FA and DV

Cross-Posted
There is a pervasive way of thinking in our culture today that seeks to undermine our fight for empowerment, and keep women in the shadows. Women are being attacked at every opportunity by messages designed to make them feel bad about themselves, in hopes that these women will then buy what the messenger is selling. At the Media Awareness Network, this problem is defined quite clearly.

Why are standards of beauty being imposed on women, the majority of whom are naturally larger and more mature than any of the models? The roots, some analysts say, are economic. By presenting an ideal difficult to achieve and maintain, the cosmetic and diet product industries are assured of growth and profits. And it’s no accident that youth is increasingly promoted, along with thinness, as an essential criterion of beauty. If not all women need to lose weight, for sure they’re all aging, says the Quebec Action Network for Women’s Health in its 2001 report Changements sociaux en faveur de la diversité des images corporelles.

It is important to remember that while this kind of shaming is a popular tactic across the gender spectrum, it is most often directed towards women.

The American research group Anorexia Nervosa & Related Eating Disorders, Inc. says that one out of every four college-aged women uses unhealthy methods of weight control—including fasting, skipping meals, excessive exercise, laxative abuse, and self-induced vomiting. Researchers report that women’s magazines have ten and one-half times more ads and articles promoting weight loss than men’s magazines do, and over three-quarters of the covers of women’s magazines include at least one message about how to change a woman’s bodily appearance—by diet, exercise or cosmetic surgery.

Television and movies reinforce the importance of a thin body as a measure of a woman’s worth. Canadian researcher Gregory Fouts reports that over three-quarters of the female characters in TV situation comedies are underweight, and only one in twenty are above average in size. Heavier actresses tend to receive negative comments from male characters about their bodies ("How about wearing a sack?"), and 80 per cent of these negative comments are followed by canned audience laughter.

So the message that is largely received by both women and girls from magazines, television, and film is that not only is something inherently wrong with their body, but that these "flaws" also constitute a personal moral failing which renders them deserving of any humiliation that comes their way.


In and of itself, there is nothing linguistically harmful about the word "fat". It is a generic descriptor much like tall, short, blonde, brunette, etc. The reason that "fat" is such a loaded term is that our culture has framed fatness as practically a crime against humanity, especially if the owner of the fat is female. We're taught from a very early age that fat is not a simple descriptive term, because fat is culturally synonymous with lazy, unpleasant, smelly, unloveable, etc. This correlation is made not only by many thin people, but often by fat people who firmly believe they deserve the disrespect being thrown at them.

Sandra Kiume on Psych Central wrote a letter to the editor detailing an event she'd witness where a man on the street demanded a woman he knew follow him and called her fat along with a few other insults. Kiume's response deftly illustrates why body image is a subject central to the fight against domestic violence.

First, she wasn’t fat. But all mean kids and abusers know that the easiest way to hurt a young woman’s self-esteem is to attack her body image, especially with that cruel three-letter “f” word. It’s verbal abuse in our thin-obsessed culture. The other two words he called her are just more obviously abusive.

Verbal abuse is just as damaging as physical or sexual violence–the American Psychological Association classifies all three as wartime torture methods. In their daily wars women come to view themselves as worthless and powerless and internalize the loathing. They may develop serious medical problems like depression, anorexia/bulimia, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, substance abuse and more, all while afraid to leave the abuser. A woman is ten times more likely to be murdered by her abuser in the six months after she leaves him. Those threats are dead serious, and they’re a means of control that answer the common and naïve question, “Why doesn’t she just leave him?”(Emphasis Added)

Fortunately, there is a movement that those of us in the fight against domestic violence can look to, to promote women's ability to feel comfortable and worthy in their own skin. Providing information about the inaccuracy of the obesity crisis and other weight-related scientific findings, shining a light on medical abuse, debunking of stereotypes about fat people, and creating a safe community for women to celebrate their bodies are just a few of the things the Fat Acceptance movement has to offer.
More specifically, Kate Harding in The Fantasy of Being Thin, thoroughly discusses the power of the myth that having a stereotypically perfect body is somehow attached to your ability to be a good or worthy person and the fact that many times the hardest part of accepting your body is that it means accepting and appreciating all aspects of yourself.

But exhortations like that don’t take into account magical thinking about thinness, which I suspect — and the quote above suggests — is really quite common. Because, you see, the Fantasy of Being Thin is not just about becoming small enough to be perceived as more acceptable. It is about becoming an entirely different person – one with far more courage, confidence, and luck than the fat you has. It’s not just, “When I’m thin, I’ll look good in a bathing suit”; it’s “When I’m thin, I will be the kind of person who struts down the beach in a bikini, making men weep.” See also:

When I’m thin, I’ll have no trouble finding a partner/reinvigorating my marriage.
When I’m thin, I’ll have the job I’ve always wanted.
When I’m thin, I won’t be depressed anymore.
When I’m thin, I’ll be an adventurous world traveler instead of being freaked out by any country where I don’t speak the language and/or the plumbing is questionable.
When I’m thin, I’ll become really outdoorsy.
When I’m thin, I’ll be more extroverted and charismatic, and thus have more friends than I know what to do with.
Et cetera, et cetera. Those are examples from my personal Fantasy of Being Thin, but I’m sure you’ve got your own

....The thin person inside me finally got out — it just turned out she was actually a fat person. A reasonably attractive, semi-outgoing fat person who has an open mind and an active imagination but also happens to really like routine and familiarity and quiet time alone.

Embracing our bodies for what they do for us rather than punishing them into submission is a long process, but the benefits are well worth it. For a powerful introduction to celebrating yourself and living in the now, check out Joy Nash's Fat Rant Video below.

In Response to Dangers of Domestic Violence Calls

Recently on Police Link, which bills itself as the Nation's Law Enforcement Community, a post entitled Dangers of Domestic Violence Calls detailed some of the hazards police officers face when responding to domestic violence calls and offered tips for those officers to minimize the risks to their personal safety. The idea of this post is quite useful. Part of domestic violence response training for police officers should include training on how to preserve their own lives. Police officers are in danger everytime they respond to any type of call and each department should equip their officers with all of the knowledge necessary to avoid being hurt or killed in the line of duty.

Unfortunately, the author of this particular piece seems to have a special contempt for domestic violence calls. Even from the first line, it's clear that they find dv calls to be more troubling than any other disturbance.

Don't discount DV calls as routine. It just takes one to get you killed.

This line seems to assume that, for example, a traffic stop can't get you killed. Many "routine" duties of a police officer can very well get you killed. That's why it is such a difficult and noble profession.

The author then proceeds to recount the (unsourced) story he/she has read about a police officer being shot by an abuser after they had responded to a domestic violence call, which leads the author to expand upon their experienced based tips on handling "domestics". With each tip category's introduction, it is clear that the author needs more training on the nature of domestic violence, and feels that the victims bring their troubles on themselves.

Exercise Caution
Consider this: There's a reason that you're called to a location. The transition from domestic bliss to domestic violence can take place in the blink of a wandering eye and the person requesting your presence often has some legitimate expectation of getting his or her ass beat. And the person who may inflict such harm might not care who's on the receiving end.(Emphasis Added)

This entire paragraph demonstrates the mindset that domestic violence is the result of one incident (that is the fault of the victim) that pushes an otherwise rational human being "over the edge". Let us be clear, this is patently false. Domestic violence is systematic terroristic behavior. A person who manages to survive in a violent relationship is well-studied in the behaviors that do not upset their significant other. The problem with this type of safety plan is that the violence is not truly related to emotional responses. It isn't the result of stress, or alcohol, or infidelity. It is a thought out way to exact control over another human being and the violence will continue in some way or another no matter what the victim does. These rages are not uncontrolled episodes where the abuser "might not care who's on the receiving end." The abuser very much cares. And while the violence may spill over to a police officer, or someone else who is trying to offer help, those people are simply collateral damage to an abuser demonstrating that there is no one who can protect their victim.

Maintain Peace and Safety
If the person is on site and you're able to contact them, first determine if there's been a crime involved. Whether or not one has been committed, tell the person you're assisting to keep their mouth shut so they don't provoke the aggressor into going Jerry Springer on their ass, or more importantly, yours.

Conduct a cursory pat-down search of BOTH parties. Considering the nature of circumstances, the omnipresent threat of danger associated with such calls, the understandably agitated frame of mind of the distraught boyfriend/husband/significant other, and the possibility that one/the other/both may have a weapon to launch or prevent an attack, it shouldn't be too hard for you to justify your need for doing so.(Emphasis Added)

Here again there is the repeated theme that domestic violence is an emotional response to some sort of provocation. In addition, the emphasis is on putting responsibility on the victim to not "provoke the aggressor" rather than taking steps to effectively neutralize the abuser, i.e. the one who has actually committed a crime. The author even enters the apologist frame of mind at this point in the post, stating that the "boyfriend/husband/significant other" will have an understandably agitated frame of mind.

Personal Experience
I hate domestics, and was wounded while responding to one when an idiot ambushed another deputy and myself with an AK47. Perhaps predictably, the girlfriend we saved—the one who, along with her family, was the object of the suspect's murderous rage in the first place—pissed backward when it came time to go to court and testified on his behalf (he was still sentenced to 160 years).

Personally, I believe that the first time any person becomes a victim of domestic violence, law enforcement officers should do everything in their power to insulate them from any further attack. But the moment they go back to the abusive son of a bitch, then we should be able to wash our hands of them. Professionally we don't have that discretion: We are expected to continually run interference on behalf of these Darwin Award aspirants.

Ignoring the general tone of obvious contempt and disrespect that litters the "Personal Experience" section of this post, we can still see the continuing theme of a complete misunderstanding of the nature of domestic violence. Once again, we have to reiterate that domestic violence is systematic terroristic behavior used to control another person. If, as the author states, this abuser was not only trying to kill the victim but had also threatened to kill her family it is no way strange that she would be scared to testify and may in fact have logically felt that the only way to protect her family was to testify for the defense. It is unfortunately likely that she had had previous experience with unhelpful law enforcement and had no reason to believe that her abuser would not be right back out on the street. If the attitude of the author of this piece is consistent with his/her department, then it shouldn't shock them that she would feel that the criminal justice system would ultimately be of no help to her. The author's ludicrous Darwin Award insinuation that repeat victims of domestic violence are stupid implies that the main reason the victims return to their abusers is out of a genuine belief that things will change. In fact, the number one reason that victims return to their abusers is an economic inability to go anywhere else. Economic reasons are followed closely by the desire to protect their family and themselves. It is well documented that a woman is in the greatest danger of being killed after she leaves or attempts to leave the relationship.

Perhaps if the author really doesn't want to continue to be called out to the same locations time and time again, he/she ought to lobby for better victim's resources, more law enforcement training, or more effective domestic violence legislation rather than jumping on the victim-blaming apologist's bandwagon.

Cross-Posted

Dennis Rodman charged with domestic violence

CNN.com is reporting today that ex-NBA star Dennis Rodman was charged with domestic violence Wednesday for assaulting his girlfriend, Gina Peterson, in a Los Angeles hotel room last month. Rodman was arrested on April 30, after Peterson called hotel security. According to police, Ms. Peterson suffered injuries to her arm. Rodman's spokesman and attorney do not deny his culpability, but instead they are trying to minimize this serious offense with some very familiar language.

Rodman spokesman Darren Prince says Rodman had had too much to drink when he got into an altercation with Peterson. Prince says the couple are still dating.
"We look forward to a successful resolution of this misdemeanor matter," said Rodman's attorney, Paul Meyer

Having too much to drink is not an excuse for violent behavior. That they are allegedly still together is not evidence of innocence. Many women stay in abusive relationships for one reason or another, that does not excuse the abuser's past or future actions. Finally, while the charge may be a misdemeanor, Rodman's attorney is trying to make it sound like he shoplifted a candy bar. A person who made his career off of his physical abilities is accused of beating up on someone who cares about him, and is likely a great deal weaker than him. That is a serious offense even if the penalty does not reflect it.

Take it Seriously Part 3: Aarone Thompson

Deidra at Black and Missing but not Forgotten has posted the story of Aarone Thompson, a 6 year-old in Colorado who was killed by her father Aaron Thompson and his girlfriend Shely Lowe after years of abuse including denial of food, cruel punishment, and denial of medical care. Aarone's death is solely the fault of her father and his girlfriend. This post isn't meant to assign blame to anyone other than the abusers. What we wish to point out is that this death (and many others) could possibly have been prevented if friends, family, and other bystanders had acted on the information they had.

While the depth of the abuse the children in the Thompson-Lowe home suffered may have been unknown,the indictment against Aaron Thompson reveals a pattern of abuse that was not kept secret.

The [Lowe's]sister told a therapist that Lowe and Thompson punished Aarone for "peeing" by putting her in a coat closet. It goes on to explain that sometimes it would be part of the day, other times it would be part of the day and all through the night. The sister also remembered the last time she saw her sister, saying she was in the closet and was going to be there all night as punishment for "peeing."

Aarone's bed-wetting is also detailed in the indictment as it was Lowe's responsibility to clean her. Aarone's older sister explained that she heard Thompson giving Aarone a "whoopin'" in the middle of the night. Another sister also said Aarone got "whooped" with a belt by Thompson for "peeing" in the closet.

In two paragraphs there are three adults who have been made aware of this child's circumstances, including a therapist who ought to recognize the signs of abuse and should know what avenues to take for reporting it. In addition, the indictment goes on to report that Aarone's grandmother stated that she had never met the child and never seen any pictures. During the course of the police investigation it came to light that there were no credible reports of anyone having seen Aarone for 18 months prior to the time that Thompson reported his child missing.

So many times when any kind of domestic abuse culminates in murder, friends and family will report things that were said or done that they just didn't take seriously. Sometimes they legitimately think there is nothing to worry about, but all too often people do not intervene because they don't want to get involved in "someone else's business" and end up looking foolish.

Family violence is not a private matter. It is a blight on our community and there needs to be a visible public stance that it will not be tolerated.

An Eco-Friendly Way to Help Domestic Violence Survivors

In honor of Earth Day, Women's Resource Center invites you to participate in their easy and eco-friendly Cells for Survivors campaign to help survivors of domestic violence.

WHAT IS IT?
Cells for Survivors is a community-based cell phone drive of the Women’s Resource Center
to End Domestic Violence (WRC). Cell phones are collected from individuals, local businesses, schools, and community organizations and then converted into cash proceeds, which benefit WRC’s family resettlement program. In addition, the cell phone recycling program WRC has partnered with, 911 Cell Phone Bank, provides WRC with working cell phones and chargers to provide survivors with 911 access.

WHY PARTICIPATE?
Your donations of cell phones support women and their children as they overcome homelessness as a result of domestic violence, transition into homes of their own, and establish a foundation of self-empowerment. Funds are disbursed to meet families’ needs of resettlement, including first month’s rent, deposits, utilities, and MARTA tokens.

HOW CAN I HELP?

-Organize a cell phone drive at your place of business/employment, worship, or recreation;

-Donate old, unwanted cell phones and phone batteries directly to WRC; and/or

-Place a collection receptacle in your place of business/employment, worship, or recreation.

For more information about Cells for Survivors, forming a cell phone drive or setting up a donation bin, or if you'd like to donate cell phones directly to WRC, please contact Rachel at 404-370-7670 ext. 104 or via e-mail at rachel@wrcdv.org.

Action Alert: New Gun Control Legislation

House Bill 257, which was backed by the NRA, passed the Senate on Wednesday evening after two rounds of intense debate. The bill was originally intended to allow constables to carry their firearms into court, but an amendment to the bill could mean fatal consequences for thousands of women throughout the state of Georgia.

It was amendment two, however, that really shook things up.

It states that a person who has a license to carry a firearm can carry it "in public transportation," as long as it is not a violation of federal law. Additionally, a firearm license holder can't consume alcohol in a restaurant or other eating establishment while carrying a firearm. Under current law, guns can't be carried in any place where alcohol is served.

Thankfully, some of Georgia's lawmakers understand the danger this policy presents to domestic violence survivors as well as the population at large.

Sen. Nan Orrock, D-Atlanta, spoke against the bill.
"The leading cause of death in domestic violence is gun violence," Orrock said. "Now we're opening up a whole new window to have people carrying guns and imbibing alcoholic beverages." Bartenders and waitresses won't be enforcing the prohibition against drinking and carrying a gun, Orrock said.

Sen. Vincent Fort, D-Atlanta, said that most of the people who have committed mass killings in America recently were not felons, and likely could have legally carried guns. "We might be asking for a tragedy on MARTA or other transit systems, and it might be the next best place to go for the fellow that is about to drop off the edge," Fort said. "Let's keep guns out of places where they don't belong."

Senator Fort even went so far as to add a third amendment that he knew would ultimately not be approved in order to stall the voting and keep the bill from passing. Unfortunately, these voices of reason are in the minority. This bill was passed at 7pm on April 3, 2008. Those in the Senate who have said that this bill only affects "law abiding citizens" with permits haven't taken into account the fact that many batterers have no criminal record and could legally obtain a concealed weapons permit. And while many women do not wish to follow through on assault or harassment charges, a weapons charge could still keep a dangerous person off the street or at least establish a documented pattern of violence. House Bill 257 has dramatically decreased the safety of public spaces, not just for survivors of domestic violence but for everyone in our community. Please contact your representatives and senators and let them know that you oppose this legislation and that it must be repealed.

Yay for Small Victories! Wisconsin amends housing rights to include domestic violence victims

Govenor Jim Doyle of Wisconsin has officially signed the Safe Housing Act into law! This new law allows victims of domestic violence to break rental agreements without penalty if they provide their landlord with documentation such as a criminal complaint or a restraining order. The law also makes leases void if landlords punish tenants for calling police or emergency services and prohibits municipalities from enforcing ordinances that charge fees to property owners when tenants call police for help in domestic violence situations.

While supporters have praised this latest effort to reduce the number barriers to leaving domestic violence situations, Kathy Kintopf, account executive with Start Renting and board member of the Fox Valley Apartment Association opposes the legislations and believes that it would place an undue burden on landlords. She issued this charming statement.

“I don’t know if it really protects anyone else in the building if that victim moves out,” Kintopf said. “Where does it stop? Would the bank let me out of my mortgage? Landlords are in favor of helping people, but I’m not convinced this is the best way.”

There are a lot of things wrong with this quote. First, the primary victim is the only one who is in need of protection. The rest of the tenants are only in tangential danger. For example, if the abuser decides to set the apartment on fire, or ends up in a hostage taking situation or shootout with the police then the other people in the building are put in harms way. But that sort of problem is solved if the victim is allowed to move out.
As far as the question of "Where does it stop?" goes, that single sentence truly encapsulates the horrific amount of societal bias against victims of domestic violence. It insinuates that these are people who are either lying or who in some way deserve what they get. The scenario of the bank letting Ms. Kintopf out of her mortgage is not comparable and she must know that. In most areas of the country, finding a new tenant is no more than a minor inconvenience. Basically it seems that she would rather have blood on her hands than be "burdened" by a little lost money.

Domestic Violence is never okay

Cross-Posted

This month, two players for the Pittsburgh Steelers were charged in separate domestic violence incidents within 11 days of one another. However, while wide receiver Cedrick Wilson was released from his contract, linebacker James Harrison is being allowed to remain with the team. Both men assaulted the mother of their children. Both men were charged with simple assault. There appear to be only two differences between these men. The first is Harrison's alleged motivation.

"What Jimmy Harrison was doing and how the incident occurred, what he was trying to do was really well worth it," [Dan] Rooney [team chairman] said of Harrison's initial intent with his son. "He was doing something that was good, wanted to take his son to get baptized where he lived and things like that. She said she didn't want to do it."

Harrison is charged with breaking down the door to his girlfriend's home, breaking her cell phone in half as she attempted to call 911, and slapping her in the face, knocking off her glasses. Apparently, this kind of conduct is perfectly acceptable in the NFL if it is done for religious reasons. As Feministing's Vanessa Valenti notes,

While the Steelers are getting quite the rep for violence against women as of late, the team managers have turned a blind eye to a player slapping his girlfriend because what he was trying to do "was really well worth it."

When the Steelers were accused of condoning domestic violence they released a statement to "clarify" that they do not approve of domestic violence for any reason, but that "Each incident must be considered on a case-by-case basis."
Melissa McEwan at Shakesville brought up another interesting difference between these two players' "cases" that is worth examining.

....[W]hat's also notable is that the man who was released from his contract assaulted his ex-girlfriend, while the man who was retained on the team assaulted his current girlfriend—and undoubtedly the still-pervasive attitude that domestic violence is "between a man and his woman" affected the decision. As long as she stays with him, as long as she's willing to suffer the abuse, that's "their" business.

The ex-girlfriend, by virtue of her "ex" status, no longer belonged to Wilson, so it's easy to see why his hitting her was wrong. But things are always muddier, somehow, when it's a current girlfriend or wife, which signifies our collective belief that men still have some ownership of women with whom they're in a relationship, and therefore have more right to do ugly things to them than men who don't have any claim over them.

Many women in domestic violence situations feel judged by the outside world because of the pervasive societal notion that if they are unhappy, they should "just leave." There are many reasons that women do not leave violent relationships. There are economic considerations, emotional attachment, the societal belief that a "broken home" is bad for children, and family pressures. A less expected but very prevalent reason that women stay in violent relationships is safety. Abusers often threaten to kill their victims, themselves, their victim's family, and/or their children if they ever try to escape or expose the abuse. Also, statistically a woman in a violent relationship is most likely to be killed after she leaves or while she is in the process of leaving.

Given this societal prejudice it would not be surprising if that was a real factor in the Steeler's "case-by-case" decision to keep Harrison on the team. Email the Steelers or call their administrative offices at (412) 432-7800 and tell them that there is no case in which condoning violence against women is appropriate.

Take it Seriously

Cross-Posted

John Gambrell of the Associated Press reported Tuesday that Katharine Wood, 24, an English major at the University of Arkansas, had been found dead in her bathtub on Sunday, March 9th 2008. Hours later, Wood's ex-boyfriend Zachariah Scott Marcyniuk, 28, of Fayetteville, was arrested in western Oklahoma and charged with her murder.

A man [Marcyniuk] accused of murdering a University of Arkansas student told others "I think I hurt her real bad" but said he blacked out and couldn't remember what happened, a police affidavit says.

The affidavit also said Wood appeared to be the victim of a violent struggle, but police say the actual cause of death has not yet been determined. Friends and family told the AP that Wood recently complained that Marcyniuk was harassing her, stalking her, and "acting creepy." For example, Wood told friends he stalked her at a nightclub and tried to monitor her phone calls.

"After they broke up three or four weeks ago, she'd become increasingly afraid," said Michelle Mustion, a friend of Wood's. "She'd talked to her mom and I about getting a restraining order, but she had reason to believe everything was going to work out."

We now know that Marcyniuk had a history of violent behavior, having been sentenced to two years' probation in July 2005 for aggravated assault on a former girlfriend. Without this knowledge however,Wood and her family and friends probably just saw a guy who was having a hard time with a break up. It is cases like these that really illuminate the need to educate our society about domestic and dating violence. This is the third murder in the last three weeks that we have reported on that could have been prevented if the warning signs had been recognized and taken seriously.

Most recently, we reported on the murder of Kristina Lamberson who was killed in front of her 4-year-old child by her husband Robert Lamberson just one day after he had been arrested for violating a protective order she had against him. As we reported then,this tragic situation carried two important lessons. The first is that there needs to be a better system for keeping victims informed when someone who poses a known threat, like Robert Lamberson, is roaming free. The second comes from the statement of a family friend: "He liked to run his mouth a lot and I don't think anybody took him serious...."

On February 20th, we reported on what is probably the most glaring example of a severe (and ultimately fatal)threat of violence that was brushed off and normalized, not only by civilians but also by trained law enforcement officers. Natasha Hall was only 17 when she was shot by her 19-year old ex-boyfriend, Clay Kufner. In the months prior to the shooting, Ms. Hall had reported to police that Kufner hit her in the face, threatened to burn down her home, and posted nude photos of her on the internet. Despite this, the DeLand Police Department's Chief Deputy Randel Henderson had this to say in response to allegations of police inaction, "Basically we have a very young couple who are experiencing, at least up until last Friday evening, just very normal relationship problems."

In a society where one in every four women will experience domestic or dating violence within her lifetime and and an estimated 1.3 million women are physically assualted by a partner each year, we cannot afford to downplay this kind of behavior. There is no such thing as too cautious when it comes to saving a life. Speak up if you think something is wrong, and reach out if you need help.

It's all your fault

Cross-posted

Under the innocuous headline Matchmaker's Dating Dos and Don'ts CNN and Oprah.com have managed to bring together a variety of the most harmful gender stereotypes and promote them as "cute." For this article, Oprah.com interviewed Patti Novak from the A&E show "Confessions of a Matchmaker."

Patti says her years of experience have taught her one thing -- millions of women have missed the mark when it comes to love. "Somewhere along the line, and I'm really not sure [when], we lost our common sense," she says.

Unfortunately, Ms. Novak's definition of "lost our common sense" is that women are gradually abandoning the trend of manipulating men into thinking that women are weak, simple-minded, dependent, or just overall less than human. The most telling example of Ms. Novak's view is the "pickle-jar" scenario she uses to illustrate how women could better help men "feel like" men.

Allison's take-charge attitude is what Patti calls the pickle jar effect. "We are so successful today, women. We're fabulous. We work hard. We make good money. We parent. Sometimes what happens when we spend a lot of time alone, we forget to let them open the damn pickle jar," Patti says.
Patti says that if he's not in the room, go ahead and open your own pickle jar. But if he's standing there, Patti says it's just as easy to ask him to open it. "And know that you are the smarter, clever one for doing it," she says. "It's about attitude."

This type of advice, especially when it is distributed through mainstream media, does not reflect positively on men or women. It puts forth the thesis that a woman must be manipulative to be in a relationship and that manipulative behavior is a natural part of being a woman. It also portrays men as insecure and kind of stupid. Blogger Arkades at Shakesville explains this point quite clearly.

I don't think validation based on manipulation is helpful. For one thing, it's a trivial and exceptionally shallow form of validation. It's also easy to see through, at which point it becomes patronizing. Why, it's hard to see how men could possibly survive out in the world at all, so easily and capriciously are our poor egos pumped up and beaten down at every turn!

My advice, to women *and* men: no one rational cares about stuff like who opens the jars. No man should feel slighted if a woman opens her own jar of pickles. Any man who *would* feel slighted by this is clearly not ready for a relationship among equals. Furthermore, a woman *pretending* that she can't do something may indeed be coy, but it isn't cute, it isn't sexy, and it isn't relationship-affirming.

A woman capable of doing something for herself ought *never* feel self-conscious about her abilities, and a man shouldn't take a woman's capability as a sign that his own abilities aren't appreciated.

Carol Lloyd of Salon.com also takes exception to Ms.Novak's version of dating advice stating "What's obvious is that these formulas for harmony between the sexes request that women, no matter their empowerment in the workplace or their personality, should dumb themselves down to placate their lovers. " We would argue that Ms.Novak's line of advice also portrays being in a relationship as more important than being secure in who you are and having people appreciate you for that.

To recap, according to Ms. Novak, the following are impressions women want to avoid giving out if they want to find love.

"[It's like,] 'I love my life. It's great. It's perfect.'"

"I'm content. I'm having fun,'"

We are so successful today, women. We're fabulous. We work hard. We make good money.

With some parts of the mainstream media encouraging women to be manipulative and ashamed of themselves and other parts proclaiming that women are naturally stupid and deceitful, it's not hard to see why violence against women is so prevalent and misunderstood in our society.

Call to Action: Deadline March 14th

President Bush's 2009 budget proposal will make devastating cuts (almost one-third of the funding or $120 million) to the Violence Against Women Act program.

Why should you care and what can you do?

"The Administration's budget for Violence Against Women Act programs is an outrage," said Sen. Joe Biden, author of the Violence Against Women Act. "Domestic violence impacts one in every four women, yet the Administration proposes cutting spending by almost a third. If allowed to go forward, this Administration's disastrous budgeting priorities could roll back more than a decade of success in investigating, prosecuting and preventing domestic and sexual violence."

Stop Family Violence.org is mounting a campaign to prevent these budget cuts from becoming a reality. Recently, the House of Representatives has provided an opportunity for opposition to these cuts to be heard. Below is an excerpt from open letter written by StopFamilyViolence.org's Executive Director, Irene Weiser.

If allowed to go forward, this Administration's disastrous budget priorities could roll back more than a decade of success in investigating, prosecuting and preventing domestic and sexual violence.

But something hopeful is happening in the House of Representatives!!

Leaders from the Victim’s Rights Caucus and the Congressional Caucus for Women’s Issues are circulating a 'Dear Colleague" letter (congress' version of a petition) urging other members in the House to support full funding for the Violence Against Women Act.

The deadline to sign the Dear Colleagues letter is Friday March 14. For more information and to send a pre-written e-mail to your representative, click here .

Since this is such short notice I don't have time to outline the many important things that VAWA does and the horrible consequences the proposed changes will bring. Fortunately, StopFamilyViolence.org has outlined all of those things really well at the above link.

Mother Murdered while Children were Present

Cross-posted from The Big Picture because I wrote it so I can do that.

A Boston tragedy shows us once again that the effects of domestic violence are not confined to adults. Police found Melissa Santiago, 29, laying face down on her kitchen floor on Sunday. She had been stabbed multiple times and was pronounced dead at the scene.

Hours later, Santiago's boyfriend, Jose Torres, 26, was arrested for her murder. Police said the murder seems to be "the result of domestic violence."

According to Santiago's neighbors, the children were all at home during the slaying. The police were called after the children ran outside saying that their mother had been killed. Neighbors report that Santiago's eldest child is five years old.

On a positive note, neighbors on scene were very vocal about the need for law enforcement to take domestic violence seriously. One woman stated:

They've got to crack down more on these people who are killing their spouses and stuff, because they're not doing enough for domestic violence, I think. Otherwise, you wouldn't be finding dead bodies like this.

This call for reform is supported by statistics from the Boston-based domestic violence organization Jane Doe Inc., who said the number of domestic violence related homicides have risen nearly 300 percent since 2005.

For more information on the effects of domestic violence on children click here .

Oh, The New York Post

From the publication that brought you Ike "Beats" Tina to Death, comes this charming and poignant "article", Miss-Leading: The truth about gal's serial fibbing.

Now strictly speaking this is not an article, it's a sub par book review. And if the New York Post had characterized it as such, I might not find it worth writing about. However, they are presenting the findings in this book as factual news rather than the results of an extremely small and flawed study.

Deceit, thy name is woman.
Most females lie "more cleverly and successfully than men" about everything from infidelity and facelifts to barhopping and shopping binges, according to a new book.

Susan Shapiro Barash, author of "Little White Lies, Deep Dark Secrets: The Truth About Why Women Lie," claims to have done a study encompassing 500 women nationwide. The NY Post does disclose that Barash obtained the subjects of her study through an ad on Craigslist where she solicited women who wanted to confess fibs they had told in the past. I'll say it again, she put out an ad asking for liars, and is now claiming the fact that liars have lied is scientific proof that women lie more than men. In addition to the flawed method of gathering subjects, The NY Post did not seem to think it was important that there was not a male group involved in the study for comparison purposes.

The mainstream media portrayal of women as inherently stupid, or inherently deceitful is not only offensive, it's dangerous. These stereotypes are often used by batterers in domestic violence situations to justify the on-going abuse, or used as a vehicle to deny to the public that abuse ever took place. It's this type of thinking that leads to women’s disclosures of violence not being taken seriously by clergy, family, law enforcement, etc. If you're doubtful that these portrayals are in line with mainstream attitudes about women, just ask yourself how a piece this offensive and this deeply flawed got through an editorial board and into a newspaper, and remained there with little public protest?

Update on Lamberson Murder

6News has posted a follow up story under the headline Mom Defends Son Police Say Killed Wife, Himself. There are several problems with this new story, starting with the headline. The fact that this man murdered his wife is not contested and this headline waters down the blame. The second problem with the way this story is framed is the insinuation that because Kristina had been in contact with Robert, she did not consider him a threat and was partially to blame for what happened. Many people in domestic violence situations are not sure of the proper conduct, particularly when there are children involved. It is important to remember that these relationships did not begin this way. These women simultaneously care about their abusers and are afraid of them. Either as a result of concern for their abuser's future or out of fear that engaging the legal system will enrage their abuser further, many women feel that it is better to deal with the situation on their own, rather than go through the legal system. This does not mean they deserve to be shot.

Murder-Suicide Leaves 4-year old trapped

Cross posted from The Big Picture because I wrote it and I can do that

6News in Indiana reported yesterday that a four year-old girl in Elwood Indiana was trapped in her home after her stepfather killed her mother and then himself. According to the article Robert Lamberson shot Kristina Lamberson on Sunday. The shooting occurred just one day after Robert was arrested for violating the protective order Kristina had against him.

The girl, unable to leave the home because she couldn't undo the front door's lock, called her aunt for help. The aunt called 911, and officers broke into the home and found the dead couple, police said.

6News reported that Elwood Police Chief Jack Miller said it was hard knowing that the Lamberson's daughter was in the home at the time. Relatives tell 6News that the girl has talked repeatedly about her mother's death, and they are angry that Kristina was not told that Robert had been released from jail.

This tragic situation carries two important lessons. The first is that there needs to be a better system for keeping victims informed when someone who poses a known threat, like Robert Lamberson, is roaming free. The second comes from the statement of a family friend: "He liked to run his mouth a lot and I don't think anybody took him serious...." Domestic violence is a serious and often hidden problem. When someone "runs their mouth" about harming another human being, it should always be taken seriously.

Should you rape a woman?

Cross posted from The Big Picture because I wrote it so I can do that.

The Australian Football League is making an interactive DVD as part of their efforts to improve players' respect for women. Respect and responsibility program co-ordinator Melanie Heenan says it's purpose is to "prompt confident decision-making in situations that can be quite complex".

We are always thrilled when a professional athletics organization takes a step to deal with violence against women. However, we are disappointed that the type of training being implemented by the AFL is actually necessary. Melinda Tankard Reist says it best:

We have so failed in the very basics of civilised human interaction that the Australian Football League has been forced to hire a swag of actors and a film crew to make an interactive DVD to help players understand that perhaps it's not a good idea to pretend to be your best mate so you can have sex with his girlfriend.

As sarcastic is it sounds, Reist's chosen scenario is drawn from an actual draft question from the training DVD's script. Among the drafts released to the public are the complicated moral dilemmas of whether or not to trick a woman into having sex with you, take advantage of a woman who is very intoxicated, or watch people have sex without their permission. In respect to these questions, blogger Melissa McEwan comments,

That these are considered complex ethical questions is just completely insane to me. It's like being asked: "You see your friend Todd walking down the street toward you. Do you: (a) say hello or (b) hit him in the head with a shovel?"

In her column, Ms. Reist goes on to say that it does not seem that the DVD will address the seriousness of sexual assault and that it is playing on negative stereotypes of women. She also believes that the actions of the AFL are a reflection of a larger culture of contempt for women as exemplified by an Australian made t-shirt that reads "It's not rape, it's surprise sex."

Growing Advocacy for Muslim Women

Cross-posted from The Big Picture because I wrote it so I can do that.

Via The New York Times.
Domestic violence in Muslim culture in the Unites States has been a difficult problem to address due to a lack of understanding of the culture on the part of outsiders or a hesitancy to interfere in what is considered traditional religious gender roles. Thankfully, organizations founded by Muslim American women are fostering a movement to publicly define domestic violence as an unacceptable cultural practice. While domestic violence occurs in the Muslim American community at the same rate as most other groups, approaching the topic has been difficult because it is seen by many involved in the faith as an attack.

“The Muslim community is under a lot of scrutiny, so they are reluctant to look within to face their problems because it will substantiate the arguments demonizing them,” said Rafia Zakaria, a political science graduate student at Indiana University who is starting a legal defense fund for Muslim women. “It puts Muslim women in a difficult position because if they acknowledge their rights, they are seen as being in some kind of collusion with all those who are attacking Muslim men. So the question is how to speak out without adding to the stereotype that Muslim men are barbaric, oppressive, terrible people.”

Ms. Zakaria and other women like her believe that the best way to refute Muslim stereotypes is to show the public that Muslim women are addressing the problem of domestic violence. And while many organizers have been expelled from mosques and other Muslim activities for attempting to discuss the problem of domestic violence, recent attempts to find allies within the church are gaining ground.

Apart from self-empowerment and fighting stereotypes, there are other important reasons for Muslim women to be pro-active in tackling domestic violence.

First, many Muslim women who have sought help for domestic violence report that cultural misunderstandings often hinder their recovery. Take this story from the New York Times of a young Yemeni-American woman who went to a local shelter after suffering for seven years at the hands of her husband.

The shelter brought in a hairdresser, whose services she accepted without any misgivings. But once her hair was styled, administrators urged her to throw off her veil, saying it symbolized the male oppression native to Islam that she wanted to escape.

While these women in all likelihood had good intentions, they failed to recognize that this young woman was fleeing her abusive husband and not her religion. Someone with an understanding of Muslim culture and religion would have been able to highlight the ways in which this young woman could find support and strength within her beliefs rather than fostering the harmful misconception that leaving an abusive relationship means giving up or betraying Islam.

Another reason that Muslim American women must get involved in the movement is that those Muslim women who are sheltered and who may not speak English run a higher risk of being victimized due to the fact that accurate information concerning domestic violence and a woman's legal rights is hard to come by in that context. Consider the story of this same Yemeni-American woman's first efforts to escape her husband by reaching out to her family.

The clerics offered marriage counseling, but only if the husband came too, a condition she knew doomed the idea. Her sister suggested she lose weight and be more obedient. Her father encouraged obedience, too, while her husband hit her through three pregnancies. After she filed for divorce, she said, her father hauled her home and hit her too, for shaming him.

Hamdard Center for Health and Human Services in Chicago is an advocacy group for Muslim American women and they have developed several interesting solutions to this problem. Hamdard briefs area grocery store owners and hairdressers that cater to Muslims, which has produced numerous referrals. It also organizes mosque seminars about breast cancer, then inserts a small segment about domestic violence.

It is important to reiterate that the Koran does not condone domestic violence. There is one Koran verse that is cited by some as support for abusive behavior, but mainstream clerics such as Imam Johari Abdul-Malik, the outreach director for Dar Al-Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Virginia are currently lobbying to make the official interpretation of this verse as saying that women must be obedient to God.