Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
jim777

Av's Varlamov arrested

85 posts in this topic

I did not follow up on the jets fan incident but I believe I heard that all three parties (one man and two women) who used physical violence were arrested.

 

Which is the right thing to do.  Both parties acted dumb and probably had their fair share of liquor in them.

 

However, this only was huge news because a guy hit a woman and was caught on tape.  Fights happen at Jets games all the time but because of the participant this made the news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A small percentage of spousal physical abuse is by women towards men.  A much larger percentage is men towards women.  The reason for all this leeway granted to women re: physical abuse is quite simple - men are bigger and stronger than women.  Do some women abuse that status?  Sure.  It's a consequence of living in a more tolerant and just society.

 

CarterForPresident is of course wrong when he says that men are always hitting women - physical abuse of women has no doubt declined over the last 50 years, at least in the U.S.  You just think it's increased because since it is rarer, it's now bigger news.  Man hits woman would be 'Dog bites man' of the early 20th century in the U.S. (and indeed, is still the case in many parts of the world).

 

Re: this Varlamov stuff, who knows what exactly is true, but all the Russian hockey writers jumped on Twitter to defend him, which was rather odious.

 

I'm not going to say that women physically abusing men is a serious problem, but as far as percentage of actual REPORTED cases, if you could somehow tally every single incident of domestic abuse, the percentage of actual reported man-on-woman physical abuse in relation to actual incidents of such is higher than the other way around, and for obvious reasons...men being afraid of the stigmas that will go with calling in such an incident, etc.

 

Say a woman smacks a man in the face twice.  Technically, that IS assault.  Will the man call the police?  Probably not.  It's also unlikely that the people around him will pressure him to report it, even if he has visible marks on his face. 

 

Man does the same to a woman...she is more likely to call it in.  If she doesn't want to, people around her will likely threaten to report it themselves, even more so if she has visible marks on his face.

 

Not even really disputing your original percentage statement (man-on-woman violence definitely happens more), but just stating that woman-on-man violence happens far more often than is ever documented.       

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is the right thing to do. Both parties acted dumb and probably had their fair share of liquor in them.

However, this only was huge news because a guy hit a woman and was caught on tape. Fights happen at Jets games all the time but because of the participant this made the news.

if the guy just walked away and/or got police to intervene it wouldn't have been national news either. From what I saw of the video it seemed like he wasn't in a hurry to leave or get help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But we've seen how this often turns out for men.  He loses his house, furniture, and has to pay alimony and child support, even if his ex is fully capable of supporting herself (but refuses to work).  And he likely won't get to see his kids nearly as much as she will.     

 

If everything was split 50/50, that I could understand, and I think that's fair, regardless of who earned the most money during the marriage.  But that's not what often happens.   

This whole issue is very gray as you mentioned. No one should be violent towards another, period. Man, woman, whatever. Especially with men defending themselves, as women can definitely be violent and it shouldn't be just put up with because they're a girl. That being said, if you are a man that is a professional athlete, like Varlamov is, and I have a feeling his gf isn't gonna be a female bodybuilder or anything, he could very easily contain her if she was being violent without inflicting any harm on her. Of course, if you're a regular Joe and your wife summons extra strength via her rage, you should probably either A. Call the cops(but then you're a giant pansy, seriously, if you can't handle family issues without the cops, wtf are you doing?) or B. Go take a walk and think about what it is that has poisoned your relationship with you SO and whether it's really worth repairing.

On divorce though, I disagree. When you marry someone and the two of you make the decision that say she will stay home to care for the kids rather than work, that was your decision too. In divorce, they're not just looking at whether the woman has the ability to work for themselves, it's the level of comfort and lifestyle that person is used to. If they used to work and made $35-45K, but when she married you, making say $100k, you've accepted the fact that you've raised your families level of comfort and lifestyle and you cannot just think oh well, she can go back to just scraping by because you don't want to pay extra. You signed a contract saying everything is 50/50 here on out and usually the only way you can get out of deal, is to buy your way out of it, as is done in divorce.

Maybe this discussion will be different in the future, but with the way women are still discriminated against in the workplace, it would be unfair to have it any other way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: this Varlamov stuff, who knows what exactly is true, but all the Russian hockey writers jumped on Twitter to defend him, which was rather odious.

I know next to nothing of Russian culture, and I don't want to judge based on a few tweets by these writers (and posters in here), but if what the girlfriend said is true then I don't know how any civilized society can defend what happened or claim some crazy Olympic conspiracy theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the guy just walked away and/or got police to intervene it wouldn't have been national news either. From what I saw of the video it seemed like he wasn't in a hurry to leave or get help.

 

Oh yeah I mean no one acted right in the video.  But if it was 2 guys pounding each other it wouldn't have been national news either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole issue is very gray as you mentioned. No one should be violent towards another, period. Man, woman, whatever. Especially with men defending themselves, as women can definitely be violent and it shouldn't be just put up with because they're a girl. That being said, if you are a man that is a professional athlete, like Varlamov is, and I have a feeling his gf isn't gonna be a female bodybuilder or anything, he could very easily contain her if she was being violent without inflicting any harm on her. Of course, if you're a regular Joe and your wife summons extra strength via her rage, you should probably either A. Call the cops(but then you're a giant pansy, seriously, if you can't handle family issues without the cops, wtf are you doing?) or B. Go take a walk and think about what it is that has poisoned your relationship with you SO and whether it's really worth repairing.

On divorce though, I disagree. When you marry someone and the two of you make the decision that say she will stay home to care for the kids rather than work, that was your decision too. In divorce, they're not just looking at whether the woman has the ability to work for themselves, it's the level of comfort and lifestyle that person is used to. If they used to work and made $35-45K, but when she married you, making say $100k, you've accepted the fact that you've raised your families level of comfort and lifestyle and you cannot just think oh well, she can go back to just scraping by because you don't want to pay extra. You signed a contract saying everything is 50/50 here on out and usually the only way you can get out of deal, is to buy your way out of it, as is done in divorce.

Maybe this discussion will be different in the future, but with the way women are still discriminated against in the workplace, it would be unfair to have it any other way.

 

I've always had a problem with that thinking.  I agree a marriage is a contract and I believe in a divorce things should be split evenly for large majority of them.  However, to expect to live the same lifestyle after the divorce as you did before is just foolish and unrealistic.  The household was split in two so their combined income will never be as high.

 

In most of these cases its the man paying the woman alimony it is up to the man to then pay the difference.  What if he loses his job?  I know he can go back to court to ask it to be lowered, but a lot of times that doesn't happen.  There is/was a very real case of that happening in Flemington where a guy was jailed for failure to pay alimony after he lost his high paying job and after his requests to lower his alimony payments were rejected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say a woman smacks a man in the face twice.  Technically, that IS assault.  Will the man call the police?  Probably not.  It's also unlikely that the people around him will pressure him to report it, even if he has visible marks on his face. 

 

Actually, technically it is battery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On divorce though, I disagree. When you marry someone and the two of you make the decision that say she will stay home to care for the kids rather than work, that was your decision too. In divorce, they're not just looking at whether the woman has the ability to work for themselves, it's the level of comfort and lifestyle that person is used to. If they used to work and made $35-45K, but when she married you, making say $100k, you've accepted the fact that you've raised your families level of comfort and lifestyle and you cannot just think oh well, she can go back to just scraping by because you don't want to pay extra. You signed a contract saying everything is 50/50 here on out and usually the only way you can get out of deal, is to buy your way out of it, as is done in divorce.

 

Problem is there are abuses and loopholes.  My brother is divorced and has since remarried.  His ex-wife has a master's degree and was very gainfully employed before they had two kids.  She quit her job once they had their first child, but the plane was that she would go back to work in time.  Those kids are now almost 13 and 11, and VERY capable of taking care of themselves after school...she has no reason to stay home anymore.  The ex is perfectly capable of working again, as was PLANNED, but refuses to...she would rather collect her alimony.  She is in a relationship with a man that is technically living with her, but since that would cause her to forfeit her alimony if he actually WAS doing that, he maintains a cheap apartment, for no other reason that it shows an address that isn't where she lives.  My brother was extremely fair in the settlement, and has a great relationship with his kids (and has ALWAYS taken care of them financially), but she is always looking for more money.

 

And the problem with what you're saying is the man often has to give up the lifestyle HE was accustomed to as well, so she can continue to enjoy living the lifestyle SHE was used to.  How is THAT fair exactly?     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is there are abuses and loopholes.  My brother is divorced and has since remarried.  His ex-wife has a master's degree and was very gainfully employed before they had two kids.  She quit her job once they had their first child, but the plane was that she would go back to work in time.  Those kids are now almost 13 and 11, and VERY capable of taking care of themselves after school...she has no reason to stay home anymore.  The ex is perfectly capable of working again, as was PLANNED, but refuses to...she would rather collect her alimony.  She is in a relationship with a man that is technically living with her, but since that would cause her to forfeit her alimony if he actually WAS doing that, he maintains a cheap apartment, for no other reason that it shows an address that isn't where she lives.  My brother was extremely fair in the settlement, and has a great relationship with his kids (and has ALWAYS taken care of them financially), but she is always looking for more money.

 

And the problem with what you're saying is the man often has to give up the lifestyle HE was accustomed to as well, so she can continue to enjoy living the lifestyle SHE was used to.  How is THAT fair exactly?     

 

I agree that alimony is a system that needs to be very seriously reformed. New Jersey's alimony laws in particular are rather awful. That is, however something that must be taken up by ballot box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always had a problem with that thinking.  I agree a marriage is a contract and I believe in a divorce things should be split evenly for large majority of them.  However, to expect to live the same lifestyle after the divorce as you did before is just foolish and unrealistic.  The household was split in two so their combined income will never be as high.

 

In most of these cases its the man paying the woman alimony it is up to the man to then pay the difference.  What if he loses his job?  I know he can go back to court to ask it to be lowered, but a lot of times that doesn't happen.  There is/was a very real case of that happening in Flemington where a guy was jailed for failure to pay alimony after he lost his high paying job and after his requests to lower his alimony payments were rejected.

I think the way the way they deal with it post-divorce could definitely be improved. I know someone who was hassled, just like you said, to the point where he was being jailed, which does nothing but make the situation worse. I think men are overwhelmingly handicapped when it comes to making a case that they are being overburdened by alimony or child support payments.

At the same time though, I think, especially when children are involved, the higher paid/more successful partner has a responsibility to maintain a lifestyle across the board for their family.

If you have one parent making good money and another making near nothing, it can really skew how kids feel. How is it fair if one parent can afford to take the kids to places for vacation or see a concert or a sporting event or buy them this toy, but then to have the other parent in a place where doing that would mean taking food off the table?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that alimony is a system that needs to be very seriously reformed. New Jersey's alimony laws in particular are rather awful. That is, however something that must be taken up by ballot box.

 

Hasn't that come up before and every time it never makes it to the ballot box?  I bet the lobbiest for the lawyers are going hard to prevent it ever from having it decided by vote of the populace.

I think the way the way they deal with it post-divorce could definitely be improved. I know someone who was hassled, just like you said, to the point where he was being jailed, which does nothing but make the situation worse. I think men are overwhelmingly handicapped when it comes to making a case that they are being overburdened by alimony or child support payments.

At the same time though, I think, especially when children are involved, the higher paid/more successful partner has a responsibility to maintain a lifestyle across the board for their family.

If you have one parent making good money and another making near nothing, it can really skew how kids feel. How is it fair if one parent can afford to take the kids to places for vacation or see a concert or a sporting event or buy them this toy, but then to have the other parent in a place where doing that would mean taking food off the table?

 

 

That's what child support is for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're saying Russian women deserve to be beaten? 

 

am.. no. i don`t. you take that from context

Edited by Guadana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hasn't that come up before and every time it never makes it to the ballot box?  I bet the lobbiest for the lawyers are going hard to prevent it ever from having it decided by vote of the populace.

 

Well I was referring to by voting for representatives who will change it, but I suppose that trying to get a referendum might not be a bad idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I was referring to by voting for representatives who will change it, but I suppose that trying to get a referendum might not be a bad idea.

 

Representatives are even worse.  A lot of them are former/current lawyers themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a perfect world it would be 50/50, but we do not live in a perfect world. Right when both parties walk into the courtroom, in a huge majority of cases the woman is guaranteed at least 50% while the man would have to fight tooth and nail to just get 50%.

Divorce cases are heavily stacked against men, even when it is not their fault.

I don't disagree. That's why I'm making damn well sure that I marry someone who the likelihood of getting a divorce from is near zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree. That's why I'm making damn well sure that I marry someone who the likelihood of getting a divorce from is near zero.

I hope so but there are no guarantees in life. My brother a couple years ago would have thought the probability of him getting divorced was near zero too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree. That's why I'm making damn well sure that I marry someone who the likelihood of getting a divorce from is near zero.

 

I don't think too many people enter marriage thinking "This is only temporary."  Yeah, some people are stupid about it and shouldn't have gotten married, but a lot of people enter into marriage thinking it's going to be forever, end of story.  A lot can change over time, people can grow apart...simply, a lot can happen, and you cannot predict the future, no matter how hard you try.

 

As much as you may think you've got all it figured out, no one can really say that they do.  You can only do what feels right at the time, and do the best that you can.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think too many people enter marriage thinking "This is only temporary." Yeah, some people are stupid about it and shouldn't have gotten married, but a lot of people enter into marriage thinking it's going to be forever, end of story. A lot can change over time, people can grow apart...simply, a lot can happen, and you cannot predict the future, no matter how hard you try.

As much as you may think you've got all it figured out, no one can really say that they do. You can only do what feels right at the time, and do the best that you can.

as I said earlier, the majority of divorces I have seen of people I know or heard of are either: people younger than 25 who think they know what they're doing then 10 yrs go by and they say "crap this is it huh?" Or people who are together less than a year or two and think "it doesn't get any better than this, let's go!" And realize after a few years that it may not get better, but it can get worse.

Of course this is by no means a scientific study and there are always other factors, but I believe a lot of divorces I've seen are a result of people being too naive about the situation they are entering into.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Checked back on this thread hoping for some details about what Varlamov did, stumbled into pretty interesting debate about divorce and domestic abuse.

 

Needless to say, this is way too heavy (at least at this moment) for my taste for a hockey forum, so I'll just...see myself out..


 

Now THAT'S more like it 

 

/slight sarcasm

Edited by Devilsfan118

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Checked back on this thread hoping for some details about what Varlamov did, stumbled into pretty interesting debate about divorce and domestic abuse.

Needless to say, this is way too heavy (at least at this moment) for my taste for a hockey forum, so I'll just...see myself out..

Now THAT'S more like it

/slight sarcasm

when the devils win there's nothing to complain about so we need to keep ourselves entertained until the next loss somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You walk away and leave the girl.

leave the girl, take the cannoli.

That's what I always say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0