Expressions of resistance to violence metaphors for cancer provide important insights as to how these metaphors are perceived and which specific aspects of their use are deemed inapt or inappropriate by actual language users. The first objective of this paper is to examine different types of resistance standpoints that are expressed in critical responses to violence metaphors for cancer as well as the different metaphor dimensions these standpoints are focused on. Secondly, the paper aims to demonstrate the value of a close analysis of standpoints of resistance to metaphor from a combined argumentation theoretical and metaphor theoretical perspective. It will be shown how a combined argumentation theoretical and metaphor theoretical framework constitutes a useful and structured method for understanding the nature of resistance standpoints and the specific dimension(s) of metaphor they address. In this paper the combined framework will be put into practice in six case studies, each illustrating different manners in which language users express their disapproval of a particular use of violence metaphors for cancer.