'14 CA RB Joe Mixon (Oklahoma Verbal)

[BeauBenken]

I'd like to see a picture of a woman who can break a dudes face in 5 places.

I was watching some crossfit competition at work. Those chicks are buff.

 

[stlnd01]

Quick question, would the reaction be different if it was a drunk male insulting and getting physical with a woman who then proceeded to punch him so hard she broke his jaw?

The reaction may be different but the intent would have been the same, and it'd still be an assault. Crime or not probably depends on what you mean by "getting physical."

 

[Calabrese's People]

Quick question, would the reaction be different if it was a drunk male insulting and getting physical with a woman who then proceeded to punch him so hard she broke his jaw?

Realistically... absolutely.

At the same time if the story was "Joe Mixon slaps woman" or "Joe Mixon wrestles woman to the ground" and he said that he had to do it in self-defence, would the reaction have been the same?

Also, if this didnt come on the back of the Ray Rice suspension, and the public outrage over that, it might not be such a big media deal either. He'd probably get a 2 game suspension from Stoops...

 

[BeauBenken]

I also hate to make excuses for the kid but take into account what your initial reaction is when you get struck in the face (I'm guessing that is what happened in order to make go as far as punching the girl) and how jacked the kid is (physically and the hormones).

 

[Woneone]

I'd like to see a picture of a woman who can break a dudes face in 5 places.

I was going post a picture of Cris Cyborg, but I'm heading to bed soon and don't need that mental image....

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

I was watching some crossfit competition at work. Those chicks are buff.

Im on youtube searching for a video. The first one was disappointing.

 

[Irishnuke]

I'd like to see a picture of a woman who can break a dudes face in 5 places.

 

[greyhammer90]

I say yes. And I just had this hypothetical debate with someone yesterday lol... girl was a feminist and saying that "man hitting a woman" should not be considered any different than "human hitting a human" by society. Was interesting.

That's my kind of feminist. Equality even when equality sucks. It's the ones that want to keep the advantages that annoy me. I don't know if I agree with her that it should be the exact same because the inherent physical differences should always cause a high level of scrutiny against the man, but I do think a weird incident like this one, which is pretty much the opposite of the old "gets drunk and goes home to beat his wife" stereotype, gets overblown because of the macho-mindset that hitting a woman in any situation, ever, always means the guy is pure evil.

 

[Irish#1]

Quick question, would the reaction be different if it was a drunk male insulting and getting physical with a woman who then proceeded to punch him so hard she broke his jaw?

I say yes. And I just had this hypothetical debate with someone yesterday lol... girl was a feminist and saying that "man hitting a woman" should not be considered any different than "human hitting a human" by society. Was interesting.

Would the reaction be different? Of course it would. Would it be different or should it be treated different? No

There's no justification unless someone hit you first and then there should be some discretion. I think it was Jayzee's sister in law, was caught on camera trying to crank away on him. Video showed him keeping his arms outstretched and fending her off. That's how you handle a woman attacking you.

 

[BeauBenken]

Okay so is it because he is a man or just because he is capable of breaking someone's jaw bone with one punch?

 

[yankeeND]

I am not at all on board with a man hitting a woman, but in this scenario, does Mixon know her? If not, and she assaulted him first, I am a little bit more sympathetic. Not on the act itself, but the reaction. If a random person is being belligerent and then puts their hands on you, then I feel you are justified in subduing them so that they may cause you no harm. Jus being female does not overrule the fact that it's okay to do whatever you want. It is also easy to play captain hindsight and say your shoulda, woulda, coulda's, but we all know at Mixon's age, things tend to escalate much more quickly because of the youth/experience factor. Again, I do not condone his actions, I just have a difficult time believing that a kid would do that without being antagonized. Even so, it is difficult to defend a guy using that kind of force towards a female, but with having seen what caused his reaction, it is tough to make any conclusions.

 

[ulukinatme]

Quick question, would the reaction be different if it was a drunk male insulting and getting physical with a woman who then proceeded to punch him so hard she broke his jaw?

I'd like to see a picture of a woman who can break a dudes face in 5 places.

I bet I can not only find a picture of such a woman, but one from Oklahoma:

 

[Old Man Mike]

I get all this equality-in-law idealism/legalism, it is an "intellectual" argument being overlain onto a much more basic human inequality situation. In many ways, civilizations and their legal systems have [ideally] been instituted to protect the freedoms of everyone, and in particular those citizens who are especially vulnerable to things like brute force. Women, almost all of them, are a vulnerable-to-the-casual-male-exercise-of-brute-force. Textbook intellectualism aside, ones civilization cannot approach anything close to an ideal unless men realize that, except in extreme situations, women are to be protected by men [without men feeling that they've then "earned some favor".] In fact, one of the definitions of "being a Man" must be Protector of Women. My father laid this rule down to his sons as the first principle of what it meant to be a real man.

Equality under the law or not, when we forget our duty [whether one thinks of it as deriving from The Creator or from the evolutionary principles of race survival embedded in biological evolution] [which are to this Catholic scientist the same thing], we throw half of our companions on this planet into even less security than they might currently have, and vastly impoverish the quality of ... well, everything. Our girls are not all angels [but some of them even are that] and they don't want to be treated like porcelain statues and especially not caged birds, but we guys have to at least quietly cast a bit of a wing over them, and still allow them to fly.

Do we all have equality under the law? We should have. But this is a bit of a red herring lying dead on the surface of a much more important reality.

 

[yankeeND]

I get all this equality-in-law idealism/legalism, it is an "intellectual" argument being overlain onto a much more basic human inequality situation. In many ways, civilizations and their legal systems have [ideally] been instituted to protect the freedoms of everyone, and in particular those citizens who are especially vulnerable to things like brute force. Women, almost all of them, are a vulnerable-to-the-casual-male-exercise-of-brute-force. Textbook intellectualism aside, ones civilization cannot approach anything close to an ideal unless men realize that, except in extreme situations, women are to be protected by men [without men feeling that they've then "earned some favor".] In fact, one of the definitions of "being a Man" must be Protector of Women. My father laid this rule down to his sons as the first principle of what it meant to be a real man.

Equality under the law or not, when we forget our duty [whether one thinks of it as deriving from The Creator or from the evolutionary principles of race survival embedded in biological evolution] [which are to this Catholic scientist the same thing], we throw half of our companions on this planet into even less security than they might currently have, and vastly impoverish the quality of ... well, everything. Our girls are not all angels [but some of them even are that] and they don't want to be treated like porcelain statues and especially not caged birds, but we guys have to at least quietly cast a bit of a wing over them, and still allow them to fly.

Do we all have equality under the law? We should have. But this is a bit of a red herring lying dead on the surface of a much more important reality.

Very well said. I feel the same way in terms of it being a duty by birth to be protector. I apologize for making it seem somewhat casual in regards to the circumstance as even being slapped by a woman does not constitute breaking her face on a whim's notice. It should be an extreme situation that would cause a man to do such a thing and only then could it be justified. Not just a pride issue either. Some women cross that line just to get a reaction from men, but having your pride hurt does not give you an invitation to treat a woman as a man. Well said sir, I would expect nothing less from you though!

 

[ResLife Hero]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Police release 911 call in alleged Joe Mixon assault investigation: “Some girl just got clocked in the face," <a href="http://t.co/TH2A0ErSBT">http://t.co/TH2A0ErSBT</a></p>— Chuck Carlton (@ChuckCarltonDMN) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChuckCarltonDMN/statuses/494164570659770368">July 29, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I get all this equality-in-law idealism/legalism, it is an "intellectual" argument being overlain onto a much more basic human inequality situation.

Very well said. I feel the same way in terms of it being a duty by birth to be protector.

This a minority view. The prevailing Nietzschean modernist outlook asserts that gender is merely a social construct, to be accepted, rejected, or altered however autonomous individuals see fit. Arguing for the objectivity of such gender roles is antiquated, hetero-normative, and oppressive to womyn.

The social justice warriors on Tumblr would be happy to assist you in your reeducation.

 

[yankeeND]

This a minority view. The prevailing Nietzschean modernist outlook asserts that gender is merely a social construct, to be accepted, rejected, or altered however autonomous individuals see fit. Arguing for the objectivity of such gender roles is antiquated, hetero-normative, and oppressive to womyn.

The social justice warriors on Tumblr would be happy to assist you in your reeducation.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that times are changing, I'm just saying it would take something extremely detrimental to my well being before I punched a woman in the face. I am not sure what is more barbaric, the times of then, or the times of now, but I do know this, woman are unique in that society today allows for them to have their cake and eat it too. You want to be treated like a man, but when you are it can become heinous. Society can be the most brutal of all judges and in each situation it seems to dictate the ruling of acceptance or not. It is very difficult for me to wrap my head around wanting equality, but not wanting to face the repercussions of ones actions. Anyway, this is kind if why I would prefer to play the role of protector vs he man woman hater. Reality and perception are very different, Ronda Rousy aside.

 

[irishog77]

I think all bets are off the table if a woman initiates and genuinely attacks me.

I'd definitely initially show some restraint, but if she continues on with a genuine attack, then yeah, I'd probably legitimately punch her. In this day and age of drugs, weapons, and craziness, I'm going to worry first and foremost about protecting myself or my loved ones.

If a 5'3, 130# dude attacks me, then I'd have no qualms about doing what I have to do to protect myself from him.

My and my loved ones safety is more important to me than what society may or may not believe about opposite sexes.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Antiquated I am. Hetero-normative I quietly am. Oppressive to women, womyn, or girls I am not.

Nietzche I would punch... "I wouldn't even need a reason."

Uneducate-able? Probably.

 

[connect the dots]

This a minority view. The prevailing Nietzschean modernist outlook asserts that gender is merely a social construct, to be accepted, rejected, or altered however autonomous individuals see fit. Arguing for the objectivity of such gender roles is antiquated, hetero-normative, and oppressive to womyn.

The social justice warriors on Tumblr would be happy to assist you in your reeducation.

Is it Flight of the Valkyries or Ride of the Valkyries? I ask because I have this reoccurring dream, and it has to do with Nietzsche and dykes on bikes. Anyway, Friedrich accepts a ride on the back seat of a Harley. He is clinging with both hands to the expansive midriff of a diesel dyke who goes by the name of Mel. The background music in my dream - can I give it the title Ride of the Valkyries or Flight of the Valkyries?

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Is it Flight of the Valkyries or Ride of the Valkyries? I ask because I have this reoccurring dream, and it has to do with Nietzsche and dykes on bikes. Anyway, Friedrich accepts a ride on the back seat of a Harley. He is clinging with both hands to the expansive midriff of a diesel dyke who goes by the name of Mel. The background music in my dream - can I give it the title Ride of the Valkyries or Flight of the Valkyries?

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Is it Flight of the Valkyries or Ride of the Valkyries?

The "-ritt" at the end of "Walkürenritt" translates directly to "ride".

 

[irish1958]

The sense of the opera would be best if the meaning were "flight" and not ride.

 

[Irish#1]

I get all this equality-in-law idealism/legalism, it is an "intellectual" argument being overlain onto a much more basic human inequality situation. In many ways, civilizations and their legal systems have [ideally] been instituted to protect the freedoms of everyone, and in particular those citizens who are especially vulnerable to things like brute force. Women, almost all of them, are a vulnerable-to-the-casual-male-exercise-of-brute-force. Textbook intellectualism aside, ones civilization cannot approach anything close to an ideal unless men realize that, except in extreme situations, women are to be protected by men [without men feeling that they've then "earned some favor".] In fact, one of the definitions of "being a Man" must be Protector of Women. My father laid this rule down to his sons as the first principle of what it meant to be a real man.

Equality under the law or not, when we forget our duty [whether one thinks of it as deriving from The Creator or from the evolutionary principles of race survival embedded in biological evolution] [which are to this Catholic scientist the same thing], we throw half of our companions on this planet into even less security than they might currently have, and vastly impoverish the quality of ... well, everything. Our girls are not all angels [but some of them even are that] and they don't want to be treated like porcelain statues and especially not caged birds, but we guys have to at least quietly cast a bit of a wing over them, and still allow them to fly.

Do we all have equality under the law? We should have. But this is a bit of a red herring lying dead on the surface of a much more important reality.

Gloria Steinem wants to talk to you. lol

 

[dshans]

KILL THE WABBIT!

 

[Huntr]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>OU Athletics statement: "Joe Mixon is not reporting for team activities at this time. We will continue to monitor the situation."</p>— Oklahoma Football (@OU_Football) <a href="https://twitter.com/OU_Football/statuses/494624961005223936">July 30, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[ResLife Hero]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>OU RB Joe MIxon suspended for the season—> RT <a href="https://twitter.com/OU_Football">@OU_Football</a>: Official Statement of The University of Oklahoma: <a href="http://t.co/YP87lfrGcY">pic.twitter.com/YP87lfrGcY</a></p>— George Schroeder (@GeorgeSchroeder) <a href="https://twitter.com/GeorgeSchroeder/statuses/501471976738017282">August 18, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Strange that this happened today.

 

[GBdomer]

Not kicked out though? Just gonna redshirt and tear up the Big 12 for the next three years. Great move by Stoops to keep his guy

 

[ColinKSU]

Good on OU for taking a stand against athletes who commit acts of violence against women.

Now if they just didn't accept DBG who, among other things, threw a woman down a flight of stairs...