Feminist Amanda Marcotte writes about DV case with Patterson

Started by ClarenceClockwork, Mar 03, 2010, 11:17 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down


I'm the kind of person who likes to listen to both/other sides, so I freqently read feminist sites as well as men's rights sites. I found this analysis by feminist Amanda Marcotte: http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/how_covering_up_for_abuse_is_sadly_common/. These paragraphs caught my attention:

"Do people back up abusers and pressure victims to shut up and behave because they love wife-beating?  No.  It works the same way as rape.  They just define what their friend did as somehow not the behavior in question.  Real wife-beating looks like X, they tell themselves, and this looked like Y.  If a victim cried too hard, protected herself, or yelled at the abuser during one of his rages, then they chalk it up to 'fighting' and blame her as much if not more, even if she was actually cowering below his fists...

"From the literature on domestic violence I've read and people in the know I've talked to, the reason is as simple as it is depressing: In most cases, the people in the couple's social network like the abuser more.  You know how you know couples and you like one more than the other, and it's because you either know them better or find them more charming?  Abusers deliberately set out to create that impression in their friends' minds. First of all, abusers can be very charming, and in lieu of that, they can make themselves indispensable.  (That's how they got their victims to commit, after all!) Second of all, abusers find excuses to separate victims from their friends and family, not letting victims socialize much (and blaming them to others for being shy when asked about it, making people like the victim less), or letting her only socialize on his terms.  This strategy can be implemented pretty subtly---making it so miserable for her when she sees her friends through complaints that she starts to roll back on those relationships, poisoning her against her friends, or even moving her away from her support system.  Abusers exploit sexism, notably the sexist belief that men are fun-loving guys while women are nagging bitches.  And the abuse itself also helps.  Abusers can be glowing with power after they've forced a woman to submit, but she will be tired and depressed.  Glowing people are more fun to be around than depressives, and so he gets more points against her.  When the abuse finally comes out, their social network is ready to turn on her. "

This all makes sense to me, but I understand if some here have a different or contrasting view. I want to listen, because my own views on the topic of domestic violence are still developing. I do fear for false accusations, and I do know that men can be the ones rejected by the social system. But which happens more often? Which is systematic, rather than incidental? I hope I can fill in more blanks in my understanding of these issues.

Thank you.


I also have an account on Pandagon, so perhaps I can ask her and her commenters some questions if any of you have some. I would be happy to do the asking for you.

Go Up