Use of the words abusive and controlling on MN

[SrAssumpta]

Recently there seems to be a surge in the dramatically unnecessary use of words like abusive and controlling on here and I really think I've become desensitized to it so I would imagine that's how real victims of abuse or people with genuinely controlling partners would feel too if they came on talking about their relationship, does that make sense?

A woman got told the other day she sounded controlling for making a meal plan ffs, I mean seriously? These words get thrown around now it's going to either lead to everyone thinking they're in abusive relationships or in fact controlling and the people who genuinely need to understand that their relationship isn't normal won't be able to see it because suddenly everybody is abusive or controlling.

say things which are mild are abuse then it makes those really abused in a sense short of a word to use or diminishes the word.

I don't really agree that. Mild abuse is a phrase I think is an oxymoron and usually escalates.

Again this thread is talking about situations where there is clearly no abuse.

RedDaisy, again you are missing the crucial element, which is that mildness/ seriousness is a matter of opinion and not objective fact.

ApplePaltrow, what is clear to you is clearly not clear to me. Clearly imo (see what I did there Bumbley?) you have not given much thought to the matter of domestic abuse, or maybe you would not have seen fit to joke about the topic? Or maybe I am being charitable here.

I am bothered that someone seems to think it is ok to make jokes about the Relationships board, where (mostly) women post about domestic abuse, and think it is ok to mock people who take the subject of domestic abuse seriously.

If nothing else has been accomplished by this thread, it is the frankly gobsmacking revelation that there are plenty of people who do not take domestic abuse seriously. So thanks, OP -- it is nice for abused women to be able to see exactly what they may already sense they are up against when trying to decide what to do about a relationship with a partner who is popular, comes across well to other people, wouldn't say boo to a goose at work, a woman who has carefully hidden abuse from friends and family for many years. Such a person is already imprisoned in her relationship and feeling she has few options. Now along come people on this thread who are ready to insinuate that there is real and imaginary abuse and to illustrate their misguided opinion with mockery. And also to illustrate the level of disbelief that may greet her when she finally comes out. Nice.

Bumbley, I have been careful as stated to Starling to use 'to me' and 'imo' in my posts. Have you read them?

Starling, I try not to contribute to threads about threads, which are not kosher here. This thread is imo (

Oh FFS. People want examples of threads on which outlandish accusations of abuse have occurred, and when they're provided, you say you don't want to talk about a thread on a thread.

It's very easy, isn't it, to accuse those you disagree with of casting aspersions on the notion that abuse can manifest itself in small ways? And to refuse to discuss the specific examples people have provided? Then you can avoid actually THINKING CRITICALLY about your own attitudes and posting history.

I've said above that I was regularly abused by my father. I've also said that I minimised it in my head because I was too regular, or too violent. I don't see any sympathy or support from you about that. convenient just to ignore my experiences, I guess. Or don't you believe me? Perhaps you think I'm exaggerating?

'Again this thread is talking about situations where there is clearly no abuse.'

Spartans, what would you think of Apple's mockery of the Relationships board therefore?

I note again your use of the phrase 'clearly no abuse'. You do not seem to understand that it is all a matter of differing opinions, not objective facts.

If you have a definition of abuse that you are using to inform your stark statements, would you care to share it?

math, have you read the other people's posts because I'm genuinely wondering where you think people are mocking women who are victims of abuse or suggesting that they don't believe them.

"You do understand that people are allowed to disagree with you, right? "

Some people on this thread clearly disagree with your opinion. You're ok with that, right?

*it wasn't too regular, that should say.

Well no, I don't intend to be drawn into a discussion about another thread. I will concentrate on this thread.

Yes it is easy to state that abuse starts small, because it is true and an established fact, and obvious to anyone at all familiar with domestic abuse. It is really sad that this detail needs to be pointed out here, on Mumsnet.

Threads about threads are bad form and the very good reasons for this are illustrated on this thread. Continued attempts to bring up other threads as if they illustrate some profound truth about relationship threads in general or the responses those threads generate is a dishonest and disingenuous attempt to undermine the discussion of abuse in general and the Relationships board in particular, and to cast aspersions on the idea that abuse exists.

'...the way some posters react to minor relationship issues has made me cautious about venting when I've had a disagreement with my DP, because of the response I'd get, when I know it's just niggling things, and not controlling or abuse, because I have my father's behaviour to compare.'

While extending my utmost sympathy to you over the abuse you suffered at your father's hands, I think it is important to point out that just because abuse someone reports seems to be less vicious or less terrifying in your opinion or in comparison to your own experience, it may be terrifying or awful or all sorts of horrible things to someone else, i.e. the person actually having the experience. You cannot 'know' what is niggling or very significant to someone else. You really cannot.

I will ask you the same question Bumbley.

(Hint -- take a look at ApplePaltrow's disgraceful posts here.)

And if you really want an answer to your silly question about disagreement, then read my posts too.

And NO-ONE, NO-ONE, on this read is failing to take domestic abuse seriously. I honestly think you're being deliberately obtuse. How can you read the same thread and come to such an egregiously misleading conclusion? People are saying that the misuse of the words abusing and controlling is offensive and harmful to people who are suffering abuse. A good analogy would be people using the term 'fraped' ("facebook raped") to describe having someone hijack your facebook page - this minimises actual rape.

So you think no-one should ever comment on trends across MN, or use threads as examples to illustrate their point? There ARE trends, people HAVE noticed them, and if it was so wrong to discuss them, don't you think MNHQ would have pulled this thread? Or is it just your opinion that we shouldn't discuss something a lot of us evidently find worrying and damaging!

You can bleat "you shouldn't make a TAAT and I refuse to join in" as many times as you like, but you aren't fooling anyone.

Cocklodger was another buzzword a couple of years ago and I remember thinking if I had written about my relationship at 23 especially if I'd been feeling ranty, DP would most definitely have been called a cocklodger. In reality he was a wonderful SAHD and it just made sense for me to work as his trade and gone bust and I had better earning potential at the time. Now he works really hard in a new industry and his earnings mean I can work part time at the moment. He wouldn't have been called a cocklodger at all as he was clearly a great sahd, not a cocklodger. I've been round for 10 years and I've only ever seen controlling and abusive men called controlling and abusive. To be honest there isn't nearly enough of this sort of advice for women, to often they are conditioned to put up with absolute shit from men. I wish I'd had access to mn 15 years ago, it would have saved me a world of pain.

Shout all you like, but unfortunately ApplePaltrow gives the lie to your opinion.

' the way some posters react to minor relationship issues has made me cautious about venting when I've had a disagreement with my DP, because of the response I'd get, when I know it's just niggling things, and not controlling or abuse, because I have my father's behaviour to compare.'

Your analogy is really stupid. The huge problem here, that people here seem not to be able to grasp or understand at all, is that something you categorise as "minor relationship issues" is a matter of opinion. Your opinion on what constitutes a 'minor relationship issue' is only an opinion.

What, in your opinion, constitutes abuse?
You have indicated that it needs to be equal to your own abuse at the hands of your father. Please assure me this is not so and that you are able to think objectively about the topic.

I have asked three posters here at this point what they think of as abuse and have had no response.

Third time lucky?

What makes you qualified to know whether something is a "minor issue or not" Math.
How do you know you are not doing more damage than good.
As i said if I had followed some of the advice on the relationship boards for my situation my DH could well be dead by now.
As it is he is well recovered and we are happy and enjoy our life together. Its not perfect but then nobody has a perfect relationship

If you have a definition of abuse that you are using to inform your stark statements, would you care to share it?

In Apple example... The dh hadn't done the dishes.....that's not abuse!

But one of the examples people have used, which you refuse to engage with, there wasn't even a relationship! The OP had been on one date, the guy wasn't interested, and on the way home, bought cake. This was described as abusive and an attempt to belittle the OP. IT CLEARLY WASN'T ABUSIVE.

But if you refuse to actually discuss specific cases that support an opposing point of view to your own, what really is the point. I'm not going to reply to you again. You have no interest in doing anything other than accusing others of things that they aren't doing.

Sorry about delaying in answering Math. I know it took me a whole hour to answer. But you know, I do have a life outside MN.

It's not my opinion that you were having a dig.....it is a fact! It's there to read. You mocked my understanding of English. If you are going to do it, at least be honest about it.

At the end of the day Math, I will never agree with you on this. If I can't form an opinion on whether something is abuse or a small relationship problem, why can you?

One last thing, though. I'm comparing my own relationship, my own experience, with my own experience with my father. That's what I said.

In addition, I actually said "it's easy to accuse those you agree with of casting aspersions on the notion that abuse can manifest itself in small ways". You're either misreading me or deliberately misinterpreting me. And doing the same to pretty much everyone else on the thread.

So you think no-one should ever comment on trends across MN, or use threads as examples to illustrate their point?
A reductio ad absurdum that will get you nowhere. You yourself insist this is is thread about a thread and not a concerted attack on Relationships or certain regular posters there. You can't have it both ways -- either it is a TAAT or what you are doing is making random comments. And you should not misrepresent what posters (and MNHQ) say about TAATs as general disapproval of random references to other threads, which happens all the time and is perfectly acceptable.

There ARE trends, people HAVE noticed them, and if it was so wrong to discuss them, don't you think MNHQ would have pulled this thread? Or is it just your opinion that we shouldn't discuss something a lot of us evidently find worrying and damaging!
(And again there is a reductio ad absurdum.)

Trends? And people ('a lot of us' -- who is 'us'?) have noticed them?
In other words, you disagree with some responses you have read, apparently in your case the disagreement is based on the misguided notion that the whack-a-mole principle applies to perceptions and experience of abuse, i.e. that experiences of abuse must be compared to some gold standard in order to qualify.

What we are seeing here is an anti-Relationships board agenda, with a snide attack on the sort of support and advice that is given there most of the time, and certain posters ('a small amount') implied as worthy of mockery.

I would really like to see someone from the 'some of us' camp attempt a definition of domestic abuse.

You can bleat "you shouldn't make a TAAT and I refuse to join in" as many times as you like, but you aren't fooling anyone.

Bleat?

I am not joining in a thread about a thread because this is not a thread about a thread except in your head. Many posts on going NC and mocking of the Relationships board and calling regular posters there 'fishwives' illustrate that nicely.

And of course it doesn't need to be "equal" to the abuse I suffered from my father. I never said or indicated that! I did say that having a history of being means I am aware that abuse exists and gives me some idea of what to look for.

Really, do you aurally think that trying to use my history if abuse against me is fair or kind, math? I find it pretty offensive, to be honest. You're extremely keen to defend abused women, unless you're talking to one who disagrees with you, en her history is fair game? Shame on you, you hypocrit.

And I haven't said this is a TAAT. You've said it repeatedly! Not me. I've said it's a thread about a TREND. I also haven't said anything about whether it relates to the relationships board or specific posters or not. I suggest you get your facts, and your posters, straight.

The "lots of us" are the posters on this thread who agree with the OP. There are quite a few.

Do you really know what reductio ad absurdum means, btw? Your use would suggest not. Hint: it doesn't mean "disagrees with me"

Spartans, I am still waiting for your definition of what abuse is.

[Bruffin]
What makes you qualified to know whether something is a "minor issue or not" Math.
What makes people here (who seem so shy of defining abuse) qualified to know whether someone is posting about 'a minor issue'?

How do you know you are not doing more damage than good.
How are so many people here so sure they are not doing more harm than good, waging a crusade for restricting use of the term abuse to something they consider real, by means of mocking the Relationships board, labelling of posters there as mouthy fishwives, and above all their implication arising from the insistence that the words controlling and abuse need to be rationed that an elusive and hard to pin down entity called real abuse exists? (judging from the hesitation of people to come up with definitions).

As i said if I had followed some of the advice on the relationship boards for my situation my DH could well be dead by now. As it is he is well recovered and we are happy and enjoy our life together.

You are a perfect example of the fact that people have more brains than many here are giving them credit for when they post on Relationships (Jazeera would disagree, I suspect), and are perfectly capable of taking the advice they need, and making up their own minds as to how to proceed.

I think you are capable of recognising that a situation where a man was taking medication that affected him was a rather unusual case, and I am sure you can appreciate that probably 99% of people described by frustrated partners are not adversely affected by medication and are choosing to behave badly.

nobody has a perfect relationship -- well quite.
But that is cold comfort to someone whose partner is abusing her in ways either small or large starting out small perhaps but on the way to large, which is nearly always the case and who feels bothered enough by that one small thing to post.

And it is not actually useful to point out the bleeding obvious in a general way to someone who is faced with an unequal workload at home or someone who is subjected to unasked for remarks about her weight, or the myriad other relationship issues that rankle.

You're extremely keen to defend abused women, unless you're talking to one who disagrees with you

This is very true.
What has actually shocked me the most is that some of the people claiming to be the defenders of abuse victims are actually so prolifically aggressive themselves.

You did indicate that, Starling.

'I know it's just niggling things, and not controlling or abuse, because I have my father's behaviour to compare.'

It might well be abuse in your own relationship, just not equal to the abuse your father handed out. Your MO of comparison is a problem.

You cannot use what you might call 'worse' previous abuse by someone else to measure abuse in a new situation for yourself. Or use your experience of abuse to judge someone else's.