Hektore

Holy excellent question Batman!

Time for another moral gut check I guess. For me against most women, I would probably just disarm her, but I would go to town on the guy...Why? Basically for me it boils down to this(Call it machismo if you want, it isn't): Of all the guys I am friends with I hit them 5 or 6 times as hard as I can various places, they lay there for a while, get up dust themselves off, hurt for a few days, maybe bleed a bit but aren't that much worse off for it. I do the same thing to about any of the girls I am friends with; I send them to the hospital for a day or two, possibly longer.

So yeah, I am more willing to hit a guy than a girl, but I consider myself on more equal footing with guys in a fistfight. I think that is where the difference lies. In a fight I try to teach the guy a lesson he is more likely to be able to defend himself. Just because I start a fight with a guy getting physical with a girl doesn't mean I'm going to win that fight, even if it is the right thing to do. It's not the same with a girl, I have yet to meet a girl that could possibly beat up both her boyfriend and myself. That is why I say I would only disarm her. Once the crowbar is gone, it's(to me) no longer a fair fight. *shrug* Maybe I have some growing up to do, but this is what I think is right, at least for now.

__________________
The advantage law is the best law in rugby, because it lets you ignore all the others for the good of the game.