Boston Teens Say Rihanna Responsible for Beating

I've been hearing some similar stuff from my 10 year-old - that Rihanna is "stupid" for going back to him, etc.  Of course, this is what he hears on gossip shows and from his friends.  One time he mentioned it in front of a family member who said, "Yeah, some women are just stupid that way," in response.

It's always come up at times when we couldn't have a more in-depth conversation about it, but I'm going to sit down with him and talk about it to him at some point soon.  Glad to have this thread as a reminder.

That's a reasonable enough question, and I'm probably going to be asked that by my son when we talk about it too.  A lot of people wonder the same thing, so I think it's a good thing for feminists to make the point, wherever they can, about the way we as women are conditioned to love and make allowances for controlling and abusive behaviour in the men we're attracted to and love, even when we happen to be the ones to hold the "purse strings" in the relationship.

I don't have time to share a lot of thoughts on this right this moment, but maybe others do...I'll be back (she says in a Schwarzenegger voice).

I'm having a hard time finding one where we specifically discuss why women with financial means find it hard to leave, but this thread might be a start.

I think it's important to realize that, while financial reasons are significant for many abused women, that's not the ONLY reason why women find it difficult to leave. There are often other reasons, like psychological abuse (feeling like they aren't good enough to leave or to do any better, or emotional blackmail), fear of escalating violence, etc.

Thanks for the tips. I'll check out the thread you mentioned, Michelle since I really was at a complete loss to understand this...

Michelle wrote:

  You want the abuse to stop, but you don't necessarily want the abuser deported, subjected to involuntary or abusive treatment himself, have his livelihood or career or future destroyed, etc.

I certainly wouldn't shed a tear if any of those things were to happen to Chris Brown.

[quote=Star Spangled Canadian]

I certainly wouldn't shed a tear if any of those things were to happen to Chris Brown.

[/quote]

No, but she might.  Love and care isn't always something you can just turn off at a flip of the switch the moment someone does something mean to you. 

Triciamarie, Rhianna doesn't need the publicity. She is a well known and very popular singer. She has been in the media spotlight for quite some time now, way before the Chris Brown incident.

I'm glad there's a thread for this. I have been outraged by the treatment of this story from the start (the extent to which they blame the victim, say she brought it on herself, etc.); I cannot believe the media referring to this incident as a "brutal argument" (wtf?) instead of an assault! In some stories they've used incidents from her past to try and paint her as the abusive partner, comparing angry outbursts and arguments to a brutal beating as if they equate. Other stories have attempted to gloss over Mr Brown's very real history of violence against women (and he's now arranged to have previous accusations silenced lest they impact on this case). Its generally just been disgusting to read so thanks for making this thread!

(I have to admit as someone who almost never starts babble threads I'm rather intimidated to start threads in this forum; I'm glad someone else did so!)

saga, the kid's aren't saying it's wrong she went back, they're saying it was HER fault she was beaten.

Stargazer wrote:

Triciamarie, Rhianna doesn't need the publicity. She is a well known and very popular singer. She has been in the media spotlight for quite some time now, way before the Chris Brown incident.

... that probably was one of his frustrations. 

saga, I respect your posts and views on a number of topics, but what you posted above is truly not understanding who's at fault for what happens when women are in relationships with abusive men.

In case it's not clear, it's the abuser. I'm very sad to have to type that. 

In this case, two well-known popular musicians with media machines on them already, we the public have absolutely no access to the "truth" of what's going on since the known incident in which he was known to have beaten her. If it's for show, if it's part of the cycle of violence, many other reasons, we just have no idea.

I'd like to suggest that if your understanding is so bereft of any thinking or analysis (he's wrong, she's stupid) to please educate yourself. I've linked these sites many times before, there's info on these sites about abuse, why women stay, why women return, why they finally leave for good (if they haven't been killed) and how women stay alive after leaving, because most women are killed by their abusers in the 18 months after they leave.

This issue isn't something that can be summed up so neatly, and to do so is an insult to any woman who has survived abuse. Because of where I live and the resources I know, all these resources serve Toronto and/or Ontario.

Springtide Resources (formerly Education Wife Assault )

http://www.springtideresources.org/

Assaulted Women's Helpline http://www.awhl.org/

Toronto Rape Crisis Centre/Multicultural Women Against Rape 

http://www.trccmwar.ca/ 

Many thanks to martin for what you've said here.

Edited to add: there's little difference between women with financial means and women without financial means, except the public's misogyny is increased against the woman. But let's be clear, the public's (lack of) understanding is almost always against the woman anyways so that's no newsflash.

And why don't we stop asking "Why did she stay/go back?" and why don't we start asking "Why doesn't he stop?" 

Yes Snert, that's what's important about this discussion. Semantics.

No one has the right to abuse another person.  It doesn't matter if the other person said anything or did anything that the other person would deem inappropriate.  It you don't like someone, leave.  Don't abuse someone if you don't like what they may or may not be doing.

As for an abused person returning to a relationship, that still does not justify the abuse.

Quote:

Ah, right.

Yep, sounds right. 

martin dufresne wrote:

Interesting:

"He hit her.

Wrong.

She went back.

Stupid."

The (male) abuser's action is assessed; he made a "wrong" move.

The (female) abused's nature is attacked: she is deemed "stupid".

This double standard is part of why men can go on battering women.

 This isn't a double standard. You've made up your own 'standard' by presuming that I think "stupid" is worse than "wrong".

He's wrong. The law will apply. I could also say he's a stupid a-ho if that makes you feel better.

She's stupid for going back.

Revolution, I read the thread and I am responding to the cases where people are making excuses for her for going back or are criticising kids for saying she is stupid for going back.

http://www.rabble.ca/comment/998322/Ive-been-hearing-some

http://www.rabble.ca/comment/998379/Im-having-hard-time

http://www.rabble.ca/comment/998388/case-pop-star-I

  I think the people who try to excuse her for going back are perpetuating female victimhood. I think the kids who say she's stupid for going back are smart kids who have learned what we've taught and are far more emotionally mature than Rhianna or her apologists.

If we're gonna teach young people to avoid abusive relationships, we can't turn around and make excuses for women who make a choice to risk being a repeated victim, imo. It's not a role model children should follow, and should be clearly identified as irresponsible behaviour, imo.

Personally, I think defending/excusing the stupid decisions of some women demeans all women.

martin dufresne wrote:

So women are either omnipotent or victims but, whatever the view, they, rather than their circumstances, are the ones being discussed and judged. Seems a bit convenient for their assaulters - and for all of us standing by, not holding these men accountable.

Who's not holding him accountable? He's been charged. What else is there to do at this point? He's a friggen abuser loser and I hope his career is over.

I also hope that women who might want to associate with him will stay the hell away from the aho, including Rhianna, and yes, I think they are behaving stupidly if they fraternize with the jerk.

What other message do we want young girls to learn?

That it's 'romantic' to go back to an abuser, because you're the only one who understands him? (Oh puleeeez!!!)

 I don't think the education of young girls should be compromised by the kind of excuses people make for the 'weaknesses' of abused women going back. I think young girls should be taught that is stupid, and that they are not that 'weak'.

And I think the child in the last frame of the cartoon above is RIGHT ON, except I wouldn't use the word 'retarded'.

She's (stupid) for going back and I hope she knows I'll never listen to her (music) again.

BRAVO !!!

Rhianna should lose the respect of smart young women like this.

Fish or cut bait. I'm cutting bait. You'll be out of this thread soon enough, thankfully.

Fine by me. The values in this thread are entirely fucked and harmful to women, imo. Not to mention about 30 years out of date and young girls know better these days.

Maysie can speak for herself, and if she rereads she will find that she has presumed things I did not say.

I see you've avoided responding directly to my questions.

I think we should be free to teach young women that it is smart to walk away.

But you have a problem with that? How so?

I will need a clear explanation of how my post (the one you called the mods on) is so offensive that it warrants such action, please, because I don't see it.

"No comment necessary (or possible)."

Well, I'll try anyway. It seems a cheap shot to blame teens when, in fact, EVERYONE makes excuses for batterers and generally makes assault victims responsible for the violence in some way or another, be it by rhetorically whining "Why doesn't she leave?" or "Why doesn't she press charges?" - as if this was her job - or spouting psycho-crap about "codependency", dyadic dynamics, male loss of self-esteem and what have you...

Blaming teenagers for regurgiting that pap they are immersed in is just a way of washing our own hands (edited for clarity) of the responsibility for putting out, relaying and tolerating that deresponsibilizing discourse and for our institutions still not prosecuting assaulters with any efficacy.

Done. I tend to occasionally back-edit my posts for clarity. Calling that "sneaky" seems sort of a cheap shot.

Sorry for the drift but if people are going to edit their posts 4 days later, a little "edited: reason" might be useful.  One thing I don't like about the new babble.

edited: to remove poor choice of words. 

Saga, nowhere in my post in my address to you was I snarky. I was snarky to Snert, I will admit that.

Women returning to abusers is a reality. Nowhere do I indicate EVER that I support this happening, but there are many many factors involved regarding why women return (some are about the woman who hasn't healed enough, whose self esteem isn't high enough, or she doesn't perceive that she's in a high level of danger. These are only some reasons). NOWHERE do I say women are victims if they stay, women are victims if they leave and then return, women are victims if they stay and are killed or women are victims if they leave and are killed. Women are strong to survive this. Victims is stupid legal system language. The Ministry of the Attorney General has encouraged the use of victim language and what it does is completely remove the gender analysis and feminist analysis that women in the VAW movement have used for decades. Most in the sector can't complain because MAG funds them. 

Other reasons why women return have NOTHING to do with their situations individually and have everything to do with the world we live in. The police no longer automatically press charges, something that's questionable how helpful this was for women in the first place. There have been few (maybe no) affordable housing units built (in Ontario anyways) for a number of years. This matters, as not finding housing the the NUMBER ONE reason why women return. I didn't just make that up, this is from shelter directors across Ontario who I've spoken with. A very important piece is there is no societal value that men who are abusers need to be taught, severely and instantly, that this is not okay. Ever.

These truths makes me sick. They make me furious that women end up returning to abuse, knowing what they know and feeling what they feel. Victims? Are you kidding? These are warriors, wounded bleeding warriors, returning to the scene of their daily traumas, hoping for a way out eventually.

Yes, please teach your daughters it is unwise and unhealthy and lethal to return to an abuser. Many women live on the streets and in homeless shelters rather than return. We don't hear about them, do we? There's bravery. They often live in tremendous fear, though. That their abuser may yet find them and hurt/kill them. They make that choice, too, for many reasons.

Power and control is what abusers feed off of. In our woman-hating society, women and men are both taught that power and control can equal love. Not all men abuse and not all women become abused, but the roots of abusive relationships can be found in a culture that we all have internalized: our own.

In other words, there are a few differences between myself, who's never been in an abusive relationship (outside of my family) and Rhianna. The more distance we put between her as an abused woman and those of us who can call ourselves "not abused women" the more we make her "other", and the less we understand her, and any other abused woman, and can then say that what she did was "stupid". I mean, seriously, what a horrible and insulting thing to say about someone who has survived abuse! Would you say this to someone you knew?

My fairly simplistic question from upthread hasn't been answered either. Why the focus on the woman's behaviour and not the man's? Why doesn't he stop? He knows it's wrong. If every man who hit a woman was sent to jail and fined, you're damn right there would be less abuse. Why doesn't this happen?

P.S. Those questions are rhetorical. The reality of our woman-hating society should answer them. None of those questions are meant in a snarky way at all, just to be clear. 

Whatever makes babble happy.

It makes me much happier to ignore this forum and I usually do, knowing my opinions will be twisted out of all recognition here.

But criticizing young people for saying it's stupid to go back to an abuser?

The kids are generations ahead of the babble feminism philosophy, imo.

Men who make comments about this thread and the subject matter within it,  while in it, or out of it, from a negative positioning, of any sort, have absolutely no business doing so.

Ascribing negative labels to women, who make choices one does not oneself approve of, is not helping the plight of women in our society. In fact, quite the opposite.