Today I heard my seven year old son teaching the noticeably larger dog that was picking on (in his mind) the smaller, vulnerable cat in his iPad-based video game to, “Pick on someone your own size!”  Instantly, it clicked for me.

We should allow men to legally hit women and see what happens.

I bet women would stop instigating fights, and insisting that men hit them – all so the woman could have a valid reason to call the police on said man. We teach young boys a life-long lesson about fighting by saying, “pick on someone your own size!”  What we are saying is to fight within your weight class.

As a bigger, stronger, fighter you should have the maturity and compassion to only fight a formidable competitor.  And as a smaller fighter make intelligent decisions about who you mouth off to; just ‘cuz you never know.  Now in the case of the video below we have a bully (who inaccurately sees himself as a heavyweight champion) compared to the soft spoken, introverted victim (the sleeping giant underdog).


What you have is a boy that finally couldn’t take the torment and just snapped.  He finally fought back and was victorious.  His statement was brief and swift but was heard – and felt – loud and clear.  The video below this paragraph is basically a snapshot of the world’s thunderous applause to Casey Haynes’ physical response.  As a young boy he suffered years and years of abuse, bullying, and ridicule, and finally just had enough.  In today’s world of Internet super stars I’m sure this video was seen by everyone in his school, and no one will bother him ever again.


So what does all of this have to do with domestic violence?


Once again, we teach little boys to fight within their weight class, but we never teach little girls the same thing.  What we say is, “Boys aren’t supposed to hit little girls.”  Where in that is the lesson for little girls that we can impart on them to keep as they get older?  Do we ever tell little girls, “Don’t hit boys because they are bigger than you and stronger than you and can easily hurt you”?

Sadly, we don’t plant that little pearl of wisdom into little girls’ minds.  We never tell them that they are not supposed to hit boys. What we tell them is that boys will get in trouble if they hit girls.  So you end up with a generation of young girls feeling an unhealthy sense of empowerment and entitlement.  They see, from the reaction of their parents and teachers, that boys are the ones that get in trouble for hitting girls.  The girls suffer no consequence at all for their actions.

All people should be required by law to keep their hands to themselves; not just men.

As we age this never changes.  Women know that they can hit a man, and if he retaliates in anyway he will go to jail.  She won’t.  But what about the lessons we learn in Kindergarten?

  • Don’t hit anyone or you will get in trouble.
  • Keep your hands to yourself.
  • Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Why don’t these lessons apply in the real world as we mature?  If two men or two women get into a fight one of two things happens.  The person who started the fight (threw the first punch) goes to jail, or they both go. If the fight is coed it becomes a lopsided scenario that is unjustifiably biased towards men.

Why are women allowed to yell, scream, and hit a man and not suffer the consequences of their actions?  Why is it assumed that because she hit a man he must have hit her first so he has to go to jail? The police respond to domestic violence calls this way.

Subsequently, we as the public, take action against domestic violence in the same manner.  Are we, as a species saying that a woman, because of implied fragility and comparably smaller size, are allowed to be bullies?  By not holding women to the same standard and same consequence as a man we are telling little girls (who grow up to be women) that they’re dangerous actions and violent behavior is acceptable.  We are creating a double standard that is unhealthy and not safe for either sex.

But are we not a society of double standards?  For years this country has battled with inequalities between Blacks and Whites, voting rights for women and Blacks, equal pay rights for women, job security for maternity and paternity leave, equal access for civilians who have special accessibility needs, and even LGBT discrimination and marriage rights.  But when it comes to domestic violence the law – and the opinion of the public at large – has always been in favor of women.

Ultimately, we are telling women that it is OK for you to abuse and beat on a man, and you will suffer no form of recourse or consequence.  Where is the equality in that? Why do people accept this type of behavior from women – even in public – but it is against the law for a man to exhibit the same type of behavior?


Imagine if the law were equal for both sexes in the case of domestic violence.  There are two ways this could work… or not.

Scenario 1)  Federally, we make it legal for men to hit women (just as women are legally allowed to hit men).  I’m pretty sure what would take place between the sexes is something that is completely radical for women – but a complete snooze of an unnoticeable event for men across this great land.

Women would be forced to size up their opponent carefully and think twice about “poking the sleeping bear”.   As men we do this every time we walk into a nightclub or bar.  Confrontation awaits around every corner and with every swig, and the way we assess each scenario is based on two very distinct factors.

Fight or flight!  We are completely aware of our own combat and negotiation skills and have to determine which would be our best defense against the drunken imbecille standing in front of us.  We will either have to be a clever fox and verbally diffuse the situation with our opponent, or we’ll regress back to our schoolyard years and scrap it out like children.

Now if women are legally bound to the same standards, rules, and laws as men then they would have to do just as men do.  Stop, and really consider the ramifications of getting into a physical altercation with someone that is genetically more aggressive and stronger than themselves.  I’m sure we can all agree that there would be even less cases of female led domestic violence in this day and age.

Scenario 2)  Federally, we make it 100% completely illegal for women to hit men no matter what the reason – just as it is currently illegal for men.  If it’s against the law, and you can go to jail just as easily as a man can then would you risk your freedom for 17 seconds of emotional satisfaction that a violent outburst provides?

Now, I know it needs to be said.  I grew up in a household full of women, and in raising my little boy we have discussions about why he’s not supposed to hit girls. I am not advocating that men should be allowed to hit women for any reason. Domestic violence is wrong, despicable, and should be punishable by all – for everyone.

We are stronger and naturally more capable of inflicting bodily harm than women are.  Once again, my question about the inequality in this manner is NOT posed in this article so a man can be allowed to strike a woman, but for women to be held to the same standard – and if need be – consequences for hitting a man.

All people should be required to keep their hands to themselves; not just men.  I posed the question the way I did to get us all, men and women alike, to stop and think about what would happen if the law took domestic violence and equalized for all of us.  How would it change your interactions with your significant other?  Would you argue less knowing that a physical battle between you two is always a possibility?

Leave your thoughts and comments below, and let’s see if we can be the catalyst for change.