[image ID: thread by butchanarchy
Maybe folks prioritize an abuser’s need to be “healed” from the abuse they inflicted because it is far more comfortable to think of an abuser as “broken” than it is to see them as someone who takes many of our society’s values about relationships and control to their logical conclusion.
I think many people’s real concern isn’t even how survivors handle abuse so much as the fact that we call actions they see as ultimately acceptable/justifiable abuse in the first place. Because even if they’re not outright abusers. many folks see control as integral to relationships.
Easier to see an abuser as the ultimate victim of circumstance that can be “fixed” from their “deviancy” rather than reckon with the fact that they don’t actually deviate that much from our dominant cultural norms and what that says about those who buy into those norms, too.
Many people believe that there is a level of control over a partner’s/child’s/friend’s/etc. autonomy that you have a right to once you have a close connection to them. People don’t want to have that belief challenged, as it is a significant player in many of their relationships.
So it’s easier to think of an abuser as a poor, broken deviant in need of fixing because they take those values “too far” rather than have to question why any of us have a right to claim ownership and control over the people in our lives.
My abuser very much knew exactly what she was doing, and told me so explicitly at more than one point. She saw her attempts to gain and maintain control as utterly justifiable. She had no illusions about her actions, she just didn’t want them labeled as abuse.
And neither did the community we both shared, and not even in denial of the specific actions I outlined when I outed her. Rather, they all saw actions of control, manipulation, sexual exploitation, as just natural and acceptable parts of relationships in general.
Deeply appreciative of this point @/ClarissaAdjoint made here a couple weeks ago. Abuse IS a learned behavior, but not learned from being abused as much as learned from being taught who is an acceptable target of control and the tactics of domination. https://twitter.com/ClarissaAdjoint/status/1559677090516967424
reply by greatplainspunk:
This is so true and why Batterer Intervention Programs are court ordered and you don’t see people voluntarily lining up at the door. Most abusers know what they’re doing and don’t want to voluntarily give up control because they know it serves them to meet their needs.
reply by salome_af:
It really fucked me up when I recently discovered my father was never a direct victim of violence, rather he witnessed his step sibs beaten. And decided that was the type of parent he wanted to be. The violence was about keeping him feeling powerful.
/end image ID]
[image ID: the nested thread by ClarissaAdjoint from the above thread
screenshot of a tweet by AbolitionBuns: “1. The core idea of TJ is to break the cycle of harm. It is understood that people only engage in abuse towards others because of prior experience of being abused. Abuse is a learned behavior. No one is born to abuse others.”
Okay look I’m screenshotting because I don’t feel like directly arguing since I don’t think it’s going to do any good
but here’s the deal:
yes, no one is born to abuse
yes, abuse is learned behavior
but that doesn’t imply “hurt-people hurt people” like op thinks
what I mean is that they’re operating under a false dilemma: there's more ways to learn to abuse than having it done to you
I argue that the primary way is by learning how/when you can hurt others to get what you want without consequence
learning to commit violence against your intimate partners, your children, your coworkers, your employees, to women you don’t even know, &c.
is about learning what kind of violence your society tolerates and more importantly who it tolerates that violence against
cops don’t learn to beat their wives because they were abused anymore than a karen learns to threaten black strangers because she was abused
it’s about navigating social rules of acceptable targets to get what you want
it is not just a choice it is ten thousand choices
the only real cycle of abuse is not the abused growing up to be abusers—a mere determinism by another name—but the abused growing up to think they deserve abuse, to habituate to it
again and again and again
til they’re more scar tissue than soft flesh
so, no, no one is born to abuse
and that is why they can be held accountable for their choices
/end image ID]
40 notes
·
View notes
also worth noting that "abusive" doesn't actually mean "irredeemable" either.
there's a lot of people that have done things in the past that were bad, because they weren't taught any better, or they were in an overall toxic situation where EVERYONE was shitty (like a cult), or they were just at an especially low point and hurt others for it.
you don't have to forgive them. you don't have to ever speak to them again. you can be angry with them until you die if you want.
but society cannot function if we don't allow them to move on. to change their behavior and fuck off somewhere else and build meaningful relationships without bothering you again. we need a path for people to change, or nothing ever will.
19K notes
·
View notes
I also heavily resent the ever-present implication in mainstream media that at all touches on trauma that we cannot have any sympathy for Bad Victims. That it's evil to write a sympathetic Bad Victim. Hell, that it's bad to portray one at all at times. Writing a victim of trauma who's an addict or self-destructive is already an edge case-- writing trauma survivors who end up actually hurting someone else, being chronically "treatment"-resistant or having inconvenient ptsd, perpetuate the cycle, or are just kind of a total dick is considered an evil move. Instead of like. An actually complex and interesting artistic choice.
Idk. It pisses me off a lot how often Bad Victims[TM] are brushed under the rug and if you dare to speak of them/make art of them, let alone SYMPATHIZE with them you're an irredeemable monster. And that's just fictional characters. Don't even get me started on the way people treat actual people who have ptsd in a way that's at all inconvenient and problematic in their opinion.
2K notes
·
View notes
Is anyone going to talk about how Cazador was also both victim and abuser? How as Vellioth's spawn, he tried to reach out to a former friend (likely for help) and then Vellioth made Cazador watch as he drained his friend dry as punishment (and how Cazador locked Astarion up in a tomb for a year after being unwilling to kill a "darling boy" and trying to run)? How Cazador tried to rebel against his master and failed, being impaled for 11 years after (and how in Cazador's journals, he records all the actions of his spawn “with particular attention paid to Astarion”, and it's only in recent entries when Astarion disobeys him and goes missing that he “betrays any emotion” and is furious, writing about how he tortured Astarion's "siblings" for not finding him and wanting to torture Astarion himself)? How Cazador kills Vellioth during the Rite of Perfect Slaughter (just as Astarion kills Cazador during his Ascension ritual)?
How Astarion says that Cazador took particular pleasure in torturing him because his “screams sounded the sweetest”, but it's more likely that Cazador saw himself in Astarion from when he was Vellioth's spawn? How Cazador says "You are mine. Forever." in Astarion's nightmare, and how Ascended Astarion says "That's what you want, isn't it? To be mine, forever?" to Tav?
The parallels. The cycle. Augh.
1K notes
·
View notes
there's such an interesting extra layer to amity and her relationships (especially w luz) that gets revealed when you learn that not only is she an abuse victim herself, but she is also the child of an abusive marriage
like not only was she personally abused/neglected and taught that she doesn't deserve to have her boundaries respected and won't get positive attention unless maybe she "earns it" by being useful and overachieving, but also her main example of a romantic partnership involved one partner exploiting the other and treating him as an expendable tool
in all of her relationships (platonic, romantic, familial), amity learns to give and receive kindness, learns to respect and set boundaries, learns that the value of herself and others aren't dictated by achievements or usefulness. she's breaking the toxic patterns that her parents taught her via their treatment of her.
but with her romantic relationship with luz, not only is she learning all of the above, but she's also breaking the toxic patterns of a romantic relationship that she would have learned from watching her parents.
when she shows kindness to luz, loves luz wholeheartedly even when she makes mistakes or causes problems, respects luz's privacy and boundaries, she is treating her girlfriend in a way that opposes the way her mother treated her own husband.
when she learns that she doesn't need to be useful or else risk abandonment/punishment, she's learning that she shouldn't accept or expect to be treated by her girlfriend the same way that her father was treated by his own wife.
i just. i love stories about characters breaking cycles. and i love luz and amity's relationship so much. it's very much not the kind of relationship i'm invested in the same way i am invested in with ships between adults. but rather like, it's a relationship between these two young people who are learning to healthily navigate this kind of relationship for the first time in their lives and it's really sweet.
464 notes
·
View notes