this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2026
118 points (86.0% liked)

Crazy Fucking Videos

9235 readers
396 users here now

Dive into the World of Insane Videos!

Rules

  1. No hate speech of any kind.
  2. Content warnings are required in post titles where applicable. Example: [CW: Injury]
  3. Use your best judgement and mark NSFW posts as such.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] deft@lemmy.wtf 24 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Anyone who thinks he is defending himself is a fucking moron proof is in the pudding

She tries to stop him grabbing his drink, must've known something was coming. He kicks he when she's down.

What else do you idiots need? Humans are worthless

[–] loppwn@sh.itjust.works -5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

we need context. blend the gender stuff out.

[–] deft@lemmy.wtf 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
  • Throws drink in face, shoves, kicks, shoves.

  • Reaches for bottle before drink thrown in face, reaches for bottle a second time but does nothing with it.

Those are the actions both parties took. You're out of your mind to think context is even needed. At no moment was she stopping him from leaving he initiated and continued. Are you brain dead?

[–] peacepath@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

Of course you can't judge without context: we can't understand. We don't know their relationship, their history, nor what they say to each other.

Context may make thing even worse for the guy? Or maybe his reaction is, still not pardonable, but more understandable with the context?

Getting the context doesn't mean your favorit side will loose anything. But judging without context is accepting to deliver unfair judgements.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

Or maybe his reaction is, still not pardonable, but more understandable with the context?

There isn't acceptable context for how he kicked her while she was on the ground nor for hitting her at the end.

[–] peacepath@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

And there is not a fair judgement without understanding of the context.

I may illustrate with two different possible contexts, most likely none apply here, the point is to show you that your judgement may not be the exact same:

A: They are from the same family and she comes-out to him as a lesbian, and that her actual partner she plans to marry has an other ethnical origine. The anger and violence of the guy is their based on homophobia and racism which adds to the physical aspect.

B: He was a soldier in some military conflict and has traumas. Some flashbacks make him violent. He would need meds but can't afford them anymore due to life cost rising. In this scenario, the violence is not even related to his victime.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

You don’t need to invent scenarios to justify his actions here. There is plenty of evidence on the video to know that he is in the wrong.

[–] peacepath@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

If you take the scenario A as a justification, we clearly don't have the same idea of justice.

[–] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world -2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Not siding with him, it seems likely he was in the wrong. But regarding your comment. Hypothetically, let's say he is the recipient of constant abuse. Both verbal and physical, and this was him finally snapping and giving it back. Let's say he has been on the receiving end of his fair share of kicks whilst down. Let's say he previously never wanted to fight back because he isn't violent.

I am not saying that is what happened. But i am saying you cant say "there isn't acceptable context" when it took me 5 seconds to think of some.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 hour ago

He is still responsible for his actions. Previous abuse does not excuse assaulting this woman multiple times in this scenario.

Why are you playing devil's advocate for this man?

[–] deft@lemmy.wtf 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Why is it my favorite side? I don't know these people don't put anything on me.

Context will only clear up one thing, why did she put her hand on the glass and if you could argue it was simple battery. Which would be unlikely because most judges find frivolous charges like that unnecessary without some kind of history of actions or whatever. Putting your hand on someone's glass in an isolated situation is not simple battery.

On the flip side responding with violence because a hand was put on your glass is likely assault. Escalation, specific intent to harm and multiple violent interactions require zero context. We don't need to know anything for that.

If he was afraid for his life his body language and the rest of his actions didn't support that. She never prevented him from leaving.

If you think in any situation his reaction is understandable you're being completely stupid, there's no reason to put your hands on someone like this in this situation.

[–] peacepath@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

So I am being completly stupid, I am fine with it.

But while I do not understand what happend, I don't pretend I do.

What is she telling him? I have no idea, and that could (or not) be part of the explaination.

His reaction looks like anger. It may not be. But it looks like it. Yet what causes this anger? Is it understandable to be angry in such cases?

Anger should not allow us to be violent, and he is wrong to beat her. One this I totally agree. But no, I can't judge the cases.

[–] deft@lemmy.wtf 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Yes you absolutely can. He assaulted her. Anyone in this thread leaning away from that is defending this situation and looking for justification for his actions.

It's assault. It's fucking gross.

[–] peacepath@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Once more, the context, the full story, may not make things better for him.

He may deserve a stricter punishment than you would be willing to give him without the context.

Understanding is not defending him. It is defending the research of a fair judgement.

I especially invite you to think about the fact he could be reacting judgementaly to that she says, without taking the time to understand fully. As you are reacting now. And that it would be very wrong of him.

[–] deft@lemmy.wtf 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

My point is context isn't necessary to know he's so far beyond being in the wrong and the degree people wanna defend him in these comments over "cOnTExt" is a fucking laugh.

Context isn't necessary in this situation it would only offer insight into what a piece of shit he is, not deciding if he is a piece of shit. So anyone asking for context before making their judgement is, for lack of better words and to make the point very clear, a fucking moron.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

My point is context isn’t necessary to know he’s so far beyond being in the wrong and the degree people wanna defend him in these comments over “cOnTExt” is a fucking laugh.

Say it louder for the back.

I just stumbled on this thread and it's really disappointing. Sorry (but maybe not sorry?) someone accused you of being me simply for standing up for the woman in the video.

[–] deft@lemmy.wtf 1 points 2 hours ago

It's fucking infuriating.

[–] Tiral@lemmy.world -1 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Thank you. I get tired of people being white knights and such. It might be the way it looks, it might not be. Without context anyone is just guessing.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 hours ago

Without context anyone is just guessing.

There is no justification here for how he assaulted her. It's not white knighting to know that he is in the wrong.

[–] deft@lemmy.wtf 1 points 3 hours ago

The only action that needs context is touching the bottle. None of his actions could be justified no matter what.

Context is she was breaking up with him. Add or remove that, the situation is outlandishly disgusting behavior and you're literally trying to justify it. Doing anything but calling it what it is, misogynistic and assault is justifying it.

Notice the whole crowd defending his actions are also trying to claim it isn't misogynistic? Interesting.