A Friend's Controversial Theory on Abused Women

[Portia]

They did an experiment(I think in Japan) Where three bottles of rice were kept ---one that they prayed for and talked sweetly to every day, one that they abused every day, and one that they just ignored. At the end of the month, the one that was talked nice to and prayed for was healthy and white, the one that they abused was grey and unhealthy, but the one that they ignored was completely blackened and dead.

Just wanted to say Bloopsy, this really stuck in my head and thank you. Reminds me of the babies in the Romanian 'dying rooms' who were never touched etc. Ignoring is the cruelest thing, even though I feel that torture is the cruelest - it really is ignoring, certainly for babies.

Thanks for the rice Bloopsy, P

[bunny]

Actually there are women in severely abusive relationships who are quite successful, whose self-esteem in many areas is high. For instance, Dr. Susan Forward (psychologist) has written books about abusive relationships and had an excellent radio show that I listened to. She advised a lot of abused women on her show. She was extremely calm, knowledgeable, confident. During this time, I later found out in her book, she was in an abusive marriage. So it's not as simple as self-esteem although that's definitely a factor. The book I mentioned explains it.

bunny

[Anonymous]

Bunny:

Haven't read the book so forgive, but it's got to be low in the internal emotional area, or set of beliefs related to romantic relationships.

It just doesn't compute intuitively or practically that someone with a very high sense of self value and worth in that area would allow themselves to be treated so horrifically on a continuous basis.

I think our sense of self esteem/worth and confidence differ in areas. That these qualities are not equal across the "emotional board".

So for example, in the area of employment, which can be related to a different set of inner beliefs for some, it could be on the higher end, while related to our more personal, individual selves and romantic relationships it can be very poor.  

Sometimes where self esteem/value/worth is very low in one area,  individuals can feel compelled to over-compensate or "over achieve" in other areas where they do feel stronger, such as career.  So, no surprise there can be very successful business people who are being abused privately.

I see that you did say "esteem ok in many areas", not in all areas.  Agreed. Though my guess only, is that if it is low enough to allow for ongoing harsh daily abuse for years, then it is lower in general across the board, than higher.

When it gets higher across the board, these women have the opportunity to gain the momentum they need to boost the overall esteem enough to affect the lowest areas, and begin to think about leaving the abusive relationships.The abusers seem to somehow know this and try to isolate their partners.Any input from family, friends, any new experiences, work promotions, new school studies, are a huge threat to the abuser because they figure it might change their partner's perceptions and they might begin to become stronger {more esteem} in other areas, which will cause them to be stronger in the area of the relationship, and not put up with the crap anymore.

So if we are specifically talking about staying in abusive relationships I think low self esteem, sense of value, self worth in the area of relationships only is a very key factor.

I define self esteem/worth/value as a quality of the core self and even global beliefs we have about the circumstances at hand, that came out of prior learning and life experiences.

MVP

[longtire]

I am reading "The Road Less Travelled" by M. Scott Peck right now.  I just read the section last night that delas with masichism in relationships.  I think I am starting to understand wht that term means in this situation.

I don't like the way my wife treates me.  I have told her many times.  I have told her many times that I would not put up with her verbal and emotional abuse.  Yet, here I am still married to her after all these years.

Masochism in this situation doesn't mean I lLIKE the situation, but there must be something I get from this situation that I believe I need.  If there weren't something important about the situation, I would just leave.  Iv'e done that before with other people in other situations.  Why not here and now with her?

I'm not sure exactly what need I have to be met in this, but I grew up thinking that the world is clueless and just doesn't care or value caring, since that's how my parents came across to me.  I don't know if staying in the situation is to show that people really are like that so I'm justified somehow in my feelings or beliefs?  If so, why can't I just accept that those are my feelings and beliefs?  This, despite that fact that I consciously believe that people are basically good and caring, but some have problems that keep them from being open, aware, or connecting.  Am I trying to "fix" the world by trying to fix my wife before I am able to fully emotionally trust and move on?  Neither of these quite fit, but the answer feels like it is in this general area for me.

I will tell you that I understand the "Battered Wife Syndrom."  In the past I didn't understand that if someone is hitting you, why not just leave?  It's very hard when it is you in the situation and it doesn't even make sense to yourself why you stay.

[Anonymous]

Longtire, I think you nailed it pretty eloquently, at least for some (and maybe most) cases.

Although I still think there are some "accidentals" (Mum's story is a good example), where there was an absence of information about or modeling of abuse to the point where the abusee is just simply unprepared to anticipate threat, I think most others are looking for something.

Back to re-creation theory:

In my own experience, I was not a little frightened by the prospect of having a child. Pretty scared of the potential to repeat the past. I did have a couple of good things going for me, though: having spent several years in the field of developmental disabilities (MR/ED/Autism) and effective, humanizing behavior management (this, I swear by as having made me a better parent than I would have been without it), a  partner who WANTED (even initiated) to be a father, and fan-damn-tas-tic genetic potential between the two of us.

However, I was still a nervous wreck at the thought. I had always believed I would not have children, but I had to admit that I really did want to, were I to be honest about it. I talked to a therapist about this, though, and he said he thought it was a good idea, as it would give me a chance to re-create my past as it should have been, if I really wanted a child and was up to the task, as he thought I was. I decided to heed his words, and I'm very happy about it today.

In this case, it has really worked. My daughter and I are close like I have never been with my own mother, and she's confident, lovely, and getting on quite well despite the usual pitfalls of childhood.

This CONCSIOUS re-creation strategy worked (so far, so good, anyway).

I thknk we can get sucked into and remain longer than is healthy in situations where we are seeking to re-create and ultimately revise on some level, but are not yet conscious of what exactly it is we're trying to accomplish/learn/gain.

That's the hard part, I think.

If you brought that question to a therapist: "What could I possibly be trying to gain by staying?" you might get some good and useful help in reaching an answer. Or you may, now that the question has been raised within your own mind, be able to draw a solid conclusion on your own.

In any case, this question is an excellent one for any person who feels trapped or is a repeater to ask of themselves. Thanks for bringing it around.

T

[bunny]

MVP,

You make good points and I agree.

The only difference in what we're saying is that I am also talking about the attachment and traumatic bond between the woman and her abuser. That is slightly different from self-esteem and is a very powerful force keeping them together.

bunny

[no1where]

for al the replies.  I liked the rice fable too.  Some of those simple parables are the most powerful.

I write stiffly, eh?  Is this a creative writing class or something?  Sheesh, everybody's a critic.  It's a damn good thing my <i>editors</i> like stiff.  LMAO!!!!!!!!!!  

Oh, and guest, you have a nice writing style too.  Stiff. *wink wink*

Uh-huh-huh, Beavis said, "stiff." Uh-huh-huh.

[serena]

Don't know about the rest of you but I'm getting ultra-confused by all the 'guest' posters.  I know there have been problems signing in but you can still put your name at the top of any post?

Maybe I'm just thick - no, hang on - that's what my Mum thinks and it's not true!!!!!

[Anonymous]

I write stiffly, eh? Is this a creative writing class or something? Sheesh, everybody's a critic. It's a damn good thing my <i>editors</i> like stiff. LMAO!!!!!!!!!!  Oh, and guest, you have a nice writing style too. Stiff. *wink wink* Uh-huh-huh, Beavis said, "stiff." Uh-huh-huh.

ok--I do apologise for that lol--  Yeah, I know I can pull out that writing style, too. I guess as the saying goes-- "it takes one to know o...    And you're right, you probably do well in your field, and are laughing all the way to the bank!

MVP {I guess I will use that sig. from now on}

[mum]

thanks, Serena for bringing that up. It would be nice to know which guest is writing....Oh, and my username is mum but I'm not your mum (I don't think!)

[T]

T testing, here...to see if it show up as username.

Nearly my thought, no1where (BTW - is that number one where or no one where?):

 Uh-huh-huh, Beavis said, "intro to expository writing 101." Uh-huh-huh

T