Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Serious Domestic violence was never accepted. Wife beaters used to be just as hated as child molesters a century ago

E

Edmund_Kemper

Disregard my larping efforts. I can’t change it.
-
Joined
Sep 26, 2019
Posts
25,309
A lot of people (including feminists) perpetuate this myth that until the 1970s, domestic violence was ignored by society, ignored by police and ignored by judges and it was seen as something between the husband and wife that wasn’t our business. This is a myth. The idea that society ignored and was indifferent toward domestic violence prior to the 70s is a myth. Even over 200 years ago, society was against it. In fact, throughout most of human history, it was completely frowned on and condemned by society. in fact, woman beaters were much more hated a century ago than they are nowadays. Today, if you beat your wife, people just want you jailed and yeah they’ll wanna kick your ass but only few will want you dead. Back a century ago, people would’ve tried to lynch you or violently beat you with an inch of your life. Telling someone back then that you’re a wife beater is like telling someone today you’re a child molester or telling someone in the 1690s you’re a witch.
In the early 1900s, there were MANY frequent cases of men being arrested for wife beatings. It was common for them to be arrested and there were also many cases where they were victims of a vigilante attack. Many wife beaters were tarred and feathered, dunked in water, whipped, violently beaten, or even lynched for what they did. Although a small amount of women participated in these vigilante attacks, these attacks were mostly done by men, sometimes the wife’s family or sometimes neighbors or posses. In the late 1800s/early 1900s, some states started to have flogging on a whip post as a punishment for domestic abusers (and many Americans supported this) and it was done because it would be an eye for an eye and they thought jailing them would get rid of the family breadwinner who provides for the family. So they did this to deter domestic abuse. Some judges did the flogging themself or allowed the battered wife to do it.

“Dissatisfaction with the statutory sentences led judges to condone extralegal violence against wife beaters, even occasionally partici- pating in such violence themselves. This hands-on approach was cele- brated, often in ways that emphasized the manly aggression of the judge’s conduct. For example, Alderman John F. Donahue, a judge in

Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, became famous “all over the country and in Europe, too” beginning the day “he first descended from the bench, tore off his coat, and soundly thrashed a chronic wife beater.” He “received scores of letters from men and women thanking him for what he has done for oppressed and abused wives,” and even received numerous awards from humane societies.In Donahue’s view,

“You can usually knock all ideas of violence out of a man’s head by treating him violently, and if every wife beater was thrashed, was bruised and pained to the same extent as he bruised and pained his wife, and a little more for good measure, there would be less wife beating.”

Male domestic violence victims were known about back then but were ridiculed and made fun of and judges often were lenient on female domestic abusers and sometimes even showed approval towards female domestic abusers. For example, I read one situation where a judge praised a female domestic abuser for beating her husband for coming home drunk and another judge who praised a foid for beating her husband who came home too late at night. The judge said “good job. We ought to have more women like you”.
the hatred towards wife beaters was so bad, that they were presumably viewed as worse than child molesters back a century ago. Many people back then wanted wife beaters killed or executed, some tried to violently beat one and tell him to apologize to his voice and promise never to harm her again and to treat her kindly

in 1700s France for example, male domestic abuse victims were forced to wear outlandish outfits and ride backwards on a donkey as a humiliating punishment.

more information:

@JosefMengelecel @Robtical @Mainländer @ThoughtfulCel
 
Last edited:
I believe punishment should be allowed so you can discipline your wife, but not excessive force unless needed.
 
@SergeantIncel @mental_out @GoffSystemQB @cocksucker pin this. I want everyone’s thoughts
 
@RREEEEEEEEE
 
It's as if traditional society is inherently cucked. The only way forward for humanity is for the ruling class to stop being hypocrites and turn civilization from socialist to ancap. That way there will be cucked trad businesses that reject you for beating your wife and cultured business owners who will willingly trade with you.
 
Those are cucked pictures from a few soy magazines they had in the late 1800's and early 1900's. That's when cucks got in control of the media, and paved the way for foids to vote. The late 1800's might have been a little cucked, but before the early-mid 1800's no one cared about wife beaters, and the AoC was 7 and 9 in some places.
 
I mean hitting your wife just cause you feel like it is cucked. But disciplining her should have been widely accepted
 
@JosefMengelecel @Personalityinkwell @Diocel @Transcended Trucel @FUCKITALLREEE @RemoveNormalfags @Total Imbecile @MuslimMentalcel @BummerDrummer
Those are cucked pictures from a few soy magazines they had in the late 1800's and early 1900's. That's when cucks got in control of the media, and paved the way for foids to vote. The late 1800's might have been a little cucked, but before the early-mid 1800's no one cared about wife beaters, and the AoC was 7 and 9 in some places.
Not really. Newspapers weren’t controlled by foids yet and it was mostly newspapers not magazines. A lot of judges and mobs attacked wife beaters
I mean hitting your wife just cause you feel like it is cucked. But disciplining her should have been widely accepted
H your wife is never cucked
 
@Sparrow's Song @FinnCel @ionlycopenow @Ropemaxx @nxdismycope @ordinaryotaku

mods pin this @SergeantIncel @knajjd
 
Damn i didn't know soyciety was also cucked back then.
 
Foids need to get beaten if they misbehave. It’s the only way to keep them in check and make sure they don’t ruin humanity
 
Not really. Newspapers weren’t controlled by foids yet and it was mostly newspapers not magazines. A lot of judges and mobs attacked wife beaters
In the late 1800's foids got into reading newspapers, that's why shortly after they were allowed to vote. There were only two cucked judges back then who cared about wife beaters. Beating your wife for no reason is bad, but if she cheated or hit you first then people back then would think it's ok to hit them. Before the late 1800's there was almost no whiteknighting for rosties, unless they were part of your family or your own wife.
Foids need to get beaten if they misbehave. It’s the only way to keep them in check and make sure they don’t ruin humanity
 
In the middle ages, at least in France, it was common to laugh at a man being beaten by his wife, disown and chase him out the village sitting on a mule backwards.
If a man beat his woman he was shamed and persecuted by law. "Traditional" societies are always biased against men, because they are organized around an existential survival. In this, people are resources that need to be effectively utilized to compete against enemy societies, and the woman is a more valuable resource than a man.
A woman can get pregnant once every 10 months, for this duration plus the year of breast feeding, she is almost useless for labor while needing an intensified intake of calories. One man can impregnate hundreds of women if need be, with little input. Simply based on this, men are disposable.
Beating a woman is a shameful act looked down upon, because it is an attack against societies integrity itself. And of course, in a patriarchal society women still have fathers and brothers who wont look kindly to having their families name get humiliated like that.

Foids need to get beaten if they misbehave. It’s the only way to keep them in check and make sure they don’t ruin humanity
Sure, you could beat her, lock her up, cover her under a dress and it will shut women up, but you will still be a slave to gynocracy.
See, women were gatherers, they werent strong enough to overcome wild animals let alone a predator, so they remained in groups and scavenged for berries to eat. In this groups they learned the quintessential factor that makes up the female homo sapiens sapiens: gossiping. Women like to talk badly about other women to discredit those and increase the resources allocated to them, they like to lie and manipulate men to get their way. A woman is dependent on society for her survival, and her treatment is just a secondary detail, because even in some Afghan backwater men are forced, forced, to house, clothe and feed some random foid they probably dont even like, this alone is in favor of the foid and at that point beating her is just helpless frustration.
Men are hunters and they dont need this shit, they dont need a society to survive, its the other way around. If you really want to fuck foids over, tell them they are on their own. No benefits, no tax deductions, no simping, no feminist patting for misbehavior, and they will quickly rediscover the virtue of "patriarchic" domination.
 
In the late 1800's foids got into reading newspapers, that's why shortly after they were allowed to vote. There were only two cucked judges back then who cared about wife beaters. Beating your wife for no reason is bad, but if she cheated or hit you first then people back then would think it's ok to hit them. Before the late 1800's there was almost no whiteknighting for rosties, unless they were part of your family or your own wife.
It shows many records of many judges condemning wife beaters. I also think people overreact when a man beats his wife for no reason (most do have a reason) because they shrug if I beat a random manlet
Foids need to get beaten if they misbehave. It’s the only way to keep them in check and make sure they don’t ruin humanity
Giving women rights was bad
 
In the late 1800's foids got into reading newspapers, that's why shortly after they were allowed to vote. There were only two cucked judges back then who cared about wife beaters. Beating your wife for no reason is bad, but if she cheated or hit you first then people back then would think it's ok to hit them. Before the late 1800's there was almost no whiteknighting for rosties, unless they were part of your family or your own wife.
Affluent foids were educated well before the 19th century, Ottomans had their corrupt womans sultanate, there were well respected Nuns, female pagan priests and a lot Roman emperors had their viper mothers or sisters pulling the strings behind them, what are you talking about.
 
@turbocuckcel_7000
 
It shows many records of many judges condemning wife beaters. I also think people overreact when a man beats his wife for no reason (most do have a reason) because they shrug if I beat a random manlet
I only saw two judges who condemned them from back then. But I agree, they should stop caring when a man hits a foid until they start caring about a man beating up a weaker man.
Affluent foids were educated well before the 19th century, Ottomans had their corrupt womans sultanate, there were well respected Nuns, female pagan priests and a lot Roman emperors had their viper mothers or sisters pulling the strings behind them, what are you talking about.
Those foids were rare, but in the late 1800's is when even average foids gained power because of cucks.


These were based times.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98qw86DsdZ0
 
Last edited:
I only saw two judges who condemned them from back then. But I agree, they should stop caring when a man hits a foid until they start caring about a man beating up a weaker man.

Those foids were rare, but in the late 1800's is when even average foids gained power because of cucks.


These were based times.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98qw86DsdZ0

What about the vigilantism attacks and whip posts?
 
I believe it. Cuck fags are like "all women were beaten by their husbands back then" without citating jack shit, except for the memes about 1950s men being wife beaters and whatever they watch on Netflix.
 
What about the vigilantism attacks and whip posts?
Whipping posts were mainly used for black slaves, rarely were those punishments given to white men. The vigilante attacks were very rare, and only seemed to happen when the foid was part of a whiteknight's family.
 
Whipping posts were mainly used for black slaves, rarely were those punishments given to white men. The vigilante attacks were very rare, and only seemed to happen when the foid was part of a whiteknight's family.
Actually I noticed some of the flogged men were white and the vigilante attacks certainly were more common then than nowadays

I wouldn’t hit a foid if I time travelled to a century ago
I believe it. Cuck fags are like "all women were beaten by their husbands back then" without citating jack shit, except for the memes about 1950s men being wife beaters and whatever they watch on Netflix.
People also have think that popularity ends in college even though the opposite is true. It’s everywhere in college (maybe except community college)
 
Actually I noticed some of the flogged men were white and the vigilante attacks certainly were more common then than nowadays

I wouldn’t hit a foid if I time travelled to a century ago
The flogged men were all drawings from cucked newspapers. Most of the time the whipping posts were used on black slaves. Vigilante attacks for wife beaters were as rare as vigilante attacks on jb fuckers back then. In the 1800's they used to burn foids for being witches. Most the men didn't care about a guy slapping his wife back then, unless they were extreme cucks or related to the foid who was hit.
 
A lot of people (including feminists) perpetuate this myth that until the 1970s, domestic violence was ignored by society, ignored by police and ignored by judges and it was seen as something between the husband and wife that wasn’t our business. This is a myth. The idea that society ignored and was indifferent toward domestic violence prior to the 70s is a myth. Even over 200 years ago, society was against it. In fact, throughout most of human history, it was completely frowned on and condemned by society. in fact, woman beaters were much more hated a century ago than they are nowadays. Today, if you beat your wife, people just want you jailed and yeah they’ll wanna kick your ass but only few will want you dead. Back a century ago, people would’ve tried to lynch you or violently beat you with an inch of your life. Telling someone back then that you’re a wife beater is like telling someone today you’re a child molester or telling someone in the 1690s you’re a witch.
In the early 1900s, there were MANY frequent cases of men being arrested for wife beatings. It was common for them to be arrested and there were also many cases where they were victims of a vigilante attack. Many wife beaters were tarred and feathered, dunked in water, whipped, violently beaten, or even lynched for what they did. Although a small amount of women participated in these vigilante attacks, these attacks were mostly done by men, sometimes the wife’s family or sometimes neighbors or posses. In the late 1800s/early 1900s, some states started to have flogging on a whip post as a punishment for domestic abusers (and many Americans supported this) and it was done because it would be an eye for an eye and they thought jailing them would get rid of the family breadwinner who provides for the family. So they did this to deter domestic abuse. Some judges did the flogging themself or allowed the battered wife to do it.

“Dissatisfaction with the statutory sentences led judges to condone extralegal violence against wife beaters, even occasionally partici- pating in such violence themselves. This hands-on approach was cele- brated, often in ways that emphasized the manly aggression of the judge’s conduct. For example, Alderman John F. Donahue, a judge in

Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, became famous “all over the country and in Europe, too” beginning the day “he first descended from the bench, tore off his coat, and soundly thrashed a chronic wife beater.” He “received scores of letters from men and women thanking him for what he has done for oppressed and abused wives,” and even received numerous awards from humane societies.In Donahue’s view,

“You can usually knock all ideas of violence out of a man’s head by treating him violently, and if every wife beater was thrashed, was bruised and pained to the same extent as he bruised and pained his wife, and a little more for good measure, there would be less wife beating.”

Male domestic violence victims were known about back then but were ridiculed and made fun of and judges often were lenient on female domestic abusers and sometimes even showed approval towards female domestic abusers. For example, I read one situation where a judge praised a female domestic abuser for beating her husband for coming home drunk and another judge who praised a foid for beating her husband who came home too late at night. The judge said “good job. We ought to have more women like you”.
the hatred towards wife beaters was so bad, that they were presumably viewed as worse than child molesters back a century ago. Many people back then wanted wife beaters killed or executed, some tried to violently beat one and tell him to apologize to his voice and promise never to harm her again and to treat her kindly

in 1700s France for example, male domestic abuse victims were forced to wear outlandish outfits and ride backwards on a donkey as a humiliating punishment.

more information:

@JosefMengelecel @Robtical @Mainländer @ThoughtfulCel
Well there was a probably a difference between what is considering wife beating. I'm guessing stuff like slapping her or pinning her up against the wall was OK back in the days.
 
@turbocuckcel_7000
everyone could literally just use their intuition
does a world where civilized men routinely beat their wives sound likely to you? how about with no consequences?

it's fucking stupid and a myth and the wars are responsible for female emancipation which includes the manufacturing of these stupid myths
 
Men have been white knighting since the dawn of time

The only difference is that back then their wives used to be HQNP virgins so beating your wife like that for no reason is messed up

If you beat a 10+ bodycount whore today thats just nothing in my book, shouldnt even be a fine
 
Women commit domestic violence more often than men. And when they are beaten, usually it was because they chose to be with a tall high T chad.
 
The flogged men were all drawings from cucked newspapers. Most of the time the whipping posts were used on black slaves. Vigilante attacks for wife beaters were as rare as vigilante attacks on jb fuckers back then. In the 1800's they used to burn foids for being witches. Most the men didn't care about a guy slapping his wife back then, unless they were extreme cucks or related to the foid who was hit.
I don’t think jb duckers were ever attacked back then at all
Well there was a probably a difference between what is considering wife beating. I'm guessing stuff like slapping her or pinning her up against the wall was OK back in the days.
no the definition was the same back then
Women commit domestic violence more often than men. And when they are beaten, usually it was because they chose to be with a tall high T chad.
bluepillers think only scrawny manlets are wifebeaters when it’s the opposite
 
@RREEEEEEEEE
Wife beating is looked down upon, even in Islamic communities.. and we have existed since the 7th century. So you could say it goes back 1300 years.
 
Long but basically it’s a (((feminist))) lie that foids were ever rlly “oppressed”
 
Wife beating is looked down upon, even in Islamic communities.. and we have existed since the 7th century. So you could say it goes back 1300 years.
Quran 4:34 is very misinterpreted by islamophobes
 
Quran 4:34 is very misinterpreted by islamophobes
They take things out of context on purpose and add their own twists to it. That's how the Bible had changed.
 
Beating your wife is only ok if you are chad
full
 
In muslim countries a hundred years ago there was no problem with beating your wife if she cheated or got out of line.
 
In muslim countries a hundred years ago there was no problem with beating your wife if she cheated or got out of line.
Is Turkey currently a cucked Muslim country?
 
seems some cherry picked examples. im sure if you wanna look for something, you can find one. but what matters is statistics.

the fact is, back then beating up a wife isnt a big deal, unless shes like severely injured.

beating up wife is roughly equal to beating up ur own kid back then

if you wanna find materials where fathers who beat up his kids were jailed, fined, attacked, im sure one can find plenty. but we all know at the end of the day, beating up kids back then wasnt big deal
Cope. Theodore
seems some cherry picked examples. im sure if you wanna look for something, you can find one. but what matters is statistics.

the fact is, back then beating up a wife isnt a big deal, unless shes like severely injured.

beating up wife is roughly equal to beating up ur own kid back then

if you wanna find materials where fathers who beat up his kids were jailed, fined, attacked, im sure one can find plenty. but we all know at the end of the day, beating up kids back then wasnt big deal
Cope. Theodore Roosevelt and evening Lincoln condoned flogging for wife beaters and there are many newspapers back then that condemned them or reported on vigilante attacks and many judges condemning them. Read the paper
 
paper can be misleading coz they report news that attract views. if wife beating was common, then attacks on wife beaters would be novelty and therefore make good news.
Attacks on them were reported on a lot back then
 
you are so damn low iq. for fuck sake.

what makes you think its news? if they happen all the time do they think it would be news?

a murder in a quiet white middle class neighbor hood would make news. a murder in a crime ridden black neighborhood might not. any murders in countries like Mexico and Guatamala mostly dont make it to local news in their countries coz its so common

the fact these wife beaters got punished and made ti news meant it was NEWSWORTHY, which means it wasnt something thats usual. aka majority of wife beating were unnoticed and tolerated
Yes even though child molestation happens all day yet it’s still all over the news. That argument of yours doesn’t work. Go search up arrested for domestic violence on google and results will still happen today. Theodore Roosevelt literally shook the hand of a vigilante. Trust me, domestic violence was frowned on back then even more than it is now.
 

Similar threads

SnakeCel
Replies
7
Views
128
Copexodius Maximus
Copexodius Maximus
sociology blackpill
Replies
11
Views
274
SoycuckGodOfReddit
SoycuckGodOfReddit
highiqpostmaxxer
Replies
7
Views
174
uglyugly
uglyugly
FrenchSandNigger
Replies
12
Views
538
unluckygenes
U

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top