Question is then, would she have killed the assailant to prevent what happened to her from happening to her daughter? In nature, "mothers" can be as or more violent when called upon than the male of the species.
BTW, I have met someone who said the same thing - that it's not her place to kill another human being, that their life is not hers to take. That this applies to the perp and that the perp will take her's doesn't change that fact. Kinda like because a terrorist, will behead US civillians, doesn't make it right for us to torture terrorists. (Not my belief necessarily, but that's the general concensus.)
You must have missed what I said. She most certainly should have fired, even just protecting herself. Pulling a gun on someone that then advances and not firing is one of the most foolish things a person could do. They just escalated the situation, and then refused to follow through, putting themselves at even greater danger, and supplying the person with a firearm at the same time which could be used against them.
I was simply saying there is a natural difference in mindset, and it should be respected. There is a reason it exists, and it has served humanity well for thousands of years.
Any man or woman should still defend themselves, with lethal force if necessary.
Zoogster--
***???????????
Have you heard of the Amazons?
Have you actually spoken to a live woman yourself?
Do you know any live women yourself?
That post of yours now stands as the stupidest b***sh** I have ever read on THR. I'm assuming that any female partner of yours awakens each morning, happily dons her apron, and spends the better part of her day baking cookies and tending to domestic duties with a maniacal smile on her face all the while. One assumes that, during her lunch hour, she fantasizes about how "naturaly [sic] hesitant" she is to shoot an intruder.
First off the Amazons were a myth.
There have been many female warriors, but for a portion of the population that is over 50% of the population, I think it is fair to say they are represented by a very small percentage in combat.
Even out of those in the military, very few are placed in the roles of frontline combat. More serve in logistics or support roles.
If you cannot recognize the differences both physical and mentaly in a man and a woman without feeling like it is insulting then I don't know what to tell you.
A man or a woman should be free to pursue whatever path in life they wish. May each succeed at what they choose according to thier abilities.
They however start with differences. Physical differences, different bodies, different chemicals in the body etc
Men have lots of testosterone, around 50x more than a woman. If you put that in a pill and sell it it is called an anabolic steriod, and it makes people very irritated and aggressive. Women taking a lot of it would also start developing masculine features like facial hair and muscle tone, have problems with thier cycles, rougher skin, and various other issues along with increased libido. They would also become very irritated and aggressive.
In fact a women even starts having problems when the body fat gets near what is healthy for a man. You must only look to female body builders to find many of these issues.
Men on the other hand also have a similar body chemistry all the time, and it does not greatly vary during the month, so in a sense you can say a similar reaction to the same stimuli will result more often with men.
The much higher strength to weight ratio, low body fat, and increased aggressiveness make men better in combat, in many sports, and in other roles whether you think so or not. A healthy conditioned 200 pound man can lift another fallen 200 pound man, and proceed. An average conditioned healthy female cannot do the same with another similar weight female.
Men can carry more equipment to thier weight ratio, and in general are better suited to the role. Men are also more inclined to pursue that role, not surprisingly it is mainly men in that role.
The same existed when society was kingdoms, and they went to war endlessly with eachother.
Further a society where women were soldiers had a much lower birth rate, and subsequently would have had thier culture slowly displaced by the more successful cultures with higher birth rates. The birth rate
potential of any society is directly proportional to the female population. You can kill off most of the males in war, hard work etc, and still have the same population growth. The men that still exist might have more wives, as was the case in most of ancient times, but population growth is not impacted. So even for purely logical reasons, societies that had men and women in the same roles would have fared poorly against those that didn't and eventualy been displaced after generations of warfare.
In a hunter-gatherer society men also blend better with the environment. Many animals have a very good sense of smell. Well without going into details I can assure you a man would blend better into thier surroundings in such societies, making better hunters. It is much easier to track a woman, especialy when there is a lot of physical exertion over an extended period of time.
Dogs were also used by many people in warfare...
I do not believe anyone should be limited by society based on gender to any roles. You however are being naive if you do not see clear differences which are the strengths of both men and women and compliment eachother.
Don't be illogical because women have had to overcome prejudices.
So many people tip toe around real logical discussion on such topics simply to avoid hyper sensitivity.
It is easier to just drop it than deal with the illogical hypersensitivity.
There is still natural biological differences between men and women that influance cognitive decisions as well as physical capabilities.
Both genders have strengths which are different and which compliment eachother.
As we have seen male children actualy do worse in school treated in ways that female children do better in. There is many studies which have shown this. They socialize differently, and they thrive under different conditions.
