She gets to throw things at him and his only option is to let her and/or run away? Whether or not it hurt him or could hurt him is completely irrelevant.
HER lack of control and violent behavior started the confrontation. After denying it you’re now admitting it.
You’re making the standard “man up” argument that women so often use which translates to “lie down like a doormat and do nothing while I walk all over you”. Which is exactly the opposite of being a man.
According to you, she’s accountable for nothing and the criticism is reserved solely for him. You sound like a stereotypical left-wing man-hating feminist. What are you doing on freerepublic?
I have never denied that she was immature for throwing the doll. But that immaturity reflects on her, not on him.
A wise man understands that. A foolish man thinks it’s a good idea to join a foolish woman in foolish behavior.
Adults are expected to act like adults in conservative society—and part of adult behavior is not joining a fool in his (or her) folly.
He doesn’t look weak if he realizes he doesn’t have to “avenge” himself because she threw a glorified Ken-doll at him.
He becomes weak when he uses that as an excuse to assault her and attempts to illegally evict her.
He’s a fool because he thinks the way to show strength is to beat up someone physically weaker than he is. That’s how a bully thinks.
He’s a fool because he clearly does not fear God—or the thought to raise a finger against her would not occur to him.
He’s a fool because he engaged in foolish behavior and then wanted her to lie to get out of the consequences of his foolhardiness.
Liberals want to defend abuse of women; conservatives NEVER excuse the practice.