[Emithith]

Originally Posted by fido123

This is the kind of thinking I can't stand. Two females are capable of killing a man so why is he not allowed to defend himself? Why do they deserve extra sympathy? I think this kind of thinking belongs in the 1950's and is plain ignorant. Women should be held to the same social standards as men, and I think it's plain ignorance to think anything else. Any women who argues me on this I usually respond with telling them if they don't want true equality they should get back to the kitchen.

I said bludgeon.
He already defended himself with a show of strength. But when they were on the ground and he continued it became assault.
Any other thinking is morally wrong.

Furthermore, it is scientifically proven that Women are physically weaker than Men. While they should be allowed the same rights, e.g. Jobs, voting, etcetera, it is bigoted to think that they can only have 2 shades of rights (black and white is to "kitchen" and full rights) when there are many shades in between.
I am in no way a women's activist, or a feminist, but that way of thinking pisses me off.

edit: I also give them extra "sympathy" because it became assault after he had them on the ground. I do not give them extra points for being women, or even if the situation was turned around I wouldn't give extra points to the males.