A recent Huffington Post article about a domestic violence victim (she didn’t survive), paints an all-too-typical portrait of abuse. Thomas Fiffer draws a different picture.
___
The article popped up in my Facebook feed, shared by the National Network to End Domestic Violence.
The intro read:
“Fixating on that question — why doesn’t the woman just leave — reveals a fundamental misunderstanding about the realities of domestic abuse, said Kim Gandy, president of National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV).”
Read more in this fantastic article from The Huffington Post:
As a person who is intimately concerned with domestic violence, I naturally read on, expecting the piece to shed light on why women don’t leave—or take so long to leave—abusive situations and call for renewed efforts to clear up the common misunderstandings.
I encountered a narrative that could have been aired on any local news channel and also fit the box into which most people comfortably place domestic violence.
|
Instead, I encountered a narrative that could have been aired on any local news channel and also fit the box into which most people comfortably place domestic violence—horrible stuff that happens to poor, uneducated women who made poor choices for partners and (to be blunt) didn’t have much of a future anyway. A brief article on Jezebel made similar observations. We’re oh-so shocked when we hear about violent domestic disputes involving celebrities, or in wealthy suburbs, or in the house next door, because we think we know these people, and we believe they rarely do such things. But when we hear stories such as that of Laura Aceves, we tend to feel blasé, because we think we know her even better, and because she matches our pre-conceived notion of who gets abused.
♦◊♦
I have three issues with the HuffPo article.
One thing many people fail to realize is that being subjected to consistent abuse over time rewires the victim’s brain and alters the decision-making process.
|
First, it doesn’t address in any satisfactory way why women don’t leave violently abusive men. For one of the best lists of reasons I’ve seen, I suggest consulting A Woman’s Heart. One thing many people fail to realize is that being subjected to consistent abuse over time rewires the victim’s brain and alters the decision-making process. That’s why it’s easy to say from the outside, “Well, I would just leave.” The perspective from inside is different, fogged by fear, twisted by torture, corrupted by conditioning, and skewed by isolation, combined with a lack of confidence and support. It’s as if you’ve been dragged underwater, given a breathing tube by your abuser, and convinced you won’t make it if you try to reach the surface again.
There are many complex reasons why women stay with abusive partners. Leaving can be economically impossible, as well as dangerous. Research has shown that women are at greatest risk of homicide at the point of separation or after leaving a violent partner.
Vice President Biden is quoted as saying, “Lives are being saved—we know how to do it,” but there is clearly a lot that a lot of people don’t know.
|
Second, the article does not fixate on and effectively avoids the question of why someone—in this case, a local Arkansas sheriff—would ask why women don’t just leave. Instead, it leaves the reader with the sense that small-town law enforcement is ignorant, while big city police—in municipalities with new domestic violence programs in place that screen for potential “lethalities”—know the score. Vice President Biden is quoted as saying, “Lives are being saved—We know how to do it,” but there is clearly a lot that a lot of people don’t know. One thing that’s missing—from both the article and our current culture—is an examination of the influences that would cause any man or woman in law enforcement to ask that question and to persist in victim-blaming, as well as a nod to the lack of education for first responders at the federal, state, and local levels that might correct mistaken attitudes that work to prevent the prevention of crime.
In the last decade, Arkansas has frequently been ranked as one of the 10 worst states in the nation when it comes to men killing women, according to annual reports by the Violence Policy Center. The ranking is based on FBI data on incidents in which a sole male offender kills a single female victim, a typical indicator of domestic homicide.
In Arkansas, the combination of lots and lots of guns and lax firearm laws contributes to the problem. Research has shown if a batterer has access to a gun, the victim is eight times more likely to be killed. According to an analysis by the Center for American Progress, in 2010 Arkansas had the third-worst gun murder rate for women in the nation.
When we read about an uneducated, unmarried young woman in a small town in a Southern state with a menial job (she was a chicken deboner for Tyson foods) and kids out of wedlock, we think—admit it, please—that’s what happens to “those people.”
|
Third, and perhaps most problematic for me, is the narrow focus on the story of Laura Aceves and the accompanying failure to use it as a backdrop for the much larger, endemic, cross-cultural, cross-socioeconomic problem of domestic violence that is not confined to any particular geographic region of the country. It’s not that Aceves’s story isn’t tragic; it’s tragic on every level. But when we read about an uneducated, unmarried young woman in a small town in a Southern state with a menial job (she was a chicken deboner for Tyson foods) and kids out of wedlock, we think—admit it, please—that’s what happens to “those people.” I know people who do not fit the profile of “those people,” people who might work in your office or go to your church or synagogue, people you might see at a play or expensive restaurant, people who are well-educated and well-off, people whose lives appear smooth on the surface, who have been:
- thrown violently against a wall
- forced to hide in the bushes so their abuser couldn’t find them
- raped within marriage
- stalked and hunted
- forced to leave everything they have and know behind and take on a new identity
- emotionally abused to point of considering suicide
If you want an example of a smart, professional person who got stuck in an abusive relationship, watch Leslie Morgan Steiner’s TED talk.
It was early afternoon and the 21-year-old had finished her shift at the Berryville Tyson Foods plant, where she worked on an assembly line deboning chicken. Moments after pulling out of the parking lot, her car broke down. At the nearest service station, a mechanic identified the problem: Someone had poured bleach in her gas tank.
Laura knew who was responsible. Her abusive ex-boyfriend, Victor Acuna-Sanchez, was out on bail and had a history of destroying her stuff. “No one else would have done this,” she told police.
A fourth point that also bears mentioning is that men are also victims of domestic violence and not just the perpetrators. Obviously not every article can cover the entire topic with sufficient depth, but when a case such as that of Laura Aceves reinforces the stereotype, it’s critical to provide broader context. And it’s time to inform ourselves and understand the truth about a massive national problem.
♦◊♦
The perspective from inside is different, fogged by fear, twisted by torture, corrupted by conditioning, and skewed by isolation, combined with a lack of confidence and support. It’s as if you’ve been dragged underwater, given a breathing tube by your abuser, and convinced you won’t make it if you try to reach the surface again.
|
For in-depth statistics, here is a link to the CDC’s recent study on intimate partner violence.
If you don’t have time to read the CDC piece, you can get a handle on how prevalent domestic violence and abuse are in the U.S. by considering these numbers, cited in an earlier Huffington Post article:
1. 60% of Americans know a survivor of domestic violence.
2. One in three women (30%), and one in seven men (14%) report living with intimate violence. That’s 22% of American adults—or about 60 million people who live with violence in their homes.
♦◊♦
The bottom line is this: Domestic violence is not specific to sex, race, social class, or income level. How could it be if so much of the population is affected? No, it’s everywhere, and yet we continue to treat our neighbors who live with domestic violence as the anomaly and not the rule. Twenty-two percent of the population is not an anomaly. It’s enough people to decide an election. Clearly, our view of domestic violence and who the people involved on either side of it really are doesn’t add up.
Other articles I’ve written that shatter the stereotypes of domestic violence include:
The 7 Real Reasons We Suck at Ending Domestic Violence
My Heart Broke This Week, and I Need Your Help Fixing It
This Guy Makes Your Abuser Look Good
Photo—Feans/Flickr
@Erin I don’t know why you constantly resort to projection. Where did I say GMP or anywhere had no inherent value? Yes for learning specifically about men or women. I’ll tell you why GMP is a bad place to learn about men – GMP has a moderate feminist agenda. Any reality that doesn’t fit the feminist agenda is dismissed, misrepresented, or diminished. I will grant that this isn’t the case for every single article. Point is anyone writing anything on the inherenet (and you can include me in that) has an agenda. Are really being so obtuse as to believe… Read more »
Erin, you are disgusting liar. You are intent on building a strawman to argue against. No where have I said we shouldn’t acknowledge women as victims. No where have I said that girls don’t suffer abuse. No where have I said that women/girls suffer less than men/boys. The topic of this artile was ‘not’ stereotypying abuse. yet you want the stereotype to continue. It is you who is off topic. Everywhere, I have said, though that if we are going to find a way to break the cycle of violence we need to look at reality. That reality is that… Read more »
The article BROUGHT UP THE ABUSE OF MEN, Erin.
How in the world is it unrelated to refer back to that topic, and on how it is presented?
Same old same old – it’s derailing apparently to refer to something that was in the bloody article in the first place ^_^
I understand where your coming from, but I think part of the disconnect is that we’re told not to stereotype abuse (agreed), we’re told that this is a stereotypical case of abuse (agreed), we’re told that the danger in stereotyping is that we fail to recognize and support other victims (agreed), and she was killed. This is the case that the laws were created to address and they failed. Part of the reason why someone may ask why didn’t she just leave is because this question was already asked and supposedly answered in the creation of battered women’s shelters. Maybe… Read more »
I would urge anyone interested in any ‘gendered violence’ to watch the Swedish documentary Gender Wars. You can find it online with English subtitles easly. It shows what scary situations can arise when we leave certain groups narrative on violence between genders go unchecked. Many of the politicians in the documentary are still active In Swedish parliament today.
@Erin I will be frank…perhaps that’s redundant. I have for some time now, after years,no, decades of consideration, given less and less focus to women’s issues in general. The reasons why are practical and relational. If I were to invest all of the time that women who frequent GMP suggest that I should in order to make myself decent if not attractive, I would be exhausted all the time. I would be resentful too because I do not ask for nearly as much as women seem to, therefore, this creates an imbalance in the relationship. Being an African American male… Read more »
I wasn’t sure if I should respond to you or not because I don’t want to distract from the topic. BUT, I feel like we got to start recongnizing this problem on GMP if we are going to move forward. So here I go. If we are ignorant about how to deal with racial issues then keep talking to us about it in a way that doesn’t completely alienate us from the discussion Og! You just have to keep talking about the stuff that matters to you. Haven’t you notice how much stuff I talk about over and over and… Read more »
@ Erin I’ve noticed a slightly different dynamic than what you have suggested. What I’ve noticed is that articles which focus on abusers tend to be “derailed” more whether the abuser is male or female. Articles which focus on the victim tend to get more supportive comments, but dissenting comments usually remain “on topic”. Most articles discussing male perpetrated abuse will focus on the perpetrator. Most articles discussing female perpetrated abuse will focus on the victim. I’ve noticed that on those rare occurrences when there is an article that discusses female perpetrated abuse from the perspective of the perpetrator when… Read more »
“clearly the men of GMP are not ready to talk about this side of the complex issue.” How do you figure? Because someone felt it necessary to mention the fact that there is a movement that actively distorts data to create a false narrative? One person having a personal cause is clearly a good reason to stereotype an entire gender of readers. Do you likewise declare the female readership of an entire site not ready to talk about issues when a female reader says someone is a misogynist who is taking the focus away from women for bringing up male… Read more »
It doesn’t matter what unique position an article on domestic violence takes on GMP. It always results in the same responses over and over again. Statistics used to insist that violence against boys and men is much worse then what happens to girls and women, while dismissing other statistics that talk about violence against girls and women. What I’ve learned that statistics are only true when they present your gender as the greater victim. However, the real truth is that no amount of statistics reveal the true picture of domestic violence in America for men and women. Because many men… Read more »
It seems that even if you make statements consistent and supportive of an article that help to debunk a stereotypical victim it will still draw criticism from some as long as those statements are supportive of men and boys.
I find it fascinating that Erin always seems to get so upset that, on a website for men, that men want to have the truth told about men. She would rather disregard the 100,000s of studies and peer reviews that support the notion that there is parity in IPV and keep the feminist ideology of the duluth model and patraichy. Heaven forbid men talk truthfully about men on a mens site. All Erins concerned with is the social steriotypes of women. Never mind these: When a woman is the victim society assumes him a monster. When a man is the… Read more »
Hi Josh – you can speak directly to me. I’m right here. But sometimes the third person is fun so I’m game…… Erin may come off passionate but she is not “upset” right now or when she wrote the post below. Erin has learned a lot about men by reading GMP and is learning more everyday. Before Erin game to the GMP she really struggled with finding a healthy place to learn about men. She wondered if men just cared about sites like Playboy and Maxim or Askmen magazines. Clearly men do not just care about those things. What website… Read more »
If you come here just to learn about men and you consider it a reliable source over the real world then you need to have a think about how you interact with the outside world. I don’t visit sites to learn about women, perhaps individuals, but not the demographic. I prefer the real world. Agreed about who should be heard. But what is more important is the truth. Being a woman doesn’t make your opinion unique. You are one of 3.5billion women. Articles about DV on the Gmp get similar comments time again because they are often full of false… Read more »
If you find no inherent value in GMP, what in the world are you doing here then? If you find no inherent value in reading articles online or having discussions, what are you doing here? Do you also find no inherent value in reading books to learn about things too? Instead insisting that the “real” world is the only place you can learn about people? I’m baffled. Everyone uses the internet as a tool. I can’t believe I even need to say this to you. You clearly consider it a tool in your life otherwise you wouldn’t even be here… Read more »
Erin, Thank you for returning to the article’s focus.
Seems like a bit of a projection Erin.
Its generally women and movements that claim to represent women that are interested in obscuring the data, the men you are talking about that post here about it are just telling the truth.
Trying to at least Thomas…. apparently unsuccessfully. You might as well have just given a header: “Domestic Violence”, and when we all clicked in it, left it blank. The same exact comments would have basically been made regardless of the actual topic of the article. It’s too bad that it always centers around to the same conversation no matter what angle a topic is presented from. It has to be frustrating as a writer who clearly drew a clear outline in their article about the angle they were addressing. I don’t always agree with you Thomas but you write some… Read more »
Hi CT I’m insulted that you would think I’m doing the same thing as these writers at Huff post and similar do. I’m not going to put the links into the message because they will get caught in the spam filter. Google the following phrase to get a chart on partner homicide, the official female to male homicide has dropped 75% since then. Homicide trends in the U.S. Intimate homicide There has been a decline in homicide of intimates, especially male victims Intimates are defined to include spouses, ex-spouses, boyfriends, and girlfriends. Google the following to get the high rate… Read more »
“In 2010, 39 percent of U.S. female homicide victims were killed by an intimate partner. Just three percent of men suffered the same fate.” Men are killed at 3 to 4 times the rate of women so are about 25% – 33% of all domestic violence killings. The phrasing at Huffpo was deliberately intended to suggest that men were a tiny fraction of those killed in domestic violence cases. ____________ I couldn’t find some of the articles or websites you referred to you in your most recent post, apart from an extremely outdated analysis on murder defendants from 1988 and… Read more »
If you google the following
“Homicide trends in the U.S. Intimate homicide There has been a decline in homicide of intimates, especially male victims Intimates are defined to include spouses, ex-spouses, boyfriends, and girlfriends.”
You will find the data on intimates.
It’s worse than that. The facts are deliberately distorted to support the narrative. “In 2010, 39 percent of U.S. female homicide victims were killed by an intimate partner. Just three percent of men suffered the same fate.” Men are killed at 3 to 4 times the rate of women so are about 25% – 33% of all domestic violence killings. The phrasing at Huffpo was deliberately intended to suggest that men were a tiny fraction of those killed in domestic violence cases. The opposite is true also. Since men commit about 90% of the murders, men who kill are far… Read more »
John, I wondered about that statistic. It didn’t sit right with me. Thanks for clarifying.
“about 25% – 33% of all domestic violence killings.”
Its actually larger than that, the killings were near equal in the 1970s. women continue to be near half of those that appear in court on spousal murder charges, but are acquitted at much higher rates and can use defenses such as claiming they were abused.
On top of that men are far more likely to be driven to suicide by abuse and women are more likely to use a proxy killer.
I would be curious to see where you get your statistics. And also, I am curious if you are questioning the validity of a woman using the defense that she was abused? As the article above states, 1 in 3 women and 1 in seven men is abused. That’s nearly double the amount of women than men. John, you state that men are killed at 3 to 4 times the rate of women – in what context? In domestic violence situations? The facts don’t support that. Domestic violence is a huge problem among all people and yes, males are also… Read more »
@ CT The 39% of women killed is not in the context of domestic violence either. It’s a relationship between the number of women killed overall and the number of women killed in DV. The 3% statistic for men is similarly a comparison of men killed overall compared to the number killed in DV cases, but men are killed overall 3 – 4 times as often as women so to get the number of men killed in DV cases relative to the number of women killed in DV cases, you have to multiply the 3% by 3 – 4. Still… Read more »
John explains the issue with comparing domestic violence deaths to overall homicide and how is it used to willfully distort the data. Also CT you are now distorting data: “As the article above states, 1 in 3 women and 1 in seven men is abused. That’s nearly double the amount of women than men.” You just took the rate for those living IN a domestic violence situation and treated it as actual prevalence. This is what the study actually says “More than one-third of women in the United States (35.6% or approximately 42.4 million) have experienced rape, physical violence, and/or… Read more »