Financial vs physical/sexua abuse

(46 Posts)
nailak Sat 06-Apr-13 08:47:25

When a woman is raped, it doesn't matter how drunk she is, how vulnerable she made herself, what she was wearing. It is not her fault. We are all clear on this.

When a woman is hit. It is not her fault he should have controlled his anger.

When a woman it is financially abused it is her fault for allowing herself to be financially dependant on another? She should have been prepared and not made herself vulnerable?

noisytoys Sat 06-Apr-13 08:59:16

No abuse is acceptable. Ever.

Financial,abuse is just another sort of abuse. It's not any different. Abuse is abuse.

And a vulnerable woman who is being subjected to financial abuse is more than likely being emotionally abused as well. They go hand in hand. IMHO.

TunipTheVegedude Sat 06-Apr-13 09:05:02

It is the fault of the abuser. Victim-blaming is no more acceptable with regard to financial abuse than any other.

nailak Sat 06-Apr-13 16:37:12

so why is it seen as a legitmate opinion that women shouldnt be sahms and make themselves vulnerable etc, in a way it would never be seen as acceptable to tell someone who has been raped or emotionally abused that they should never have put themselves in that situation?

WidowWadman Sat 06-Apr-13 19:48:50

Financial abuse can and does happen no matter whether the abused works or not. It's the abuser who is in the wrong.

I don't think that pointing out that giving up (or never embarking on) paid employment puts you in a vulnerable position is victim blaming per se, though.

nailak Sat 06-Apr-13 20:23:02

why is it not victim blaming? if a person is emotionally abused we dont say it is your fault for putting yourself in an emotionally vulnerable situation?

SatsukiKusukabe Sun 07-Apr-13 16:18:57

so if I say a woman out on her own in a short skirt and heels shouldn't do so because she leaves herself vulnerable.... I'm not victim blaming widow?

nailak Sun 07-Apr-13 19:16:27

exactly, you get what I am trying to say!

I think it depends what you're implying she is vulnerable to. 'Women in short skirts make themselves vulnerable' unless qualified by 'to cold legs' tends to imply sexual abuse. 'Women who give up work are vulnerable' refers more to difficulty getting another job and inequality if the relationship breaks down than to financial abuse (IMO).

WidowWadman Sun 07-Apr-13 20:42:17

AFAIK, the evidence is that women in short skirts are no more likely to be raped than others.

nailak Sun 07-Apr-13 21:00:43

So it is ok to rely on a husband for emotional security and support, even though that would make things difficult if relationship breaks down,

But is not ok to rely on husband for financial security and support?

For a woman to make herself utterly financially dependent on a man is a bad idea whether he's abusive or not. Nice, non-abusive, wonderful hubby might drop dead and leave the woman with no money and no earning power.

WidowWadman Sun 07-Apr-13 21:23:58

Or he might just lose his job - not making yourself fully dependent on one income protects both partners.

noviceoftheday Sun 07-Apr-13 21:32:09

Dmil didn't work again after she had her 2 kids so she's been a sahm or housewife for almost 40 years. Dfil had a good career and they were canny with money. They are very well off. She has a very healthy bank balance, their main home is in joint names and some of their investment properties are in her sole name. From what I can work out they share their finances equally. I admire them both for it as she certainly isn't financially dependent on him.

BasilBabyEater Sun 07-Apr-13 22:49:10

Financial abuse can happen to women in work.

In the Philpott case, he wasn't employed but the women were.

Men can abuse financially by hiding bank statements so that women don't know what's in the bank, borrowing money against a joint account without consultation, etc.

You'd be surprised at what variation there can be in financial abuse.

SatsukiKusukabe Sun 07-Apr-13 23:23:23

if I dropped dead tomorrow sgb, dh could not afford child care and we have no one to rely on . He would be FUCKED, good and properly.

we're hoping to get insurance for both of soon (so he'd be a sahd if something happened to me) but for various reasons haven't done it yet.

nailak Mon 08-Apr-13 01:06:56

SGB if a womans husband dropped dead she would obviously also be emotionally distraught, but we don't say no woman should be emotionally dependent on her husband?

novice I agree with u that SAHM doesnt have to mean financially dependent.

sashh Mon 08-Apr-13 06:46:20

Being a SAHM and financial abuse are different things though.

Someone already mentioned Philpotts - he had the women's benefits paid into his account and didn't let them have their own money.

Compare that with my cousin who was a SAHM for a number of years, but had equal access to the joint bank account her husband's salary went into.

SatsukiKusukabe Mon 08-Apr-13 14:14:34

I think bleating on about financial abuse is just one way for some people to excuse haranguing sahps. women who work or receive benefit still get financially abused. It's like saying a woman who knows karate won't get physicaly abused. being physicaly or financialy strong doesn't help if you are emotionaly under someone's thumb first.

RichManPoorManBeggarmanThief Mon 08-Apr-13 14:24:06

I think what sgb is saying is that there are many more scenarios than financial abuse why being a SAHM may leave you financially vulnerable- eg partner dies, partner incapacitated by illness, relationship breaks down, partner made redundant etc. Emotional dependency isn't the same because it cuts both ways. There is vulnerability on both sides. The thing with being a SAHM is that the arrangement benefits both partners but the risk is borne more heavily by the woman. This is not to say that people shouldn't be sahm's but there's no point in pretending that there isn't a long term financial risk attached.

nailak Mon 08-Apr-13 14:59:26

I agree sashh Is just some people have the view that being a SAHM and giving up work is always making u vulnerable.

I am not pretending their is no financial risk involved. I am wondering why we, as a society, put financial risk as more important than emotional risk.

I think the reasons for not being financially dependent are really complicated. I agree 100% with SGB.

Also, I've seen my mum suffer bad depression because she ended up giving up her career. It was bad for her mental health that she didn't go out to work, and it was bad for her self-esteem she didn't earn money. That's obviously not going to be the case for everyone, and it might be that it bringing up children were better valued, she'd be less affected. But it's a second good illustration of reasons why it can be a good idea not to be financially dependent, that don't have anything to do with abuse.

Some relationship issues, and personal issues, have to do with finance but don't have to do with abuse, just as you might be unable to cope in a marriage to someone who was a terrible sexual match with you, despite there being no question of abuse.

But, I don't think it's that society thinks financial risk is more important than emotional risk. It's that emotional risk underlies all kinds of abuse - that's fundamentally part of what abuse is. It's what distinguishes depressing and annoying financial situations within a couple from financial abuse, which has to have a component of one person not treating the other with proper respect.

SatsukiKusukabe Mon 08-Apr-13 15:35:13

what about my point about my dh being in the exact situations financially if I were to die? our money is spent each month he could no sooner afford child care than sprout wings out of his butt and fly away. Again you are all seeing this from a privileged position. Maybe you could each run a house hold and afford child care on either of your individual wages should a partner become incapicitated but in most families that is not the case.

my friends where both partners work there is a shift work situation and child care isn't an issue.

Well, it's possible I am seeing it from a privileged position but I thought it went without saying that for most of us, death of a partner is going to have a bad effect on the surviving partner's finances, isn't it?

confused

Neither DH nor I can afford to run a house and get childcare, not on our individual wages, not together.

nailak Mon 08-Apr-13 16:01:23

LRD Your Mum and women in similar situations, do you think it is because they specifically didnt go out to work? Do you think that by being involved in rewarding community stuff that they would get a sense of esteem and confidence etc, and maybe it is not about money? it is just about regularly using your talents and doing something rewarding out of the home?

"emotional risk implies abuse"

not really, not in the situation where one partner dies, which has been brought up here, or in the case of break up with no infidelity etc, or you know even normal misunderstandings and arguments within relationships can have devastating effects on peoples mental health and emotional welfare at the time of the argument.

nailak Mon 08-Apr-13 16:02:44

yes satsuki It seems that most people on these boards, assume everyone works 9-5 or something. Whereas most people I know where 2 parents work, work shifts.

SatsukiKusukabe Mon 08-Apr-13 16:07:41

at the risk of outing myself but because I am fed up of this conversation.

dh works he leaves the house at 745 every morning.
he then comes home around 6pm.

it was 7pm before we moved closer to his job.

he makes 42000 dollars a year (is that 25 or 30,000 pounds? ). that money pays for electric (we even have to run ac in winter) petrol, car insurance, 900 dollars a month rent for a 2bed apartment. and then a small amount is put in to childrens accounts. we have internet, we don't have any extras like cable. we have to cater to different diets that and because food costs a fortune at moment combined with nappies x 2 (though we try and use cloth as often as possible) plus the price of keeping two cats that we had before having kids, we easily spend 500 a month on shops. all our clothes and most of our "stuff" comes from charity shops. we have 2 babies we can't go in to a smaller apartment to reduced rent.

if I were to work, I would have to do so around his hours as I would only be on minimum wage. I'd make about 1/3 of his wage so his job is the more important. I would never see my husband and I would have to work unsociable hours while adding milage to our already unreliable car.

it would also put us over the threshold for access to certain emergency benefits in our state.
if I work during the day a second piece of shit car plus insurance plus child care would put us in the negative.

I realise every one just thinks women who stay at home are fucking thick as pig shit, but please someone tell me what I should be doing since I'm getting it so wring?

I love posting in fwr but I think I'm going to flounce as I'm sick of feeling like I don't belong and if feminism here means making real women feel crap about their Ives which are hard enough with out this... then maybe my views really don't belong anyway.

I've been on mn for years (I NC a lot, so may not recognize me) but Im trying to think of another time I've sat here in tears while posting?

nailak - with my mum particularly, I suspect it had to do with it but probably isn't the whole story. I do think - as I say - that the valuing of the work she did as nothing had a lot to do with it. She was lucky she could (in retrospect) have just about afforded to keep on working, but she didn't realize it was even an option. She would have seen it as financially and personally selfish. And I think that is what crushed her, feeling that anything that wasn't being a SAHM was selfish.

I am mentioning her situation because I think there are instances where women suffer horribly, but it is not their partners abusing them - it is society's set up that kicks them down. There is a limit to how much a partner can do. My dad is most certainly far from ideal, but I do know my mum felt - for herself - that she should give up work. The fact she didn't know there was another option, and the fact she feels shit about it all, it something I blame on society more widely.

Btw, who are you quoting, who said 'emotional risk implies abuse'? I can't find it. I certainly disagree.

SatsukiKusukabe Mon 08-Apr-13 16:11:03

thank you for "getting it" nailak. I love that I am home with my children now, and I get that time with them but it is also the most practical solution. I feel like everyone wants me to admit that I'm mentally unstimulated, bored and financialy abused. my husband loves me and knows what a difficult job I have. it's only from other women I get shit

way to fight the patriarchy confused

Cross posted with you satsu.

I'm really sorry you're feeling rotten.

I'm obviously missing something ... what is it that's so upsetting you? That fact your DH works?

My impression on FWR is that lots of us have DHs who earn more, or all, of the money. It's normal. It's no reflection on you. God knows why you are worried people will think you are 'thick' because of it, but if people say that, tell them to fuck right off.

Feminism has fuck all to do with telling women that, and I have never seen a thread where feminists suggest that. It's utter, utter bollocks. Honestly it is. You must know this - please read all those hundreds of threads and believe them.

satsu, where are people saying this stuff?

Point me to the thread, and I will be right on it.

SatsukiKusukabe Mon 08-Apr-13 16:19:16

lrd this thread is basically a continuation of a much much longer nastier thread started by spb (while in her defense didn't know it would turn that way). I don't think you were on that thread so you may not know what it was like.

I know feminism isn't about turning on women, but fwr is a smallish forum with mostly names I recognize and thinking that people who I respected see me and other women that way is actually really upsetting.

Ah. I only saw the start of that thread. It was perfectly sane then, but I didn't see how it turned out. confused

I'll stop commenting here as I must be making no sense if it's all about another thread.

SatsukiKusukabe Mon 08-Apr-13 16:42:40

the point that we were being financial abused or leaving ourselves open to it was made lrd and the op if this thread rightfully (imo) wanted to discuss that.

nailak Mon 08-Apr-13 16:55:03

i was misquoting "It's that emotional risk underlies all kinds of abuse - that's fundamentally part of what abuse is"

Lrd i agree with you. women should have the choice to do what makes them happy. The shouldn't be seen as selfish if they go to work, or as workshy vulnerable idiots if they choose to stay at home.

Personally I think it is strange that for so many paid employment validates their existence. Paid employment gives them a sense of self. I mean if you introduce yourself as a mum that is seen as silly, subsumed identity etc, but if you introduce yourself as a lawyer, that is fine as you are paid to be a lawyer? what is the difference?

LRD this isnt thread about a thread as such, it is a discussion that arose from issues in another thread, that i felt should be had so feel free to comment, I welcome your perspective!

Ah, thanks. Yes, 'implies' means the opposite of what I said.

I am going to get off here now as I obviously need to read the other thread to understand.

But - someone who is working bringing up their children, is working. I definitely believe that. My mum suffered because that work is not valued. It is utterly shit.

Darkesteyes Mon 08-Apr-13 17:39:16

Last weeks coverage of the Philpott case by the right wing really made me angry and saddened me too. There was so much focus on the benefit aspect of the case and a lack of respect for the fact that six children lost their lives.
If the focus is going to be on monies then it would have been better to focus on and raise awareness of financial abuse in relationships.
Because reading some of the recent threads some people just dont get it. If awareness can be raised so that more people can recognise the signs and leave a financially (and otherwise abusive) relationship so a tragic case like this has less chance of being repeated then a little bit of good could come out of something really bad.
It would have been much more productive for journos/writers/presenters etc to focus on this rather than stir up hatred towards people of a lower economic status.
A chance to do some good has been completely wasted here.

Darkesteyes Mon 08-Apr-13 17:45:02

My experience with my ex OM.
Probably not direct financial abuse but he certainly showed some red flags.

08-2010, 5:39 PM


Serious MoneySaving Fan



Join Date: Aug 2010

Posts: 891

Thanked 1,778 Times in 597 Posts


Is this miserly or moneysaving

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi I felt i had to join this site to conribute to this thread.One poster suggested to the OP to get a job.Well how can she attend a job interview in her only pair of holey shoes.The interviewer would think she didnt care.I once dated a man like the OPs husband.
1 My ex would time me in the shower only allowing me THREE MINUTES maximum (worried about his water meter)
2 i was round his late one night and when it came for time to take me home we found his sisters car which he had borrowed had been broken into,drivers window smashed glass everywhere both big shards and very small ones.I couldnt believe what he then said.
"well it will be a bit cold but i will brush the glass of the seats and drive you home" He actually expected me to risk sitting on broken glass rather than fork out for a taxihe insisted he had no money i only had 10 pounds to my name until payday. It wasnt until we went to the cashpoint i found out he had 700 pounds and it was only 4 days till his next payday.He begrudgingly lent me 30 pounds for a taxi after i phoned the cab company and got an exact quote from them and yes i paid him back.No way could we drive around in car with a smashed window.Police might have thinked my ex was the one who pinched it and it would have caused complications getting the crime number which you need for the insurance payout.Oh and it was November so it was cold
He refused to by a present for his brothers 40th not even a cheap bottle of plonk even though i offered to go halves yet he insisted on going to the party
He saw a duvet set in my catologue that he fancied so he asked me to order it and he would pay me back when it was delivered.
On the day it came i met him for dinner and took the duvet set with me and instinct told me to take the invoice as well.I gave him the set we went and sat down and i asked him for the money so i could pay off the invoice.Every time i asked he kept changing the subject and this went on for a good hour and a half.In the end i had to put the invoice in his lap.
The straw that broke the camels back in the end?He invited (insisted) that i pop round three days before Christmas and didnt tell me he had a really bad tummy bug and then he CRAP**D the bed I KID YOU NOT.He said he thought it was safe enough to try and fart HIS WORDS I went down with said bug on the Boxing Day.I was absolutely furious.I ended the relationship on New Years Eve.
Incidentally he would NEVER buy groceries at all unless he knew i was coming over 1 packet of pasta 1packet of pasta sauce 1 bottle of diet coke and garlic bread.One time i was too ill to go over and he had a right go at me cos he had already bought this stuff. He did deliveries for an Indian takeaway five nights a week and they gave him a free meal to take home every night.When i pointed out this was bad for his health he just said "Its free.
In the summertime i used to buy ice cream and leave it in his freezer.I gave up on this after a while as he would just let the electric run out and the ice cream would melt. One time i was getting out of the shower at his one NIGHT and the electric just went off and i nearly slipped.He would only get a tenner out of the cashpoint at a time but then would get the car out to take the five minute drive to the cashpoint every time he needed more
By the way this was a man in his early fifties.
There was also a time that he refused to go out and buy more toilet roll when he once ran out when i was over there and told me to take my Imodium so i woudnt need to go.(i suffer from IBS) I sincerly hope that no woman ever has children with my ex.It would be a pass port to poverty. I will NEVER tolerate a tightwad again!

Darkesteyes Mon 08-Apr-13 17:48:02

My linked post is from this old thread. Some shocking incidents of financial abuse here.

forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=2690837&highlight=is+this+miserly+or+just+moneysaving

Darkesteyes Mon 08-Apr-13 17:52:42

I recognised the red flags in my relationship above. I was in my early thirties at the time.
Philpott kept choosing younger and younger partners knowing that their lack of experience meant they would be less likely to question things. Maybe be more malleable.
I think there is a need for an advocate to go into schools and teach awareness of financial abuse (and other abuse) in relationships.

Badvoc Mon 08-Apr-13 17:57:46

I have been told on more than one occasion on MN that I am stupid to be a sahm.
I am married with 2 dc, one school age, one pre schooler.
I do voluntary work and have to spend a lot of time caring for my mother and her fragile health.
My eldest ds has sen.
My dh works away (other side of the world type away) every few weeks.
He also does shorter trips to Europe.
I would need a job that worked around school hours, in term time only and not shifts as I would have in childcare when dh is away.
Of anyone can find me a job like that, then do let me know!
The idea that sahms are stupid and haven't thought it through is spurious.
Many of us have no other option that makes sense either financially or emotionally.

BasilBabyEater Mon 08-Apr-13 19:34:06

There's only one self-identified feminist I know of on MN who would say that SAHMs are by definition stupid.

And she's bonkers.

I don't think any of the other FWR regulars who actually identify as feminists, would say SAHM=stupid. They're just not that stupid.

Badvoc Mon 08-Apr-13 19:40:38

I didn't say it was feminists who called me stupid!...
(And I think I know to whom you refer! smile)

BasilBabyEater Mon 08-Apr-13 23:57:09

No clues now.

grin

Badvoc Tue 09-Apr-13 09:53:21

smile

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now