There's a difference..... men do not hit women..... and since there would be no difference in out come for me.... then why hit her... to make me "feel" more like a "man"?
Poll: Some Alberta men believe violence against women is okay
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
There's a difference..... men do not hit women..... and since there would be no difference in out come for me.... then why hit her... to make me "feel" more like a "man"?
Not even close, I'm a liberal, completely irreligious, gun owner but not nuts about it, man from Saskatchewan. But if I'm attacked, I will defend myself.Geez Dexter, what are you, a conservative religious gun nut Albertan?
D.S. I'm surprised a seemingly intelligent person like yourself would be tethered to ANY political party, being that one is really no different from the rest - only interested in their longevity and all perks available. :smile:
THAT would probably be the poorest reason. :lol:
Is the propensity any higher in Alberta than any other province? I'd be surprised if it is. Actually I would hazard a guess,it's lower.
Oh I don't know...bankers are a strange lot, and I'll bet oil execs are no different in that regard...
I wasn't making light of hitting women gerry, I was making light of you...
At least he went out with a smile on his face.. lol (other than being tied up in a closet)
... oh look at that, all the Albertans left the forum.. their GOD Harper is on TV right now giving a speech..
lol. I'm watching too.. Haper on Criminal Justice. (kick ass Harper)
Last edited:
Time for some rational thinking, Gerry, I DON'T think hitting PEOPLE is OK, sometimes it's necessary for your health or survival- the gender of the threat doesn't enter into it. (In this day and age can you actually be certain of the gender of anyone?) :lol:
There are probably more cowboys, farmers and ranchers than either.
My understanding from the article was that the survey was done to identify attitudes towards domestic violence and to encourage men and boys to take a stand against it. What seems to be missing from the article and survey are definitions about domestic violence. I get the impression that many believe it is defined by physical aggression.
These are also characteristics of domestic violence, or violence in general: 'verbal attacks—ridiculing, insulting, name-calling, swearing'
What is Family Violence? - Family Violence: Department of Justice Canada Overview paper
These are also characteristics of domestic violence, or violence in general: 'verbal attacks—ridiculing, insulting, name-calling, swearing'
What is Family Violence? - Family Violence: Department of Justice Canada Overview paper
Alberta is also where the worst anti-native attitudes are found. I would call those men Neanderthals, but I suspect, from the evidence found in Neanderthal burials, that this would be a real insult to the neanderthals.
They truly need to enter the 20th century (forget about the 21st, they are so far behind that getting up to current levels would be impossible for them)
They truly need to enter the 20th century (forget about the 21st, they are so far behind that getting up to current levels would be impossible for them)
Is it weird that I'm offended at not being equal enough for gerry to hit me? hmmm.
So, what is the 21st century benchmark? Note that more than 10% of men across this forum, from a variety of provinces, have stated that there are times it's okay to hit a woman.
So, what is the 21st century benchmark? Note that more than 10% of men across this forum, from a variety of provinces, have stated that there are times it's okay to hit a woman.
is inconsistent with:
While it's not stated in the former statement that you would cause physical harm, it's certainly implied, and if you denied it, I'd say you were being dishonest...
Is this a double standard or a circular argument?
Either way it invalidates your apparent conviction over this matter...