Context is More Damaging than Content

My post It's not abuse, it's just my interpretation? was discussed by corboy on the Rick Ross cults and destructive groups forum. Thank you corboy for your articulate expansion of my idea .

Corboy wrote:

The person who wrote this blog has reached the heart of the matter. The horror/shock quotient is not always the content of the message, but is often influenced by WHO DELIVERS THAT MESSAGE.

The term 'verbal abuse' may not be enough to provide a full description of what accounts for the impact. I would invite us to ponder the term 'relationship-specific abuse.' For, verbal content is not enough to account for the stunning power of certain utterances or even gestures.

Its when the words or gestures or battery take place in the context of a relationship based on mutual trust, and thus shatter that trust, that it becomes abusive and trust-shattering.

For we select spouses and friends based on trust that they will never do such things to us in the first place! ('To have and to hold, to honor and to cherish...')

[snip]

If the local insane drunkard on the corner calls me a filthy name, I can write it off. The person is, clearly nuts. I have not given this person the level of radical trust that I would give a lover or ultra close friend.

But if your spouse, your lover or your close friend were, suddenly, within the existing frame of that trust-bonded relationship call you that same bad name that the nut on the corner gave you--you'd be blown away.

The book I was discussing, "The Secret of Overcoming Verbal Abuse " says that the reason your partner's remarks cut so deep is that they "cut straight into the painful self-doubts and non-acceptance of yourself you have had since early childhood" That may be for some people, some of the time, but as corboy and I have noted, it ain't necessarily so.

I hope that targets of relational abuse will not automatically accept the pronouncement that their pain is solely, or primarily, due to their old insecurities . If old pain is part of it, it certainly makes sense to work towards healing those wounds and loving yourself despite your imperfections. One very helpful mantra I got from the book was "Just because I'm not perfect, doesn't mean I deserve to be abused."

We all have imperfections, and an abuser will use your humanness as an excuse for his abuse. If there is any truth in the deprecating remarks, and your partner knows, or should know, of your sensitivity, that makes his behavior all the more deplorable. Someone who loves you does not jab you in your sensitive areas.

I realized the relational context was what made the abuse most painful, so I stopped thinking of him as 'my husband'. It wasn't that hard to do because he does very little which is consistent with that role.

I used to think of him both in terms of who he is - Bob and his relationship to me, - husband., i.e. my husband, Bob. Now, I simply think of him as "Bob". Well, not only 'Bob' actually. I think of him as Bob the emotionally handicapped guy who lives in the other side of the house.

It's easier that way. I don't expect or want anything from him that way. He's just a guy with profound limitations. I don't need to label or dehumanize him by thinking of him as "the abuser". To the best of my ability I try to cultivate an attitude of indifference.

When I can pull it off, I feel better. When I remember he is my husband, and I long for that caring connection, it hurts. But that's okay too. Sometimes it's good to just hurt for a while.

)

"You got mad at me"

Yesterday Bob was recounting some of his grievances against me. I realized that almost every one of them was basically, "You got mad at me". What he did that I was mad about was irrelevant.

For example he reminds me that I got mad at him when he barked at me "Why don't you just fucking tell me!" when I asked if he wanted to hear my ideas about where to stay that night when we were on vacation one summer.

He was driving down a steep, curvy, dark mountain road late at night and I thought it might be taking all his concentration. He interpreted my question as (can you guess?) as an ATTACK. He did not recognize that I was being considerate. He thought I was ACCUSING him of not wanting to hear what I had to say. He later told me that because I had previously complained that often I felt like he didn't want to hear what I had to say, that I was accusing him of doing that again.

I start to feel dizzy just trying to follow his logic. Seems to me that if your loved one sometimes felt like you didn't want to hear what they said that you might make an effort to show that you are interested rather than yell "What don't you just fucking tell me!"

So that was the horrible thing I did - I got mad. Imagine the nerve!

Okay, but I confess that wasn't all I did. I was scared. It was a bad road and I don't want to be a passenger in a car with an enraged man at the wheel. So about five minutes later I said I had to pee. He pulled over. I got some warm clothes and shoes from my suitcase in the trunk. We were in very remote country. We had not seen another car in two hours. Nonetheless, I told him I was not getting back in that car with him unless I was driving and until he calmed down. And if that meant I spent the night under a pine tree, so be it.

"Freedom from accountability means that the abusive man considers himself above criticism. If his partner attempt to raise her grievances she is 'provoking' him. ", says Lundy Bancroft in "Why Does He Do That?".

It is commonly believed that abusive men have a problem managing their anger. This is what Bancroft says:

"Your abusive partner doesn't have a problem with his anger; he has a problem with your anger. One of the basic human rights he tries to take away from you is the right to be angry with him. No matter how badly he treats you, he believes that your voice shouldn't rise and your blood shouldn't boil. The privilege of rage is reserved for him alone."

No wonder Bob is so unhappy. Despite his relentless attempts, he has never been able to convince me that there is something wrong with me for feeling angry. So I do not dispute his grievances. Yes, I got mad. And I'm not sorry. Anger is a healthy response to abuse.

Bancroft says this about abusers and anger:

HE ISN'T ABUSIVE BECAUSE HE IS ANGRY; HE'S ANGRY BECAUSE HE'S ABUSIVE.

Why Does He Do That?: Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men

*