Skip to main content

How many women are abused by husbands or boyfriends?

According to this article, 40% of us.

I'm calling BS. Seriously folks, what is going on here? If I were a woman who *was* abused I'd be pissed. Well, okay, probably I wouldn't be angry at all. Probably I'd have such a poor concept of my own worth that it wouldn't occur to me to be angry on my own behalf.

13% of women reported that the abuse went on for 20 years. Now that makes more sense to me. I've known abused women, had co-workers who were abused... and most of them would stay for 20 years. The rest of us have arguments or bad days and exchange snotty, pouty, and hurtful remarks. Some of us grow past this and have our tear filled shout fests *without* the hurtful remarks. Most people have good times and bad times in their relationships. This is normal.

Most of us can tell the difference between being abused and our partner (or ourself) having a bad day. Typically women who are abused stay with their abuser. The reason that this is *typical* is that women who won't stay with an abusive man... don't. I've known or worked with women in that situation as well. They leave him. They don't leave him after it builds up over time, they leave him *now*. Does every self-respecting woman leave her husband or boyfriend when they have their first fight? No.

Does name calling in an fight hurt? Yes. Is it better not to do it? Yes. Is it the same sort of thing as the determined long term tearing down of a person's psyche, you're ugly, worthless, no one else would want you, sort of thing that happens in an abusive relationship? No.

It's not just quantitative, it's qualitative. Abuse isn't the same only more... it's *different*.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Anyone who hits or berates his wife or girlfriend is a COWARD. He needs to be physically delt with by the same means he uses on his wife except in triple means. I repeat he is a COWARD.

Popular posts from this blog

Some times some people.

 

It's Not Projection

Take the case of "fascism". When you can see clear as day that the person who is accusing you of fascism is a fascist, they aren't projecting. They're talking about something ELSE. Basically, in the case of fascism, the basic set of fascist government controls are the default assumption of reality for a whole lot of people. The government is supposed to control every part of your life. The government is supposed to make you moral and good and reflect "justice". The government is supposed to do this by picking winners from the good people and losers from the bad people. The government is supposed to control the way people do business, how businesses (and farmers) function and what they produce. And people should be made to cooperate with this control because they are part of society and society is dependent on everyone being in compliance. This is simply the Truth. It's how the world works and how the world is supposed to work. The Socialist Nationalism, ...

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...