A Justice Site
Mirror Sites:
CSUDH - Habermas - UWP - Archives
Practice Module on This File
California State University, Dominguez Hills
University of Wisconsin, Parkside
Soka University Japan - Transcend Art and Peace
Created: November 9, 2002
Latest Update: November 9, 2002
jeannecurran@habermas.org
takata@uwp.edu
Coping with Acknowledgment:Site Copyright: Jeanne Curran and Susan R. Takata and Individual Authors, November 2002.
"Fair use" encouraged.
Now I'm going to quit apologizing for taking so long to get these comments up on the Internet. There's hardly a simple one amongst them. No, I'm not fussing about that. I'm thrilled. You're thinking. Deeply. And you're bringing social theory into your analysis of the problem. That means I can't just dash off a nice Dear Abby answer. You're really asking for a Dear Habermas answer. Well, Dear Habermas, and dear Goffman, and dear Cohen, and dear Maria Pia Lara and . . . .First of all, let me disclaim any "expert" knowledge that consists of my "knowing" what you should do, how you should live, how to change your mother, spouse, the courts, the school, and so on. Just as I remind you so often in class, I don't have "answers." What I do have is knowledge of social theory (some of it), philosophy (some of it), learning theory (lots of it), and life experiences (67 years of 'em). That's the same "expertise" I'm trying to transfer to you through our classes. Well, not the 67 years part. I'm afraid you'll have to go ahead and live that on your own.
On Wednesday, November 6, 2002, Tammy Starnes wrote:
Hi Jeanne,It's me, Tammy Starnes. I wanted to talk to you about "denial". To be exact, I wanted to talk to you about real "states of denial" of a close friend .She was in an abusive relationship for 10 years. The abuse was both verbal and physical. He would curse at her, call her out, make derogatory comments about her appearance, push her, pull her hair, hit her, and force sex on her. She put up with this for 10 years. When he was nice, he was really nice. When he was mean, he was really mean. I think she was "in denial" because she believed that this man who would hurt her so much, also loved her.
Jeanne, you said that denial is when something is true and not true all at one time. My friend said that this man that would bring her so much sorrow also brought her joy. She was in denial. They have been separated for 5 years now. But for some reason she still loves him. But she also says she hates him. We talk about it. She admits she's in a state of denial, but how should she deal with it?
On Saturday, November 9, 2002, jeanne responded:
Dear Tammy. This is a tough one. I love him, but he abuses me. This one's been with us for as long as we have had stories. And there certainly are no "answers." But there are several good theoretical approaches, many of which we considered this semester.First: illocutionary discourse. Some people will tell you that once he hits, it's never over. It will only get worse. But when we say this without first having some sense of who and what he is, his narrative, we risk very inaccurate prediction. Why is this so? Well, domestic abuse is a big, big problem at every class and ethnic level of society. Organizations who deal with abused women see lots and lots of women, and in most cases their rule of thumb, that it will only get worse, works.
I guess that means that if there is no psychiatric or psychological help available, the rule of thumb may have to serve for your friend. Without solid counseling help on how to break the cycle, without understanding where the cycle came from, how it got there, and how to reasonably avoid escalation, the best rule is to get out before you get hurt. I'm sorry for your friend, because I know that with help and understanding perhaps the roots of the problem could be reached and the marriage could work. But the prognosis is not good when physical abuse has already started, as you indicated it had with your friend.
One of the dilemmas I continually encounter is that women abused by their husbands frequently accept the breakup without anyone ever really trying to help the male. Males in this society have terrible problems with aggression. It's OK when little boys hit little boys. Our sports are physical and often violent. Macho is in. All this means that the male is existing in a culture that encourages at least the early stages of aggression and domination. I know, I know, we send offenders to anger management classes. But by the time the male has been sent to one of these he has already been labeled a problem. We need anger management classes in the third grade! And we need them for little girls, too.
Once there was the big, wide west in which we could work out our frustrations. These days if John Wayne punched the wall too hard, his fist might go right through to his neighbor's apartment. It used to be "OK" to slug someone who insulted you or your girl friend. Now it's criminal assault. Gee, I can't even hit my husband over the head with the plate he well deserves. That's physical assault, too.
Let me summarize. If we follow the theoretical approach we have been using and engage in illocutionary discourse, we might discover that the whole control/aggression issue is as deep and complex as all the other major issues we're facing today. But who could we engage in such discourse with? Not with Centers for Abused Women. They're dealing with the worst offenders and are trying to protect those women in serious danger of criminal assault. The local elementary, middle, and high schools? You try entertaining illocutionary discourse on bullying and hitting when society is sure that domestic abuse is a hideous bugaboo. Remember you have to be willing to entertain all validity claims for the purpose of understanding in illocutionary discourse. The colleges? Think I should teach a course on understanding the domestic abuser? I don't think so.
This issue has a horribly dangerous side in which women and children die as a result of the abuse. Until we manage to deal with those egregious scenes, there's not a welcoming climate for illocutionary discussions. Of course, that's also true about Christian/Islamic relations, isn't it? Few of our current social problems are affect-free. Look at Leslie Keeney's concern over disapproval of how the US has acted with foreign allies. September 11 did not bring out the best in US illocutionary tendencies. Until we reconstruct ourselves as paragons of virtue and good guy leaders of the world, we're not too open to trying to understand the Other, especially the Other who blames us.
But where does that leave your friend and her ex- or almost-ex husband? I don't think the counseling help they need will be readily available. I'm genuinely sorry about that. But I would suggest that she check out the possibilities. Maybe a minister, a priest, a rabbi, an imam? Maybe a well-loved uncle or brother or cousin, who might be able to reach him, and draw out the narrative that might help bring some understanding.
Now, remember that Maria Pia Lara speaks of this stage as bringing both parties to the discussion closer to being able to negotiate in good faith alternative solutions to the problem. May be that your friend will have to let other males approach him alone. Perhaps later, in a reasonably public place, where there are others who are party to the transaction present, and where they assume responsibility for not allowing the situation to degenerate into something dangerous. I do see the injustice in the unexplored assumption that the male is wholly at fault, but I do not for one moment underestimate the real danger to the woman in these encounters.
This is another of those cases in which I suspect the best hope we have is of families bonding together and informing the abuser that abuse will NOT be tolerated. Often the abuser is unwilling or unable to forego the whole family, and so he can be forced into therapy and or counseling and or religious participation, whatever works for them.
I personally prefer the family restorative justice circle to official agencies and institutions. That is, the meeting of all the family members where the offender is given to understand that the family disapproves of the violence and of the screaming, shouting, blaming, etc. that harms family members. I prefer this to legal enforcement because it is healing to all the family members. But let's face it. Sometimes you need a restraining order. These are serious situations. Weigh the consequences with others who are less likely to be emotionally distraught. And don't take unnecessary chances when you lack a large enough and close enough family to attempt a restorative justice circle, though a family of close friends should certainly be acceptable. Also, contact some restorative justice people to give you help beforehand. Grant the gravity of the situation all the respect it deserves.
And for me, since I was abused as a child, I would rely on formal institutional controls where children are at risk. Someday, hopefully, we will have restorative justice procedures in place. But for now, we generally do not. Our children deserve our protection.
That still doesn't't answer Tammy's friends question about how do I handle the fact that I still love him? With tenderness and gratitude for having known that love. Some never do, you know. Your friend has already left this man she loves. That's the hardest part. She has forced him to listen to her narrative - to acknowledge the harm he has done to her. That she still loves him says much about her, and about her ability to maintain a long-term caring relationship. It's her love that's alive and healthy. He's the one who needs to make adjustments. She should cherish her own love and that ability to love. Just please, admonish her not to go off ever to meet with him in an out-of-the-way place where no one is around for her. Remember that almost all domestic abuse takes place in the obscurity of the private sphere. You love him; he's a nice guy; tell him you love him, and you hope he can overcome his problems - but do it with friends there - so that you're safe.
Maybe I'm wrong, but my own gut-level reaction to meeting him alone would be to want a lot more than an anger management course between him and me. I'd want the illocutionary narrative of acknowledgment. I'd want to know where the anger came from, and that he recognized it, and that he could talk about it. As long as he can't, I'd be scared it might trigger again.
Humans are complex. No matter how much we know about someone, we still can be surprised by some of the old triggers. The apperceptive mass, remember? Something from long ago floats up and all of a sudden we're dealing with what seems like a whole different person. Respect that. Don't assume that you "know" him or her or what they'll do in extreme circumstances. They may not know themselves.
SO: be proud of a love that lasts, especially one that weathers storms such as your friend has gone through. And know that physical and emotional abuse are not only not legally and ethically acceptable, they aren't healthy for any of us, including the children who see it. Then remember that these are not the best of times for helping men discover their caring natures; we're more into punishing them than helping them just now. And so, be as kind as you can, and hope that he can someday work out his problems. Just remember to test that theory with specific details that let you know that he has faced and dealt with whatever led to all this. And I'd sort of like an expert opinion to go along with that, especially in any children will still be around.