A text comes to Tiger’s phone at 2 a.m. Since Tiger is under the influence of pain medication, he does not notice the text while it awakens his wife. Elin turns over grabs the phone to see what is so important at this late hour. It’s a racy text about how Tiger made a woman climax violently and how she is looking forward to more of the same. After years of rumors and his vehement denials, Elin lounges at Tiger. Filled with rage, she starts screaming and slapping him awake. Through his drug-induced fog, Tiger hears “phone”, “text”, “fucking around”, “Rachel” and decides to make a break for the door. He lurches out of the driveway only to be distracted and run into a tree and fire hydrant when he hears the crack of a golf club against the SUV’s rear window.
At least that it what “THEY” say…but a lot of people say it though. I’m sure the truth is somewhere in that alleged scenario.
All in all, I think Tiger handled this situation very well. After years of (alleged) cheating with multiple partners, Tiger decided to take full responsibility for the 2 a.m. incident. And in an effort to save his marriage and family, he supposedly gave his wife $5 million to stay and upwards of $80 million if she decides continue the marriage. Of course they will have to deal with the jokes and the continuous internet/tv coverage, but with great celebrity and wealth comes a lot of attention. It’s really all kinda hilarious…
And the people say: BUT WHAT ABOUT CHRIS BROWN?!?!?!
Here comes the nifty “Theory of False Equivalency”…as politically incorrect as it sounds, no, the Chris Brown/Rihanna situation is not the same as the Tiger Woods episode and here’s why:
First, while one strike from any person is bad, it’s the result of the ESCALATION of domestic violence that causes the most harm: hospitalization, serious injuries, and/or death. You can also add isolation from family/friends and the woman staying in the relationship because of the threats of serious bodily harm or death. In the Chris Brown case, Rihanna feared for her life, was choked, and received a litany of injuries including bites, a black eye, scratches, and head contusions. Witnesses from the neighborhood and the hospital recount Rihanna repeatedly screaming, most likely out of pain and fear. As for Tiger Woods, his wife allegedly scratched his face and struck THEIR automible with a golf club. Immediately after the incident, Tiger was sleeping (probably from the medication) and told a friend that his wife had “went ghetto” on him and said he would have to get her a “Kobe Special.” There was practically no way that Rihanna could have stopped that beating, whereas Tiger could have most likely restrained his wife. So why is there so much focus on the men in these scenarios? Because OVERWHELMINGLY (upwards of 85%), women are on the receiving end of serious harm or death, which leads me to the second point…
Feel free to blame God/Yahweh/Allah, the universe, or who ever you believe to be responsible for difference in biology between males and females, but men are generally much stronger physically than women, PERIOD. (I’ve been restrained by a male in a few situations and it was not even a contest.) It is not a “fair” fight between a man and a woman and to perpetrate that myth is a horrible disservice to women who find themselves in these sometimes life-threatening situations. This is why you don’t see men boxing women in the ring. Women who are raped, severely beaten, or killed do not end up that way because they refuse to use their strength to stop these men…those men physically overpower them. PERIOD. While females are not always on the receiving end of the serious injuries, I am speaking of most likely scenarios. Any woman who seriously harms a man (short of self defense) should be treated just as harshly under the law.
Still having a hard time wrapping your head around the “false equivalency”? Suppose you have a young black male in an altercation with a police officer. During the struggle, the young man strikes the police officer. The cop can: (1) immediately slap the cuffs on the young man for assaulting a police officer–BEST, (2) strike the offender, slam him on the ground, then cuff him or (3) shoot the young male because he says his life is in danger–WORST. In most cases, the young man will not have a weapon and the police officer has a weapon and the law behind him. If the officer over reacts and uses his “full strength” (which includes the gun), this can never be a “fair” fight. The young man and the officer are not similarly situated.
The bottom line is a man getting hit multiple times by a woman is not the same as a woman getting beat up by a man. To say otherwise, while easy and somewhat popular, is simply ignoring reality.