never, ever an excuse for a guy to put his hands on a woman. . . . My wife and I have been married for almost 30 years. We’ve known each other since we were almost 12 years old. We’ve obviously been through some shit together and we’ve got three kids, and this is one of those situations that’s horrible. . . . People are going to have their opinions on this. Most of the people’s opinions will be right — especially in my case. You don’t put your hands on a woman ever. My wife and I obviously love each other. We’ve been together for a very long time. We’ve known each other since we were very little and this is just one of those unfortunate situations. . . . There was definitely a lot of alcohol, but there’s no excuse.
To her tremendous credit, White’s wife Anna released a statement blaming both the alcohol and herself:
Dana and I have been married for almost 30 years. . . . To say this is out of character for him is an understatement — nothing like this has ever happened before. Unfortunately, we were both drinking too much on New Year’s Eve and things got out of control, on both sides.
’Tis a pity that almost no one in the press mentioned the whole “on both sides” thing.
White is also being haunted by comments he made in 2014 insisting that
[t]here’s one thing that you never bounce back from and that’s putting your hands on a woman. Been that way in the UFC since we started here. You don’t bounce back from putting your hands on a woman.
You can buy Jim Goad’s Answer Me! here.
When we hear about “police brutality,” we never hear about the brutality against police that often triggers it. When we hear about “hate crimes,” we never hear about white people as victims. When we hear about “domestic violence,” we never hear about women hitting men.
The only stats I’ve ever seen that reflect popular prejudices and misconceptions about domestic violence come from law enforcement. According to the United States Department of Justice, 96% of federal domestic-violence prosecutions target males. The Department of Justice also says that around 85% of domestic-violence victims are female. Studies also find that both judges and society at large are far more likely to come down harshly on male abusers while squirming for creative ways to justify female violence against men. Knowing that, men are far less likely than women to call the police when their partners start swinging at them. They assume that she won’t get arrested and that the cops may either laugh at him or arrest him — or worse, both.
Although studies based on self-reports are not scientifically precise, our culture rewards women who say that men hit them, while it ridicules men who claim the inverse. Keeping that in mind, the following stats may sorely underestimate the prevalence of female violence against men:
- Crunching the numbers from 1975’s US National Family Violence Survey, Suzanne K. Steinmetz found that nearly identical percentages of husbands and wives had hit, shoved, or thrown an object at their spouses.
- The 1988 book Intimate Violence by Murray A. Straus and Richard J. Gelles focused on 2,146 families and found that men were slightly more likely than women to report being violently victimized by their spouses. Straus and Gelles based their results on the National Family Violence Surveys from 1975 and 1985, which both concluded that about a quarter of domestic violence featured males as the sole perpetrator, a quarter featured females as the only aggressor, and about half of family violence consisted of mutual combat between males and females.
- The National Comorbidity Study of 1990-1992 found that similar quotients of men and women had experienced both “minor” and “severe” violence from their intimate partners.
- A 1995 Home Office Research Study in England and Wales found that identical quotients of men and women between ages 16 and 59 reported being assaulted by a romantic partner.
- A 1997 survey of 55,000 members of the US Armed Forces found that nearly two-thirds of domestic-violence situations involved mutual combat between men and women.
- A 1999 study published in New Zealand found that women were less likely than men to report being abused by their partner, while women were more likely than men to admit abusing their partner.
- The Canadian General Social Survey of 2000 concluded that men and women experienced equivalent levels of assault from their romantic partners. The same survey in 2005 found similar results.
- A 2000 meta-study of 82 surveys of interpersonal violence found that “women were slightly more likely than men to use one or more acts of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently.”
- The 2001 National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health concluded that about half of domestic-violence situations involved mutual combat between men and women. But in the cases where there was only one perpetrator, it was a woman in 70.7% of the cases.
- A 2004 study found that being an initiator of violence is the strongest predictor of women becoming a “victim of partner violence.”
- The 2006 International Dating Violence Study, which covered over 13,000 students in 32 countries, concluded that “about one-quarter of both male and female students had physically attacked a partner during that year.” In nearly 70% of the cases, the violence was “bidirectional,” meaning both sides were swinging fists. But in cases where only one perpetrator was violent, even in situations involving “severe assault,” the assaulter was twice more likely to be a woman than a man.
- A five-year study of nearly 1,000 California college students found that female abusers cited “self-defense” — which is frequently trotted out by feminist apologists as the only reason women ever hit men — far less often than reasons such as “my partner wasn’t sensitive to my needs” (46%), “I wished to gain my partner’s attention” (44%), and “My partner was not listening to me” (43%).
- A 2007 study of 11,370 young heterosexual adults concluded that nearly a quarter of all relationships between men and women aged 18 to 29 featured violence. Half of those situations involved mutual combat, AKA “reciprocal violence.” But in the 70% of cases where only one partner was violent, it was the woman.
- A 2014 study by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics found that “equal proportions of men and women reported being victims of spousal violence during the preceding 5 years (4% respectively).”
- A 2010-2012 meta-study of 1,700 peer-reviewed studies of domestic violence in the US, United Kingdom, and Canada found that women were more likely to instigate violence than men (28.3% vs. 21.6%).
- A 2014 study involving over 1,000 male and female students found that women were more likely than men to use physical violence in an attempt to “control” their partners.
It’s so simple that I’m exasperated even having to say it, but if you don’t want someone to hit you, don’t hit them first. Either that, or shut the fuck up about equality, because you obviously don’t believe in it.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “Paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
- Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments.
- Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
21 comments
This is why the more seedy underbelly of the right wing exists (manosphere, PUA, MGTOW, incels etc). You simply can’t have this conversation. Women will not allow it and neither will their simps. They will simply change the subject and pretend to support unity (imaginary consensus) rather than gynocentric unanimity. There is no negotiating equality. It cannot happen for the same reason a treaty with Israel will never exist and is destined to be a ‘special relationship’ instead: established perimeters. It is why feminists permanently shelved the Equal Rights Amendment after they realized that it would require equal number of men in nursing, teaching, college, combat etc and unisex bathrooms. Obviously that will never happen even ceremonially like female Selective Service.
The only pushback to this are ironically the transsexuals. These ultimate trolls are making a mockery of female privilege and I salute them. The NEETs/underemployed are doing even more damage by refusing to work more than part-time, which is why we have a permanent labor shortage/service deficit because this society simply isn’t worth defending or buttressing anymore.
Such an earth-shattering and important news story.
WHITES FOR A CHANGE CAUSE MINOR MELEE OUTSIDE NIGHTCLUB!
Sounds like what took place in Bobby Brown’s and Whitney Houston’s breakfast nook on any given morning. Valentine’s Day with the Simpsons.
I stopped beating my wife
Agree 100%.
The person who says “never hit a woman under any circumstances” has a limited imagination.
With booze you lose.
If Dana White truly believed it is never justified to hit a woman then he wouldn’t allow transsexuals to compete against actual women in the UFC.
I believe Dana White has come out against trannies in the UFC and none has ever fought in the UFC. There was a nasty tranny named Falon Fox who they were pushing to get in the UFC 7-8 years ago. He likes to threaten “transphobes” online. Thankfully, he got beat by a real women fighter and his career fizzled.
I am a fan of the UFC and it will get far worse when Dana leaves. One of the few (maybe only?) sports organizations that didn’t embrace the whole BLM or LGBT agenda. There are a few outspoken right wingers who fight in the UFC or are recently retired (Colby Covington, Jake Shields, Chael Sonnen, Matt Hughes, a female fighter who joined the Proud Boys whose name I cannot recall). Connor McGregor spoke at an anti-immigration rally in Ireland recently. Jorge Masvidal offered to provide security for Trump rallies against antifa. Neither lost their job. When Dana leaves, the usual suspects will likely take over and start making it impossible to be openly right-wing or even slightly conservative.
You’re correct. I was mistaken that Alana McLaughlin and Fallon Fox fought specifically in the UFC and not just an “MMA” competition.
Great handle.
Thank you.
“Wanna know why I’m whittling? Because that’s what you do in a town where a yellow light still means slow down and not speed up.”
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R52y6DcPINg
The all-female military would win every war. No one would dare to shoot back.
Anyone who’s ever lived near negros knows that not hitting a female back can result in getting oneself beaten up pretty bad. Always practice self-defense as necessary, I’ve known some pretty tough chicks in my life, and they will severely harm you if you allow them to.
Your comment reminds me of a story told me by a doctor of my acquaintance. He did his medical residency at a public hospital in an east coast city perhaps 40 years ago. He was frequently on duty in the hospital’s emergency room and saw many victims of domestic violence there.
One hardy perennial at the ER was an older black man whose modus operandi was to get drunk, and in that condition to slap his wife around. She would defend herself against his onslaught with whatever kitchen utensil that came to hand – sometimes a cast iron skillet, others a rolling pin, a bread knife, etc. Hubby inevitably came out of these rencontres the worse for wear, and ended up at the ER being patched up by my friend or one of his colleagues. He always refused to press charges, went home, and enjoyed some sort of peaceful coexistence with his spouse until his next bender and the ensuing dust-up.
The last time my friend saw this patient, the usual scenario had played out: the man had a few too many, struck his wife, and she defended herself with a paring knife. Unfortunately, this time she managed to cut an artery, her husband bled out, and he was declared DOA at the hospital.
My friend said that when the cops informed the wife that her husband was dead and she was under arrest, her response was “He die? He nebber do dat befo’.”
It has been said that evolutionarily men dominate women by physical force, but women do their attacks via emotional abuse, gossiping, reputation ruining, and sometimes even poisoning. Aside from the poisoning, none of this rarely gets charted as abuse of men, but women are quick to claim they are in an abusive relationship if a guy notices her dress size keeps growing. Men get sent to jail for their attacks, but when the ladies go on their rampages… well they have gotten rid of the “Cucking Stool”, haven’t they? “Happy wife, happy life”…Is that a proverb or a kind of threat about passive aggression, withholding sex, general Harrigan/backbiter stuff? Given that the wife of Dana White stands to lose lots of money and standard of living if he is deplatformed, is it any surprise she has admitted some culpability?
Until this side gets enough power to make some of the rules, part of the battle is learning how to be persuasive with the rules at hand. For instance how many women understand the difference between the adjusted and unadjusted pay and wage gap? When working the same exact job, it is uncommon for women to be paid less. But women as a group make less then men owing to choosing lower paying careers (art, social work, nonprofit sector, etc) and also taking time off to raise children (when a social worker is married to an engineer, does it make sense for the engineer to stay at home). I don’t have a problem with women doctors, scientists, attorneys, etc. But is nowadays an endless push for girls being exposed to STEM propaganda and yet some just don’t want it… Even some of the NYT and NPR lady reporters chose not to go that way for themselves.
But equity reigns supreme among discussion of the cognoscenti and Kommissars. But following up on some points Mr. Goad makes from time to time, why aren’t men demanding more equity in being casualties of war, or that there be more female representation among sanitation crews (no darlin, I don’t mean in the office). You can google “male dominated careers” and find mention of inadequate equity for architects (25% women) and software developers (19% women). But these lists make no mention of sanitation (18% women), window cleaners (8% women), welders (4%), roofers (3%), plumbing (2%), auto body repair (1%), or brickmasons (0.3% women)…. Hmm, who is compiling these lists? No this isn’t some sort of Men’s Rights plea, it’s just about equity.
It has been said that evolutionarily men dominate women by physical force, but women do their attacks via emotional abuse, gossiping, reputation ruining, and sometimes even poisoning.
The book that does a deep-dive into this concept is When She Was Bad: How and Why Women Get Away With Murder by Patricia Pearson.
Thank you for the book tip.
But how come this title, in print since 1997(?) and updated 2021, doesn’t exist for Kindle?
And why did Amazon not display it to me, having browsed and bought nonfiction books of similar subject matter? Suppressed algorithms?
According to a recent report, the number of women divorcees who suffered physical or emotional abuse while married is 100%.
It’s generally wrong to beat someone weaker. But if the physically inferior person misuses advantages he or she has in other areas or hits the stronger person first, then it can be proper to respond with violence.
I have seen women behave in ways that made them deserve being slapped and I would not condemn any man for having used force against his woman without knowing all the circumstances. However if such situations occurs constantly I don’t see why you should be a couple at all. Mutual respect is one of the ground pillars in all types of relationships.
“When we hear about “police brutality,” we never hear about the brutality against police that often triggers it. When we hear about “hate crimes,” we never hear about white people as victims. When we hear about “domestic violence,” we never hear about women hitting men.”
I sincerely appreciated this paragraph, as it sums up the entire matter. I have to admit, I hadn’t thought quite clearly on the subject until I read Mr. Goad’s words above. I grew up steeped in second-wave feminism propaganda, and looking back at it from my current perspective, the double standards are so blatant. I find myself amazed that White men of that era exercised as much restraint as they did when told that, basically, they had to consider a 90-pound woman who couldn’t even lift a 25-pound box their equal in physical labor — not to mention the emotional and often inefficient female thought-processes (of most women) in any kind of intellectual labor. Personally, I’ve never hit any man because I am a small female and I have good physical survival instincts!
Sean Connery had interesting insights on the justification of open hand slaps to women. Doubtless Sean had extensive experience with the fairer sex. His viewpoints should be considered with an open mind.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment