Angry White Men (or, just Angry, Insecure Men, IMO)

[Triana]

A rant I found. Sounds like some men I've had the misfortune (and lack of knowledge) to become involved with. Edit: Mentions the AWM/NCFM club I posted about earlier and some of the books we've discussed here! I'd change the title and leave out 'White' 'cause it has nothing to do with their color. Angry, insecure men are from every color, religion, political group, and every economic group. The one(s) I've known were supposedly "liberal Democrats" (or I'd not have dated them). They STILL were VERY much like the below as far as their behavior with me went. Yoiks.
_ _ _ _ _

You know the ones. Guys who can't stand women who are independent and self-aware? They hate them for having lives and minds of their own and seem to have this burning need to put them down and try to control them. Constantly. It seems maybe they're STILL pissed that women now have the right to vote, the ability to gain financial independence, and that they dare think for themselves. How DARE women try to be their own persons - how DARE they be allowed to live as a human being that is NOT (treated as) inferior to, controlled by, subjugated by, judged by, or dominated by a MAN (or men) in some way, shape or fashion.

These guys try to control or 'beat' women (verbally or otherwise) into some predetermined mold or use manipulative tactics to get "cooperation", wield control, and to "win" and to dominate over them, as if having a relationship (or a conflict or issue in a relationship) is some sort of competition they have to WIN at all costs. Along those same lines, men who treat a woman badly based on negative and erroneous preconcieved ideas about her or about women in general, destroying any potential or existing relationship with her by suffocating it inside a frame that doesn't fit the real picture of who or what she REALLY is as an individual, or what's actually going on in the relationship. This destroys their relationships - for obvious reasons.

Who's responsibility is it to decide who or what or how a woman IS or SHOULD be? OR what she might be upset about at any moment -- or if that upset is justified? Who defines HER? That definition belongs to her and her alone, not anyone else. Especially someone who doesn't even know her as well as she does, or at all. When a man tries to impose HIS (negative, demeaning or destructive) definition upon a woman or appoints himself judge of HER and HER feelings, this is an issue of control and dominance. It's about his "power over" her -- as opposed to her own "personal power". Many men do not LIKE women who exert their own PERSONAL POWER. It makes them feel insecure because it threatens their idea of themselves as superior to and dominant over women.

The best men I've known are those who do not try to "handle" or "control" women, no matter how long they've known them. There will never be a time when a man knows a woman as well as she knows herself - especially if she's upset about something. Which, more often than not, there's a damn good reason for -- as much as a man will try to convince her otherwise. And what makes this his parameter to define -- to dictate how another person feels, or should feel -- and why? Or to decide that she is an inferior human being to himself and therefore needs to be constantly reminded of that and treated accordingly? What self-respecting, self-aware, independent woman would put up with this? Plenty, it seems, because they're not aware of the AWM modus operandi and attitudes they're based on.

There's a whole movement of men out there who have a penchant for trying to control women and a whole slew of tactics they share and use to try to manipulate them, control them, keep them in their place, and let them know who's boss and who is superior - and to simultaneously get what they want out of them. Obedience, control, submissiveness, sex, maybe money if they can get it, and power over them - in some form or fashion. The power to decide who and what and how the woman IS and how she will be treated according to someone else's definitions and labels of her besides her own. (His). This is, by all definitions, CONTROLLING behavior and too many men are notorious for it. Furthermore, these AWMs are in a huff over who pays for dates and who gets and withholds sex and why and how (again, it's about "power over" and control), who buys gifts and who's more romantic, and who has more problems with "committment" or fidelity, or who's better at communication, and who abuses, murders or rapes who more often. Lemme tell ya they're hot under the collar about this stuff and they've got a whole litany of complaints and erroneous bassackwards statistics to "back them up".

Call me a silly idealist, but my idea of a good partnership is one with give and take, where both partners look for ways to please each other, rather than turning everything into a struggle for dominance.

A man who's always more interested in "winning" than anything else can have quite a large part in a woman just getting tired of that relationship and of his tactics. And WHAT is the guy winning in the end - unless winning is the sole objective? Most men with this "win at all costs" attitude will LOSE any relationship with a self-respecting independent woman - the kind of woman many men these days *claim* to want to have relationships with.

If a couple is trying to work things out in the relationship, and he argues vehemently to win all the battles, twists things into every logistical (and illogical) angle possible in order to blame her for everything, projects his anger, insecurity, and behavior problems all onto her (YOU this, YOU that! It's all YOUR fault!) - then in the end the woman ends up leaving because the net result of all those battles is a relationship she simply doesn't want to be in with a man she certainly doesn't want to be in it with. And many of today's women don't NEED to be in any relationship. When such a guy is ultimately confronted with his behavior, and the relationship ends (and it usually does at that point), then he either just blames HER (again) for it all, or wonders what went wrong. Well DUH. Far be it for him to look in the MIRROR for answers.

The implication seems to be: "Listen Little Woman - I'm brilliant and I'm superior to you and YOU will change YOUR behavior and YOUR expectations to fit in with MY rules and MY mold of how YOU ought to be, think, feel, be, and act in this relationship at all times!"

Oh REEEALLY?

And what about smart, independent, self-aware women? In reality, these guys don't really like that type of woman. Think: Hillary Clinton. There is no more hated woman in America today - especially by men. She defined herself and there's nothing they can do about it, whether they like it or not - whether they like HER or not. There you go.

I suppose womens' independence and intelligence does make it much harder for men to control, label, and predefine them, and for those insecure men bent on control, I can see why this would be an issue (for them).

The AWMs are very well-organized these days too, and their erroneous perceptions and indifference to women has spread like kudzu. Let me introduce to you The Angry White Men's Club

Why these types of guys want any type of relationship with any woman, even just sex, I can't understand. Why bother? Why not save themselves the trouble and "do it yourself" and leave women alone if they don't like or cannot accept women - and many of them can't. And when issues arise stemming from their anger, projection, blame and abuse of the women in their relationships - and there WILL BE issues if a woman with any self-esteem, intelligence or independence is involved - the A.W.M. "gotta control the hysterical bitch" modus operandi is put into action. Here are the tactics these men use:

1) Play the victim. Whine, insult, & criticize. Make damn sure she knows what an inferior being she is and how everything is HER fault. "Well I wouldn't do that to you if you weren't so __." "Well, I have to act that way because of the way you ___!" "You should feel sorry for me because I have to put up with you and your crap - that's why I abuse you - you drive me to it!" "I have to keep secrets from you because I can't tell you anything without you getting upset!" "You're lucky I bother to put up with you!" "You're insecure/lazy/narcissistic/TOO SENSITIVE/a bitch...and you need psychiatric help!" (she probably WILL by the time she's done putting up with all that projection and verbal abuse for very long - and NO woman should).

2) Deny, Invalidate - "It's all in your head". "You're just imagining things!" "You're just making shit up!" "Why are you bringing shit up that happened YEARS ago. It's not important to ME!" (?) "Why do you dwell on this stuff?" (DOH. Probably because it NEVER gets resolved in relationships with AWM types)

3) Blame the victim for being abused - "It's all YOUR fault - you bring it on yourself!" (see #1). "You ASK to be humilitated and yelled at in front of my friends and in public! You DESERVE it!"

4. Projection. He accuses HER of doing the same things HE is doing himself. Hypocritical finger-pointing. Projecting HIS own bad behavior and personality problems onto her then abusing her for it. This is a Republican tactic that particular political party is very good at. I suspect the majority of Republicans are members of NCFM - aka the Angry White Men's club - or at least subscribe to that same mentality. Whenever a woman hears "You're insecure!", "You're Paranoid!", "You're oversensitive!" and other "You're .....you...you...you!" BLAMING statements - that is most CERTAINLY projection.

5. Mocking. "Oh, I thought YOU were the computer expert around here!" (with superior sarcasm), "Oh, poor you, your're SUCH a victim!", "Are you being a little Princess?" "Well, there's a GOOD reason I blame YOU for everything, woman - because everything is always YOUR fault!" (with very serious and self-satisfied superiority). ALL OF THESE are outright examples of VERBAL ABUSE.

Particularly insidious are men who claim victimhood - they claim that they are punished and oppressed by the oh-so-unreasonable females (see #1 and #2). Woe is them. Then, when they abuse a woman (physically, verbally, or emotionally), and she complains about that abuse, he tells her SHE is "playing the victim". But he plays the victim role himself (see #1) and uses HIS OWN victim story as an excuse for his abusing her. It's a circular logic that's all too familiar. It's HER fault that he cannot handle his own anger, impatience, hostility, need for control, insecurity, and his need to treat her like an inferior human being in order to salve his insecurity about himself. He projects his own personality issues and bad behavior onto HER, blames her for them, and abuses HER because of them. Far too many men have their projection and their circular (blame the/play the) victim strategies down really well.

Some of these men even refer to rape as a "game" that they apparently resent was made illegal years ago, and they lament that while women are still allowed to "play games" with men, that men can no longer "play games" with (rape, abuse) women. It's JUST NOT FAIR is the claim. They insist they'd never play games with women (they just have ooodles of websites out there instructing each other how to do it) because the ones they're really like to play are illegal (and that's unfair in their opinion).

The utter hypocrisy and circular logic is head-spinning.

Besides physical abuse, which is most commonly reported and most commonly occurs against women by men they know, date, or are married or related to, there's also verbal and emotional abuse that women often endure from their boyfriends, husbands, & relatives. That verbal and emotional abuse can and often does precede physical abuse. Here are some good books on that subject:

The Verbally Abusive Relationship: How to Recognize it and How to Respond

The Macho Paradox: Why Some Men Hurt Women and and How All Men Can Help

Controlling People: How to Recognize, Understand, and Deal With People Who Try to Control You

For the record, I do NOT think all men out there are "Angry White Men". I know they're not. However, there is a substantially well-organized AWM movement and they all use the same key phrases and the same tactics. They subscribe to the same grossly erroneous data and assumptions about women, and try to imprison women within those erroneous perceptions - a distorted reality. The objective is to control and manipulate women with insidious, cruel "rules of play" that many women aren't even aware of. Most women aren't even aware of the the fucked up perceptions these men have about women, the labels that they've slapped on women collectively, OR the games or the "rules" of the game that men play based on those perceptions. It's no wonder women often find men's behavior puzzling or insensitive - at best. They should all be aware of the AWMs out there and what their bylaws, attitudes, and rules are. Only then will they know what they're truly dealing with -- and will likely choose NOT to if they can recognize one.

There are also some decent men who do NOT approve of the way women are largely (still) treated in today's society - and who will acknowledge that the prevalent verbal, emotional, and physical abuse of them worldwide is a HUMAN RIGHTS issue - not just a women's issue. The second book above, The Macho Paradox, was written by such a man: Jackson Katz. It's a worthy read.

FINALLY, here is a quote about UNDERSTANDING, which at least from a Buddhist standpoint, well illustrates the problem with some mens' attitudes towards women and what the problem is with their relationships with women:

"When you plant lettuce, if it does not grow well, you don't blame the lettuce. You look for reasons it is not doing well. It may need fertilizer, or more water, or less sun. You never blame the lettuce. Yet if we have problems with our friends or family, we blame the other person. But if we know how to take care of them, they will grow well, like the lettuce. Blaming has no positive effect at all, nor does trying to persuade using reason and argument. That is my experience. No blame, no reasoning, no argument, just understanding. If you understand, and you show that you understand, you can love, and the situation will change."

--Thich Nhat Hanh, Vietnamese Zen Master

Of course this type of quote does not address a man's own personality issues such as anger management and insecurity - which they must acknowledge and deal with themselves. However, few men are willing to undergo that level of critical self-examination -- or do the work to change. It's much easier to just project it upon, blame and abuse the women in their lives for it all. And so it goes.

[wtbymark]

1. hmmmmm

the woman who wrote this isn't jaded at all :sarcasm: she may say shes talking about certain men, but she threw a blanket over all of us (IMO), a very condescending piece

[Triana]

2. there you go...doing exactly what she said AWMs do...

1) Play the victim. Whine.

2) Deny, Invalidate.

3) Blame the victim.

4) Projection. (condescending)

Well now.

[lukasahero]

6. Great, now, even when we use the word "some"

we don't really mean it.

Of course, the fact that her point is that some men should refrain from dictating to women how they should act, speak and feel is completely lost on this poster... Ah the irony.

[Triana]

7. wtbymark apparently Kant Read

In fact his response was so split-second, there's NO WAY he could have thoroughly read the piece before jumping in to defend "all men" - which is NOT what the author was writing about - she was writing about SOME of them - and even said so at least twice in the article. But he didn't READ it.

[Orrex]

8. Question

Do you suppose that it's necessary for an author to state explicitly whether she's referring to all men or some men?

Or are we automatically to infer that the default position is one or the other?

I can imagine an argument in favor of either option...

[Triana]

9. She could....and maybe should but the way I read it...

...she is pretty clear that she is referring to a certain type of man/men. She does use the word SOME MEN in several places and delineates often by using the phrase "these men" or "these guys" - which indicates specificity to the type of men she's talking about - and makes it clear (to me) that she isn't referring to ALL of them. I didn't get the impression that she was. In one paragraph she states that she does NOT think all men are AWMs and KNOWS many of them are not - somewhere about 3/4 down.

Maybe she ought to put that part nearer the top.

[Orrex]

10. Well, I think she's fairly clear, but I meant more generally...

Should a piece specifically state some versus all, or should the reader be allowed/required to draw inferences based on context?

I suppose that this is more a question of text theory than Women's Rights, but I wasn't trying to hijack the thread, honest!

[lukasahero]

Here on DU, it has become obligatory to use the word some

lest any substance in a post be lost to those decrying they are not like that.

Just my own experience but I've actually started using the word some more sarcastically than I ever would have before simply because any criticism levelled at the (specific) men who are deliberately trying to bring women back to the 1800's is overshadowed by the (specific) men who ignore the point and object to the criticism if the word "some" is not used.

I would love to leave it to the reader to understand but too many important posts are hijacked by those who refuse to do so.

[Quantess]

50. I absolutely hear what you are saying, about the hijacking of threads.

But, have you never met any nice guys? Or, men who defy stereotypes? Of course you have.
It isn't fair to use blanket statements toward any group, and though I have been caught using blanket statements myself on occasion, I felt contrite afterward, and vowed to not paint any group with a broad brush. I get irritated when women get painted with broad brushes, and I'm sure you do, too. If I were a man, I can only guess that I would be annoyed at men being given broad brush treatment.

Please, keep using qualifiers "some", "many", "often", etc.

[nashville_brook]

45. if you can't have either "some" or "all" then basically you're saying we can't

speak of these things at all.

what would be your preferred way to reference men in this piece? do you think this is something that should be talked about at all?

[lukasahero]

12. "You know the ones."

The very first sentence deliniates who she is talking about. Guess the poster didn't get past the subject line...

[Triana]

13. Yes. I thought she was very clear that she was not referring...

...to ALL men. (spelling lesson: ALL is not spelt "S-O-M-E". ALL is not spelt "T-H-E-S-E").

I think the guys who frequent this forum - which bytheway is called the

WOMEN'S RIGHTS

forum (¿), come in here specifically to defend their bretheren (well for ONE reason) and in fact are SO on the defensive that they filter everything through their defensiveness, see what they want to see, read what they want to read no matter WHAT is actually written - in the OP, for instance.

It's interesting to me that so many MEN responded to the post immediately (they obviously hadn't taken time to read, understand, or fully comprehend the OP). I see some nit-picking, whining, denying, invalidating, projecting, all the stuff the author of the rant wrote about. Not one of them has addressed the issue of AWM or their behavior or what can or should be done to change it -- or at least increase awareness of it. MEN can be part of the solution too. Just ask Jackson Katz. He'll tell you why, and how. They're NOT all jerks. I don't think they are and apparently the author of the 'rant' I posted doesn't either. She SAID so in her rant. And, she's right.

Increasing awareness of this issue is the MAIN reason I posted this rant. So other WOMEN would be aware there are SOME guys like this out there. So they will be educated as to what to look for and what to DO to avoid having relationships (or continuing relationships) with them. EDUCATION. AND because of the rant author's similarity of experience with my own.

I DID NOT post the rant so I could sit here and defend the author's rant (an author whose experience with THOSE TYPES OF MEN matches mine bytheway) to a bunch of MEN who are hanging out in a WOMEN'S FORUM. ¿

Are they going to try to say this problem doesn't EXIST? ("You're just imagining things!" -- go LOOK - it's listed in the rant). Are they going to try to deflect attention from THE ISSUE (angry, abusive, insecure men who abuse women) by distracting the OP into defending every letter and nuance of the rant - or how it was written?

I think it's pretty CLEAR what the issue is and WHO it applies to. It is ALSO clear that it's a PROBLEM for women to be in relationships with THESE TYPES of men -- and that those relationships ARE abusive - verbally, psychologically, and physically.

I just want other WOMEN to be aware that THESE TYPES OF MEN are OUT there and to know what their mentality apparently is, what their attitudes are, what to look for in their behavior so WOMEN can be aware and do NOT have to go through what I did, or what the author of the rant, and a good many other women have apparently gone through with THESE TYPES of (not ALL) men. There are key phrases and key tactics she points out that are worth a woman keeping ears open for.

The OP is for WOMEN - and THAT is why it is posted in a forum called "Women's Rights". And - I question the true motives of ANY man who responds to it in this forum - UNLESS they're an AWM. If they're NOT and they KNOW they're NOT, then they should have no motive to respond so defensively.

[lukasahero]

14. "Not one of them has addressed the issue"...

"...or what can or should be done to change it"

And they never will. Thank you for posting this. I have read (and recommended) Jackson Katz to "certain" men on this board before. Their excuse (and there's always an excuse): men aren't going to join a coffee clatch... So someone like Katz comes along with solid ideas of what men can do to help women solve this problem and they still don't listen.

The fact is, SOME just don't care. They like their position of privilege. While they deny it, the very fact that they have a choice about whether or not to involve themselves in the fight against violence against women, women's rights, etc. is a privilege women don't have - we fight or we lose.

[Triana]

15. It's easier to just keep blaming women...

...than to do any work to change their own abusive behavior or to help educate other MEN against violence and abuse of women and how and why it occurs and how to stop it.

That said, women can at least SOMETIMES (if they're not financially dependent on a man) CHOOSE NOT to put up with a man who abuses her - verbally, physically, psychologically.

My posting the rant was to give women here some warning signs links to websites (about their attitudes), books to read, and to alert women to key tactics and phrases abusive-type men use to control women, and to point out some of the excuses abusive men use to "justify" their abuse. And their blaming, projective behavior - that circular logic they use.

To an extent you're right - we have no choice except to fight and NOT to put up with it - or be abused. And if a woman has financial ties to a man or is dependent on one, then she has to get out from under that before she can even think about fighting back. Many women today don't NEED a relationship with a man though, and for those, they shouldn't put up with the type of behavior the rant I posted (and that I experienced) talks about.

One, or MAYBE TWO warnings / discussions about it with him are ENOUGH. If things don't improve after that and/or he isn't listening and shows NO desire to work with her on the relationship or to work out problems, she oughtta be OUT of there. An abuse counsellor TOLD me this rule, just FYI, as did a couples counsellor I saw. Easier said than done, no doubt, but that's what they said.

[Orrex]

3. Can we take issue with the Thich Nhat Hanh quote?

Or would that be too tangential?

[Triana]

4. Seems it had to do with blame...but I don't know the context

of that quote.

[nashville_brook]

46. what is wrong with the TNH quote?

[RaleighNCDUer]

5. "there is a substantially well-organized AWM movement "

It's called monotheism.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Triana]

16. One more thing about these abusers I learned...

...which is in the 'Verbal Abuse' book, and is one of the hallmarks of this type of abuse:

THESE TYPES OF MEN are VERY WELL LIKED socially by neighbors, co-workers and friends in their social circles. In public, with OTHER people, they're VERY nice. They have EXCELLENT anger management, conflict resolution, and diplomacy skills. Problem is, they don't RESPECT their female intimate partner enough to USE those skills with HER in their relationship.

If an abused women tries to tell anyone else in their mutual social circles or friends or neighbors how he abuses her (verbally, psychologically, emotionally) - they won't believe it. The comment you'll likely get is "Oh, I can't believe he'd EVER be like thaaat!"

But is he IS "like that" (and often worse) with his intimate partner/girlfriend/mother/wife. This amazing dual-personality serves to marginalize and isolate the victim of abuse. And, it serves to make her doubt her own perceptions and feelings about the abuse and her own pain. Women need to trust their own perceptions and feelings and not allow them to be challenged by anyone else. If you feel something is wrong, something undoubtedly IS wrong.

The ONLY way out is to get hold of one of those books - the Verbal Abuse book linked in the OP outlines very well this type of abuse (I think EVERY WOMAN ought to own a copy of that one). And get help from an abuse or other type of counsellor as to what to do. Maybe try to address his behavior WITH HIM IN FRONT of the counsellors if possible. Then, if HE isn't willing to acknowledge and change his abusive behavior, then shore up your finances if need be and GET OUT of that relationship.

The abuser I was involved with TOLD THE COUNSELLOR that he thought ALL of the issues in our relationship were MY FAULT. He continued to call me names, blame and project his abusive behavior onto me, and verbally abuse me IN FRONT of the counsellor. He EVEN CALLED THE COUNSELLOR NAMES. Talk about ANGRY! I was advised to GET OUT of that relationship BEFORE physical abuse ensued because usually that's what typically follows this. I was told that if he wasn't willing to change his abusive behavior, there is no other option for me. I had been threatening to end it before that and counselling was the last straw. I SHOULD NOT have put up with this man as long as I did. THAT was my fault. However, HIS ABUSIVE BEHAVIOR, his views of women as inferior humans and treatment of me accordingly, and his abusive personality are HIS fault and HIS problem and they ARE what destroyed that relationship. But I REFUSED to stay in the relationship long enough to let it destroy ME.

I hope other women here see this, get that book, and learn enough from it that they won't get into, or STAY in a relationship where a guy treats them like this. DON'T DO IT. If you see any signs of this type behavior from a man you're involved with, ADDRESS them immediately with him. If he won't listen, or blames you or invalidates you and your feelings and concerns, and REFUSES to work out issues in the relationship with you in a fair, kind and understanding way, then GET OUT. Don't put up with it as long as I did.

ONE or maybe TWO discussions about it are enough to guage if he is willing to be a MAN in the relationship, or a JERK. If he choses the JERK mode of operation - LEAVE - ASAP.

[BoneDaddy]

18. Christ

let us demonize all men why dont ya

[Morgana LaFey]

20. If the shoe fits...

I've never understood why men who aren't guilty can't seem to extricate themselves from the universe of men who ARE guilty. Or maybe I just give too many of them the benefit of the doubt??

[Triana]

22. AFAIC - any male who responds in this thread is one of them...

(or has some guilt about it) ....or they wouldn't feel the burning need to respond. If they're not the type of man that behaves that way - then it wouldn't bother them to read that SOME men do. No one said they all do.

[BoneDaddy]

27. Wrong

So I am to assume men only have two choices? Either agree with your rhetoric 100% or not and if we don't agree we are abusers or support abuse? That is not only extremely illogical it is childish immature thinking. You have become as fundamentalist in your thinking as much as the most radical religious nuts out there.

My problem isn't with your critique of patriarchy, I tend to agree with you on most if not all points. My problem is the hatred, vilification and demonization of all things masculine and male.

Look, there are tremendous strides that still need to be taken in ensuring equality, but the way to go about it is to stop the WAR against men and masculinity. You will only alienate the very men who you NEED to move things forward. If you think you can do this only with the support of women, you are not going to see your ideals become reality. It simply will not happen.

[shance]

41. I would ask you to define masculinity. Are you meaning machismo

Where a person is allowed carte blanche treatment to do essentially whatever he pleases, in this particular case, because he's white and male, at the expense of others?

I don't think that is what you mean, but that is specifically what I think most of us are talking about here.

The abusive machismo/overly competitive mentality which essentially supports a belief that everyone else is inferior to them.

What has not been discusses as much here is how many women, perhaps more particularly in gay partnerships have experienced much of the same mentality BY OTHER WOMEN.

They have experienced literally the same dynamic of abuse by other women.


So we have a problem that is more of a state of conditioning than a gender based issue perhaps? I think there is gender prevalence, but it also can definitely be seen in some more "alpha" type females, if that is an appropriate term.

I think it has more to do with the conditioning of people perhaps by the various religious and monetary systems we are living under. I think that is a big part of it.

[Quantess]

53. Yes, you do HAVE TO.

Look, buddy, you yourself, take tremendous strides with your balls a flappin'. ROFL.

What are you doing on Women's Forum, seriously? If you don't reply to me here, I just may ask you in a PM.

[Triana]

54. I wondered that myself....

"What are you doing on Women's Forum, seriously?"

Easy pickins, I suspect, may be the reason. You know. Like a canned hunt. If a guy's got some anger and insecurity to act out, he can always come in here and find some targets. Not that we need any more demonstrations of that behavior...

[Quantess]

56. Reporting back to you:

Yes, I actually went ahead and PM'd BoneDaddy, as I said I would, since I was a little intoxicated...(:party: :toast:).... New Year's and all.

The next morning I regretted it, but he'd already PM'd me back, and he seemed pretty cool about it. I replied "thanks for not being mad at me", not that I had said anything harsh, I was just stating my views (through a drunken filter). But anyway, BoneDaddy seems like an agreeable person.

Why a man would post on Women's Issues, I still cannot understand. But then, there are many mysteries in this world.

[Triana]

58. thanks....

...there've been one or two guys who've responded here who seemed ok - if a bit defensive and frankly, confused. I still can't figure why they're in here. ¿

The rest though, seemed angry and abusive - like they just come in here to smack some women around (verbally) and stick their noses in things that really don't involve them (controlling behavior, actually). They seem to want to demonstrate the very behavior the OP is about. (OK maybe it DOES involve them and that's their problem!) ;)

As the OP says, they aren't ALL 'angry white men'. No one said they are. But I think the angry and abusive ones (as opposed to just defensive and confused ones) are pretty easy to pick out.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Orrex]

28. Not sure about that

Elsewhere within this posting Group the question has been raised about the justification for men remaining silent in the face of misogynistic sexism; silence on the subject has been equated with the outright condoning of sexist behavior. We can address that worthy subject more fully in a new thread, but it seems relevant to what's going on here.

If someone (male or female) disagrees with the sentiment of the OP, is that person required to remain silent about it at the risk of being declared summarily guilty? I don't think that's what you intend, but that's sort of how it comes across. In essence, one could say that no woman can reply to a thread about the relative aesthetic appeal of exotic dancers unless she was herself such a dancer. Clearly that's not the case; one may readily comment on a subject without implying a personal investment on the matter one way or the other.

This is, by the way, consistent with the repeated (and correct) observation that a statement about some men is not a statement about all men. But by that token the claim that "any male who responds in this thread is one of them" might be a trifle over-generalized IMO.

[Triana]

29. No one declared men summarily guilty...

...that's the POINT, in its entirety. If a guy isn't guilty of the type of behavior the OP is about, what reason does he have to respond here? And might I mention again that this is a WOMEN'S RIGHTS forum? I would find no reason to respond to a post in a MEN'S FORUM about the relative aesthetic appeal of exotic dancers. I don't frequent such forums for JUST THAT REASON. So WHY are men responding to posts in a WOMEN'S RIGHTS forum? ESPECIALLY if they are NOT the type of man the OP is about?

UNLESS they want to CONTINUE denying, invalidating, and projecting the blame for ABUSE of women in interpersonal relationships back onto a woman or women - which is what the OP is about and what I've already seen several of the men do here? Bottom line is that there is NO EXCUSE for some types of men to *abuse* women the way they do in relationships. They need to deal with THEIR OWN behavior issues and STOP trying to blame WOMEN for them - HERE or anywhere else.

If they're not the type of man that behaves that way - then it wouldn't bother them to read that SOME men do. No one said they all do.

What it boils down to is that SOME men do not want to be responsible for THEIR OWN behavior. WOMEN are not responsible (or to blame) for SOME men's behavior either, and those types of men ought to STOP trying to make them responsible for it - here, or anywhere else. And, THAT is what I've seen and continue to see several of them DOING in this thread and it will get EXACTLY NOWHERE - nor SHOULD it get anywhere.

The ISSUE exists, pretty much as stated. I KNOW, I experienced it - like a lot of women have. And NO woman is responsible for it, EXCEPT to educate herself (which I'm trying to help WOMEN with here) get to herself out of an abusive relationship ASAP. That's what women can do about it -- and that's about all.

[Orrex]

30. Of course it's the Women's Rights Forum

But unless I missed something in the charter, all sexes are permitted to post. I can think of a ton of reasons why someone might reply to the thread other than guilt.

I think that it's possible to take issue with certain points in a given post without disagreeing with the overall intent. Issues of factual error, for example might reasonably be addressed by anyone regardless of her or his opinion on the underlying subject (not that factual error is the issue here, but I'm making a point...)

And regarding the hypothetical thread about exotic dancers, you might take quite justifiably issue with the misogyny and objectification implicit in the discussion. You needn't necessarily express an opinion about the relative aesthetic one way or the other, even though you could address key points of the discussion with which you disagree. The same happens in this group somewhat routinely.

I grant that some blow-hards will all too often reply to threads without really having read the OP, while others might reply specifically to disrupt the discussion. Nonetheless, it seems to me entirely acceptable to voice differing viewpoints--even those that some find objectionable or incorrect.

Although the forum is indeed about Women's Rights, it's hardly a Women Only club. It's not even an exclusive forum--opposing viewpoints can be shared openly, just like in the Religion/Theology Forum.

For the record, I would hope that it's self-evident that women aren't responsible for men's behavior, and attempts to blame women for it are ridiculous at best and patently offensive at worst. On this subject I think that you and I have no disagreement.

[BoneDaddy]

32. Well said

[nashville_brook]

48. given that verbal abuse exists and you don't consider yourself a verbal abuser,

then what do you disagree with?

[Orrex]

60. This part

AFAIC - any male who responds in this thread is one of them
(or has some guilt about it) or they wouldn't feel the burning need to respond. If they're not the type of man that behaves that way - then it wouldn't bother them to read that SOME men do. No one said they all do.

I disagree with this framing, because it's a summary dismissal of all possible discussion. In essence, it's saying "either you're silent, or you're guilty."

It doesn't bother me at all to read that some men behave a certain way, because they do behave a certain way (in this particular case, they behave like assholes). But it does bother me to have a viewpoint excluded on the basis of sex.

[BoneDaddy]

24. No it is the

all or none thinking I argue against.

[Triana]

26. You didn't read it..or you didn't read it correctly...

..NO ONE is blaming ALL MEN for this type behavior because they ALL don't behave that way. Here we go again.

[nashville_brook]

47. i fail to see where T is demonizing "all men" here -- are all men "verbal abusers"?

that would be the only way you could paint all men with this brush.

[SemperEadem]

62. see---precisely what the OP was talking about

Triana didn't demonize all men. She is exhorting the women here on this WOMEN'S RIGHTS forum to educate themselves on the signs of abusive men, what is their pathology to own and what isn't. You completely fell into the exact pattern of behavior OP was talking about: playing the victim and making this about all men when from the start, the OP stated 3 times in her post that she isn't making the assertion that it's all men.

However, it does take one to know one...

[Triana]

67. Exactly. All men are not abusers...and I do encourage women

to use the resources in this thread (that's why I posted the OP and ensuing resources and personal stories) to learn to recognize abusive behavior for what it is, and to recognize who is and is not responsible for it, so that they can protect themselves (and in some cases, their children) from living like that. It is womens' responsibility to educate and protect themselves if at all possible. They cannot be responsible for the behavior of abusive men.

[nashville_brook]

44. omg -- describes the EX to a "T" -- he actually bruised me a few times

so the abuse wasn't just verbal. when i filed for divorce my attorney wanted to know about any instances of violence and i demurred. but she persisted... "has ever bruised you?" well, yeah -- BUT ONLY when he was really angry.

she said, "and how do you think he's going to react to your lawsuit?" and said i needed a protection order and that SHE needed a protection to cover her ass just in case. so i was like, sure, okay.

i had to leave the house and have been gone ever since, but i've heard from my former friends who he whined to about the protection order. they simply COULD NOT BELIEVE he was dangerous and INSISTED that i was making shit up to make my case stronger. they called me every name in the book -- the one which hurt the most, btw, was WEAK -- as in, "strong women don't resort to such tactics."

he's a prince to everyone. i'm the BAD person. no one in a million years would believe he could do the things he did.

[Feron]

70. This thread describes my ex to a T

He was certainly the "nice guy" until we were in private.

I can't tell you how many times he said that I was paranoid for simply airing my concerns. It didn't even have to be about the relationship. Funny thing was he really WAS paranoid. For example, in restuarants he would always worry about the staff spitting in his food.

Another time he got drunk and kissed my friend on the cheek in front of my friends and I. I certainly didn't care because it was no big deal. However he denied it ever happened and that I was making it up.

Yet another favorite tactic was to bring up something that happened weeks or months ago and claim offense aka trying to gaslight me. I suppose he wanted an apology to validate that he was always right. I hated feeling on the defensive for something that I didn't even do wrong. IN one particular instance he claimed that I insulted his parents on our first date. Apparently he wasn't THAT offended if he kissed me at the end of that date and continued to date me afterwards. Argh.

I think part of the problem was that I was maturing and growing as a person whereas he wasn't. He got mad at me one time because I had joined an all female college service organization and would do things without him. Hell, my ex got mad if I did anything independently. As if I'm going to strum my fingers in my dorm room waiting for his call.

Fortunately my mom had drilled into my brain to never let a person hit you. Prior to meeting my dad, she had been in an abusive relationship and I grew up with her lecturing my brother and I to never repeat her mistake. So when my ex actually did raise a hand to me during one argument, even though I had no self-esteem it was like "oh no he didn't". I told him that if he hit me I'd rip his nuts out. You never saw a hand go down so fast. LMAO

I do kick myself for staying with him so long, but I can't change the past. Many of these things I've never told anyone in real life because I'm embarassed that I let someone treat me so crappy. You think that it is something that happens to "other" women, but never to you. Even after the breakup, it took a good two years before I could admit to myself that I had been in a verbally abusive relationship.

If a person does not value your feelings and concerns, then leave because it won't get better. There are good men out there that will treat you right. And being alone isn't so awful if the alternative is being with an abuser.

[BoneDaddy]

17. Where is the woman's responsibility?

Curious how every possible situation could be blamed on men...where does the women's right to self determination come in or are they absolved of any responsibility?

[Morgana LaFey]

19. Post #18

Get out, leave. That's where the woman's right to self-determination comes in and is best exemplified.

Unfortunately, women are often sweet-talked back into their abusive relationship by their abusers, and have had their self-esteem and that sense of self-determination eroded a little or lot each day since they took up with the JERK, so that makes it considerbly harder to damn near impossible.

Also unfortunately, the most dangerous time is when she's leaving. That's when she's more likely to be killed by her abuser. And too often is.

But yeah, men who are abusers usually ARE blamed for being abusers. Since there is NOTHING any woman can do to "deserve" being abused -- whether that abuse is physical, sexual, emotional, verbal or all of the above -- she is not responsible for her own abuse. That would be "blaming the victim." But that's not what you meant by the woman's responsibility, is it? No, I'm just sure it's not.

[Triana]

23. Exactly. I couldn't have said it better myself

"A woman's responsibility" in HER abuse? And just HOW is a woman responsible for the ABUSIVE personality and behavior of a MAN? That's BLAMING the victim - and that circular logic of claiming to be a victim of the victim. THERE IT IS AGAIN. Anymore AMs want to come in here and DEMONSTRATE the typical behavior and attitudes of of AMs for us? C'mon you KNOW who you are. We've had some excellent examples here.

[shance]

31. Great points Morgana. To add, I would include the economic factor

Which is often the biggest. Not to mention, the earning factor.

The monetary system has essentially created quite a system of enslavement really, and/or limitations of freedom because unfortunately we exist in a system where money dictates our level of access to things, our freedom, our power and/or in many ways our dignity.

Here's an interesting thought: if we weren't beholden to a monetary system, would the level of power abuse that occurs today and the extent of classism that pervades in our world still occur to the extent that it does?

I don't believe it would.

I think therein lies one of the core issues dictating the dysfunction.

But that's a whole other ball of wax isnt it?

;)

[Morgana LaFey]

33. You're exactly right

There were two things that made the women's movement possible at all:

1. The pill -- It gave women the absolutely revolutionary ability to avoid being chained to their biology (and sexuality). There was a sexual revolution that went along with that and I was all for that, too. But giving women the nearly iron-clad ability to prevent pregnancy and childbirth gave them a freedom unknown before in modern society.

2. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, I think it was -- the one where certain chauvinist legislators threw into it the provision that no one should be discriminated against on account of sex AS A JOKE, or perhaps to add a poison pill that would prevent the Act's passage, but which passed anyway and suddenly a certain level of EQUALITY was the law of the land.

OMG, suddenly women had reproductive freedom, and they had a growing economic freedom.

Because if you can't take care of yourself by earning your way in this society, you will stay with your abuser. And that is a MAJOR reason women were kept unequal (chattel) in the first place: so they couldn't leave -- or at least couldn't leave and SURVIVE too. Starvation is a powerful disincentive to insisting upon your freedom and rights.

[Triana]

34. Or starvation of your kids...

...if you have them. Abuse like this affects kids too - in very negative ways both economically and emotionally. Most often the abusive, angry, controlling types abuse the kids too. At the very least they see their mother being abused and that is not good. They learn that this is 'normal'. Girls think that's just the way it is for women and males learn to be abusive towards women. It just really destroys *people* and *people's* lives. If the woman leaves, she and her kids suffer economically. Of course, it's all womens' fault. Just ask an abuser. He'll tell you. :sarcasm:

[shance]

35. This is very much the same case today unfortunately. Many men have gotten

their MBA's while women have stayed home with the kids. They have increased their earning capacity while women have lost theirs, and or never had the opportunity to increase their own.

I have friends who would probably not ever decide to leave because there is simply too much economic pressure and there are also those who have a standard of living they do not want to lose. There is also a social status level if you will that frankly they would lose as well which is quite difficult, because as a job is a mans identity, so often is a woman's social status. It is a women's power quite often. However I have had friends who have divorced and left a very enviable life behind because it was simply too toxic for them and their kids.

The truth is the woman should in no way have to lose what she has earned as a wife and if the husband is fair and equitable, simply because the man has been able to increase his earning capacity and often times become wealthy while she has been at home raising the children.

[Triana]

36. loss of status and...

...guess who friends and family most often seem to want to blame for ended marriages and relationships no matter what the circumstances? The WOMAN, of course.

I know a women who was physically, emotionally, verbally abused by men for years who finally decided to leave. She ended up living in squalor with her kids with a job from Hell. And both friends AND family were divided up between her and him (by their own choice). Most of them blamed HER for the breakup. She got NO support from any of them. UNbelievable. I KNOW what he did to her. I SAW it. I HEARD it. (he didn't know I was there or that the phone was on). She LOST friends, family, and social and economic status. Her kids suffered both economically and emotionally. It's not uncommon. Abusers destroy lives.

This is partially something I wrote about in another post in this thread about the isolation and marginalization of victims of abuse and how their abusers are SO NICE to everyone ELSE but her - even family members. Then, when a breakup happens and she leaves (and tells them why) - everyone is like: "Ohhh, I can't believe HE would ever do anything like thaaat! He's SUCH a nice guy!". But, he DID - and WORSE. He charms them into believe he's oh-so-innocent and sweet and SHE is the seething angry bitch who left him! Woe is him. (blame the victim). It happens all the time. THIS is why I absolutely will NOT brook any of this "you're the angry one!" crap. It's a deception, a pretense, and a projection. It's a LIE.

But it does beg the question: DO WOMEN HAVE ANY RIGHT TO BE ANGRY when a man hurts them? Abusers think not. In abusive relationships, the right to anger is SOLELY reserved for the abuser. The victim - no matter WHAT he does or says to her - has NO right to be or get angry - ever. This is in the Verbal Abuse book. It's ALL in there. It's human nature to become angry with someone who's hurt you. If someone mugs you, once you get over the trauma and regain your financial ground, you're ANGRY at the person who mugged you. And rightfully so. That's NORMAL. But it's not "allowed" in an abusive relationship - no matter what the abuser does to his victim - HER anger is unjustified. And, of course HE is The Decider about that, too. He'll TELL his victim what feelings she's allowed to have and when and why and if they're justified or not. In reality, SHE should be the only one who decides that. Not anyone else. Not him.

I believe one reason our patriarchal society and gov't has been so slow and reluctant to embrace financial equality and reproductive freedom for women here is to make it harder for them to leave marriages and relationships that are abusive. This dates back to the age when women were property to be done with as a man pleased and where they were entrapped and enslaved in abusive marriages. Since we have a mysogenist regime in the White House now progress on this (women's financial equality and reproductive freedom) has - like progress on so many other issues - slid WAY backwards.

Anyway, I shared the rant I found, and my own experience and what I learned from counsellors and from the books I read here so other WOMEN can see it and maybe recognize the attitudes, phrases, and behaviors of these types of men BEFORE they get too far involved - or even after - and to recognize it for what it is. I knew something was wrong myself, - but it was not until I saw counsellors and read a couple of books did I fully realize what I was really putting up with.

My abuser - like most of them - had succeeded in making me doubt my own feelings and perceptions that something was wrong in that relationship and that it HURT. Well, no wonder. This is what abusers do. They try to make their victims doubt their own feelings and perceptions about the abuse (and try to control them) so that the victim will continue to tolerate it. But if a woman feels hurt or depressed and like something's wrong, something almost always IS WRONG.

At some point I realized "OMG, THIS is what I've been putting up with! NO way will this continue!". I confronted him with his behavior. (and it got worse). I told him it has to change or we end it. I told the counsellors. They told HIM he was abusive. He refused to change. We split. But I didn't have financial ties, kids, or a marriage like many women, to worry about. I lost friends and some social status but I regained and retained my sense of SELF and my self-esteem, which he was busily working on tearing down as he tore me down as a person on a daily basis - because that's what abusers do. It's easier to abuse someone who has weak or no self-esteem and who is convinced that they are somehow inferior as a human. Abusive type men work on that - constantly tearing their victims down as a person and making them doubt themselves and their value.

OFTEN, men who are abusive in these ways are not fully aware of it. SOME of them, if made aware of it, will work to change - and making them aware of it to give them a chance to do that if they will, is fair. MOST however, will NOT recognize or work to change their abusive behavior. That leaves the woman with no other recourse than to find a way out of the relationship in order to save herSELF and maybe her KIDS too. It will get harder before it gets better as she re-establishes her life alone. But too often, things get so toxic and damaging to herSELF and / or her kids, that there's no other option than to take that leap and unfortunately for women, that leap is still too often a leap down.

[shance]

37. You and I must know the same woman Triana.*

I'm joking (I think). I think we certainly know of the same "women". There are many of us. The good thing is I think many are awakening to the damage, abuse and repercussions it creates.

One of my closest friends went through essentially the same situation you so eloquently described and was scapegoated by her husbands family and yes, most in her own family. It was both heart breaking and infuriating to watch as a close friend, and really a sister to her. She and I have many years together. She was receiving very little support and defense by those other than her friends, and some of her friends even jumped ship due to what they described as their Christian beliefs. Yeah right.

It was breathtaking to me, and yet, I grew up in much the same situation as my friend, and I believe I could see it realistically. I also could see how that could happen to me if I were in the same situation. We were both the products of a rather upper middle class conservative environment where men were placed above women in stature and importance, however thinly or thickly veiled. Men called the shots, which of course happens in the North and or the South, east and west of our nation. Location really has little to do with it. The patriarchy is firmly entrenched in our culture and our conditioning.

It is nothing short of tragic to see how individuals are so influenced by money and the male patriarchal image. Men are conditioned by it as well of course. There are many wonderful men out there, however there are those who will stop at nothing to 'win', at the expense of their children, and any concern for their wives, or anyone other than themselves.

I have actually seen women do the same thing, however much more often and prevalent in men. It seems it is a patriarchal/competitive/capitalistic mentality that drives people to engage in such immoral behavior that I believe people cannot consciously imagine someone could be so dishonest, so they often resort to believing the offender, because they WANT to believe their fantasy, instead of seeing the truth and reality for what it is.

Thank you for your wonderful post.

[Triana]

38. Christian beliefs...

...oh boy. Is it Christian to abuse your wife or any woman? To treat them as inferior, without respect? To lie, and be dishonest and pretentious about that? To destroy them and their lives? I guess so. Or some people twist it to mean that it's OK because that's what they want to do - or what they were conditioned to do. Boys who grow up in abusive homes usually grow up to be abusers.

Patriarchy is a problem. Most men men are raised (whether they realize it or not) with a sense of entitlement and superiority in a world where men lead and dominate and 'win' - at all costs. Whether they actually *say* it or not, many of them think they are always to be superior and dominant and to have (or take, or do) whatever they want. But voiced or not, that attitude comes out in other ways. Words comments and actions, controlling behavior, and verbally, emotionally, or physically abusive behavior. I don't think women ought to dominate the world either, but there certainly needs to be more balance than there is now.

And abusive behavior towards women is conditioned - in men and women. That's another reason (besides the abuser making his victim doubt her own perceptions of it and tearing down her self-esteem) it's so difficult to recognize. Because it's so entrenched, expected, and accepted in society - and religion. But it shouldn't be, and it doesn't have to be. It destroys *people's* lives. (people being the victims - not always, but usually women and children).

It's important - which is why I made this post, that women learn to recognize it for what it is - to educate themselves about it, to learn to trust their own perceptions of it, and just get out if necessary in order to save themSELVES, their emotional health, their kids health and well-being, and possibly their own lives, in extreme cases.

It's time for this to change - at least in womens' individual lives if not beyond that. There are men out there who are helping - Jackson Katz, Lundy Bancroft, and others. Bancroft counsels abusers and their families and he has done so for 15+ years. He knows ALL the abuser tricks. To read Bancroft's accounts of some of the counselling sessions and how abusers act/react to being confronted with their behavior is both disgusting and compelling. Here is his site:

http://www.lundybancroft.com/

The book "Why Does He Do That?" is another good book, I have it.

Here's a whole page of resources for victims from his site:

http://www.lundybancroft.com/pages/resources.html

And a whole slew of articles and commentary from professionals about the issue here:

http://www.wcwonline.org/p-main.html


WOMEN OUT THERE: Read this thread. Visit the sites, get some of the books, IF you feel you're in an abusive situation (verbally/emotionally and/OR physically). Don't doubt your perceptions! Educate yourself to recognize what's going on, learn about how abusers behave and what their attitudes and tactics are, and find out how to get yourself (and kids if any) out. Even if you're not married and just dating the guy and want to know how best to extricate yourself - and learn to recognize abuse early on next time so you don't get involved with an abuser to start with. Even I didn't fully recognize it when it was going on. I knew I was unhappy, hurting and something(s) were WRONG, I knew he was being very MEAN to me, but I didn't see the whole picture until I really looked into it. Then, I was shocked. I knew I had to get out of that relationship before it destroyed me. It's not always obvious. No matter how old you are. Or how intelligent you are.

We live in a patriarchal society with dominant religious beliefs which largely accept abuse, dominance, and control over women by men. We are *conditioned* to accept it. But it's NOT acceptable - especially when it hurts you or your kids.

[shance]

40. Triana, thank you for this post and thank you for what you are doing.

I hope we can find more ways to bring women together and break the misperceptions that have been so conditioned in us. I hope we will bond together more with other women and build circles and families of women. I think we need that now more than ever.

The women's movement started off in what was a powerfully charged, passionate and empowered direction and believe it or not, as Aaron Russo stated in his film From Freedom to Fascism, it was actually those in power, namely the likes of the Rockefellers who essentially took over the direction of the movement through the media and steered it essentially into a wall and wound up removing women from the homes, propagandized the myth that women can do everything, (perhaps we can but someone, usually the children suffer) made us pay taxes (which was part of the good ole boy agenda)and the schools essentially took over our kids began controlling their minds and the information they were taught. If it is true what Nick Rockefeller said, that it was all indeed intentional. I think we as women and awakened men, really citizens nationwide will have to turn our backs on the brainwashing that is bombarding us everyday with advertising and media. Its that pervasive and I believe it is that intenional and that is why it is so tightly controlled by the white men who monopolize virtually everything.

[Triana]

42. You're welcome...

...I just hope it helps. If ONE woman can avoid going through what myself and so many others have because they got information, resources, shared experiences and education beforehand, then I'd be happy. I still can't believe I didn't see what was going on - and that I put up with it for so long.

On Dr. Irene's site, she says ( http://drirene.com/goes_wife.htm ) "It hits many victims as a "Realization." - that's how it hit me. I was floored. And VERY hurt. And justifiably angry. Most victims are. How we handle that anger is key though. I'd like to channel mine into education - helping other women avoid going through what I did. I don't 'hate men'. I've known some very nice, harmless, kind men. And some not-so-nice ones who had "issues" that they wanted me to suffer for and with. I didn't appreciate that and it hurt a LOT and I finally had to set some boundaries about that - even if it meant breaking up.

In the end, I pity them, mostly. Because they have a LOT of work to do on themselves (very difficult work) and if they don't do that work, they will repeat the same pattern they did with me. Over and over and over. And, OTHER women will be hurt just like I was - unless those women can recognize those abusive behaviors before they get too involved. We can only be responsible for ourselves, not the men we're involved with, no matter how much we 'love' them.

Women can't do everything. Shouldn't be expected to do (or endure) everything. They have to stand up for themselves and set boundaries about what they will and will not put up with. Easier said than done of course, but mysogenist, abusive, patriarchal attitudes won't destroy women if they REFUSE to let them. That's what women can do. They can only take personal responsibility for their own selves and their own boundaries. It's HARD and often means a loss of financial or social status. But women can't and should not take responsibility for an abusive man's behavior when it's destroying HER and her life. No way. That's HIS issue and in the end, she has to care for herself (and her kids too).

And men (like Katz and Bancroft) can help. Abusers can help if they're brave enough to face up to and OWN their own fear, insecurity and anger and stop acting it out in destructive ways towards women and blaming women (or anyone else) for it.

[SemperEadem]

63. Sometimes, even a therapist doesn't help

I learned this not too long ago about the big difference between therapist and domestic abuse counsellors:

The first thought many of us have when things start to head south with our relationships/marriages is counseling. This would be the first step in attempting to salvage an otherwise healthy relationship. Problem is, abusive relationships are not healthy relationships. And this is where we run into problems with traditional marital/family therapy settings.

Traditional marital counseling is based on a couple of different principles and assumptions. They assume that both people in the relationship are normal, rational human beings and that the relationship itself is otherwise healthy except for whatever the problem is. And generally, it’s a communication issue. Pastoral counseling also takes this track, so we’ll keep that lumped together (pastoral and secular). It also assumes that there is a balance of power in the relationship, meaning both parties are equal.

This is not the case with abuse. Both parties are not normal, rational human beings. It is not a simple communication problem. And there is definitely not equality among the parties. Abuse is a power imbalance – one person holds all of it and does not relinquish it without a fight. Power to them takes on many forms, be it financial, control physically/mentally/emotionally over another, passive forms (such as not doing chores, not helping with kids, not financially assisting in the relationship, etc.). And, more to the point, they don’t feel as though they need to change what they’re doing. They believe they are entitled to behave in the manner to which they are accustomed. So, traditional counselors will say both parties are equally at fault. There is NO SHARED BLAME IN ABUSE. It lies squarely with the abuser, the party holding all the power.

And this is where traditional counseling breaks down.

To get anything out of counseling, you have to truly want to be there and work through whatever problem it is you are having, be it personal or in a relationship. Like an addict, you have to want to change. Many abusers do not want to change. Even if they say, “Oh, baby, I’ll change, I promise…”, 99% of the time they are paying lip service. They’re saying that as a condition of you staying…or them staying. Often times this is why abusers agree to counseling. They see it as a condition of the relationship staying in tact.

Many times we hear people who have tried marital counseling (both secular and pastoral) with their abusers say that their SO sat there and lied in the session, or called them a liar. Or said nothing. Some people have even been hauled into therapy by their SO’s in an effort by them to prove they are insane, need medication, need to be committed, etc., because they don’t ‘act right’, according to their abusers (read: they behave like a normal person, but not as the abuser expects them to.). Often times, abusers will feel, even after one session, that counseling is a waste of their time and money and lose interest in going. And we know that sometimes they will try and convince their victims to stop attending because the counselors are “stupid”, “don’t know what they’re talking about” or are putting “ideas” into your head.

On the flip side of this we have the counselors themselves. Most traditional counselors (pastoral included) do NOT have training in handling DV situations. It just isn’t taught. So, they counsel as if the relationship is otherwise healthy, meaning they give ideas on how to communicate more effectively, they promote compromise as a solution, and they try to get you to work WITH your abuser as a team…and all of us know that ain’t going to work. If one party doesn’t want to play nice, how is this approach supposed to work?

On top of that, counseling itself is supposed to be helpful. The session is supposed to be a place where you can air your fears, concerns and problems in front of a neutral third party and get some feedback. IF YOU DO THIS IN FRONT OF YOUR ABUSER, YOU ARE HANDING THEM THE BULLETS TO THE PROVERBIAL GUN. If you say A, B, C bothers me, that’s telling the abuser that they are being successful and they will continue on with it. They also may retaliate for it. We have heard of people being beaten on the drive home from sessions because of what they said. Others have almost been killed in intentional car accidents. Others have been berated for hours because of what was said. Then, if it’s brought up the next session, the abuser sits there and denies it ever happened.

Friends, this is why traditional counseling is NEVER, EVER recommended in abuse situations. We encourage abuse victimes to contact their local shelters to get counseling with trained DV pros, people who know and understand how abuse works on the victims, what the consequences are, etc. And it’s either individual or group, sometimes both. They help address the what and why and help the victims to understand that it is not their fault. I’m not knocking traditional counseling, it is extremely beneficial for situations where you’re not dealing with abuse, same with pastoral counseling. The church, much like with traditional secular counselors, is great for routine issues, but the church at times is even worse than secular, because they will often times blame the wife for not living up to her “duties” and will FAIL TO ACKNOWLEDGE that there is abuse even existing and put the blame squarely on their shoulders. Pastoral counseling can be a wonderful supplemental counseling avenue once you are in recovery mode.

[Triana]

68. Patricia Evans points this out in her book - about traditional counselling...

...and you know MY abuser insisted on counselling as a condition for the relationship staying in tact. As soon as we got the part where we were talking about his verbally abusive behavior, he got angry at me and the counsellor, and bolted the next session, ending the relationship. I agreed to end it of course, since he refused to acknowledge or change his abusive behavior. No other option.

He was not able or willing to face his own personality issues - the ones that got our relationship to that point once I realized what I had been putting up with. For me, it was that he had to change his abusive behavior or I was leaving. He was obviously not willing to change it, acknowlege, or deal with it. That's oftent he case. For the woman, her only option then is to leave because she cannot change his behavior. HE has to do it. And it's a lot of HARD work and personal emotional searching most men are not willing to undergo.

On "Dr Irene's" site, she says that abusers often have little or no clue that THEY have a problem. They blame their victim for it. It isn't until she leaves him or something really big happens (and sometimes not even THEN) that he recognizes that something is wrong - with HIM.

And, you're correct about most traditional counsellors. Counselling in abuse situations is totally different and involves a totally different set of circumstances - the counsellor must be specifically trained for this. Lundy Bancroft - a guy who as counselled abusers for over 15 years, also acknowledges that counselling abusers and people involved in abusive relationship - is a whole different animal than traditional marriage counselling.

[Morgana LaFey]

21. Excellent thread, Triana

I'm going to have to come back to it. Lots to look at and study.

[Triana]

25. PLEASE do...

...my primary reason for posting it is so that other WOMEN would see it and learn from it - not make the same mistakes I did and the person who authored the "rant" did, and that many other women do. So they know what signs to look for and what to do to avoid men like that. Get the Verbal Abuse book (EVERY woman ought to own a copy) - and the one on Controlling People is good too (not just for controlling-type men but moms and bosses and others). It'll (the Verbal Abuse one) help you recongize it and respond to it, and gives a roadmap out, if need be.

[Triana]

39. Dr. Irene's Verbal Abuse Site...(resource)

...an enlightening interview with an abuser:

I mentioned that often, abusers don't know they're being abusive - until they're confronted with it. Then, they'll either wake up and realize that their behavior is hurtful and work to change it (HARD work) or they'll deny and try to cover it up. Abusers are often fearful and insecure (and often will accuse their victims of being both of those things - projection) - and that's why they are abusive. In this and all situations of abuse though, it's up to the victim to speak up - LOUDLY and take decisive action to let the abuser know his behavior is not acceptable and that she will no longer tolerate it and that he is hurting her and damaging their relationship - threating to end it is one way to get their attention. Then, they will either recognize their abuse and be willing to deal with the fear and insecurity behind it in order to change it, or they'll deny and blame it on their victim (in which case -- she has no choice but to leave).

This interview is with a person who saw his behavior and wanted to work to change it. He'd already lost his wife though. Anyway, to see it from the other side:

There goes the bride:
http://drirene.com/goes_wife.htm

This site is FULL of resources about abuse, abusers and victims. INCLUDING information about the VICTIM's anger and what they can do about it:
http://drirene.com/the.htm

And dealing with your abuser: when words won't work:
http://drirene.com/when_words.htm

A verbal/emotional abuse checklist:
http://drirene.com/verbal1.htm

Mailing lists victims might want to join:
http://drirene.com/support_lists.htm

TONS of stuff there. Check it out!

[SemperEadem]

65. another site which is good

www.youarenotcrazy.com

[Triana]

66. THANK YOU! That is a great site!

I've seen so many sites and PhDs recommend Patrica Evans' book. I have it and I have to say it opened my eyes. It's unbelieveable what women will put up with - and not even be aware of it because it's so socially ingrained in us (and in our relationships) to tolerate it.

Thanks. :hug:

[nashville_brook]

43. my EX was seen as a feminist/enlightened guy, BUT he did every one of those

verbal behaviors.

i think the bottom line is that relationships where boy-girl competition is a feature are DOOMED relationships. i could be a part of my marriage as long as i accepted the fact that i was inferior to him... and then accepted the blame for the lousy relationship ON THE GROUNDS that i was inferior to him. "everything will be better as soon as you make some money. everything would be fine if you held your own with all the housework, yardwork and repairs. everything would be fine if i didn't expect intimacy."

btw -- the no-job thing was the result of a major illness (osteomylietis). it wasn't like i was just wanting to "stay home and do nothing" as he was fond of saying.

BUT he saw himself as totally different from "angry men." he often regaled me with stories of the knuckle-draggers, putting himself on a pedestal in comparison. a yellow-dog democrat a musician and a generally-enlightened guy...

and here's the thing: i was blinded by his liberal credentials. i had trouble seeing that he treated me like shit because of his reputation as a feminist.

[shance]

49. Thank you for posting. Sometimes JUST being a guy gives them precedence.

over anyone else, and with that the so called truth and the facts.

It is wrong but it is a product of patriarchy and what I believe as well to be an over zealous controlled market accompanied with a privileged white male owned media.

Bless you. There are many of us who have been in your situation. Kudos to you that you are able to verbalize it so well.

I really believe women, and even men as well, need to throw away their televisions and wake up to the lies and the brain washing that is being continually thrust upon us.

I think it needs to begin first with the women.

I want to add :

If women need to find their power by connecting with other women sexually, they should definitely connect in that way. IF it breaks their delusion of the romantic myth, then all the better. The illusion of romance and marriage really seems to be a media driven apparition on many levels, does it not?

The sexual realm is conditioned in us and in our culture. The lie that we are only to be fulfilled through a man is also a HUGE lie and media driven myth, although of course it can happen and does. However, it does not by any means have to be our goal or by any means a necessity. Such a goal leaves us conveniently and forever seeking a male as our partner and that might not be what is comfortable for us. Connecting with other women on that level is amazingly powerful and life altering, and if that wakes other women to begin exploring the true value in our gender and who we are, and what we inherently are to each other, then by all means, do it.

[Triana]

52. the illusion of romance and marriage is definitely...

...media and society driven. And the patriarchal society does imbue boys right from the get-go with a sense of superiority and entitlement - and I DO believe that's the crux of some of their attitudes. I would not find it surprising if a woman gets tired of suffering with that and decides to try to connect with other women, instead. Who can blame them?

[Triana]

51. Exactly - sounds very similar to my own "liberal" knuckledragger

ESPECIALLY this part:

"as long as i accepted the fact that i was inferior to him... and then accepted the blame for the lousy relationship ON THE GROUNDS that i was inferior to him."

He TOLD the couples counsellor that in HIS opinion all our relationship issues (which were primarily caused by his fear and insecurity which manifested in the relationship as a disregard of me as a human being and subsequent verbal and emotional abuse) were MY fault. He used to say "well, there's a GOOD reason I blame you for everything - because everything IS all YOUR fault!" I'm sure that's a familiar song and dance, no?

This guy considers himself "liberal" - voted for Democrats most of the time. But - a 'feminist' or any supporter of women or women's rights - NOPE. That he was NOT. He had an angry streak in him where women were concerned and was bent on controlling (and judging whether valid or not) their every action, reaction, and emotion. He was angry. He was controlling. He was insecure -- and that's why he was angry and controlling.

I read something on Dr. Irene's site about guys who like to tell the woman they're abusing "You're oversensitive!" - her suggested response is: "Yes. That's right. RESPECT it."

DON'T make excuses or explain to them why you're upset or blah blah - or try to get them to understand. That only validates their assertion (which is usually a projection of their own anger or fear or insecurity onto you). They don't NEED to understand why you're upset or "oversensitive" - because you're NOT. They need to address their OWN anger and insecurity and stop projecting it onto - and taking it out on - someone else - that's what they need to do.

The Verbal Abuse book, (which Dr. Irene recommends also) says the same thing. It's easier said than done though, when someone is hurling "you're imagining things!", "You're insecure!", "You're oversensitive!", "You're lazy!" insults at you. It requires a great deal of self-assuredness - and NOT allowing someone else to degrade YOUR opinion or image of yourself by hurling their own personal crap at you. Crap they don't want to deal with directly - but it comes out SOMEWHERE - always - and it happens to be coming out on you. Don't believe anything they tell you about yourself (because they're really talking about THEMSELVES). Only believe what YOU tell you about yourself. And don't let anyone change that. Except YOU -- if YOU think it needs to change.

I STILL think every woman out there (and most men) ought to have a copy of that Verbal Abuse book!

[nashville_brook]

61. while women and men are BOTH subject to this kind of abuse, here's why it's in the Women's

Rights Forum -- WE are socialized to blame ourselves, change ourselves and accomodate the abuse (emotional, verbal, etc).

this kind of treatment is something that we are likely blind to in intimate relationships -- that's why it feels like such a revelation when we read about. it IS a "revealing" -- lifting the veil, so to speak.

in the case of my marriage, it took 15 years to even put my finger on what the problem was. prior to that, my line of reasoning was that he had a crappy childhood, that his parents didn't teach him affectionate behavior, or that i was doing something wrong (usually along the lines of not being understanding enough).

turns out he was just another selfish asshole.

i have a good male friend who i shared this thread with. he had an immediate "reactionary" reaction -- pissed that this was being shaped as a "women's only" issue, b/c in his family of origin, the mother was the abuser (and continues to be). we ARGUED over it, which was dumb because he was coming from a place that isn't up for discussion -- emotional pain.

after the dust cleared i thought about the difference between his situation and mine. he only accomodated his mother's behavior in so much as he had to as a child living at home (to keep the peace). no one ever told him that HE had to change. no one ever questioned his assessment of the conflict. it was right there for everyone to see.

that's the difference. as women, we're supposed to make the changes. we're supposed to either stay quiet or stay in the relationship.

[noamnety]

64. Yep, Accomodate the abuse

If the guy is dangerous, cruel, abusive, locks you up and literally starves you, you need to be good and patient and sweet, and eventually he will change. (With the correlary: if he doesn't change, you weren't good and sweet enough.) The Beauty and the Beast storyline.

Are there any comparable plot lines in children's stories with flipped genders? Stories that kids are raised on, where the wife is evil on the surface, but has a good heart inside that just needed to be unlocked by a patient man whom she abuses?

[nashville_brook]

69. The Evil Stepmother is all i can think of... but she is not redeemable

hmmm... that's an interesting question.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

71. Such stories exist, although in the UK I don't think they're well known any more.

There's an old "parametric" story from various parts of England, often called "The Grumly Wife" or something along those lines. A good example of it is "King Henry", Child Ballad #32, which I know because Steeleye Span recorded it. You can find the lyrics at http://www.sacred-texts.com/bos/bos502.htm

There are lots of other variations on the theme of ugly old crones who are transformed into beautiful young women when a man (often a third son) does the right things, which usually involves doing all they tell him to, and often marrying them in return for help with his quest. I don't have any of Andrew Lang's compilations, sadly, but I suspect you could find some in there.

But none of the really well known fairy stories, most of which come from either the brothers Grimm or Perrault, fit that model, I think.

It's possibly worth noting that in a lot of fairy tales, though, the correct female response to the situation you outline is to wait to be rescued by another man who will kill the original one, or to kill him yourself and escape (although these only ever happens *before* marriage, so far as I know - I know of few if any examples of remarriages in fairy tales).

Outside of fairy tales... hmm. Estelle in "Great Expectations"?

[Quantess]

55. How interesting. I've seen similar scenarios.

Kudos to you for recognizing the situation, and getting away from him.

Another thing that faux-enlighetened, otherwise-liberal guys often do, is talk about how women in other countries are lower than dogs, and how lucky American women are. Look buddy, I don't care how bad those women have it in some other countries (and anyway, American women do not have the tippy-top of optimal conditions for equality compared with some European countries), I will not lower my expectations just because some other women in the world have it worse! What nerve!

[Triana]

57. That's just a distraction tactic...

...that way they still don't have to address or acknowledge the ongoing treatment of women in the US as second-class citizens. Good point about European women.

Sure. It could be worse. And if many men have their way, it WILL be. HOWEVER - it could be better too - and it damn well SHOULD! There's no reason women anywhere should have to accept second-class citizen status, not be fairly represented in their governments, or be dominated, controlled, abused, or oppressed by men.

[Katherine Brengle]

72. I can't tell you how many times I've come up against #s 2 & 4 --

I think they're probably the most common, based on my own experience with men.

[Triana]

73. I believe you - #2 especially - heck, DOCTORS will tell women that, often...

...rather than actually addressing a health problem - tell her "it's all in your head" - "here, just have some Valium". I know women who DIED because they had significant issues the doctor refused to do anything about because it was "just a woman" who was the patient. Pancreatic cancer - went untreated and the woman died.

This is the mantra of far too many men - that women are all hysterical and crazy and not to be believed, taken seriously, or listened to no matter the circumstances.

[raccoon]

74. You and me both! Every boyfriend I ever had did those. nt