Alright. Let's do this. I'll bite.

So first thing's first, this article is clearly click bait and no, the Chinese government isn't going to start encouraging or even allowing women to simply carry flamethrowers and open fire on any threat like it's nothing. So let's start by establishing that we are arguing hypotheticals here over a clearly click bait article.

However, the point of self defence isn't to provide an equivalent punishment to the crime committed, but to allow someone to use violence preemptively against an aggressor to stay safe. You don't practice self defense after you get raped, but hopefully before you do.

This opens the door to many difficult and vague situations where it's hard to tell whether an act was justified or not, but that doesn't mean that burning someone is necessarily in any way less justifiable than shooting them or stabbing them etc.

So in this hypothetical scenario, the question isn't whether burning someone is equivalent to being sexually harassed, because that's not the type of situation that self defence is meant to be used in. It's not equivalent but rather preemptive.

So we are now asking the question: are women entitled to self defence against sexual harassment? And I'd guess the answer probably lies in the middle of "yes every time" and "never" because no one should get raped for lack of self defence avenues, but also I don't think someone should get burnt to death for cat calling someone else, no matter how inappropriate I may think it is.

However, if a woman (honestly, any SA victim, not just women) gets touched inappropriately and feels threatened, I think it's fair to allow her to preemptively attack. So I'd say you can't argue self defence without the presence of a physical threat. And even then, self defence obviously needs to be clearly outlined to minimise the likelihood of unjustified attacks.

That being said, this is both obviously clickbait and also a terrible idea simply because of how much uncontrolled collateral damage a flamethrower can do to others, structures and even first responders. So yeah, it's a dumb idea. But I don't think that's because sexual assault is not a basis for self defence, rather because flamethrowers are extraordinarily unsafe weapons for everyone involved.

There is no level of violence unacceptable for self defense against sexual assault. Keep your hands to yourself.

Oh no, wont anybody think of the sex criminals just minding their own business harrassing women.

EVERY TIME ANYTHING WOMAN RELATED COMES UP IN THE FEED, HERE YOU ARE ACTING IT OUT, EVERY. FUCKING. TIME. HOLY HELL WHAT DO YOU HAVE AGAINST WOMEN? I NEED TO KNOW. WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU?

Are your concerns for others or yourself?