Is "titty twisting" a crime worthy of being thrown in jail for?

[name not needed]

I figured I'd ask the non-braindead forum on DU.

[RDU Socialist]

1. don't you understand the psychological trauma one endures!?

THEIR NIPPLES WERE TWISTED A LITTLE!!!! THIS IS AS BAD AS MURDER, RAPE, AND PIRATING DVDS... COMBINED!!!!

</GENERAL DISCUSSION>

[Maddy McCall]

2. Yes. If someone I don't know walks up to me...

and twists my titty, he's going to get a face full of mace.

[havocmom]

21. And he would be lucky if that were all he got!

Did you decide which new gun you wanted Maddy? :evilgrin:

[jpgray]

3. It's an unpleasant but necessary part of growing up

Of course if boys are doing this to girls in jr high or high school, that's somewhat different. But if you can't deal with titty twisters on your own, your problems won't end in gym class.

[RDU Socialist]

4. according to some of the inmates of bellv--- i mean GD

you are saying sexual assault is a necessary part of growing up. How do you sleep at night?

[Maddy McCall]

5. Lemme ask you this.

Do you believe that girls or women should be able to set limits concerning their own bodies?

[RDU Socialist]

6. this is about guys doing it to guys

and you know that.

[Maddy McCall]

7. Why would I know that?

And what difference does that make?

Do you believe that BOYS and MEN should be allowed to set limits concerning their bodies, then?

[RDU Socialist]

9. the difference that makes is huge

guy twists another guy's nipple, he's not touching someone in a sexual way, it's a couple of guys acting like guys. guy twists a girl's nipple, considering our society's views on breasts, it's a sexual act and if it isn't invited, sexual assault, and I agree with that. I believe boys and men should set limits concerning their bodies, but not such low limits. I've been kicked in the nuts by friends, I've been slapped on the ass by friends. I'm not filing any reports because this is usually done in fun. I threw a tennis ball at my friend's groin a few years ago because he got a point on me and started dancing. It hit him there, and he fell to the ground in a big heap. I laughed, and he did too once he got better (two minutes later). Never did the idea of calling the police enter his head.

[jpgray]

10. I don't think women understand the inner workings of the male brain

(and vice versa, naturally)

They have complex social games to determine rank and order, we bash the crap out of each other like civilized people. :D

[Maddy McCall]

11. I'm not a sexist.

:shrug:

[jpgray]

13. That's not saying one sex is superior

It's just saying there are characteristics of each sex that its opposite will never understand.

[Maddy McCall]

Did you see Spider's post in this thread?

He said very eloquently what I didn't say. It is indeed all about perspective, but not necessarily gender perspective.

[jpgray]

17. I'm not seeing the connection

SJ laments how awful kids can be to those they outcast socially, but tittie-twisters and the like don't -cause- this, they are merely means to the end of making someone painfully aware they have been ostracized. If it weren't tittie-twisters, it would be name calling, or shunning, or something. It's never going to be solved by playing whack-a-mole with the methods of choice, because the methods can be changed while the goal of socially outcasting someone remains the same. Do you see what I mean? SJ saw a tittie twister as part and parcel of his social pariah status, whereas a guy on the football team would get one and not think twice about malicious intent. The action is the same, but the interpretation is very different. If you give all the power of defining actions to interpretation whilst ignoring intent and context, a lot of craziness will ensue.

[Maddy McCall]

20. And it's the "social pariahs" who experience this kind of bullying...

more than anyone else.

But, back to what I said before: Is it still a "joke" if one party doesn't feel that it was funny?

[jpgray]

24. Yes

About half of Richard Pryor's oeuvre would be defined as racist filth if that weren't the case.

[merh]

34. There is a huge difference between a racist joke

and a physical action that is not invited.

Folks paid to hear Richard Pryor, the victim of the battery did not ask to be touched, let alone appreciate it.

[jpgray]

39. The question was this

Is it still a "joke" if one party doesn't feel that it was funny?

I answered in general, but for you I will answer specifically:

If the intent and context were relatively harmless by society's standards, I have a hard time defining the action based totally on a radically negative interpretation. Was the action intended to cause lasting or serious harm? I don't think so. So much for intent. Was the action something that takes place -all the time- in a school setting and is widely considered to be a nuisance rather than a serious offense? Yep. So much for context. What's the interpretation? That this was physical assault and worthy of jail time. One of these is not like the others. One of these just doesn't belong.

Another example more analogous to this would be a football player getting his ass slapped lightly during practice. Now, this action is uninvited, and sexual assault in some situations. But the intent and context here are so obviously harmless that filing a sexual assault charge would be a bit much, don't you think? Do you see how the interpretation of an action can't be the only criteria used to define it?

[Maddy McCall]

40. You know what I was talking about.

I was talking in specificity to this case. It evidently WAS NOT a joke, because one party ended up with a fine and sentence.

[jpgray]

41. Again you're hanging everything on interpretation

Intent and context are incredibly important, and deserve a hearing.

Again I pose you the example of the football practice ass slap. Uninvited ass smacking is (rightly) often considered to be sexual assault. Now, the intent and context in the football practice scenario are obviously benign--meant as encouraging, non-sexual contact and widely acknowledged as such. But someone could in theory interpret it as sexual assault and file charges. By your logic, this would define the action as sexual assault and the perpetrator should be thrown in jail, labeled a sex offender for the rest of his years. All that because someone has a harsh interpetation of something millions see on network TV every Sunday for months on end.

[Maddy McCall]

45. Oh, come on.

Apples and oranges. And you know that. Ass slapping on the field is akin to high-fiving.

We are talking about a case in which one person touched another in a way that offended the person who was touched. Evidently the courts and mediators thought differently about the situation than you do.

The poll on this page specifically refers to "titty twisting." That's what I'll discuss. I really don't see any parallels in your hypotheticals.

[jpgray]

47. Do you hear yourself? It's akin to high-fiving -for you-

And tittie twisters are an unpleasant but regular part of school horseplay to me. What if someone views the ass-slapping as sexual assault? What if someone views a tittie-twister as assault? How are the two any different? Neither is consensual, both have contexts wherein they should be considered assault.

[Maddy McCall]

49. Yeah, ass slapping on the field is consensual, because it's TEAM PLAY.

Am I correct to assume that the boy whose nipple was twisted was not involved in team play with the other boy, but was merely standing at a deli counter? Since you are so adamant to inject context into the argument, it's hardly the contextually appropriate place for a "titty twister," I'd say.

Edit: Do you know these two boys? Again, I say, one complained to the authorities about it, which demonstrates that he didn't see it as just "horseplay." Perspective IS everything, and mine and yours will never agree.

[jpgray]

52. Do football players say "teammate, would you kindly smack my ass?"

You're getting tied up with your own arguments now. Tittie twisters happen anywhere and everywhere in school, and the cafeteria is no different. It's presumed in both cases that the action will not be viewed as assault. The football player believes that the action will be viewed as a high-five, and the school bully believes that the titty-twister will be viewed as a physical "you suck"--certainly irritating and assholish, but nothing resembling assault. But if someone views the ass-smack as sexual assault, or if someone views the titty-twister as a deadly serious crime, what side of the story do you believe? How do you define the action?

You can't just look at interpretation. That's all I'm saying. You have to look at intent and context as well. To you, the cafeteria is totally contextually removed from horseplay being proper--apparently to you young boys also talk over with each other which behaviors are acceptable and which are not. In my school life, I found that these behaviors were all over, and that no one took them too seriously wherever they occurred..

[Maddy McCall]

56. Argue about the "titty twisting" question.

That's why we're here, isn't it?

:shrug:

[jpgray]

59. Isn't most of my above post about it?

Point out to me what isn't:

Tittie twisters happen anywhere and everywhere in school, and the cafeteria is no different. It's presumed in both cases that the action will not be viewed as assault. The football player believes that the action will be viewed as a high-five, and the school bully believes that the titty-twister will be viewed as a physical "you suck"--certainly irritating and assholish, but nothing resembling assault. But if someone views the ass-smack as sexual assault, or if someone views the titty-twister as a deadly serious crime, what side of the story do you believe? How do you define the action?

You can't just look at interpretation. That's all I'm saying. You have to look at intent and context as well. To you, the cafeteria is totally contextually removed from horseplay being proper--apparently to you young boys also talk over with each other which behaviors are acceptable and which are not. In my school life, I found that these behaviors were all over, and that no one took them too seriously wherever they occurred..

Looks fairly well tittified to me. I'm just using the ass-smack as a more or less comparable example. A wet willie, a "what's that on your shirt?" (smack)--all of these are examples of invasions of personal space that could be considered assault but widely aren't.

[RagingInMiami]

105. Your post was right on the money

[Spider Jerusalem]

65. Actually, in school, I viewed that sort of thing as assault.

My response if that sort of thing happened (at least, when I was a bit older and had the spine for it) was to punch or kick the worthless fuckhole doing it, get up in his face and say "you don't want to touch me again."

And...you saw what I said about PTSD, yes? I suppose you think that's an acceptable consequence of this sort of behaviour? My own fault for being born with an autistic disorder, right? And it wouldn't have happened if I hadn't brought unwanted attention to myself by being solitary and preferring books to talking to other people. Silly me. Suppose I just shouldn't have taken it seriously.

You obviously have NO IDEA how completely idiotic your argument sounds.

[jpgray]

69. Do you really believe your tormenters intended all this?

It's possible they did. I don't know you, or your situation. But a lone titty-twister to me is just a bullshit prank that isn't at all intended to do serious harm. Can it do serious harm? Yeah. But that's why context and interpretation have to be considered when looking at an action.

You're reading a lot into my posts that isn't there. I don't judge you or your situation. All I'm judging is the argument "because someone interprets an act as abusive behavior then it -must be- abusive behavior." That just isn't the case.

[Spider Jerusalem]

75. I'd say...

that whether or not it's abusive behaviour depends on how the person on the receiving end perceives it. In most of your examples re context, the questiohn of whether or not it constitutes abusive behaviour wouldn't even be at issue, because where it wasn't perceived as such there'd be no attempt by the other party to bring disciplinary action. So most of your argument is, particularly in the context of the particular case under discussion, moot.

[jpgray]

76. Nonsense

A Jewish person can't go to fucking India and file suit on their national museums after viewing Vedic artifacts because there are swastikas present. A symbol or action needs to be viewed in all three factors: intent, context and interpretation. You can't just look at one.

[Spider Jerusalem]

77. We're talking about uninvited and unpleasant physical contact.

Not about something more innocuous. If the interpretation of the person on the receiving end is that it's an uninvited assault, then it is; it catregorically fits the definition. Doesn't matter what the intent was. Not from a practical or legal standpoint. Your argument is fallacious and really rather ridiculous.

[jpgray]

79. Progress: now it's -qualified- nonsense

Uninvited and unpleasant is totally subjective, and again dependent on context and intent. If you have a football player that views a teammate touching his ass as extremely unwelcome and extremely offensive, to me that still doesn't make a football practice ass slap assault. It fits all your criteria--it's uninvited, unpleasant, and it's viewed as assault by the recipient of the act. To me, and most of the world, it isn't assault. With your logic, it is. Now you will qualify yourself out of this example, and tell me again how ridiculous my argument is while being totally at sea trying to prove the same. :D

[Spider Jerusalem]

80. I point you to my earlier post:

"depends on the perception of the person on the receiving end".

Reading comprehension, anyone?

And a smack on the backside isn't quite in the same category as twisting someone's nipples. Especially not on a football field where it's considered a normal expression of cameraderie. You can't extrapolate from your hypothetical football player to a freshman walking down the hallway in school who gets thrown against the wall by a senior who has six inches and forty pounds on him and gets his nipples twisted (to give an example). If you want to come up with a hypothetical you'll really have to do better than that.

[jpgray]

82. So a football pratice ass slap is legally sexual assault?

Just because I walk into practice with that viewpoint (which no one else has), I can put down a teammate for reform school, jail time, and a lifetime of being labeled a sex offender just because I don't like having my ass slapped (which the perp has no way of knowing)? Whose argument is ridiculous?

[Spider Jerusalem]

85. I edited and expanded my last response.

And note that I never used the word "sexual".

[jpgray]

91. All right, let's have another go at this

Especially not on a football field where it's considered a normal expression of cameraderie.

To whom? What if someone -doesn't- consider it a normal expression of camaraderie? That, by your logic, totally overrides social context and makes the action an abusive one.

But let's use your example:

You can't extrapolate from your hypothetical football player to a freshman walking down the hallway in school who gets thrown against the wall by a senior who has six inches and forty pounds on him and gets his nipples twisted (to give an example).

Here you'd have a much better case for assault. Being thrown against a wall isn't by any means regular school horseplay in our social context. A single isolated titty-twister, however, is a different matter. Just as you say on a football field it is considered normal behavior to smack someone on the ass, it's also considered utterly normal to have received a lone titty-twister at some point in your scholastic career. The two aren't directly analogous--however you view a titty twister it is irritating and the calling card of a fuckknob, but most people view it is as a wholly inisignificant act. Could it be assault? Yes. A "titty twister" could be given hard enough or often enough to do genuine physical and mental harm to someone. But an isolated "normal" one I just can't see as assault, no matter how it is interpreted. And I think contextually most would agree with me. From what I understand the perp was embarrassed in front of a girl by the victim, and that was the impetus for the behavior. This sounds like your typical dumb "oh yeah?" in physical form rather than a purposed attempt at criminal harm.

[Spider Jerusalem]

94. ...

To whom? What if someone -doesn't- consider it a normal expression of camaraderie? That, by your logic, totally overrides social context and makes the action an abusive one.

You postulate "a football player". Given the social dynamic of a football team, one would think he'd some idea of what was meant by it. I say it's a very bad and artificial example.

A "titty twister" could be given hard enough or often enough to do genuine physical and mental harm to someone. But an isolated "normal" one I just can't see as assault, no matter how it is interpreted.

If by "normal" you mean "an unprovoked act of physical aggression intended to humiliate and/or intimidate', that's pretty much assault by definition, whatever protests you care to make to the contrary.

[jpgray]

98. See, this is the whole issue

Very few people I knew in school viewed a titty-twister as such:

an unprovoked act of physical aggression intended to humiliate and/or intimidate

Most recipients in my experience (I was one, never dealt any out) viewed the things as a slightly more unpleasant version of "What's that on your shirt?" *light smack*. At the restaurant I serve in, the kitchen staff often give titty twisters to one another. Should I inform them that they should all file charges against each other for assault? It's just part of the social process in some cases. Teasing is another example--it can be genuinely hurtful, flirty, or sociable (note I am -not- saying an uninvited titty twister can be "flirty" ;-)). When it's the latter two, I don't see it as a problem. While a titty-twister is more generally unpleasant, it can still have other meanings and purposes than humiliation or intimidation.

[Spider Jerusalem]

100. And as I've said repeatedly..

and continue to say, that depends on the interpretation of the person on the receiving end. In those examples you cite in support of your argument, these people view it as harmless horseplay. That doesn't mean that everyone does, or that people who don't ought to just "get over it" if they've been (as they would consider) assaulted and/or violated by this sort of unwanted and moderately aggressive act.

I'm willing to concede that in those instances you cite, there's no reason to consider this "assault"; but you seem unable to realise that such situations DO in fact exist, and the interpretation of the recipient is the determining factor.

[jpgray]

103. I noted several times that a titty twister could be assault

But I maintain that the interpretation of the recipient is -not- the determining factor. You're correct when you say that at the restaurant I work in the staff understands the gesture as non-assaultive, but say a new chef comes on, and without thinking one of the kitchen line cooks gives him a titty twister. This is the same action, mind you, that in intent and in context is perfectly acceptable and understood as a harmless act. Now, should that be considered assault? I give you an example made by a more coherent person than I upthread, of a person tackling someone out of the way of traffic. Now a random uninvited tackle could be considered assault. In fact if the person tackled never saw the traffic, that's exactly how he would likely see it. But there's more to it in this scenario and others than -just the interpretation-. This last point is literally -all- I am trying to argue. The recipient's interpretation simply isn't absolute. Now, with something unreservedly assaultive like kicking someone hard in the nuts it would be almost impossible to come up with a context and intent to explain the action away as something that isn't assaultive (Shaolin monks practicing is one), but with a titty-twister there is a much broader range for non-assaultive motivations and contexts. Again, this is ALL I am trying to say.

[Maddy McCall]

84. JP, my last post on this topic.

If a woman does not consent to sexual intercourse with a man and considers what happened to her to be rape(as the law does), yet that man says that she surely was dressed in a sexy way, and contextually, she was walking to her car after work, but the man interpreted it to be that she was inviting him by being alone in a dark, unlit parking lot at night, does that make the rape any less of a rape?

Before you call my hypothetical ridiculous, realize that mine draws more of a parallel than yours does. One person assaulted another. The person on who was assaulted considers what happend to be an assault. The law considers what happened to be an assault. All characteristics of my hypothetical, but of none of yours.

As many people have tried to tell you, the determination of offensiveness lies with the receiving person. There's just no avoiding that one, pivotal fact.

Now, I've got a movie to watch and REAL popcorn popping, so I bid you adieu.

[jpgray]

88. I don't see it

These two scenarios have -very little- in common. A titty twister is widely considered to be completely harmless in a society of young males, whereas rape is not considered to be completely harmless by anyone but the tiniest minority. A titty-twister isn't widely viewed as assault, but as horseplay. Rape is all but universally viewed as assault. The social contexts for the actions are completely different. This leads to the victims interpretation in the case of rape holding way more sway than the perp's intent. So your example does show how intent, context and interpretation all have to be examined to make sense of an event.

[RagingInMiami]

107. What does a titty twister among boys

Have to do with a women not consenting to sexual intercourse who ends up getting raped. You are way off in your anology.

[Lolivia]

95. Not true on the legal front

If we are walking down a crowded hallway and I bump into you - even graze your backside- that would qualify as "uninvited and unpleasant physical contact" and you may perceive it as assault. It is not legally assault or battery, however, because that kind of contact must be expected and endured in society.

I could even not try to avoid you, knowing contact will occur, and it would still not be legal battery - no matter how you personally interpret it. In that context, the uninvited contact is not battery.

I could think of other examples. Say I think you are about to step in front of traffic (and I'm wrong) so I tackle you and throw you to the ground to stop you from doing it. From your perspective, I just beat you up, but if I reasonably believed you were about to get killed (even if I was wrong) it would not be battery. So the perspective on the giving end is also relevant.

It seems to me that the issue in this case isn't whether bullying should be tolerated (it shouldn't) but whether this type of contact is automatically bullying. And the other poster is right - context matters in determining whether behavior crosses the line. The exact same behavior could be bullying in one context but not in another.

Was it bullying in this particular case? I don't know - I don't know all the context. I don't know what the giver thought, I don't know the boys' histories with each other, etc. Maybe the twister had been harrassed by the twistee at some other point, maybe they routinely twisted each other, who knows? It very well could have been bullying.

My only point, really, is that context (and not just individual perceptions) does matter when determining if certain behavior mets the definition of assault or battery.

[Spider Jerusalem]

101. More disingenuous interpretation.

None of these examples bears any relation to grabbing someone's nipples and twisting them; this sort of contact IS legally battery if the offended party chooses to take legal action.

[Lolivia]

104. Not always

If the two kids had done it before to each other without complaining, that would be accepted contact between the two of them. Neither one could suddenly interpret that as battery, even if he didn't like it that particular time and felt it was assault. So "someone grabbing someone's nipples and twisting them" is NOT automatically battery, even if the kid didn't like it.

My first post responded exclusively to your assertion that it is ONLY the interpretation of the receiver that determines whether contact is battery. It's not. The context would matter.

This post deals exclusively with your assertion that this contact would automatically be battery between them. It wouldn't. The context would matter.

I posted before that I'm not making a judgment in this case - I was only agreeing with the other poster that context matters.

[fishwax]

81. there aren't any laws against displaying the Vedic artifacts, whereas

there are laws against assaulting other people.

I understand the point about context and intent, but this doesn't negate the act, which was apparently unwelcome.

[jpgray]

83. It doesn't negate the act, but it mitigates a ridiculous interpretation

The interpretation that this is a jailable offense, for one.

[fishwax]

89. he wasn't jailed for the twisting

he was put in juvenile detention for not obeying a court order.

But with respect to the interpretation, etc, it seems fairly simple to me: whether or not it is offensive/assault depends on interpretation. Intent and context might be mitigating circumstances, but if you were to go and grab the ass or twist the nipple of the person in front of you at the deli, it would be, regardless of your intent, assault.

[jpgray]

92. But that's not acceptable in our social context -at all-

That would be universally viewed as assault, whereas most schoolboys do not view titty twisters as assault. Do you see the difference?

[fishwax]

96. the worldview of "most schoolboys" doesn't determine the law

:shrug:

And as for whether most boys see it as normal, I don't entirely think so. Thinking back to my school years, I think a titty twister from a close friend in certain circumstances might be one thing, but it's far from clear that the boys in this case were friends. Titty twisters to random school mates? Not entirely uncommon, perhaps, but not normal or acceptable, and not something any of the boys in my high school would do with no expectation of consequences. One certainly wouldn't, for example, brazenly titty twist a classmate in front of a teacher and not expect to be reprimanded. (This makes it quite different from the ass slapping on a football field, where nobody bothers to wait until the coach's back is turned.)

Additionally, I think the setting would play into the view of most schoolboys, who see the school itself as quite different from outside of the school. (This incident took place outside of school.) Inside the school walls, the person on the receiving end might have some confidence that the nearby presence of authority could prevent things from getting too out of hand, whereas in the local deli there are no such assurances.

[Spider Jerusalem]

97. ...

"Most" ≠ "all"...which seems to be a point you're not getting.

[fishwax]

99. delete

whoops ... thought you were responding to my post ...

[LostinVA]

111. You're right,, Maddy

It's one thing if it's buddies doing this... another when it's being used a s a bullying, intimidation tactic... which it was in the case everyone's talking about. From what my male relatives and friends have told me, HORRIBLE physical abuse goes in boy's locker rooms, etc. CErtain boys (usually gay or seen as "wimpy," as some DU posters have called the assaulted boy) are singled out and tormented. And that's what it is.

And,f or all the guys on this thread saying "boys will be boys," I'll call bullshit. That excuse no longer works for things done to females, and shouldn't for things done to males, either.

[merh]

44. Again, you answered in generalities and that has no place

when discussing what is perceived as a personal insult, attack or assault.

It is an individual's right to do what they feel is necessary in the situation and to equate a personal insult/attack to Richard Pryor's jokes is reaching.

There is no comparsion.

[jpgray]

50. Intent, context and interpretation

If you use only interpretation as a basis for judging the action, both Pryor's humor and the tittie twister can be viewed as disgusting, violent behaviors. If you use context and intent as well, they become much less offensive. There's a comparison right there for you.

[merh]

55. No there is no comparison.

Again, Pryor was a performer. To hear his racist jokes that could be perceived as insulting to some, one has to be pro-active, they have to buy his album, watch his specials, go to his concerts.

Now, the tittie twistee was passive, he was just there and his tittie was twisted. He didn't ask for it, he did not stick his tittie out and say twist it and I don't believe he paid to have it done.

Your comparison fails.

[jpgray]

63. Any two things that are not the same thing will have differences

That doesn't mean that because there are differences you can't compare the two. Better throw out all poetry and most prose, since metaphors involve two things that aren't exactly alike.

[merh]

70. Are we talking literature or real life?

If you are going to make comparisons relative to personal insults or attacks, then you should base those comparsions on like facts.

Again, in your comparsion one party is active or invites the offense and the other party is passive and is a victim of the offense. They don't compare.

You keep reaching, but you haven't yet found the right set of facts to support your contention.

[jpgray]

74. Fact: A certain interpretation will make a titty twister offensive

Fact: A certain intepretation will make Richard Pryor's comedy offensive.

What's your problem with the above? That a titty twister isn't a comic?

[merh]

78. No, how silly of you to ask that.

To be insulted by Pryor one has to take an action - e.g. watch one of his shows, listen to an album or attend a concert.

Are you following?

The titty twistee was passive, he did not take any action that invited the attack.

Thus, there is no comparison.

How much simplier can I make this for you?

[jpgray]

93. OK, let's bow to your point

You hear the bit in a tv store, or on a cab radio, or at a friend's house. In none of these cases is the behavior invited. Does this dispel your trouble?

[merh]

125. If you continue to listen to it and not leave, not change the station,

not stop listening, then again you are an active participant.

Active versus passive.

[hfojvt]

18. you bring up another huge difference

whether the person doing it is your "friend", or just another classmate. But I probably would not laugh if I did what you did. I would not expect him to call the police, but I would not think it was funny - unless I thought he was only pretending to be hurt.

[fishwax]

27. we don't really know whether the boys involved were friends

does that make any difference in your mind? Is twisting the nipple of a complete stranger okay? A casual acquaintance? A coworker? How friendly would you have to be with someone before you'd let them twist your nipple?

[Guaranteed]

87. Sure, but who's doing the setting, here?

You, or them?

[hfojvt]

8. I slugged a guy pretty hard for this

when I was a HS senior. Jail time, however, would have been pretty severe, although we almost got into a fight which would have meant suspensions and who knows what.

[Maddy McCall]

12. Good.

You should have.

[GirlinContempt]

19. What about other dudes 'body limits'

:eyes:

[Maddy McCall]

22. Clarify.

[GirlinContempt]

25. *ahem*

7. Why would I know that?
And what difference does that make?

Do you believe that BOYS and MEN should be allowed to set limits concerning their bodies, then?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=4840477&mesg_id=4840535

[Maddy McCall]

29. I'm coherent.

I know what *I* posted.

Now, can you, with some clarity, tell me exactly what you are asking?

What I am saying is that, male or female, if someone violates my personal space, they'll pick their teeth up off the floor. I don't know how much more concisely I can say that.

[GirlinContempt]

32. I'm asking if your comments about bodily limits

extend to others. Because this is a trend I notice in many many people. Violence isn't ok, unless it's responding to violence. My body limits are more important than yours. Etc.

I thought it was fairly clear, seeing as that is what I asked you. What about the second parties body limits, in response to you cheering on others violence.

[Maddy McCall]

38. Re-read my last post.

And I reiterate. If someone puts their hands on me without my consent, they will either pick their teeth up off the floor or they will find themselves with a face full of mace.

In the hypothetical sense, if you start it, I will respond. I will protect myself. If I see someone bully another person, I encourage the victim to respond with all due force, to protect himself or herself. Period.

No, your question wasn't clear at all. My response is crystal clear.

[GirlinContempt]

42. Crystal clear, huh?

Protecting yourself is one thing. Knocking someones teeth out seems a little... excessive. Knocking someone out for pinching you, also seems a little excessive. That isn't protection, that's retribution. At least be honest about it.

So, are you in fact saying that physical violence is ok if you feel it is justified (IE he started it)?

[Maddy McCall]

48. Well, yeah, that may be a little....excessive.

But you get my point. I'm not being dishonest. I am "in fact" saying this:

I will defend myself with DUE FORCE if someone violates my personal space. Why are you having such great difficulty in understanding that?

[GirlinContempt]

51. I have difficulty understanding that when

you advocate knocking peoples teeth out. That doesn't sound like DUE FORCE. It sounds like excessive force. Do you have difficulty with these basic concepts, or are you deliberately being thick?

[Maddy McCall]

54. I don't advocate knocking teeth for the sake of knocking out teeth.

But in the heat of the moment, if someone, without my consent, suddenly places their hands on me, I will respond with due force. If in that process, I physically harm them, OH WELL!

That's the price one pays for putting one's hands on another person without consent.

Not being thick at all. I'm enjoying toying with you. :hi:

[GirlinContempt]

62. In toying with me, you seem like an evasive disingenuous person,

but if it floats your boat.

Using force as self defense is only excusable by law when you use only the necessary amount of force to escape the situation. Beyond that is retribution which is not protected by law.

What, exactly, is your definition of 'due force'?

[RagingInMiami]

108. Getting your teeth knocked out

seems a bit extreme for a simple titty twister. I'd rather take the four days in juvie.

[ghostsofgiants]

53. Due force?

"Slugging a guy pretty hard" for a pinched nipple is "due force"?

[havocmom]

60. Some of us would consider it tit for tat

And some of us have learned that there are bullies about who do not respond to subtly

[ghostsofgiants]

67. And some of you would be wrong about that.

Tit for tat = equivalent retaliation.

Don't act like a punch up is the equivalent of a pinched nipple. I've been on the recieving end of both. They are not.

[havocmom]

68. For some of us, one is a sexual attack

And the purp will GO DOWN for such things

[ghostsofgiants]

72. For a female, yes, I can understand it being a sexual attack.

For a guy, however, not so much. And we are talking about a guy punching someone for this.

[Maddy McCall]

73. "Offensiveness is going to be judged by the person" on the receiving end.

http://www.mailtribune.com/archive/2005/0807/local/stories/13local.htm

[smirkymonkey]

123. Ok, then - a kick in the balls.

that should do it.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

102. Hi RDU Socialist! Welcome to DU!

:hi: from Chapel Hill

[fishwax]

23. being held accountable for your actions is also an unpleasant but

necessary part of growing up.

This case could actually have been resolved fairly easily, but the mother of the boy who administered the twist wouldn't allow her son to show up for the intake hearing, and therefore it resulted in a trial.

[Maddy McCall]

26. Ahhh...so now we get details. Can you post a link to what it's all about?

They person who continued a discussion in GD by bringing it into the lounge didn't give us the benefit of knowing the background of this situation.

Thanks! :hi:

[Heidi]

30. Link.

Here ya go, Maddy.

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/news/local/14002543.htm

[Maddy McCall]

35. Thanks, Heidi.

Yeah, it makes much more sense now. Thanks.

[fishwax]

37. here's a news story that provides some different details

http://www.mailtribune.com/archive/2005/0807/local/stories/13local.htm

For some reason, when people import complicated discussions from other forums, they tend to leave out details which might work against their position :)

:hi:

[NashVegas]

109. Yes. Funny How the Tribune Story Left This Part Out

He said he balked when told he must also describe his "criminal thought processes."

He said that would imply malicious or criminal intent, and "none of that applied to my feelings or actions."

Thumler said he had no criminal intent because he considered the victim to be a friend at the time of the incident - which he deemed horseplay. Including the language sought by Mediation Works, he said, would turn his prior court statements into lies.

He refused to bow to the Inquisitioners.

[Spider Jerusalem]

14. No...

it's just something that's worthy of getting the fuckwit who's doing it beaten severely by the guy he does it to so he learns to keep his goddamned hands to himself.

Note: I was smart, quiet, introverted, not athletic and mostly friendless in school, and wound up on the receiving end of a lot of bullying (which left me with mild post-traumatic stress disorder). As a result, I have no sympathy for bullies or for those who defend them; you might as well announce 'Hi, I'm a brain-damaged moron and I'd like to state my support of brain-damaged moronic behaviour!', as far as I'm concerned.

[Maddy McCall]

15. Yes, Spider Jerusalem.

Yours is the most intelligent post on any of these threads. I regret playing the game with the idiots on these threads.

I was always a defender of those who were bullied when I was a kid. I guess that still runs through my veins.

:hi:

[LostinVA]

112. Great post -- real common sense and perspective

[Kire]

16. It's battery.

"intentionally caused harmful or offensive contact with another person"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_ (tort)

[havocmom]

36. Yep. And bullies need to learn that they can't 'laugh' their way out

of trouble every time they violate social boundaries. The fact that they HAVEN"T learned to recognize culturally accepted boundaries is the biggest part of the problem. Nobody has taught them to respect others. And by insisting it's 'all in fun, boys will be boys' people are ensuring that the bullies' behavior will only escalate.

For evidence of just how bad the escalation can be when a sadistic bully never faces consequences for his actions, look to the mass murderer/war criminal in the Oval Office.

Bullies need to be confronted HARD early on in their little careers or they will just keep getting worse until somebody bigger finally smacks them down.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

28. times like this i am glad i went to an all girls private school.

we would be expelled for such behaviour

[Maddy McCall]

31. I went to a private school.

It was tolerated at my school. I'm so glad that bullying is something that is not tolerated these days as much as it was in the past.

I can remember being in first grade, and seeing the second-grade boy bully throw a small girl on the ground and pull her panties down, in front of everyone. I don't think she ever got over it, because from that point forward, she was treated as an outcast by everyone.

Guess where he is now. Principal of a public high school.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

33. ugh! i went to a very prissy school. where we were really protected

from us and the world.

cant say it was a bad thing.

[Maddy McCall]

43. It was a good thing.

Imagine going to school with some of the people on this thread, who think it's ok to twist your nipple or otherwise lay their hands on you without your consent.

[GirlinContempt]

46. Oh for sweet fuck sake

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x4840698#4840701

[Maddy McCall]

57. And with relish...

I add you back to my ignore list.

[GirlinContempt]

64. Thank fuck for that

[DS1]

126. wow

[havocmom]

58. I DID go to school with people like some on this thread ...

back in the days of the metal lunch box with the heavy glass lined metal thermos. OK, I'll admit it: havocmom handed out some serious justice on the playground one day at lunchtime. And there was a better understanding of where the line was for 4 young men who attacked me and a couple of my wee little gal-pals.

Our teacher had us put down our books at a point that afternoon. I thought, this is it, I am doomed! She said she heard there had been an incident on the playground earier... (I thought I was gonna throw up at this point).

She called up one of my friends, the smallest in class and the one who suffered the most abuse at the hands of the bad boys. The teacher had her stand up in front of the class, on a little chair! My rage started boiling all over again! She was a victim! Don't humiliate her further!

Then, the teacher called the boys up and made them get down on their knees in front of the class and the little girl on the little chair. She went on a bit about bad manners and inappropriate behavior. Then she told the boys each would BEG forgiveness from the young lady. And they did. They cried. They slobbered. They blubbered. But they fuckin begged for forgiveness.

You could have heard an angel sigh in that room. I knew I would probably be publicly flogged for what I had done to those boys with my lunch pail after they had attacked us.

The teacher told the boys to go to the fountain and get a drink then return to their seats and finish the reading. She gave my little pal a hand off the chair, nodded to her and she sat down and opened her big book at her big desk.

She did not so much as utter one word to me, the mad girl with the now battered lunch pail. She did look up once and wink though.

Maddy, you have mail. ;)

[Maddy McCall]

61. You and I were just alike in our childhoods.

I, too, confronted bullies who physically harmed the little kids.

I'm going to my mailbox now. :D

[havocmom]

66. Alike except for the fact that mine was back in the Paleocene

and yours was in the latter half of the last century :evilgrin:

[Maddy McCall]

71. True dat.

Began kindergarten in 1969. Not that many years between us, though.

:D

[GirlinContempt]

86. No sex threads

[TimeChaser]

90. Disobeying a court order is n/t

[Wetzelbill]

106. if a guy does it to another guy, no it isn't

but if a guy does it to a woman, well, that's getting into a blatant sexual area. So, it would have to require some form of punishment I would think. I don't know about jail or whatever. I think though, that young kids should be made to understand at an early age that sexual harassment cannot be tolerated. Even if they may think an action isn't harmful, they should know better than to go there in the first place. If somebody harasses someone else the punishment should be harsh enough that a lesson is learned.

[LostinVA]

114. Per the courts, yes it is

[Wetzelbill]

116. yeah

I'm not sure if a boy doing that to another boy is worth jail time. It's bullying, not sexual harassment, which I think takes it up another notch. You can't say it's a good thing or anything like that, but it's a little different. Now, my friends and I would mess around and do that to each other and it was no big deal. Just screwing around and nobody got hurt or anything. However, if somebody is bullying a younger or weaker kid by doing that, then he definitely should have to face some sort of consequence. I think jail time would be going too far in that instance, but it's not like I'm going to lose sleep over it or anything. If somebody does something wrong they have to face the consequences whatever they may be. If that's jail, well, so be it, that's just how it is.

On edit:

I should clarify, that the kid who received juvenile detention for this, deserved what he got. He didn't comply with his punishment. If he did he wouldn't have ended up in detention. And, to tell you the truth, his initial punishment wasn't unreasonable. So he made his bed, and he has to lie in it, so to speak. :)

[LostinVA]

118. No, it's considering sexual harassment

As per the man who was bullied on the offshore oil rig. The lower court said it wasn't because they were the same sex, but a higher court changed the ruling. It was a few years ago.

I think the boy is only facing juvi because the parents ignored the court order. I'm just glad something is being done, because I hate a bully, and I think teenage bullies grow up to be people's bosses!

[Wetzelbill]

119. I added a little more on edit

well, if a higher court constitutes it is sexual harasmment then people should be aware of what they are getting into before they do something stupid. The law is the law and either way they are wrong for doing that in the first place. It can't be condoned, and I hope you don't think I am condoning it. I believe that a punishment should fit the crime, and it probably does so in these cases, both the offshore rig one and the kid going to juvi.

[LostinVA]

120. Oh, no no! I understand what you're saying!

I just was obnoxiously correcting you. A bad habit!

[Wetzelbill]

121. Psh...Librul elitist

always trying to correct people. Why do you hate Mercka so much? :rofl:

Nah, you weren't being toooo obnoxious, just a little. :) It's fine, I need to be put in line every once in a while. :)

[LostinVA]

129. I love being a librul elitist

Especially one who makes hardly any money!

[Atmashine]

110. Yes. *@$% them. Right in the ear.

As a complete nerd in high school, complete with taped glasses, plaid clothing, always lugging around a stack of books, with no wish to conform, I woulda loved sending my tormentors to jail.

For every little tease inflicted with no power to stop it builds up a social wall that will continue later on in life. It's a slow social death where if you have no one to support you, well good luck working up the courage to act competent in job interviews, asking people on dates, and just being a little bit assertive.

Being constantly bullied will destroy your life just as thoroughly as one of those Columbine students putting a bullet through you.

[BlueIris]

113. For the Nos, picture it happening to your daughter, sister or mom.

Now does it look criminal to you?

That's what I thought.

Digusting.

[Name removed]

115. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BikeWriter]

117. They'd get a face full of fist from me.

[last_texas_dem]

122. Not jail, but...

I have no problem with somebody getting community service, etc., or some sort of fairly harsh punishment for that sort of assholish behavior, at least in the context of the original story that this is a response to. To me, it's hard to argue that doing that shit to someone isn't assault- note that I'm not saying sexual assault- but assault, in many cases. I think context should be considered, but if it's a case of a kid coming up and doing that to another kid for the sake of bullying or harassment, I have no problem with the punishment the kid got in the initial story.

[Science Of Myth]

124. If you guys want to have a serious discussion

please check your terminology. A titty twister is a frat-boy gag. Groping is a fucking crime. It seems as though I'm referring to the first and you all are discussing the latter...I haven't seen the story you're referring to (and the OP doesn't reference it at all) but I gather some kid felt a woman up, yes?

Thats not exactly my definition of "titty-twisting"

[DS1]

127. This is turning out to be the greatest thread of the year, and its climax,

in the form of a lock will only prove how goddamn silly and high-n-mighty this place manages to be AT THE SAME TIME :eyes:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

[Science Of Myth]

128. I think there alot of DU posters were victims of child abuse

after reading this thread :(

[DS1]

130. I can't believe some of them made it past the 4th grade

[Pithlet]

131. Locking

This is flamebait.