[dropcap]W[/dropcap]ith a tip of the hat to The-Spearhead, this one is worth re-posting (in about a million places). Jezebel.com comes to mind. It involves an altercation between two women and a man who was working in a Manhattan area McDonalds. The two women went on the attack after the man questioned a $50.00 bill they were trying to spend at the restaurant. The man responded by beating the holy shit out of both of them, even using a metal rod.
Of course the women, both drunk, after slapping the man and further attacking him 2 on 1, were not charged with assault, but with criminal mischief. I also note that the news reported here referred to the women as “unruly.”
You can view the video of the altercation in our pop up viewer here.
I think this one will gain a lot of media attention, so AVfM writers may want to address it in upcoming articles. In my view, and this is just on the information so far reported, the assault of a store employee who is scrutinizing money being used at the establishment of his employment should be construed as an attempted robbery. That being the case, his reaction would seem appropriate.
What would you do if you were attacked by two people while working as a cashier for questioning the money they were trying to pass? Forget the fact that they were female. They were both intoxicated and extremely violent. Is it within your rights, or should it be, to respond in a way that ensured your attackers were incapacitated and unable to renew the attack?
Now, undoubtedly, McDonalds will be sued by the two female criminals. And just as undoubtedly they will settle, likely for retirement level funds, just to quiet “bad press” on the incident. Two thugs will walk, with enrichment, because they are female. And one employee will likely go to prison (he has already been charged) because he is a male that defended himself from violent female criminals.
There will be plenty of people that attempt to use the man’s violent past as a way to justify punishing him. They will likely succeed. But the fact remains that these two women had no idea of his past when they attacked him. It had nothing to do with the events that transpired.
Last year, during the month of October, which is designated as Domestic Violence Awareness Month, I wrote a satirical piece on violent women called “Bash a Violent Bitch Month,” in which I imagined a world where men responded with vigor when women attacked violently because they were confident that they were able to act with impunity. It was in response to a post at Jezebel.com where there readers and staff were celebrating their physical violence toward their husbands and boyfriends.
While it was a piece of satire, I also intended it to portray the possibilities involved in a culture that glorified violent women while pushing men to abandon any sense of chivalry or inclination to protect the “fairer” sex. I just never imagined that we would get such a glaring example of that presented, this year, in the month of October.
