The Instigator
Miserlou
Pro (for)
Losing
18 Points
The Contender
GeoffG
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

Not Hitting a Girl is Sexist

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/11/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 6,858 times Debate No: 1683
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (14)
Votes (14)

 

Miserlou

Pro

I know a lot of men and boys who would not hit a women in the same situation where would hit a man. You may call it chivalrous, but I find it sexist because the connotation is that women are weaker and therefore it would be immoral for a man to hit a woman.

-This is not arguing the morality of hitting someone in the first place-

If a person were to hit a man and not a woman when all other aspects of the situation were the same, then it would be sexist.

I will expand my argument in the second round.
GeoffG

Con

I posit that there is nothing sexist about restraining from striking a woman based soley on the fact that she is a female.
First, it is no secret that the average woman is physically weaker than the average man. Even government has acknowledged this is policy. (See CA fire code certification tests)
Second, as many sports that men play (and women typically do not) involve is certain level of physical violence (i.e. wrestling, football, etc.), there is a reasonably high probability that a man will have greater understanding of unarmed combat.
So, given these reasons, I propose that not hitting a woman is not a matter of being sexist, but a matter of being fair.
Debate Round No. 1
Miserlou

Pro

"the average woman is physically weaker than the average man."

But the average woman also has an equal and often greater pain tolerance- how do you think we give birth? And most women aren't so drastically weaker as to have far worse injuries then if a man was hit. And even if their muscles aren't as strong; the ability to heal from a wound does not discriminate based on gender. A woman will not necessarily feel as much pain or sustain longer or more potent injuries then a man.

"there is a reasonably high probability that a man will have greater understanding of unarmed combat."

I think what you're saying is that women will have a tough time hitting back? Ignoring the women who do play sports with physical contact and are used to it, there is a degree of common sense that goes into unarmed combat. And women know their bodies; for example I know that I have a bad punch but a good kick even though I'm not in sports and have never gotten into a fight. And if a weapon was called for, most women would know it.

Also, an increasing number of women are building strength and playing sports, as a decreasing number of men are. These generalizations are becoming less general, and there is a greater chance that a man and a woman would be matched relatively evenly in a fight.
GeoffG

Con

You've argued against my evidence, but not my overall claim.
I'm concerned with a physical confrontation being fair.
Put me in front of a woman, and I'm going to say that, unless she's one of those Asian Tai fighters, a Bohemian olympic weight lifter or Trinity (Matrix reference), I have a pretty decent chance that I'd would have the upper hand in a fight.
Also, pain tolerance has little to do with anything. I'm a college wrestler, and I don't care what your pain tolerance is, if I dislocate your shoulder: game over. Along with that, I'm sure any girl can throw a punch or kick if the situation calls for it, I simply question the effectiveness.
Say what you want about generalizations, but unless you want to have specific match ups (Jessica Alba vs. Richard Simmons???) they're just going to have to do.
Given that, I stand behind my original statement that a fight between an average man and an average woman is not fair, and that's why not striking a woman is not sexist, but simply fair.
Debate Round No. 2
Miserlou

Pro

"You've argued against my evidence, but not my overall claim."

I'm arguing against your overall claim using the evidence.

"Put me in front of a woman, and I'm going to say that, unless she's one of those Asian Tai fighters, a Bohemian olympic weight lifter or Trinity (Matrix reference), I have a pretty decent chance that I'd would have the upper hand in a fight."

"Also, pain tolerance has little to do with anything. I'm a college wrestler, and I don't care what your pain tolerance is, if I dislocate your shoulder: game over."

If you dislocated anyone's shoulder you've won, but if you're just throwing a punch that isn't causing any serious damage, then a woman will not necessarily be more affected than a man.

As far as pain tolerance goes, you must know that endurance is as much a part of physical combat as strength. A woman with a high pain tolerance will be able to last out the fight and keep going, which evens the playing field.

"Along with that, I'm sure any girl can throw a punch or kick if the situation calls for it, I simply question the effectiveness."

The effectiveness is individual. If someone has more upper body strength, they'll throw a better punch. If someone is a body builder they'll have an advantage over someone who's not. My point here is that effectiveness isn't gender stratified.

"(Jessica Alba vs. Richard Simmons???)"

That'd be funny

Not hitting a girl ONLY because she's a girl is sexist. There are girls who can take most guys and there are guys who could be taken by most girls, so the idea only serves the image of men being strong and women being weak.
GeoffG

Con

GeoffG forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Gohkan 6 years ago
Gohkan
"But the average woman also has an equal and often greater pain tolerance- how do you think we give birth? And most women aren't so drastically weaker as to have far worse injuries then if a man was hit. And even if their muscles aren't as strong; the ability to heal from a wound does not discriminate based on gender. A woman will not necessarily feel as much pain or sustain longer or more potent injuries then a man."
- Wrong, women have 2x more pain receptors than men, so they have a lower pain tolerance on average actually. Kidney stones usually hurt more than birth so that's no excuse. And yeah, women are ‘weaker' if you will. They would be hurt more by injuries than men would. Also, a woman will feel more pain generally than a man.

"for example I know that I have a bad punch but a good kick"
- Everyone does, the strongest muscles in the body are legs.

"Also, an increasing number of women are building strength and playing sports, as a decreasing number of men are. These generalizations are becoming less general, and there is a greater chance that a man and a woman would be matched relatively evenly in a fight."
-Wrong again. Only a handful of women these days are doing any of that stuff, it hasn't gotten higher for years. And actually, more and more men are starting to build strength and play sports than ever! The chance of them being matched evenly is HIGHLY unlikely, the "generalization as you call it, stays the same.

"As far as pain tolerance goes, you must know that endurance is as much a part of physical combat as strength. A woman with a high pain tolerance will be able to last out the fight and keep going, which evens the playing field."
-Not really, but okay. And maybe, but a man with a higher pain tolerance(which is higher on average than women's) will be able to last even longer. So that doesn't even the playing field at all.

"There are girls who can take most guys and there are guys who could be taken by most girls, so the idea only ser
Posted by Chuckles 9 years ago
Chuckles
i agree that technically it is sexist, even if you don't hit women because you have greater respect for them, not because "they are weak", like me. Still, i think it's meaningless either way.
Posted by Guardian27 9 years ago
Guardian27
This is a tough one. I agree the morally, we shouldn't hit women. At the same time though, what's the difference between a woman, and the skinny nerd that always got picked on in high school. There was no outrage when he was beat up by the jocks. Is it truely a physical issue???? I don't believe in hitting women, but at the same time, I WILL protect myself and do whatever is necessary to get out of that situation.
Posted by bringtheshred429 9 years ago
bringtheshred429
while miserlou's point is valid, I disagree on the basis that the rules for sociable behavior differ between the sexes. I simply think that it's a non-issue given that the behavior exhibited towards your buddies will differ from the behavior you would show most women. Also, in my own personal experience I find women in general to be less prone to physical "violence" (strong word, but the point remains) than men, at least in any sense other than a gesture I've come to call the "feather-tap." In short, women don't hit as hard as men usually do in a situation other than a fight. This is not necessarily because of any issues with physical strength, they do so intentionally.

As a sidenote, I would say that my experience also substantiates the hypothesis that the average man could easily take the average woman in an actual fight.
Posted by Miserlou 9 years ago
Miserlou
Imagine this: a woman instigates a fight with a man. She makes the first blow; doesn't he have the right to defend himself? And if she's strong enough, he fight really need to. There have been cases where a woman has started a fight but the man was prosecuted or held in the wrong because he fought back. I think that's wrong, and it's a terrible double standard.
Posted by Miserlou 9 years ago
Miserlou
"You are a femenist that has taken it to it's extreme end. What happens when you get your way, and a man rears back and punches a woman cause she pisses him off? Then is he using his body strength to oppress her? When does it end? Seriously."

You're assuming that I wouldn't back up my own issue; why I don't know. If he had a legitimate reason to hit her (i.e., not because she burned dinner or something), then, yes, I wouldn't say he's oppressing her.
Posted by soundman 9 years ago
soundman
Ummmm......a woman is generally physically weaker, not weak, weakER. The comparative. Compared to the average male, the average female is weaker physically. Whether or not you think it is sexist, it is the truth. Okay, women have high pain thresholds. If a male punches a female, chances are greater that a bone would be broken by the blow than if a woman punches a man. You are a femenist that has taken it to it's extreme end. What happens when you get your way, and a man rears back and punches a woman cause she pisses him off? Then is he using his body strength to oppress her? When does it end? Seriously.
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
I think you should have phrased your resolution better as the con could have easily taken this in a different direction that would have proved fatal to your argument.
Posted by Miserlou 9 years ago
Miserlou
I have heard of being a gentleman. Being a gentleman is not resorting to violence with anyone. Being sexist is when a guy threatens to punch me and the man next to me and then says "Oh wait, you're a girl..." I was insulted. He's implying that he's so strong that punching me would be totally unfair, but it would be fair to fight another guy. And the three of us were friends, and I'm pretty sure we were rather evenly matched.
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
For a man to hit a women is wrong. It is not sexist, for a man to not hit a girl. It is called respectful, also while some women can hold their own against a man in a fight. More often than not the man will be larger and able to physically hurt the women. Also have you ever heard of being a gentleman???
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by C4747500 9 years ago
C4747500
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Randomknowledge 9 years ago
Randomknowledge
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by NickUnderwood 9 years ago
NickUnderwood
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by CharmingAnecdote 9 years ago
CharmingAnecdote
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Miserlou 9 years ago
Miserlou
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Guardian27 9 years ago
Guardian27
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Richard89 9 years ago
Richard89
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by beem0r 9 years ago
beem0r
MiserlouGeoffGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03