John I just finished abnormal psych (and got a B in it) from what I learned, psychology is just now understanding the connection between certain kinds of stress and personality/mood disorders. Personality disorders begin whenever they begin and may come and go or be *cured*, mood disorders begin in childhood and usually persist for a lifetime. We, meaning the medical profession (with the exception of many nurses) are just now understanding and accepting these concepts. Holisitic health care looks at these factors (and more) to connect the dots but it is an emerging field and has a couple of quirks that need addressing.
In all honesty I can say that being able to have complete honestly with one person is vital to mental health.
Remember what I said about violence being the last refuge for the idiot? The second last refuge of the idiot is using the bible to back up his (or her) idiocy.
Your handling of the bible in this argument is even worse than Smikeol's. And that ain't good! Not by a long shot!
First off, I asked where in the bible because I knew that you believed in it as God breathed (or you act like you do -- at convenient times, that is).
2nd, the verses you supplied do not address when a woman is 'henpecking' a man, a situation that you specifically mentioned that gives a man the right to 'clock' her.
Rather, the verses talk about a man's wife grabbing him (or his opponent) by the family jewels, and 2 situations where the newly wed wife was found not to be a virgin. So you still haven't provided me with the verses where a man gets to clock his wife for her harping on him.
And even those examples are not allowed as legal in today's society--for which I am very thankful!
I have found a few verses in Proverbs that basically talk about its more peaceful for a man to live on top of the roof in peace, than in the house with a contentious wife, and nowhere is there given any go ahead to whack her. So does the bible show those men to be 'emaciated'? And how about that judge that Jesus talked about who was henpecked by a widow to hear her case? Why didn't Jesus portray the necessity for that judge to 'be a MAN' and throw her a** in jail, hmmmm?
Amazing how desperate some people will be to bandy about verses in the bible to support their morally bankrupt viewpoints.
P.S., Now here I am, this so-called 'spiritual slime', yet I can present a better biblical case for my side than you, the True Believer, can? You can't do better than that?
Classic case of your PFAL and the 'rightly divided Word', huh?
-->
So be a man, and go sleep up on the roof. I think there was a James Taylor song about that anyway.
We discussed whether the information therein is slanted because the writer is a man and he mentions the 'good old boy' judges in the article.
Interesting. Women's rights is a relatively new concept and still not widely accepted. I'd dare, a little, to suggest that the bias scales might begin to tip some as things progress. For equality and fairness in the judicial system, I hope that is true.
My feelings on death vs life in prison isn't implied here either. Just one person's study that I found worthy.
I've thought about this and discussed it with both of my daughters. Were it me that had such a meltdown in my life that I made a decision to deserve the maximum sentence, I would definately NOT NOT NOT want life in prison.
Maybe I'd have to fight the system for death.
Were someone I love a victim? There isn't a sentence on the books for that.
I don't believe the system works and hasn't in a very very long time. (I'll probably not get an A in this law class)
These controversial murders, sentences and prison policies only add to the ineffectiveness of that.
I have heard that when women commit murder or manslaughter they do more time for it than when men do. I watched a documentary on this about 8 years ago. Having been in a domestic abuse shelter myself and listening to what the other wives and girlfriends went thorough was very enlightening. One woman had a bus ticket to get out of town and she didn't go. She died mysteriously in a fire in her apartment about 8 months later.
I still remember talking to her on the back porch of the shelter. The biggest defense for both men and women against abuse is self-esteem. When you like yourself and are confident you don't have to spend tearing someone else down to make yourself feel good.
I was married to someone who didn't like me discussing world events with his family or spending time putting on make-up. It didn't last long. To this day when he talks to me about something I go over it after he isn't around to make sure it is the truth. I have never met anyone else that can not tell the truth so convincingly.
Equality between the sexes is going to take a very long time. In general, I think that respect among people has been declining terribly and that just leads to more challenges within a person's personality and mental health as well as disrespect for people's safety, well-being, and property.
My teacher in marketing said that it was important to speak your mind, however, it is very important to be mindful of the words you use and to think about if the words would be hurtful to the person listening. I agree.
Shell, thanks for the link. I am not surprised that women globablly don't get the death penalty as often as men. I am not saying that is the way it should be, I'm just not surprised.
Yeah, I don't see any place where it is ok to whack your wife Johniam. I do see in the Bible where a wife could drive a man crazy, and he would be tempted to belt her, but I do not think that it fits with Romans 12 where it says
"...be not overcome with evil, but overcome evil with good".
Or, as in proverbs where it says;
"A soft answer turneth away wrath".
And of course, there is the example that Jesus set forth where he was despised and rejected of men, he was laughed to scorn, where they beat him, mocked him, falsely accused him, publicly humiliated him, and how he, in whose mouth NO GUILE was found, during his passion, did not retaliate in any way shape or form. And even as he was led as a sheep to the slaughter, "so openeth he not his mouth." He just bided his time and waited through the agonies for His Heavenly Father to rescue him, which in fact God did after three days and three nights in the grave, for he was raised unto eternal glory, bringing you and I with him. And what a guy huh?! That's our Big Brother, the Prince of Peace.
But that verse about a wife that can drive a man crazy? Well, I am not exactly sure where it is, but it says;
"A contentious wife is as a continual dropping".
I rember Vince Finnegan pointing out that this was tantamount to "Chinese water torture". Hah! No kiddin...But still, we have Jesus' example to follow when it comes to self control.
Garth: There are two things now that can be seen from space: the great wall of China, and your one dimensional thinking!
quote: 2nd, the verses you supplied do not address when a woman is 'henpecking' a man, a situation that you specifically mentioned that gives a man the right to 'clock' her.
Garth, isn't it just a little bit reasonable to assume that if it was OK for the "men of her city" to throw huge rocks at her until she was dead and if some unnamed law enforcement equivalent could "cut off her hand" that just maybe it wasn't a big deal if primary strategy was met with last resort.
If you and those can't make your case without blurring the obvious distinction between primary strategy and last resort and going way way out of your way to deliberately misrepresent my opinion in this manner, then your case is weak.
I cannot think of more respected actors today than Paul Newman and Clint Eastwood. Each has long been able to accept or reject any part of any script submitted to them. Yet both men have movies where their characters hit women. Eastwood did it in both "The Gauntlet" (1977) and "Sudden Impact" (1981). Newman did it in "The Verdict" (1982). To be fair, Newman's scene may have cost him the best actor oscar for that year. He finally got that oscar for "The Color of Money" in 1986, but "The Verdict" was a much better movie.
In the scene in question, Newman played a down and out alcoholic lawyer who was given an "easy" case in which a doctor at a catholic hospital gave a woman in labor the wrong anesthetic putting her in a coma 6 years and counting. The hospital offered the family $215,000 to make it go away. Newman convinced the family to sue for $650,000. All the cards were stacked against Newman. Charlotte Rampling played a woman who let Newman pick her up in a bar and later relayed info he was privy to about the case to his lawyer opponent played by James Mason. She also would wait until he was good and drunk with his defenses down and rip him a new one by scolding the hell out of him. Late in the movie, he found out what she was doing and decked her the next time he saw her right in front of a crowd and stared at her for a minute or so as if to enjoy her pain.
Sure this is a movie, but what does it tell you that those respected actors would deliberately include those scenes?
quote: John you are a horrible person shame on you for wanting to clock a defensless woman!
Defenseless? Are you braindead? Yes, PHYSICALLY, most woman cannot match up to a man, but is that the ONLY thing to be considered? Most women are glad they're women and not men because they know they have advantages over men in other areas. So much so that some get a false sense of superiority; they think they are so much BETTER than men that they act like elitists. They get more and more open and free about disdaining men in general. NY Times columnist Maureen Dowd is a classic example of a "faithful in the household bigot feminist secure in the arms of her parallel universe". What does she have to fear? What man who has access to her is even going to think of messing with her? Why should she "compromise" by offering the slightest amenity to the "lesser" beings? If she does have a husband he's an indentured servant at best. Her attitude is spreading.
Plus you still fail to grasp the simple distinction between primary strategy and last resort. Do you think your having taken abnormal psyche makes you an expert in everything?
quote: Garth: There are two things now that can be seen from space: the great wall of China, and your one dimensional thinking! .....
and on and on, ad nauseum
A-fricking-mazing! And you accuse ME of one dimensional thinking? (Oh, byu the way, that is an urban myth about being able to see the Great Wall of China from space. But then again, it just goes to show that there are some people in this world who will believe anything *without verifying it*. ;)-->)
The major flaw in your desperate rambling to justify even the 'last resort' reasoning of clocking a woman due to harp-harp-harp? *There isn't suich a 'last resort'*. Ergo, no such 'blurring of such an obvious distinction'. The only thing that is obvious here is your slanted attitude against women who just 'won't learn their place', and this stubborness in hanging on to a now outmoded, and illegal practice in smacking them to enforce some masculine authority you seem to believe you have. I mean, look at all the examples you bring up to make it look good and justifiable! -->
Misrepresenting you? Hell chief, you depict my rendering of you by your own posts!
Oh, and speaking of going on and on in the verbal sense, I gather from your posts, and the not-too-short amount of the number and content of them, that you can be quite the motor mouth yourself.
So should we likewise clock you as well? ... Hhhmmmm?
Thanks but no thanks, pal, you can keep your views and beliefs. I don't see where any civilized and intelligent individual would want all that.
quote: John I just finished abnormal psych (and got a B in it) from what I learned, psychology is just now understanding the connection between certain kinds of stress and personality/mood disorders.
Speaking of which, there is a most relevant article in today's STL Post Dispatch. A 46 year old man was released from incarceration after 15 years. He calls himself a "psychiatric prisoner" (comparative to political prisoner), a victim of "coerced psychiatry". He doesn't believe in mental illness; says it is a fictitious label used by some people to control other people.
He hit his ex wife in 1989 during an argument. Charged with aggravated battery, he was conned into pleading "guilty but mentally ill". This happened in Illinois, a state now famous for smelly trial lawyers. His jail term ended in 1991, but because he refused treatment for his "mental illness", authorities convinced higher authorities to keep him incarcerrated. The only reason he got out is because of a change in county leadership who could see the forest for the trees. Then they still tried to keep him in jail by charging him for a fight he had with another prisoner several years ago.
He's out on bail and he has a big network of support including a publisher for a book he plans to write on the subject. That's a lot of credibility given to some "wifebeater". It doesn't surprise me that your perspective would regard psychiatry as the highest standard.
quote:Sure this is a movie, but what does it tell you that those respected actors would deliberately include those scenes?
It tells me that Frank Galvin would hit Laura Fischer if she was annoying him. It tells me nothing about whether Paul Newman would ever hit Joanne Woodward under the same circumstances. Somehow I doubt it.
Clint Eastwood punched Jessica Walter in the face, threw her off a balcony and over a cliff in "Play Misty For Me." Then she was trying to kill him so I guess you could say she had it coming.
quote: It doesn't surprise me that your perspective would regard psychiatry as the highest standard.
It sure beats bible verse justified, 'I'm just a poor lil' white male persecuted by the Evil Liberals' whining, white trash reasoning for wife beating.
quote:Newman did it in "The Verdict" (1982). To be fair, Newman's scene may have cost him the best actor oscar for that year. He finally got that oscar for "The Color of Money" in 1986, but "The Verdict" was a much better movie.
Johniam, I haven't seen that scene in a while, but I remember everyone watching that movie loved it when she got wacked, because of what she did. Good example.
quote:Eastwood did it in both "The Gauntlet" (1977) and "Sudden Impact" (1981).
I enjoyed Ocean's Eleven, especially the scene when everyone got safely out of the casino with the money, but that doesn't mean I think it's a good idea to rob casinos.
Oldies: Part of this is the "present truth" of the world. I recently saw a production of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" at my daughter's high school. I was in a college production of it in 1975. I noticed that in the book and in the production I was in, Mc Murphy really roughed up Big Nurse in the near final scene before they over powered him, doing permanent damage to her neck area. Not even close to that in the high school version. This is a taboo subject today and yes fewer women are getting hurt, but at what cost?
She really deserved that one too, because of what she did.
Since we're talking about violence against women, had Yates been caught perpetrating her murderous act, it would have been legally justifiable for anyone to have killed her right on the spot.
Oh, and speaking of going on and on in the verbal sense, I gather from your posts, and the not-too-short amount of the number and content of them, that you can be quite the motor mouth yourself.
So should we likewise clock you as well? ... Hhhmmmm?
Garth, I suggested that a while back, internet annoyance doesn't measure up ya know, the tone of voice has to be there, etc. :P-->
I've encountered my share of big-mouth, woman-slapping worms, and they do tend to run at the mouth when arguing with others. They also tend to back off pretty quickly when they realize that they don't have the muscle to back up their words.
...it would have been legally justifiable for anyone to have killed her right on the spot.
Oldies, in most jurisdictions, it is legally justifiable to use sufficient force only to stop the perpetrator from carrying out their act. It would have been legal to kill her only if that was the only way to keep her from killing her kids. Usually less than lethal force is sufficient. May not be right, but that's the law.
Similar to me not being legally justified in beating johniam to a bloody pulp if I catch him hitting a woman.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
20
24
16
26
Popular Days
Jan 11
54
Jan 10
43
Jan 13
37
Jan 7
29
Top Posters In This Topic
oldiesman 20 posts
GarthP2000 24 posts
Oakspear 16 posts
johniam 26 posts
Popular Days
Jan 11 2005
54 posts
Jan 10 2005
43 posts
Jan 13 2005
37 posts
Jan 7 2005
29 posts
herbiejuan
I found the women leadership were more on the ball than then men and it seemed most men had a woman nearby taking notes.
lol
talk about a derailed thread
John you are a horrible person shame on you for wanting to clock a defensless woman!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
herbiejuan
John I just finished abnormal psych (and got a B in it) from what I learned, psychology is just now understanding the connection between certain kinds of stress and personality/mood disorders. Personality disorders begin whenever they begin and may come and go or be *cured*, mood disorders begin in childhood and usually persist for a lifetime. We, meaning the medical profession (with the exception of many nurses) are just now understanding and accepting these concepts. Holisitic health care looks at these factors (and more) to connect the dots but it is an emerging field and has a couple of quirks that need addressing.
In all honesty I can say that being able to have complete honestly with one person is vital to mental health.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
herbiejuan
Ok so R n D may or may not have dined at the Y
M went on a rant about homo's and is in exile
Women were more capable than the men at taking care of business
men could teach
often
but the women were in charge
hmmm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Remember what I said about violence being the last refuge for the idiot? The second last refuge of the idiot is using the bible to back up his (or her) idiocy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Johniam,
Your handling of the bible in this argument is even worse than Smikeol's. And that ain't good! Not by a long shot!
First off, I asked where in the bible because I knew that you believed in it as God breathed (or you act like you do -- at convenient times, that is).
2nd, the verses you supplied do not address when a woman is 'henpecking' a man, a situation that you specifically mentioned that gives a man the right to 'clock' her.
Rather, the verses talk about a man's wife grabbing him (or his opponent) by the family jewels, and 2 situations where the newly wed wife was found not to be a virgin. So you still haven't provided me with the verses where a man gets to clock his wife for her harping on him.
And even those examples are not allowed as legal in today's society--for which I am very thankful!
I have found a few verses in Proverbs that basically talk about its more peaceful for a man to live on top of the roof in peace, than in the house with a contentious wife, and nowhere is there given any go ahead to whack her. So does the bible show those men to be 'emaciated'? And how about that judge that Jesus talked about who was henpecked by a widow to hear her case? Why didn't Jesus portray the necessity for that judge to 'be a MAN' and throw her a** in jail, hmmmm?
Amazing how desperate some people will be to bandy about verses in the bible to support their morally bankrupt viewpoints.
P.S., Now here I am, this so-called 'spiritual slime', yet I can present a better biblical case for my side than you, the True Believer, can? You can't do better than that?
Classic case of your PFAL and the 'rightly divided Word', huh?
So be a man, and go sleep up on the roof. I think there was a James Taylor song about that anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shellon
I asked my Law Class Professor about this subject of women vs men executions.
The instructor ( I won't say if man or women ) suggested this interesting research done.
http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/streib.html
We discussed whether the information therein is slanted because the writer is a man and he mentions the 'good old boy' judges in the article.
Interesting. Women's rights is a relatively new concept and still not widely accepted. I'd dare, a little, to suggest that the bias scales might begin to tip some as things progress. For equality and fairness in the judicial system, I hope that is true.
My feelings on death vs life in prison isn't implied here either. Just one person's study that I found worthy.
I've thought about this and discussed it with both of my daughters. Were it me that had such a meltdown in my life that I made a decision to deserve the maximum sentence, I would definately NOT NOT NOT want life in prison.
Maybe I'd have to fight the system for death.
Were someone I love a victim? There isn't a sentence on the books for that.
I don't believe the system works and hasn't in a very very long time. (I'll probably not get an A in this law class)
These controversial murders, sentences and prison policies only add to the ineffectiveness of that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
reikilady
I have heard that when women commit murder or manslaughter they do more time for it than when men do. I watched a documentary on this about 8 years ago. Having been in a domestic abuse shelter myself and listening to what the other wives and girlfriends went thorough was very enlightening. One woman had a bus ticket to get out of town and she didn't go. She died mysteriously in a fire in her apartment about 8 months later.
I still remember talking to her on the back porch of the shelter. The biggest defense for both men and women against abuse is self-esteem. When you like yourself and are confident you don't have to spend tearing someone else down to make yourself feel good.
I was married to someone who didn't like me discussing world events with his family or spending time putting on make-up. It didn't last long. To this day when he talks to me about something I go over it after he isn't around to make sure it is the truth. I have never met anyone else that can not tell the truth so convincingly.
Equality between the sexes is going to take a very long time. In general, I think that respect among people has been declining terribly and that just leads to more challenges within a person's personality and mental health as well as disrespect for people's safety, well-being, and property.
My teacher in marketing said that it was important to speak your mind, however, it is very important to be mindful of the words you use and to think about if the words would be hurtful to the person listening. I agree.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
reikilady
Shell, thanks for the link. I am not surprised that women globablly don't get the death penalty as often as men. I am not saying that is the way it should be, I'm just not surprised.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frankee
Yeah, I don't see any place where it is ok to whack your wife Johniam. I do see in the Bible where a wife could drive a man crazy, and he would be tempted to belt her, but I do not think that it fits with Romans 12 where it says
"...be not overcome with evil, but overcome evil with good".
Or, as in proverbs where it says;
"A soft answer turneth away wrath".
And of course, there is the example that Jesus set forth where he was despised and rejected of men, he was laughed to scorn, where they beat him, mocked him, falsely accused him, publicly humiliated him, and how he, in whose mouth NO GUILE was found, during his passion, did not retaliate in any way shape or form. And even as he was led as a sheep to the slaughter, "so openeth he not his mouth." He just bided his time and waited through the agonies for His Heavenly Father to rescue him, which in fact God did after three days and three nights in the grave, for he was raised unto eternal glory, bringing you and I with him. And what a guy huh?! That's our Big Brother, the Prince of Peace.
But that verse about a wife that can drive a man crazy? Well, I am not exactly sure where it is, but it says;
"A contentious wife is as a continual dropping".
I rember Vince Finnegan pointing out that this was tantamount to "Chinese water torture". Hah! No kiddin...But still, we have Jesus' example to follow when it comes to self control.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Garth: There are two things now that can be seen from space: the great wall of China, and your one dimensional thinking!
quote: 2nd, the verses you supplied do not address when a woman is 'henpecking' a man, a situation that you specifically mentioned that gives a man the right to 'clock' her.
Garth, isn't it just a little bit reasonable to assume that if it was OK for the "men of her city" to throw huge rocks at her until she was dead and if some unnamed law enforcement equivalent could "cut off her hand" that just maybe it wasn't a big deal if primary strategy was met with last resort.
If you and those can't make your case without blurring the obvious distinction between primary strategy and last resort and going way way out of your way to deliberately misrepresent my opinion in this manner, then your case is weak.
I cannot think of more respected actors today than Paul Newman and Clint Eastwood. Each has long been able to accept or reject any part of any script submitted to them. Yet both men have movies where their characters hit women. Eastwood did it in both "The Gauntlet" (1977) and "Sudden Impact" (1981). Newman did it in "The Verdict" (1982). To be fair, Newman's scene may have cost him the best actor oscar for that year. He finally got that oscar for "The Color of Money" in 1986, but "The Verdict" was a much better movie.
In the scene in question, Newman played a down and out alcoholic lawyer who was given an "easy" case in which a doctor at a catholic hospital gave a woman in labor the wrong anesthetic putting her in a coma 6 years and counting. The hospital offered the family $215,000 to make it go away. Newman convinced the family to sue for $650,000. All the cards were stacked against Newman. Charlotte Rampling played a woman who let Newman pick her up in a bar and later relayed info he was privy to about the case to his lawyer opponent played by James Mason. She also would wait until he was good and drunk with his defenses down and rip him a new one by scolding the hell out of him. Late in the movie, he found out what she was doing and decked her the next time he saw her right in front of a crowd and stared at her for a minute or so as if to enjoy her pain.
Sure this is a movie, but what does it tell you that those respected actors would deliberately include those scenes?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
that they were acting ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Herbie:
quote: John you are a horrible person shame on you for wanting to clock a defensless woman!
Defenseless? Are you braindead? Yes, PHYSICALLY, most woman cannot match up to a man, but is that the ONLY thing to be considered? Most women are glad they're women and not men because they know they have advantages over men in other areas. So much so that some get a false sense of superiority; they think they are so much BETTER than men that they act like elitists. They get more and more open and free about disdaining men in general. NY Times columnist Maureen Dowd is a classic example of a "faithful in the household bigot feminist secure in the arms of her parallel universe". What does she have to fear? What man who has access to her is even going to think of messing with her? Why should she "compromise" by offering the slightest amenity to the "lesser" beings? If she does have a husband he's an indentured servant at best. Her attitude is spreading.
Plus you still fail to grasp the simple distinction between primary strategy and last resort. Do you think your having taken abnormal psyche makes you an expert in everything?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
A-fricking-mazing! And you accuse ME of one dimensional thinking? (Oh, byu the way, that is an urban myth about being able to see the Great Wall of China from space. But then again, it just goes to show that there are some people in this world who will believe anything *without verifying it*.
;)-->)
The major flaw in your desperate rambling to justify even the 'last resort' reasoning of clocking a woman due to harp-harp-harp? *There isn't suich a 'last resort'*. Ergo, no such 'blurring of such an obvious distinction'. The only thing that is obvious here is your slanted attitude against women who just 'won't learn their place', and this stubborness in hanging on to a now outmoded, and illegal practice in smacking them to enforce some masculine authority you seem to believe you have. I mean, look at all the examples you bring up to make it look good and justifiable!
-->
Misrepresenting you? Hell chief, you depict my rendering of you by your own posts!
Oh, and speaking of going on and on in the verbal sense, I gather from your posts, and the not-too-short amount of the number and content of them, that you can be quite the motor mouth yourself.
So should we likewise clock you as well? ... Hhhmmmm?
Thanks but no thanks, pal, you can keep your views and beliefs. I don't see where any civilized and intelligent individual would want all that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Herbie:
quote: John I just finished abnormal psych (and got a B in it) from what I learned, psychology is just now understanding the connection between certain kinds of stress and personality/mood disorders.
Speaking of which, there is a most relevant article in today's STL Post Dispatch. A 46 year old man was released from incarceration after 15 years. He calls himself a "psychiatric prisoner" (comparative to political prisoner), a victim of "coerced psychiatry". He doesn't believe in mental illness; says it is a fictitious label used by some people to control other people.
He hit his ex wife in 1989 during an argument. Charged with aggravated battery, he was conned into pleading "guilty but mentally ill". This happened in Illinois, a state now famous for smelly trial lawyers. His jail term ended in 1991, but because he refused treatment for his "mental illness", authorities convinced higher authorities to keep him incarcerrated. The only reason he got out is because of a change in county leadership who could see the forest for the trees. Then they still tried to keep him in jail by charging him for a fight he had with another prisoner several years ago.
He's out on bail and he has a big network of support including a publisher for a book he plans to write on the subject. That's a lot of credibility given to some "wifebeater". It doesn't surprise me that your perspective would regard psychiatry as the highest standard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pirate1974
It tells me that Frank Galvin would hit Laura Fischer if she was annoying him. It tells me nothing about whether Paul Newman would ever hit Joanne Woodward under the same circumstances. Somehow I doubt it.
Clint Eastwood punched Jessica Walter in the face, threw her off a balcony and over a cliff in "Play Misty For Me." Then she was trying to kill him so I guess you could say she had it coming.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
It sure beats bible verse justified, 'I'm just a poor lil' white male persecuted by the Evil Liberals' whining, white trash reasoning for wife beating.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
I enjoyed Ocean's Eleven, especially the scene when everyone got safely out of the casino with the money, but that doesn't mean I think it's a good idea to rob casinos.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Oldies: Part of this is the "present truth" of the world. I recently saw a production of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" at my daughter's high school. I was in a college production of it in 1975. I noticed that in the book and in the production I was in, Mc Murphy really roughed up Big Nurse in the near final scene before they over powered him, doing permanent damage to her neck area. Not even close to that in the high school version. This is a taboo subject today and yes fewer women are getting hurt, but at what cost?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
She really deserved that one too, because of what she did.
Since we're talking about violence against women, had Yates been caught perpetrating her murderous act, it would have been legally justifiable for anyone to have killed her right on the spot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
I've encountered my share of big-mouth, woman-slapping worms, and they do tend to run at the mouth when arguing with others. They also tend to back off pretty quickly when they realize that they don't have the muscle to back up their words.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Similar to me not being legally justified in beating johniam to a bloody pulp if I catch him hitting a woman.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
herbiejuan
I'm no expert I just ask lots of questions
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.