But it's chemistry for hungry people, you get to eat the fruits of your labour!

Men confuse me, baking is delicious and not even particularly difficult as long as you can read a recipe.

Did you read the comment I responded to? She's making a big assumption that men are in any way more comfortable than her. Read the comments on this article and you will find the same sentiment repeated a bunch of times.

Fact is I'm a small fairly weak guy, I couldn't win a fight against a particularly tough wet paper…

Are men who bake in short supply or something?

Why do people always assume that men are eminently comfortable in public? I constantly hear that I can't know a woman's experience, what makes you feel justified in turning the tables and assuming that you can know mine?

I feel you. I feel a little sad for the people who proudly claim they would murder the dude.

This is an emotional response, not a logical one. Violence can be a useful tool to stop bad actors but it needs to be paired with restraint or else you are just indulging your innate human cruelty

Fair enough, dorks are cooler anyway(and they have the fun toys)

Uh huh. I'm not a rapist so I'm not terribly worried.

My point is more of whether or not the uncle could have been subdued with less force.

Not what I'm saying, don't try to create a false dichotomy where it's either stand by and do nothing or kill the bastard.

All I'm curious of is whether the beating he gave him was necessary to the degree he delivered it, judging by the pictures the uncle got fairly worked over.

It, as always, depends entirely on the situation. I subscribe to the idea that when confronted with a violent actor there is a hierarchy of action to take, first you aim to harm, then you aim to maim and finally you aim to kill.

If he a few punches were all it would take to subdue the uncle than that is all that…

This was the question I raised that has netted me a LOT of vitriol. It's an impossible question to answer as none of us were there but it's one that I feel should be in people's heads. Violence if it isn't used as prevention is just cruelty dressed up in the guise of good.

I don't approve of that and your strawman can't make it so.

All I'm saying is that people often go far beyond what necessity demands when their passions are raised, and restraint can be a far gone concept in a situation like this.

Defense of a victimized party I approve of but what I don't approve of is when we use…

I never made any sort of value judgement on that, I wasn't there and I don't know if just a threat was enough to stop him or if a beating was. All I'm saying is that the actions we take and the actions that are strictly necessary to prevent harm often has a fair bit of room in between.

Harming someone to get them to…

Message people! I know from the other side that I stress and debate with myself forever about sending a woman a message, it's scary and worrying and just a bad time.

Why would you assume a geeky guy is either unemployed or immature? Experience I guess?

Horror stories will by nature of what they are get lots of traction. You don't hear about the dates that didn't involve crazy murder but did involve the unpleasant realization that your date is a 9/11-truther in search of the ruling class of lizard folk.

Not anti social just geared for a different personality type. I'm super awkward and shy so having a low-pain way of breaking the ice helps.

Well you seem to want to conflate the state in Canada with the situation in the UK, when they aren't the same. And yes the technical ownership and the name on the deed is what matters. Legally it is not owned by the public, your claim that it was is just false.

Assault is still assault. Unless it was necessary he should be charged

acornprince is a very brave man. Feet are just...yuck.