To think if a boy hits my daughter then yes it is different to if a girl does

[ouchthathurtsabit]

Preparing to be flamed as this is a controversial issue.

I'm a mum of a girl and 2 boys. My daughter came home with a red mark on her face saying that a boy- known for hurting others- had punched her in the face because she had gone in front of him in the queue. The boy was spoken to and it was dealt with. The children are 8 and in year 3.

So I spoke to the teacher and said I was glad it was dealt with and that I was sure my daughter would be fine but it would probably be helpful for this boy to know that it's unacceptable to hurt or hit anyone but that hitting a girl in the face is really not acceptable.

The teacher then had a massive rant at me saying that there is absolutely no difference and that's a very dangerous thing to be teaching children and it would not be an appropriate thing to say in school.

Whist I do understand what she was tryouts g to say, I do try and explain to my boys that In our society, no matter what age you are, if you hit a female then it is completely unacceptable and that no matter what a girl does or says to you then if you respond with physical violence then it's not acceptable. Males are generally bigger and stronger. Am I completely wrong in thinking at 8 years old this could be mentioned? Because I don't know! I know if one of my boys hit a girl in the face I would be a tiny bit more mortified than if it was a girl

No More Not Today...I sort of agree.

Victims shouldnt have to learn how to protect themselves.

But..

If I am responsible and care for that victim....

I cant force society to improve.

The teacher was right.

It is no worse for a boy to hit a girl than a girl to hit a girl. Or a boy to hit a boy. Or a girl to hit a boy.

Violence is violence.

Creating a hierarchy of violence based on the gender of the participants seems a bit dated to me.

Asdad if you are a parent of a boy sure you can. You can teach them not to target women, not to laugh a rape jokes, not to let other men behave that way. You can teach them to recognise the flaws in their socialisation and how to think critically about this.

If you have girls you stay away from teaching them how not to be raped. You can teach them to be aware of the ways in which they are socialsed to behave in mysogynist ways themselves.

Kick boxing itself is great for confidence and fitness and something to take pride in and develope discipline. My girl does mma for precisely these reasons. But any rape crisis councilor can tell you all the self defence classes in the world are unlikely to help if she is attacked by a man. He is still likely to be stronger and she will likely do what most victims do and freeze and dissociate. You can't teach people not to be victims, but we can all work on challenging the culture of male violence that exists. And the ops situation is exactly a situation it should be challenged.

He should t have punched anyone in the face.

But then again maybe teach your DD not to push in front of him?

I've always taught ds he can't control others behaviour hit he can control his own.

I will absolutely make it clear to my son that to hit a girl or woman is more serious (while obviously stressing all violence is wrong)

I don't think that it in any way suggests boys hitting boys is fine if one addresses the huge issue of gendered violence we have in this country (as around the world).

Men don't tend to hit men they're related to, and yet in 'love' relationships men hit and kill women at still horrifying levels. Men also rape and kill women they don't know at sickeningly high rates. Women are still much more vulnerable around men than they are ever likely to be around women.

Therefore, for all the above reasons I will make it dlear that hitting a female is an aggravated offence. Nb excluding the infinitesimally small chance that my son has to defend his life against a violent woman.

There also seems to be a misunderstanding of the term equality. It isn't used to mean 'the same', it means of equal value

strange then that female violence isn't of an "equal value" to male violence.

for those saying "violence is wrong but"
Do you think that the person getting hit gives a shit for equality when they are being beaten?

Don't you think that their greatest wish is for the hitting to stop?

Do you think that this changes when its a man instead of a woman?

All of this "but it different" makes you part of the problem.

strange then that female violence isn't of an "equal value" to male violence.

Well no because that would be equality and not equal value. Which was precisely that posters point.

IMO tje teacher was right.

I have always taught my dc that violence is wrong. I've not differentiated regarding the sex of the victim. Hitting/violence is wrong full stop.

No one has said it is worse for a boy to hit a girl

Errr... multiple people have said that in this thread.

I think I want to marry NoMoreNotToday 😍

This archaic "boys should never, ever hit girls" thing is dangerous thinking, because to some people, equality doesn't mean "everyone has the same rights now". Equality means "all bets are off". It means "that rule about hitting women doesn't apply anymore. They want to be treated the same as men, and I've got no problem hitting men."

You know, the vast majority of the population does not think this way, and thank God for that. But there is a small subset of the population, that does. I have legitimately interacted with people who think this way. They are out there. They do exist.

So the teacher in this scenario was absolutely right. Nobody has any business hitting anyone else, period. It doesn't matter what's in their pants, it matters what they're doing with their fists. As PP have said, at age eight, the differences in size and strength are negligible and in fact, the girls are closer (statistically) to their growth spurts than the boys are.

Saying "mustn't hit girls" to children has the danger of implying "but boys are fair game".

Teaching children "mustn't hit anyone" will stand them in good stead for the rest of their lives, living in a world where assault is legal despite the genitalia of the victim, and it removes this thinking of "well, if women want to be equal, I should get to punch them" that comes from growing up in a world that told them "mustn't hit girls."

I'm still not convinced that men and women. Should be treated equally in this respect as adults and that this needs to be taught.

Men generally are physically stronger and more powerful than women, statistically more likely to commit violent crime. And women are more likely to be victims.

Women do actually have a different biology. If anyone has ever fought or competed in anything physical with a man could tell you

But if these adults with different biology were taught at the age of eight that hitting anyone is unacceptable, then surely the biology differences become moot? Why should we teach "mustn't hit girls ever because they're smaller and weaker" (thereby patronizing and minimizing women) and teach "oh, don't hit boys either" as an afterthought (thereby creating situations where a boy DOES hit a boy, and it's minimized because he "should be able to stand up for himself") when we can just teach all our children, regardless of gender, that it is not okay to hit anyone, regardless of gender?

OP, gender in this instance is a red herring. What happened here is that a child, who by your admission is known for being violent, hit your child. You are right to want to protect your child. You are wrong to be clutching your pearls because your child happens to be a girl and the other child is not.

Am I the one whose "on glue" here? How is bullying and beating the shit out of someone who you know cannot physically compete or fight back just as bad as picking a fight with someone your own size? Of course hitting is bad and I intend on teaching my boys that, but taking advantage of anyone smaller and weaker in any way is another level to me. You bet your sweet bippy I teach my sons to never lay a hand on a female or little child, they may not be bigger at 9 but soon he will be. Misogyny and violence against women continues to be a huge problem that's not going away and I'm not going to minimize it when raising my sons.
I can see what yall saying about "nobody should hit" and I agree. but I think it does need to be specifically addressed.

Nobody should be hitting anyone else. I don't care what gender you are.

Why we feel the need to complicate this is beyond me.

I'm going to assume that when you say gender you mean sex colours

@FerretsAreFeminists your message wasn't to me, but it might as well have been! I meant sex every time I said gender. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what happens when you try to type a forum post while you're watching Court TV in the other window - you get distracted and lose your train of thought!

In my posts, every time I say gender, it should say sex. My points, however, stand!

Well no because that would be equality and not equal value. Which was precisely that posters point.

and my point is that the person on the floor being beaten doesn't give a crap for your or anyone else's politics.

they just want the pain to stop,

I have a very sensitive, non violent/non confrontational DS. I've always maintained hitting anyone is unacceptable behaviour, whether it be him hitting either sex or either sex hitting him.

My reasoning for this is that I don't want him becoming a human punch bag for girls or in the future, women, as I've known women that believe it's ok to hit men in the name of feminism, or because they see it in movies and think it's passionate etc. (I'm a feminist btw, and women hitting men and it being seen as more acceptable as women are weaker is a patriarchal viewpoint and a symptom of internalised misogyny) I don't want my son to take punches from anyone and I don't want him to think he has to take a punch from a woman as it's more acceptable for them. That's why so many male victims of domestic violence stay quiet.

But then I only revealed to someone today that I was sexually assaulted at primary school by a group of other girls. I never mentioned it before because somehow in my own 10 year old mind it wasn't that bad as it was girls, not boys.

I am in total agreement with the teacher. We should teach children it's unacceptable to hit anyone. No ifs, ands or buts.

*Example 1. Boys are playing a game of footie. There is some argy Bargy. One boy lashes out at another and hits a boy who in turn retaliates by hitting him back and busting his lip . Team mates and spectators tell the boy who retaliated that he was well within his rights to stick up for himself.

Example 2. Lads and lasses are playing at the ball courts. A lass comes up behind a lad and wacks him on the back of the head because he is being rude and acting like an idiot. He turns around and instinctively hits her in the face busting her lip. Would the peers and the girls parents tell him he did right.

Neither act is wrong and both should be accountable. But I know that th boy who retaliated to the boy would get off more lightly*

Which is wrong.

Example 1 - a fight where both were in the wrong. Both should be punished the same.

Example 2 - an instinctual move where the girl instigated the entire thing for no reason. Both should be punished but the girl should be punished more severely.

Clearly the fact that a child hit anyone is serious.

However, there is a serious and particular problem with a) male violence and b) male on female violence in the world and before any mansplainers arrive, yes, women can be violent and hit men and that is terrible too, but let's deal with the vast, vast majority of the problem which is with men.

Boys do need to be taught yes, not to be violent to anyone, but there needs to be a specific message to not harm girls because while girls might be bigger and stronger now, in general grown men have a physical advantage over women.

Thanks ferrets. Am super depressed with this now that people still obtusely ignore the meaning of what's being said even after explained in easy to grasp fashion.

I sort of get it, I was to an extent blind to this when younger but I guess id hope for better grasp of these concepts on a parenting site.

Good luck.

I'm a feminist btw, and women hitting men and it being seen as more acceptable as women are weaker is a patriarchal viewpoint and a symptom of internalised misogyny

I agree, Rhoda. I don't want a man not to hit me because I'm a weak female. I want him not to hit me because I'm a person.

And as the vast majority of violence is committed against women and is growing, I think we need a different message, because teaching men that women are the weaker sex and so should not be hit is clearly not working.

I don't understand why specifically hitting women should be taught differently. Everyone should be taught that hitting is wrong. Everyone seems to be assuming that a man is in some way stronger BUT it is difficult to know if the victim has any issues - illness/disabilities/other issues.

There was a documentary recently about one punch killers. Person A hits victim, victim hits head, victim dies. Every person who died was male, would it be somehow worse if the victim was female? No! Should the puncher have been punished more if the victim happened to be female? No.

In a DV setting, male on female violence is far more likely (though not exclusive), In a public setting male on male violence is more likely.

Those posters arguing that boys should be taught specifically not to hit girls are feeding into misogynistic thinking that women are the "weaker sex" and therefore need protecting.

All children should be taught not to hit anyone. End of. The arguments about hitting being less/more serious depending on the sex of the perpetrator and victim are dangerous as they feed into sexist ideology which negatively impacts on girls and women.

NoMoreToday I'm sure lots of people get it and appreciate your articulate response but the argument is going round and round in circles with lots of people misunderstanding or unable / unwilling to grasp some of the concepts. We already have certain characteristics protected in law because their structural vulnerabilities are recognised. For example, race hate or homophobic violence. I have yet to hear anyone say this is problematic because it amounts to justifying attacking a straight white person. Yet applying the same critical thinking to the structural inequalities females endure appears to be unacceptable to a large portion of posters here.