What if a woman wanted to stay with her abuser?

[psychedelicsoul]

I hit a stumbling point in my thinking... If morality is subjective, and ones life value is determined by ones self then a woman has the right to stay with an abusive man and should legally be able to allow the abuser to continue.

I mean, it's her freedom and her individuality. It's her life and her choices, she's only harming herself. Like a heroin user. And if this guy is arrested and she says, "let him go" aren't we forcibly applying some objective form of morality? Aren't we just egotistically forcing our morality onto her. Isn't that against her freedom, who are we to say what's objectively right for her?
And what if she dies?

Well that would be bad but... Wouldn't we be forcing an objective value onto her life? Who are we to determine her life is worth saving if she doesn't feel that way. Aren't we robbing her of her freedom to decide for herself what life is worth? Isn't her individuality and her freedom more important than her life?

I don't know... I've hit a tough moral stumbling block... I don't' like stripping people of individuality, and I don't like domestic violence. Damn.... This is a hard as question.

 

[Mysterie]

im not so sure its possible to only harm yourself. if you are self destructive then it probably negatively affects the people you interact with and the people you care about.

similarly if you practice self-acceptance then you could have a positive impact with the people you come into contact with.

"if the guy gets arrested"? how would he get arrested unless the woman who was being abused called the police? if she called the police then she came to her senses and realised she doesn't deserve to be treated like shit.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

im not so sure its possible to only harm yourself. if you are self destructive then it probably negatively affects the people you interact with and the people you care about.

similarly if you practice self-acceptance then you could have a positive impact with the people you come into contact with.

"if the guy gets arrested"? how would he get arrested unless the woman who was being abused called the police? if she called the police then she came to her senses and realised she doesn't deserve to be treated like shit.

You know... If I had a girl close to me that was in an abusive relationship, I'd probably kick his ass.... actually, no, if I did, it would only result in her getting beat more as he'd take out his rage on her... However, if she's happy being with him and she wants to be with him and is willing to bail him out of jail... Why should my pain be more important than her individuality.

What if she didn't call the police, let's say a family member did it, or he hit her in public... Shouldn't her will be more important than others

 

[Mysterie]

You know... If I had a girl close to me that was in an abusive relationship, I'd probably kick his ass.... actually, no, if I did, it would only result in her getting beat more as he'd take out his rage on her... However, if she's happy being with him and she wants to be with him and is willing to bail him out of jail... Why should my pain be more important than her individuality.

What if she didn't call the police, let's say a family member did it, or he hit her in public... Shouldn't her will be more important than others

i dont rly think individuality is related to people who are co-dependant and have low self-esteem. when there is some kind of trauma in early childhood which has people think its okay that they get stepped on, i don't think it makes them truly 'happy', but perhaps 'validated' or something is a better word.

it probably does come down to the woman in the end because even if someone puts him in jail, or beats him up so he leaves her alone. unless she gets some kind of therapeutic assistance or has some kind of epiphany the cycle would probably just continue and she would find another man to treat her badly. she would have to have better standards of what she is willing to put up with in a relationship, or a better opinion of her self.

i don't think i would feel okay seeing a guy beating on his wife in public, im not sure that is actually within the bounds of the law in this day and age. i think it would be best to give the woman some resources on domestic violence and try to encourage her to seek some help.

 

[psychedelicsoul]

i dont rly think individuality is related to people who are co-dependant and have low self-esteem. when there is some kind of trauma in early childhood which has people think its okay that they get stepped on, i don't think it makes them truly 'happy', but perhaps 'validated' or something is a better word.

it probably does come down to the woman in the end because even if someone puts him in jail, or beats him up so he leaves her alone. unless she gets some kind of therapeutic assistance or has some kind of epiphany the cycle would probably just continue and she would find another man to treat her badly. she would have to have better standards of what she is willing to put up with in a relationship, or a better opinion of her self.

i don't think i would feel okay seeing a guy beating on his wife in public, im not sure that is actually within the bounds of the law in this day and age. i think it would be best to give the woman some resources on domestic violence and try to encourage her to seek some help.

I actually agree with you. She should be offered counselling... I just think it should be up to her to decide.

 

[swilow]

I think you're getting caught up on the idea of objective right and wrong. Of course it can be argued that such thing doesn't exist, but the majoirty of society believes it does and that is really all that matters. Society considers violence to be wrong, with very few exceptions, especially asymmetrical violence. Its hard to see a way in which violence is right. But because there doesn't appear to be objective rights and wrongs, it has been up to humans to invent these things. Given that this stuff seems like an inventions, these concepts are therefore infinitely flexible.

There are aspects to human psychology that can make people willing victims, who appear willing but are being coerced in more subtle ways. Its difficult to generalise about the motivations of such people though.

Don't get so caught up in trying to find absolutes and objective principles. It is possible to maintain two or more opposing views. I believe deeply in self-determination, for all people. I am largely unwilling to impose my values on people. At the same time, I do believe that there are limits to this principle that must be enforced. This hypothetical woman has the right to return to her violent partner; but he does not have the right to hurt her. You simply cannot have both outcomes simultaneously and, as the inventor of right and wrong, now is the time to make a value judgement- again. Impinging on a persons freedom to be with a person that hurts them is an affront to Liberty that I think is acceptable.

It almost doesn’t matter if the woman says "let him go". Why do her rights overwhelm the rest of societies right to be safe from violence? I propose that a freedom is only 'real' or valid if it doesn't harm or violate the freedom of anyone else. I think there are many loopholes in my statement that my stoned brain is too stoned to figure out though...

 

[psychedelicsoul]

I don't know... it's just that allowing societies repulsion to something to dictate anothers freedom seems wrong to me. I just can't support getting involved with someones life if they don't affect me. Whether he hits her or not is none of my business.

I might sound like a shitty person, but if I was in that position and real life and I know a girl who's in love with her abuser, I'd tried to talk to her, but I wouldn't call the police. That would just be selfish on my part, I'd be doing it to satisfy my own hero complex without regards to her feelings.

 

[Ninae]

There are many staying with abusive men. For one thing, there's many abusive men around, most aren't abusive in public or in front of anyone else. So all it takes for many is some kind of dependence, emotional or material, or having a child with someone.

Many end up helpless in that way and it's kind of crazy when you think about it. Women shouldn't be so needy. You don't need men in your life or a particular man in your life. At least not in the way that many think. Feelings for the opposite sex are only temporary and will pass most of the time. It's just a matter of time.

When you see if like that it's not such a big deal. Most men in my family have been abusive in some way, although they're not really bad men, or perceived to be. It just seems quite normal.

 

[socko]

In college, I had an abusive girl friend for around a year. My childhood and my parents were so messed (abusive) up that I thought she was normal. Compared to them, she was fairly normal. It took her being locked up in jail (for violence against me) and confined to mental hospitals for me to realize how messed up she was.

There are many staying with abusive men. For one thing, there's many abusive men around, most aren't abusive in public or in front of anyone else. So all it takes for many is some kind of dependence, emotional or material, or having a child with someone.

Many end up helpless in that way and it's kind of crazy when you think about it. Women shouldn't be so needy. You don't need men in your life or a particular man in your life. At least not in the way that many think. Feelings for the opposite sex are only temporary and will pass most of the time. It's just a matter of time.
....

Do you not believe in true love?

 

[Ninae]

In its existence, but it's quite obvious it's not always around and when it is it affects you in different ways. But I don't believe this life is all about personal fulfillment so I don't think it's supposed to always be around.

I've been in love quite a few times and when it's there it's very satisfying or makes you feel very content. I find it similar to drugs in that sense, in the way that you don't need anything else, or the same kind of euphoric high. It's a gateway to higher consciousness, for sure. But life isn't all about dwelling in that kind of euphoria.

If by "true" you mean eternal, I guess in the sense I believe that it's possible, but not accessible to everyone.

 

[socko]

In its existence, but it's quite obvious it's not always around and when it is it affects you in different ways. But I don't believe this life is all about personal fulfillment so I don't think it's supposed to always be around.

I've been in love quite a few times and when it's there it's very satisfying or makes you feel very content. I find it similar to drugs in that sense, in the way that you don't need anything else, or the same kind of euphoric high. It's a gateway to higher consciousness, for sure. But life isn't all about dwelling in that kind of euphoria.

If by "true" you mean eternal, I guess in the sense I believe that it's possible, but not accessible to everyone.

Yes, eternal, or at least life-long with one person. Obviously, it would have to last longer than the 6 month "honey moon" hormonal phase where it feels like a 'valium drip.' It would be the kind where you meet someone you want to spend the rest of your life with and would be willing to work on yourself to make that possible. The kind where you find yourself in the other and them in you fi that makes sense to you. You would grow together spiritually. You would need to have enough thigns in common for it to be worthwhile...

With a divorce rate of around 60% in the US and other developed count(ries, I don't think most people believe in it or at least are willing (or are even capable of) to work for it.

 

[Ninae]

I find it to be more akin to opiates?

Anyway, 5 years ago I met someone I had some of the strongest feelings for in my life and stayed in love with for 3 1/2 years or so. So it actually outlasted the honeymoon phase, which is more around 3-12 months then starts to decline.

I was told by my guardian angels through that medium that the person in question was someone I have been with in a romantic way in many lives in earth, and we weren't supposed to meet up in this life, but still did by a freak accident and feelings were really strong.

I didn't dig any deeper into it. but wonder if spiritual connections is what's at the basis for more lasting love. It might be something that can outlast the usual phase as it's more than just biology. In that relationship it was kind of like the feelings never really died and could might be rekindled again.

I'm not really such a hopeless romantic and value my freedom most of all. I fall easily and lose interest easily. But with him it was different. Anyway, I'm 29 now and won't be able to attract men for that much longer, and that's just as well. It will be strange but a relief (some say it's like walking off a cliff ).

 

[socko]

I find it to be more akin to opiates?

Anyway, 5 years ago I met someone I had some of the strongest feelings for in my life and stayed in love with for 3 1/2 years or so. So it actually outlasted the honeymoon phase, which is more around 3-12 months then starts to decline.

I was told by my guardian angels through that medium that the person in question was someone I have been with in a romantic way in many lives in earth, and we weren't supposed to meet up in this life, but still did by a freak accident and feelings were really strong.

I didn't dig any deeper into it. but wonder if spiritual connections is what's at the basis for more lasting love. It might be something that can outlast the usual phase as it's more than just biology. In that relationship it was kind of like the feelings never really died and could might be rekindled again.

I'm not really such a hopeless romantic and value my freedom most of all. I fall easily and lose interest easily. But with him it was different. Anyway, I'm 29 now and won't be able to attract men for that much longer, and that's just as well. It will be strange but a relief (some say it's like walking off a cliff ).

I tend to be more of a romantic. No idea why. But being that way, I believe that a deep spiritual connection is needed for long lasting love (unless you marry only for the purpose of having babies or for financial support). For my last long term relationship, my gf lacked any sense of spirituality or romance. Her mind and soul were all muddled up. She grew up a Christian Fundamentalist and thought that is all there was. I never felt a deep connection with her. In hindsight, I think I might have only been with her as long as I was because I was lonely.

At 29, aren't you worried about being alone? I never had a real family of my own to fall back on and have had to try to find my own.

 

[Ninae]

No, I am romantic myself, but I'm not that concerned about finding love or the ideal partner, etc. As you say there are many who aren't really that suited to it. And when you fall for someone like that it doesn't work out so well. Most relationships aren't as idyllic as people make out.

I have quite a lot of family and at least I know they'll always be there.

 

[Foreigner]

I don't know... it's just that allowing societies repulsion to something to dictate anothers freedom seems wrong to me. I just can't support getting involved with someones life if they don't affect me. Whether he hits her or not is none of my business.

I might sound like a shitty person, but if I was in that position and real life and I know a girl who's in love with her abuser, I'd tried to talk to her, but I wouldn't call the police. That would just be selfish on my part, I'd be doing it to satisfy my own hero complex without regards to her feelings.

Co-dependent relationships are one thing, but when someone's life is in danger, yes the rest of society has a right to intervene. The classic relationship between a narcissist and an empath can go on and on indefinitely until someone dies or there is a massive, violent falling out. Victims of abuse often defend their abuser, especially if they've already fallen in love with them previously. It becomes easy to justify what is going on. On the other hand, it may simply be dangerous to seek agency because the abuser may outright kill them.

As someone on the outside looking in, you're talking about rights, but you aren't understanding the psychology. Yes, we all technically have the right to get intimately involved with assholes, and yes we technically have a right to let them abuse us to death. No, we don't have the right to prevent others from intervening if they feel concern for the level of violence we are experiencing.

Sometimes people need agency and don't know it. Sometimes people need agency and can't ask for it, for various reasons. Sometimes people don't even know they can seek agency because they feel their abuse situation is so abnormal that nobody could possibly understand. How do you differentiate those when you're on the outside looking in, as a bystander?

 

[psychedelicsoul]

Co-dependent relationships are one thing, but when someone's life is in danger, yes the rest of society has a right to intervene. The classic relationship between a narcissist and an empath can go on and on indefinitely until someone dies or there is a massive, violent falling out. Victims of abuse often defend their abuser, especially if they've already fallen in love with them previously. It becomes easy to justify what is going on. On the other hand, it may simply be dangerous to seek agency because the abuser may outright kill them.As someone on the outside looking in, you're talking about rights, but you aren't understanding the psychology. Yes, we all technically have the right to get intimately involved with assholes, and yes we technically have a right to let them abuse us to death. No, we don't have the right to prevent others from intervening if they feel concern for the level of violence we are experiencing.Sometimes people need agency and don't know it. Sometimes people need agency and can't ask for it, for various reasons. Sometimes people don't even know they can seek agency because they feel their abuse situation is so abnormal that nobody could possibly understand. How do you differentiate those when you're on the outside looking in, as a bystander?

What if her life is endanger?Who are we to say her life is worth saving? I think if someones self-esteem is so low, that they think their life is worthless, then who am I to say their life is worth something.

 

[ebola?]

She would be acting against her own interests, and you could say that the trauma of abuse would distort her thinking in such a way as to partially hinder her ability to freely exercise decision-making; as a conceptual pivot, we can ask what the chances are that she would still consider her decision to withstand the abuse sound after she's out of the relationship and mentally healed.

But yeah, people are free to act in this way, but humans are there to help each other out when we're trapped, even by our own psychology.

ebola

 

[herbavore]

But yeah, people are free to act in this way, but humans are there to help each other out when we're trapped, even by our own psychology.

ebola

That's a great way to put it. And let's remember that it applies to both the violent person (not always male) and the victim (not always female).

OP, you seem to be coming at this from a kind of detachment that I have never found possible. Right after college my first job was working in a shelter for battered women. I had a male friend that was a social worker that worked with men with anger problems that resulted in domestic violence. We used to try to support emotional sanity for each other as the endless hopelessness that we each encountered in our jobs was very draining. One of the most devastating things to both of us was the effect that this cycle of violence had on the children. (My friend was himself a former victim of both childhood (father) and adult violence (male partner).This is very important to remember even when you are looking at it as you are from a completely detached perspective that allows you to say, "They are adults and what they choose is their own business." Meanwhile the children of these adults are in the process of learning how to be these adults and they had no choice whatsoever. When you consider that most domestic violence has roots in low self-esteem (both the abuser and the abused) would you not have chosen to intervene somehow back when these adults were children themselves? When I see adults playing out these roles of dominator/victim I see damaged children inhabiting adult bodies. For me this elicits a very human (empathetic) response. Do you never feel that?

 

[psychedelicsoul]

That's a great way to put it. And let's remember that it applies to both the violent person (not always male) and the victim (not always female).

OP, you seem to be coming at this from a kind of detachment that I have never found possible. Right after college my first job was working in a shelter for battered women. I had a male friend that was a social worker that worked with men with anger problems that resulted in domestic violence. We used to try to support emotional sanity for each other as the endless hopelessness that we each encountered in our jobs was very draining. One of the most devastating things to both of us was the effect that this cycle of violence had on the children. (My friend was himself a former victim of both childhood (father) and adult violence (male partner).This is very important to remember even when you are looking at it as you are from a completely detached perspective that allows you to say, "They are adults and what they choose is their own business." Meanwhile the children of these adults are in the process of learning how to be these adults and they had no choice whatsoever. When you consider that most domestic violence has roots in low self-esteem (both the abuser and the abused) would you not have chosen to intervene somehow back when these adults were children themselves? When I see adults playing out these roles of dominator/victim I see damaged children inhabiting adult bodies. For me this elicits a very human (empathetic) response. Do you never feel that?

I agree, children should be taken from such an environment.
But what you do to the abuser. IF the woman is begging you to let him go and claiming that he's a good man, then at what point should we respect her wishes?

 

[Foreigner]

What if her life is endanger?Who are we to say her life is worth saving? I think if someones self-esteem is so low, that they think their life is worthless, then who am I to say their life is worth something.

Who are you to say her life is *not* worth saving?

If she has free will then so do I. Your questions are specious.