Ray Rice Abuses Wife, Loses Job & Is Suspended Indefinitely

[Tsa-la-gi Nation]

I was joking around about this yesterday (& I have a few more), but on a serious note, I see two sides of this issue.

1st) Without taking the time to dig up his history,(myself) as a Baltimoron, I'm pretty sure Ray Rice came out of the projects of urban NY, & worked hard for a chance to be in the NFL. In Baltimore, he has done a lot of good with athletic youth programs & such. As horrific as an act as we all witnessed, it looks like anger issues while drunk, & a moment of absolutely no self control. In my opinion, he deserves a 2nd chance much, much more (for example) than Michael Vick did. I say that because Michael Vick (although not hurting other people) arranged for dogs to kill each other for sport for a long period of time. His actions were planned & repeated, while Ray Rice had a single moment of extremely poor self control. Some of the best role models are people who made terrible mistakes, put forth effort to make things right & were given a 2nd chance to do so. I'm not saying I'm positive Ray Rice would be that person, but it seems he is trying to do what is needed at this point.

2nd) Now, with that being said, there is nothing necessary about a professional athlete. A sporting event is suppose to be an event that a family can watch. Professional athletes are people that kids should be able to look up to and admire & parents should be able to point them out as people to be admired. When a sports league loses the proper role model to children part of their mission statement, they no longer have a useful purpose to the society that they serve (In my opinion). I'll be dammed if I want to bring my child to see a woman beater, a rapist, someone who is cruel to animals, etc...

The culture of sports can be changed if the pros agree to draft their players as only as collage graduates, and collages agree to set standards that players must keep up their GPAs (on real college level courses) to average or above average levels to play. I know that is a hardline point of view, but I think a system like this would product more mature people to be real professionals, and thus more likely to handle themselves as role models accordingly. I would rather watch better people play a game with less athleticism, than better athletes play a game who are poor examples as role models to society.

[The Black Forrest]

I personally find the coverage of this incident to be sexist. Jump all over the guy when they are both obviously assaulting each other.
Stupid woman should've known ahead of time not to start a physical fight with a professional athlete.

It seems like she was using her size and sex to assume he wouldn't react, and she was wrong, and got the bad end of it.. at first. Now they are both screwed, more out of public pressure.. which, honestly, isnt any of our business.

They obviously worked it out and got married. Maybe they both learned something from this experience.

Ok. We accept you know next to nothing on the matters of abuse and it's effects....

[Vitaphone Racing]

is this for all folks who beat their spouses? one punch and you lose your ability to earn a living?

If he's going to earn a living, it shouldn't be in the NFL.

Bullshit. He committed a crime, he sought counselling, he's going to pay the price for it, he even sorted things out with his partner. Why should someone be punished for what they did long after they get their life back on track? Honestly, if we're going to treat him as a criminal, wife-beating thug for the rest of his life, we may as well just keep him locked up.

[The Black Forrest]

If he's going to earn a living, it shouldn't be in the NFL.

Bullshit. He committed a crime, he sought counselling, he's going to pay the price for it, he even sorted things out with his partner. Why should someone be punished for what they did long after they get their life back on track? Honestly, if we're going to treat him as a criminal, wife-beating thug for the rest of his life, we may as well just keep him locked up.

So? It was just a joke sorry man is all that is needed?

Abusive people tend to need counseling for a long time. It was obviously not working when he laid her out. It was not working when he decided to drag out away. I kind of get the impression he would have no problem picking her up.

The fact he is a football player doesn't deserve special treatment. He should be punished like everybody else in his state. If the franchise or the league tried to cover it, they should be punished as well.

[Vitaphone Racing]

his wife needs to smarten up and get out while she can.

Maybe she accepts his apology. Maybe she knows it won't happen again. Maybe she still trusts and loves him. Maybe she isn't stupid like you seem to think she is.

[The Black Forrest]

...he punched her hard enough to knock her out.


^

and then she married him.

his wife needs to smarten up and get out while she can.

Depends on how much he mentality abused her. Some women need help with leaving.....

[Vitaphone Racing]

Bullshit. He committed a crime, he sought counselling, he's going to pay the price for it, he even sorted things out with his partner. Why should someone be punished for what they did long after they get their life back on track? Honestly, if we're going to treat him as a criminal, wife-beating thug for the rest of his life, we may as well just keep him locked up.

So? It was just a joke sorry man is all that is needed?

Where did I say that? Seriously, where did I say this was all a joke, no big deal, get back to work? Where? Highlight it for me.

Abusive people tend to need counseling for a long time. It was obviously not working when he laid her out. It was not working when he decided to drag out away. I kind of get the impression he would have no problem picking her up.

The fact he is a football player doesn't deserve special treatment. He should be punished like everybody else in his state. If the franchise or the league tried to cover it, they should be punished as well.

Did I argue any of this? Did I say he should escape punishment? No. I said if he's served his sentence, if he's rehabilitated himself, he should be treated as a reformed person and welcomed back to his old job. I didn't put a time frame on it. I didn't say he was innocent. I said he doesn't deserve to be treated as a criminal for the rest of his life. And he doesn't.

[Paketo]

https://cbswashington.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/rice-screenshot.jpg

As I have not seen it on this thread yet, I would like to point out what Ray Rice's wife posted on Instagram. It seems really that they had worked out the incident between themselves and the public outcry after this event came to light has ruined both their lives.

[The Black Forrest]

https://cbswashington.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/rice-screenshot.jpg

As I have not seen it on this thread yet, I would like to point out what Ray Rice's wife posted on Instagram. It seems really that they had worked out the incident between themselves and the public outcry after this event came to light has ruined both their lives.

Hmmm. If that is her, she needs to as Ash mentioned Wisen up. Cycle of violence has a reconciliation and a calm phase and then starts over again.

My wife is Italian. She has a temper. In all our time together, I never had an impulse to make a fist and lay her out.

I predict he will do it again if not worse. I hope I am wrong.

[The Black Forrest]

Jon Stewart weighs in.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/footb ... N+Facebook

[Ashmoria]

his wife needs to smarten up and get out while she can.

Maybe she accepts his apology. Maybe she knows it won't happen again. Maybe she still trusts and loves him. Maybe she isn't stupid like you seem to think she is.

the only way it isn't "stupid" to stay is if she doesn't think she can get out without being killed. she is in mortal danger and she is the only one who can decide to get out. even then she needs real support from her friends and family. (not that there aren't plenty of women who had to get out over the objections of their friends and family but it is so much harder that way). maybe her husband can get treatment for his inability to control his anger but until that is successful she ought not risk her life for "luuuuv"

.....

given that "smarten up" isn't the best way to put it.

[The Zionist Nation]

At least they did something to punish him.

[Faith Hope Charity]

I personally find the coverage of this incident to be sexist. Jump all over the guy when they are both obviously assaulting each other.
Stupid woman should've known ahead of time not to start a physical fight with a professional athlete.

It seems like she was using her size and sex to assume he wouldn't react, and she was wrong, and got the bad end of it.. at first. Now they are both screwed, more out of public pressure.. which, honestly, isnt any of our business.

They obviously worked it out and got married. Maybe they both learned something from this experience.

Ok. We accept you know next to nothing on the matters of abuse and it's effects....

Its more like, only you think male to female abuse matters... and its effects, it goes both ways, as seen here. There is obvious female to male abuse as well, you just choose not to see it because it is politically incorrect to do so, and you sir, are sexist because of it.

[Kelinfort]

Ok. We accept you know next to nothing on the matters of abuse and it's effects....

Its more like, only you think male to female abuse matters... and its effects, it goes both ways, as seen here. There is obvious female to male abuse as well, you just choose not to see it because it is politically incorrect to do so, and you sir, are sexist because of it.

Yeah, Ray Rice was so abused by his wife slapping him. If I were a three hundred pound athlete, I'd feel so threatened, I'd deck her for good measure.

Female to male sexual abuse exists and it's a major problem. But it's largely overblown and used as a strawman to show how "sexist" people are.

[The Black Forrest]

Ok. We accept you know next to nothing on the matters of abuse and it's effects....

Its more like, only you think male to female abuse matters... and its effects, it goes both ways, as seen here. There is obvious female to male abuse as well, you just choose not to see it because it is politically incorrect to do so, and you sir, are sexist because of it.

An odd way of thinking. You know next to nothing on the matter translates to me saying only male on female violence matters. Strange.

Female on Male violence happens sure. The problem is people who basically argue the "bitch asked for it" bring it up as the number of incidents are equal. They are not. 85% of domestic violence victims are women. It breaks down to 1 in 4 women will experience this in their lifetime. Does these make the male victims less of a victim? Of course not. But to compare the commonality of frequency says much of the people who use it as an argument.

http://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViol ... nal%29.pdf

As Kelinfort said, a 212 pound running back in peek condition was so threatened he had to use his fist and lay her out for his own safety.

Sorry there is no defense for that.

[Tahar Joblis]

Its more like, only you think male to female abuse matters... and its effects, it goes both ways, as seen here. There is obvious female to male abuse as well, you just choose not to see it because it is politically incorrect to do so, and you sir, are sexist because of it.

An odd way of thinking. You know next to nothing on the matter translates to me saying only male on female violence matters. Strange.

Female on Male violence happens sure. The problem is people who basically argue the "bitch asked for it" bring it up as the number of incidents are equal. They are not. 85% of domestic violence victims are women.

That depends on what sources you use and how you analyze them. The figure you use happens to be highly suspect. There are several major methodological issues, including that women and men code incidents differently both as victims and as perpetrators, disparities between long-term and short-term rate measurements, et cetera.

In general, as you control for the methodological issues, it becomes clear that:


1. Women engage in non-reciprocated violence against a male partner about twice as often as men do against a female partner.
2. Women are injured by a male partner about twice as often as men are injured by a female partner.
3. Women initiate or escalate violence against a male partner no less often - in most studies more often - than men do against a female partner.

This is particularly clear once you examine abuse rates in homosexual partnerships, which turn out to be quite similar to the rates in heterosexual partnerships. See here. It is of particular note that lesbians often report higher levels of victimization and perpetration, as in that article, but that this difference goes away after you introduce some controls, as in that article.

What this tells us is that women are, if anything, more likely to be physically abusive towards a partner; they are vulnerable to injury, but this is thanks to the unfavorable balance of size and strength rather than any lack of aggressive behavior.

Do not present the bullshit myth that domestic violence is a male-on-female problem. I suspect your figure comes from arrest rates... which reflects only that police actions are biased against men, not that men are more violent towards female partners than women are towards male partners.

[The Black Forrest]

An odd way of thinking. You know next to nothing on the matter translates to me saying only male on female violence matters. Strange.

Female on Male violence happens sure. The problem is people who basically argue the "bitch asked for it" bring it up as the number of incidents are equal. They are not. 85% of domestic violence victims are women.

That depends on what sources you use and how you analyze them. The figure you use happens to be highly suspect. There are several major methodological issues, including that women and men code incidents differently both as victims and as perpetrators, disparities between long-term and short-term rate measurements, et cetera.

In general, as you control for the methodological issues, it becomes clear that:


1. Women engage in non-reciprocated violence against a male partner about twice as often as men do against a female partner.
2. Women are injured by a male partner about twice as often as men are injured by a female partner.
3. Women initiate or escalate violence against a male partner no less often - in most studies more often - than men do against a female partner.

This is particularly clear once you examine abuse rates in homosexual partnerships, which turn out to be quite similar to the rates in heterosexual partnerships. See here. It is of particular note that lesbians often report higher levels of victimization and perpetration, as in that article, but that this difference goes away after you introduce some controls, as in that article.

What this tells us is that women are, if anything, more likely to be physically abusive towards a partner; they are vulnerable to injury, but this is thanks to the unfavorable balance of size and strength rather than any lack of aggressive behavior.

Do not present the bullshit myth that domestic violence is a male-on-female problem. I suspect your figure comes from arrest rates... which reflects only that police actions are biased against men, not that men are more violent towards female partners than women are towards male partners.

At least you are consistent.

I will start supporting your quixotic crusade of showing men are getting abused, assaulted, and killed by women at the same frequency or probably in your mind much more....probably when the biased police reports and the baised domestic violence groups start reporting it.

[Gauthier]

That depends on what sources you use and how you analyze them. The figure you use happens to be highly suspect. There are several major methodological issues, including that women and men code incidents differently both as victims and as perpetrators, disparities between long-term and short-term rate measurements, et cetera.

In general, as you control for the methodological issues, it becomes clear that:


1. Women engage in non-reciprocated violence against a male partner about twice as often as men do against a female partner.
2. Women are injured by a male partner about twice as often as men are injured by a female partner.
3. Women initiate or escalate violence against a male partner no less often - in most studies more often - than men do against a female partner.

This is particularly clear once you examine abuse rates in homosexual partnerships, which turn out to be quite similar to the rates in heterosexual partnerships. See here. It is of particular note that lesbians often report higher levels of victimization and perpetration, as in that article, but that this difference goes away after you introduce some controls, as in that article.

What this tells us is that women are, if anything, more likely to be physically abusive towards a partner; they are vulnerable to injury, but this is thanks to the unfavorable balance of size and strength rather than any lack of aggressive behavior.

Do not present the bullshit myth that domestic violence is a male-on-female problem. I suspect your figure comes from arrest rates... which reflects only that police actions are biased against men, not that men are more violent towards female partners than women are towards male partners.

At least you are consistent.

I will start supporting your quixotic crusade of showing men are getting abused, assaulted, and killed by women at the same frequency or probably in your mind much more....probably when the biased police reports and the baised domestic violence groups start reporting it.

Fighting the good fight against the Amazon World Order.

[Tahar Joblis]

:D At least you are consistent.

I will start supporting your quixotic crusade of showing men are getting abused, assaulted, and killed by women at the same frequency or probably in your mind much more....probably when the biased police reports and the baised domestic violence groups start reporting it.

What you're doing right now is quite similar to claiming that blacks are inherently violent because black men are roughly seven times as likely to be incarcerated at any given point in their lives. That is to say, you're pointing to the behavior of the criminal justice system in order to advance a discriminatory claim.

You are also ignoring a very large body of science. Some domestic violence advocacy groups recognize that abuse of men by women is under-recognized, under-reported, and largely going unaddressed. Others are in denial. This is not unusual, because some of them, like you, are dominated by highly sexist views.

It is well documented that male victims of domestic violence neither expect nor receive the same degree of remedy from the police that female victims of domestic violence receive; and that bystanders, witnesses, police, etc are far more likely to intervene on behalf of women. E.g.:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.100 ... 012-9482-9
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 156.x/full

There is an enormous body of literature showing that male victims are not seeking out and receiving police help. It's widely believed (and with good cause) that domestic violence victims stand a non-trivial chance of being arrested, and this is particularly true of men, to the point where a male victim is more likely to be arrested than a female perpetrator.

A large systematic overview of extant scientific literature was conducted beginning in 2010. It says much the same as I'm telling your right now. Yes, including the parts about the criminal justice system treating men and women differently at every step of the way.

The idea that domestic violence is a male-on-female problem is also consistently undermined by gay and lesbian partnerships, as I pointed out.

[The Rich Port]

I never thought the fanbase would also tolerate this kind of shit, but a local radio DJ outright said "If a player fucks up, we should protect him from crime because the games matter more," and a whole bunch of idiots called in supporting the player.

It's obscene.

He should go straight to jail and football fans should wake the fuck up.

If I was there and heard that I'd have been tempted to call in on the show and repeatedly chant "Penn State".

You know what's sad?

Plenty of people I know wanted to defend that scumbag coach AND the school for letting it happen. Why? 'Cuz football.

FUCK football. It apparently turns people into paedophile enablers.

[Gauthier]

If I was there and heard that I'd have been tempted to call in on the show and repeatedly chant "Penn State".

You know what's sad?

Plenty of people I know wanted to defend that scumbag coach AND the school for letting it happen. Why? 'Cuz football.

FUCK football. It apparently turns people into paedophile enablers.

"For the small contribution of one virgin boy's anus every month..."

[The Rich Port]

You know what's sad?

Plenty of people I know wanted to defend that scumbag coach AND the school for letting it happen. Why? 'Cuz football.

FUCK football. It apparently turns people into paedophile enablers.

"For the small contribution of one virgin boy's anus every month..."

"BIG BUCKS, NO WHAMMIES, BIG BUCKS... YES!"

"Holy cow! Congratulations, Mr. Gauthier, you win... A SMALL BOY! Yes, this compact, supple, tender young man is 100% American hootenanny. Have him serve you food or have him serve you in other ways! Do whatever you want with it, really! We don't really care, we're a soulless game show corporation!"

[Waideland]

You know what I find even sadder? A man who punched someone in the face in a moment of poor judgment during a heated argument that didn't result in any permanent injury or death gets more attention than:

1) The Dallas Cowboys player that killed his friend while driving drunk last year, and who by the way, is already back in the league without losing his contract, and after serving a shorter suspension than Rice.

2) The Eagles QB that tortured and killed dogs for many years, in much the same fashion that serial killers tend to do before they switch to humans.

3) The Patriots TE currently being held without bail for two execution-style murders, and suspected of several more.

4) The "other guy" in the league accused of domestic violence, but since there's no Tosh.0 style video tape, no one cares.

5) Pre-emptively, Adrian Peterson's child abuse charges. Sure it's in the news now since the story literally just broke, but in three days, it'll go away, and we'll be back to the the earth's greatest villain, Ray Rice.

I guess the lesson to be learned here is that Rice would have been better off getting drunk and having his wife in the passenger seat of his car while he hit a tree a tree at 80 mph, rather than getting drunk and hitting her.

[The Rich Port]

Also, I've taken a look a few times at the video, and I honestly can't tell what happened.

He seems to say something or do something to her and that's when she seems to try to hit him... She doesn't really succeed, if you ask me. He seems to push her face away, and as she comes at him, that's when he punches her out.

She doesn't seem like a particularly dangerous woman, either. A little wiry.

You know what I find even sadder? A man who punched someone in the face in a moment of poor judgment during a heated argument that didn't result in any permanent injury or death gets more attention than:

1) The Dallas Cowboys player that killed his friend while driving drunk last year, and who by the way, is already back in the league without losing his contract, and after serving a shorter suspension than Rice.

2) The Eagles QB that tortured and killed dogs for many years, in much the same fashion that serial killers tend to do before they switch to humans.

3) The Patriots TE currently being held without bail for two execution-style murders, and suspected of several more.

4) The "other guy" in the league accused of domestic violence, but since there's no Tosh.0 style video tape, no one cares.

5) Pre-emptively, Adrian Peterson's child abuse charges. Sure it's in the news now since the story literally just broke, but in three days, it'll go away, and we'll be back to the the earth's greatest villain, Ray Rice.

I guess the lesson to be learned here is that Rice would have been better off getting drunk and having his wife in the passenger seat of his car while he hit a tree a tree at 80 mph, rather than getting drunk and hitting her.

Maybe sports media are using this as a distraction?

The NFL did indefinitely suspend a guy for smoking marijuana and were about to give Rice a two game suspension for assaulting his wife.

[Divitaen]

:D At least you are consistent.

I will start supporting your quixotic crusade of showing men are getting abused, assaulted, and killed by women at the same frequency or probably in your mind much more....probably when the biased police reports and the baised domestic violence groups start reporting it.

What you're doing right now is quite similar to claiming that blacks are inherently violent because black men are roughly seven times as likely to be incarcerated at any given point in their lives. That is to say, you're pointing to the behavior of the criminal justice system in order to advance a discriminatory claim.

You are also ignoring a very large body of science. Some domestic violence advocacy groups recognize that abuse of men by women is under-recognized, under-reported, and largely going unaddressed. Others are in denial. This is not unusual, because some of them, like you, are dominated by highly sexist views.

It is well documented that male victims of domestic violence neither expect nor receive the same degree of remedy from the police that female victims of domestic violence receive; and that bystanders, witnesses, police, etc are far more likely to intervene on behalf of women. E.g.:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.100 ... 012-9482-9
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 156.x/full

There is an enormous body of literature showing that male victims are not seeking out and receiving police help. It's widely believed (and with good cause) that domestic violence victims stand a non-trivial chance of being arrested, and this is particularly true of men, to the point where a male victim is more likely to be arrested than a female perpetrator.

A large systematic overview of extant scientific literature was conducted beginning in 2010. It says much the same as I'm telling your right now. Yes, including the parts about the criminal justice system treating men and women differently at every step of the way.

The idea that domestic violence is a male-on-female problem is also consistently undermined by gay and lesbian partnerships, as I pointed out.

This debate about the gender aspects of domestic violence is very interesting. I don't claim to have all the answers on this issue, but let me just give my two cents here.

I actually am one of the people who believe domestic violence is a women's rights issue (not to say violence against men doesn't deserve urgent redress either). For several reasons. First, somewhere above the statistics about 85% of domestic violence victims being women was debated quite fiercely. I've seen some conflicting reports claiming its 60% or something. However, it seems in most centres the accepted number is around 85%, as far as we know.

http://www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/domviol/facts.htm
https://www.dosomething.org/facts/11-facts-about-domestic-and-dating-violence
http://www.statisticbrain.com/domestic-violence-abuse-stats/
http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/intimate-partner-violence/Pages/measuring.aspx

This seems to be the general consensus from law enforcement agencies, domestic violence help centres and prosecutors' offices. Of course, this raises the concern that men under-report incidents of domestic violence levelled against them by their wives. Since we all know domestic violence victims in general, men and women, both tend to underreport incidences of abuse, for various reasons, it comes down to who underreports more and to what extent it impacts the '85%' statistic.

Here, the most famous study is actually by an IPV researcher by the name of Ko Ling Chan, who found that men tend to under-report the violence they perpetrate against women and women tend to under-report their victimization. This is often due to women's socio-economic dependency on their partners and the fact that women, due to disempowerment in society, tend to blame themselves rather than their partners. Cultural factors, such as the influence of machismo and the notion of male household dominance also influence the extent to which men and women view certain acts of violence perpetrated against women as 'normal' and 'not worth reporting' to authorities, on both sides.

I suppose this comes down to the main reason why domestic violence is a mainly women's issue. Statistics aside, much of the causes of domestic violence centre around concerns of female autonomy. The largest reasons for the perpetration of domestic violence are social views of female submission to her husband, the notion that women are the property of her husband and thus may be punished for disobedience by violence, customs and traditions that reinforce this like FGM, child marriage, polygamy and honour killings. In the developed world, women's disempowerment often comes from a pervasive sexual objectification of women, traditional views of the subjugation of a woman's role in the family and the continuing socio-economic dependence that many women still have on their husbands.

I guess this comes to an important part of the Ray Rice controversy is that the victim-blaming that we saw in the media is perhaps endemic of a wider culture of misogyny and objectification that reinforces continuing cycles of abuse in dating and marriage.