Anyone that thinks what Stephen A said equates to "she deserved to be raped because of her short skirt" is a simpleton and incapable of actual intelligent thought.

 

This.

Anyone that thinks what Stephen A said equates to "she deserved to be raped because of her short skirt" is a simpleton and incapable of actual intelligent thought.

 

Here's the video:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDzWvHhgTrY#t=118

 

 

He was very clear. It is UNACCEPTABLE to EVER hit a woman. EVER. He also said that females SOMETIMES have a role in the incident.

 

What is offensive about what he actually said?

 

IMO he is simply guilty of trying to add another layer to the debate for a society that is incapable or unwilling to consider anything past the obvious.

 

I'm not going to stoop to your level of insulting the intelligence of those that disagree with you, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Acknowledging the fact that it's POSSIBLE for women to provoke instances of domestic violence IN NO WAY indicates someone DESERVING to be involved in domestic violence. I'm not sure how that stretch can even be made.

Anyone that thinks what Stephen A said equates to "she deserved to be raped because of her short skirt" is a simpleton and incapable of actual intelligent thought.

 

Here's the video:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDzWvHhgTrY#t=118

 

 

He was very clear. It is UNACCEPTABLE to EVER hit a woman. EVER. He also said that females SOMETIMES have a role in the incident.

 

What is offensive about what he actually said?

 

IMO he is simply guilty of trying to add another layer to the debate for a society that is incapable or unwilling to consider anything past the obvious.

 

Let me go on record for saying I don't believe Smith should have been suspended. I also don't get all of the hatred toward Beadle. I wouldn't doubt for a second that she was encouraged to tweet her objections to Smith's comments.

The problem with what he said is that it's not limited to a man defending himself. I think some people see the word "provoke" and think he's saying a woman should not hit a man if she is not ready to be hit back. In reality this takes into account any way a man could justify hitting a woman other than defending himself. Like a woman complaining or refusing something. I'd imagine this is why most people are upset.

I'm not going to stoop to your level of insulting the intelligence of those that disagree with you, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

I should have been more clear. I don't believe for a second that you believe that he is a "she deserved it" kind of thinker, thus, the "simpleton" comment wasn't aimed at you.

So why the need to suspend?

 

Because ESPN is concerned they would look as bad as the NFL and overreacted.

He victim blamed. You can't do that.

 

As someone else mentioned, that's like saying the chick was asking for it by wearing a short skirt or revealing top.

 

No it isn't. The two aren't even comparable.

The problem with what he said is that it's not limited to a man defending himself. I think some people see the word "provoke" and think he's saying a woman should not hit a man if she is not ready to be hit back. In reality this takes into account any way a man could justify hitting a woman other than defending himself. Like a woman complaining or refusing something. I'd imagine this is why most people are upset.

 

 

You could be right on why people are upset. I'd just encourage them to listen to the interview in its entirety and understand the IMO fair point he was trying to make.

 

Again, even though you agree with everyone else you can talk yourself into trouble by trying to add to the debate.

I think some people see the word "provoke" and think he's saying a woman should not hit a man if she is not ready to be hit back.

 

She shouldn't... I'm not condoning hitting women, but I strongly believe a woman shouldn't think she can hit a man with no penalty.

Let me go on record for saying I don't believe Smith should have been suspended. I also don't get all of the hatred toward Beadle. I wouldn't doubt for a second that she was encouraged to tweet her objections to Smith's comments.

 

Yeah, probably by someone with an agenda. I think it is telling when women hear what Stephen A. said and then agree with him.

This is what he should have said.

 

"Men, it is TOTALLY unacceptable for you to EVER hit a woman, in ANY circumstance. Ladies...the exact same thing goes for you...it is unacceptable for you to hit a man as well, outside of being accousted/assaulted in some way and you are defending yourself. Hitting each other does not solve the problem, and only creates more problems. Period". Message the same, but delivered in a much better fashion I believe.

The problem with what he said is that it's not limited to a man defending himself. I think some people see the word "provoke" and think he's saying a woman should not hit a man if she is not ready to be hit back. In reality this takes into account any way a man could justify hitting a woman other than defending himself. Like a woman complaining or refusing something. I'd imagine this is why most people are upset.

Pretty good point. As a side a woman shouldn't hit a man if she is not ready to be hit back. Again, it's not something I would do but...

 

Chris Rock on OJ, "I'm not saying he should have killed her, but I understand."

She shouldn't... I'm not condoning hitting women, but I strongly believe a woman shouldn't think she can hit a man with no penalty.

 

We can all be chivalrous and say "a good man never lays his hands on a woman" and we'd probably be right UNTIL we add layers to it. It's not as black and white as many try to make it out to be. It's completely discounting emotions and state of mind.

 

As Chris Rock says "It ain't right but I understand."

He victim blamed. You can't do that.

 

As someone else mentioned, that's like saying the chick was asking for it by wearing a short skirt or revealing top.

Know he didn't. If that is what you took from his comments you weren't listening.