2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

It was my understanding that domestic abuse isn't rooted in any of these kinds of factors - that these are only the superficial causes. Domestic abuse isn't an anger-management problem (or stress-management, or hopelessness-management) but a worldview problem.

Men who abuse their female partners don't also abuse their bosses, coworkers or friends - even when they're very stressed or angry or hopeless in their presence. In fact, they *do* have the ability to self-regulate. The problem then is that they view their female partners as subordinate in some way, and proceed to use them as a scapegoat. Otherwise, why wouldn't the problem go both ways? Are women less stressed by the economic recession? No.

Of course domestic violence isn't exclusively male-to-female, but almost entirely. I feel that the causes listed above only serve to excuse the men guilty of abusing their partners.

posted 2 years, 3 months ago
view in context