Different reactions to domestic violence

pablomakaveli

So i watched this video yesterday:

For anyone who cant watch it for whatever reason it basically shows two actors playing a couple having an argument in a public place in front of hidden cameras to capture the reaction of the unsuspecting public.

In the first part the male actor acts in an abusive manner towards the female actor and members of the public immediatly step in to help.

However in the second part with the roles reversed with the female abusing the male the public just stand and laugh.

I did think to see the two reactions compared directly like this that it makes the reaction to the second scenario seem quite shocking and probably reflects poorly on ourselves as a society.

Ideally we should view both male on female and female on male abuse as unnacceptable but evidently we don't.

So whats everyone elses opinion?

AnonoBoy

People are d*cks is my opinion.

Covers this and many other scenarios.

Arthur Beesley

AnonoBoy wrote: »

People are d*cks is my opinion.

Sexist.

Why can't they be c**ts?

Oranage2

As a species we discriminate, it's a natural instinct, we try to protect what we think is weak, men and women being equal is a sense of morality that is for ever changing and not a natural instinct.

pundy

this thread is going to be 20 pages long by tomorrow. i bet.

OP is this not just another way of asking the exact same question as countless other "sexism" threads?

Mr. CooL ICE

pundy wrote: »

this thread is going to be 20 pages long by tomorrow. i bet.

The only thread longer than this could only be the shoddy Thurles tarmac thread

pundy

LordChessington wrote: »

The only thread longer than this could only be the shoddy Thurles tarmac thread

haha damn, looks like i jinxed it, and it will go no further.

ScumLord

The problem for men is that for the most part we see them as bigger and stronger, the worry is never that a woman is beating a man, it's what will happen when the man snaps and hits back.

There's really no good way to deal with an arguing couple. If you get involved they invariably turn on you. The only time you can step in is when one of them turns to an all out assault and knocks the other out so they can't team up on you anymore.

Hotale.com

Worst part about that video is that the way the woman "abusing" the man was actually worse than the way the man "abused" the woman.

beyondbelief67

My father never sought help for this reason that people would laugh and think he was joking, he was 6'1 and my mother 5'3 yet it didn't stop her giving him black eyes and other bruises over the years and never once did he snap but I wish there had been support groups like amen when he was alive that he could of got help from.

Links234

pablomakaveli wrote: »

So whats everyone elses opinion?

That public attitudes about domestic violence needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century. That it's nowhere near as clear cut as women being the victim and men being the villain, many people in same sex relationships can suffer from domestic violence as well. And as I understand, there are also problems where if a man is the victim of domestic abuse they will often times feel like they have nobody to talk to because they will be judged about it or feel weak, or are more afraid to speak out because of this.

dundalkfc10

beyondbelief67 wrote: »

My father never sought help for this reason that people would laugh and think he was joking, he was 6'1 and my mother 5'3 yet it didn't stop her giving him black eyes and other bruises over the years and never once did he snap but I wish there had been support groups like amen when he was alive that he could of got help from.

Or he could have just left her!

so when the guy was been abused they all laughed holy **** that's not right

pablomakaveli

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Or he could have just left her!

It's not always as easy as that though. Especially with kids involved.

beyondbelief67

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Or he could have just left her!

The same as many say in that situation men and women both they want to stay for the kids and also what reason would he of given for leaving her ? That she was violent and abusive ? No matter what reason he had given he would of looked the bad one an her the badly done too victim as she was a casualty sister so an angel to her patients and anyone who knew her till she was behind closed doors so she would of made sure he was destroyed if he ever tried to go.

H3llR4iser

pablomakaveli wrote: »

It's not always as easy as that though. Especially with kids involved.

Exactly - for the kids and, as crazy as it sounds, possibly ever for the wife herself.

In a divorce, the man almost invariably pays the price - more so if he is the one "leaving": other than being stuck financially, he'll always be the "selfish man" that "left his family", no matter the reason.

beyondbelief67

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Exactly - for the kids and, as crazy as it sounds, possibly ever for the wife herself.

In a divorce, the man almost invariably pays the price - more so if he is the one "leaving": other than being stuck financially, he'll always be the "selfish man" that "left his family", no matter the reason.

yes that's exactly why he never left as he knew he'd be always thought of badly and not get to see us if he did.and same with other men I've spoken to in similar situations since then.

Chattastrophe!

There's a thing called (I think) the bystander effect, basically if no one else is doing anything, people are more likely to keep their heads down and walk on by whatever's happening.

So in the first incident, people were more comfortable to step in once that one person had. In the second incident, maybe if one person had intervened, others would have too, but it just happened that no one did.

Having said that, maybe there's something to it. I mean, if I saw a man much bigger and taller than me (I'm female by the way, and not very tall!) being treated that way, I have to admit I'd be reluctant to intervene - it would nearly feel like I was demeaning him even more, somehow, by having me try to come to his rescue?

In all honestly, I have to admit I'm not entirely sure what I'd do as a bystander in that situation, whether it was a man abusing a woman, or a woman abusing a man, or a same-sex couple involved. Obviously if was there was serious violence involved, I'd ring the Gardai. And I don't think I'd be able to just casually walk on by and ignore it, no matter what. But it's hard to know exactly how to intervene? And whether you might end up making matters worse for the victim afterwards?

Links234

Another thing to keep in mind with the "Why don't they just leave?" argument, older generations have very funny attitudes towards married couples splitting up, and by "funny" I mean horrible. Ireland was a very catholic country where divorce wasn't a reality until quite recently, and 'till death do you part was really the only way to leave a marriage.

My father used to beat the **** out of both my mum and me when I was a kid. Long story short, he moved out after a certain incident, and although they didn't get divorced, we had neighbors who didn't speak to us any more because of it. Didn't matter if he was the kind of bastard who sent a kid to hospital with broken ribs, "for better or worse" meant that, no matter how much worse. I'll never understand the mentality of these neighbors, but after my dad moved out, my mum got the stink eye from them constantly and they'd never spoken to her since. I just can't wrap my head around it, but to some people in this country, leaving a marriage is anathema. That's probably got something to do with why people just don't leave.

Amirani

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

Having said that, maybe there's something to it. I mean, if I saw a man much bigger and taller than me (I'm female by the way, and not very tall!) being treated that way, I have to admit I'd be reluctant to intervene - it would nearly feel like I was demeaning him even more, somehow, by having me try to come to his rescue?

In all honestly, I have to admit I'm not entirely sure what I'd do as a bystander in that situation, whether it was a man abusing a woman, or a woman abusing a man, or a same-sex couple involved. Obviously if was there was serious violence involved, I'd ring the Gardai. And I don't think I'd be able to just casually walk on by and ignore it, no matter what. But it's hard to know exactly how to intervene? And whether you might end up making matters worse for the victim afterwards?

That's fair enough, and I think most people would have similar hesitations. A big question is though; would you laugh at the abuse like many of the people in the video? I think that's the difference.

BrianBoru00

Anyone else think that the witnesses just thought "crazy irish bitch" ?

Chattastrophe!

Diego Simeone wrote: »

That's fair enough, and I think most people would have similar hesitations. A big questions is though; would you laugh at the abuse like many of the people in the video? I think that's the difference.

It's very heavily edited, so I'm not sure how much I'd trust the footage ...

However in answer to your question, no, of course not. But I have seen people laughing in similar situations, usually when I used to get the LUAS from Abbey St. There'd be junkies having rows, and people waiting for the LUAS would be sniggering away at them. I really didn't find it amusing. I will admit I never intervened in the rows in any way, but I certainly didn't laugh. I was just thankful for the life I'm lucky enough to have, it must be an awful way to live.

thomas anderson.

Would have knocked her out

BAM

Czarcasm

Of course there are different reactions to domestic violence based on the gender of the perpetrator, and the gender of the victim. This is why all that 'egalitarian equality' I've been reading about in the feminism thread falls flat on it's arse, because there's no such bloody thing as equality for both genders in society beyond internet and academic discussions.

Society has been aware of male on female violence since, well, since time began really, but the issue of female on male violence is still a fairly new concept, and it's an odd one for us to get our heads around, and because it's such a foreign concept to us, it's one of those things where you know you're not meant to laugh, you shouldn't laugh, but that's freaky shìt that your brain is having trouble coming to terms with.

It's not "right", of course it's not right, and it isn't acceptable, but people's natural reaction is to laugh at things that aren't happening to them, or make jokes about issues that don't affect them, hell, some people even deal with their issues by making jokes about them, but the thing is, you're never going to live in a society where everyone gives a shìt about each other and everyone thinks the same way.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Czarcasm wrote: »

It's not "right", of course it's not right, and it isn't acceptable, but people's natural reaction is to laugh at things that aren't happening to them, or make jokes about issues that don't affect them, hell, some people even deal with their issues by making jokes about them, but the thing is, you're never going to live in a society where everyone gives a shìt about each other and everyone thinks the same way.

It's only a natural reaction because society have been brainwashed to see men one way and women another. Same reason that egalitarianism falls 'flat on it's arse', as we are taught that equality is just an issue for women to strive for and not something men.

All rubbish of course.

It should be a major goal of our education system to teach children egalitarianism. Then maybe one day, should they see someone (or some family member) getting mentally and physcially abused, thier brain won't see it as some 'freaky shit' and so just laugh at it instead of trying to help and who knows, maybe one day also, if the essence of egalitarianism is instilled into our children at a young age and they are brought up to see all humans as being equal in fundamental worth and social status, they might even be just as disgusted to see a man getting abused, as they would be to see a woman. One can only hope.

Pumpkinseeds

I watched the video yesterday, without the sound so I don't know what's being said. But I found it shocking that so many people found it amusing to see a guy being visibly assaulted by a woman. Knowing whether or not to interfere in another couples argument is a tricky thing. Recently we saw a young couple having a domestic and did nothing because, well to be honest I was worried that he'd beat the crap out of her when they got home as a result of us getting involved.

But laughing at someone, anyone, getting assaulted would not be something I could ever imagine myself doing.

Galwayguy35

People will jump in if they think a woman is in trouble, not so much if it is a man.

I was in a nightclub years ago and this girl grabs one of the drinks I have just bought and makes off with it, I followed her and never left a hand on her but just took the bottle out of her hand and next thing I know 4 lads have surrounded me fully prepared to lay me out.

It would have been a totally different scenario if it was a man who took the drink, no knight in shining armour would have stepped in.

ALiasEX

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

I watched the video yesterday, without the sound so I don't know what's being said. But I found it shocking that so many people found it amusing to see a guy being visibly assaulted by a woman. Knowing whether or not to interfere in another couples argument is a tricky thing. Recently we saw a young couple having a domestic and did nothing because, well to be honest I was worried that he'd beat the crap out of her when they got home as a result of us getting involved.

But laughing at someone, anyone, getting assaulted would not be something I could ever imagine myself doing.

No worries, it would have been him that got the beating.

How Soon Is Now

Its one of the many examples that proves when it comes to gender there is never gonna be such thing as equal.

People see men and women as two different beings and always will.

When it come s to being abused its men who tend to be the ones who are labeled. There either the scumbag who's dishing it out or the one whos weak for accepting it .

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Slicedgerkin wrote: »

How is female on male a "fairly new concept"? It's been happening for millenia.

Indeed, and it has been known for millenia that both sexes are as equally culpable.

Erin Pizzey, who set up the world's first women's shelter back in 1971 in the UK, was helping home more battered women than any other perspn before her. To the degree that she was mentioned in the British parliment and hailed for the work she was doing. Then she made a mistake. she started interviewing the women and finding out about their lives and also took part in the following research: ""Comparative Study Of Battered Women And Violence-Prone Women" with a doctor at a local hospital. The results of the study were not what her fellow feminists wanted to hear (that women were just as violent as their male counterparts) and they began to hijack her work at the shelter and push her out.

These feminists were the same notorious ones that had a bombing campaign throught the UK during the early 70s and when Erin heard them planning one of these bombings, she told them she would go to the police. In response, they threatened her life and even poisoned her dog. Unsurprisingly, she left the country shortly afterwards but she realeased a few books on domestic violence, one of which was pioneering in that it was one of the first books in the world to cover the taboo subject.

Strange how a woman like Erin Pizzey, who set up one of the world's first shelters for battered women and who penned one of the first books which drew attention to domestic violence, is not heralded by Feminists. Surely she should be one of the first women discussed in women's study courses but no, guess they would much rather give accolades to women like Andrea Dworkin.

tritium

pundy wrote: »

this thread is going to be 20 pages long by tomorrow. i bet.

OP is this not just another way of asking the exact same question as countless other "sexism" threads?

Don't you know that's what we do in AH? We're trapped in endless reruns of the same sexism/rape culture/ abortion/ dole bashing/ anti whatever threads

Welcome to our own little part of hell!

tritium

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Or he could have just left her!

Yes, yes its really that easy. Walk out on her! Sure walk out on your relationship with your kids while you're at it.

People used to say the same about battered women until they copped on

Czarcasm

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

It's only a natural reaction because society have been brainwashed to see men one way and women another. Same reason that egalitarianism falls 'flat on it's arse', as we are taught that equality is just an issue for women to strive for and not something men.

All rubbish of course.

Aren't men just as much a part of society as women? Who's brainwashing who exactly? Are you trying to claim men are treated by society as inferior to women? You're right - that is complete rubbish.

It should be a major goal of our education system to teach children egalitarianism. Then maybe one day, should they see someone (or some family member) getting mentally and physcially abused, thier brain won't see it as some 'freaky shit' and so just laugh at it instead of trying to help and who knows, maybe one day also, if the essence of egalitarianism is instilled into our children at a young age and they are brought up to see all humans as being equal in fundamental worth and social status, they might even be just as disgusted to see a man getting abused, as they would be to see a woman. One can only hope.

You don't think children are taught in school from an early age to respect each other? That still doesn't stop some children organising fights on social media that take place with an audience in the local park? Rather than try and stop it, they're there to record it on their smartphones.

Your egalitarian idealism isn't worth jack shìt in the real world tbh.

Pumpkinseeds

ALiasEX wrote: »

No worries, it would have been him that got the beating.

Definitely not in that instance.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Czarcasm wrote: »

Aren't men just as much a part of society as women? Who's brainwashing who exactly? Are you trying to claim men are treated by society as inferior to women? You're right - that is complete rubbish.

Ah, here we go again. Just like you did on the last thread, twisting words around to make yourself appear as if you're saying something far more cleverer than you actually are.

It sounds good to finish that paragraph the way you did, but makes zero grammatical sense.

'You're right - that is complete rubbish'.

You see, the word 'that' in your sentence, is referring to something which you said, not I and so it would be impossible for me to be "right", about something you said, now would it.

But, at least you're not calling me names this time, so we're making some progress at least.

You don't think children are taught in school from an early age to respect each other?

Are you kidding me?

Girls are taught that they should fear boys and boys are taught that they should respect girls. Hell, one of the first things I remember learning at school was:

Girls are made from Sugar & Spice and all things nice.

Boys are made from nails, snails and puppy dog tails.

Your egalitarian idealism isn't worth jack shìt in the real world tbh.

I know. The point is: it should be.

Czarcasm

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Ah, here we go again. Just like you did on the last thread, twisting words around to make yourself appear as if you're saying something far more cleverer than you actually are.

It sounds good to finish that paragraph the way you did, but makes zero grammatical sense.

'You're right - that is complete rubbish'.

You see, the word 'that' in your sentence, is referring to something which you said, not I and so it would be impossible for me to be "right", about something you said, now would it.

But, at least you're not calling me names this time, so we're making some progress at least.

We're discussing domestic violence, and you're more concerned with my grammar?

Domestic violence, grammar, domestic violence, grammar...

Easy see where your priorities lie.

Are you kidding me?

Girls are taught that they should fear boys and boys are taught that they should respect girls. Hell, one of the first things I remember learning at school was:

You have to be taking the piss surely? You're using a Victorian nursery rhyme to make a social commentary on modern society?

Again, we're talking about domestic violence here, not some nursery rhyme you learned when you attended school over 100 years ago. If you want to talk about how women were viewed in society 100 years ago, it was legal for a man to rape his wife.

I know. The point is: it should be.

Your idea of egalitarianism seems to be biased towards men. How very "egalitarian" of you.

Shakespeare's Sister

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Or he could have just left her!

Sure, shift the responsibility over to him!
What about the kids needing their father?

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Czarcasm wrote: »

We're discussing domestic violence, and you're more concerned with my grammar?

Oh give the sanctimony a rest.

What you said made no sense. Kinda hard to pretend it did.

You have to be taking the piss surely? You're using a Victorian nursery rhyme to make a social commentary on modern society?

I'm no spring chicken, it's true - but I assure you I went to school in the 20th century, not the 19th.

Again, we're talking about domestic violence here, not some nursery rhyme you learned when you attended school over 100 years ago.

See this is your tactic on threads Czarcasm. You constantly try and suggest one comment a person makes, is really about something else, just so you can make them look the way you wish they did. We were NOT specifically talking about domestic violence when I mentioned that rhyme. I brought up that nursery rhyme as you implied that children were taught in school from an early age to "respect" each other, REMEMBER. My mentioning it was purely in effort to negate THAT point and that point alone.

If you want to talk about how women were viewed in society 100 years ago, it was legal for a man to rape his wife.

Yawn. I mention a nursery rhyme to negate your nonsense opinion and because that rhyme was written hundreds of years ago, this must of course mean that I want to discuss domestic violence from that period. I mean seriously. Quit trying to point score. It's boring.

Your idea of egalitarianism seems to be biased towards men. How very "egalitarian" of you.

My idea of egalitarianism is precisely what I said it was:

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

.. if the essence of egalitarianism is instilled into our children at a young age and they are brought up to see all humans as being equal in fundamental worth and social status, they might even be just as disgusted to see a man getting abused, as they would be to see a woman.

You see, nothing whatsoever that would suggest a bias towards men.

Want to make anything else up?

kowloon

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

There's a thing called (I think) the bystander effect, basically if no one else is doing anything, people are more likely to keep their heads down and walk on by whatever's happening.

Reminds me of this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSsPfbup0ac

Czarcasm

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

Oh give the sanctimony a rest.

Quite.

Want to make anything else up?

The difference between us is that I wasn't making it up as I went along, trying to 'point score' as you put it.

I wanted to talk about domestic violence, you wanted to talk about nursery rhymes and grammar.

Neyite

A woman will attempt to leave an abusive relationship on average 7 times before she finally manages to leave for good. I imagine that for men, its a lot more, given that there would be a very real fear that the woman would get custody of the children, and therefore the family home, and that the abuser will just take out their wrath on his children if he is not there to take it and therefore protect them.

Its complex and disingenuous to say 'just leave'. Abusers of both genders use manipulation, coercion, blackmail, threats to build a prison of fear for their victims. Usually the victims are isolated from friends and family, financially and emotionally abused until they are almost brainwashed, such is the fear.

And they know that the most dangerous time in any abusive relationship is just before or during your attempts to leave. That is why most victims flee with only what they can carry and dont dare to go back.

The stereotype of abuse needs to be smashed - it is genderless. It happens in male-female, and same sex relationships. It happens to our elderly by their cruel child, to our children by their parents or guardians. It is not about beatings - in fact, thats the more honest type of abuse - thats the one people can see and you have 'proof' for want of a better word, that you are a victim. Emotional abuse, Financial abuse, Gaslighting, Sexual abuse, are all severe forms of control that are not visible to the outside. Those scar too. And take longer to heal than a broken nose or black eye. The secrecy empowers the abuser. The longer the victim feels ashamed the longer their abuser holds the power to continue to do what they do.

Here is a handy checklist.

General warning signs of domestic abuse
People who are being abused may:

• Seem afraid or anxious to please their partner
• Go along with everything their partner says and does
• Check in often with their partner to report where they are and what they’re doing
• Receive frequent, harassing phone calls from their partner
• Talk about their partner’s temper, jealousy, or possessiveness

Warning signs of physical violence
People who are being physically abused may:

• Have frequent injuries, with the excuse of “accidents”
• Frequently miss work, school, or social occasions, without explanation
• Dress in clothing designed to hide bruises or scars (e.g. wearing long sleeves in the summer or sunglasses indoors)
• Warning signs of isolation

People who are being isolated by their abuser may:

• Be restricted from seeing family and friends
• Rarely go out in public without their partner
• Have limited access to money, credit cards, or the car

The psychological warning signs of abuse
People who are being abused may:

• Have very low self-esteem, even if they used to be confident
• Show major personality changes (e.g. an outgoing person becomes withdrawn)
• Be depressed, anxious, or suicidal

Abusers don't change. The only way to make the abuse stop is to leave.

Pat Custard

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Or he could have just left her!

and leave her with the house that he probably paid for??

would you say that if the roles were reversed?? she should just leave him if he was battering her?

Violence from both sides should be equally punished. male on male, male on female, female on male or female on female.

It shouldn't be a case of just leave her.

She should have been punished.

Pwindedd

Anyway back to the video. I watched it 3 times and noticed that the crowd was a different crowd, it was obviously done on different days or different times.

If the women that stepped in, had been witness to the "other" couple would they have still stepped in. It's not a huge crowd. Have a go heroes maybe few and far between. Maybe the question is - why do some people have the instinct to put themselves at possible risk for a stranger, or why don't more of us?

I would have been nervous to interfere in either situation. Both are equally unpleasant to watch. The woman could easily turn her anger on me, as could the man. I could make the situation worse for either of the couple. It's a toughie. But agreed - we need more people to make abusers aware that we don't find violence acceptable - either in public or behind closed doors.

diveout

Neyite wrote: »

Abusers don't change. The only way to make the abuse stop is to leave.

I think this is really a dodgy claim because if abusers believe this they won't seek help to change. I believe the majority can.

Czarcasm

Neyite wrote: »

Abusers don't change. The only way to make the abuse stop is to leave.

Great post Neyite, but the last part - I just wanted to point out that people who engage in domestic violence can, and in some cases do change their behaviour, and in other cases, just leaving doesn't stop the abuse, seeking help is the most effective way to stop the abuse.

Often when the victim leaves, their abuser can still terrorise them, and they should be encouraged to make a report to the authorities rather than just keep running away and always living in fear.

Neyite

diveout wrote: »

I think this is really a dodgy claim because if abusers believe this they won't seek help to change. I believe the majority can.

Pretty much every expert in the field of Domestic Abuse would disagree with you - its their claim, not mine. Abusers rarely, if ever, change, and the ones that genuinely do, only do so after years and years of therapy and hard work.

Have you links to the success rates of the programs for abusers that support your assertion that the majority change?

Neyite

Czarcasm wrote: »

Great post Neyite, but the last part - I just wanted to point out that people who engage in domestic violence can, and in some cases do change their behaviour, and in other cases, just leaving doesn't stop the abuse, seeking help is the most effective way to stop the abuse.

Often when the victim leaves, their abuser can still terrorise them, and they should be encouraged to make a report to the authorities rather than just keep running away and always living in fear.

Czarcasm, I attended DA counselling when my ex tried to strangle me. I went on to continue that counselling, outside of the refuge where I initally attended. I filed a Garda report of all the incidences of violence. I read lots and lots of books to try to understand how it happened, all written by experts and psychologists who have worked for years in the field - with abusers and victims. And all of those , without exception, have said that it is rare for an abuser to change.

And I never said not to seek help or that you never stop running. Of course you should. You go to the authorities and Womens Aid/ Amen and let them help you - leaving a paper trail of logging the abuse is often the only way you can protect yourself and any children.

Kiwi in IE

Links234 wrote: »

Another thing to keep in mind with the "Why don't they just leave?" argument, older generations have very funny attitudes towards married couples splitting up, and by "funny" I mean horrible. Ireland was a very catholic country where divorce wasn't a reality until quite recently, and 'till death do you part was really the only way to leave a marriage.

My father used to beat the **** out of both my mum and me when I was a kid. Long story short, he moved out after a certain incident, and although they didn't get divorced, we had neighbors who didn't speak to us any more because of it. Didn't matter if he was the kind of bastard who sent a kid to hospital with broken ribs, "for better or worse" meant that, no matter how much worse. I'll never understand the mentality of these neighbors, but after my dad moved out, my mum got the stink eye from them constantly and they'd never spoken to her since. I just can't wrap my head around it, but to some people in this country, leaving a marriage is anathema. That's probably got something to do with why people just don't leave.

This post made me really angry! What the f*ck is wrong with people that would make them ostracise and isolate the victims of violence for ending the violent relationship.

It is a shame that the hell these types tend to believe in dosn't exist, because it would be nice to think they will burn in it!

Czarcasm

Neyite wrote: »

Czarcasm, I attended DA counselling when my ex tried to strangle me. I went on to continue that counselling, outside of the refuge where I initally attended. I filed a Garda report of all the incidences of violence. I read lots and lots of books to try to understand how it happened, all written by experts and psychologists who have worked for years in the field - with abusers and victims. And all of those , without exception, have said that it is rare for an abuser to change.

That's not what you said originally Neyite which is why I picked up on it, because you said abusers never change, which is quite a definite statement as opposed to it's rare for an abuser to change. It's rare, but it does happen, which means it can happen.

And I never said not to seek help or that you never stop running. Of course you should. You go to the authorities and Womens Aid/ Amen and let them help you - leaving a paper trail of logging the abuse is often the only way you can protect yourself and any children.

Honestly Neyite I'm not being a picky fcuk just for the sake of it, but you said the only solution was to leave. You never mentioned options like relationship counselling or individual therapy, just leave. I was only making the point that just leaving doesn't always solve everything either.

diveout

Neyite wrote: »

Pretty much every expert in the field of Domestic Abuse would disagree with you - its their claim, not mine. Abusers rarely, if ever, change, and the ones that genuinely do, only do so after years and years of therapy and hard work.

Have you links to the success rates of the programs for abusers that support your assertion that the majority change?

I said the majority can change, not that they do change. If all the professionals believe they can't change why are their rehabilitation and intervention programmes? What about the huge industry that is anger management? Do you know that some of the current main offenders of DV in the US now are returned soldiers with PTSD?

And if you listen to this radio programme "A Woman's Right to Be Evil" it talks about the lack of rehabilitative services for female violent offenders whereas it is in place for the men. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/freethinking/2009/events/event09.shtml

If it was so cut and dried that it didn't work, why are so many professionals involved in rehabilitative services, therapy and anger management?

And it obviously would depend on the nature of the abuse, [is it due to mental illness, susbtance abuse...alcohol... trauma...] but I don't believe that it has to be a personal destiny and that abusers should feel they can change otherwise is there any point in even trying?

That doesn't mean someone should stick around while the abuser is working on it though.

Neyite

Czarcasm wrote: »

That's not what you said originally Neyite which is why I picked up on it, because you said abusers never change, which is quite a definite statement as opposed to it's rare for an abuser to change. It's rare, but it does happen, which means it can happen.





Honestly Neyite I'm not being a picky fcuk just for the sake of it, but you said the only solution was to leave. You never mentioned options like relationship counselling or individual therapy, just leave. I was only making the point that just leaving doesn't always solve everything either.

Relationship counselling is a BAD idea in a DA relationship. That is never offered as a potential solution, and if you were familiar with DA dynamics, you'd see why the professionals warn against it. Individual therapy can help, but requires a lot of work on the person undergoing the therapy, and a genuine willingness to change. Oh, and also therapy actually BEING there in the first place. Which in this country is practically non-existent. Why do I say they never change? because by far that is usually the case. An abused partner clings on to the hope that they can change. In doing so, they remain in the relationship, exposing themselves and vunerable children to more and more violence and dysfunction, all the while giving the abuser no reason to change. If they leave, THEN that abuser might see what they have lost and work towards changing, but meanwhile their family is safe from harm.

diveout wrote: »

I said the majority can change, not that they do change. If all the professionals believe they can't change why are their rehabilitation and intervention programmes? What about the huge industry that is anger management? Do you know that some of the current main offenders of DV in the US now are returned soldiers with PTSD?

And if you listen to this radio programme "A Woman's Right to Be Evil" it talks about the lack of rehabilitative services for female violent offenders whereas it is in place for the men. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/freethinking/2009/events/event09.shtml

If it was so cut and dried that it didn't work, why are so many professionals involved in rehabilitative services, therapy and anger management?

And it obviously would depend on the nature of the abuse, [is it due to mental illness, susbtance abuse...alcohol... trauma...] but I don't believe that it has to be a personal destiny and that abusers should feel they can change otherwise is there any point in even trying?

That doesn't mean someone should stick around while the abuser is working on it though.

Im at work so will have a listen to that when I get home.
We should at least try to help. They say that rehabilitation for sex offenders has an abysmally low success rate but you have to try, dont you? because for the 50 that may be time-wasters and only there as part of a sentencing requirement, there may be one person who is genuine, who really wants to change. I have a book at home that might have stats for successes. It was written by Lundy Bancroft and he worked with abusers in therapy for many years. Its a very interesting book and explains the psychology of an abuser far better than I ever could.

Are they 'reasons' or excuses though? If there are reasons, such as mental health issues or substance abuse, then those need to be worked on before or in paralell with intervention programmes and be completed and definite changes made before a relationship can reconcile.

Anger management is a different dynamic from Domestic abuse though. As is anger issues from mental health. Someone with anger issues take it out on everyone. Their boss, their colleagues, on random strangers, through road rage, and in the home. The Domestic Abuser though is a different fish - they only take their anger out on their partner and family, even if the apparent source is entirely unrelated to family life. They are the pillar of the community outside of that.

Your last sentence is the key to what I'm trying to say : That doesn't mean someone should stick around while the abuser is working on it though- Absolutely. I fully agree with this and its what I was trying to say. I would always tell someone that they cant change. Because if I said that some can change, then the victim might stay put hoping their abuser is one of the ones that might. And if harm comes to them as a result, I'd never forgive myself.

My ex might have changed. Or he could be married now and battering seven shades of sh!te out of his wife and terrifying his children if he has any. I dunno. But I wasnt prepared to live in fear like that for the 5 or 6 years that it might have taken for him to get sorted. Or bring children into a home where things get smashed, where holes get punched in walls, where screaming matches, verbal abuse and walking around on eggshells several times a week. I have never regretted leaving. But I do regret that I stayed that long.