SharinganUser said:
Violence against anyone who isn't trying to cause physical harm against you or others around you is immoral. If you are a respectable person, then there will be no need to beat your gf in the first place. It has nothing to do with seeking approval or trying to impress, and everything to do with acting like a civilized person and letting people know they've crossed a line without assaulting them. Hitting women and children doesn't show that you have a backbone, it shows that you are spineless and have to rely on violence to gain the respect of others.
If a woman doesn't respect me then I'd rather just dump her than keep her around with a mark on her face.
Moreover, there have been civilizations that have lasted longer than ours where slavery was common, where men had to bow down before kings/emperors and if they didn't they had their heads chopped off. Should we bring back those practices as well?
Cultures without slavery have been successful in preserve themselves and prosper therefore slavery is not a necessary condition, think of eastern roman empire or the greek city states,think of the italian cities during renaissance and Im sure you'll find more.
Republics like those (except byzantium) prospered with no slaves or kings, just a simple government advanced for that time.
So no your last question is a fallacy.
Instead you wont find any civilization that prospered and succeded in his area where family were corrupted or women were virtually free to behave any way they wanted withtout conseguences, nor you'll find any civilization where part of the population were made of effeminate man or white knights, nor you'll find any where masculinity was criminilized when used to stand his own ground in family or work.
Any time conditon like that happened the limits have been moved and the maps modified, as I said its not external military superiority the main cause for collapse but its internal weakness of a society.
Regarding hitting women the main topic, you can rationalize any way you please your decision to take it silently, I see you are using moral, good choice its the main one used from priests and feminists to contraddict those who expose their fallacies, stick to the classic.
And also keep that shaming althouth "spineless" is not as strong, you should take example from the feminists or the other white knight and use "coward", its much more effective when it comes of shaming.