Manspreading Should Be a Constitutional Right

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Ok I was wrong. My information was out of date.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

How can you have a polite society where people can go around beating on other people for any supposed grievances? What is and isn't considered polite varies from person to person. It's not like it's set in stone. Some things ARE obvious, like manspreading, but others are less so.

It would seem that we don't have a polite society, as evidenced by this discussion. To combat some asshole kids who behave in an obnoxious manner on public transit, we are willing to stomp all over the rights of people, violating currently established law in cases of medical issue (see the above poster).

To me it is insane that we would involve the police in a personal dispute resolution type scenario. The police should focus on finding murderers, rapists, theft/robbery, etc.

Im not a fan of beating on people. But an ass whooping has its place in maintaining a polite society. If you know being an asshole in public will result in the loss o a tooth or something....it incentivizes you to not be a public menace. what we are talking about here aren't people with medical issues....we are talking about public menaces. Around here, a young man that is a public menace will likely recieve his ass whooping pretty quickly. No, im not the kind of guy that would be the delivery mechanism....we have plenty of roughnecks around here to handle that role in the public interest.

To be completely honest, the solution is to quit locking up all the grown men in urban areas. Its a drug war issue. Young men without fathers aren't likely to observe the common social contracts.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
It would seem that we don't have a polite society, as evidenced by this discussion. To combat some asshole kids who behave in an obnoxious manner on public transit, we are willing to stomp all over the rights of people, violating currently established law in cases of medical issue (see the above poster).

So because kids are acting obnoxious and impolite, that gives us carte blanche to act impolite back and assault them? I'd rather them be fined... Lost money hurts worse than a bruise. At least to me.

To me it is insane that we would involve the police in a personal dispute resolution type scenario. The police should focus on finding murderers, rapists, theft/robbery, etc.

The police's job is SUPPOSED to be to resolve domestic disputes. That's why assault is illegal across the country (even in Texas).

Im not a fan of beating on people. But an ass whooping has its place in maintaining a polite society. If you know being an asshole in public will result in the loss o a tooth or something....it incentivizes you to not be a public menace. what we are talking about here aren't people with medical issues....we are talking about public menaces. Around here, a young man that is a public menace will likely recieve his ass whooping pretty quickly. No, im not the kind of guy that would be the delivery mechanism....we have plenty of roughnecks around here to handle that role in the public interest.

What constitutes enough transgression to warrant an ass whooping then?

To be completely honest, the solution is to quit locking up all the grown men in urban areas. Its a drug war issue. Young men without fathers aren't likely to observe the common social contracts.

The single parent issue is a red herring. Science has shown that kids raised in a single family home aren't more likely to be trouble makers. They DID find a significant cause of trouble making though is the income of the parent(s). Now many divorced couples end up with lost income after the divorce, so that can CAUSE the hardship, but you appear to be focusing on parents that were never married to begin with and the father was just never in the picture.

Since I got called out for being wrong before, here is some evidence for me.
www.clasp.org...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

its obvious you and I come from different cultures. You just don't seem to understand.

It not like there are fistfights in the streets. But there absolutely would be if people didn't straighten out their behavior into something more palatable to the community. And knowing this is what maintains social order.

ETA: something else to consider about the culture in this part of the world: there are very, very few armed robberies or home break ins. Your chances of being shot/killed are extremely high. We just deal with our own problems. A guy i worked for had a bunch of stuff stolen from him by an employee. He grabbed his gun and went to get his stuff back. Which he did. Then he called the police who arrested him for about 100k in theft.

I guess i should also add, as it pertains to this...most reasonable people would just stand. Its a few blocks....just stand up. The number of seats is not the capacity of the vehicle...so its obvious that standing is also an intended way to use the transit. So i i were to be caught in that situation...ill just stand anyway.

If a kid has his legs spread out really wide so a pregnant woman can't sit down...invoke the rule of "if it fits, i sits" and just sit on his leg until he moves it. It is unlikely that he will choose to continue the confrontation. And if he does..that's where the ass whooping comes into play. Its an easy metric, really. If he choses to ignore you and just let you sit on his leg, then you start spreading out too, and lay all over him. Be as big an asshole as he is being. If he chooses to not confront, and move his leg out from under you, then you get up and give the seat to the pregnant woman. Problem solved. At least, in the mind of a West Texan.

Our liberties stop where another's liberties start.

So spread away my fellow men!
...As long that you don't invade the space of others.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Krazysh0t

its obvious you and I come from different cultures. You just don't seem to understand.

I've experienced many different cultures actually. I've lived in 6 different states and 1 other country (while in the Army). I DO understand what you are getting at. I used to live in Mississippi and Oklahoma (where I lived 45 minutes away from Wichita Falls, TX). I know EXACTLY what you are talking about, and I still don't agree with it.

I've rarely ever seen an instance where I'd say that violence is the goto answer to solve the problem.

It not like there are fistfights in the streets. But there absolutely would be if people didn't straighten out their behavior into something more palatable to the community. And knowing this is what maintains social order.

The problem is that as soon as you start being lenient for one instance, some other yahoo is going to take it another inch, then someone else takes it an inch further, then a third person takes another inch. Eventually people are beating the crap out of each other for stepping on your shoes.

ETA: something else to consider about the culture in this part of the world: there are very, very few armed robberies or home break ins. Your chances of being shot/killed are extremely high. We just deal with our own problems. A guy i worked for had a bunch of stuff stolen from him by an employee. He grabbed his gun and went to get his stuff back. Which he did. Then he called the police who arrested him for about 100k in theft.

I'd bet things work a bit differently in Houston.

The manspreading issue hasn't arrived here yet, but when I heard it was a real issue in the US and Canada, I almost choked.

There's a quite a few clips on YouTube, mainly from the masculinist and men's movements, and I'm a bit confused on the exact situation.
Some clips show feminists (or journalists?) with tape-measures to measure the "spread".

I've read about men being arrested for it, and even if they didn't pay the fine, that must be unpleasant enough.
OK, taking up two seats is a bit much on crowded public transport, but it's not clear whether they actually did.
www.huffingtonpost.com...

I've had a woman sitting cross-legged next to me whose filthy high-heel was virtually pointing into my lunch, and that should then also be illegal.

Some spread is necessary.
It's our anatomy.
Try having testicles and underwear made in China (which are usually affordable, but ill-fitting), especially when it's hot.

No, this seems like a war on male bodies, and male cops who enforce it are traitors to our gender, as far as I'm concerned.
Otherwise be fair, and make female cross-legged "foot-assaulting" illegal too!
Keep your foot out of my newspaper of lunch, or cross your legs to the other side!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Houston is an 8 hour drive from where i am. It couldn't be further from our culture.

But for context, this is one of the more recent robbery attempts in the general vicinity of where i live (this guy owns several stores in the area):

www.newswest9.com...

I know the Avants. They aren't to be messed with. They operate their stores in the roughest parts of any community, and staff it with minimum wage earning former felons. And nothing is ever stolen. Shoplifters tend to get the ever loving snot beat out of them in the backroom before being released to warn others to not shoplift.

ETA: forgot to point out:

The problem is that as soon as you start being lenient for one instance, some other yahoo is going to take it another inch, then someone else takes it an inch further, then a third person takes another inch. Eventually people are beating the crap out of each other for stepping on your shoes.

This is a slippery slope fallacy.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

It sure is a slippery slope fallacy. I'm glad you pointed that out. But here's the thing. We've already PROVEN that slippery slope is true. People DO beat people up for the wrong reasons. Plus how is a weak person supposed to stand up to a muscle building asshole?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Im going to quote myself here:

If a kid has his legs spread out really wide so a pregnant woman can't sit down...invoke the rule of "if it fits, i sits" and just sit on his leg until he moves it. It is unlikely that he will choose to continue the confrontation. And if he does..that's where the ass whooping comes into play. Its an easy metric, really. If he choses to ignore you and just let you sit on his leg, then you start spreading out too, and lay all over him. Be as big an asshole as he is being. If he chooses to not confront, and move his leg out from under you, then you get up and give the seat to the pregnant woman. Problem solved. At least, in the mind of a West Texan.

Considering that we don't have fistfights and shootouts here every day (read the above article...people mention that they haven't seen something like that before...because its not frequent at all), it would seem that the "fallacy" in "slippery slope fallacy" is the most prudent word.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Plus how is a weak person supposed to stand up to a muscle building asshole?

Right to carry states seem to have that issue partly resolved.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I'd bet there are assault laws on your books though. I wander what would happen if that kid you hit because he was being rude to the pregnant lady was the son of a prominent attorney.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Oh GREAT. Turn a verbal pissing match into a lethal firefight. THAT is a GREAT solution... /sarc

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I'd bet there are assault laws on your books though. I wander what would happen if that kid you hit because he was being rude to the pregnant lady was the son of a prominent attorney.

I am going to quote myself again for you.

If a kid has his legs spread out really wide so a pregnant woman can't sit down...invoke the rule of "if it fits, i sits" and just sit on his leg until he moves it. It is unlikely that he will choose to continue the confrontation. And if he does..that's where the ass whooping comes into play. Its an easy metric, really. If he choses to ignore you and just let you sit on his leg, then you start spreading out too, and lay all over him. Be as big an asshole as he is being. If he chooses to not confront, and move his leg out from under you, then you get up and give the seat to the pregnant woman. Problem solved. At least, in the mind of a West Texan.

Essentially, in that case I am just defending myself from someone assaulting me.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Oh GREAT. Turn a verbal pissing match into a lethal firefight. THAT is a GREAT solution... /sarc

I thought the same thing about getting the cops involved.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6



Oh GREAT. Turn a verbal pissing match into a lethal firefight. THAT is a GREAT solution... /sarc

"Muscle building asshole" seems to indicate some elevated physical threat level. As an adult, I honestly don't ever see a reason for an armed individual to accept a beat down. Obviously there's no reason to escalate a verbal match into a gun fight, however.

"Manspreading"? Is this some lewd vernacular of queer subculture...?

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Oh GREAT. Turn a verbal pissing match into a lethal firefight. THAT is a GREAT solution... /sarc

I thought the same thing about getting the cops involved.

I'd say 99% of the time with the cops involved, no one comes out injured and the correct parties get tickets if necessary. I know there are those few times where things DO go bad that always end up on Youtube, but we both know that the majority of confrontations with police don't end in violence. There are cops who go their whole career without firing their service weapon (outside of range shooting of course).

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6



Oh GREAT. Turn a verbal pissing match into a lethal firefight. THAT is a GREAT solution... /sarc

"Muscle building asshole" seems to indicate some elevated physical threat level. As an adult, I honestly don't ever see a reason for an armed individual to accept a beat down. Obviously there's no reason to escalate a verbal match into a gun fight, however.

So because the guy is bigger than you, that warrants sticking a gun in his face even if you don't plan on using it?