The New Yorker article: "How Far Can Abused Women Go To Protect Themselves"

[Dr. Richard Grossman]

Hi everybody,

Here's a horrifying article on voicelessness written by Elizabeth Flock in The New Yorker (1/13/2020):

"How Far Can Abused Women Go To Protect Themselves"

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/01/20/how-far-can-abused-women-go-to-protect-themselves

Richard

[Hopalong]

Doc G,
I see the world through the filter of the pervasive reality of sexism and overall male domination, and as terrible as this story is, it didn't shock me at all.

Systemic sexism is an ugly billboard I see hanging over the culture, in ways great and small every day.

Many women are raped and murdered just for daring to exist or to assert their human rights.

Much of our pop entertainment is built on the bodies of women: murdered or sexualized.

And predation on children is increasing at an incredible rate with the dark web.

It's hard to be optimistic.

Hops

[lighter]

I have some thoughts on this topic.  It's something we talk about often in this house.

I'll have to think about it a bit, but I'll be back.

 



Lighter

[sKePTiKal]

I found the article is kinda confusing legal and moral justice issues.

Legally: The 2nd Amendment says I have a right to defend myself; that's been qualified and restricted and regulated by every state in the country. But the "right to self-defense" is still a precedent in the judicial system. Perhaps not effectually in that locality, equally for everyone - but corruption/power networks have been around a LONG time. It is true, that poorer women suffer this kind of "justice" decision from the "system", than more upper-class women.

Morally: I also believe I have a right to defend myself, but that's taken a long, long time and many arduous hours to arrive at and it's a PERSONAL choice to believe that. I accept fully that other people make other choices for themselves and that's perfectly fine by me. Like I said, it's PERSONAL. I understand that some will judge me for my choice, but then, they haven't lived through what I have or had to do the work to get A choice, of any kind for themselves, because no one can imagine what that involves until one has actually lived through it.

More than that I'm not willing to discuss. Except to say I truly feel for the woman in the article.

(From the title of the article, I expected this to be about denial, self-sabotage, etc. instead of physically defending oneself. Tells ya where my head's been at lately.)

[lighter]

I'm coming back to this thread, soon.
Yup.

[lighter]

A few  realities about the justice system.

1. It's not innocent until proven guilty.  It's guilty till proven innocent, and the fact Defendants have to sit in jail, sometimes for years bc they can't make bond or are denied bond is a primary indicator for that, IME.

2.  My (amazing, professional and very competent) Defense Attorney blurted out, unceremoniously, during one of these ur first meetings....
"We're lucky, bc this Assistant District Attorney doesn't regularly hide exculpatory evidence in order to get convictions.". I'm paraphrasing here.



He seemed relieved.

 I was horrified. 

3.  When I was trying to bring criminal charges against my FIL, my attorneys PI (retired FBI agent) told me flat out ...
"DAs don't bring charges against rich white men.....they prefer low hanging fruit."

That was another shock. 

4.  My attorney told me the ADA and his crew would highly five each other at the water cooler, the morning after I was convicted, even if they knew I was innocent and they'd wear jeans and feel joy about it.

5.  My attorney said there's a war on society to incarcerate large numbers of our population. Looking at the statistics, he was right.

6.  Starving litigants out is a legitimate legal tactic.....I mean, starving out children, abused women and litigants with the better case, but not enough money to get through court, who would otherwise win.

7.  Judges may run their Courtroom as they like.  This includes making up lies about the Defense Counsel and Defendant in order to sway the jury.  It also includes excluding as much Defense witnesses and evidence as they like, while allowing all Prosecution evidence in.

8.  Prosecutors may claim knowledge of activities and conversations they have no evidence happened, but put it forth, to a jury, as though they themselves witnessed the scene.....and they aren't required to swear in before doing it.

Will leave it there, for now.

[lighter]

It's obvious....women are still considered property and toys/slaves, for men when viewing the justice system.

Women don't have the same rights to protect and defend their property or selves, IME.

They must testify, if indicted, for defending their lives using force. 

They must never ever ever be angry, no matter what they, and their children, we're subjected to.  Zero anger.  Zero, or else, prison, for certain.  Consider that while contemplating Prosecutors using very old battered woman info and statistics to convict battered women, who absolutely fit the criteria now. 

That, IME, should be considered a hate crime against women, as domestic abuse should be treated as terrorism, with zero tolerance.

Instead, it's been normalized to the point of being dismissed and ridiculed when women attempt to be heard or seek divorce/help, IME.

[sKePTiKal]

That is a point of view I can't really sign on to, Lighter. Why? (I get why you do. Mostly.)

No one owns me, but me. (And B would have a fit if I behaved, felt that way; he wants an equal partner.) Proved this IRL more than once.

Everyone has to testify, for using deadly force defending themselves. Yes, men too. I haven't had to live through this yet. I hope I never have to. I HAVE had to defend myself - FOR defending myself - against a bully many years ago. My argument was short & bittersweet.

If you think women are not permitted to be angry, you haven't known me all these years - and I'd like to introduce you to my Ds.

And I AGREE that domestic abuse needs to be in the spotlight a bit more, and that women in those situations need a safe platform from which to be heard; for the justice system to become more educated and be more impartial.

This discussion comes up about weekly around here. Hol is working her own path through her anger - and right now is buried under the messaging of her generation re: militant feminism and incels, and male "privelege". I believed I'd taught her enough of the ways to never BE dependent on a man, that she would automatically develop her own boundaries over that and be emotionally independent as well. I guess it doesn't work that way - she HAS done that, but on her own; the hard way. She knows codependent patterns are the main bait into those kinds of relationships now. She knows what her own kryptonite is.

The MORE people can and do discuss all the issues around abuse - and how people react, behave, feel and how they think of themselves - in those kinds of situations, the understanding of the issues is increased and the closer we get knowing which soluations work best in unique individual situations.

At the root of things, I'm not angry at men because they seem to be favored in the justice system. I am accountable for my decisions, actions and behaviors... and that includes learning to stand up and fight for myself. It may not be my proudest achievement, in all cases, but the trauma that taught me that no adults COULD protect me 100% of the time in all situations taught me I could/would engage the fight. And I didn't give a rat's ass how that made me look. And I don't apologize or people-please to avoid the fight or appease after. I am within my rights (at least I believe) to defend myself. Don't care what society thinks; don't care how other people look at me. I have to be able to look at myself - with respect, compassion, and understanding. That's enough for me to go on.

[lighter]

Amber, you're welcome to your anger .... justified anger should be acceptable for all human beings fighting for their lives and children's safety, imo.

Unfair, but if a woman shows anger to a jury, a scary facial expression, puts witnesses on the stand who've taken notes on any anger at all..... you're going to prison, bc angry women aren't allowed to defend themselves and stay out of prison, ime.

I know this, disagree with it, but can vouch for that truth, as I didn't believe my attorney when he said it ......
till I saw it with my own eyes.  Holy cow!

It's real and unfair and something women should be aware of.  Just stating facts.  Not debating any piece of it.  I didn't believe it either, but women jurors will convict quicker than men on that one.

Lighter