Texas Tech suspends Amber Battle

[j66kicker]

At the risk of being labeled all kinda unpleasant things -
Objectively, just being female does not exempt somebody from retaliation. I hate seeing the simple phrase "playing a girl (for heaven's sake)" for so many reasons. I think it perpetuates stereotypes of weakness,, frailty, feminine liability. Human beings, male or female, shouldn't go around shoving each other, but, having been shoved, an equitable shove back (or the viable threat thereof) is not necessarily inappropriate: let's face it, that's the foundation for a lot of foreign policy, historically and globally.
Subjectively, you aren't talking about a defensive tackle vs. a gymnast. You are talking about a cornerback vs. a WBB guard: still a size and strength disparity, but, it ain't King Kong and Faye Wray. Let me be quite clear on this: I AM NOT CONDONING THE ALTERCATION, PARTICULARLY THE ESCALATION TO DAMAGING ASSAULT. I am pointing out that any human being, much less an athlete, who initiates a physical confrontation, much less with another athlete, should not be surprised if there is a response that is also physical. I emphasize "athlete" because physical contests are, basically, what they do.

That's not to say that there shouldn't be consequences for the actions of both parties. And, let's face it, it is highly unlikely that the initial shove came out of the blue, or out of left field. Odds are, there was some sorta sparring, verbal or "hard play" that led up to the shove.

Basically, if you physically lay hands on somebody, regardless of gender, don't act all surprised or "get the vapors", if the physical contact is returned.

Male humans, on average, have an inherent size and strength advantage over human females. King Kong vs Faye Ray is a slight exaggeration, but even though this female was a large athletic female, an in-shape NCAA cornerback has a huge physical advantage. MAYBE a little shove-back (probably not), but NWIH is it OK for him to clock her in the head and break her jaw.

 

[pinotbear]

Agree completely, j66. That's why I say (in caps) that I don't condone the altercation, particularly the escalation to damaging assault. To use your phrase, "NWIH is it OK for him to clock her in the head and break her jaw". I would only add, NWIH would it have been OK for her to clock him in a similar manner (and, a fit female athlete her size could do damage) - or, if her shove had resulted in him hitting his head on the court floor, resulting in concussion or other such damage.


My point was, and is, that the mere fact that one person carries ovaries instead of testes does not exempt them from a physical response to a physical act. Being female isn't a "magical shield". If we believe in true equality whenever possible, that means removing old stereotypes, good and bad, and those that give advantage where none is objectively warranted.

Stupidity is not gender-specific, no matter what Madison Ave. would lead you to believe. Physical abuse isn't either. It's likely still quite one-sided, but it's not exclusively male-on-female. Certainly, emotional abuse isn't gender-specific.

 

[Striper69]

So you would've punched her if she pushed you down?

 

[Striper69]

As a kid I was taught that you never, ever hit a woman. I don't think that way anymore. I think everyone is entitled to defend themselves without having to deliberate about skill, relative size, age or s e x of the person committing the assault.

In this case I think I'll defer to the opinion of my go to guy for all things in the law - Judge Judy. She says - "You can't put your hands on someone. If you end up getting the worst of it - what do you want me to do about it?" She does not differentiate between the s e xes. If Battle deliberately shoved the guy with enough force to knock him down, then if she got her ass kicked that's her problem.

Who - if anyone did the police charge?

You too?

 

[pinotbear]

Lord, of course not, Striper. I say in my original post (in caps), and repeat in my second post, that I do not condone the altercation, particularly the escalation to damaging assault.

Whether deliberate, or due to the inability to read critically, you miss my point, explained and expanded upon: the mere fact that somebody is female doesn't exempt them from the consequences of initiating a physical confrontation. I'm not saying the consequences are legal, moral, or "right". I'm kinda saying what vtc quotes Judge Judy as saying: "what do you expect? You lay hands on someone .." We should not give women, nor burden women, with the "you can't hit me, I'm a girl" label. When you boil it down, what I'm saying is "treat people EQUALLY". That includes when they're being stupid.

A larger human being shouldn't punch a smaller one, whether male or female. One human being shouldn't shove another, whether male or female. If person "A" shoves person "B', they shouldn't be surprised if person "B" responds. Person "A" shouldn't be given a pass merely because they have ovaries.

 

[easttexastrash]

If he had pushed her down and she jumped up and punched him in the nose most people would probably say "he got what he deserved." The point here is that when one person initiates a physical attack they cannot expect the other person not to retaliate. I think that in that moment that this guy did not see Battle as a female, just a person that pushed him to the ground.