If you hit your OH then YES you are as much an abuser as he would be if he hit you.

[QueenGigantaurofMnet]

I have just seen someone on another forum discussing how she couldn't possibly have been an abuser. she has only hit her husband twice (although the second time she hit him twice as she enjoyed the fear and shock in his face) in the 15 years of their marriage.

the rest of the forumn are telling her that it was ok. they are both "headstrong"

other are saying things like "i wish i could hit my oh"

It makes me feel sick.

Violance on a relationship is wrong. It is called Domestic violance, not man hitting wife violance.

if you have hit your partner then you ARE an abuser and you SHOULD be looking at ways to deal with your anger.

Im sorry but i am actually quite angry about this

well i would think that was wrong, as i come from the pov that violence is wrong, whereas you seem to think in certain circumstances it is justified?

I agree with Jareth - at last people are engaging with the idea that intent and motivation for violence are important.

Quoting Jareth:

intention rules. If it's control, then nothing violent is acceptable. If it's pleading, desperate, no other option, then it's human emotion.

I think it is sad that we live in a society where many people think it is ok to hit their partner.

Just looking at the invidual level here: I totally get the social level but they can be separated IMO

'Men are MUCH stronger.'

That's variable isn't it? My DH is a ten stone weakling whom I could easily flatten should I wish- I just am fitter and stronger.

On a purely individual level it's less dangerous for him to hit me than vice versa, and yet if he even tried my trust levels wold evaporate.

I have a male friend who has been a victim of domestic violence. He works in a physical job, and is much bigger and stronger than his now ex-wife. She only 'lashed out' at him when she was suffering the effects of her mental health problems that she refused to control.

Should we deny the impact that the violence had on him? He could have easily defended himself physically, but refused to do so on the basis that he did not think that it was justifiable to hit his spouse.

I could not look him in the eye and say that his ex was justified. Not the first time. Not the second time. Not the 50th time.

Interesting post Thistledew.

I think lots of abuse happens because the protagonist iss out of control; alcoholic, MH issues, anger. All that offers is an explanation- and often one we can understand if not condone- but it doesn't mean the person being hit should accept it.

DS1 is aggressive- heck I have an active thread in chat, he could outdo most abusers. It is not right when he hits people and people have to be protected from him; you'd ahve to be ppretty lacking in compassion ot to understand- has a form of ASD and othern related issues- but it's not right. He's also pretty damned strong and certainly at 11 strong enough that he has been able to exert force over me for some time.

We teach him that there is no excuse for aggression and that 'anger issues ' (as he likes to state) / perceived victimisation etc are no excuse. The only time he can hurt is if he has reason to fear for his own immediate safety if he does not.

There does seem to be much ignorance as to what constitutes domestic abuse on this thread;

www.womensaid.org.uk/domestic-violence-survivors-handbook.asp?section=000100010008000100310003

There are a number of different definitions of domestic violence. In Women's Aid's view, domestic violence is physical, psychological, sexual or financial violence that takes place within an intimate or family-type relationship and forms a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour. This can include forced marriage and so-called 'honour' crimes. Domestic violence often includes a range of abusive behaviours, not all of which are, in themselves, inherently 'violent' - hence some people prefer to use the term 'domestic abuse' rather than 'domestic violence'.

Domestic violence is very common: research shows that it affects one in four women in their lifetime. Two women a week are killed by their partners or former partners. All forms of domestic violence - psychological, financial, emotional and physical - come from the abuser's desire for power and control over an intimate partner or other family members. Domestic violence is repetitive and life-threatening, it tends to worsen over time and it destroys the lives of women and children.

Crime statistics and research show that domestic violence is gender specific - that is, it is most commonly experienced by women and perpetrated by men, particularly when there is a pattern of repeated and serious physical assaults, or when it includes rape or sexual assault or results in injury or death. Men can also experience violence from their partners (both within gay and straight relationships); however women's violence towards men is often an attempt at self defence, and is only rarely part of a consistent pattern of controlling and coercive behaviour.

* Destructive criticism and verbal abuse: shouting; mocking; accusing; name calling; verbally threatening.
* Pressure tactics: sulking; threatening to withhold money, disconnecting the telephone, taking the car away, taking the children away, or reporting you to welfare agencies unless you comply with his demands; threatening or attempting suicide; withholding or pressuring you to use drugs or other substances; lying to your friends and family about you; telling you that you have no choice in any decisions.
* Disrespect: persistently putting you down in front of other people; not listening or responding when you talk; interrupting your telephone calls; taking money from your purse without asking; refusing to help with childcare or housework.
* Breaking trust: lying to you; withholding information from you; being jealous; having other relationships; breaking promises and shared agreements.
* Isolation: monitoring or blocking your telephone calls; telling you where you can and cannot go; preventing you from seeing friends and relatives; shutting you in the house.
* Harassment: following you; checking up on you; not allowing you any privacy (for example, opening your mail), repeatedly checking to see who has telephoned you; embarrassing you in public; accompanying you everywhere you go.
* Threats: making angry gestures; using physical size to intimidate; shouting you down; destroying your possessions; breaking things; punching walls; wielding a knife or a gun; threatening to kill or harm you and the children; threatening to kill or harm family pets; threats of suicide.
* Sexual violence: using force, threats or intimidation to make you perform sexual acts; having sex with you when you don't want it; forcing you to look at pornographic material; forcing you to have sex with other people; any degrading treatment related to your sexuality or to whether you are lesbian, bisexual or heterosexual.
* Physical violence: punching; slapping; hitting; biting; pinching; kicking; pulling hair out; pushing; shoving; burning; strangling.
* Denial: saying the abuse doesn't happen; saying you caused the abusive behaviour; being publicly gentle and patient; crying and begging for forgiveness; saying it will never happen again.

i have tried to strangle my husband once

it felt appropriate at that moment because i had lost the plot
that is the worst thing
suddenly i had my hands around his throat

i haven't hit him at any other time nor do i abuse him verbally or he I for that matter

it was totally the wrong thing to do

i don't think it makes me an abuser though
perhaps i am kidding myself but one episode in 12 years does not show any sort of abusive pattern

it doesn't make it okay either

Should we not define a single incidence as abuse then?

Should a person who has just been beaten up by their partner be turned away from a refuge because it was just once incident? Maybe told that if their partner does it again, or it develops into a regular thing, they can come back and ask to be reassessed?

I accept there is a difference between sustained abuse and an isolated incident, but the difference must be in the abuser's recognition that their actions were wrong, and the abused's trust that their abuser will take steps to ensure it does not happen again.

Of course a person who has been beaten by their partner should not be turned away from a refuge - nor would they be.

A single incidence of domestic violence would generally be classed as assault.

A pattern of systematic control and violence that has a cyclical nature and which has an unbalanced power dynamic is abuse.

A person who hits their partner once as an isolated incident has committed assault not abuse.

It is the same with sexual violence. If a man rapes his girlfriend once he has sexually assaulted and raped her. If he is the perpetrator of ongoing sexual violence he is abusing her (through the means of sexual violence).

All of these behaviours are of course wrong. (other than self defence - this is recognised in the law.)

Spikeycow for example assaulted her partner - she did not abuse him. He abused her.

I'm pretty shocked at the victim blaming mentality that has been shown on this thread. Also a poster from Women's Aid has come on and made informed and sensible points and has been dismissed by a whole load of people who seem hazy on what the actual definition of abuse is.

All this 'yeah but my husband's weaker than me' stuff is just ridiculous. Men on the whole are physically stronger and more powerful than women. Men are also educated in an entirely different way to women with regards to power dynamics and control. Anybody who wishes to argue otherwise is deluding themselves.

Spikeycow I'm glad you seem spikey enough not to have allowed this ridiculous thread to get to you too much. You know what you did and why you did it - bloody well done on surviving and getting out.

beachcomber i find it interesting that you mention sexual violence here and refer to a one-off rape as assault. i know there is a vast difference between the two but i know for sure that if a child had been raped once i would defintely refer to it as sexual abuse. how is it that we see it so differently when it happens to an adult woman? i am genuinely asking for the logic behind this btw not picking holes.

"I'm pretty shocked at the victim blaming mentality "

your words are implying that posters have been blaming abuse victims for their abuse. this is not what has happened here. posters have expressed that they consider the abuse victim responsible for the physical actions they took (whilst NOT in self defense) against their abuser.

Personally if a child had been raped as a one off incident by a person not known to them, I would consider that to be rape of a minor.

As for what constitutes child abuse, i think this is a good definition.

"Child abuse is the physical, sexual, emotional mistreatment, or neglect of children.[1] In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) define child maltreatment as any act or series of acts of commission or omission by a parent or other caregiver that results in harm, potential for harm, or threat of harm to a child.[2] Most child abuse occurs in a child's home, with a smaller amount occurring in the organizations, schools or communities the child interacts with. There are four major categories of child abuse: neglect, physical abuse, psychological/emotional abuse, and child sexual abuse."

I bolded parent and caregiver. The difference between children and adults is that children are dependant on the adults in their lives and therefore an act of violence against a child in one's care is considered abuse - abuse of the child and abuse of the power and control that an adult automatically has over a child.

Beachcomber, I am also not clear what you are saying.

Are you saying that a one-off incident of violence in a relationship is not abuse, therefore it can be justified and excused?

If you do not think it can be justified or excused, what is the point in saying it is not abuse?

No-one doubts that there is a difference between a one off incident and repeated instances of sustained or cyclic abuse, but is is really helpful to the victim of sustained abuse to differentiate the two?

Surely one incident is bad enough to be unjustifiable?

thank you beachcomber that makes sense.

thistledew i think beachcomber is saying taht a one-off incident is not abuse and tehrefore the perpertrator is not an abuser as was suggested in teh OP.

"your words are implying that posters have been blaming abuse victims for their abuse"

Yup. Read back over the thread if you can be bothered - lots of classic victim blaming.

i.e. Comments along the line of people should get out of abusive relationships/remove themselves from abusive relationships before they get to the stage of hitting back. If they do not and they do hit back, they are abusers themselves.

Classic victim blaming.

Also there are other ways to engage in victim blaming than simply blaming the victim for the actual abuse. That is far too simplistic a definition.

Is there that much of a divergence between a relationship with a caregiver and child and that between partners? I appreciate that the latter has the added factor of physical dependancy, but surely they have in common a bond of trust and love?

Is it not that the breach of this trust and love that makes an assault an abuse? An assault from a stranger in the street is just an assault. An assault from someone with whom you have a relationship of love and trust is abuse.

"If they do not and they do hit back, they are abusers themselves."

but not leaving does not automatically mean they will hit back. hitting back is a choice that person makes, (and i have already agreed that there is extreme provocation for them to do so) and i do think that person is responsible for that action. unless they are hitting out in self defense they always have a choice about whetehr they hit. that is the point i was making.

Thistledew I answered your question before you asked it.

"All of these behaviours are of course wrong. (other than self defence - this is recognised in the law.)"

This statement from you is just silly and looks like you are wilfully misunderstanding me;

"Are you saying that a one-off incident of violence in a relationship is not abuse, therefore it can be justified and excused?"

Um, no. I'm quite clearly saying it is assault and is wrong but it is different behaviour to abuse. At no point do I say that assault is justified or excusable.

thistle i do think there is a difference. a child is dependant on teh caregiver, as just that, a caregiver. an adult is not dependant on a partner for care. tehre is the issue of mutual trust but it in't the same as taht of a chidl/parent relationship

Beachcomber - in the example I gave of my male friend who suffered from sustained domestic violence, the point at which he decided to walk away from the relationship was when he found himself thinking 'If I just hit her back, she will stop hitting me'. Would you say that he would have been blameless if he had stayed and hit her back? It is not just about strength. By this time he was walking around with scratches and bruises that he explained away by saying he got them from trimming the hedges at work

Folks it would seem that you are determined that a one off isolated incidence of violence in a relationship that has a healthy power dynamic is abuse.

"An assault from someone with whom you have a relationship of love and trust is abuse."

Thistledew this is your own personal definition of domestic abuse. It is not the definition of abuse commonly used by women's aid/refuge workers or the police or the law or the women's movement.

One might say that one's trust has been abused if one is assaulted by one's partner but that is an entirely different thing to domestic abuse.

I am going out now - I think my points are pretty clear.