Let me start today by expressing appreciation for the comments regarding last weekend's diary (3/14), and express my apologies for not responding to them in more substantial fashion sooner. One of the biggest, most important challenges I face every day, is to challenge my own perception. I find that much easier (though still difficult) to do successfully when I listen to input from others. I also find it more likely that I will listen if I invite comment. So thank you.
So what have I heard? First, that thus far my contribution has been pretty lightweight. While I am fond of the English language, I'm aware that fondness carries a concomitant risk of babbling. In this case, however, since I was trying to lay some foundation I hope that you will bear with me.
Meanwhile, since I doubt that I would want to read my work, I’ll try to work on my syntax and other stylistic issues to improve its readability, just don’t expect miracles.
As for my definition of abuse, I find it useful because it reduces my tendency to make a snap judgment about whether I should or shouldn’t apply the label of "abuse" to a specific behavior. Even though I may still label it as abuse, or even harmful abuse, slowing the process down and considering how and why it is abuse will enable me to better address the roots, the intentions (particularly in light of the likely consequences) and the actual, as differentiated from the intended, consequences of the behavior in question, as well as the behavior itself. That having been said, I find the greatest benefit for myself is that its application reveals much abuse that otherwise goes unrecognized.
An example of the latter is the couple whose relationship is in trouble, and is seeking a resolution of the difficulties. Often one will say something to the effect of, “I would do anything for my partner.” I find that the true test of the motivation behind that affirmation is the question, “Would you let your partner go, if that is what they truly want?” Anything less than a commitment to freedom would be abuse.
This discussion of the definition of abuse brings up a related issue which will appear again later. Part of the richness of our language is the broad symbolic value of the individual words we use. This makes it a gold mine for poets, but often triggers unfortunate confusion or misconnection in the course of normal communication. One case that will arise later in this discussion is the word “love,” where the various definitions can not only trigger misunderstanding, but sometimes abet the emergence of profound "righteous" rancor, often to the bewilderment of its target. The word abuse is another one which can trigger similar confusion, thus the definition.
I now believe, however, that it was not terribly useful to start this process by plunging right in without explaining what I'm trying to do here. I could have better addressed both how and why I want to engage in this discussion, and the scope of my intent as well as why I want to seek input from others on these subjects, instead of assuming people would find the subject both appropriate and interesting.
While behaviors like intimate violence can be tremendously and broadly damaging, the tendency for most of us is to try to respond to it in ways which will, we hope, either insulate us from it and/or deter it. Unfortunately, this often means that, when confronted by this behavior itself, as with many other behaviors, we tend to focus more on the behavior itself, and sometimes its consequences, than on its roots. There are at least two significant problems with that approach.
First, if we disapprove of intimate violence, and want to do more than just insulate ourselves from it, or attempt to deter it, (both of which are, in my opinion, futile endeavors in any but the most temporary and/or superficial sense), we need to formulate an effective response to it. It seems unlikely to me that we will be effective in that until we understand the roots and dynamics of the behavior, both in general and in the instant manifestation.
Second, if we disapprove of intimate violence enough to want to avoid employing it ourselves, we need to be familiar enough with the roots and dynamics of the behavior to recognize its precursors in ourselves as early as possible, in order to be able to intervene effectively enough to choose another response.
Regrettably, the vast majority of us too often do not name our behaviors for what they are, let alone become consciously aware of how and why we employ them. This goes particularly for behaviors which are commonly labeled as inappropriate and/or harmful, such as intimate violence.
I’ve been working with these issues for many years and have become well acquainted with countless victims and aggressors as well as having had to confront its all too frequent presence in my own behavior. I have yet to meet an aggressor (including, I think, myself) who deliberately set out to hurt someone just for the sake of hurting them. Even antisocial personalities don’t do that. Do people get hurt for no apparent reason, at least from the viewpoint of the “objective” observer? Of course they do, but the aggressor is always able to justify that behavior by virtue of a perceived need that is considered to adequately warrant the behavior, with justice being high on the list of preferred justifications.
Interestingly enough, even victims will often blame themselves for their injury, thus, sometimes indirectly abetting the justifications employed by their aggressor. We will get into why that happens a bit later.
Part of the problem for us individually is that our choices of behaviors are often so deeply rooted in our history, our belief systems, and our values, and therefore are so much a part of who we are, that we never even entertain the possibility that they might not be entirely rational, except in our own private reality (thus the often heard plaint “Of course I retaliated Dave, what did you expect me to do?”).
Even though we are usually aware that some of life to which we have been exposed is at variance with the experiences of others, and even though our thoughts, feelings, beliefs and opinions are often recognized by us to be at radical variance from others, somehow it often is not apparent to us that our perceptions and/or responses might not be quite in line with nature or truth themselves. In fact, it is astounding how often we want others to modify their views and/or behavior so that they better integrate with, or better respond to, our views and needs. We are very adept at externalizing blame. After all, if what I object to is someone else's fault I don't have to fashion an effective response.
I believe that intimate violence, in at least some, or perhaps all, of a number of its myriad variations, is a behavior to which none of us is immune, either as victim or aggressor. Therefore, if we disapprove of it, we would be well advised to understand how and why it manifests itself in our lives, both to reduce its appearance in our repertoire, and to better equip us to help others we care about reduce it in their lives (including by being less judgmental of them).
Perhaps even more important than our disapproval, however is the fact that any form of violence is not only ineffective except perhaps in the short term, and in a very limited sense, but is also very counterproductive. Progress in human relations has almost always been achieved in spite of, not because of any violence employed. If I am right about this, then why would we ever truly want to employ violence other than because it is handy and often gives us the momentary illusion of competence.
Of course, if we're on the losing end, and thus lose even a perceived benefit from our violent behavior we can always simply adopt the mantle of victim. It was fascinating to me when I suddenly realized that I had never met someone who had been abusive of their partner, often brutally so, who did not sincerely believe that they were the victim of their partner, not the other way around. This, ironically, becomes a valuable tool in helping them achieve some insight into the true nature of the behavior they have chosen in response to their perceived victimization.
Paradoxically, I find that intimate violence is both a straightforward and complex phenomenon, so it is my intention over the course of a number of contributions to detail its many components and related issues. In the process, I hope, before we are done, that thosey components will fit together is such a fashion as to present a relatively straightforward (though for some, perhaps painful) approach to limiting its experience and/or use in our lives.
In order to accomplish that objective we must visit a number of related issues (to many of which I alluded in the title and tags of this exercise).
Certainly trauma, and the conceptualization of trauma that I have found useful in understanding it better, the Trauma Outcome Process Model, will be a major focus of this discussion. The many forms of intimate violence, including the well known ones, sexual violence, violence against one’s partner, child abuse, etc., but also some of the lesser known ones, such as passive aggressive behaviors, borderline personalities, emotional neglect, etc., and then too the self-inflicted aggression, such as cutting, substance abuse, anorexia and bulimia, etc. will all provide grist for the mill.
Issues such as anger and depression, healthy vs unhealthy relationships, child development, the role of our world view, and perception in general, denial and other defense mechanisms, how we make decisions, etc. will all play a part in helping us to both see, assemble, decipher, and employ the various pieces of the larger mosaic.
My estimate is that I will surely have completed this by 2100 or whenever Al Franken gets seated, whichever is later. I initially had hoped to make this a daily contribution as per my new found blog hero Winerev, but I found out this week that I’m not worthy to even shine his shoes, so I’ll stick to once a week, at most.
If all of this scares you away (assuming you weren’t scared away by the first few words, in which case you probably aren’t reading this anyway), whether because its too intense, too obscure, or just too damn boring, then so be it, but if you want to join and participate in what I expect to be an exciting journey of discovery (even if only for myself), as much as it is an assemblage of the understandings I’ve acquired to date for whatever they're worth, then welcome, and see you next time. Meanwhile, as always, comments are ever welcome, even if (or perhaps, dare I say it, especially if?) they ruffle my feathers a bit (my therapist keeps telling me to go where the pain is, and I keep listening to her, damn it!).
Two items that warrant disclosure:
First, I discovered that I had almost certainly misquoted Elizabeth George in my signature line. My apologies to her. I hope this new version is correct, because I have appreciated this, its role in triggering my many associated insights, and the contributions of them both to my knowledge base ever since I encountered it. I will see if I can track down the original so that I can be sure to do her the justice she deserves.
Second, I should mention that all of my work and thinking is based exclusively on my personal and clinical experience. I make no claim that any of it is research based. Therefore any claims and conclusions should be approached with appropriate caution.
Dave
"Those who are the primary builders of ramparts rarely, if ever, feel constrained by their presence." Elizabeth George