The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.

Of course, if someone initiates force against you by fighting, cheating, stealing, or threatening you; go ahead and kick the s~~~ out of them, then take back what they stole from you, and threaten to beat their ass again if they ever again try that s~~~ on  you.

Like I said there is more to it, and there are some famous exceptions.  For example, if you are in a life or death situation, and the only way for you to survive is to steal, then it is not immoral to steal (survival is the purpose of morality, so it trumps morality) — but only if you take full responsibility and admit to your action and (if at all possible) make reparations plus damages to the person from whom you stole.  In such a case, your initial action would be considered an amoral action, not an immoral action.

Also, sometimes a situation is so f~~~ed up that you have no choice but to ‘violate’ the non-aggression principle.  Where there is no free choice, there is no morality.  So if someone is going to kill you unless you club an old man to death, you are not violating the non-aggression principle by complying.  This sounds odd at first, but remember, where there is no free will, there is no culpability.  The blood is on the hands of the f~~~tard that put you in the situation, you simply did what you had to do.  Again, your action would be considered amoral, not immoral.

There are volumes more to say on this topic, and I have probably fuct it up horribly.  So please wiki it.