This story proves…
- That Wonder Woman dissing school is run by idiots, but we knew that.
- Life has a sense of humor.
- Some problems—many, even— are best solved by violence.
- Trying to mug Wonder Woman would be safer than trying to mug Monique Bastos, and
- Nothing could start this long weekend better, at least for me, than a news item where justice prevails and anti-violence nuts have a lesson in why it’s better to be strong than meek.
I love it.
Wesley Sousa de Araujo and a fellow punk decided to rob two women on a street in on a street in Acailandia, western Brazil. They didn’t expect one of their victims to be this woman..
…Bastos, a 23-year old professional MMA fighter and a jiu-jitsu whiz. Maybe he was thrown off because she didn’t have her gloves on, but it was a big mistake. Instead of submitting, she attacked when the men blocked her and her companion using their motorbike and ordered the women to hand over their mobile phones. Bastos explained later that when one of the men grabbed the mobile phone she was carrying, she realized that they had no weapons. She immediately knocked their motorbike down, and placed de Araujo in what she called a “rear-naked choke” before locking him in the dreaded “‘lion killer” choke hold for 20 minutes until police arrived. The other failed mugger, realizing what he was up against, ran away
Smart.
The Brazilian wonder woman’s grateful companion used her now secure phone to video the helpless man as he transformed into a pathetic wimp, pleading and crying (in Portuguese):
“Daddy, daddy, call the police, daddy! Help Jesus. I swear, it was the first time I’ve ever done this. Help, Lord, somebody help me. Where’s my mommy?”
This is wonderful in every way. It’s a vivid warning to bullies and thugs everywhere. It’s an inspiration to women and girls that there is nothing unfeminine about being strong and able to defend yourself. It is an antidote for anyone who has been warped by our suddenly flaccid and cringing “progressive” culture to believe that passivity, submissiveness and confrontation avoidance (you know, like U.S. foreign policy and the Iran Deal, a.k.a. “Munich II”) is virtuous. It also vindicates Wonder Woman. Thank Hera!
And it makes me smile.
Monique Bastos is an Ethics Hero.
Here’s the video…
Ethics Alarms 
Can anyone stand up and say they had a duty to retreat please?
Please.
Oh pretty please? I wear a shirt to school, in honor of Chris Kyle, about once a week. It has the logo of his company, Craft International, on the front. On the back is a very large “Punisher” skull logo, surrounded in very bold red letters that read “Despite what your momma told you, violence does solve problems”. It’s one of my favorites.
I know a school that would send you home. About 250,000, actually…
I would fight them on it. Not because I don’t believe they have a right to enforce a dress code, but because it’s very selectively applied.
I always have another shirt ready to go, realizing that if they really insist, ill have no choice. I can’t help it. I feel the need to push back a little bit. Left-wing stuff everywhere. Every left-wing platitude you can think of, not to mention professors who push left wing politics during class. Science class. It started with the visible distain that me wearing my command shirts or ballcaps elicited. That got under my skin. “You don’t like shirts with the names of places I’ve SERVED?”
Do you have a response all loaded and cocked?
I could just link to any of the other discussions on this topic. But seriously, the *duty* to retreat will always empower bad people and diminish one of the natural checks on the devolution of civil society.
She didn’t kill him. She restrained him — effectively making a citizen’s arrest — assuming such a thing exists in her country. Good for her.
For those unfamiliar with Beth, she condemned a black man for showing restraint in defending himself from an assailant also, before backing out of the confrontation.
This is called inconsistency.
Oops, this is clunky, it would better read:
For those unfamiliar with Beth, she condemned a black man for defending himself against an assailant, in that situation, the man also showed restraint AND he even went so far as to depart the area of the confrontation as opposed to staying, which he had every right to do.
This is called inconsistency.
This is called — Tex is an idiot. There is a big difference between a woman restraining a mugger and calling the authorities and a man punching a drunk obnoxious woman in a bar INSTEAD OF restraining her and calling the authorities.
Thank God you’re not in law enforcement.
Actually, there’s not alot of difference. Restraining (what she did because she had the ability to do so) and stopping (what he did because he didn’t want the confrontation to escalate) aren’t all that different. She had the likelihood of being believed, he, probably less so (if the video hadn’t been taken and he had no reason to think a video was being taken). For both of them, they displayed a PROPORTIONATE response and ended the attacks on them.
Here you are cool with a woman defending herself from a man and not cool with a man defending himself from a woman (unless he has the presence of mind to do so in exactly the way you demand – which we thoroughly debunked you on in the previous discussion).
Again, you have no consistent standard. Nice.
Tunnel vision Tex — that’s your superpower. Sometimes a power and sometimes a curse.
If the video were reversed and a man restrained a violent female offender, then my position would be the same.
You won’t see a lot of videos like that because most violent crimes are committed by men.
No no, you still haven’t shown any consistency whatsoever. A black man demonstrates restraint in stopping a crime against himself and decides to break away from the confrontation because he has that option, you condemn him. A latina female demonstrates restraint in stopping a crime against herself and controls the confrontation until authorities arrive, and she’s the greatest thing since sliced bread. You do realize the difference is immaterial to the concept of self-defense right?
You have no consistent standard on this. But it is interesting what your method of deciding who is right and who is wrong is…
Then there was that time Sliced Bread stopped that knife that tried to slather it in butter, and stuck the knife in a drawer, which some weenies, spoons mostly, complained was false imprisonment and excessive force. Other confrontation averse slices claim that if they didn’t retreat in the face of such spreading threats, they would be toast. Opponents pointed out that the knife would feel empowered and validated, and would assault other slices similarly, regarding itself, like the butter, as being on a roll.
I’m going back to bed…
At yeast you are able to find humor in this. Now let’s leaven this discussion alone until Beth can come up with her rye response.
Wheat are you doing on during Labor Day?
Trying to make some dough, though I’d like to loaf. I’m still crumby, but I should be all white.
Wow, you guys are funny!
By the way, why did killing come up? Already trying to reframe the discussion?
Wonder Woman never never never EVER killed anyone. Ever.
Or put them in a “lion-killer” head-lock.
Well, not that we know of. She did have an invisible plane. God only knows what went on on that thing.
Anybody who came anywhere near it knew…you could see right through it. I always wondered, too…how did she fly the thing, if the controls were invisible?
Imagine how silly we would all look if our cars were invisible.
Good God! It doesn’t bear imagining.
I wouldn’t have been a good place to change into her costume! But then again, a telephone booth is a lousy place, too.
Linda Carter just spun around a few times and the costume appeared. “Phone Booth? I don’ need no stinkin’ phone booth!!!”
If only real life were that way. Couples everywhere would be showing up on time.
I keep remembering a now-ancient WW parody in Mad Magazine… where she DOES change in her transparent F-104! Her Army boyfriend gazes at her through smoking binoculars. I was just old enough to appreciate the humor!
It would have been a tragedy if she killed him. He could reform, and become a social justice warrior.
He already believes in taking the earnings from one person and distributing it to others…
Or he could stay a punk thug waiting for some citizen to blow his ass away. Third alternative, scared straight by this episode, goes on to become upstanding citizen and leads a productive life. Wonder which is more likely?
Hopefully the last one. The first two are equally bad.
Far as I’m concerned, the first two are the same thing.
Yup.
No — but killing often comes up in duty to retreat discussions. I’m using YOUR framework.
But it didn’t get brought up until you arbitrarily chose too…
Can’t get around that…not even Charles Green level of tap dancing can accomplish this.
Google “duty to retreat” Tex. Nine times out of ten it involves use of deadly force.
I know it hurts your brain cells when people apply logic to your very narrowly confined ethics examples. I know it’s easier for you if we stay within your tiny little sand box because it will help you prove whatever point you’re making, but many of us have mastered most of the playground equipment.
Does anyone want to explain to Beth why there is an increased likelihood of hearing about Duty to Retreat when someone is actually killed and duty to retreat becomes a question versus why we may not hear about duty to retreat when someone actually does retreat and nothing comes of a situation other than a bad person being empowered?
It’s kindergarten simple.
“I know it hurts your brain cells when people apply logic to your very narrowly confined ethics examples. I know it’s easier for you if we stay within your tiny little sand box because it will help you prove whatever point you’re making, but many of us have mastered most of the playground equipment.”
I’m not sure claiming I’m pigeon holing a discussion holds up under scrutiny after you are the one who isolated the discussion to killings. Try again, this time, without non sequiturs.
Sorry Beth, he caught you. In Liberal Circles, this would be called disparate impact. Bastos beat them soundly, they were bleeding from the mouth and nose, and I can’t find myself with any sympathy for them, just like I couldn’t find any sympathy for the woman who called the football player a nigger and kneed him in the groin before being fed a knuckle sandwich. My position is consistent, even if you disagree with it, your consistent is inconsistent, but consistent with your feminist bias. A larger than the assailant woman can apparently beat up her attacker, and that’s OK, but a male attacker who is larger than his assailant has a DUTY to retreat? I think those were the words you used. You wanna take a turn on the top Beth? Spin spin spin.
It’s too early. “your consistent is inconsistent” Jesus. Position. And before you spin about DUTY to retreat, do us all a favor and go back to the discussion about the case we’re talking about. You can’t give us grief for using your words.
If he actually makes it to jail, he’ll look back on this video as the good times.
In Brazil? You got that right.
She looks exactly, and I mean exactly, like a girlfriend I had in Panama. This whole thing is so beautiful. Yes, they’re trying their level best to de-fang this generation of kids. Meek, passive, fearful kids are obedient kids. Single-parent households are great for this. Lack of a masculine influence WILL harm kids, especially boys. Psychologists arre trying to say that that’s not true. They’re wrong. They’re lying. Anybody that pays close enough attention can see evidence of this.Parents are going to have to work very hard and deliberately against the gradient to give their kids a fighting chance.
She should be on lunch boxes here and in Brazil. Btw, in the city I live in, there are cheap continuing ed classes offered for kids and teens to learn martial arts.
We have free Krav Maga at our school. Which is really, really odd, all things considered.
To quote the Gambler: “You got to know when to hold “em …. .” This was an exceptional lady with suprise on her side. On the other hand even after my latest bilaterial spinal epadurial I would “fold ’em. That violence can solve problems is well known in this country: when it should be used is not so well known.
Miss Bastos is not only a professional fighter, but certainly a lovely young lady. It should be noted here that she didn’t attempt to put down this two bit punk until she had ascertained that he and his buddy were unarmed. That denotes wisdom as well. I don’t know what the gun laws are like in Brazil, but I’d take it from this that they are restrictive. The punk was too stupid to get one on the (inevitable) black market and the girls were too law abiding to get one themselves. Miss Bastos had the advantage of training and surprise to overcome her inept assailant. The vast majority of girls would have no such recourse.
And sadly, she would have been completely and utterly at the mercy of these vermin had they been armed, unless they happened to stray within her area of influence. That’s what people who say that martial arts can negate the need for being armed don’t understand.
Yup. Sadly, hand-to-hand means just what it says…she’d have to able to reach him in order to do any damage. Which, by-the-bye, is why the cop shows showing somebody shoving a gun in your ear are a bit unrealistic, as there are all kinds of ways to keep a gun from firing if you can reach it, and certainly ways to keep it from firing AT YOU.
You’d think that a country with the immense crime problem that Brazil has would know this. But then again, you’d think the same of Washington D.C.!