Coping strategies

Tactic #10 — Denial, Minimising, Blaming

by Clare Murphy PhD on February 28 2013

This is the tenth of 16 blogs discussing the patterns of tactics from my power and control wheel — Denial, Minimising, Blaming.

We are all responsible for the choices we make in life. We’re personally responsible for our own thoughts, beliefs, assumptions and interpretations of situations. Our thoughts lead to our feelings and in turn our thoughts and feelings influence our behaviours. When we’re in a “healthy” relationship and one of us causes harm to the other, the one who causes harm will acknowledge and own what they did — take responsibility for it — and take steps to never do that again, to change their behaviours with the aim of developing greater levels of love, care, empathy and respect for the other person. They do what it takes to try to hear, understand and empathise with the other, and in turn express themselves in helpful ways to help the other person understand them. Self-Responsibility requires giving up blaming others.

However, in a relationship where one person is motivated to be right and get their way at all costs, and to maintain power and control over the other, they relinquish personal responsibility for their harmful words and actions — they deny they’ve done wrong, they minimise their abusive and controlling behaviours — they blame the target of their abuse.

Men who use coercive control against their female partner deny their behaviours outright. Or he’ll admit to causing harm but minimise it saying the abuse was not that bad, or he’ll tell her their relationship is the best she can hope for. Men who use coercive control use rationality and reasoning, by for example reminding her of times he was right and she was wrong. When she gives him feedback about his behaviours he’ll divert attention away from himself and pick her personality apart. He’ll blame his abuse on his stress, drugs, alcohol, or anything or anyone outside of himself. He’ll blame her for his behaviours by twisting things around so that it appears she is responsible. And if she wants to escape the clutches of his incessant control tactics, he’ll use intimidation and threats by doing things like warning her that if she leaves, he’ll commit suicide and that she’ll be responsible.

Denying, minimising and blaming all lead to obstructing change. . . . . No matter what the victimised person says or does in an attempt to resolve the controlling person’s behaviours and attitudes, the controlling person prevents the development of a healthy relationship.

Here are some experiences that women have when living with a male partner who denies, minimises, and blames….

Denial

Denial entails acting as if he has not been abusive, not been controlling, not caused any harm. Therefore he believes there is nothing to be responsible and accountable for.

Elsie said her husband Leon “was a real control freak, but he never acknowledged it to himself. He would quite often say to people how nice he was. I don’t think he ever knew what he was ever like. I’d say nothing (laughter). He was so nasty if you crossed him, it just wasn’t worth it.”

It is common for some men to use counselling as an arena to continue denying their controlling behaviours and to try to get the counsellor to take his side.

For example, Elizabeth said her husband David “thought counselling was about telling me that I was wrong, so he came along to agree with the counsellor that I was wrong. Even in later years when I went to counselling over the whole sexual abuse thing and so on it was always about, ‘there was something wrong with me’. There was never any acknowledgement that anything he might be doing could be contributing to what was happening in our relationship.”

Minimising

Minimising entails acknowledging he may have done something harmful, but he refuses to take responsibility for the level of abusive behaviour and the level of harm caused — saying things like, “It wasn’t that bad, get over it.”

Karen said she “would feel guilty and self‑indulgent for arguing because he’d say, ‘What are you making all this fuss about? Settle down, calm down, live your life peacefully.’ So I started making these decisions to close myself down. You do begin to doubt how right you are if you’re just living this life in one continual power struggle and everything’s being constantly bitched over, everything. Everything (sigh of exhaustion). You just get exasperated and exhausted and you don’t know which battles to pick and which one’s important.”

Victoria said her partner Graham would minimise his behaviours mainly by saying, “things aren’t that bad”. She said that it wasn’t an overt, “this is what I think and you’ll damn well think that way, but if you don’t agree with what I’m saying then I’m going to make you doubt yourself, so I will manipulate you to believe the way I believe, but I won’t overtly tell you that you have to believe that way, but I’ll just make sure you feel so unsure about what you believe that you’ll take on what I believe anyway.”

As a response to Graham’s subtle ways of minimising his controlling behaviours and their effects, Victoria “started to believe that he was right and that maybe I really did misinterpret a lot of things, that I really wasn’t made for this marriage thing and that was my fault, that I was too pushy, that I wanted to change him and that was a wrong thing to do, and that I should accept him for who he was, and that I wasn’t a very nice person for doing that, and I must stop that immediately, and that that’s another bad aspect of my personality that must be fixed.”

When Victoria had an emotional response to something, Graham would say things to minimise what he’d done and to shut down the conversation and therefore obstruct change. He would tell her she was, “overreacting…. misinterpreting and … you just don’t understand… everything’s such a bloody big deal to you, just get over it… what are you on about, for God’s sake do we have to go through this again?”

Over time Victoria “learnt not to trust my own judgements. I always thought if I was upset about something, I was overreacting. There wasn’t a degree of upset before I decided that I was overreacting, any minute hint of being upset I was overreacting. Get over it and move on and accept that there is nothing you can do about it. So just put up and shut up. Get on with it.”

Because Susan’s husband Anthony would deny, minimise and blame, and therefore close all doors to the possibility of resolving issues and developing a healthy relationship, Susan said, “I was the only person who ever said sorry. He’d be late home from the pub and I’d say, ‘I’m sorry, but I really missed you, that’s why I’m really angry that you’re not here.’ Whereas he’d say, ‘It’s only the pub, what’s your problem?’ I suppose that’s when it becomes my fault and I fully believed it was my fault for being so impatient, for being so controlling over his space.”

Rationalisation

Similar to minimising, people who use power and control to get their way will use reasoning and rationalisation. They’ll rationalise by saying things like, “I only did it one time” yet in actual fact they use controlling tactics daily, weekly … in an ongoing way over a long period of time. They rationalise by saying that one behaviour they did a moment ago was a one-off – and therefore minimise the incessant ongoing pattern of control across time.

Teresa said “It’s very clever because there’s a logic to what they say. At the time there isn’t an argument against it, it makes sense, it’s not till you go away afterwards and think about it and think ‘no that’s not right’.”

The controlling partner will rationalise by reminding her of all the times she did something wrong and he did something right. He’ll also compare his behaviours with other men’s saying that his were nowhere near as bad and that she has it good with him. Such comparisons especially happen when the man never uses physical violence. There is so little mention of coercive control in the news media — which means the victim has very little back-up from society to support her interpretation of his behaviours.

Justification

When a controlling person justifies their behaviours, they usually turn the attention onto the victim — saying that they would not have behaved that way if she had done what he expected of her, such as keep the children quiet, have the dinner on the table on time, not challenge a decision he made.

As Donna said, “Everything in Frank’s world was…he was justifiably right in everything.”

Blaming

Blaming entails admitting that he has used abusive, controlling behaviours, admitting she may feel harmed, BUT he takes absolutely no ownership or responsibility for his actions and their effects.

It’s common for men who use controlling behaviours to say to their partner “it’s all your fault you’ve done this.”

Elsie said Leon would “blame my dog for things and it obviously wasn’t. I remember his dog one day (laughter) had shat on the floor in the lounge, he’d been shut in or something. I was really cross about it and he blamed me for that. If he blamed me I would just agree and say I was sorry. I suppose I did that quite a bit and accept it was my fault just for peace, but internally I didn’t believe it.”

Being continually blamed for someone else’s behaviour can be crazymaking. However when I question deeply, the women who come to me for counselling, they will have been like Elsie — that is, even though many women start to outwardly behave as if they are “letting the abuse happen” or as if “they are putting up with his controlling behaviours” . . . . In reality, somewhere deep inside them they will have quietly held onto their own voice as they learned it was not beneficial to continue to push for him to take personal-responsibility.

The effect of being constantly blamed for her husband David’s behaviours would lead Elizabeth to “bend over backwards. I would say to him well, ‘How do you want me to be?’ I wanted him to tell me what I needed to do to be okay, to be the wife he wanted, to be the person he wanted.”

Teresa said her partner Patrick “blamed me for lots of things. The drinking was the thing he blamed me for most. He was a secret drinker. When I would confront him about being drunk or about drinking, it would be my fault because I’d upset him by telling somebody something, or I’d spent too much time with my friends, so what was he supposed to do. That sort of thing felt like a consequence of breaking the rules.”

Teresa said Patrick “tried to make me drink and said that the reason he drank was my fault because I had such an odd puritanical attitude about alcohol which is totally untrue. That he had to hide it from me because it would upset me and that if I would sit down and have 12 beers a night with him, then it would be fine.”

As many women do in response to incessantly being blamed, they do as Teresa did: “I apologised, said I wouldn’t do it again.”

Teresa said Patrick “blamed me for his marriage breaking up as well. The blaming me for the drinking is a thing I recall most vividly, because in retrospect it’s so absolutely bizarre (laughter). How could it be my fault that he got pissed every night and hid the cans under the floor and in the ceiling and in the filing cabinet, it’s not my fault. But I really thought it was, that I had some serious problem with alcohol that I couldn’t see that this was normal behaviour (laughter).

Women usually seek to engage their partner in conversation seeking to understand why he abuses and controls them. During such conversations with Patrick, Teresa said he’d respond by saying, “Because I made him. Every behaviour of his I didn’t like, he did because I made him, because of my attitudes and my behaviour. He was doing it in response to me and a lot of the time he was doing it so he didn’t upset me, like hiding his drinking. It was my fault that I was upset about it because if I hadn’t snooped I would never have found out about it so what could I expect?”

Sally said throughout her seven year marriage to Dylan, she would never back down from trying to get him to take responsibility for his behaviours, but, “He never ever would work out any problems that we had. He always blamed me every single time, without fail. He would just never take responsibility for any of his actions. I left him because he just would not meet me half way.” She said he blamed her all the time and like many women who are consistently made to feel responsible for their partner’s behaviours, she ended up believing it was true, so she “always tried hard to fix myself and I think that is why, in the end, I went on Prozac because I was exhausted from trying to fix myself when I actually wasn’t the problem.”

Raewyn said it might only be little things, but that Brian would often “blame me (laugh). If something went missing he would blame me, whereas really it had been him who put the thing somewhere, whatever it is, a book, or some tool, or whatever.”

Donna said her husband “wouldn’t acknowledge that there was anything wrong. To this day Frank will tell you that our whole marriage break up was my fault.”

Victoria said Graham would blame her for “everything! His actions, problems in the marriage. Everything was my fault. Everything, absolutely everything. Our first real fight once we got married, we’d been married about 20 minutes, and we got to the reception and his family threw rice at us sitting in the back of the car and it went down his shirt — That was my fault. So he stormed off and wouldn’t talk to me, and my sister’s husband had to go and get him into the reception. And then we went into the room after we got married that night he wanted to watch a video. We didn’t have the video cord adaptor thing, so I rung down to reception and asked them about it and they’re like, ‘aren’t you the newly weds?’ and I’m like, ‘don’t even go there’. They said, ‘we didn’t think you’d need the adaptor so we lent it to another room’. So that was my fault somehow, I should have been aware of the adaptor problem.”

Karen said her husband Felix “had this new age philosophy that we all construct our own lives, our own existence and he would say, ‘if you have got this problem Karen, then this is entirely your fault and your decision, and you are the only one who can do anything about it, it’s got nothing to do with me. You own your situation, it is yours not mine.’ Which is fine to an extent, I’m ok with this. But I do believe that we need to take responsibility for the way that we behave with each other and how our actions impose on other people. He’s got this philosophy if you’re sitting down watching tele at night on the couch and a piece of fuselage falls off a plane falls through your ceiling and kills you, then you obviously created that, you asked for it, it’s your fault. Everything he did was my creation.”

In response to Felix avoiding taking responsibility for his controlling behaviours, and twisting the concept of personal-responsibility around as a way of blaming Karen for his abusive and controlling behaviours, Karen “argued with it. I hated it. I still hate it. But I resisted it, I argued about it every time, and I’d say, ‘well how come it’s that way that everything in your life is my fault?’”

Denial, minimising and blaming are destructive tactics of power and control

The perpetrator’s belief that he has to be right — at all costs — every time . . . . . leads to a downward spiral over months and years, as the victim of control becomes more and more debilitated.

Ironically, as the victim loses her confidence, self-esteem, and dignity, many men end up not liking the result! That is, not liking the person she has become. And because the perpetrator of coercive control denies, minimises and blames throughout the course of the relationship — he is oblivious to the fact he is the one who — by using one control tactic at a time, over years, chipped away at her — as if chipping away at a slab of marble slowly shaping her into a shadow of her former self.

When a man constantly denies, minimises, rationalises, justifies and blames — over time — and seldom, if ever, takes personal responsibility — and does not show he is holding himself to account by actually changing his behaviours — then these control tactics are the hallmark of a relationship that will never ever become the loving, caring, healthy relationship the woman is hoping for.

Watch out for blogs on the following control tactics:

One-Sided power games
Mind games
Inappropriate restrictions
Isolation
Over-protection & ‘caring’
Emotional unkindness & violation of trust
Degradation & Suppression of Potential
Separation Abuse
Using social institutions & social prejudices
Using the children
Economic abuse
Sexual abuse
Symbolic aggression
Domestic slavery
Physical violence

References:

Anderson, Kristin L., & Umberson, Debra. (2001). Gendering violence: Masculinity and power in men’s accounts of domestic violence. Gender & Society, 15, 358-380.
Cavanagh, Kate, Dobash, R. Emerson, Dobash, Russell P., & Lewis, Ruth. (2001). ‘Remedial work’: Men’s strategic responses to their violence against intimate female partners. Sociology, 35(3), 695-714.
Coleman, Karen H. (1980). Conjugal violence: What 33 men report. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 6, 207-213.
Eisikovits, Zvi C., & Buchbinder, Eli. (1997). Talking violent: A phenomenological study of metaphors battering men use. Violence Against Women, 3, 482-498.
Goodrum, Sarah, Umberson, Debra, & Anderson, Kristin L. (2001). The batterer’s view of the self and others in domestic violence. Sociological Inquiry, 71, 221-240.
Hearn, Jeff. (1998). The Violences of Men: How Men Talk About and How Agencies Respond to Men’s Violence to Women. London: Sage
Mullaney, Jamie L. (2007). Telling it like a man. Men and Masculinities, 10, 222-247.
Stamp, Glen H., & Sabourin, Teresa Chandler. (1995). Accounting for violence: An analysis of male spousal abuse narratives. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23, 288-302.
Wood, Julia T. (2004). Monsters and victims: Male felons’ accounts of intimate partner violence. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 555-576.

{ 0 comments }

Cognitive dissonance – how women justify staying with a controlling partner

by Clare Murphy PhD on June 15 2012

Cognitive dissonance is a theory developed by social psychologist, Leon Festinger, in the 1950s. The theory explains how people respond when their attitudes and beliefs do not match their behaviours. We humans are driven to have harmony between our attitudes and our behaviours and to avoid dissonance, that is, to avoid contradiction. Cognitive dissonance theory explains why women who stay with abusive male partners adapt their beliefs and behaviours. They do this so there is no contradiction between staying with him and their thoughts, attitudes and beliefs.

If a woman believes she has married a charming, caring man, but then he goes on to control, manipulate and abuse her, this can be extremely confusing. There are many many reasons why women continue to live with a psychologically controlling partner. However, when women go down this path they experience cognitive dissonance. In other words staying with an abusive partner causes her to have feelings of discomfort and disharmony because her thoughts and beliefs about his abusive behaviours don’t match her action of sticking with him.

So, the theory of cognitive dissonance explains that people find ways to reconcile the discrepancy between their thoughts and their actions. Cognitive dissonance theory explains the ways we all go about achieving such reconciliation. In this instance, women do the following:

Adopt beliefs and attitudes that are in harmony with the situation.
Change perceptions about his abusive behaviours.
Change her behaviours to match her beliefs and attitudes.

Here are some examples of ways the women I interviewed for my Masters research attempted to eliminate the discord they felt by continuing to live with their controlling partners.

1. Women changed their beliefs and attitudes so these were in harmony. They did this by altering or trivialising the importance or value of their belief that their partner was the wonderful man they used to know e.g.

No marriage is perfect

Adriana said, “There are always trade offs. I wouldn’t have stayed if there weren’t the good bits”, Pauline said, “No marriage is smooth all the way”, and Susan said, “I always gave him the benefit of the doubt”.

Disbelief he would abuse her intentionally

Victoria said, “I was never sure if he was doing it intentionally because I think that would be a really horrible thing to have to admit that he was doing that intentionally. So we excused him a lot in my family saying he’d had a really rough upbringing and he didn’t really know any better”. Likewise, Teresa said, “I trusted him not to hurt me and he kept hurting me. But because I loved him and trusted him not to, I couldn’t believe that he was doing it, so I must be misinterpreting it. Teresa said, “I didn’t know I was abused, I would have said no, no, no he really loves me”.

Belief there was still potential for the relationship to work

Karen’s partner worked as a caregiver. She said, “There really was potential. I could see the love and support and patience that he offered his clients. He’d bring them around home and I saw the love and the patience he had”.

Waiting for the old him to come back

Heather said, “I always thought back to the person I first met, I thought where’s that person gone, he’s got to be there somewhere, he can’t just disappear altogether. I just wanted him to come back. I thought he might look and say, ‘Gosh this is a lovely little boy, I love his mother and how can I go about this to get it to work out for a family situation?’ which is what he claimed he wanted the most.”

Pauline thought, “That it would get better. It would actually go back, right back, rewind to the time …. I was waiting for my old husband to come back, that whatever was bugging him or was going wrong, that would go away and we would go back to how it used to be”.

2. The women changed their perceptions about his behaviours. They achieved this by: emphasising beliefs that supported their decision to stay; by finding justifications for his behaviours; by focusing on his positive qualities and ignoring his abusive ones; and, by blaming themselves; e.g.

Finding justifications for his behaviours

Raewyn thought perhaps he behaved as he did because he had “troubles at work, a bit of conflict at work. And therefore he’d bring it out on me…. Or that he’s sick I think actually something physiologically and mentally wrong with him”. Teresa said, “At the time I thought he behaved the way he did because he loved me so much and maybe that that’s what people did when they loved each other that much. Then later in the relationship I thought he behaved the way he did because he was an alcoholic. Now I think he behaved the way he did partly because he was an alcoholic but I think the reason he was an alcoholic also is some of the reason he behaves the way he did, and I think he’s sick, almost psychopathic really, in terms of not having a conscience, of being charming and manipulative, being able to turn on the tears and appear remorseful, and he’s not”.

Holding onto the positives

Susan said, “I put up with it for so long coz he’d be really nice for a week after he’d done that and it’s like ‘far out this is cool’. He’d do things for me. He’d cook the tea, he’d help out and then he’d go out and do that sort of thing again….. Every time he upset me, he’d then be nice to me. And I always thought something good always comes when something bad has happened”.

Believing it’s her problem and she’s to blame

Elizabeth said, “I just thought that was the way it was. There must be something wrong with me. Other women didn’t seem to be having the problems I was having. He kept telling me it was my problem and I just believed him”.

Heather said, “I found it quite hard especially when he blamed me for the relationship not working. I’d say the relationship’s only not working because of the way you are treating me and I don’t want to be with you. He’d say, ‘That’s your fault, if you were living here it wouldn’t be like that, if you were living with me I’d be the same person I was when we first went out, you’re making me be like this.’ I’d start to believe him and thought maybe I should move there and things would be different if I was living with him, maybe I’m being too hard on him.”

3. The women adopted behaviours to match their beliefs and attitudes that the marriage had to work at all costs, e.g.

Belief she has to make the relationship work

Teresa thought, “That I would be able to make a success of it. That I would be able to change him into being a normal person (laugh) and that we would be able to have this stable, happy relationship…. I perceived it as a failure on my part to have a good relationship with a good person, so I didn’t really want to talk about it to friends or family because I felt that they would see me as a failure and that I’d buggered it up. And I guess also that they would want me to do something that I wasn’t ready to do, like you have to leave. Whereas my feeling was that if you’re in a relationship, then you have to do everything you can to make it work and you can’t just get up and walk out because you’ve made a commitment”.

Belief it’s the woman’s job to make the relationship work

Victoria said, “I didn’t want to lose face. I wanted to be married, because without my marriage, who was I? I was nothing again and I was worse than nothing because I was a failed wife and that was worse than being a spinster, to have been a failed wife. It was just dreadful to admit to my family that my husband was treating me like he was because by the end of it I truly believed that I was worthless, there was just no point and to leave the marriage would have been to confirm that I was of no worth, I wasn’t even worth keeping as an abused wife. God I’m pleased I’m older, got over that!”

Marriage is a commitment that must be worked at in order to overcome any problems

Elizabeth said, “I think I stayed because I thought it was wrong to leave”. Likewise, because Elsie had “a very religious upbringing. I had the belief that marriage is forever and if you make the commitment you have to stick it out”. Teresa also, “saw it as a long term commitment, not as a convenience thing…. I certainly believe that the couple unit was the most important unit and that all steps should be taken to preserve it and protect it and nurture it”. And Victoria, “believed we were going to be together forever, that’s what marriage for me was. I never believed divorce was the right answer. I thought it was an easy way out and that if you worked hard enough at it, if both of you decided to marry in the first place, then there must be something that you had together, so what you should be doing is try to find out what had changed, what had you lost that you needed to work on getting back together. Divorce was a big sign of failure. I didn’t want to confirm the suspicions that my family held, so I was determined to make it work”.

Belief he needs her help

Teresa said that, “for a long time I thought it was my fault and then once I discovered the drinking pattern, I thought that was my fault as well and that I was responsible for it because that was the way he would fling it back at me, and that because I was in a relationship with him it was my duty to help him. It would be wrong to walk away and leave him, that he needed help and that I should be able to help him”.

Children need a family that stays together

Pauline said, “The whole religion expectation, I felt really guilty for my children. I thought, ‘what am I going to do to them?’ I was the big bad person because I was going to initiate a separation I was going to initiate a split of this family. I felt guilty because of what I was going to do to my children, never mind the fact what their father was doing to us all, all those years. But all of a sudden that wasn’t a part of it, it was I’m doing this I’m the one to be guilty”.

Similarly, Teresa wanted to ensure her stepson had stability. She said, “that it was really important to create a nice family home for him”.

Belief that children need a father

Susan said she stayed, “Because I’ve got this thing that children have the right to be with their father”.

Belief that being married has higher status than being single

Susan said, “You’re taught back then marriages stay together and you try and hold it together. I can remember thinking I didn’t want to be a solo mother”.

Believing she has to make it look like she tried hard

No matter what abuse the women experienced, many such as Elsie believed that, “After a while I’d always hoped that I would leave one day. I started thinking if I put up with it for a year or two maybe I can leave, it won’t look so bad, I would have tried hard”.

Women draw from social messages about how to be a woman

The attitudes women adopt, in order to reconcile staying in relationship with their dysfunctional partner, do not come out of thin air, women draw from dominant social messages about how to behave – as a woman – in an intimate relationship. Unfortunately, these dominant social messages do not take into account how to recognise and protect themselves from mind-games, manipulative brainwashing, and crazymaking tactics of psychological power and control.

Therefore, women do what comes naturally – that is, do what it takes to find ways to explain the contradiction between committing to a relationship then staying in it after discovering their partner was not the man they expected him to be.

When women make these adaptions to their thoughts and behaviours they silence or bury beliefs they once held dear. However, most women continue to hold onto an inner spirit and conviction, so that no matter how many months or years later, if or when they reach the limit of their tolerance, they will be able to excavate remnants of themselves again – despite this often being a long painstaking process.

{ 2 comments }

Tactic #4 — Isolation

by Clare Murphy PhD on February 9 2012

This is the fourth of 16 blogs discussing the patterns of tactics from my power and control wheel – Isolation.

Isolation is a powerful tactic used by controlling partners

Isolation is a pivotal tactic that controlling partners use in order to weaken their victims, prevent them from hearing others’ perspectives, and to bring them into line with his own beliefs and requirements. Often possessiveness and jealousy play a part in some men’s motivation to isolate women from social contact with friends and family. Some tactics aimed at isolating the victim include telling her that she cares more for her friends, family and pets than for him, telling her he’s the only one who understands her and loves her, controlling incoming information including what she reads, calling her names if she spends time with friends and family, purposefully moving towns or countries, and there are a whole lot more tactics that women describe below in interviews from my Masters research.

Isolation is a debilitating consequence of abuse and control

Anyone who lives with an ongoing experience of being abused by a family or household member can become isolated as a result. For instance, the victim may withdraw from friends and family to save face or because they feel misunderstood, judged, stigmatised, or not supported. Particular tactics aimed at isolating the victim can lead women to become extremely dependent on their controlling partner.

He controls the money to prevent her use of the car

Elsie said her husband had the money for the petrol, “so I could only go and see my parents if he gave me petrol money. So I’d only go sometimes. I still saw them. As Leon’s control over me got higher and stronger over me he would let me go more often. Near the end of our marriage, friends would come and he would open the door this much (indicates two inches) and say I wasn’t home. That way I never ended up with anybody to counteract what he said. It did start to wear me down.”

He turns off electricity to prevent her exiting through the electronic gate

A couple of friends of Heather’s said, “’I don’t know how you live here with these gates around you all the time. It’s a fully fenced section with these gates.’ They said they’d feel a bit trapped, it’s like Fort Knox in there. I started to think, yeah, I’d gone to go a couple of times and Luke stopped me coz he switched the power off and I couldn’t get in to turn it back on. There were just a few things like that that started to scare me. That’s when I started to panic and thought I’ve got to get out of here and have some time on my own to see what’s happening.”

He manufactures situations aimed at isolating her

Heather would tell Luke, for instance, that she “was going out with a friend on Saturday and he’d say, ‘Oh didn’t I tell you, I was planning on going away, ring and tell them you can’t, I’ve already planned it.’ Sometimes now I think he really hadn’t planned it, he’d just ring at the last minute, so any time I went to go to an outside activity, ‘Oh didn’t I tell you mum wants to come over’. There was always something stopping me getting contact with the outside world. He’d say, ‘Let’s go fishing, it’s too nice a day you can’t go shopping today, I’ll go and pack and we’ll go to the lake fishing.’ So I’d ring my friend and say, ‘Can we go shopping on a wet day, it’s such a nice day Luke is off to go fishing’. In the end I was realising that I was spending all my time with him. Then when he was doing that with the phone calls I started to get a bit scared. I was scared more than anything.

Says what she does makes him jealous so insists she not do it

Karen said her partner Felix “was a very jealous person, he was afraid that I’d be running around screwing everyone. I learned how to shut myself down. I stopped seeing my friends as much. Once the baby came there was utter isolation, poverty, and loss of trust.”

Attempts to isolate him and her as a couple from the rest of the world

Teresa said her partner “didn’t want the world encroaching or shining its bright light on anything in the relationship, that it had to be exclusive and separate from the rest of the world. I thought it was quite nice. It meant that you were really special (laughter). Somebody loved you that much.”

Heather’s partner attempted to isolate her from family and friends “mainly because my parents didn’t really like him that much and my friends didn’t like him that much he’d say, ‘Oh if just you and me went to live in Australia it would be amazing. We wouldn’t have your family and everyone against us. They’re all against us here. If we moved away it would be just us. We would be so much happier. We wouldn’t have the interference.’ I didn’t want to move away. I liked having my family. But I must admit there was one stage he’d say, ‘They’re just against us because we’re so happy’. I started to believe maybe my aunty and uncle aren’t very happy, and maybe my grandparents haven’t got anything else to do but think that their granddaughter should have something better, I’d start going through all that. But I couldn’t make that move to Australia.”

Demands loyalty to him, not to others

Elsie said she really adored her stepson, Jeremy, but if ever her husband “saw us get close he’d really get stuck into me, and to Jeremy too, coz that was like disloyalty to Leon. It would really hurt because I really did adore my stepson. He was just adorable. He wouldn’t let Jeremy ever come near me, it would be like total disloyalty.”

Tells her she is not allowed to see certain people

Sally said, “I was not allowed to keep in touch with my male friends. I made the assumption he was jealous but he’d never admit to it – he had no comprehension that my friendship with these men did not mean I loved him any less or that they’d get more attention in anyway whatsoever – it was so immature and pathetic of him and ignorant that he refused to even meet these people.”

Dismissive of invites to participate with her friends and family

Teresa said her partner Patrick “very strongly tried to prevent me from continuing and developing relationships with other people. I did what he wanted. Again it was quite subtle. It wasn’t, ‘I don’t want you to have any friends, I don’t want you to talk to your family’. It was – he’d refuse to come and visit my family for weekends or Christmas. The first Christmas I stayed, I didn’t want to stay, I’d much rather have gone to visit my family, but I felt sorry for him being left all alone, even though it was his choice to be left all alone. So I told my family I had to work because I didn’t want them to know that he was the kind of prick (laughter) who didn’t want to come and be with the family. Then with friends, he didn’t like it when they came round and he’d go and shut himself in the study and be quite dismissive to them. I was especially confused for a long time about the friends thing because my idea of living with someone was that you could have friends around for dinner and drinks and lunch, and that wasn’t the right thing to do. It took me a long time to figure it out.”

He puts limits on her visits with friends and family

Susan’s sister lived three quarters of an hour away. “But Anthony didn’t like me going over there and spending the day with her because I wouldn’t be home doing things. We were allowed to visit my cousin who was 15 minutes drive away. Anthony would go off and do a job. When he got home I thought he’d been working the whole time, but he hadn’t, he’d been visiting. I didn’t know this for a long long time, but I know he used to call into various people’s places whenever he was going past, but he used to put a time limit on my outings. I used to argue with him and he used to just look at me like I was an idiot and said, ‘well I’m not talking to you’. And he didn’t. He’d stop talking to me completely.” However Susan would still visit but would “only visit if I had to go and do something such as grocery shopping, because otherwise you have nothing if you don’t have friends.”

Teresa “narrowed the range to what was acceptable to her partner.” She used to go away for a weekend with girlfriends every four or five months “and drink lots of Lindauer and eat chocolate and cheese and crackers and I didn’t do that at all when I was with him because he was really threatened by it and didn’t like it.” She said that, “At work he didn’t like it if I spent too much time with other people, or did things when he didn’t know what I was doing. He had to know what I was doing all the time. He used to ring up every hour when I was at home and say, ‘What are you doing?’”

Tells her that her friends or family don’t care about her

Heather said Luke “was starting to set me against my parents, saying, ‘They’re just being mean, they don’t like me, they just want you to go back to your ex-husband and they’re not giving us a chance’.”

He attempts to divide and conquer by provoking jealousies and rivalries

Teresa said that her partner Patrick would tell her, “That people at work had said things about me, that they had said that I was this, that I was that, horrible things, which I believed and I don’t know whether they had said them or not. I think that he probably twisted a lot of things like that and I believed him, so that would change my judgement.” This led Teresa to reduce her interactions with other people, “and my job which I previously really enjoyed, I’d just go to work and do my job and go away as quickly as I could so I wasn’t around people. And I wouldn’t phone people or do things with people at all.”

He’s rude, critical or dismissive of her visitors

When Sally’s “best friend travelled from the North Island to visit her and Dylan in Nelson, Dylan, who was not usually very active when it came to renovating the house, suddenly appeared ‘busy’ renovating the house. He didn’t want to go out, and spent most of his time making my friends wrong or visiting with his alcohol drinking marijuana smoking buddy. My best friend told me I had become a clone of Dylan’s, which I had not realised. He did not want me to keep in touch with her after that and whenever I wanted to get in touch he disapproved.”

Sally also said that “one year, my sister did not tell Dylan she was coming up to surprise me for my birthday coz she knew he wouldn’t let her stay. And another time one of my friends rang to use our shower because her electricity had gone out and he said ‘no’.”

Teresa said Patrick “came down to my parent’s place once and that was the only time he would, and he was rude and I was really embarrassed by it.”

Elsie said, “If I had a friend that was my friend and not somebody that Leon had introduced me to, he’d run them down, he’d say they’re not like you, they’re a bitch and stuff like that, to get rid of them, put them off. It would work because it was so unpleasant to listen to all the time and he’d embarrass me if they ever visited, so I wouldn’t encourage people to come and see me. Friends would ask me to go out or something. I just kept saying, ‘Oh no, no.’ There was one young girl, she was such a nice girl, we really got on well, and she said when I was leaving work – we’d worked together – she said, ‘I’ll come round and see you, we’ll still see each other eh?’ And I said, ‘No we won’t.’ And she was really hurt I know, but I never explained why. I think she just thought I was a nasty (laughter) person.”

Karen said “Felix accepted my involvement with my family more than with my friends, but he was very critical, especially of my mum, which is understandable. And it used to drive me nuts that I couldn’t have my brother there coz I sort of brought up my little brother and I felt very closely bound to him. He would let me have him, but there would always be a bloody hassle, there would always be a row when my brother was there, always. I felt terrible about that because I wanted to give him support and love.”

Elizabeth “would go to groups or do personal growth type things and I’d meet people and I’d maybe have them over, and David would say to me things like, ‘Why are you making friends with her she’s separated, why don’t you make friends with married people?’ He would be quite cold to them when they came to the house. I would be quite reticent about having them back, or I wouldn’t go to things that he couldn’t come to. If I got invited to something on my own I wouldn’t go unless it was a couple invitation. So I only really did couple things.”

Friends and family decide to stay away because of his abusiveness

Elsie said “I was isolated in the sense that Leon would have a guise of being nice to my parents, but then he would be rude sometimes, enough for them not to like him and they wouldn’t want to come round and see me. He was unwelcoming and unfriendly to anybody who knew me, so people just started to stay away.”

Victoria’s “sister came to stay once, my sister and I aren’t particularly close, it was getting close to the end of the marriage and Graham did one of his ‘behaviours’ and it was the first time that my family had actually seen him in action. And it wasn’t nothing, it was like, ‘you think this is a problem, you should see him on a good day!’ My sister said, ‘I’ll never come and stay with you again because I couldn’t believe the way he acted.’ So it wasn’t about, ‘Oh my God let me support you and help you’. It was about, ‘I’m never coming back, I’m not going to associate with you guys because this is stuffed’. So through the dysfunctions we were having people pulled back, and I didn’t want people to see that. So it was best to pull away and not engage in too many behaviours with others. I didn’t want to admit that this was my lot. If they saw it I’d have to admit it to myself and I wasn’t ready to admit it to myself.”

He makes her feel bad for pursuing friends of her own choosing

Elizabeth said, “I used to try and do any socialising that I wanted to do during the day when David was at work, but in the hours that were acceptable to him. I didn’t do separate things in the evenings although I did join a quilting group and I remember getting a real sense of belonging because it was all women.”

He requires relationship issues be kept secret

Teresa said, “Whenever I’d talk to people on the phone Patrick would make it really clear with body language and non-verbal behaviours that he didn’t like it and he’d sulk afterwards. He’d say things like, ‘What happens between you and I is just between you and I and it’s nobody else’s business. I don’t think you should ever tell people what’s between you and I. It’s special, it’s just ours.’ I did still talk to my friends a little bit, but I really cut myself off from people to keep him happy.”

Elsie “made the mistake of saying something to mum one day. It was something really harmless about something in the house and Leon waited until we were out of earshot and then let loose. So no I never talked to anyone about it, and my parents to this day don’t know. They still don’t know what it was like. I’ve never talked to anyone.”

Pauline’s husband came from parents who thought very highly of themselves and had to keep up appearances. “So his parents believed that if anything went wrong, ‘God you should not tell people because if they think badly of you, you’d go down the ladder!’ Yeah so I had to come to terms with not telling anybody if bad things happened. When we were finally separated, my family just went into total shock because they thought it was an absolute perfect marriage and they were just stunned.”

However Pauline did share some traumatic experiences with her friend. “My friend went ballistic at him when she found out about the miscarriage and he was like, ‘Oops I feel a bit awful someone has found out I can get rather nasty and everyone thinks I’m Mr Wonderful’.”

Pauline “was so confused and I thought I was going quite crazy because he acted like nothing’s wrong. So I’d think well maybe it’s me, it’s all my thinking, my perception.” However she finally experienced validation for her perception when her friend, who lived miles away and had not visited for a long time, arrived for a visit and her husband was home on shift. Until that visit her friend had “thought my husband was an absolute angel, she went to school with him.” But at this visit her friend told Pauline, “All these months you talked to me on the phone about what he’s been like, I didn’t think you were lying, but I couldn’t see that’s how he would be, because that’s not him.” But she said, “Now I’m here today, I can see this is for real, it’s happening.”

She chooses to isolate herself to save face

Teresa said, “I didn’t really want to talk about it to friends or family because I felt that they would see me as a failure and that I’d buggered it up. And I guess also that they would want me to do something that I wasn’t ready to do, like you have to leave. Whereas my feeling was that if you’re in a relationship, then you have to do everything you can to make it work and you can’t just get up and walk out, because you’ve made a commitment.”

Victoria said she and Graham “were very quite secluded and isolated as a couple, so the opportunities to talk weren’t greatly there. I never spoke to Graham’s family about the relationship because they were in their own dysfunctional homes. My family wasn’t particularly close and I certainly wasn’t going to tell them that I was in trouble. Secrecy was more about my perception of saving face than it was about an overt ‘You mustn’t tell’.”

She becomes isolated due to fear of consequences

Raewyn said “I didn’t go and see my family as much because Brian really used to get pissed off with me travelling up there. He’d say, ‘Oh it costs so much money.’ That’s probably one thing I did restrict myself in because he was so anti it.”

Victoria said she and Graham “reduced social activities. The only ones we did were involving his family, what Graham wanted to do. And that’s also because I didn’t want anybody to see us function, or dysfunction is probably more appropriate, as a couple. So I’d go to his family because they were all dysfunctional anyway, and he’d have a tantrum if we didn’t go to his family. His tantrums had to be seen to be believed.”

Susan said, “I was scared that when I got home Anthony was going to get angry and not talk to me. He’s always sulked. If he didn’t like something I did he wouldn’t talk to me. But usually it was for a day. The two weeks he ignored me was far out, it was unbelievable. He still would sleep with me. We wouldn’t have sex, but would sleep in the same bed. I’d talk to him and he’d just turn his head and walk away.”

Karen said she would sometimes “stop and have a jug of beer with people after uni and I knew there would be hell to pay, I knew there would be a problem. I was fearful, dreading, just the dread. I couldn’t enjoy spontaneity. I couldn’t enjoy social things because of the fear and the guilt, so I would withdraw and just choose not to do it, it would be too much bother.”

Reference:

Murphy, Clare (2002) Women Coping with Psychological Abuse: Surviving in the Secret World of Male Partner Power and Control. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Waikato, New Zealand. Available here.

Watch out for blogs on the following control tactics:

One-Sided power games
Mind games
Inappropriate restrictions
Over-protection and ‘caring’
Emotional unkindness & violation of trust
Degradation & suppression of potential
Separation abuse
Using social institutions & social prejudices
Denial, minimising, blaming
Using the children
Economic abuse
Sexual abuse
Symbolic aggression
Domestic slavery
Physical violence

{ 10 comments }

No bruise no victim?

by Clare Murphy PhD on April 28 2011

Why women and society miss the cues of psychological abuse

What have I done wrong? Am I going crazy? Is this normal?

One of the most common problems for women experiencing psychological abuse, is that they do not realise what is occurring in the early stages and are often not able to put it in context of their normal lives. When psychological abuse begins it will often creep in over time; a subtle edge of voice tone, the odd ‘put down’, a criticism here and there, seemingly uncharacteristic selfish acts.

Little behaviours at odds with the norm. And so it grows. Conquest by stealth – psychological abuse knows no bounds. It can be a soft pattern of almost unwitting abuse or a planned campaign of immense cruelty.

Instead of being able to name their partner’s behaviours as ‘power and control’ or ‘abuse’, lots of women can only think of their partner’s actions as ‘puzzling’ in its early stages. Then ‘odd’, ‘weird’, and ‘bizarre’ as it escalates. As power and control is exerted, women become more and more confused, and self doubt causes women to blame themselves and desperately rummage through their own behaviours for clues how to please their partners and make the problem go away.

They may simply feel that what they are experiencing isn’t right, just or fair but will search for answers within themselves and their own psyches. What am I doing wrong that he is angry with me? What’s changed in our relationship that he belittles me? Why can’t I see my friends? Why can’t I use the car?

Karen, a woman I interviewed for my Masters research said, “I knew that I was angry, but I didn’t really understand what was happening”. Several women said as Teresa did: “I didn’t notice this until I looked back and realised. It was gradual and insidious and you just slid slowly down the slope”.

Psychological abuse is either hidden or is considered less important than physical violence. This could be because of the imminent life-threatening nature of physical violence and the visible bruises and broken bones that some women experience. The media sensationalises physical violence and it’s extremely rare to read of a critical analysis of the perpetrator’s use of non-physical control tactics.

When the man is not using physical violence the woman usually thinks like Teresa, that psychological abuse “was something I knew absolutely nothing about. I thought abuse was hitting”. Most men and women think that physical violence is the only legitimate reason to leave a relationship. Most women respond as Elsie did:

“If he’d hit me I would have left, it would have been a really justifiable reason to leave. I did not think psychological abuse was a legitimate reason to leave because you explain it away, you rationalise it and it’s not as accepted the way physical abuse is by society. You’re just supposed to lump that, you’re supposed to put up with it.”

All the women I interviewed believed that psychological abuse is trivialised, misunderstood, or dismissed by friends, family and society in general. The psychological abuser relies on this, so feeds off the confusion, doubt, disbelief and the trust of his partner. To deal with a lack of support from others, Victoria said she just told people that her experience with her partner “wasn’t particularly pleasant. I could justify it if he beat me. It would give me more credibility”.

Raewyn never sought help for 12 years of psychological abuse, but sought help immediately when her partner hit her – because physical violence is seen as a credible form of abuse.

Elizabeth said, “If I had been hit, we all know that being hit is not okay, so if I had been hit it would have called my attention to something being wrong sooner. There is more press about it”.

Violence not only means physical abuse and sexual abuse, it also means psychological abuse.

The New Zealand Domestic Violence Act states that psychological abuse includes, but is not limited to, intimidation, harassment, damage to property and threats of physical abuse, sexual abuse, or psychological abuse.

The Act also states that when a tactic appears “minor or trivial when viewed in isolation or appears unlikely to recur, the court must nevertheless consider whether the behaviour forms part of a pattern of behaviour”.

Psychological abuse may, or may not, be written into civil and criminal laws in the country where you live. Either way psychological abuse is a form of intimidation that is not readily understood and continues to avoid the spotlight. Victoria said, “We see ads all the time about women’s refuge and the women on the ads have black eyes, but what about the women who’ve just been worn down day in and day out, do they get to go to women’s refuge? What happens to them?”

Women are able to see that there’s “something wrong” because of the impact they’re experiencing. Heather said, “You think that every relationship has to have some problems, it can’t all be smooth”.

Some women find it difficult to distinguish between the constraints of motherhood and the constraints put upon them by their partner’s power and control tactics. For instance, Karen said: “It’s difficult to know whether the responsibilities of motherhood isolated me more than he did. I could fight against it while I was still me, but when I was me plus one and me plus two you are a lot more vulnerable and the opportunities are lessened.”

The lack of awareness about psychological abuse causes women to assume they are experiencing “normal” relationship problems. This makes women extremely vulnerable to developing mental or physical illnesses and to experiencing more and more abuse. This is because women often have no knowledge of how the pattern of power and control forms over time.

To address this knowledge gap, I’m going to post several blogs to elaborate on the following patterns of psychological abuse which are outlined in my power and control wheel discussed here. I’ll link to each one here as and when I post each blog:

One-sided power games
Mind games
Inappropriate restrictions
Isolation
Over-protection and ‘caring’
Emotional unkindness & violation of trust
Degradation
Separation abuse
Using social institutions & social prejudices
Denial, minimising, blaming
Using the children
Economic abuse
Sexual abuse
Symbolic aggression
Domestic slavery
Physical violence

NOTE: Perpetrators of abusive power and control can be of either gender. This article is based on my research on women victims and male perpetrators.

{ 6 comments }

Anger that just won’t go away

by Clare Murphy PhD on October 14 2010

I’ve known many women who, after leaving a controlling male partner, experienced ongoing anger that just would not go away. Some women have incessant thoughts of revenge and fight with themselves not to do something they’ll regret. I’m writing this blog in response to a comment posted by Amy in my blog post about how victims cope with psychological abuse. Amy’s tried meditating, running, writing, art, etc. and continues to struggle with an “inner anger”. I have many questions/suggestions that could help expose and dampen the boiling lava underneath the surface . . .

Acknowledge your competence and functioning

List 50 ways in which you are a competent/functioning woman, sister, friend, daughter, mother, human – if you have trouble writing this list ask friends and family to help.

List 20 things you said and did in an attempt to make the relationship work.

List 20 ways you wish you’d behaved differently – then decide (a) which of these things could have in reality made a difference when faced with someone who was avoiding responsibility by denying, minimizing or blaming; and (b) which of these things you may need to practice in ongoing relationships with others.

Plan a meaningful future

Name 30 things/values/beliefs that are important to you. Prioritise them into what is the most important in your life. For me I make nearly all of my life choices based on the path that makes me feel most alive – “aliveness”.

Revise the meaning of “loyalty”

Were you loyal to a committed relationship – or to your wellbeing?
Were you loyal to respecting and trusting your partner despite some suspicious behaviours – or were you loyal to your gut feelings?
Were you loyal to a situation that was depleting your lifeforce, that was eating you up inside, that was making you feel unwell – or were you loyal to whatever it is that makes you feel alive?
Were you loyal to religious doctrines or social messages that it is a woman’s role to make a relationship work and that you made your bed you must lie in it – or were you loyal to your physical, spiritual, emotional wellbeing?

Unravel any remnants of confusion

Do you still hold tight to a Belief in a just world? (I wrote about the problem with this belief here.) Do you still wonder how someone you loved and trusted could be so deceiving, manipulative, denigrating and controlling? Do you still find it hard to believe he could do and say some terrible things to you? Do you still assume there’s something wrong with you and that despite doing a lot to try to make the relationship work you you still feel you failed? Do you continue to churn over ways you could have behaved differently to ensure you did not “fail”?

The way I personally deal with the “belief in a just world” is to acknowledge that so-called good people, people in positions of authority, people who are supposed to be trustworthy – can all do and say unjust, abusive things – fact. People misusing power and control lurk around many unsuspecting corners. Do NOT BE SURPRISED by this fact. Acknowledge this as a reality. Keep a watch out for it – do not live by the illusion that this problem does not exist. On the other hand MOST people are great. Be surprised every time you spend time with a new person who you can trust – and celebrate that person.

Another idea – List things your ex-partner said about you that you still wonder might be true. Get real about which of those things are true and change them. Get real about which of those things were blatantly not true – and tell yourself the truth.

Powerlessness and vulnerabilities often underpin anger

Brainstorm answers to each of the following. Say the question out loud to yourself over and over until you have come up with several answers to each question . . .

A way I’m feeling vulnerable as a result of what happened to me is . . .
A way I still feel unsafe is . . .
Ways I now lack trust are . . .
The fears underlying this anxious feeling are . . .
A reason I’m resisting letting go of anger is . . .
A reason I’m resisting letting go of revenge is . . .
Something I still feel resentful about as a result of that relationship is . . .
A way the feeling of shame is affecting me is . . .

Your answers to these questions will give you clues to issues you need to deal with – and anger may not be one of them. If you benefit from suggestions in this blog, I’d love it if you would post comments to say what was useful. And also let me know any other things that may have worked for you to deal with anger that seemed not to go away. I wish you well.

{ 15 comments }

The Belief in a Just World harms women who are abused and controlled

by Clare Murphy PhD on July 30 2010

Most people want to believe the World is Just and Fair. Melvin Lerner, a social psychologist who in 1980 wrote The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion, says that the Belief in a Just World influences our assumptions about how to judge perpetrators who do harm and how to judge victims who are harmed.

If you read any novel, Christian doctrine, watch any movie, or listen to people around you, you will consistently see and hear assumptions based on the Belief in a Just World – that good people get rewarded and bad people get punished. That if you develop self-less, hardworking, kind, caring, compassionate, giving, loyal qualities and behaviours then you will benefit – there will only be positive outcomes . . . . Good people get what they deserve!

And a Belief in a Just World assumes that if you are selfish, lazy, denigrate others, manipulate or con them, lie, break commitments, promises and marriage vows then negative consequences will follow . . . . Bad people get what they deserve!

But the world is not always Just nor Fair

When a man engages in a long-term pattern of controlling, undermining, enslaving, belittling, restricting and entrapping his female partner – this is neither Just nor Fair.

The world is not Just when the woman’s protests and attempts to stop the abuse fall on deaf ears. The world is not Just when the man responds by denying he’s doing harm, minimising the harm, or blaming the woman. The world is not Just when family, friends, colleagues, neighbours, legal and human service professionals condone the man’s ongoing systematic campaign to control his partner. Many male perpetrators of intimate partner abuse do not get what they deserve. Many female victims do not get the justice they deserve.

It is detrimental for female victims to Believe in a Just World

Many women try to make sense of their male partner’s behaviours by assuming he must only be acting in Just and Fair ways. So, if she feels harmed by something he says or does she will let him know, discuss it with him, seek change on his part. But if he says he did nothing wrong, that it’s all in her head, that she provoked it, or that it is her behaviours that are the problem, then she will go away and contemplate what it was in her own character or behaviour that caused him to harm her.

Over time she will develop the belief that there’s something wrong with her, that she’s not good enough, that she’s not worthy. If she believes in a Just World she will find it extremely difficult to believe her partner is as horrible as his behaviours seem. So she will blame herself and double her efforts to be the good wife he is wanting. After all most women I’ve ever met who experience being manipulated and controlled by their male partners spend years attempting to be good – knowing that being good is supposed to result in positive outcomes. So, she will put aside her suspicions that he’s actually intentionally harming her.

Women make sense of abuse and control based on the Belief in a Just World

If you experience confusion about how to behave in response to ongoing subtle abuse and control, and confusion about how you feel and the cause of those feelings this is so often linked with the Belief in a Just World. If you are a good girl, always wanting to be there for others you’ll probably assume others have the same goal – that they want to be nice and caring to you. So you will be consistently shocked every time your partner (who is supposed to care about you) abuses, manipulates or controls you. And shocked when others abuse you.

Be honest with yourself – listen to your gut instinct

Set aside the idea that everyone acts in Just and Fair ways, then you will have a clearer view that all your partner’s small, trivial, covert, subtle harmful behaviours over months and years create a pattern. You may admit a number of things to yourself – perhaps the pattern is harming you, perhaps you did not “let” it happen, but that you probably made multiple attempts to get him to take responsibility for his behaviours, perhaps you might remember that he has said things like “there’s something wrong with you”, that “you’re not good enough” and that “you are so unworthy you’re lucky you have him as no one else would have you”. If you’re honest with yourself you would admit such statements by the man who is supposed to love you are not the hallmark of a Just World.

Drop the Belief in a Just World

Admit to the reality that injustice and unfairness lurk around every corner. Then you will not be surprised when someone attempts to psychologically control you – whether that’s your partner, someone at work or school, a friend or family member. Watch for warning signs. Start being wonderfully surprised every time someone is good, kind, caring, honest, trustworthy and respectful – don’t automatically assume everyone is going to be so nice and trustworthy. Admit to yourself if you feel suspicious about someone – listen to your gut instincts. Tell yourself the truth and stop making excuses for someone who is potentially attempting to abuse and control you. Be honest with yourself – do you feel psychologically safe with your partner, or anyone else in your life, or with any new person you meet?

Not everyone is trustworthy or safe – even people who are supposed to love you

Until you can be 100% honest with yourself that you feel completely free and safe to be yourself – your kind, giving, trusting self with someone – then do what it takes to protect yourself – set your boundaries and remember – it is delusional to believe that a Just World exists everywhere. Not everyone is all bad or all good. Just because an abusive and controlling person also has many weaknesses, insecurities and vulnerabilities – this does not mean you should ignore what is harmful about them. Don’t give your trust to everyone – not everyone deserves it!

Be discerning – you can have compassion for someone’s humanity and vulnerabilities – whilst at the same time protecting yourself from abuse and one-sided power and control.

Reference:

Lerner, Melvin (1980). The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion (Critical Issues in Social Justice)

{ 1 comment }

Book review: Not of my making: Bullying, scapegoating and misconduct in churches

by Clare Murphy PhD on February 15 2010

Here I write a review of Dr. Margaret W. Jones’s book about her experience of abuse within church communities.

My first impressions when I received this memoir to review were that it was a heavy long 400-page book with small writing so I thought it better be good! I was surprised that a Reverend had written the foreword, so realised Margaret must have found someone in the church who was not a bully. I thought the foreword was well written and it enticed me to want to read the book. I thought I could learn something – and I did.

In Chapter One titled Vulnerability I read that Margaret had been neglected, physically abused in the house by her father, sexually abused by a neighbour and an uncle, she experienced school bullying, and psychological abuse and ignorance by teachers. The author paints a visual picture of the environment and an emotional picture of the neglect and lack of ability by any adults to nurture and nourish. Her vivid story telling is a major strength of the book. It begins with a story of a child alone, naïve, uninformed with zero wise guidance from any adult. Reading this chapter made me feel very angry and hungry to read what happened next.

The title Not of My Making gave me a clue that Margaret was probably going to describe her experience of being embroiled in abuse of a one-sided nature amongst church members – and she did.

The theme of the book grapples with a belief in a just and safe world within churches and coming to terms with the fact that many church communities are not safe, nor are they just. This book is one person’s life across multiple settings where bystanders support abusers, where those who might ordinarily be considered benign authority figures turn out to condone bullies and never follow through on promises to bring justice for victims.

This book tells a story that could be experienced by any unsuspecting innocent person – male or female – in any community organisation, any workplace, any institution – any place where you think you should expect friendship, safety, kindness, honesty and trustworthiness.

I personally have a poor memory for recalling the storyline in books and movies, but Margaret’s story was so well written and stirred such emotions of outrage that I don’t think I’ll ever forget it. I was frustrated when she was continually up against a brick wall, and joyful when she started to realise that the abuse was not about her being flawed or not good enough, but . . . that the abuse was actually being perpetrated by so-called just people. Her process of discovering this reality was slow and frustrated me greatly because I wanted to see justice done NOW! But that is not reality for many many victims of psychological bullying.

I wondered who the right audience would be for this book. Victims of abuse would find it extremely validating. And this book is important for friends, family or professionals who want to understand what a victim thinks and feels and how they behave in response to abuse – such as endlessly asking the abuser to take responsibility for their actions; self-harm; constant help-seeking from people who want to help, who pretend they want to help but don’t, and who refuse to help. The problem is the victim trusts that ALL people will and do take responsibility for their actions. It took Margaret years to realise this is a myth.

The author’s purpose in writing the book is to have her voice heard in a step towards making religious communities safe places. I think the purpose is only partially met. The main weakness in this book is the lack of analysis throughout the story to explain to the reader why the victim responded to the abuser in the ways that she did and why the abusers (there were many within the church communities) refused to take responsibility for their actions.

Although the author did mention a small number of insightful turning points that helped her, I really wanted more tips for how to recognise, deal with, or stop such abuse. The saving grace here is that the author has provided a bibliography of books that people can read. This list also names books about other themes addressed in the book including: hidden culture of aggression amongst girls; lack of bystander intervention for victims; adoptive families when the experts make things wrong; subtle power of spiritual abuse; how to identify and deal with antagonists in the church; and a book about Sudanese young refugees. Overall I enjoyed every morsel I read and highly recommend the book.

About the author – Margaret W. Jones PhD. Margaret was awarded her doctorate in 1986 from Hofsta University, USA. Her professional background includes extensive work with both severely mentally ill and developmentally disabled clients. Dr. Jones draws from her own recovery from trauma to assist other survivors to thrive. Click this title Not My Making to check out the book at Amazon.

{ 2 comments }

Safety tips for leaving a controlling partner

by Clare Murphy PhD on December 2 2009

Women who have male partners who psychologically abuse, restrict, control, manipulate and rob women of their sense of self, need a safety plan whether their partner ever lays a finger on them or not. Many controlling men stalk, threaten and harass women who leave. Other controlling men use physical violence, or threaten to kill, or do kill the woman who leaves and sometimes kill the children too.

By safe I mean – spiritually safe, psychologically safe and physically safe – to maintain a sense of dignity and aliveness. Some women have been controlled by their male partner for 10, 20, 40 or more years and want to make plans to eventually leave. Other women know that they are going to leave very soon and know they need to take safety measures.

If you are a woman being abused and controlled it is highly likely you are always doing what it takes to keep your psychological wellbeing as safe as possible – whether that is arguing and getting aggressive, or going silent and withdrawing into a private world. Here are some added tips for women who may need or want to leave their controlling partner – whether he has ever used or may use physical violence or not.

Plan possible escape routes

Plan with your children which doors, windows, fire escapes, stairwells, etc. to use if you need to escape quickly

Enlist trustworthy support

Leave copies of your safety plan, your Protection/Restraining Order and Custody Order with a trusted friend, neighbour, your children’s school or day care
Develop a code word or phrase with children, trusted friends or colleagues so they know when you are in danger and should call for help
Teach your children how to use the telephone to contact police or a trusted friend

Transport to escape

Keep the car full of petrol, the driver’s door unlocked and always back the car into the drive to make it easier to leave quickly
Hide a spare car key where you can grap it quickly
Keep money handy if you need to take a taxi cab
Keep the taxi cab number handy
Ask people you trust in advance if they will provide a ride to help you escape

Choose a place to go

Ask people you trust in advance if they would give you a place to stay
Women’s refuge/shelter
A holiday park is cheaper than a hotel

Create a false trail

Create a false trail, for example, call motels, real estate agencies and schools in a town at least six hours away from where you plan to relocate. Ask questions that require a call back to your house in order to leave phone numbers on record.

Pack a survival kit and hide it

Keep the following items in a safe place – could be a friend’s house, neighbour, or workplace: Phone/contact numbers, money, spare keys, clothes, small sentimental items, medication, important documents

Important phone numbers/contacts

Crisisline, helpline numbers
Trusted friends and family
Taxi cab
Police
Women’s refuge/shelter (if you call from home, immediately dial another number so your partner cannot push redial and find out where you’ve gone)

Money

Put money away in a safe place to assist with the escape and getting started again in a different location
Small, sellable objects
Open a bank account in your own name to increase your independence
Money, cheque book, hole-in-the-wall cards, credit cards, bank books

Spare keys

Extra set of keys to the car, house, office and safe-deposit box

Clothes, small sentimental and comfort items

Clothes
Children’s baby photos and other pictures
Children’s favourite toys and blankets
Comfort items for you and your children

Medication

A supply of prescription medicines for you and your children
A list of the drugs and dosages

Important documents

Transport documents

Driver’s license, registration and ownership papers

Health documents

Social security cards
Community service cards
Medical records
Children’s immunization/vaccination records
A list of prescriptions

Work/financial documents

Work permits, green card
Bank records
Papers that show jointly owned assets
Work references

Identification papers

Birth certificates – yours and your children’s
Passports
Citizenship documents

House documents

Mortgage papers, titles, deeds
Lease/rental agreement

Legal documents

Protection/Restraining orders
Custody papers
Court documents
Marriage license
Divorce papers

Other documents

School records
Insurance papers
Address book

References:

Calgary Women’s Emergency Shelter. (2005). Resistance to violence and abuse in intimate relationships – A response based perspective. http://www.calgarywomensshelter.com/
Barbara J. Hart’s collected writings. http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/hart/hart.html

{ 0 comments }

Interview with a woman who was bullied and scapegoated in churches

by Clare Murphy PhD on August 9 2009

The following is an interview I conducted today with Margaret Jones PhD, who has written a book about her experiences titled: Not of my making: Bullying, scapegoating and misconduct in Churches.

The nub of one-sided psychological abuse and power and control is that it occurs across all social institutions. In fact the trigger that helped Margaret realise what was happening to her was a television show explaining school bullying.

Whilst the abuse Margaret experienced occurred within the context of churches, her story resembles those told by survivors of workplace bullying. Her coping strategies also resemble those of women who experience psychological abuse by their male partners.

Clare: What were the tactics of bullying, scapegoating, misconduct and psychological abuse that you experienced as the target of those tactics?

Margaret: My adversaries refused to talk directly to me about their complaints. Instead they gossiped with each other about me. They shunned me during social events such as coffee hour but made a big show of coming over to me during church services to hug me even when I told them I didn’t want them touching me. They also carried stories to the minister who then chastised me. Eventually they initiated church discipline procedures against me and ousted me from church.

Clare: At what point did you actually define what was happening as psychological abuse?

Margaret: The abuse began in 1993 and went on for 10 years. I was slow to figure it out. Somewhere near the end of that time, Stossel (a TV magazine reporter) had a television shot on school bullying. That was when I realised not only that I was being bullied, but that it wasn’t my fault.

Clare: I was interested to read in your book at the point where you were really starting to understand what had been happening to you over those years, that in order to forgive, survivors of abuse first need to blame their perpetrators and not themselves. But, like survivors of domestic violence, it can take years to understand the dynamics of the behaviours from people you love and trust. How did you respond in the immediate moment back before you really understood you were being abused?

Margaret: I kept trying to find out what was wrong so I could fix it. I tried to get the people involved to talk to me about it.

Clare: How did you cope in the days/weeks after the abuse?

Margaret: Not well at first. I was anxious, suicidal and fought strong urges to self-harm. I sought counselling and began journaling. I also began reading everything I could find on church conflict and bullying. I corresponded with some of the authors of those books. I also joined some online support groups for survivors. Once I realised I was being bullied and it wasn’t my fault I fought back more effectively. Since my adversaries wouldn’t leave me alone I filed a professional liability claim against them. Fighting back really helped. Writing “Not of My Making” also helped me to figure things out and heal.

Online support groups Margaret recommends as helpful include http://christiansurvivors.com/ and http://www.advocateweb.org/index.php.

Clare: What type of people in the churches psychologically abused you?

Margaret: People bully in churches for the same reasons they bully everywhere. I think if you are more concerned with maintaining appearances and don’t believe in expressing anger directly you are more likely to use back room type of tactics. Also, if you are prone to jealousy and aren’t willing to admit you have “negative emotions” or that you sin like everyone else you are more likely to bully. Often people who bully are trying to protect or gain status and power. One way to achieve power is to defeat someone who is perceived as competent or having status. I think my adversaries were trying to promote their own agendas. By attacking me at Murray church they avoided discussing my concerns. At FXUU church my interest in Christianity was a direct threat to those who wanted to promote neo-paganism. At Immanuel I think there was a lot of jealousy. Pastor Karen whose own marriage was failing resented my successful marriage to Lyndon. Others resented my affluence and professional status. There was also a lot of prejudice about women and race (Margaret is married to a Black Trinidadian man). I think they succeeded in consolidating their power and status while strengthening the cohesiveness of their clique. That is why they had no need to talk to me and negotiate.

Clare: In what ways do you think (a) being a woman, (b) a woman with a PhD, and (c) a white woman married to a black man related to being abused?

Margaret: Because they made me different. And there’s a lot of social psychology research into how people treat minorities and women. If a minority or a woman matches their stereotype, and their behaviour matches that stereotype, they will be liked. But if their behaviour doesn’t match the stereotype they will be disliked.

Clare: What kind of support mechanisms existed that made it easy for the bullies to bully in the first place, and made it easy for them to continue their campaign of psychologically abusing you?

Margaret: The church leadership both within the congregation and in the denomination supported the bullies. The leadership was assumed to be right and good by virtue of their position. They were able to hide what was going on and/or distort information. There was no policy and procedure to bring a complaint or to ask for mediation by a disinterested party.

Clare: What kind of help from family, friends or professionals did you find most helpful?

Margaret: Therapy was essential – it was different from other experiences – because Steve (my therapist) lived through it while I was living it. Being believed was essential. My husband, during the FXUU church thing, was very supportive. He read me a poem about a wife who’s been abused and what it’s like at midnight. He was vigilant at night about where I was at emotionally and what I was doing – also during the day when he was concerned I was suicidal.

Clare: What kind of help from family, friends or professionals did you find detrimental?

Margaret: Comments such as, “You should just get over it and move on”. Refusal to talk about it. Psychologists are not well trained about this issue, or they approach it totally wrong. They don’t know their social psychology enough to understand the interactions. Psychologists think the client is misperceiving it. But I was right about my intuitions.

People still say, “What part of this was your fault?’ and I answer, “That I trusted the wrong people”. Psychologists say both parties are at fault. Mutuality is the belief in a “Just World” – that belief blinds people to evil. It may be person “a’s” fault, or person “b’s” fault or it may be both. In each case you have to investigate the reality – but that requires work – so people just walk away. They think, “If I can say it’s both their faults I can just walk away from both of them.”

Clare: Why do you think the bullies chose you as a target, and not others?

Margaret: Same reason they did in the schoolyard. I was short, introverted, competent and intelligent. I also didn’t know how to fight back. I was too nice and not aggressive enough. I think bullies test the waters and see how far they can go. For instance in the early grades school bullies choose targets randomly. By middle school they have figured out who won’t defend themselves well and who lacks allies. Bullying is a way to knock out the competition. My professional status and willingness to share my beliefs and opinions also made me visible. They perceived me as a threat to their own agendas.

By fighting back and aggressiveness I mean that, if criticised, I would think, “They must be right”, “What can I do to fix it?”– rather than a more appropriate response, “You’re wrong.” So I mean assertiveness.

Clare: Looking back, what would you now say are the warning signs that someone should look out for so they could define what is happening to them as psychological abuse – and not blame themselves?

Margaret: I am finding this one hard to answer. I think you need to pay attention to how people talk or don’t talk to you. Do they make comments that leave you feeling inadequate? Do they criticise or put you down especially in front of others? Do they give unsolicited advice? Do they continue to do things that make you uncomfortable even when you have asked them to stop?

Clare: Given everything you’ve learned from your experience of psychological abuse, how do you deal with it differently now?

Margaret: First there is a change in mindset. I no longer worry about whether someone likes me or not. I ask myself if I like them and pay more attention to whether they reciprocate offers of friendship. I stay away from people who don’t think it is okay to express anger or who confused feeling anger with behaviour. I am also more willing to be aggressive if I think it necessary. I will push back in some way. I won’t let put downs go by without responding to them. I talk to others about it and seek allies. It is important to have allies. You can see this in the way I have handled some negative reviews of my book. I have written blog posts about it. I also am more observant of other people’s behaviour in group settings.

For instance, in my current church, power is handled very differently. Initiative from church members is encouraged. Things are not so top down. I also read the church constitution before I joined and noted that the constitution included a structure for dealing with complaints. The minister at the church where I am now has the view that any complaints should be made openly to that person, that you should have the nerve to say it to them, or not say it at all. Whereas in one of the churches where I experienced abuse, Pastor Karen had all sorts of reasons why it was okay for people to go behind my back to her.

Clare: What advice do you have for others about the most effective strategies they could use to cope if they find themselves embroiled in a pattern of being psychologically abused?

Margaret: Assert yourself when unfairly criticised. Learn verbal self-defence tactics. Find allies and don’t be silenced. Talk to as many people that will listen about what is happening. There is a risk if you stay. If your adversary is very powerful they will find a way to silence or run you out. If the leadership condones gossip and bullying – for your own sake, you need to leave. I should have left earlier and found a healthier church. Nothing I did was going to change things. I didn’t have enough power.

. . . . .

Although this is the end of my interview with Margaret, I am half way through reading her book Not My Making and intend posting a review of it in October. It is a very personal story of what happened to her and how she made sense of the insidious, often subtle, sometimes obvious psychological abuse across time. Meantime it is available from the publisher or at Amazon.

{ 14 comments }

Are women who live with abusive partners codependent?

by Clare Murphy PhD on July 8 2009

The other day I met a social worker/counsellor at a seminar. When she found out I research domestic violence she immediately told me that women who stay with violent men are codependent. She said such women were just the same as women who live with alcoholics. She was not interested in another view because she was adamant that she was right.

According to Codependents Anonymous World Fellowship, the following are six of a long list of characteristics of codependency:

She has difficulty identifying what she is feeling
She has difficulty making decisions
She harshly judges everything she thinks, says, or does – as never “good enough”
She does not perceive herself as a lovable or worthwhile person
She puts aside her own interests and hobbies in order to do what others want
She compromises her own values and integrity to avoid rejection, or others’ anger

I have difficulty with applying the ‘codependent’ label on a woman surviving in a relationship where her male partner abuses and controls her – for the following reasons …

Victims of intimate partner abuse are not codependent

Research with women shows that the above six characteristics are an effect of experiencing long-term, ongoing, relentless abuse and control. Many male perpetrators degrade and intimidate women into believing they deserve physical violence, sexual violation, verbal abuse, or other forms of punishment.

A tactic of abuse entails brainwashing women into believing they think and feel something other than they actually do. Many domestic violence perpetrators control the decision-making. Many make women wrong for making decisions, or denigrate any decisions made by women. Many male perpetrators enslave women, making demands that she be a more than perfect housekeeper, partner, parent or woman. No human can meet those kinds of demands, hence can never be ‘good enough’. Being degraded several times a day, or several times a week, month after month after month leads to feeling unlovable and unworthy.

Changing her values and integrity to avoid rejection or anger are often consciously chosen strategies of self-preservation used by abused and controlled women. Women I have interviewed would confront the man, avoid the man, lie to get some freedom, be completely honest to try to make him stop controlling them, become violent themselves, retaliate verbally, be passive or silent. Yet these women would secretly harbour knowledge of their true selves, whilst attempting a variety of behaviours – that went against their values – in order to avoid, or stop the abuse. These are not strategies of a codependent person.

It is dangerous to give the ‘codependent’ label to victims of intimate partner abuse

Codependence implies a lack of assertion. Whereas, if a woman asserts her opinions, needs, or rights to a controlling man, he could then engage in more or worse abuse to stamp out her assertiveness. It may, therefore, be dangerous for a psychologist to coach a woman to assertively stand up to her partner. Anyone wishing to help such a woman should respect her reasoning for not asserting herself.

Codependence implies women serve others to the detriment of flourishing to her full potential. Whereas, women who want to, or do, attend tertiary schooling to improve their skills and talents, can actually experience more, or worse, abuse by their partner because he wants to ensure she does not grow. For example, a man interviewed by Eva Lundgren (1995) said, “It makes her reconsider when I lock her up in a cupboard. Then she gets scared. Give her a sense of her total dependency, that’s the only way.” Therefore, it may be dangerous for a psychotherapist to encourage a woman to go against her partner’s demands by attending school. People in the helping professions need to listen to women’s views on how detrimental to her safety such a step might be.

Codependence implies women stay with violent and otherwise abusive men because they are attracted to being abused, like it, and want it. Whereas, in reality, women engage in multiple strategies to stop the abuse, to help the man change, to protect themselves and their children, or to avoid being abused in the first place. It may be dangerous for a counsellor to encourage a woman to leave. Social workers should honour women’s knowledge about what will, and will not, keep her safe, and that might mean staying with the abuser. It definitely means that multiple services are required to support the woman’s safety, such as police, safe housing, and financial support agencies.

Blaming the victim is tantamount to abusing her

Anyone who gives the ‘codependent’ label – to anyone who is living with a man who engages in a degrading pattern of psychological abuse and control – is blaming the victim and pathologising her. This label implies the victim has behaviours that pull the abuse out of the man. Yet, Jeff Hearn’s (1998) in-depth interviews with male perpetrators shows, for example, that some men threaten suicide as a way of ensuring women do not leave them, and other men threaten to harm or kill pets, children, family, friends and/or the woman herself.

Many perpetrators of intimate partner abuse consider themselves to be the King of the Castle, the Boss, the Master who must be obeyed at all costs. Such attitudes may creep in slowly over time entrapping and disempowering their female partners. These men may also be charming, caring, protective and kind at other times. This is confusing to women. Many women spend years attempting to understand and change the man’s abusive behaviours – they do not accept abuse as their lot.

The subject of this website is domestic violence which is different to mutual abuse – it is about one person’s campaign to control the other through whatever means they find works. For example, one of the men Cavanagh and her colleagues (2001) interviewed said he “was a bit of a tactician” and that he would “more or less try to intimidate her by going quiet and staring.” This kind of intentional behaviour aimed at subservience, and at lowering a woman’s sense of self-esteem, worth and personal integrity, is a hallmark of a systematic pattern over time. A pattern that entails the male abuser refusing to take responsibility for his behaviours and entails blaming the woman, confusing her, isolating her, making her wrong and demanding respect for his position as the man. Coping with such behaviours does not make a woman codependent.

Power and control over women is a social issue

This is not about a woman being codependent by reinforcing the man’s behaviour. The need that many men have to establish and maintain authority over women is a social issue – an issue of contemporary expectations of masculinity. My research with male perpetrators shows that this is a way for certain men to avoid feeling weak, vulnerable and feminine – as not being a so-called ‘real man’ is considered inferior. Controlling a female partner is a socially sanctioned way for the man to gain social kudos. Men who control their partners know what they’re doing. Many men provoke women to do something that the man then believes will justify hitting her. For instance, a man interviewed by Cavanagh and colleagues (2001) said he’d “do anything to get an excuse” to use violence against his partner.

In sum, any psychological issues female victims experience, that resemble characteristics deemed to be codependent, are a result of incessant abuse and control by their male partners, and are reinforced by social issues that support male authority in the home and male control and possessiveness over humans and animals in the home. Women’s coping strategies should be taken seriously. Blaming women revictimises them, further isolates them and deepens their growing sense of not being good enough.

References:

Cavanagh, Kate, Dobash, R. Emerson, Dobash, Russell P. & Lewis, Ruth. (2001). ‘Remedial work’: Men’s strategic responses to their violence against intimate female partners. Sociology, 35, 695-714.
Dear, Greg. (1997). Blaming the victim: Domestic violence and the codepenedency model. Retrieved June, 2003, from http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/27/dear.pdf
Hearn, Jeff. (1998). The Violences of Men: How Men Talk About and How Agencies Respond to Men’s Violence to Women. London: Sage
Lundgren, Eva. (1995). Feminist Theory and Violent Empiricism. Aldershot, UK: Avebury.

{ 13 comments }

← Previous Entries