this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2026
150 points (87.1% liked)
Crazy Fucking Videos
9235 readers
494 users here now
Dive into the World of Insane Videos!
Rules
- No hate speech of any kind.
- Content warnings are required in post titles where applicable. Example: [CW: Injury]
- 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
view the rest of the comments
we need context. blend the gender stuff out.
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?
You're a misogynist, woman are capable of aggression.
She invades his space, trying to grab his drink. That's primary aggression. She approaches him (!) with a bottle in hand, that's a threat with a dangerous weapon.
Meanwhile he:
Throws drink in face (unnecessary but not dangerous) Repeatedly tries to back up while she appraoches. Pushes her to regain personal space (most non-violent possible reaction)
Instigates the aggression, continues aggression. Escalates the aggression. Defending himself. Sure.
Absolute scumbag shut up
Are you blind or just a misogynist who cant accept that women are human beings capable of aggression?
Are you fucking retarded like actually?
She touches his drink, he throws it in her face. She stands up and reaches for him. He throws her down, THEN HE STANDS UP AND KICKS HER.
She stands up again unsure what aggression will continue because this cunt has instigated violence and then escalated violence. He shoves her to the ground.
He could've left, left again, left a third time. He didn't. You're a fucking moron if you think anything else, so I guess you're a fucking moron.
Fucking thank you for speaking up in here.
It's cathartic.
I feel that <3
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.
There isn't acceptable context for how he kicked her while she was on the ground nor for hitting her at the end.
According to her friend, it was their second date and she told him she didn't want to se him anymore. Someone else posted the article with her friend's version of the story, yesterday with two links. Here is the one without a paywall :
https://www.themarysue.com/this-man-needs-to-go-louisville-local-warns-of-violent-man-who-allegedly-attacked-her-friend-after-she-rejected-him-on-the-second-date/
I fail to see how he supposedly attacked her first...
This blog is not a news source.
Look how non aggressive he is. He definitely didn't stand up and b-line to kick her while she's down
Listen man, if you want to deny her aggression that preceded all this that's fine, but don't act like you're standing up for women while doing so.
You're denying basic agency to women, you misogynist.
Never developed past the first-wave of feminism?
SHE'S THREATENING HIS LIFE SOMEBODY STOP HER.
Justified response.
This is how you're worthless brain works?
Shut the fuck up idiot.
What a dip shit you are
Now screenshot her invading his space literally 1 second before this.
Throwing a drink in someones face is harmless, threatening someone with a bottle is not.
"Invading his space"
Moron shit to say
Ok but like maybe she literally killed his dog.
That's why context is important.
He's probably a shithead though.
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.
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.
If you take the scenario A as a justification, we clearly don't have the same idea of justice.
Why stop at two fake scenarios? If anything can happen why'd you plop those two out?
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.
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?
Sorry, i wasn't clear enough.
As far as we can tell this man is at fault. He has assaulted this woman.
I was only pointing out that your blanket statement that there is no context in which this is justified is incorrect. And frankly the attitude is dangerous. Is there any context where the woman can pick up a glass bottle to use as a weapon? Considering the level of harm a glass bottle would cause? Perhaps the justification is she is being attacked by a man that is apparently much stronger than she is? Does that justify it? Or does it only work one way?
Again. I agree. Given all available evidence, it seems this man has unjustly assaulted this woman. But your attitude towards this is just basic.
Self defense.
The order of events.
Man picks up drink. = normal with no context
Woman tries to take it = odd with no context
Man splashes drink in her face = bit of an over reaction with no context
Woman goes to attack man = dramatic escalation, but no context
Man pushes woman away = self defence
Man kicks woman whist she is down = awful. Terrible thing to do. Still no context.
Man goes to leave = should have just left
Woman grabs bottle and some words are exchanged = escalation/self defence depending on the context
Man pushes women down again and leaves. = self defence followed by de escalation.
I still think it is more likely the man is in the wrong. But given what actually happened you cant claim self defence when you started the fight.
At least thats how it looks with no context.
Would you feel the same if she had actually managed to hit him when she tried to attack him. Would him pushing her down seem more justified in your opinion? Or is there really no way you could view this any differently?
AGAIN! i am on her side. I am just not on yours.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It's fucking infuriating.
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.
There is no justification here for how he assaulted her. It's not white knighting to know that he is in the wrong.
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.
It certainly is, and this is why I've been volcel for four years.