Why Doesn’t She Leave Him?
It's time to put the question to rest..
It's reached the point where I hate to tell people I write about battering. And in any social gathering, the reaction is almost always the same. Usually a woman proclaims to everyone within earshot, "I'd never put up with that" and invariably someone takes me aside and says, "I'm very sympathetic to these poor women, of course, but what bothers me is, why don't they just leave?" One of these days, when I'm asked that question again, I may haul off and batter the questioner myself.
It's not that I'm can't answer it, various experts have been answering that question for generations. In the 1920's, social workers explained that battered women were mentally retarded. In the 1940's psychologists found a new answer: Battered women don't leave because they're masochists. They like it. Feminists outraged by that theory in the 1970's came up with new ones. Battered women don't leave because they can't support themselves and their kids, they're isolated from friends and family and they've been terrorized into a state of "learned helplessness" by repeated beatings.
Now these "modern" answers emphasizing individual psychology have been superseded by a more practical one. It's illustrated by the case of Lisa Bianco Indiana. Her ex- husband was in prison for assaulting her and kidnapping the children. But he got a day pass for good behavior, drove to Lisa's home and clubbed her to death. Lisa's grieving mother told TV reporters; "People ask, Why don't battered women leave?" they get killed That's why.
True enough. Since a batterer is dependent on the woman he batters for his sense of power and control losing "his" woman is like losing himself. That's why he's much more likely to kill her (and perhaps himself) if she leaves than if she stay and "takes it."
According to the FBI, current or former husbands and boyfriends murder more than 1,400 women every year. Every day there's a new headline: Man slays estranged Wife. Murdered woman had protective order. Often, he kills the kids, other relatives, and her friends or innocent bystander too. Yet people still have the nerve to ask, "Why doesn't she leave?"
What bothers me most about that question is that it's not a real question. We'll never find and answer that's good enough to lay it to rest because it's really and accusation. It passes judgment. It implies that violence is the problem of the woman, who suffers from it, and hers to solve. It ignores the fact that battering is a crime and insists that the crime victim walk away and forget about it. It transforms and immense social wrong into a personal transaction. At the same time, it pins responsibility for the violence squarely on the woman who is the target.
The question also gets us and our social institution off the hook. If battered women could solve the problem simply by walking away, then why should we so anything? And how can we expect the police or courts or doctors or social workers to take action? (They'd like to help, but hey—what can they do? Why doesn't she just leave?) Even some feminists, weary of what they call "victim feminism," insist that the battered woman take responsibility for herself. She made her bed, they say; now why doesn't she pick up and leave? (After all, they wouldn't put up with it)
Worse, by blaming the woman who suffers from violence, the question diverts our attention from the man who inflicts it. Through the decades, the "expects" mostly male, have discussed her low intelligence but not his. They've used research grants, provide by our tax dollars, to study her masochism but not his sadism, her "low self-esteem" but not his pathological aggression her learned helplessness" but not his studied assaultiveness.
Experts have answered "Why doesn't she leave" so often that "battered –women's syndrome" has become an everyday phrase. But why is there no "battering- man's syndrome?" And why, when every day the news brings another story of a man who tracked down and killed the woman who left him, does no one ever ask the real question "What's wrong with him?" Why didn't he stop beating her? Why don't we make him stop?
But no! The first question, and often the only question, is why doesn't she leave? And while we busy ourselves asking or answering that victim – blaming question, men continue their violence undeterred. Lost in this shell game is one simple principle: that every American ha a constitutional right (not to mention a human right) to live free from bodily harm. Assault violates that fundamental right. No matter whether the assaulted woman is mentally retarded, or masochistic, or financially dependent, or isolated or "helpless." No matter whether she stays or goes. Assault is still a crime.
Thirteen years ago, a battered woman called a radio talk show to set me straight on this point. I'd been advising women in my audience to pack up and leave abusive partners. "Why should I leave?" the caller asked. "It's my house. I worked for it. I painted it. I clean it. I'm not committing and crimes here. Why don't you tell him to leave?" Now that's a good question.
It's reached the point where I hate to tell people I write about battering. And in any social gathering, the reaction is almost always the same. Usually a woman proclaims to everyone within earshot, "I'd never put up with that" and invariably someone takes me aside and says, "I'm very sympathetic to these poor women, of course, but what bothers me is, why don't they just leave?" One of these days, when I'm asked that question again, I may haul off and batter the questioner myself.
It's not that I'm can't answer it, various experts have been answering that question for generations. In the 1920's, social workers explained that battered women were mentally retarded. In the 1940's psychologists found a new answer: Battered women don't leave because they're masochists. They like it. Feminists outraged by that theory in the 1970's came up with new ones. Battered women don't leave because they can't support themselves and their kids, they're isolated from friends and family and they've been terrorized into a state of "learned helplessness" by repeated beatings.
Now these "modern" answers emphasizing individual psychology have been superseded by a more practical one. It's illustrated by the case of Lisa Bianco Indiana. Her ex- husband was in prison for assaulting her and kidnapping the children. But he got a day pass for good behavior, drove to Lisa's home and clubbed her to death. Lisa's grieving mother told TV reporters; "People ask, Why don't battered women leave?" they get killed That's why.
True enough. Since a batterer is dependent on the woman he batters for his sense of power and control losing "his" woman is like losing himself. That's why he's much more likely to kill her (and perhaps himself) if she leaves than if she stay and "takes it."
According to the FBI, current or former husbands and boyfriends murder more than 1,400 women every year. Every day there's a new headline: Man slays estranged Wife. Murdered woman had protective order. Often, he kills the kids, other relatives, and her friends or innocent bystander too. Yet people still have the nerve to ask, "Why doesn't she leave?"
What bothers me most about that question is that it's not a real question. We'll never find and answer that's good enough to lay it to rest because it's really and accusation. It passes judgment. It implies that violence is the problem of the woman, who suffers from it, and hers to solve. It ignores the fact that battering is a crime and insists that the crime victim walk away and forget about it. It transforms and immense social wrong into a personal transaction. At the same time, it pins responsibility for the violence squarely on the woman who is the target.
The question also gets us and our social institution off the hook. If battered women could solve the problem simply by walking away, then why should we so anything? And how can we expect the police or courts or doctors or social workers to take action? (They'd like to help, but hey—what can they do? Why doesn't she just leave?) Even some feminists, weary of what they call "victim feminism," insist that the battered woman take responsibility for herself. She made her bed, they say; now why doesn't she pick up and leave? (After all, they wouldn't put up with it)
Worse, by blaming the woman who suffers from violence, the question diverts our attention from the man who inflicts it. Through the decades, the "expects" mostly male, have discussed her low intelligence but not his. They've used research grants, provide by our tax dollars, to study her masochism but not his sadism, her "low self-esteem" but not his pathological aggression her learned helplessness" but not his studied assaultiveness.
Experts have answered "Why doesn't she leave" so often that "battered –women's syndrome" has become an everyday phrase. But why is there no "battering- man's syndrome?" And why, when every day the news brings another story of a man who tracked down and killed the woman who left him, does no one ever ask the real question "What's wrong with him?" Why didn't he stop beating her? Why don't we make him stop?
But no! The first question, and often the only question, is why doesn't she leave? And while we busy ourselves asking or answering that victim – blaming question, men continue their violence undeterred. Lost in this shell game is one simple principle: that every American ha a constitutional right (not to mention a human right) to live free from bodily harm. Assault violates that fundamental right. No matter whether the assaulted woman is mentally retarded, or masochistic, or financially dependent, or isolated or "helpless." No matter whether she stays or goes. Assault is still a crime.
Thirteen years ago, a battered woman called a radio talk show to set me straight on this point. I'd been advising women in my audience to pack up and leave abusive partners. "Why should I leave?" the caller asked. "It's my house. I worked for it. I painted it. I clean it. I'm not committing and crimes here. Why don't you tell him to leave?" Now that's a good question.
Comment
© 2024 Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..
Powered by
You need to be a member of Black Preaching Network to add comments!
Join Black Preaching Network