Is "nads kicking" a crime worthy of being thrown in jail for?

[Maddy McCall]

Poll question: Is "nads kicking" a crime worthy of being thrown in jail for?

[Whoa_Nelly]

1. Who kicked whom in the 'nads?

[jpgray]

2. Probably not

But it's more serious than "titty twisting." Most of the latter is male-to-male and is prepubescent behavior, but I don't know what everyone is referencing.

[hfojvt]

3. asault with intent to cause great bodily injury

But I will be all right in a couple of minutes

I think.

[RDU Socialist]

4. depends on the nature of the kick

if it's part of a larger assault, yes. if it's just a couple guys acting like idiots, then no. but i happen to care more about the situation in which the action took place than making a rush to judgment based on some absolutist view on everything.

[Maddy McCall]

5. //

//

[RDU Socialist]

6. to paraphrase the austrian prime minister

after Tsar Nicholas I put down a rebellion that would have overthrown the government concerning how Austria would react: "You have astonished me with your reply's unintelligence."

Edit to clarify: I'm not an idiot, I'm just someone who doesn't believe in crying and acting like a child over everything.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jpgray]

8. I think women don't understand the "guys acting like idiots" part of this

Guys will inflict mild physical harm on each other just as a social game. No one takes it seriously (or at least almost no one). Serious physical harm is different, but titty twisters, snakebites and wet willies aren't assault. Women have similar social games guys have no clue about as well, of course.

[RDU Socialist]

9. or indian burns

can't forget those!

[name not needed]

10. or shooting glass out of your friends hand with a paintball gun

[Maddy McCall]

11. I've seen guys do it as a form of bullying.

Is that what happened in the story that precipitated these stupid threads? A "joke" is not a joke unless both parties think it's funny.

[jpgray]

13. I disagree

There are three parts to a behavior like this--intent, context and interpretation. In my view, the intent and context were pretty benign. If a jewish person traveled to India and filed suit against the state archaeological society because Jainist and Vedic artifacts display a swastika, the interpretation is the problem--not the intent or the context. I think that's the sort of thing that happened here.

[merh]

12. I'm a little scared to ask why you are asking?

:freak: Is this research before the action? :scared:

[Maddy McCall]

14. Because he can't handle the argument in DU, so he brought it...

to the lounge instead. :shrug:

I've had fun toying with him and his little special friend, though. :D

[merh]

15. Well okay then.

:hi:

[Moderator]

16. Locking

Obviously, this has become a flamefest.