Posted on 05/12/2013 10:31:52 AM PDT by BenLurkin
She may not be a slut. She IS definitely an idiot, and the guy (if he recovers) would be wise to never see her again.
The reason for the disclaimer/warning is the tourist especially the unaware foreign tourist has always been a delicacy for street ferals.
That was Feinsteins’/city governments way to compromise short of a more direct warning as the tourist trade may suffer. Any individual hurt is acceptable damage so long as the money flows unless the incident is so bad it can't be covered up.
Case in point a German women cut down in a crossfire in Union Square. The tourist angle was downplayed as the women wasn't the target.
http://www.thelocal.de/society/20100810-29049.html
I've known women like that. Read the article:
Officials said the man’s girlfriend saw the teens involved in an altercation.She deliberately decided to intervene in a bad situation. She GOT AWAY from a dangerous situation, then GOT her boyfriend and RETURNED with him to the dangerous situation, and deliberately put him into a confrontation with a gang of 40 thugs.After the girlfriend tried to intervene, the crowd turned on her. She got away but returned with her boyfriend. Police said the teens than turned on him.
She cared NOTHING for him. She felt disrespected, and the only way she would feel better is if her boyfriend "taught them a lesson" (or died trying).
The world would be a better place without her.
What, did she drag him by the hair? Pick him up and carry him there?
Young guys have been known to do lots of stupid things when the women in their lives make them feel that they must, in order to prove they love them.
This is why women have a duty to avoid putting their men in such situations.
I agree that saying “women like to do this” is a little too inclusive.
I assume you will agree there are some women who do indeed like to do this type of thing. My now-wife was never the type, but her sister was the T R O U B L E in the country song.
Go to a bar with her and you were pretty much guaranteed a fight. (Or so I was told by several of her looonnnggg string of boyfriends.)
It is my considered opinion that any man who hangs around after a woman pulls this type of stunt needs his head examined. I don’t care how hot she is.
That certainly happened in this case.
Too bad Bishnu wasn’t there. With his kukri.
http://www.badassoftheweek.com/shrestha.html
Though he probably woulnd’t have jumped into a more or less consensual rumble. Not his job, which is protecting the innocent, not intervening between idiots.
Very good point, though not exactly what I meant.
I love “The Judge”
I used to have one (before my tragic boating accident) in rifle form. Shoots..er shot 410 shotgun AND .45 cal.
I think you have read so much into this. She left and returned with him - that to you means she made him go kick some backside etc. I just don’t have faith in our MSN to get a read on what happened. I think the point of this article is that teens can behave like vicious animals - apparently she didn’t know that and possibly the guy didn’t know that either. Either way - they do know it now.
But I am seeing some interpretation here that blows me away. The article just doesn’t say enough to go from 0-60 on whether she is or isn’t a creep herself. Let’s agree that she is a creep if she took this as a pride thing and wanted him to ‘defend her honor’ etc. and if true she may have cost him his life or quality of life. But there are many other ways this could have unfolded in which she wasn’t the monster that some have automatically assumed that she must be.
We know two things without ambiguity:
1) She left the scene. This means she had put herself out of the danger zone.
2) She returned to the danger zone with her boyfriend, thus putting both of them into danger.
Looking at (2), what rational reason did she have for returning to the danger zone with her boyfriend? Even if, upon hearing of the incident, the BF was insistent upon going, what reason did SHE have for returning? If the girl is on the scene, it makes it harder for the guy to retreat, because he has to shield HER retreat, and she is not likely to be faster than a group of teenage boys.
Her presence eliminated any opportunity for HIM to retreat safely, and divided his attention. I speak from personal experience, from an incident where I was with a girl and this crazy guy started attacking us -- the girl was just standing there and not running, so my attention was divided between her and the attacker, which could have ended badly.
In summary, the best spin you can put on this, is that this woman behaved stupidly.
Not interested in spinning it. Facts would be nice. When I read “She returned to the scene with her boyfriend” I dcon’t assume she had the ability to force him to go. Maybe he went to look and she went to show him etc. I am not saying there aren’t heartless women who want men to fight or stupid women who stand there with their hands in their pockets but spin or no spin - “she returned to the scene with her boyfriend” doesn’t say enough. The shock value of this story is the sickening animal like behavior of these ‘children’ and it’s possible that a human could not anticipate a crowd of kids beating a man with skateboards for no reason. I don’t know what the visibility was and don’t know what the yutes looked like and I don’t know if they thought to stay back and possibly call it in and were observed or had any chance of exiting without being seen. I’ll give the MSN the benefit of the doubt on ‘she returned with her boyfriend” (i.e., that both drew nearer the area where the boys were intentionally) but the attitude of “Just like a woman - making her boyfriend fight for her” is just too much extrapolation and what strikes me is the attitude that women are always making men fight gangs for them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.