The excellent post was followed up with a sideways attack slam...
“You ever hit someone? If you did it should have been done in anger. You don’t hit them because you are angry. You hit them because they did something that justifies hitting them. That makes you angry.
Who you can count on and who will run. I think I know which one you might be.”
Gag. I have no problem with masculinity, but thinking before acting is always appropriate. You should not hit a child in anger. You should not hit your spouse in anger.
The reply post flipped the verbiage from the original post, ie the person was justified in being hit, that got him angry. That’s not what was originally posted, it was “As a matter of fact it is very beneficial to boys to get hit in the mouth and to have hit someone in anger,...”
It’s ok to misspeak, or miswrite, but not attack my concern regarding the verbiage. This thread is a public record for perpetuity, and likely under extreme scrutiny.
I moved on. Please do not mischaracterize me as a man hater or someone who runs from a fight.
You have a problem with reading comprehension. I flipped nothing. What I replied was what I said the first time.
Non sequiter. I did not speak tohitting children or wives, but man to man.
Also, I said it was not about justification...but masculinity.
Don’t mischarecterize me either. I offered my opinion on the subject. Since you don’t like it, I guess it’s good you have moved on.