On one hand, when someone is verbally and/or emotionally abusive towards me, it leads me to feel hurt.
---
On the other hand, no one else can force me to feel anything, I choose to be hurt or stressed in these situations.
For me, there's a third hand: One of the consequences of long-term psychological abuse is that it can become internalized. And as you start to recognize the abuse, being a logical adult who wants a certain amount of self-determination, you also realize that "nobody can force me to feel anything." So you conclude that it has to be your fault, that you are somehow defective in not being stronger, in allowing the abusive behavior to penetrate. Dr. Phil (yes, I read one of his books) wrote that one of the fundamental truths of life is that we teach people how to treat us. I would say that, over time, abusers teach us how to treat ourselves. And in this culture of self-empowerment, where everything is a choice, the feeling that somehow you've surrendered your power can induce a whole lot of guilt and confusion.
One of the problems of recovering from, or disengaging from, an abusive relationship is that distorted view of reality. You have to question everything, you have to be willing to stop yourself all the time and say, "But is this really true?" One of the incredibly interesting and valuable things about your long thread, Longtire, is that it documents that regaining of trust in your own perceptions.
But when I recognize these feelings, it is up to me to decide what to do. I can stay in the situation and try to co-dependently "help" the one perpetrating the abuse (I don't recommend this one!), but will inevitably end up feeling "abused:" hurt, denied, and devalued. I can stay in the situation and confront the person and perhaps get them to back off around me or go elsewhere. I can choose to leave the situation if the danger is too high or if it easier. Honestly, I don't really like any of these approaches.
I honestly don't believe abusers can be "educated" or "helped" out of abuse--mostly because they don't see the objects of their abuse as full human beings, capable of a worthwhile opinion or reaction. I have to say that I don't think most abuse is about wanting to make the
object feel something bad (pain, shame, etc.), but about the
subject wanting to feel something good (power, superiority, etc.). The abuser does it because it fulfills a need that is stronger than the desire for a normal two-way relationship. Abusers prey on the weaknesses of their victims because it gives them something to fill the cracks in their own self-images. I turn you into sand, and use the mortar to patch myself. Therefore, I have to say I think the whole idea of staying in an abusive relationship because you think you can change the individual is...sadly mistaken.
Confronting actually seems like the best approach out of the three to me. It is probably the hardest and requires a lot of confidence. Ideally, confrontation would get that person's attention and they would see what they are doing and move to stop it on their own. In reality, even an hour long confrontation is not likely to overpower a lifetime of justification and repeated behavior. So the person is likely to avoid abusing the person who confronted and will simply transfer the abuse to another, easier target. Sometimes this means the abuser leaves the situation and carries on in a new setting where the truth is not recognized yet.
Confrontation is also hard because, if the abuser has been successful, the abused is extremely doubtful of the validity of his or her perceptions. Exercising any sort of positive option requires that the abused regain enough accurate perception to recognize that the treatment is not "normal" or "justified."
The third option is to leave the situation. Sometimes this is feasible, sometimes not. I hate that this feels like running away to me. However, if you are in a situation with uneven power or where the abuse has worn you down to where you don't have the resources to stay any longer, then leaving is the best option. Get out of the situation so you can heal and recover yourself from the damage done.
The most important thing is to take care of yourself first. Once that safety and healing is obtained, then what? Do we say, I'm glad I made it out and everyone else in on their own with this person. Certainly to a degree that's true, we can't make choices for them any more than we could for the person committing the abuse. Do we chase after the abuser and warn everyone about them? That sounds like harassment, not to mention still being strongly connected to the abuser.
Disengaging is not weakness. It all depends, I think, on whether you see something attractive enough in the "core" of your abuser to make you want to stay, and whether you think that elements will ever be accessible enough to tip the balance of the abuser's behavior toward healthy--or, at the least, leaving
you alone. Personally, I think all you can do is disengage. The real choice lies in determining
how muchdistance to put between yourself and your abuser. States? Continents? The width of a bedframe? It all depends on what you think the response will be when you finally say, "I value myself too highly to allow you to treat me this way. I want you in my life only if you will see me as I am and treat me with respect." Sometimes I think most abusers are incapable of really grasping that last part--that
they have a choice, too. Abusers are so often desperately afraid of abandonment and feel more or less driven to do what they do. It's really a sad dynamic.
I've rambled on far too long, I know, but I just want to say one final thing on the issue of "warning" other people. It depends. You have a daughter, and I think you have a responsibility to try to get your daughter to understand what you've learned about her mother. That's so very hard to do without seeming mean or bitter. And don't ask me how it's done; I have no idea. I think just being there to comfort her when the inevitable hurt happens is a big part of it. I don't know if your wife has transferred any of her abuse to your daughter, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if she did.
But if you have no duty to look out for another person, I would say that in general you can't warn somebody about somebody else. People see what they want to see--or are capable of seeing.
Very interesting discussion, Longtire. Sorry for the length of this reply; I just feel pretty strongly about some of these issues and have thought about them at length.