And based on your post, assaulting any of them would be treated the same.
Beard has a female ex, a female fiance, and three female daughters.
Former Texas HC, now assaulter, fired
- Thread starter amishclone
- Start date
Beard has a female ex, a female fiance, and three female daughters.
But what he doesn't have is a modern smartphone that can take reasonable pictures
**** even the teddy bear is terrified to be around him.
Do you believe people in this thread have been arguing that it would be ok if Beard committed this act of violence against his son or if his lover was a man?
I imagine (without looking) that assaulting any of the children if they were minors would be seen by the court of law as more severe.
Additionally, there may or may not be additional protections for romantic partners/spousal abuse, that could make choking a fiance receive a greater punishment than choking his (hypothetically) 25-year-old daughter.
Purely from a legal lense. Keeping any opinions of the moral implications of these actions out of the matter.
There probably is but it has nothing to do with the sex of the victim which is the discussion I have been referring to from the beginning.
Do you believe people in this thread have been arguing that it would be ok
see also; good, right, acceptable
see also; good, right, acceptable
- Jun 20, 2006
- 38,324
- 22,627
- 113
That hasn’t happened. Reminder, the below sparked the dialog. Best if all move along.
Help me understand.
X is worse than Y.
But Y is not better than X.
Makes absolutely zero sense.
Nope. Opinions about one being worse than the other started the derailment.
right---------------|-----------yx-----wrong
y is not 'better' because it is not right, good or acceptable. x is worse than y.
So, if we agree that an act is wrong, we can then look at it more like
wrong
(0) -----------yx----- (1)
for additional clarity:
bet·ter – adj.
1. of a more excellent or effective type or quality.
Last edited:
I'm so confused and I'm not reading through 25 pages of nonsense. Some people think Beard assaulted his daughter's boyfriend? The police report pretty clearly states it's his fiancé who was choked and bitten.
and your opinion in the case at hand is that Beard choking his ex-wife, fiance or one of his three female daughters is no different legally than if he had choked the boyfriend of one of his daughters?
Just my two cents, but I fundamentally disagree, hitting people is wrong regardless of gender. Neither is any more or any less okay than the other.
I had a response to argue this line of thinking, but I am dropping it and moving on to avoid further derailment.
Also, thanks for the definition.
Yes it'd be different because the bf isn't a member of the household. If he had a son and choked him then it would be no different than if you choked a daughter or fiance' under the Texas law posted above.
On average, men tend to have more upper body strength than women (obviously there are exceptions to this).
Domestic abuse victims are around 85% women (obviously there are flaws in any data collection and unreported crimes). This was from a 1993-2001 survey by the Bureau of Justice,
Chris Beard only has female family members/romantic partners. He was charged with assault of a family member, so we can safely assume he wasn’t choking a boyfriend of a daughter.
The act of assaulting a woman or a man doesn’t really make any difference; assault is assault.
When it comes to civil damages, it’s more likely that men will cause more physical injury when assaulting someone, see upper body strength.
I think the crowd saying “it’s worse to hit a woman” aren’t really correct in that it’s definitely not any different morally to hit a man or a woman. However, an average man hitting an average woman is probably more likely to cause more serious physical harm than a woman hitting a man.
I suspect the “it’s worse to hit a woman” is looking more at the likely damages, while accidentally perpetuating some negative gender stereotypes.. the “it’s the same” crowd is looking more at moral culpability of assaulting a human being.
Domestic abuse victims are around 85% women (obviously there are flaws in any data collection and unreported crimes). This was from a 1993-2001 survey by the Bureau of Justice,
Chris Beard only has female family members/romantic partners. He was charged with assault of a family member, so we can safely assume he wasn’t choking a boyfriend of a daughter.
The act of assaulting a woman or a man doesn’t really make any difference; assault is assault.
When it comes to civil damages, it’s more likely that men will cause more physical injury when assaulting someone, see upper body strength.
I think the crowd saying “it’s worse to hit a woman” aren’t really correct in that it’s definitely not any different morally to hit a man or a woman. However, an average man hitting an average woman is probably more likely to cause more serious physical harm than a woman hitting a man.
I suspect the “it’s worse to hit a woman” is looking more at the likely damages, while accidentally perpetuating some negative gender stereotypes.. the “it’s the same” crowd is looking more at moral culpability of assaulting a human being.
Thank you. I would add to your final paragraph that the "it's worse to hit a woman" narrative feeds into the idea that men cannot be victims of DA at the hands of female partners. I am not at all suggesting the two happen at the same clip or have the same likelihood of resulting in serious or fatal injuries.
The same crowd doesn't consider any other number of variables of men hitting men, like difference in size or number of participants each of which could result in more traumatic injuries.
Wow this thread took an interesting turn into a bunch of nonsense. Can't we all just hate Texas and their coaches and agree that Beard sucks as a Human
