Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to wish there was a way to make young women aim higher in their choice of boyfriends? (distressing story about child abuse)

222 replies

ReputableBiscuit · 12/11/2014 16:07

First off, this young mother is categorically not to blame for what this awful man did to her child, and ALL the guilt belongs to him for his unforgivable crime and attempts to hide it. But AIBU to just wish she'd had more self-respect than to let a man with 38 prior convictions into her (and her baby's) life? How can we empower emotionally vulnerable young women to protect themselves from dangerous men? This happened local to me. It's so bloody sad.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-30019395

OP posts:
BertieBotts · 15/11/2014 17:57

We don't need to argue about this; if you change society's perception of abuse, women will naturally see it as less acceptable, feel more able to leave, lean more towards avoiding men who show red flags or danger signs. It seems as though it is most urgent to start here, but that's backwards - by the time the woman is in the relationship it's pretty much too late, when you look at the bigger picture (of course it's never ever too late for an individual to change their own life by getting away from toxic people and absolutely it's valuable and crucial for individuals to do this).

How do you think that abusers get the way that they are? I'm sure some of them are straight up psychopaths but for a great, great number they are repeating patterns and lessons they learned about relationships in their own childhood. Attitudes of entitlement, of sexism, the premise that violence is masculine and inevitable. Some of that is cultural.

It would be nice to pretend that abusers, rapists and psychopaths fit into a nice neat little box and that they are anomalies, outliers, that we can avoid them and be okay. But I think that taking this mindset is sticking your head in the sand - the numbers are too great. Women can't avoid all men who act in these ways because - I don't know the numbers, but I reckon it's easily over half of all men. Astounding numbers. And yes, of course not all men. We don't need to hide away from or vilify all men.

When you advocate that individuals should act, that we should teach women to see the signs, you are treating the symptom. Attack the cause and the symptoms will shrink too, just more slowly. Yes more women and children will suffer in the short term, but by focusing on society as a whole, fewer women and children suffer in the long term.

Nobody deserves for their children to die. It is awful, the worst thing imaginable. She could make the worst mistake in the world - clearly, she did. She still did not deserve the outcome.

Nomama · 15/11/2014 18:03

Really - no natural differences between the genders? Show me a man who gave birth! Show me a woman who impregnated someone?

And you did it again - I said gender differences....it means something slightly different from sex differences. That may be why you disagree with me.

I said and meant the differences like those that make women mothers - celebrate them, don't make them mean a woman is weaker, lesser than. Allow a woman to be a working or SAHM and consider them equal, support them in their choices.

I have no idea why you would not agree with that!

And have you acknowledged that neo feminism exists yet?

BertieBotts · 15/11/2014 18:05

I know at least two people (in the UK) who have court ordered contact with abusive exes, one of whom had to escape to several refuges (as he kept finding her) and whose life was endangered by him. He also on at least one occasion beat her because she was attempting to get to and feed her screaming infant child. I know the UK system is not infallible. Although the "sudden allegation of abuse" thing is ridiculous - a tiny tiny number of abused partners go to hospital or contact the police, because they're being abused. It's not like they got attacked by a stranger or fell down the stairs.

The UK system is bad enough - in the experience of people I have known, they definitely don't take the "if he hits mum he'll hit the kids" stance and tend to go by "he's never abused the children, abuse against the mother is irrelevant" which is ridiculous - Social Services consider witnessing abuse to be abuse in itself. Social Services and CAFCASS are not always in agreement. There's something worth fighting to change.

ZeViteVitchofCwismas · 15/11/2014 18:06

We'd do well to tackle the underlying assumption that a woman without a partner is a failure. It's no great shock that there are some women who view any man as better than none at all:

People get lonely. its not easy out there on the dating scene. whoever you are. no matter how rich, thin or pretty, funny and so on, its hard. people get lonely and want to give people chances.

LurcioAgain · 15/11/2014 18:10

Googled Aya Gruber (who's a law professor at Colorado law school), and found an interesting looking article, though it seems to set "neo-feminism" up in opposition to second wave feminism (so seems unlikely that she'd want to count de Beauvoir as a neo-feminist). As far as I can see, the emphasis is on distributive justice (though I'd have to read the article to see what she meant by that) and what she calls "subordination (existing) on multiple axes" i.e. intersectionality.

On the other hand, wikipedia defines neo-feminism thus: "Neofeminism describes an emerging view of women as becoming empowered through the celebration of attributes perceived to be conventionally feminine, that is, it glorifies a womanly essence over claims to equality with men. It is a term that has come into use in the early 21st century to refer to a popular culture trend, what critics see as a type of "lipstick feminism" that confines women to stereotypical roles, while it erodes cultural freedoms women gained through the Second-wave feminism of the 1960s and 1970s in particular" which I'd say is entirely at odds with Gruber's conception.

Either way, it seems pretty irrelevant to the present discussion. Maybe start a thread in feminist theory on it, if you think it merits further discussion?

cailindana · 15/11/2014 18:16

There are of course physical differences between men and women. I don't accept that women are "naturally" more nurturing or anything like that. Recognition for stay at home parents is a societal issue that feminists are concerned with.

I accept that the commentator you quoted uses the term neo-feminists but it is not a term used by the feminist community.

cailindana · 15/11/2014 18:19

Going by the wiki definition of neo-feminism I am most definitely and certainly not a neo-feminist.

CrispyFern · 15/11/2014 18:51

Bulbasaur - one of the mothers got 40 years, while the man (I think the father), the one who killed the child, got 10.

That just can't be right. That shows something is just wrong there in the way we think about women policing men's behaviour. And the way we think about what a father is allowed to be and what a mother is allowed to be.

Bulbasaur · 15/11/2014 19:50

CrispyFern

Once again that would not happen to her child without her blessings. She allowed it, she is responsible. If she wasn't ok with her child being beat, she would have left. These mothers obviously didn't care about their children. Once again the onus is on her to protect her child. The onus is on the woman to leave the abusive man or kick him out. It's not a feminist issue, it's a common sense one.

If I had a dog that I knew bit children, and it bit my child, I'd be responsible. Sure, they dog should be taken out back and shot, but the mom is still responsible.

Do you have a link to the article where the mother got 40 years and the father got 10? The article I found on buzzfeed, this one: Mothers sentenced for enabling abuse, all the mothers got less time than the fathers.

BertieBotts · 15/11/2014 19:52

I think you are totally wrong bulbasaur and you clearly have little or no understanding of the dynamics that occur in abusive relationships.

Who would be OK with their child or themselves being beaten?? It's not as simple as saying they should leave.

Bulbasaur · 15/11/2014 19:55

Who would be OK with their child or themselves being beaten?

Silence is agreement.

They can cry a big sob story and say they were not ok with it.

But their actions say otherwise:

  • Their child was hit and they did nothing.
  • Their child was hit again and they did nothing.
  • Their child was continuously beat and they did nothing.

What other conclusion could be drawn than they were ok with watching their child being beaten?

cailindana · 15/11/2014 19:57

Do you honestly think leaving an abusive man is the same as getting rid of a dog Bulbasaur?

Bulbasaur · 15/11/2014 20:02

Do we not always say in threads to look at a man's actions, and not their words?

Why does it change with a mother? Look at her actions, and what she's doing.

Do you honestly think leaving an abusive man is the same as getting rid of a dog Bulbasaur?

Yes.

When the woman has had enough, she leaves. Abused women don't leave until they want the help. Just like an alcoholic will not recover until he wants the help.

cailindana · 15/11/2014 20:04

So you think the abuse has no effect on the woman - she doesn't feel any fear?

Bulbasaur · 15/11/2014 20:06

So you think the abuse has no effect on the woman - she doesn't feel any fear?

If fear for herself overrides her fear for her children, she has no business calling herself a mother.

cailindana · 15/11/2014 20:07

Right ho.

Bulbasaur · 15/11/2014 20:11

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

cailindana · 15/11/2014 20:15

Right ho.

Bulbasaur · 15/11/2014 20:17

Ok cupcake. :)

Bulbasaur · 15/11/2014 20:19

Not everyone is ok as you are with children being subjected to abuse. :)

cailindana · 15/11/2014 20:23

Right ho.

mathanxiety · 15/11/2014 20:39

I agree with BertieBotts' comments about how hard it is for women to keep abusers from children even if the women and children have managed to leave. The truth is that women are damned if they do and damned if they don't here.

How the law deals with repeat violent offenders up to the point where they commit a heinous murder is a huge problem.

Violent offences are not taken seriously, and doubly so if the violence has been against a domestic partner.

mathanxiety · 15/11/2014 20:45

In other words, if we dealt seriously with those men we know are prone to violence or those who are repeat offenders and who seem to be oblivious to the idea that there is an authority higher than them in this society, then we would have eliminated a bug chunk of the problem right from the start.

BertieBotts · 15/11/2014 21:35

FFS.

If women could leave as easily as that, THEY WOULD.

You can't seriously be suggesting that every victim of abuse stays because they like it. Are you Erin Pizzey?

If it was that easy to leave THERE WOULD BE NO ABUSE PROBLEM. Victims would just leave, the abuse would be over, yeah the abuser might move onto someone else but then they'd walk out too. Cos it's so easy and all.

If it was that easy why do we have refuges turning women away because they are full to the brim? Why does it take 7 attempts to leave an abusive partner? Why are 2 women a week murdered? Could they just not be bothered?

You've just said you've witnessed trying to "drag an abused woman out of the situation" (nice, BTW) and yet you STILL peddle this bullshit that it's easy to leave. If it's hard to leave despite having friends and family backing you up then what? Oh no of course they must have wanted it. How supportive you are.

That picture is from a make up artists' website, BTW. We can imagine what you mean, you don't need to find a made up picture to prove it.

Nomama · 15/11/2014 21:42

1982 book by Jacques J. Zephire about French feminist Simone de Beauvoir, Le Neo-Feminisme de Simone de Beauvoir (Paris: Denoel/Gonthier 9782282202945).