I guess. But I don’t think someone could be without problems and still stay in the relationship after the first two weeks as described in the article that she wrote. I can find some articles about men doing that and say the exact same thing.
It;s litany of the history of the ways women were dismissed and devalued when reporting domestic violence.
- Ruining a good man’s name
- Why’d she stay- must not have been so bad, or she wasn’t so upset then
- Both people were just as bad
- She must be mentally ill, so is an unreliable reporter
- If she had evidence why doesn’t she just go to the police
- Making women have evidence of the type that would hold up in court, before you can talk about it
- But what if she’s lying!
It was the historical pattern that kept women trapped and not believed for decades (recall marital rape only became illegal in all 50 states recently). It’s a societal problem that still exists. The default is not believe women until they have insurmountable evidence in the name of protecting the man, while essentially casting huge doubt on the reality of her claims.
The risk of a man be wrongfully accused is much more important than a woman being wrongfully dismissed.
Maybe. But does that mean that she deserved it, or that her partner was right in behaving the way he did? Of course not. “Man, she’s got bigger problems” is just a way to put blame for someone’s mistreatment on their own poor mental health and/or self esteem.
When the discussion about “why this happened” moves from the awful mental health issues of the abuser and focuses on those of the abused, it’s time to step back and reset the conversation.
I’m sure I’ll get listed as a “knuckle dragger” for this…"
Let’s say for a moment this woman stayed, not because she had self esteem issues, but because she thought this person could advance her career, does that change the story?
Ah, the gold digger trope. That didn’t take long.
The only “story” is whether she was abused. No matter her motivations to be in a relationship justifies being abused.
I don’t get it. Does it make it ok to abuse someone if she stayed because she thought he could advance her career?
Yeah, but that’s just it. I believe her story. I just don’t see why a young successful person like that would stay in that relationship past the two week point as described in her own article. It has to be because she has some type of issue. No normal person would stay in that scenario.
Would that justify his treatment of her?
Maybe she does. Maybe she doesn’t.
Battered woman syndrome is real, women are often taught that other people’s reactions are their fault (if only I hadn’t worn that dress, walked down a dark alley, let him buy me a drink, kissed him, etc). Abusive men are master manipulators in making their victim feel its their fault, it’s just a one-off, they really love you, why’d you make me do it etc.
Even beautiful and accomplished women can be insecure enough to fall for that manipulation. Where it crosses a line to pathology is beyond my expertise, but you dn’t have to be mentally ill to get sucked into it.
No, it does NOT make it ok.
But it would change my level of sympathy. If she, indeed had the rite of mind, and the means to leave but didn’t, because career. Well, shit.
Alternatively, how desperate must women be n an industry that uses and abuses them that they felt that abuse was trade off because they felt they coudln’t succeed unless they capitulated to a powerful man.
I’’m pretty sympathetic to that feeling of desperation and powerlessness.
Well shit, what? She got what she deserved?
This.
While I’m not going to pretend to be an expert on sociology and mental health, I think the idea of a cold, calculating person who puts up with abuse just to get ahead is just a fantasy.
Subjecting oneself to an abusive environment, whatever the stated reason, is ultimately something a person does if they feel they have no other choice.
Quoting myself from upthread:
. . . because if you truly don’t think it counts as a mitigating circumstance, why bring it up at all?
If you start dating a guy and after two weeks he says:
then you get the fuck out of that relationship. If you don’t, there is something wrong with you. It’s not her fault he did those things, of course not. But this is early in the relationship. No way that people get “sucked in” after just two weeks to a point where they except “Do not speak to me in public places” as a legitimate relationship technique.
So, the story in front of you, in which someone did not get the fuck out the relationship, is not enough evidence that people don’t get the fuck out the relationship?
Your premise is that people woudn’t do that unless they were screwed up, so since she didn’t get out, she must be screwed up. Alternatively, you could see this as evidence that abuse can be a mind fuck very quickly.
I have no idea if she has other problems, but whether they made her susceptible to being abused, they could still not raise to the level of pathology or illness. Everyone has their vulnerabilities and maybe hers made her more likely to submit to abuse. Does’l tmean she’s entally ill.
So you’re hypothesizing through inductive reasoning that the victim of abuse had/has “some type of issue” to have stayed with her abuser as long as she did, but you’re also asserting that her report of the abuse is credible. If you are not hypothesizing that her abnormality as a person skews her credibility, then what is the relevance?
I ask this because without a “therefore…” after your statement, the hypothesis looks like a “damaged goods” justification or a “both sides” dismissal. If it’s not your intent to justify or dismiss the abuse, and I assume it is not, then maybe you could clarify. After all, you offered the hypothesis in response to pushback against your question “what education is needed?” as if the assertion of mental instability in the victim adequately resolves all there is to know about abusive relationships.
I can accept desperation but what’s harder for me to grasp powerlessness.
My understanding of women in these types of situations is that they usually have no means of support. No money, no friends or family to lean on. No place to go, then there’s the kids to worry about… So leaving the situation is a monumental task.
This lady, as far as I can tell, had none of those issues. All she had to do was drive across town and get herself a hotel room until she can sort things out.
Am I missing something here? I’m willing to listen with an open mind.
No.
Yes, those are two possible conclusions, I agree. The amount of time that elapsed between the start of dating and the laying down of those ridiculous rules, however, leans more towards the first one.