Category: Safety

Be safe, not sorry.

Mommy, Make The Bad Man Stop

/ Alessia / 19 Comments

Whatever benefit of the doubt I gave to Master Matchmaker and VH1 Tough Love “commander” Steve Ward has been taken away — by Ward himself.

In an interview with some nameless VH1 bot, Ward defends the indefensible:

You said that Arian is going to end getting raped if she continues her behavior.

Yes.

You know it’s going to go down hill from there; he’s admitted that what he said wasn’t a mis-step, an ill-formed phrase, or something said quickly that “came out wrong.”

There was some talk around the Internet that your mindset was not unlike that of those who blame victims for being raped.

Well, that just goes to show how naive people are.

Wait, wait, wait; did Ward just call me naive?! I’m the one with the facts! He’s not merely “naive” or even “ignorant” — because we’ve told him, he’s got access to (at least) the same facts, experts and research as we do, yet he’s sticking with fiction. Dangerous fiction too yet.

I wasn’t blaming anybody for anything.

But, as you’ll soon see, Ward is doing just that.

I was explaining to her that there are risks to her behavior. She seems to feel that there are no consequences to her behavior. Like nothing bad can happen from her being as raunchy and as inappropriate as she was. And I was trying to explain to her that when you do things like that you put yourself in harm’s way. And there are men out there that because they are f***ed up in the head, for whatever reasons, they may take it as some sort of an invite, or that you really want it or this or that. I mean why would you sit there and rub a guy’s d*** under a table? You don’t know who he is or where he is from or what he is about. And you know what, a couple of beers later he may go try to rub you and you might not like it and he is not gonna stop. That’s all I was trying to point out them.

There are risks to her behavior — but not rape. The risks are that Arian is limiting herself, reducing her value to her looks, her body & sex. This is a pattern of behavior based on low self-esteem which will not bring her respectful relationships but continue with a parade of one-night-stands (who may be around for multiple nights, but are invested in her only as far as they are inserted in her). These are all fine issues to be discussed — and they certainly fit the context of the show and Ward’s (quickly diminishing In my eyes) expertise. However, everything else he discusses is the exact definition of blaming the victim.

This “if she, then he” line of thinking places the burden of responsibility for his (crappy) behavior upon her shoulders. He’s literally,”Hey, she asked for it.”

And I’ve got news for you; even when you are appropriate, “classy,” and “a good girl” — and even when he’s had no beers or alcohol whatsoever — he may try to rub you and you do not like it and he is not gonna stop. I know. Personally.

And that’s why there wasn’t backlash from the rest of the girls in the room, because they agreed with me.

Oh, so if everyone in the room agreed that you could fly, that would make it true?

The reason the women in the room agreed with you is because such bullshit thinking is so prevalent in our society — which is precisely why I continue to harp on this topic. I hope you all educate yourselves to the facts.

It’s time you, the women in the room, the VH1 producers, the Stepford Wives’ leaving comments in defense of your misogynist mythology, the asshats who like things the way they are, and, yes, the frightened & desperate who want to believe that such things won’t happen if they are “good” — you all need to be educated. You present a clear and present danger.

The reality, though, is that Arian wasn’t going to get raped in this situation. You’re there, cameras are there, producers are there. I wonder if there’s any suspicion that she might be playing up the salaciousness for the sake of the show.

No, I believe that she does this in her daily life. She is truly like that.

I too believe this is, more or less, Arians MO. But scaring her with lies & threatening her with violence is not the answer.

And she enjoys taking the risk and putting herself in that position. It is a very precarious situation. She doesn’t realize that there may be consequences. I’m not blaming the victim, but if the girl would act a little bit more appropriate, then I’m sure she wouldn’t be treated the way she is by men.

You are blaming the (in your eyes, potential) victim. If (desperately knocking wood!) Arian were to be raped, you’d be all, “I told you so!” and therefore not holding the rapist 100% accountable.

If she walked around like a classy woman and treated herself with respect, she would command respect and men would respect her.

I agree with you, she would command more respect — at least from non-violent, non-controlling, rapists.

With a personality like she has, why would anyone respect her? That was the point I was trying to make. She was trying to say that there were trust issues, and she doesn’t trust men. And of course, why should she trust men? Men don’t respect her.

True. But there’s a HUGE leap between men not respecting a woman, not wanting to “bring her home to mom,” and rape. I myself have not respected people who have not warranted respect — like you right now, Ward — but I’m not raping or assaulting any of them.

Honestly, Ward — and the rest of you at VH1 who refuse to correct the gross errors of your words and ways and continue to perpetuate myth-information, placing more women in danger — you make me feel violated.

And for every woman and man who feels that they must teach their daughters to “be good” so that the bad men won’t hurt them rather than addressing the issue of bad men, it’s another forced entry.

“Show mommy where the bad man touched you on this doll, honey.” I’m pointing all over, because that’s where it hurts.

And there’s no place on the doll for my soul.

You know what else? There are no, “And what did you do to the man to make him touch you,” or, “And what were you wearing,” or, “And what do you do for a living” questions when you show a child victim of rape or abuse the doll. Why not? Because it’s not ever the victim’s fault.

Ward, your statements perpetuate misogynistic mythology and generate the same sense of shame which victimizers, abusers, and rapists use to keep victims silent, docile, and in control.

You may not be raping women, Steve Ward, but you are adding to the exploitation of their shame and you are reducing the responsibility of rapists & perpetrators of abuse; things which punish victims and prevent them from receiving justice. And that just adds to the power of the rapists & abusers, creating more victims.

You, sir, are more of a threat to Arian than any “dangerous behaviors” she exhibited. You are a threat to me, to women every where.

UPDATE See how to take action: Enough Is Enough!

More On Moron Steve Ward & The Rape Issue

/ Alessia / 22 Comments

The conversation about Steve Ward’s stupidity is continuing — thank Gawd.

But all the talk brings up a few points I’d like to clarify.

1) I was really enjoying Tough Love up to this point. Ward (and the shows producers) seemed to be operating from the old BDSM mantra, “Safe, sane & consensual,” something pretty rare in reality television.

Most remarkably seemed to be the “consensual” part, in which scripted tricks were not played on either the female participants nor their male “possibilities.” (You might be able to debate the use of physically using electronic shocks to modify the women’s behaviors, but it’s not like these were stun-guns or something. It was no worse than having Ward or another coach standing beside them going, “Bup-bup-bup!” when they did something dumb.)

Overall — and up until the misuse of “rape” (both in diagnosis and as a fear-mongering tool) — I’ve been appreciative of the combination of tact & honest bluntness in confronting the women’s baggage — both the emotional issues & the bad habits. So it pains me to see the show go so low.

2) I’m not condoning Arian’s actions. I understand them; but I do worry for her. (A number of the other women on the show too.)

But there is a clear distinction between Arian’s self-hurtful behaviors and the predatory act of rape performed by another. She, and women like her, need to be held responsible for their own actions — but not the actions of others. In this case, Arian needs to be aware of what she is doing, how her perception of the effectiveness of her defense mechanism as inaccurate and is in fact detrimental to herself and her objective of finding a good relationship. She needs to see this in order to change her behaviors — in order to bring her the happiness she both deserves and seeks.

This is what Ward was trying to do/say. And it would have been a great lesson for all those watching too. He started well, but… *shudder*

This would have been one of those educational & self-help moments; a lesson for all of us at home, young & old who need to learn it, or at least understand it. But…

3) What about the other side? When comments are left at VH1’s blog about this “educational moment”, they go something like this one by Kaya:

To all of you who are so upset with Steve, let me ask you this: is this what you will teach your daughters? That it’s okay to get drunk, dress suggestively, act in a sexually agressive manner and take home anybody you like, and nothing will ever happen to them? Many rapists are predators, just like child molestors. A child molestor will seek out a victime when he or she is most vulnerable and least able to resist. So will a rapistt; in this case, a drunk woman eager to be alone with him. Sure, the rapist is at fault, but that doesn’t make the woman less raped, beaten, emotionally scarred, dead, etc….

If you aren’t teaching your daughters how to protect themselves, you shouldn’t be a parent.

Ignoring my desire to nit-pick some of your comments on the behaviors of rapists, let me say that I agree totally that parents should teach their daughters how to protect themselves. And when, for whatever reason, they haven’t learned such things — or have adopted bad or unsafe habits — they need to be reeducated. See all of the above.

This brings up the post I linked to in my original Ward/rape post (read it; I link for a reason, yo). I too wish the world wasn’t the way it is, but it is and we need to safeguard our daughters, our girls, our women. But what are we teaching our sons, our boys, our men? (Incidentally, that same blogger — the author of the main author here at Kitsch Slapped — has a post about talking to her son about such things.)

In all this talk about rape, where’s the part about parents teaching their sons?

Kaya’s statements completely ignore the lessons here about teaching young men that rape & other abuse is not to be tolerated. Like Ward’s original statement and those of the other show participants, such language of omission isn’t an accident. They are excusing bad male behaviors, placing the blame for “enticing” upon Arian’s shoulders — and all women’s shoulders — when the blame clearly belongs to men who commit rape, assaults, and abuse of any sort.

This sort of complacent language dismisses male responsibility & diminishes the crime. It complicates how we as a society react to charges of assault & rape. It’s why Ward said what he did, why the other women agreed with him, and why the comments at VH1 have been so stupid. It perpetuates the myths, blames the victims, and places other women in danger with misinformation. All things I’ve already spoken of, so I’ll stop now. For now.

4) Because I have a lot of friends who are sex workers * (escorts, phone sex operators, erotica authors, strippers, etc.), I also feel I need to clarify my statements about Arian, her stripping, and my thoughts on what I see regarding a history of her past abuse.

This is the toughest part of the post, actually, because what I’m about to discuss is a stereotype as old as the oldest profession. And incredibly hurtful too. So, let me say for the record that abuse & sex work do not go hand in hand.

Like any segment of society, especially female segments, abuse is a part of the demographic — but abuse is not an identifying characteristic. It should not be assumed to be a part of any sex worker’s history.

Unfortunately for sex workers who wish stories that reinforce such stereotypes would just go away, Arian, the sex worker, exhibits a hyper sexuality that moves past a self-described “bad girl” let alone a content within her own skin, sex positive person.

The true tell-tale signs for me, just in this last episode, were her approval seeking glances at her fellow house mates when she sat in the “hot seat,” her upping the loud & raunchy display & talk when she found no support, and her lashing out in pain like a wounded animal when the rape word hit the fan. (As I said before, she was looking for a reason to leave and explode — but watch closely, she’s got more pain than fire in her eyes at that point.)

In past episodes, we’ve seen her both use her sexuality to garner attention and react dramatically when it’s been of no help to her. Most obvious in her dealings with Ward himself, when she feels she not only has no control but no value to Ward.

I can’t speak for sex workers everywhere, but none of the sex workers I know behave like Arian has on the show.

And so it is this set of behaviors I speak of when I say I believe Arian has been abused; these are the behaviors which are dangerous. Her employment as stripper or sex worker has nothing to do with it.

There. I think I covered every thing I intended to.

Oh, except for the fact that I still urge you to contact Steve via his matchmaking service’s site, Master Matchmakers, and VH1 to demand an apology.

* Don’t act so shocked that I know and cavort with sex workers. They are damn fine people.

If you are “just surprised to hear this because I never mentioned them before”, well, I also don’t identify my computer programming friends. I also don’t identify my gay friends, my black friends, my white traditional straight vanilla mom friends, etc. How horrible would I be if I identified them as such for no reason? I only mention such identifiers when I feel it is relevant.

UPDATE See how the story unfolds:

Mommy, Make The Bad Man Stop

Enough Is Enough

Please take action!

Yes, I’m A Domestic Violence Survivor

/ Alessia / 2 Comments

This snippet on page five in Wives Legal Rights, by Richard T. Gallen (Dell Purse Book, 1965), breaks my heart. Not just because it’s about what we’d now call domestic violence which “may be” pursued as a crime, but because while the publication is over 40 years old, the cultural lag is so much further behind.

husband-legal-right-hit-wife-1965

You see, I’m a survivor of domestic violence. Times two. I’m not proud to say that I’ve lived it twice; but it’s important to know because once the abuse damages your world, you may be even more susceptible in the future. This is contrary to what most would call “common sense” or even a natural human instinct to survive by avoiding the warning signs (should there actually be any prior to being in the middle of the madness), but it’s the truth.

I’ll be posting a lot more about domestic violence… I hope sharing my experiences not only educate and support others living it — or even provide a means to strengthen my own voice on a subject I’ve long been afraid to speak of outside of court rooms and therapist offices — but that talking about this serves as a catalyst for awareness and change from the rest of the world who feels they are exempt for the blight. Whether they know it or not, they are part of the problem.

And yes, if that feels accusatory, like I’m pointing a finger at you, I am. Too many people are locking their doors and windows under the mistaken assumption that they are then safe (which is so not what the numbers say). And when they do so, they lock out the realities, putting themselves and their children at risk as well as perpetuating the myths and, by placing judgments on those involved (including the victims), they further allow domestic violence to live — not in dark corners or under rocks, but in the light of day.

You have been put on notice.

My Pajamas Made Him Kill Me (Or, In Which I Review A Film I Haven’t Seen)

/ Alessia / 6 Comments

Most would say it’s not fair to review a movie you haven’t seen — and normally I’d agree. It’s an ethics thing. But sometimes you hear about a movie (based on the opinions of those who have seen the film), and you just have to say something…

This is especially true when the movie is based on a true story.

In this case, the film is based on a crime — but the real crime here is not (just) that the makers of the film have sensationalized and exploited a murder, but have missed the very points which make the story moving and important.

The film is The Pyjama Girl Case (1977), and it’s based on the real life story of the unidentified charred remains of a woman discovered in Australia in 1934.

Let’s begin with the reviews…

Stanley Runk “Runkdapunk” says:

On the books this film is a giallo, but it is only in the most basic sense. Yeah it’s a murder mystery, it deals with sexual themes and it’s Italian. That’s where all comparissons end though. No rampaging killer with gloves and a hat/hood and no real body count to speak of other than the Pyjama girl herself. Sure there are a few more deaths, but not until the end of the film.

J. B. Hoyos says:

“The Pyjama Girl Case” disappointed me for several reasons. First, and foremost, it is not a true Italian giallo. Absent is the typical black-gloved serial killer. Only two people are murdered. Second, this movie doesn’t contain any major shocks or plot twists. The plot is very linear. Third, there is only one attractive woman and that is actress Dalila Di Lazzaro who later went on to act in Dario Argento’s superb “Phenomena,” which is definitely an Italian giallo.

(Oh, and “Runkdapunk” also says that Dalila Di Lazzaro is “yummy except for the armpit hair” — just in case you wanted to know.)

And those are the people who gave it three stars at Amazon; there are worse reviews with less stars.

Now I don’t know what a “giallo” is, let alone an Italian one, but that’s neither here nor there because I’m not going to judge this film by whatever standards either may have. And I’m not going to even discuss if a movie can have enough killing (I’m totally one girl who doesn’t go in for body-count flicks). But I do have a lot to say.

Again, this movie is based on a true story. The real-life “Pyjama Girl” was a brutally murdered unknown woman, whose battered and partially burnt body was found dumped roadside in Albury, New South Wales on September 1, 1934. Normally I find the phrase “brutally murdered” to be redundant or excessive — nearly an expletive to induce horror — but the details, according to Australian Screen, make it pretty clear that one can easily use the extra word:

The victim’s head was wrapped in a bloody towel and her body was pushed headfirst into a hessian bag. The body had then been set alight. A post-mortem revealed that she had been shot below the right eye, but the cause of death was probably eight blows to her face.

“Brutal murder” no longer seems to be just for shock-value, does it?

Anyway, as her identity was not known, the woman was dubbed the “Pyjama Girl” because she was found wearing pieces of pyjama fabric.

After coroner’s inquest failed to establish the identity of the woman, artists’ sketches and a forensic facial reconstruction were created to represent what the victim may have looked like, with the images shown around the world, in hopes that someone would identify her.

And her body was preserved in order to be put on display and shown to hundreds of people. Yes, hundreds of people paraded past her post-mortem. For ten years.

Her death was naturally shocking, but her death became a mystery which fascinated the nation and, for some, became an obsession. To the extent that in 1939 an entertainment “newsreel” was made to be shown in cinemas before feature films (and, in some cases, was, like other newsreels, shown continuously).

Again, a quote from the Australian Screen (where you can catch clips):

The Pyjama Girl Murder Case newsreel, produced in 1939 after the coronial inquest, is considered to be Australia’s first true crime film. Filmmakers Rupert Kathner and Alma Brooks defied a ban by the New South Wales Police Commissioner, William MacKay, on newsreel coverage of the case and even tried to break into Sydney University to film the body. The use of adverbs such as ‘stealthily’ and emotive phrases such as ‘fiend in human form’, as well as the re-creations of various episodes of the case, indicate the ways in which the filmmakers sought to sensationalise the case.

In 1944, ten years after her body was found, a man was convicted not of her murder, but of manslaughter. Rat-bastard Antonio Agostini confessed to the police commissioner that he had “accidentally shot” his wife, Linda Agostini, “during an argument.”

Just how unlikely it is that Linda was Pyjama Girl (Linda Agostini had brown eyes; Pyjama Girl’s eyes were blue), is as astonishing as a husband who confesses to murdering his wife but only gets 6 years — and serves less then 3. And this is stuff that Richard Evans tells in his book, The Pyjama Girl Mystery (also available via Amazon).

But what we end up with now, are two dead women — both of which were likely killed by men they knew. (The odds say it’s true; and who else has access to a woman in her pajamas?)

Author Evans’ investigation into this case is far more fascinating than the story told in that 1977 movie — but that’s not even my main (or only) point.

Apparently in 2004, Australia’s ABC’s Rewind program ran a story on the Pyjama Girl mystery and, along with an extremely interesting interview with Evans, they presented this fascinating bit of cultural commentary:

MICHAEL CATHCART: In the 1930s, pyjamas were exotic, the sort of thing worn by young flappers. These so-called ‘new women’ dressed in skimpy clothes, they smoked, they drank, they partied and they laughed at convention. The straitlaced moral guardians of the day held up the Pyjama Girl as an example, a warning of what happens to young women who go astray.

CALEB WILLIAMS, CURATOR, JUSTICE AND POLICE MUSEUM: It was a wonderful trope for the newsmen of the day to play with. The idea of, you know, this wonderful, gorgeous, sexy woman abandoned bashed in a ditch in a pair of exotic silk pyjamas – it was sort of media heaven, basically.

In case you missed it, let me highlight the most offensive part here: The straitlaced moral guardians of the day held the Pyjama Girl up as a warning of what happens to young women who go astray. Why did they think the young woman had “gone astray”? Because she wore pajamas.

Pajamas.

Pajamas were, at the time, the “exotic” sort of thing worn by young flappers. And flappers were amoral women. Women who, apparently, deserve to be beaten, shot, burned and left dead in a ditch.

That’s a whole lot of conclusion jumping and victim blaming.

Just like the crap said about Linda Agostini.

Wikipedia (a site I trust about as much as I do the investigation into the Pyjama Girl case), says that Linda was a “penniless glamour girl” who “worked at a picture theatre in the city and lived in a boarding house on Darlinghurst Road in Kings Cross where all accounts tell she ‘entertained’ more than her fair share of young, attractive men. Platt was a heavy drinker and a flighty Jazz Age party-goer who had difficulty adjusting to stability.” Lovely. Who writes and edits at Wiki? Tony Agostini’s family?

Wiki does not reference those particular sentiments (for they sure aren’t facts), but none of the sites referenced says such things. One of the sites referenced, Australian Dictionary of Biography, says the following:

Tony and Linda were a popular couple. He was 5 ft 7 ins (170 cm) tall, trim and dark haired; she was only five feet (153 cm) tall, attractive and well liked. Yet, according to Tony, their relationship was not an easy one.

Linda sometimes left him for long periods and drank too much which shamed him within the Italian community. In 1933 the couple moved to Carlton, Melbourne, where he worked on the newspaper, Il Giornale Italiano, and she took a job at Ferrari’s hairdressing salon in the Manchester Unity Building. Agostini later claimed that there were frequent altercations. During one quarrel in bed, Linda was fatally shot with a pistol which Tony alleged she had held.

“They were well liked,” but… Tony says “their relationship was not an easy one,” Tony says there were “frequent altercations,” Tony says they argued in bed and she had a pistol. *snort*

Tony says it was an accident — but the bitch had it coming.

Who is here to speak for Linda? (And couldn’t I argue that with an ass-hat like Tony for a husband, I’d take off and drink too. Only I wouldn’t return to where he lives — by my choice, not his hand.) But let’s all blame the victims.

Linda’s treatment is like Pyjama Girl’s: Unfair and unwarranted crap which absolves their murderers from any responsibility. Which makes me really, really upset. The kind of upset that renders me unable to even swear properly.

How can anyone ven suggest that a woman was somehow responsible for her own murder because of the PJs she wore or drinking?

That Pyjama Girl’s death & “murder case” was reduced to media hype, social agendas, sloppy & corrupt police work — and just plain political no matter how you cut it — is a story which deserves to be told. If only because it may be the only way this woman (and Linda Agostini and other victims) can be honored. And because it just might be of value in teaching people what matters.

And that isn’t a woman’s pajamas. Or her short skirt. Or the number of drinks she’s had, who she knows, where she goes. She’s human and her life was taken — and likely by someone she trusted.

So, just how ridiculous does that not-giallo-enough film made in 1977 seem now? Like some chick’s armpit hair, it just doesn’t matter. Other than it was an insignificant waste of time.

And yeah, I could be all wet because, as I readily admit, I didn’t see this 1977 film. But then “Runkdapunk” says, “The disc has a half hour documentary about the actual Pyjama girl murder case which is actually more interesting than the film.” So I rest my case.

Now if only poor “Pyjama Girl” could only rest in peace.

13 Signs You’re In A Toxic Relationship

/ Alessia / 17 Comments


Thirteen Signs You’re In A Toxic Relationship

1 Most, if not all, of your family and friends do not like or trust your partner. This can be a tricky one to recognize for several reasons. Parents, especially, may not state their lack of trust directly because they know that in our state of love & infatuation we romanticize the “you and me against the world” mentality — they also know that this is something which the toxic partner will exploit, driving you faster away from them and into the toxic person’s grasp. Some relatives and friends may know something is ‘wrong’ but won’t know just how to prove it… But if you have people you trust warning you — even if they can offer little proof — you should continue to trust those closest to you and question this new relationship.

2 There are clearly two sets of rules, one for you & one for him, and both are set by him. Most of these things will be seen first in the form of jealousy. And in the beginning, such things will be written off as misunderstandings in the ‘getting to know you’ phase, and the drama can be seen as terribly romantic and passionate. He may even tell you that he reacts this way because of what some former girlfriend (that bitch!) did to him. Eventually, though, he will be so jealous that every last detail about how you look is a fine line between being attractive enough to please him and being a whore; he, on the other hand, may come and go as he pleases and affairs are just something you’ll have to forgive and forget, either because you were fighting at the time, or he was drunk, or he’s just a man who needs your help. You’ll become so anxious to understand his rules and avoid his reactions, that you don’t know what is worse, leaving the house alone or going out with him — so you settle for staying home and letting him go out alone because it’s less likely to upset him.

3 He will want to move in or get married quickly. He may say he’s never been so in love, or he may suggest it for economical reasons — after all, you spend all your time together — but what he wants is more access to you.

4 Once you are together, the toxic partner will disrespect and dismiss all things ‘you.’ All things you will be stupid, dumb, worthless, and on & on. He will belittle you, your body, your gender, your jokes, your hobbies, your family & friends. He will belittle you when alone, he will belittle you in front of his family, his friends, in public in front of strangers — but not so fiercely, or directly, in front of your family & associates because he is smart enough to if not charm them, then at least to remove any suggestion that he is anything other than a gem. That way, should you complain, you will not be believed. He will dismiss your upset over breaking or loss of your things. He will disrespect your privacy, right down to the most intimate bodily functions. He will ignore & dismiss your complaints with a wave of the hand — if you are lucky. (See #6, #8, #10)

5 Your partner monitors your spending, phone calls, mail, computer access, etc., and gives you time allotments for finishing errants and other tasks, especially those performed outside the home or out of his sight. My ex went to far as to call what few friends I did have along with all of his friends to find out where I was if I was not back from an errand within 20 minutes — round trip. I also had to account for all money spent to the nearest 25 cents.

6 You find yourself no longer participating in activities you once enjoyed. At first you don’t see that you’ve quietly acquiesced bits of your life; you just think you two are spending all your time together — how romantic. Ugh. I gave up browsing in bookstores & the library — those time limits vanished too quickly to really browse. I gave up classes & groups, such as pottery class and book clubs, because he thought that stuff was stupid. I also gave up shooting pool with friends — even when out with him — because other men might notice me.

7 Even though your finances are supposed to be shared, he will control the spending, the accounts, access to the money. He will play daddy with the money, holding your Barnes & Noble gift cards in his wallet for you, “Because you know how absent minded you are, dear.” (This way he not only scores the gift cards, but discredits you along the way.) He will use those gift cards when he wants to, without apology. I remember one Christmas he sent me out with my credit card (one I had in my name before we were married) to buy all the Christmas presents — and then he refused to pay one cent of that bill. I had to beg to earn the money from him to pay it off.

8 You find yourself isolated, alienated &/or cut-off from family and friends. If stopping all your usual activities and socializing habits hasn’t already alienated you from your family and friends, he will start misunderstandings and fights between you and your relatives and friends. When my friends called, my ex used to pretended to be talking to me while passing me the phone saying horrid things such as, “I’m not going to tell her you don’t want to talk to her,” or, “That Cathy you call ‘The Cow’ is on the phone for you,” etc. I didn’t know any of this until after the divorce, of course. Some of us never know why or how… We just find ourselves isolated, without a support system, in a world dominated & controlled by him.

9 You find yourself flinching, cringing or otherwise fearful even if your partner has never struck you. A part of you recognizes what’s to come, even if you don’t cognitively think it — or refuse to see it.

10 When he hurts &/or disappoints you, the conversation’s focus becomes all about him. Not just an angry lecture about what he wants and demands and how you have disappointed him (that usually is part of the abuse activities); but he becomes contrite, even cries, asking you to forgive and even to save him. It’s so ridiculous that it’s hard to believe, but it’s true. I remember once, holding my ex while he cried, soothing him telling him everything would be alright — this after he beat me with balled fists for the first time. He will make many promises to be good, to get counseling, to make it up to you — none of which will ever be carried out past a smile and some trinket. But by this time, you’ll be so relieved to have him happy — or at least not agitated and angry — that you’ll accept it just to keep the peace.

11 You find yourself changing shifts at work (if allowed to work outside the home), denying yourself regular sleep habits, to accommodate his schedule and wishes. If you have children, you will also find yourself, however unconsciously, trying to be a protective shield between them and the abuser. It is also another reason why you do not leave the house to attend activities with friends — because you do not want to leave the children home alone with him.

12 He threatens you, your children &/or your pets with violence. My ex used to threaten my then-grade-school-aged daughter that her cat would be dead by the time she came home from school; neither she nor I can remember why. Violent threats are not just statements the abuser is willing to make, he’s willing to carry them out too. When he does, you might not remember why either.

13 You, your children, &/or pets are hit, shoved, raped, or otherwise assaulted.

If you recognize any of these signs in your relationship, get out of the relationship. If you are living with a controller, abuser or toxic partner, seek assistance. Feel free to contact me and visit Women Against Domestic Violence. And if you are on a computer that he has access to, clear your broswer cache!

If you see these signs in a family member or friend’s relationship, take great care in what you do. Here’s a great tip sheet for you.

Get the Thursday Thirteen code here! UPDATE: The original site appears to be down, so please check Thursday-13.com!

The purpose of the meme is to get to know everyone who participates a little bit better every Thursday. Visiting fellow Thirteeners is encouraged! If you participate, leave the link to your Thirteen in others comments. It’s easy, and fun! Trackbacks, pings, comment links accepted!

Shut-Up Cosmo: Date Rape Is Not The Victim’s Fault

/ Alessia / 2 Comments

In the latest issue of Bitch magazine (Fall ’08, Issue #41), a scathing article by Jennifer McDaniel, “Don’t Take Advice From Cosmopolitan, Part 877″, blasts Cosmo’s recent (June 2088) article — and related sidebars — on date rape.

The article, featured on the cover with the line “5 Signs a Guy Is Capable of Rape”, is called “How a Date Rapist Works”; the related sidebar pieces are “Reading a Rapist’s Body Language” and “Personality Traits That Make You Vulnerable”.

On the surface you might think this helpful advice — but only if you believe the imperative premise that women are the ones responsible for men’s behavior. As McDaniel writes:

The article, like its gray-rape predecessor, ends up being both insulting to women and victim-blaming to boot. If a rapist could be identified with such easy-to-spot criteria, what woman wouldn’t readily discern a potential assailant and haul ass out of that bar? Rape victims are traumatized enough without being made to feel that their rapists were giving off clear signals that they were too stupid or oblivious to read.

(For the record, the “grey rape” article referred to was published in Cosmo back in September, 2007; you can find that pile of steaming crap here.)

It’s dreck like this that has had me avoiding Cosmopolitan magazine for a long time now. I hope you’ll avoid it too because the only help you’ll find in those slick pages are how to perpetuate the abdication of male accountability.

Does anyone really need that?

While I want women to be safe (and I hope Cosmo does too), it’s absurd, irresponsible, and down-right hurtful to put the blame for male violence on female victims.

As McDaniel said, “It’s not so surprising that Cosmo still seems to think so little of men that it refuses to hold them accountable for their behavior, but couldn’t they try to expect more from women?”

Instead, grab a copy of Bitch — better yet, subscribe. Because Bitch does expect more from both men and women.