Domestic Violence

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by Black Jack


PPCT could still be considered assualt.

The best defense is if it is a spouse is to get her into therapy as soon as possible, if she will not go f@ck her and move on as you don't need that kind of crap.

When attacked defend yourself from harm and call the cops. Have her taken to jail. Situantional awareness goes for domestic abuse as well as street danger. Don't put yourself in a situation with a person like that.

As long as your woman has no real martial traiing or is not beefed up on steriods you should be able to absord whatever abuse whe dishes. (kitchen knives excluded). Then have her arrested or therapy depending on whether you want to stay with this woman.

[Cody]

Tony M. Yes, it is old news. But, like a lot of data, suddenly makes a "New" appearance. typical of modern media.

Zim. I think the jail concept does have merit, though that doesn't stop some.
I am wondering if a reluctance to use physical force against a woman is the opposite side of the coin of groups where it's condoned. where a woman's value as a human being is not equivalent to the man's, to put it mildly. As human beings who have joy and suffering......, there is a normal kind equality which we expect here. That brings a social pressure upon one who would consider himself a gentleman. There can be a healthy pride in that. But, having the need to actually defend against the lady, rather than put her in her "place" first, might be a problem for some. I'm not advocating the latter, just thinking of different points of view.
Thinking one might not be believed, but accused instead by the woman who acted like a raving lunatic, but now gives an Oscar-winning presentation of helplessness and points the finger in the man's direction, is also a consideration. I've seen that in a slightly different context.

I think that allowing one's self to be Continually victimized, which includes not being able to exit effectively, has more to do with individual state of mind and the relationship itself, rather than with local societal norms When physical and mental cruelty are discouraged or considered illegal. Yes, it does take two to have an abusive situation. In the case where one promises it won't happen again, the other can "believe" this and go into denial. In this state of denial the little lady is pure as the driven snow. Amazing how this can happen over and over. complicated dynamics.

Bottom line is that a man can feel just as downtrodden, not worthy of love, deserving of punishment, mentally imbalanced to the point of feeling weaker than his spouse under certain circumstances, as a woman. Men are people too.
As some stereotypes become less compelling and men and women can be seen as people who have differences on an individual basis within a general continuum, I think the difficulties each face apart and together can be more candidly addressed. Or, it's not so important anymore who is hitting or threatening who, it's Why does it happen and how can we stop/prevent it in our own lives and in our communities? Intervention by an individual is risky.

Cody

What's PPCT?

[Black Jack]

PPCT

Pressure Point Control Tactics

If its a chick I don't know on the street she gets the same principles of defense everybody else gets. I would hit a chick just as fast as I would hit a guy if I am being attacked. Remove her as a threat and skip out.

[ZIM]

Cody- maybe i'm misreading a post. Wouldn't be the first time.

Zim. I think the jail concept does have merit, though that doesn't stop some

I meant that the man was being further victimized by sending him to jail. As a wider issue, yes, fear of jail [or knowing that the current laws favor sending the accused to jail with no questions asked] does prevent larger conflict, but it may not be the most appropriiate solution. Currently, a social work DV specialist is sent with sherrif teams in parts of NY, just so we can sort these things out on the spot.

I think that allowing one's self to be Continually victimized, which includes not being able to exit effectively, has more to do with individual state of mind and the relationship itself, rather than with local societal norms

Maybe. In the case of the man being victimized by the woman in the wheelchair, this was not entirely the case. They were elderly-ish, and he had no where else to go, it was his home. He feared us more than her, actually. I admit I didn't see it, but my co-worker picked up on it, then I just talked to him about his fear of us...then we alerted the police to the real situation. Don't know what became of it all.

Its interesting to see how women go about abusing. Often, they plan it out.. they might get the man drunk, for instance, then kick him in the balls repeatedly. Often it has a component of getting the man in a vulnerable spot, then taking it out viciously, then screaming bloody murder if they're caught [or acting coy, whichever]. The point of it ususally has to do with making the other feel as miserable as they do. Not just 'blowing off steam' or getting angry. There's a specific pattern here.

WRT PPCT and use of force: AFAIK [& IANAL] there are specific laws that relate to trained individuals and how the use of force is regarded in a court of law. This takes it all away from the realm of defense into that of assault. And that follows you.

Honestly, I feel that the way the laws have gone in relation to DV and defense of self have left men [and not women] in a position very similar to that of a woman in the same situation in the 1950's: it was your fault, you're not a good 'homemaker', go apologize and take it. If you don't, no one will want you ever again and you'll be out on the street. Or at least. so goes the message society is sending...

[Cody]

Thanks, Black Jack.

ZIM, amazing how many ways the words can be read. I had missed your point. Thanks for the explanation, and for going a bit further. good perspective. I appreciate it.

My point of view is sometimes skewed by where my interests in abuse have been concentrated, DID, known as multiple personality. So, part of what I think of is revictimization of an adult by a mate, from which my second example above was derived.
The wavelengths are similar: that of getting the man in a weakened state, maybe even pressing a few buttons, and then letting the bloke have it. Agreed.
I had been thinking of the psychological state of abusing vulnerable personalities in what would appear to be a person who could take care of himself. Albiet, though this is on the extreme end of the scale of abuse, I find it interesting to draw parallels when I am able, between these extremes and the more usual examples of how people see themselves and each other.

Along these lines, you take a vulnerable monomind and put him psychologically where he can't or is reluctant to offer resistance; combine that with societal restrictions against men using force against women. On the other end of the scale, we have common hen pecking, bossing around.

Hen pecking has a comedic quality, up to the point where the guy gives lip service and does what he wants, only to have the sweet girl he married turn mean when she finds out and he's full of guilt and takes his punishment. That's one scenario where we can see why a man would take his punishment, and the woman's response "has to do with making the other feel as miserable as they do." Some people turn mean; some don't. I find that interesting as well.

Your last paragraph, dealing with blame, is well taken. And, the attitude towards the woman who had to meet all sorts of standards in order to be a fit wife might have contained a followup clause, understood but not codified in this culture: if you don't meet these standards, the punishment is your fault, or "go apologize and take it." Where is this setup for the modern day male? Men didn't require a whole movement to get the vote and so forth. Their credibility was pretty much a given, with a disadvantage in custody issues. If people don't believe the reports of abused husbands, it is not because of their lesser status, but because of disbelief of how this could have occurred (unthinkable). Assumed or real advantages in physical prowess which might make even defense against a spouse questionable follow in those footsteps.
Here, I might be misreading you, as I feel you are saying something I'm not picking up. Really opened up the discussion for me though. Looking forward to what you have to say.

Cody

[ZIM]

Cody-
You've got a pretty good 'bead' on what I was writing. Only things to address:

Hen pecking has a comedic quality, up to the point where the guy gives lip service and does what he wants, only to have the sweet girl he married turn mean when she finds out and he's full of guilt and takes his punishment. That's one scenario where we can see why a man would take his punishment, and the woman's response "has to do with making the other feel as miserable as they do." Some people turn mean; some don't. I find that interesting as well.

Yes- this shows up a lot. Where do you draw the line, though? When does it 'turn mean'? I see this with children a lot... the parent tells the kid 'you're worthless, you're stupid'. Is that joking or abuse? I say abuse... or at least abusIVE. That means I can begin to look for other patterns, other things that confirm or deny the abuse. This where you [general you] have the most leeway to intervene, even on your own behalf. If someone is abusive, this is where it starts- so stop it right there, if you can. If you can't, then get away. If you can't do that, say something to somebody until somebody listens.

All stuff they told me in 3rd grade...

Where is this setup for the modern day male? Men didn't require a whole movement to get the vote and so forth. Their credibility was pretty much a given, with a disadvantage in custody issues. If people don't believe the reports of abused husbands, it is not because of their lesser status, but because of disbelief of how this could have occurred (unthinkable).

Now, this is complex- partly because of different histories... this situation, as I outlined previous, is a new one.

Males don't start with lesser percieved status, at least not within a family unit. Accusations of abuse, swearing out a warrant or protection order CAN, however, lessen whatever status the male has. Conversely [or perversely] a womans status can be raised by making the accusation, at least within very limited, specialized contexts.

In some ways, it depends on his role in the larger world. Having such a complaint can, and has, led to: firing, suspension from work, jail time, loss of access to children, loss of custody, loss of domicile, loss of property, monetary penalties, separation from family of origin [that is, the man's mother, for instance, takes the 'side' of the woman], etc. All of this without a trial having yet taken place. Harsh.

Another thing: where are the 'battered men's shelters'? Clinics for treatment? Outreach by social workers saying 'you don't have to take it'? None of that- and men wouldn't do it anyhow. What recourse is there? Thats why I'm saying its analogous to the situation [not status] of women in the 1950's.

But anyhow, who's complaining? It is a thankfully rarer event, just sticky when it happens.

[Cody]

ZIM,
It is the deed that is unworthy, not the person. When a parent tells a kid he's nothing or worse, that identity sticks beyond that particular set of circumstances. It can be kept alive and kicking on the introject shelf, even without awareness that feelings of not being capable or good or worthy of accomplishment have come from a parent's words. Yes, that is abuse. If said once, it can be an error and corrected. If continued, that parental attitude is opposed to the ideal, and what should be considered the norm. Nurturing and building of a positive identity structure.

The analogy of men not being able to secure help they need. No recourse, and the threat of reduced perceived and actual status if he does belt her in actual self defense. The parallel is clearer.

Fine discussion.


Cody