You realize you're creating a strawman right? You are the first and as far as I can tell the only person who's even mentioned domestic violence in this thread. Even the quoted article does not mention domestic violence. Yeah, this is assault but chances are good if Hunt did this to a man and lied about it he'd have been cut as well. Arguing otherwise is making assumptions on a possibility you can't possibly know and using it as the basis for an argument to express an opinion that is wholly unrelated to the very topic at hand.Osprey":16nk18xl said:My point is that this was a scrum, not a beat down, and NOT domestic violence just because it was a woman. 3rd or 4th degree Assault at best.
Is it embarrassing, violent, and inappropriate? Absolutely, but cutting him is an overreaction that wouldn't have occurred if it had been a Joe and not a Jane.
Your view on hitting women being ok because you think we live in an 'egalitarian' society and that kids in Hunt's generation grew up genderblind, is just your opinion which is not backed up by any facts or laws. Seriously, you've created a narrative with which to defend your own narrative. That's about as fallacious as you can get.
Edit: as soon as I post this some people started talking about domestic violence, but my point still stands.