The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Hitting Your Wife
Marie August
Los Angeles, CaliforniaRegistered User regular
Los Angeles, CaliforniaRegistered User regular
So I was watching a tv show this evening, and there was a couple that, until that episode, seemed to be decently happy and functional. And then they have a fight and he hits her. He's incredibly apologetic, so very very sorry. But the show is pushing across this message that if the wife does not leave him, she's making the wrong choice. And I'm wondering, is it the wrong choice?
If someone hits their significant other, is it unforgivable? Is someone a victim making an irresponsible decision if they believe that they can give that person a second chance?
Is hitting your wife worse than cheating on your wife? Some people would find that unforgivable the first time, and some would give their husband a second chance. But neither decision is considered to always be the wrong one if it's the first time. Even if people don't agree with the decision, they can usually understand a wife being willing to forgive that kind of thing.
If someone hits their significant other, is it unforgivable? Is someone a victim making an irresponsible decision if they believe that they can give that person a second chance?
Is hitting your wife worse than cheating on your wife? Some people would find that unforgivable the first time, and some would give their husband a second chance. But neither decision is considered to always be the wrong one if it's the first time. Even if people don't agree with the decision, they can usually understand a wife being willing to forgive that kind of thing.
Marie August on
0
Posts
The thing is, many many women who get hit DO forgive it. And they get hit again, because there is a cycle of abuse. The apologetic behavior is common right after the incident, illustrated as follows:
(spoilered for large)
And normally by the time a relationship progresses to the point where someone is hitting, the relationship is already deeply mired in mental, emotional, and possibly sexual abuse. And in many way, it is the emotional and mental abuse that are far more damaging than the physical abuse it. That's why many times a battered wife or husband forgives their abusive spouse, because they're already so abused they are locked into a syndrome that is very much similar to Stockholme Syndrome.
So yes, hitting your wife or husband is much, much worse than cheating on them. And if anyone is in a situation in which they are getting hit, they need to either leave, or plan to leave, and get professional help as soon as possible. Being in an abusive relationship is a hell NO ONE should have to go through.
I don't think that the individual act of hitting is in itself so intrinsically bad that it ought to automatically end a relationship regardless of how good it formerly was--taken purely in isolation, the pain of a punch is far from the worst thing that can befall a person. That being said, hitting is strong evidence of an abusive partner, and one ought to be wary of getting unwittingly caught in the cycles of abuse and forgiveness characteristic of abusive relationships. Those cycles are hard, psychologically, for both parties to break. It thus seems to me better not to take the chance of ever letting them start in the first place. So even though hitting is not, intrinsically, the worst thing in the world, it strikes me as the most prudent course to end the relationship immediately in response.
But I would be interested in (and defer to) what people with more extensive knowledge of the empirical/psychological data concerning abuse have to say (particularly @Feral , who I recall saying enlightening things on spousal abuse in the past).
edit: looks like Decomposey said it first, and better =P
Are you talking about spousal abuse, in which one spouse abuses the other with physical violence in a systematic way? (Unforgivable, atrocious and a constant problem to be worked at fixing as a society.)
or
Are you specifically highlighting the taboo of a male striking a female, in this case in the context of a relationship. For instance, are you asking about a husband striking his wife after she slaps him in anger, specifically focusing on the power imbalance in male-female relationships?
They're both conversations that could be interesting to have, but I think they're pretty different discussions so I'd like clarification.
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197970666737/
Most the abuse a victim goes through will be verbal in nature. Some abusive relationships will only be verbal abuse. Which shouldn't be seen as lesser abuse. Violence produces fear, but the verbal abuse tends to leave the deepest scars.
There are rare cases in which both partners are equally as abusive to each other, but in every case, hitting your romantic partner is abuse.
Doesn't matter. They still are.
That's imaging, of course, that it is a single blow (or a single instance of cheating).
However, this is a largely insignificant technicality in the face of an overwhelmingly comon pattern of domestic violence.
We need to stop teaching children at a young age that normal household relationships involve hitting people you love when they don't do what you want.
This is, so far, the most civil discussion on a serious and controversial topic I have ever seen at PA.
Please be careful not to derail it.
Likewise. My wife punched me in the shoulder a little while back when she thought I was being an insensitive dick. She punched me hard and in anger. I wouldn't classify her as an abuser and didn't even entertain the notion of leaving her over it.
However, if she touched another dude's penis ever, I'd hop on the express train to Divorce Court.
Cases in which spousal abuse is mutual are very common. It's not rare at all, only perceived as such because we tend to have a gendered view of partner abuse.
For example,a physical altercation could suggest:
- unresolved anger management issues
- PTSD
- unresolved relationship issues (victim lashing out)
- terrible conflict resolution skills
- some combination of these
Abuse by its nature is a recurring pattern, not a singular event. Obviously, there is no good thing that a physical attack could signify, but there is more than one possible bad thing.
"Don't stay with someone who punches you, even if they SEEM sorry" is a more needed lesson in our society than "Oh, maybe he'll change!" (He probably won't.)
Physical or emotional abuse seems to take a much greater toll on the victim than straightout cheating. When Boyfriend/Girlfriend who is other in control of themselves cheats the reaction is usually anger. When Boyfriend/Girlfriend punches, the fallout is often that the victim feels ashamed and debased. Why this is I couldn't say, it's just what I've observed. Not that being cheated on is something that's going to make you sing and frolic, but in general abuse has much worse side-effects IMO.
("In general" because sometimes the abuser is cheating at the same time.)
My ex wife eventually became physically "abusive". Only one serious instance, though. We managed to work through it for about a year and a half afterwards but when we started having problems again, they were compounded by her anger problems, and we eventually divorced. She did make threatening remarks when things got really heated but she never clocked me in the face again.
I'm glad we tried to work on it, though, and I simply didn't end it the next day arbitrarily. Regardless, I don't think she did what she did because she was abusive, but because she had some serious personal issues left over from before we were ever married/together that she never wanted to address.
P.S. Everybody knows you watch Glee now. =P
I mean, if there's a couple that has been in a relationship for 10 years, and then the both of them are having "worst day evers", and something escalates, then yeah, that might be a sign of a need for relationship counseling, but it isn't at all a sign that the guy is an abusive bastard.
Sometimes its the relationship that needs help and not the guy in it. Most of the time its probably the guy, but not always.
I was wondering what show it was.
I think that in real life, there are many possible outcomes, some of which could include staying with the person if they get immediate professional help.
In a TV show, though? Nuanced approaches are hard to understand in real life, with hours of explaining and study and experience. Trying to get across any message more complicated than "abuse is always bad" in a TV show is even more difficult. People in abusive relationships are assaulted constantly by societal and personal pressure to "make it work" and stay in the relationship, and the mind can latch onto any one of them as a reason to believe that the abuser will get better. And sure, it could happen. But it seems like in the majority of cases, it doesn't happen, it just gets worse until the victim can leave. I'd almost always be disturbed by a TV show that tried to convey a mass-media message that muddles the issue of whether abuse victims should leave. Not to say that a more complicated message isn't sometimes appropriate, but for a broad audience it's probably going to be misplaced unless addressed in an extremely sophisticated manner.
(plus from my limited experience with Glee, I wouldn't say that subtlety is one of the strong points of that show. With society being in the place it is, I'd say err on the side of caution with regards to a message about domestic abuse.)
Also let's be honest here. The issue with spousal abuse is not that so many wonderful relationships break up over it when they could be repaired. The issue is that people are trapped in abusive situations.
I'm on various forums on the internet, including a couple that are mostly populated by women and that have a private (not visible to non-members) boards. I've seen the abuse thing come up so many times. "He's hitting me, I don't know what to do." "I would leave, but I have kids." Everything, all of it. And I've known some of these women for years. They aren't stupid, they aren't incapable, and some of them were the last people I would ever think had low self-esteem. But over and over, "we talked it over, everything's fine now!
Sometimes they finally do manage to leave their spouse/SO, and then they talk about how "everyone else saw it, and now I can't understand why I couldn't." "I don't understand why I stayed with him so long." "When I look back, I just can't believe it. Thank God I finally got out."
That is why I would hesitate to stay with someone who punches and hits--even once. Because by the time it becomes apparent that it IS a pattern, you may be caught in that psychological trap that makes it almost impossible to leave. I think we would all like to think that we are smart enough or strong enough that it wouldn't happen to us, that only THOSE people stay in obviously abusive situations, while we on the other hand are one of THESE other people . . . Well, the women I've seen struggling with this never thought it would happen to them either. Personally, I would rather not risk it. Plenty more fish in the sea. Fish who won't punch you in the face.
This. What caused the abuser to perpetrate the violence is the real problem, the violence itself is just a symptom. Apologies don't fix that problem anymore than wiping the snot off of your face cures the common cold.
If they agree to solve the real problem (and actually follow through), then there's hope. If not, you're just going to be another victim if you stay.
In a subsequent episode, they showed the guy to be a serial abuser with major anger issues, and at that point, yes, get the hell out. If something happens twice it is a pattern. Once? It's not necessarily insurmountable.
There are, of course, situations in which a single instance would justify immediately terminating the relationship.
Setting arbitrary rules may be helpful to some, but that doesn't make them any less arbitrary.
There's really nothing I can say here that hasn't already been said by you, Decomposey, Thom, LadyM, ElJeffe, etc etc etc.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I will point out that even if you newly perceive somebody to be a victim of abuse, it's usually better to start with gentle encouragement and leading questions. Questions like, "How many times has this happened" or soft advice like "I don't think this is healthy" are better than "you should dump him!"
That doesn't mean that there isn't eventually a good time for forcefulness, just only after other interactions have been tried.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
As a man, if I did something monumental to hurt her emotionally, I would cope with her hitting me, whether it be a punch, slap, whatever, as long as it did not incur severe physical damage.
Now I will preface the following with this: I personally find any form of hitting a loved one reprehensible, and would never do it, but this is a personal belief based on my own cultural upbringing.
If she were to do something that greatly injured me in some way, there is a fine line. For example, I can push her into a wall to illustrate a point without incurring large physical damage. At the same time though, as is the case with a large majority of heterosexual relationships, the male is often physically stronger than the female. If I were to punch her or hit her, there is a large likelihood that I would cause severe medical damage. This is strictly forbidden, and a case where I strongly believe a Two Strike Approach is necessary, if not 1. If they can mutually work it out through counseling, then yes, there is coming back, but if the second happens, then no, absolutely, get out.
It is absurdly sexist in many ways, but I am far more willing to put up with physical abuse inflicted upon me by a woman than I am to put up with a male abusing a woman. To me it is a matter that she is far less likely to physically hurt me, and is one of the few ways she can vent her frustrations in a manner that makes it clear to me that I have hurt her beyond her ability to reasonably emotionally cope with it. If it gets out of hand, then yes, I'd want to discuss it with her, but to that end, I feel it is more acceptable from her. Again, extremely sexist, but I don't know how else to cope with it.
Ultimately, I feel physical abuse is not something to be trifled with, and even one instance warrants outside counseling. Also, if any tools/implements or dirty tactics (attacking an unaware victim, going for particularly vulnerable body parts (Veins, Knees, Neck, Groin, Head) are used, it is absolutely a 1 strike offense.
I should clarify that I'm also not talking about a little shove or something like that. I'm talking about if you closed fist punch somebody hard, like you're trying to really hurt them. If you can do that to someone, you have no business being in a relationship with them, period. My opinion on that will never change.
Well I have a personal anecdote that disproves your baseless assertion (also, 95%? really?) but since your opinion will never change I guess there's no point trying.
Nope.
Men and women tend to engage in domestic abuse in roughly equal rates. This is known as "gender symmetry" and is pretty well-established.
We can find differences in the types of violence between genders (for instance, sexual assault, or the use of a weapon) but at a very broad high level, men are not significantly more likely to be domestic abusers than women.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Have you ever had a petite woman hurl a plate at your face? I have, and it's not nearly as cute as it seems on TV. Even with that level of dysfunction, we were able to salvage the relationship with counseling and proper medication. We still broke up eventually, but not because she kept being a violent psychopath.