Birth of a JADE - Two Different Scripts

Colourful nail polishes (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Let's take OCPD and other disorders and lock them in a closet somewhere (don't you wish we could?), pretend they don't exist, and look at what is going on when JADEing (Justifying, Arguing, Defending, and Explaining) occurs, regardless of whether one person in the relationship is disordered, or both are, or neither are.

If you've ever been in an amateur play situation, you understand the concept of scripts: Person A says line 1, Person B says line 2. If Person B forgets line 2, Person A will repeat his/her line, or rephrase it in certain ways, trying to prompt Person B to remember and say line 2.

In a  disordered conversation, it's like Person A and Person B are working from two different scripts.

Source: data.whicdn.com via Jess on Pinterest

Person A comes bouncing into the room and displays a bottle of nail polish. "Look at this!" s/he says exuberantly. "This weekend, I'm going to paint all my nails this pretty robin's egg blue!"

What Person A is hoping for in response could go in any number of directions:

• Ooh, what a gorgeous color! Can you do mine, too?
• You're always doing something wild and crazy. [If said with affection]
• That's going to look great on you.
• When I was growing up,women only painted their nails in shades of red. All the different colors still look strange to me, but I've noticed many women wearing them. [An invitation to a discussion about changing fashions.]
• Alrighty then.

Basically, Person A wants any response that says, "I hear you, I love you, I support you, I approve of you."

But what if, for whatever reason, Person B freaks out?  

I recently read psychologist Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. 

In this book he brings compelling evidence that we reach conclusions quickly, and produce reasons later only to justify what we've already decided.  He even references demand-resistance, though not by that name.

In a split second, Person B's "gut reaction" is that s/he doesn't like Person A's wild nail polish plans. It's not based on facts or logic, though s/he may truly believe it is. S/he doesn't like it, therefore it's wrong, therefore s/he must convince Person A that it's wrong. Her/his verbal response may be:

• I can't believe you wasted your money [or our money] on something so stupid.
• That color is so ugly.
• Don't you think you're a little old to try to be trendy?
• You know that the odor of nail polish gives me a raging headache.
• Did you forget we have plans this weekend? When did you think you were going to do this wild manicure scheme?
• I don't suppose you remembered to pick up the Whoosits I asked you to get, did you?
• I wish something so shallow and superficial made me happy.

Person B has changed the script. Whatever Person A replies now, the only correct response for Person B has become, "I accept your opinion/displeasure/dominance, and will no longer proceed to paint my nails this color."

JADEing is an attempt to return to the first script.

Person A really does want Person B's approval, or at the very least, tolerance and not disapproval. JADEing assumes that the issue is a failure in communication, that Person B can be won over, if only the right reasons are presented.

But because Person's B's reaction is emotional, not logical, no matter how many of her/his arguments get shot down, s/he will come back with more, because s/he knows it is wrong for Person A to wear that nail polish.

The issue is not (and never was, really) about a minor fashion choice. It's about whose opinion/wish gets validated.

The only way the conversation can end is if either Person A or Person B realizes that the script is not going to be followed, and exits the circular conversation, because the relationship is more important than "winning" their point.

JADEing is about getting sucked into a power struggle.

[Justifying]
Person B: I can't believe you wasted money on something so stupid.
Person A: It's not like it's a lot of money, it's only a little splurge.
Person B: You're always splurging. Don't you think a homeless person would have appreciated you dropping the money in his cup?
Person A: I am not always splurging, I haven't bought anything for myself in months, and I give plenty of money to homeless people and charity.
Person B: If you have any left after wasting your money on ugly nail polish.

[Arguing]
Person B: That color is ugly.
Person A: It is not! And you like it on everything else, it's the exact color of the garden shed.
Person B: Just because it looks good on a garden shed doesn't mean it's a good color for nail polish. It'll make your hands look like a corpse.
Person A: It will not. I've never seen a corpse with robin's egg blue nails.
Person B: Like you're an expert on dead bodies?

[Defending]
Person B: Don't you think you're a little old to try to be trendy?
Person A: Lots of women and some men wear blue nail polish. Ann Romney is in her sixties, and I saw her on TV wearing nail polish almost exactly this shade.
Person B: Oh, so Ann Romney is a fashion icon now? And your role model?
Person A: She's a lovely woman. I don't have to agree with her politics to notice she's attractive.
Person B: I got news for ya, sweetheart, she pays a lot for that hair, wardrobe, and makeup. You think you're in that league?
Person A: It's not an entire wardrobe, it's a bottle of nail polish, for Pete's sake!
Person B: So you think you can accomplish with one bottle of nail polish what she needs an entire staff of top stylists to pull off? Good luck with that!

[Explaining]
Person B: You know that the odor of nail polish gives me a raging headache.
Person A: Yes, I haven't forgotten. That's why I always do my manis and pedis out on the porch where it won't disturb you.
Person B: I can still smell it on you when you come in.
Person A: Fine, I'll stay out an extra 15 minutes to make sure any smell has disappated.
Person B: I don't understand why you can't just let your nails stay their natural color.
Person A: It's fun, it's a quick and easy way to feel young and pretty.
Person B: *snorts* They say there's no fool like an old fool.

Eventually, Person B may get her/his way - persuading Person A not to wear the nail polish. Or, Person A may wear it anyway, but all the joy will have been sucked out of doing so. When JADEing mode is entered, neither party feels heard or satisfied.

Let's try cutting JADE off at the pass.

Here's some ways Person A can end the circular conversation.

Person B: I can't believe you wasted money on something so stupid.
Person A: What one person considers wasteful, others consider a necessity. Sounds like you're in a sour mood; want to tell me about it?

Person B: That color is so ugly.
Person A: I'm sorry you think so, but I like it. What movie shall we see this weekend?

Person B: Don't you think you're a little old to try to be trendy?
Person A [joking]: Crap, you've discovered my secret identity; grandparent by day, Grandmaster Trendsetter by night.

Person B: You know that the odor of nail polish gives me a raging headache.
Person A: You do seem to get a lot of headaches. What does your doctor say about that?


Here's some ways Person B can end the circular conversation.

Source: Uploaded by user via Pao on Pinterest

Person B: I can't believe you wasted money on something so stupid.
Person A: It's not like it's a lot of money, it's only a little splurge.
Person B: You're right, I'm sorry I called it stupid. I'm sure I've spent as much or more money on things you'd consider silly, too. We're all entitled to splurge once in a while.



Person B: That color is so ugly.
Person A: It is not! And you like it on everything else, it's the exact color of the garden shed.
Person B: You know, you're right. I do like that color on the garden shed, and I am sure I will get used to it on you, because you make everything beautiful.

Person B: Don't you think you're a little old to try to be trendy?
Person A: Lots of women and some men wear blue nail polish. Ann Romney is in her sixties, and I saw her on TV wearing nail polish almost exactly this shade.
Person B: You know, you're right. I'm sorry I said you were too old. I think I'm too old, to get used to all these new fashions - but you'll be patient with me, won't you?  [joking] Have you seen my buttonhook around?

Person B: You know that the odor of nail polish gives me a raging headache.
Person A: Yes, I haven't forgotten. That's why I always do my manis and pedis out on the porch where it won't disturb you.
Person B: I don't think I've given you enough credit for doing that, and I do appreciate it. Sometimes, though, the odor is still really intense for me when you come inside. Would you be offended if I went into another room or let you know it still was too strong for me?


It takes time, practice, and above all, awareness, to realize you (or another person) have gotten sucked into a JADEing loop, which becomes not hearing, respecting, or validating the other person, but "I must win this point."

If an argument or discussion ends with one party feeling deflated, stupid, or disrespected, then both parties have lost, even the person who thinks s/he "won."

Relationships are not supposed to be wars. A successful relationship is where the goal is not that one person wins, and the other loses, but that both win.

Your thoughts?

Labels Help, Labels Hurt

from cheezburger

Labels Hurt
Today, I am participating in Slutwalk LA.  Why?  Because I am beyond weary of men, women, and children being assaulted. 

I am infuriated by the misconception that rape is about anything but power and control. 

I am disgusted by the crazythink that all girls and women have to do is "stop dressing like sluts" and we will be safe.

I've already posted about the myths of rape, like the idea that rapists are looking for sexual satisfaction - when actually, many can't get their rocks off.

Back on point - pretty much, nobody likes feeling "labeled."  Black, white, young, old, prissy, slutty... people can and do find all those labels objectionable at times.  Labels are often used to divide people in very ugly ways.  She is mentally ill - I am not.  He's poor - I'm not. 

We can hold ourselves superior to "those people," whatever those people are that we're not. 

If we are "virtuous" and dress "modestly," then those girls, over there, must be "sluts."  If we like to dress to show off our bodies and feel comfortable being open about our sexuality, then those women, over there, must be repressed prudes.  

from Joe Shlabotnik at Flickr





from xddorox at Flickr



















When we look closer, we find out that, hey, the rich, the poor, the immigrants, the sluts - whatever we consider "the other," are actually... pretty much like us. 

Everyone deserves to be safe from being raped, assaulted, or killed.  Labeling some victims as somehow "less worthy" or "asking for it" does not reduce the number of attacks.  It simply reduces the number of assaults reported.  Which means that those who actually commit the attacks are still at large, free to attack someone else.


Labels Help
At the same time, labels can be helpful.  Especially for children, "labeling," or diagnosing a child with autism or a learning disability at an early age means that treatment begins sooner.

Diagnosing, aka "labeling" of mental illness allows for more effective treatment, and in some cases, appropriate medication.  Because there is still, sadly, such a huge stigma, nobody wants to be labeled mentally ill.  People who suspect their loved one might be mentally ill have to move very carefully, because their amateur diagnosis is unlikely to be welcomed with open arms. 

It's one thing to have someone tell you, "I notice you squinting a lot; let's have your eyes checked, maybe you need glasses." 

Quite another to have someone telling you, "It seems like you are anxious or angry a lot of the time; let's make an appointment with a psychiatrist and see if you... need help."

Those with substance abuse issues generally don't want to hear it, either.  "I'm not alcoholic, I just like to have a couple beers after a hard day at work."  They may on one hand insist they have no problems - and at the same time, expect you to let things slide if they misbehave, "You know I couldn't help it, I was drunk."

If we love someone with "problems," realizing it is them, not us - can be tremendously helpful in sorting out better ways to cope.  And to learn how to not enable, if we have been doing so in the past.  (See Put On Your Own Oxygen Mask, First.)

Attaching a label, in and of itself, doesn't help.  On the other hand... while the vast majority of those with mental illness are not violent, imagine if Jared Loughner's illness had been recognized and treated.  Or Ted Bundy's.

I think we can sort out whether a label is helpful or harmful.  Is it being used to hurt someone?  Is it being used to put the labeler in a position of Power Over, or to give him/her a smug feeling of superiority as compared to the person being "labeled?"  Or, is it simply identifying a possible problem so that the person can be helped?

Have you ever been labeled? 

Do you think some labels are helpful?

On Rape, Slut-Shaming, and the Illusion of Control

Northern Afghani women
via Wikimedia Commons
Even burqa-wearing women get raped

I thought I'd wandered off-topic a bit with my post on It's Not Really Rape, If... but actually, slut-shaming has a lot to do with OCPD-type thinking.

The Myth of Control goes something like this: If I try hard enough, I can stay in control of myself, of others, and of all the impersonal dangers of life.  By my control, I can be certain of safe passage.

Most men who are not total @sswipes want to care for and protect their wives, girlfriends, sisters, mothers and daughters.  Yet there is a reluctance, among men and women alike, to deal honestly with the realities of what rape really is.  Nobody wants to believe that they or their loved ones could be sexually assaulted at any time.  That's simply way too scary a thought.

So, we play these little mind games. We pretend that if we do the right things, take the right steps, we will be safe. 

Some (men and women) tell themselves that women who are openly sexual, and dress in a way that invites attention, are "sluts" and are "asking for it."  Certainly, they are asking for it - if "asking for it" means wanting attention.  "It" does not mean they are asking for rape or assault, any more than a merchant who puts effort into building an attractive display window with beautiful merchandise is "asking for" a robber to come into his store with a gun to steal the merchandise and assault him.

And, as previously noted, most convicted rapists don't even remember what the victim was wearing.  But if we can convince ourselves that sexual assault is triggered by the victim's clothing choices, we can reassure ourselves, if I don't dress like that, then I will be safe.  (Corollary for a man being, that his wife/girlfriend/daughter/mother/sister will be safe.)

If I only only date "nice" boys, or go out in groups of friends, I will be safe.

If I always keep my doors and windows locked, I will be safe.

If I don't go out after dark, I will be safe.

We can create a long list of things to do, or not do, to ensure our safety, but the reality is, even for women (and men) who do everything "right," sometimes we are sexually assaulted anyway.

The real answer is that we need to change people's attitudes towards rape, which is a much harder job.  Yet, over time, with enough social pressure, thoughts and attitudes can change.

I have seen them change in my own lifetime.  When I was a teenager and into my early twenties, drunk driving was a joke.  "Man, I was so hammered, I have no clue how I got home the other night," someone would say- at another party.  Most people in the group would laugh and confess similar behaviors.

Since then, there has been a remarkable shift in public opinion.  People are aware of how very many innocent people have been killed or crippled for life by drunk driving.  We don't think it's cute or funny any more.  No one would dream of loudly blurting something like that out in any kind of gathering, s/he would be roundly denounced by just about everyone there.

Way too many people still die because of alcohol-related driving accidents.  But in 1982 there were over 26,000 alcohol-related fatalities in the USA, and despite the population (and number of cars on the road) increasing substantially, by 2008 that number had dropped to under 14,000.  That's 14,000 too many, of course, but it proves that real social progress can be made, in a relatively short period of time.

We need to do for rape and sexual assault what we have done for drunk driving.  We need to talk, talk, talk about it.  We need to bust the myths and attack the real cause of rape, which is that of people (primarily men, but women can be rapists too) who try to prove their Power Over another man, woman or child by abusing them sexually.  We need to stop slut-shaming and start rapist-shaming.




Slut-shaming offers only an illusion of control, not the real thing.  If we blame the victim, we can give ourselves a false sense of security that what happened to her/him can't happen to us.  Yet we know, deep inside, that this is not the truth.

"Sluts" don't deserve to be raped.  Nobody deserves to be raped.

Your thoughts?

It's Not Really Rape If... Busting the Myths

Britney Spears via Wikimedia Commons
Is Britney a "slut"? Or a healthy young woman,
secure in her own sexuality?

Yep, this is a blog about OCPD and mental illness and setting boundaries, and this post is going to be about rape, which is also a boundary violation, in more ways than one.  So shut up, lay back and enjoy it, as they used to say.

One of the enduring myths about rape is that “women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized”.  This myth is so pervasive and widespread that members of the Toronto Police, among others, have voiced it as "truth," because they believe it is the truth.

The facts?  Do rape victims provoke the attack by wearing "provocative clothing" or otherwise "asking for it"?

• Wanting attention, even wanting consensual sex, is not the same thing as wanting to be forced, coerced, or drugged into unconsenting sex.  As Caitlyn commented on the original article that stirred up the SlutWalks movement (more on that later) "Blaming the woman for wanting to look attractive is like blaming a store owner for having such nice and expensive things in his store, after the store is subject to an armed robbery.  Clearly the owner should cover up and hide all the nice things so no one wants to steal them."
• A Federal Commission on Crime of Violence Study found that only 4.4% of all reported rapes involved provocative behavior on the part of the victim, and most of this consisted of nothing more than dressing or walking in a way that is socially defined as attractive.  In murder cases 22% involved provocative behavior (as simple as a glance.)
• Assault victims range in age from days old to those in their nineties.  (I never thought of Onesies or flannel nighties as "slutty," did you?)
• Women who live in countries with conservative dress, or who wear it in Western countries, such as Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Mennonite, LDS - also experience rape.
• Women, children and men who have limited mental capacity are often sexually assaulted.
• Women in the US Armed Forces are more likely to be assaulted by a fellow soldier than killed in combat.  Men in the US Armed Forces are also experiencing sexual assault in record numbers by "straight" soldiers, often by a group of them.  Both male and female assault victims are typically young, low-ranking and vulnerable.  The dynamics are similar to prison rape.  It's all about exerting Power Over another human being.
• Most convicted rapists do not remember what their victims were wearing.

There are a lot of people who pay lip service to "Rape is not about sex, rape is about violence," but they don't truly believe it.  Deep down, they believe the myth that men rape because they are desperate for sex, their wives are frigid or they can't get a girlfriend. 

Men rape because they want power and control over someone weaker than themselves. They use their penis as a weapon to control and humiliate their victim. They rape because their own lives are inadequate and unfulfilled. They do not rape for sexual satisfaction. Most rapists do not enjoy the sex, they say things like "I didn't enjoy the sex, just the fear in her eyes."  Rapists often don't ejaculate.

Rapists also may have problems achieving or maintaining an erection.  Many assaults are committed with foreign objects forced into a man or woman's body.

Many women and men in Canada and the United States are getting fed up with victim-blaming, along with the myths and misconceptions that still - still! linger about rape and sexual assault.  Therefore, groups around Canada and the US are holding SlutWalks to help educate the public about the sad realities of what rape is, and what it isn't. 

Being assaulted isn’t about what you wear; it’s not even about sex; but using a pejorative term to rationalize inexcusable behaviour creates an environment in which it’s okay to blame the victim. 

Historically, the term ‘slut’ has carried a predominantly negative connotation. Aimed at those who are sexually promiscuous, be it for work or pleasure, it has primarily been women who have suffered under the burden of this label. And whether dished out as a serious indictment of one’s character or merely as a flippant insult, the intent behind the word is always to wound, so we’re taking it back. “Slut” is being re-appropriated.

We are tired of being oppressed by slut-shaming; of being judged by our sexuality and feeling unsafe as a result. Being in charge of our sexual lives should not mean that we are opening ourselves to an expectation of violence, regardless if we participate in sex for pleasure or work. No one should equate enjoying sex with attracting sexual assault.

<snip> We are asking you to join us for SlutWalk, to make a unified statement about sexual assault and victims’ rights and to demand respect for all. Whether a fellow slut or simply an ally, you don’t have to wear your sexual proclivities on your sleeve, we just ask that you come. Any gender-identification, any age. Singles, couples, parents, sisters, brothers, children, friends. Come walk or roll or strut or holler or stomp with us. This has become a global movement, with Satellites happening all over the world. See if there’s one in your city.

I'm joining SlutWallks LA on June 4.  There will be some fabulous guest speakers and wonderful volunteers, including co-organizer Hugo Schwyzer of the Good Men Project, who wrote a wonderful editorial on Why Men Should Join SlutWalk, including some very poignant hopes and wishes for his own daughter.

Why does it matter if many men and women believe things about sexual assault which are simply not true?

From WSCAP:

Rape myths are not just a set of harmless beliefs. Rape and rape myths are destructive forces. They do not fall on deaf ears, nor are they said in a vacuum. Although some people may think they are just “saying words” or holding on to innocuous beliefs, rape myths have profound impacts. They hurt. They hurt individuals, they hurt survivors, they hurt families and they hurt communities. They encourage silence, shame and pain. They shift blame away from the perpetrator, and, ultimately, keep us believing that sexual violence is natural and normal. And, most assuredly, perpetrators count on us believing them in order to continue perpetrating sexual violence.

People who believe rape myths sit on juries.  They serve on police forces, the D.A.'s offices, become judges.  They write our laws.  They make it possible for a culture of victim-blaming - and raping - to continue.

Rape myths lead to otherwise intelligent men like Ben Stein reasoning that Dominique Strauss-Kahn was unlikely to be a rapist because he could not think of any economists who had been convicted of violent sex crimes.  Unfortunately for BS (hey, those are his initials, blame his mama,) The Daily Show has a research team.  They shortly proved that, by the same line of "reasoning," that economists are actually "the rape-iest profession going."

Myth: Rapists are 7 feet tall, and covered with rank hair.  (Or, perhaps not that exactly, but obviously creepy and menacing, like Robert Mitchum in Cape Fear.) 
Rapists look just like anybody else.  They are often married or have a steady girlfriend, even those who assault other men.  They come from all walks of life, all economic levels, all races, and all ages.


Myth: Rapes are spur of the moment. 
Actually, 90% of group rapes and 60% of single assailant rapes are planned.

Myth: If s/he doesn't say no, that means yes. 
Not in the case of minors, people with limited or diminished mental capacity, people who have been drugged or have given alcohol to the point of unconsciousness, or who are otherwise not able to give their consent.  Know what means yes?  Yes means yes.

Myth: It's not really rape, if you've had sex together before. 
Yes, it is. Even if this person is your spouse or boyfriend or girlfriend.  No means no.

Myth: If they enjoy other sex acts with you, even though they've always said they don't want to participate in anal sex, it's okay to insert a penis or other object into their anus when they're deeply asleep.  
No, that's still rape.  And an excuse of "Gee, I missed, I didn't realize I was in the wrong place" is especially lame if you are a prominent gynecologist.

Myth: women don't need abortion coverage for rape, because they should always be prepared.  Like keeping a spare tire in the trunk. 
However you feel about abortion rights, that has to go down as one of the most brain-dead things anyone has ever said.

What other myths have you heard about rape?  

It's not really rape if...

Men, Women, Children and Domestic Violence

So, dear readers, I not only read your comments but give them a lot of thought.  Especially this one.

My as-yet unmet friend and fellow blogger Thalia had posted: 

But what I keep coming back to in my head is this:

If I were in the process of recovering from a bad relationship, and I recognized that it had been co-dependent and controlling, perhaps even abusive (though I do not know if you consider your recent relationship so), and I were trying to unravel all that, I would think it a very good idea to pay close attention to how I react to known abusers. Especially if I found myself downplaying or ignoring that abuse (which you say you did know about), and even more so if I found myself expressing sympathy for that person. Because it could potentially have a lot to tell me about my self-image and who I tend to side with in these matters.

What I hear you saying in this sounds awfully close to me to If we just love them enough they'll change.

Let me address the last part first - if we just love them enough they'll change.  No. 

Well... maybe.  I believe that in some rare cases, love can "win over" somebody who has distorted thinking. 

Image via Karen's Whimsy

But when I say "love," I'm not talking about namby-pamby hearts-and-flowers let me get-that-fix-that be your adoring little doormat.  I'm talking love with muscles - love that sets firm, consistent boundaries, love that insists on therapy and emotional homework and does not tolerate being mistreated and disrespected for a single minute.  If you can show that kind of love, and if the other person realizes that if they don't change, you will walk out that door, never to return... in those circumstances, do I believe they will change?

I think it's possible.  I know a few people (very few people) who've done it.  I also believe that sometimes even with all the stars and moons and planets in alignment, with the best intentions in the world, the person with distorted thinking will not be willing or able to change.  And there's no amount of love - with or without muscles - that can make them.

I believe in most situations, sadly, change is not going to happen.  In hindsight, we might have done better to cut our losses and end it, sooner.  But we can only leave a relationship when we are emotionally ready to do so, no matter how little sense it makes to those on the outside, or how ready others think we should be.

Later, of course, we're asking ourselves What Was I Thinking?! 

If you're trying to be the good friend in a situation where someone is being abused, either verbally or physically, a good reference is Helping Her Get Free by Susan Brewster.

I know, with my ex
b-f, there is no going back.  I gave it my best shot, I swung and missed.  Ballgame over.  Time for the showers - and I'm talking a girly shower, with lots of fragrant shower gel and lather thingies and scented lotion.

On paying attention to how I think about abusers and abuse... I take it very seriously.  Although I recognize that there are false accusations of abuse out there, for the most part I also believe the woman, when an accusation is made.  Or child.  Or man.  I consider myself to have been in an abusive relationship, and just because it was "only" violent twice, and because I believe my former mate to be mentally ill, does not mean it did not have serious damaging effects on my heart and psyche.  For myself, the long-term, ongoing verbal and emotional abuse was far worse than the violence or threat of violence.  For another person it may be exactly the opposite.  We are all individuals, and what we went through will impact us in different ways.

I know that for myself, it's going to take much time and space and self-kindness and more time to recover myself.

On the "public" abusers... Thalia, you're right.  My personal jury is still deliberating, and I don't have one specifically reaction.  Am I too soft on them, to ready to make an excuse or find an extenuating circumstance?  Perhaps.  But as I sort out my many issues, I don't think that painting the world in black-or-white is healthy for me, either. 

Specifically, about Charlie Sheen - I know that I don't know.  I know that he has racked up a record of being arrested for domestic violence, and for threatening women in his circle.  I know that his recent behavior appears bi-polar.  This could mean he is bi-polar, or that his various drug abuses are mimicking the condition, or that he's putting on an act.  Or some combination of all three. 

I've now done some trolling on the Internet in search of the truth - and my conclusion is... I can't conclude.  Not without putting a lot more time into it, and frankly, I'm sick of it and him.  CS may be the biggest Male Chauvinist Pig of all time, who's gotten away with more than OJ Simpson and Kobe Bryant put together, or... "such a good person underneath all of it" as ex-fiance and shooting victim Kelly Preston recently claimed <rolling my eyes.>  I lean towards the MCP view, but who knows?  I don't really care about CS (not that I wish him ill,) except as an example for how difficult it is for families to "control" someone who seems to be mentally ill, no matter how publicly outrageous their behavior.

On abuse, in the generic: Sometimes I believe that abusers seeking Power Over a victim know exactly what they are doing.  That they can and do have control over their actions - for example, when they destroy possessions, they rarely destroy anything that they themselves value.  Those who batter their wives often choose to avoid the face or arms, because the bruises would show - that speaks to premeditation and control, in spades.  I believe that it's no accident that those who abuse the elderly or disabled in convalescent hospitals target those who are no longer able to speak coherently.  Or children.  Or hookers, the homeless, or smaller, frailer inmates - anyone perceived to be unprotected by society.

I think about this, and often I think that those who abuse - physically, sexually, emotionally - are evil, sadistic sociopaths.  And I feel a great deal of rage, and if I could wipe them off the earth simply by pressing a button, I'd get calluses on my button finger from jabbing it so many times! 

from Nagzi at Flickr Creative Commons

And then I think of all we are learning about the brain these days.  That certain areas of brain function - controlling long-term decision-making, for example, mature later in life.  That there are patterns of anosognosia in people with organic brain damage, which are strikingly similar to what people with certain mental illnesses exhibit.  We now know certain diseases, like Alzheimers, are due to build-up of plaque and tangles which inhibit brain function.  We know that damage to certain areas of the brain reduces impulse control.  I lost a dear friend to MS a few years ago, and saw the gradual loss of body control and function that was a result of the deterioration of the myelin sheaths... in his brain.

from Boaz Yiftach at FreeDigitalPhotos

My grandmother was left-handed, and she grew up when the mindset was that being left-handed was simply a matter of "being stubborn."  That she could easily learn to use her right hand as well or better than her left, if she would only try.

I am no longer 100% convinced that all abusers are evil sociopaths.  Some are, I have no doubt.  Others... may be doing their best, struggling against the ways their brains are wired, or damage to the brain due to exposure to lead or who knows what substances, legal or illegal.  Or they may be mentally ill.

Does that make it okay for them to abuse others?  No.  If you are on the receiving end, whether of a punch, or a curse, does it make it feel better, to think "Gee, I guess he can't help himself?"  Hell no.  You are still bruised, and in many ways, hurt worse than if some stranger had come up to you, mugged you and stolen your money.  There is an awful, awful betrayal when somebody you are supposed to be able to love, supposed to be able to trust, is the very person you can't trust.

I think perhaps what Thalia voiced was she was hearing support and sympathy for the possibly mentally ill perpetrator, and not so much for the victim.  Maybe I did sound more sympathetic to the abuser than the victim (though I consider those coping with a mentally ill family member or loved one to be heroes first, victims second.)

My number one priority is for the victim.  We should support and help the victim, and never for a moment stop saying, "Not your fault.  You did not and do not deserve to be: hit, slapped, punched, threatened, berated, screamed at, belittled, ridiculed..." and not run past them in a rush to shower the abuser with sympathy for the stress s/he must have felt, being compelled to abuse, poor baby!

On statistics: I know statistics indicate that far more women are seriously injured by abusive men than are men by women, women by women, men by men... Not sure who takes the lion's share of abusing children, or the elderly but I'm guessing that's probably men, too.  Men usually have a size advantage over their mates, and are often (though not always) the primary breadwinner of the family.

Still, IMO going off on a "bad men vs. abused women" angle is not going to solve the problem.  We want abuse to stop, and in order to do so, we have to enlist everybody: men, women and children to be a part of the solution.  Segregation did not end in America because the African-American community was unhappy about it; the majority of (male white) lawmakers and the general population had to also become opposed to it.  It takes time to turn public opinion around on an issue.

I am not that old (at least, I'd like to think I'm not!) and I remember a time when it was both legal and socially acceptable for an American man to beat up and rape his wife, unless he really "went too far" and put her in the hospital.  Then people would frown, perhaps even whisper about him (although even then he would rarely go to jail.)  Thankfully, this is no longer considered okay.  So I have hope that social attitudes can continue to evolve in a positive direction, even if they're not moving as fast as I'd like.

Men who are not abusing women, but who have, perhaps, been abused by women (and I personally know several), or who know another man who has been abused, are not going to eagerly sign onto taking a stand against Domestic Violence if they perceive men are being singled out and blamed as the sole cause of the problem, and that abusive women are getting a free pass.  This cannot be "just" a women's issue - it needs to be an everybody issue, because everybody is hurt by Domestic Violence.

Children are terribly damaged by witnessing abuse in the home, whether it is fathers to mothers, or mothers abusing fathers, or perhaps an elderly relative in the home, or one sibling who is the family "goat," even if they themselves are not abused.  But I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say, whether they are boys or girls, children who witness abuse committed by men or women are more likely to bully other children in school and grow up to be abusive themselves, than children who do not grow up with an abusive parent of either sex.  Even if they do not become abusers, they are likely to be vulnerable to tolerating unacceptable behavior from future romantic partners (which is part of my own picture.)

IMO, as a society, we need to take a stand and say "Abuse is not okay.  Period."  We need to teach children that abuse isn't okay, regardless of who it comes from: mothers, fathers, stepfathers,  stepmothers, grandparents, teachers, religious leaders, neighbors, other children.  Never, under any circumstances, is verbal, emotional, or physical abuse acceptable.

That said, since we can't just push a button and cleanly get rid of abusers, we need to figure out what else we can do.  I do believe there are some shades of gray here, that someone may lash out physically once or twice in a lifetime, or during a mental illness crisis.  While that's still unacceptable behavior, absolutely, I am not sure that abuser is on the same "level" as somebody who routinely batters a partner, children or parent.  If these people are contrite, if they are ashamed and truly don't want to be verbally or physically abusive, let's see if we can retrain their brain patterns, so battering with fists or words isn't their go-to reaction in times of stress or frustration. 

And let's give those with whom they live enough training to recognize the danger signs and get out before their unstable members do start shooting, slicing, or otherwise "going postal" on the family.  Enough resources to be able to leave an unbalanced relationship, and to know that they are worthwhile people, that none of this is their fault.

I do have, perhaps, a rosy-glasses view of the world.  I would like to believe that Andrea Yates and Jared Loughner and Stanley Neace were not in their right minds when they killed.

I would like to believe that with more education, people will recognize mental illness earlier and find a way to get sick people help before tragedy occurs (even as this is made harder by cuts by many states in mental health funding due to budget shortfalls.)  I don't believe that wish is incompatible with the desire to end domestic violence and the worldwide oppression of women and children, but rather, is of a piece with it.

Maybe it's OCPD fleas, maybe I want to control what is uncontrollable, but I find it less frightening to live in a world where most people harm others because they've "gone crazy," because at least in theory, that can be prevented.  I don't want to believe I live in a world where most people who harm others, do it coldly, sanely, and rationally... just because they want to.

***

Please note, this very incomplete list of resources are not just for physical violence, but can offer help to those suffering verbal and emotional abuse as well.  Don't feel you have no "right" to ask for help because you've never been hit.  Abuse includes emotional, verbal, and financial, and these resources are there for you, too.

USA:
National Domestic Violence Hotline - 1-800-799-SAFE (7233)  TTY- 1-800-787-3224 
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (includes downloadable guides for helping women in abusive relationships)
National Alliance on Mental Illness, aka NAMI

Canada:
National Clearinghouse on Family Violence - you will need to opt for English or French

UK:
Women's Aid - 0808 2000 247

Australia & New Zealand:
Domestic Violence Information Manual - phone numbers vary by territory

For Male Victims:
Menweb
Why Men Stay in Abusive Relationships

Your thoughts?
Got more links?