Even the third one is debatable, in my opinion. The thing is, without a commonly agreed upon definition of “abuse,” such as we might find in law, there are going to be a lot of differing interpretations as to whether or not Chloe was abused, even according to her own account, let alone the opinion of other witnesses.
Really, the first one doesn’t seem like a stretch at all. Of course, I’m of the opinion that it is proper to treat people with respect - so when you don’t - that’s abuse.
This has been bugging me all day.
If I said “I’ve never driven a car, but I have a pretty good sense for asshole drivers because I’ve been around people who drive cars” - how believable would that be? You don’t have skin in the game for spotting sexual predators - or guys who are just assholes to women. You may believe you are good at it, but you probably aren’t.
Also, men are far more likely to overestimate their abilities at something - women tend to underestimate theirs, adding to the probability that you aren’t good at it (and explaining why women are more likely to question their own judgement about someone who seems ‘off.’) I think you honestly believe you are good at it - heck most of my male friends think they are good at it as well - and the majority of my female friends weren’t surprised by the accusations against Hardwick, and most of the guys were SHOCKED.
You may be right, but I did grow up with an abusive father, so give me SOME credit for being able to spot the signs of abuse.
This meme seemed timely…
And I’m of the opinion that having consensual sex with someone isn’t abuse. So yeah, it’s a stretch.
Where did I say it was. I said that when the first thing you say to the doctor when your partner comes out of surgery after an ectopic pregnancy (which you had a hand is) is “when can I have sex with her” (and in front of her mother) that’s abusive. And that using your partner just for sex (or making sex the priority in your relationship) - which that statement implies - is misuse of a human being - therefore abusive.
Abusive fathers have a whole different thing going than what predatory men do to women. Your father starts in a position of power over you that is very unlike meeting a woman and convincing her to spend some time with you. You aren’t on the lookout to avoid the next father who will treat you like trash.
Sorry, but making sex the priority in a relationship is not abuse.
…ya know, that isn’t what Dangerosa said. Again. Maybe third time lucky?
It isn’t? Let’s see: “And that using your partner just for sex (or making sex the priority in your relationship) - which that statement implies - is misuse of a human being - therefore abusive”
Looks like it is.
…nope. Context matters.
“The” priority vs “a” priority is a huge difference.
Prioritizing your sexual gratification over the wellbeing of your partner is abuse.
No it isn’t. It’s just lack of caring. Lack of caring is not abuse.
Or it can be. Especially when it’s part of a constellation of other problematic and abusive behaviors.
Like Manson1972 said, we’re really stretching the definition of abuse pretty thinly here, especially since the first definition referred to things, not people, as in alcohol abuse. Not caring falls far short of the threshold for, say, violence. Assoholic, yes, but you’re taking the word abuse out of context. So yes, context does matter.
I find it interesting that one can easily imagine and defend the scenario in which it’s not abuse, but can’t seem to imagine or accept a scenario where it is abuse, especially in the context of someone saying it was abusive.
Perhaps she’s just not that good with vocabulary. She certainly seems to have avoided the LEGAL meanings of words, for instance. Both “assault” and “violate” have very specific meanings which she seems to be indecisive about which one she experienced.
If women are equals, not sure why they are not being treated as such.
If we are as good as men, why all the crying about mistreatment of women?
Do y’all consider this abuse:
There is a couple. One person, Jordan, figures out pretty quickly that the other, Taylor, has an absolute and utter fear of abandonment. Taylor, for whatever reason, is weak-willed and fearful. Because of this, Taylor lets Jordan have their way in everything: Jordan gets what Jordan wants, and Taylor’s needs and wants are ignored. Taylor is utterly miserable–for years or decades–and the only reason Taylor doesn’t leave is that the thought of being alone just fills them with chilling, irrational dread. So they have sex they don’t want to have (or resign themselves to a life of no sex), they allow themselves to be a verbal and emotional punching bag when Jordan is feeling frustrated, they let Jordan decide where they live, where they work, whether or not they have children etc. etc. Jordan understands this: it’s obvious to Jordan that Taylor is miserable, but Jordan knows Taylor will suck it up forever because Taylor doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to do anything to change it. Jordan rationalizes this as okay, because its a choice: Taylor is an adult and could leave. So as long as Jordan is not enforcing the demands and conditions with violence, they are fair.
Is Jordan being abusive toward Taylor?
ETA: In case it isn’t clear, I find that abusive. People have an ethical obligation not to mistreat others, even when they can get away with it.
Whoa. The next time you plan to blow all our minds, a little warning would be nice.