04-04-2018, 12:24 AM
(04-03-2018, 10:49 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'd argue that in both cases the woman is a victim of her own actions of being with a man who would hit her and the kids/ditch her and the kids. That's what is interesting about it. If I say the woman on welfare should have picked a better man to be her husband and father her kids I could get some support on that one. If I see a woman getting hit by her husband and I shrug and say she should have picked a better man, I'd expect to get less support.
If there is one thing I've found about this culture it is that we are amazingly good at looking at people who are in bad situations and convincing ourselves that they deserve to be there.
See my edit.
I guess it would depend on if and how the attacker is related to the victim.
If they were a couple and the attack was domestic abuse then yes, I guess you could question the woman's judgement in character plus her own character in both scenarios.
With that said, Lucie clarified himself earlier with, and im paraphrasing,"a mans obligation is with his family.
He just contradicts himself when he says "the single mom just needs to find a husband" If we accept that the mans obligation only applies to his woman and kids but no one elses', then what man would sign up to take care of another mans kid?
You can see this sentiment in many men today. I'm not sure if it's because society spreading messages like Lucies or if it's from a biological imperative to ensure your offspring lives on. But hey, nurture vs nature.
Rambling a bit, I know.
