In this thread there are two main positions outlined re the responsibility of people who stay in physically abusive relationships.
To be clear we are not talking about very extreme situations where the abuser is raping the abused, locking them up and torturing them, making various death threats and threatening to kill the abused. We’re talking about more common scenarios where there is occasional physical abuse, and the abused could pick up and leave if they chose.
Position one is that after being abused the first or second time a person who decides to stay in that toxic situation, and let the abuse continue has primarily themselves to blame if they stick around and keep being physically abused. They are making a volitional decision as an adult to stay in that abusive relationship. The rationale is that you can make what excuses you want about why abused people stay put, but in the end not leaving is a concrete decision that a person has to be responsible for.
Position two is that the abused person has effectively no responsibility for being abused, even if they stay in a physically abusive relationship where they continue to be abused. The main reasoning for this position is that the abuser is dominating and manipulating them emotionally and the people being abused are so oppressed or intimated they are not competent to make rational choices.
The other part of the reasoning is that being physically abused, regardless of whatever events transpired between abuser and abused to precipitate it, is never the fault of the abused. The abuser as the actor being violent owns all of the responsibility for being abusive.
Which of these positions makes the most sense?