jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (5 posts)

When does a slap become abuse?

  1. profile image50
    gentle thoughtsposted 5 years ago

    I know of a man who was married to a woman for 18 years.  The wife was often emotionally abusive-"Is this the day that you die and make me a merry widow?"-to physically abusive-slaps, hitting him so hard that he lost his hearing for an hour and throwing glasses so hard at his head that the shards are still in the wall 20 years after the fact.  Men are supposed to just stand there and take it but at what point is a man allowed to restrain this woman by either grabbing her hands(now she'll claim that he hurt her) or slapping her to get her off him?(again-he hit me!)
    All women have to say in society today is that her man hit her and no one checks the background story.

    1. AshtonFirefly profile image80
      AshtonFireflyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      This is a difficult one. Unfortunately, there are many cases of women physically and emotionally abusing their husbands. Equally as unfortunately, these cases go overlooked or unnoticed because our society is biased towards the women because they are considered to be physically the weaker.
      In my opinion, abuse is abuse. Whether it comes from a man or woman, it should be treated equally as important. In the case of the man, I think that he should have a right to defend himself if attacked; and that he should notify the police immediately. In his case, I believe he made the best decision--to simply get out of the marriage. His intentions were honorable but to be honest, if someone is abusing you and shows no signs of changing, it is best to leave. Man or woman.

  2. kirstenblog profile image79
    kirstenblogposted 5 years ago

    I think for me the REAL question is, why stay with someone like that for 18 years?

    She can't hit or humiliate him if he chooses not to be there to take it. No need to fight, just walk away. Re-building a life is hard, yes, but wasting one is harder still.

    1. profile image50
      gentle thoughtsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The reason the husband stayed was because he believed in the sacrament of marriage-that you worked things out with God's help and trying to follow Jesus' examples of truly loving someone.  He did not want to have a failed marriage and when they married, the wife swore that she was a Christian woman, willing to follow all of the rules of a covenant marriage.
      The husband is now remarried to a true covenant wife and one who respects the husband.  The ex wife is in the world, going from man to man but not developing a lasting bond.

      1. kirstenblog profile image79
        kirstenblogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I am not religious, once upon a time, but not anymore. That said, back when I did believe in religion and God, I could not accept that God would ever want any of us to stay with someone who hurts us. How anyone can claim God is a god of love and then say that God would not want you to leave an abusive relationship is beyond me.
        The way I see it, by staying in an abusive relationship, the abuser is being enabled to continue abusing. It sends the message that 'it's OK to abuse'. I would think that leaving and having a life of celibacy would be better, not violating the sacrament of marriage, no cheating or infidelity there. 16 years is a long time and is still impossible for me to get my head around. At least now this woman is getting the chance to learn a different message, that abusing another is NOT OK. And at least the man is also finally getting the chance to move on with his life, but I do wonder if there was more then religion motivating him to stay as long as he did (and hope for his sake, he discovers it so he can work on it). Like I say, celibacy would have been an option during those long years.

        I have actually found domestic abuse support charities and such for male abuse survivors before, they are in MUCH smaller numbers then for female abuse survivors but they do exist. I think the bigger problem is not so much that a woman will be believed if she says he did such and such, but rather the problem of gender roles. A man still has to be macho, manly, in control, top dog, however you want to put it. Men are not 'supposed' to be vulnerable or weak or any of the other things that he will be called if it becomes public knowledge that he is or was being abused. The shame seems like a bigger lock on this prison of abuse then false accusations by the woman (but that is just how I see it as I do think that people don't always believe the woman, least not here in the UK where most rape cases never see a court room and usually are NOT believed, statistically speaking).