Something else I said on the group was hugely picked apart, and I'd be interested to know others perspective on it.
I mentioned that if my son turned out to be a rapist or abuser, I'd feel that I'd failed in my job as his mother. This was met with cries of 'misogyny' and 'women blaming'. But when you consider that his father was a rapist and abuser, and for a significant portion of my sons life I was a single parent, I think it's only fair that if he turned out to be that way inclined, I would have to take some blame for that. My failure to shield him from his father's actions is a tricky issue, because I was in an abusive relationship that I couldn't find a way out of. I shielded my children as much as I could, and felt the full force of my ex's violence and aggression in order to protect them. But in the subsequent years, when I was on my own, I made sure I did everything in my power to let them know that their fathers behaviour was not OK. I'd even go as far as saying that my choice to marry a good man, who values me and treats me with kindness and respect, is part of that. It's showing my children, that (and I'm sorry to throw it in, but it's relevant) NAMALT. I don't want either of my children growing up to think that male violence is an inevitability. For my son to think it's the only path he can take, and for my daughter to accept it within her own relationships.
So is it woman blaming and misogynistic to say that if my son turned out to be a rapist or abuser, that I should accept some responsibility? I'm not saying it would be entirely my fault, and I'm not for one second saying that all abusers should blame their mother. Some men, for one reason or another, seem to be biologically predisposed to violence. My ex's mother was a very violent woman herself, as was his father. He grew up surrounded by abuse. My dad also grew up with a violent father, but his mother was exactly the opposite. And my dad was the kindest, most gentle man I have ever known, although his father's violence affected him, he chose to be the opposite kind of husband and father.
If you come from the viewpoint that all male children are 'inevitable rapists or oppressors of women' then of course environmental factors can't be taken into account. But if you don't agree with that, then it stands to reason that their upbringing has a huge impact on whether they grow up to become abusers or not.
I'm fully aware that my view might be skewed somewhat. I still blame myself, to some extent, for staying with their father so long. There came a time when I realised it was not a safe or healthy relationship, when I was around 20, and I had to leave. But it took me a good 4 years to finally do it. In that 4 years, his violence escalated significantly, presumably because I had been pregnant/given birth. Before the DCs were born, it was mostly sexual/emotional abuse. After, it became physical and financial too. But still I stayed, because I truly believed I could help him. I thought that if I loved him enough, if I showed him all the affection his mother denied him, that he could change. I suffered greatly for that belief, and I feel sad that I lost 10 years of my life trying to fix something that I hadn't broken. I was 14 when I first met him, he was 18. DD is nearly 13, and she is still very much a child, as was I. These days I try not to think too much about it, but sometimes I do look back and mourn the loss of part of my childhood.
I've rambled on a bit here, I'm sort of thinking out loud, but what I'm trying to say is if my son turned out to be an abuser I would blame myself, and I'm fully prepared to be told that's a skewed way of thinking.