Firstly, I'd just like to say I personally haven't/wouldn't hit a women.
Secondly, I don't think I could ever really condone hitting a women...but I'm open minded at the minute.
Now, it's Saturday night controversy time
Some say, if you can't comprehend how a woman can (physically) threaten or assault a man to the point that the man retaliates and must defend himself with the use of force, then you are no only ignorant, but also sexist.
For example, A (abusive) woman takes a knife to attack her partner (regardless of size) The women clearly has the upper hand in this situation, so why shouldn't the partner defend himself (with force if necessary)?
Personally I think there's a difference between defense and offense and usually the bloke can defend himself without hitting a woman back.
However, if a woman is not being rational enough to work a problem out and is in an (emotional) state, lashing out violently at a man, who's to say the man has no right in responding in the same manner?
I mean if you beat most animals with a stick, at some point, you're probably going to get a nasty response.
In a argument both parties should try to limit their emotions during to prevent their 'animalistic' sides from taking over.
Some may mention equal rights (if a women can give a slap, she can take one
).
I think when women say they want equal rights their referring to pay etc.
Not using it as a green flag to justify aggression
Some folk say a bloke should never hit a women, a absolute "no no", not even in sled defence or as a last resort.
What's your views folks???