Stephen A. Smith Apologizes about Domestic Violence Views

[Maximus Meridius]

But what if she talk about my mama she provoked me

@ these extremes yall jump too.


SAS's whole point was pointing out the fact that there are crazy *** women out there that will put their hands on a man. Some of yall seem scared to speak on it. We all know domestic violence wrong, on both sides though.

Here we go again, if that was his simple point then why he didn't just say that?

Some people understood what he was saying, other people wanna be PC and just focus on ONE word instead of listening to everything he said.

 

[heliumclinton]

Why is it so hard to understand that even though it shouldn't happen woman put themselves in a position to be hit?

Why is it so hard to understand that unless a woman puts their hands on you, they should not be in a position to be hit.

 

[7thave btn 31stn33rd st]

@ these extremes yall jump too.


SAS's whole point was pointing out the fact that there are crazy *** women out there that will put their hands on a man. Some of yall seem scared to speak on it. We all know domestic violence wrong, on both sides though.

Never fails on NT.

 

[deuce king]

 

@mgrand15
and @heLiumcLinton
, did either of you dudes watch or listen to ESPN First Take from Friday 7/25, particularly the Ray Rice segment in it's entirety??

We've been talking about the clip posted, the quotes posted, his "clarification" and his apology in this thread. I don't need to watch an entire first take episode when the real issue is shown in the clip. If that clip was taken out of context, he would've clarified that initially. It wasn't. He said what he said.

Not sure why you're throwing a cape on for SAS of all people. This is the guy that put blame on Trayvon for wearing a hoodie and trying to "look cool". Agreed with Cuban that black guys in hoodies should be feared. THIS GUY and wife beaters are who you choose to defend?

So the answer to my question is NO.  Thank you for your honesty, you have been speaking on a specific topic and issue that you didn't even bother to watch. You just wanted to post a bunch of nonsense to join in the Michelle Beadle bandwagon. 

Are there anymore "dudes" on here that would be willing to admit that they are apart of the NT feminist movement??  Now's the time to come out into the open. 

 

[lamekilla]

Why is it so hard to understand that unless a woman puts their hands on you, they should not be in a position to be hit.

I agree with this 101%. Therefore SAS comment of "provoking" shouldn't cause as much controversy as it has.

 

[deuce king]

 

@mgrand15
and @heLiumcLinton
, did either of you dudes watch or listen to ESPN First Take from Friday 7/25, particularly the Ray Rice segment in it's entirety??

yes I did and I'm very aware of how many times SAS said he doesn't justify a man hitting a woman and how many times he said people should keep their hands to themselves. Why is it so hard to understand that the problem wasn't him saying that but him using triggering language while discussing domestic violence? Why is it so hard to understand that he didn't know he was using triggering language and that's why he apologized? He didn't apologize for saying women should keep their hands to themselves.

In regards to the Ray Rice incident, why is it so hard for you and others to understand that SAS was saying that Ray Rice's then fiance had a hand in TRIGGERING that incident in the elevator to begin with.  Particularly because she hit Ray Rice FIRST, thus triggering (I know you love that word so much) a possible chain of events afterwards.

 

[Magic33]

@ these extremes yall jump too.


SAS's whole point was pointing out the fact that there are crazy *** women out there that will put their hands on a man. Some of yall seem scared to speak on it. We all know domestic violence wrong, on both sides though.

That's why that provoke comment is dangerous. Provoke means different things to different people.

I think Carrie Champion commented on it. Once they hear that, they disregard your point or what you were trying to say.

 

[heliumclinton]

a dude who puts hands on a woman just because she annoyed him is a chump.   a woman who says over the line disrespectful stuff about him or his family, a woman who spits on a man, keys his car or vandalizes his property that happens to get hit isn't a victim.  she's someone who got what she deserved.   p

But what if she talk about my mama she provoked me

@ these extremes yall jump too.
.

@ these extremes yall jump too.


SAS's whole point was pointing out the fact that there are crazy *** women out there that will put their hands on a man. Some of yall seem scared to speak on it. We all know domestic violence wrong, on both sides though.

Never fails on NT.

My bad, what a extreme statement I made

 

[keko jones]

Some people understood what he was saying, other people wanna be PC and just focus on ONE word instead of listening to everything he said.

I understood it very well. In one breath he say woman don't provoke guys while in the other he says he would beat the brikes of someone that hit a woman in his family.

In one breath he says that violence is not right while in the other he says well u wouldn't have gotten hit of you didn't provoke him.

You don't see it cause I do?

 

[lamekilla]

The double standard should be law because woman's psyche's are programmed to use it as a defense to play the victim. No one should put their hands on anyone. PERIOD.

 

[mgrand15]

So the answer to my question is NO.  Thank you for your honesty, you have been speaking on a specific topic and issue that you didn't even bother to watch. You just wanted to post a bunch of nonsense to join in the Michelle Beadle bandwagon. 

Are there anymore "dudes" on here that would be willing to admit that they are apart of the NT feminist movement??  Now's the time to come out into the open. 

So I need to watch an entire episode of first take before I can comment on what SAS said? But you aren't willing to learn anything about domestic violence before talking about it?

Can you answer my question? Why do you choose to throw a cape on for SAS of all people and woman beaters? Or are you too emotional to respond?

Glad you ignored the rest of the post though. Next time I'll watch all of Skip and SAS's buffoonery instead of just the relevant 3 minute clip, the clarification, and the apology.

 

[lamekilla]

In one breath he says that violence is not right while in the other he says well u wouldn't have gotten hit of you didn't provoke him.

You don't see it cause I do?

Violence isn't the answer. But if you inflict it upon someone why should you feel you are above being harmed? Because you're a woman?

 

[heliumclinton]

Why is it so hard to understand that unless a woman puts their hands on you, they should not be in a position to be hit.

I agree with this 101%. Therefore SAS comment of "provoking" shouldn't cause as much controversy as it has.

But it has because provoking does not stand for hit

In regards to the Ray Rice incident, why is it so hard for you and others to understand that SAS was saying that Ray Rice's then fiance had a hand in TRIGGERING that incident in the elevator to begin with.  Particularly because she hit Ray Rice FIRST, thus triggering (I know you love that word so much) a possible chain of events afterwards.

You're trying to tell me SAS was talking about Ray Rice's fiancee specifically? So he didn't go off on a tangent, bring up his life, and say in general we need to do better at preventing provocation? Ok champ

 

[Maximus Meridius]

Some people understood what he was saying, other people wanna be PC and just focus on ONE word instead of listening to everything he said.

I understood it very well. In one breath he say woman don't provoke guys while in the other he says he would beat the brikes of someone that hit a woman in his family.

In one breath he says that violence is not right while in the other he says [B]well u wouldn't have gotten hit of you didn't provoke him[/B].

You don't see it cause I do?

If that's what you got of it.

 

[Magic33]

I understood it very well. In one breath he say woman don't provoke guys while in the other he says he would beat the brikes of someone that hit a woman in his family.

In one breath he says that violence is not right while in the other he says well u wouldn't have gotten hit of you didn't provoke him.

You don't see it cause I do?

Yeah, I caught that also. It seemed like he was saying that provoke argument wouldn't fly if it was a member of his family, but all other women are fair game

I actually think a lot of men feel this way.

 

[keko jones]

Violence isn't the answer. But if you inflict it upon someone why should you feel you are above being harmed? Because you're a woman?

again provoke does not equate violence ... To me provoke is talking **** pushing buttons to get me to react or get angry ... Does that mean I have to punch the lights out? No ... But to someone else it might ... The things I have been saying is simple ... Walk away don't result to violence.

A lot of people are saying provoke means she hit me so imma put hands ... That's BS ... And even when she hits a male although I can see why someone might hit back ... You have to take into consideration who r u hitting n can you defuse restrain or walk away ...

 

[heliumclinton]

In one breath he says that violence is not right while in the other he says well u wouldn't have gotten hit of you didn't provoke him.

You don't see it cause I do?

Violence isn't the answer. But if you inflict it upon someone why should you feel you are above being harmed? Because you're a woman?

Why do you think provoking automatically means inflicting violence?

 

[Peep Game]

@ the accuracy "He had it coming, he probably cheated and deserved it"

 

[fontaine]

Oh word? You know a lot of rape victims know their attacker right? You know a lot of rape victims have gotten their attackers hard by kissing touching dancing getting semi naked etc. But at the end they say no and dudes still go for it.

You can assumed a woman did the worst to provoke a fist but not to invite the penis? Your argument is just funny.

The point here you have made it v... The same way a man should know is time to walk away is the same way a man know when to stop when a woman says no. Men that retaliate with fist are the men that continue going for it because they have no self control and were provoked.

Are those women saying "rape me?"

Stop using black and white arguments for a very grey area.

How many times have you heard a woman say "rape me, take advantage of me?"

How many tomes have you heard a woman say "hit me. I dare you."



How many times have women cranked off rape by raping another man?

How many times have women cranked off a fight by hitting a man?


You know damb well there's a difference between someone dressing sexy and provocative... As opposed to someone antagonizing someone...

Plenty of women follow guys around, poking and prodding asking to get hit.

Its sage to assume women aren't following men around saying "ease rape me"

Confused why this turned into "if a women should be able to hit a man", when that's not why SAS apologized

look at the context.

You'll argue context in another thread then go semantics in this one.

1. They were talking about Ray Rice and his wife.

2. She hit him first.

3. SAS brought up provocation. In the context of antagonizing a man...

4. The fact that everyone else can understand that besides Beadle and the round-rounders let's me know what's up.



We're going in circles though...

We all know rape =\= a woman hitting a man and him hitting her back


Y'all got it... NT round-and-rounders are in full effect...

Playing devils advocate in every thread just to show how intelligently they can think outside the box.

 

[Magic33]

The situation is dangerous and needs to be discussed, but it won't be.

Women were some of the main ones laughing and making jokes about the Solange/Jay-Z situation.

It sends a mixed message when you laugh at that, instead of praising Jay-Z for not reacting. A lot of women were wondering what Jay-Z did to provoke her.

We probably need more women on this board to be active in a discussion like this.

 

[knowledgebones72]

Some people understood what he was saying, other people wanna be PC and just focus on ONE word instead of listening to everything he said.

I understood it very well. In one breath he say woman don't provoke guys while in the other he says he would beat the brikes of someone that hit a woman in his family.

In one breath he says that violence is not right while in the other he says well u wouldn't have gotten hit of you didn't provoke him.

You don't see it cause I do?

That makes perfect sense, though.

Some dude puts their hands on my sisters/mother/any woman in my family? It's over for him. That dude is done for, and so is his facial structure.

At the same time, that doesn't mean that she didn't do something wild that might have pushed him over the edge. THERE IS NO EXCUSE TO HIT A WOMAN, but that does not mean that people (who are dead wrong for doing so) don't get pushed into doing things that are dead wrong like flying off the handle.

I've been in relationships that I had to straight up end because of how a female was coming at me when she was angry. The crazy part is that they know they are going too far with the PROVOCATION and know they are doing/saying things to psychologically take you out of your element. The crazier part is that they think it's just a normal way to be mad at guys, and that is just how you argue, and that if a dude hits you that's just a risk you take to destroy his psyche.

I've been in situations where I've had to stop mid-argument, and just let a woman know that I do not hit women and then walk away, because she knew exactly what she was doing.

There is never any excuse to hit a woman. That is never OK. But that doesn't mean that women are just crying going "BUT I LOVE YOU SO MUCH BOO!!!" while the dude socks them in the eye. That def happens all the time as well, but you've got to take life on a case-by-case basis.

 

[heliumclinton]

look at the context.

You'll argue context in another thread then go semantics in this one.

1. They were talking about Ray Rice and his wife.

2. She hit him first.

3. SAS brought up provocation. In the context of antagonizing a man...

4. The fact that everyone else can understand that besides Beadle and the round-rounders let's me know what's up.

No they were talking about Ray Rice and his wife then SAS ventured off on a different scenario and summed it all up using some ignorant terminology

 

[7thave btn 31stn33rd st]

I don't understand how "provoke" can be such a trigger word. Whether you use words, hands or weapons, all of which can be used to "provoke".

 

[heliumclinton]

I don't understand how "provoke" can be such a trigger word. Whether you use words, hands or weapons, all of which can be used to "provoke".

Then take a domestic violence class or hang out with a battered man/woman and see how they react to certain things.

 

[RyGuy45]

What's sad is Stephen Smith is still on air for us to even be talking about this, he should have stayed gone with BSPN fired him years ago.

For some reason a complete clown is on the biggest network in the world being propped up as their resident expert in everything.