Finger Punch

The following may shock some of you, because it’s real, yo.

Wes and I don’t always agree.

I’ll give you a moment to fan yourself with your lace kerchief before I continue.  Do you need a fainting couch?  Perhaps some smelling salts?  No?  Ok, onwards!

Wes and I were chatting while falling asleep the other day when an Issue emerged.  Something we didn’t agree on, and now we’re seeking couples counseling via the Internet.

The Issue was over whether or not a poke can be considered a finger punch (you know, like a punch but with just the one finger instead of the whole fist).  I’m a strong proponent of the idea that yes, a poke can be considered a finger punch.  No one would ever say finger punch over poke, of course, because finger punch is a lot more work to say, but regardless of its expediency I still argue that poke = finger punch.

Wes thinks this is pure drivel.  He refused to explain how a poke could intrinsically differ from a finger punch, simply stating that I was being silly and should go to sleep.

I’ll not let this rest, though.  I need resolution.  So, even though you guys normally side with Wes when we do polls, I’m going to open this up to you to help us decide.

[poll id=”17″]

6 thoughts on “Finger Punch

  1. Hahhahaha. I started laughing the minute I read “finger punch”. And really, I think it depends on how hard the poke is. I mean, a tickle poke isn’t a punch. But a thrust in the chest, yeah, probably.

  2. Even though I voted “no,” I agree with you… to an extent. From a legal perspective they are both battery (unwelcome touching), but I voted no because there is still a sharp difference. If someone five-finger punches you, they are probably trying to hurt you, and you would be justified in giving them a nice sharp right-cross to the jaw. The intent behind a poke (the non-facebook kind) is probably more likely to be to display indignancy, or simply to annoy/insult/vex the other person.

    Intent and response, that’s the key for me. If someone tries to full-hand (or elbow) punch me, they are trying to hurt me and I will try and hurt them right back and be legally justified in doing so. If someone pokes me, they are probably not trying to seriously injure me, so my response will be more measured, certainly more deliberate and thought out, and may just involve moving the offending finger in a not-so-gentle manner, which could actually be considered an innappropriate level of response.

    In conclusion, while a poke and a punch fall under the same title in the eyes of the law, the intent and the appropriate response provide an acute demarcation between the two which makes me hesitant to call them the same thing.

  3. -Belly Girl, Thank you! Wes is shaking his head, mwa ha ha ha ha!

    -Syd, So glad I could make you laugh! But there are nice punches too, like when guys lightly punch one another in the arm in a congratulatory fashion. Could that be equated with a tickle poke?

    -DC, Part of me just wants to say, “No! You’re wrong!” before sticking out my tongue and running to hide. But I won’t! In the interest of discourse I’ll behave.

    If intent and ensuing response are the differentiators, shouldn’t you also consider the different kinds of punches and pokes? If you poke someone in the eyes or testes, for example, couldn’t that be considered a tactical punch? And wouldn’t it merit an appropriately angry response?

    Likewise, when people do fist bumps, those aren’t intended to injure but they are considered punches. So really, what my argument boils down to is intent and response can vary and don’t provide as clear a demarcation as the jury has been led to believe.

  4. Ok, so I’m late to the party but… hinging on the word COULD I would agree with you, yes it could be. I think it all comes down to intent, pressure applied and the subject of the conversation at the time of poking!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *