After the incident, there was a great deal of conversation and controversy regarding Rice hitting his girlfriend. The majority of the conversations centered around the topic of domestic violence, and whether it was ever acceptable for a man to hit a woman. On the radio, I heard a radio announcer speak disparagingly of Rice, and said that he did not agree with Rice's actions at all. A caller was featured on the show, and said, "Ray Rice didn't do anything we don't do. That's how we deal with our women in Baltimore". This statement by this anonymous caller distressed me, because this seems to be a belief held by many people--that women who are abused get what they deserve, and they must be kept in line by male force.
The question posed by this event is this: could Ray Rice, a professional football player--weighing over 200 lbs, ever be for justified for hitting a woman? Shockingly, the country has decided that the answer to this question could perhaps be, "maybe".
However, in order to enlighten those who are uncertain, I have compiled a list of three situations where it is acceptable for a man to hit a woman because she "deserves" it:
1) Never
2) Under no circumstances
3) When hell freezes over
Although I believe Ray Rice is guilty of domestic violence, whether he is convicted is not necessarily the issue at large. The real issue is that so many people are aware of what Rice has done, and still make excuses for his behavior and treatment of his girlfriend. In fact, those who answered "maybe" to the question posed above, argued that in some situations, it may be necessary for a man to resort to violence. For example, some argued that it was acceptable for a man to hit a woman if she hit him first, and he was retaliating out of "self defense".
Women are not immune from having fiery tempers, and they have started fights with men before. I am not defending this behavior or diminishing their actions. However, men are biologically stronger than women; this is a fact. I believe that I am athletic and strong, yet I could still not compete with a man in a battle of strength. No matter how offensive a woman's actions may be against a man, it does not give him the justification to resort to violence against women. The only "self defense" scenario that I can realistically conceive, is if a woman is armed with a weapon and is readily charging a man with the intent to kill. In this case, it would be acceptable to fight back in order to stay alive, and the "self defense" argument would be valid.
However, most of the instances of "self defense" against women are not actually due to fear for their lives, but because they believe that she deserves it. They do it because they are frustrated at the woman, and the only way they can diffuse the situation and remain in control, is if they hit her. This is not being a "man", this is being a bully and a coward. I find it ironic that weeks before Ray Rice got arrested for assault, he spoke at Bel Air high school in Maryland, about the negative effects of bullying. Does he not realize that his actions are conducive to being the worst kind of bully--one that uses his size in order to impose upon a weaker person?
Though the court in New Jersey was reluctant to throw the "book" at Ray Rice, maybe his adoring public should throw Webster's Dictionary at him, and tell him to look up the meaning of the word "bully".
