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

I think it depends on the size of the children tbh.
I taught both my ds's and dd to fight back, irrespective of who they were.
However, I do think it's worse if it's a boy as most domestic violence comes from men, they do need to learn not to hit girls even if a girl hits them first.
I'm old fashioned though and in these days of equality there is an argument for there being no difference if it was a boy or girl who hit your child.

Saying female violence against males is more acceptable than vice versa puts scars on the faces of young boys when violent females grow up to be mothers.

Source: The scars on my face.

they do need to learn not to hit girls even if a girl hits them first.

What? It's that type of message that nearly got my family member killed.

So girls/women can do what they like to boys/men and they can never defend themselves?

LongWavyHair

A lot of people and society DO allow boys to be like that, the amount of threads about lazy men on here is testament to that. We know that despite many more women working full time there is still a huge discrepancy between what women do (housework, childcare etc) and men do.

I would be interested to hear from some contributors on here as to when they believe male violence would be justifiable. I think we all agree NEVER in a domestic setting, NEVER towards the smaller, frailer etc.

What about in a war situation, or a crime situation? All of us would presumably expect members of the armed services to stand between us and an enemy and fight them off. All of us would expect members of the police to wade in to save us or our family members from danger?

Violence has been part of the human experience from the birth of mankind. We can't change the world but we can make a difference in our own sphere of influence.

Starting with small children we can teach them to be gentle with each other and to respect everyone. But it is disingenuous to pretend we don't need an army/police force to defend and protect us. Those people will always be tough characters. How could they be otherwise?

Sorry but I don't think laziness is just a male thing. It's not fair to associate boys with laziness. You know like you probably don't like girls being associated with bitchiness? It's all sexist garbage.

LongWavyHair, do you know my DD and SIL? He despairs of her ever learning to pick things up or cook a meal. She is very academic and fits the stereotype of the absent minded professor.

granny Sorry I want to respond to you but I'm really confused by your last post. Did you make a typo?

Sorry LongWavyHair, I knew what I meant, I forget people aren't psychic sometimes.

I meant my SIL certainly isn't lazy, he does the lion's share of h/w & cooking as my DD is a bit dippy (she isn't lazy as she works really hard and is the main wage earner but housework and cooking aren't high on her list of priorities) so yes I agree with you men aren't all lazy and some definitely do their share at home and some do more. My sons were all brought up able to cook and look after themselves as well so apart from breastfeeding they all do their share.

grannytomine

Great, but that's not the norm.

I think VoiceofReason makes some interesting points. Also, for all those who believe in absolute gender neutrality on the issue of violence /self-protection - if a burglar broke into your house in the dead of night (as happened to us two years ago), would you be first to go down and investigate, or would your DH? Would you anticipate the burglar to be male perhaps? Would gender-neutrality go out the window in the face of a real threat?

Ohhh son in law! I though you meant sister in law! Sorry, it's been a long day.

I think it's very sad that some people think we're bringing our sons up to be bone idle, disrespectful and violent. I've never heard that attitude in real life and thank god.

Men hitting women is worse than women hitting men because of the physical differences. Most women live with men who could kill them with their bare hands if the wanted to. That physical dominance makes the psychological impact completely different.

Hitting women is about control, fear and intimidation. Its the "what will he do next time?" effect. Women hitting men is nothing more than an expression of anger because the threat of serious injury is not there.

None of that applies to prepubescent children, however. I get that children should be taught the importance of not hitting women but while you are at it, you may as well teach them that women should not be hitting men either.

Many adults struggle to understand that saying A is worse than B is not an endorsement of B so what chance to children have?

Hitting women is about control, fear and intimidation. Its the "what will he do next time?" effect. Women hitting men is nothing more than an expression of anger because the threat of serious injury is not there

So the woman I know who killed her husband was no threat then? Some men are more aggressive/dangerous/bigger than some women. The number balance might be different but when it comes down to individuals what does that matter? The woman I know is a big woman and her husband is dead, would it have been a good idea if someone had told her not to attack men?

But saying A is worse than B is saying B isn't as bad and that is the point some of us can't agree with.

You could give 1000 examples of men hitting and/or killing women, along will come some with one story they know of re a woman hitting/killing a man and will use that to say that male violence isn't a problem. When it surely is, for both men and women. & you don't have to disregard female violence or even highlight female violence in order to know that there is no comparison in levels, strength etc and it is disengenious to pretend there is

We don't live in an equal world. Deal with reality.

if a burglar broke into your house in the dead of night (as happened to us two years ago), would you be first to go down and investigate, or would your DH?

Well, it happens with mice, spiders and loud noises, so would undoubtedly happen with burglars, too.

I'm generalising and of course each case depends on the facts but it is necessary to make generalisations to meaningfully discuss gender issues.

No simple rule of thumb is going to catch every situation but on the whole violence against women is a bigger problem.

I would be more concerned to learn that my daughter was punched by her husband than my son punched by his wife.

I would be more concerned to learn that my daughter was punched by her husband than my son punched by his wife.

Well thereon lies the problem.

*there in

You could give 1000 examples of men hitting and/or killing women, along will come some with one story they know of re a woman hitting/killing a man and will use that to say that male violence isn't a problem. When it surely is, for both men and women. & you don't have to disregard female violence or even highlight female violence in order to know that there is no comparison in levels, strength etc and it is disengenious to pretend there is

The point at issue has nothing to do with this. They are 8 year old children. All they need to be told is hitting is wrong. It is absurd to set up needless distinctions between boys and girls at this stage.

The point at issue has nothing to do with this. They are 8 year old children. All they need to be told is hitting is wrong. It is absurd to set up needless distinctions between boys and girls at this stage. From a teacher's point of view there's nothing else to say.

No simple rule of thumb is going to catch every situation No hitting seem to cover every situation and it is quite simple.