Red Flags

Note: I have deliberately used the language of men being the perpetrators and women the victims of abuse. It is not intended to antagonise. It is intended to highlight the direction of power in the overwhelming majority of abusive heterosexual relationships. It is also part of Naming the Problem. Gay relationships are certainly not immune from abuse and the issues discussed in this post could be equally applied to same sex relationships.

Red flags within a relationship are warning signs that you may be with an abusive partner, the relationship is abusive or the abuse is escalating. They are useful for both the women in the relationship; their friends or family who may be worried about them; counsellors or anyone else seeking to help the abused party. Often it is an accumulation of different signs or a pattern of behaviour that gives the clearest warnings of an abusive relationship.

Abuse comes from attitudes and values rather than feelings. This is why it is so hard for abusers to change.  Ultimately they want and feel they deserve to have ownership of their partners. This may be ownership of their partner's feelings and thoughts or their behaviour or their movements. One thing all abusers have in common is a sense of entitlement and a level of narcissism. They believe that their wants and needs outweigh anybody else's and they are entitled to have their partner (and maybe children) focussed solely on them. To achieve their aims, abusers have to exert some form of control over their partners. Where that control is directed may differ but all are controlling. It is the method by which they perpetuate their abuse.

So Red Flags are born out of a sense of entitlement and are aimed at controlling the partner and focussing on the abusers wants and needs.

Why are the warning signs of an abusive relationship seemingly so hard to spot?

• Women, generally, are taught by society to ignore them and in some cases positively embrace them.  For example, how many films do you see with over-blown romantic gestures or stalkerish type behaviour?    These are the basis of most rom-coms. Take the films Frankie and Johnny (where Frankie is deprived of sleep and food before succumbing to Johnny's charms) or You've Got Mail for examples of stalkers and abusers being seen as romantic   This isn't just limited to films many songs condone violence to women e.g. Eminem's Kim and a lot of hip-hop and R& B.  Rihanna's songs are quite disturbing.  The Twilight books and 50 Shades of Grey also depict abusive relationships.  If the average person cannot recognise an abusive relationship when it is presented to them in black and white then it is no wonder that a woman in an abusive relationship can't.

• Until recently Law Enforcement has been complicit in retaining men's ownership of women and allowing domestic abuse to continue unchallenged. It has only been since 1991 that it is illegal for a man to rape his wife. And only since the 1990s that any significant progress has been made in the prosecution of men for domestic violence. As a result emotional/verbal/financial is only just being recognised and is still not illegal.

• In isolation red flags can appear as just bad behaviour so for example shouting and name-calling during an argument.

• Sometimes the signs are "revered" e.g. a workaholic providing for his family is ignoring the selfishness required to leave the house and childcare up to their partner.

• Sometimes, again in isolation, they just seems annoying e.g. sulking for hours/days, doesn't do housework.

• Abusers are not abusive all the time.  This is known as the Cycle of Abuse. Time between episodes may be long enough for the victim not to notice a pattern initially. They will invariably escalate though and the time between periods of abuse will diminish.

Most people can exhibit an incident of abusive behaviour and red flags at some part in a long-term relationship but what makes a relationship abusive is a pattern of behaviour. And this behaviour will generally escalate.  A man will not hit a woman on a first date because the woman would probably run a mile.  Yet even though a lot of women are shocked by a partner's first violent outburst this is always an escalation of previous abusive behaviour.

Here are some signs prior to a relationship starting. They may not all prove to be abusive traits but could indicate a tendency towards selfish controlling behaviour:

He is disrespectful or has a low opinion of other women - this won't change with you.
He has never lived alone - may expect you to be doing all the domestic chores.
He is a workaholic/successful business man - selfish behaviour. Behavioural traits that makes you successful in business are not necessarily compatible with being a good partner.
He spends a lot of time playing sport/getting fit - again could be a sign of selfish behaviour
He doesn't respect boundaries - he brushes against you; doesn't accept no and always tries to talk you round.
Doesn't respect your opinion.
Is an "Alpha" male.
Drinks too much and/or gets belligerent when drunk.
Becomes aggressive or intimidating to other people in social situations

Common warning signs (Red Flags):

Any physical or sexual violence from a man in a relationship is abusive.

Speaks ill of previous girlfriends/wives
Especially if they were "abusive" or turned their children against him. This is unlikely to be the case and in fact he is likely to have been the one who was abusive and his children recognised that.

He is disrespectful towards you
These could include name-calling; telling you you suffer from a mental illness; ridiculing your beliefs, values, ideas or opinions; disregards your accomplishments or uses them against you; harasses you about things you did in the past e.g. previous boyfriends; breaks dates/cancels plans at short notice; does not acknowledge the work you do or seems to think you don't work hard (especially with regards housework/childcare); humiliates you.

Does favours for you that you asked him not to or didn't want. Is inappropriately generous or loving.
Grandiose public displays of affection; brings you presents you don't want so you feel bad about refusing them; takes you places you don't want to go e.g. expensive restaurants especially after you have asked him not to.

He is controlling
Controls your access to money and what you spend it on; takes away car keys, money or credit cards; isolates you from friends or family; withholds approval, appreciation or affection; likes to tell you what you should be doing during the day or expects you to account for where you have been or what you have done, like he is your boss; tells you what to think, wear, how to behave; interferes with your work or school; sulks - not for half an hour like normal people but hours/days/weeks even.

He is possessive
Is angry if you pay too much attention to someone or something else (children, friends, school, etc.); gets jealous very easily or irrationally; is very concerned about his belongings and not so much about yours; treats you as property rather than a person.

Nothing is ever his fault
Turns arguments around to blame you; doesn't take responsibility for his actions; minimises or denies being abusive. gaslights.

Life revolves around him and his wants/needs
Does not include you in important decisions; expects you to cook his dinner, tidy up after him and generally put him first and becomes angry if this is not done to his liking; you find yourself thinking about him and what he wants all the time, neglecting your own wants.

Substance abuser
Uses drugs or alcohol to excuse their behaviour; An abuser is an abuser without substance abuse. That sense of entitlement will still be there even if he gives up alcohol or drugs.  But the nature of the abuse may change and escalate with substance abuse.

Sexual coercion and manipulation
Does not allow you to sleep; whines or nags about sex regularly (even though you may be having it several times a week); you wake up with him trying to have sex with you; barters chores for sex.

Very intense about the relationship at the start
Telling he loves you early on; putting you on a pedestal, initially, so he can knock you off it later in the relationship; fiery passionate behaviour.

Intimidation
Shouts; talks over you or fires questions at you during an argument; invades your personal space; criticises or threatens to hurt your family or friends; smashes up possessions (more often than not your possessions rather than his); reckless and angry driving; intimidating behaviour towards other people and strangers when angry.

Double Standards
He has affairs. makes contradictory demands; expects you to respect him whilst disrespecting you; comes home at late hours refusing an explanation.

Negative attitudes towards women
Stereotyped beliefs about sex roles for women; thinks women are conniving, manipulative, stupid or inferior; believes women should do domestic duties; addressing other women bitches, slags, sluts, whores;

Different public/private personas
He treats you well in company and calls you names in private; he puts you down in public and treats you better in private.

He appears attracted to vulnerability
Attracted to women who much younger than them or suffered abuse in another relationship or as a child.

Some of the feelings you may encounter whilst in an abusive relationship may include:

• Feeling afraid of your partner
• Avoiding certain topics out of fear
• Feeling you can't do anything right
• Believing you deserve to be hurt or mistreated
• Wondering if you are going crazy
• Feeling numb and helpless

• Thoughts constantly revolving around him and pleasing him

The above lists are not exhaustive and taken in isolation some of them may not be abusive behaviour. If in any doubt please ring Women's Aid and speak to someone. They are very used to spotting abuse and helping victims.

Resources used:

Lundy Bancroft: Why Does He Do That: Inside the minds of Angry and Controlling Men
Emotional abuse checklist
Signs of abuse and control

Helpful resources for abused women:

Women's Aid
Refuge
Rights of Women
CRASAC - Coventry Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre
Rape Crisis
Domestic Violence - Scotland

16 days of action on violence against women

Misogyny - a taboo word?

Misogyny is a word I have only relatively recently begun to use quite regularly. Before that I felt uncomfortable about it but without really understanding why. I have been prompted to try and articulate why by two recent incidents:

1. A man online stating <read mansplaining> that rape wasn't always an act of misogyny and those that perpetrate it weren't always misogynists.
2. While I was reading Lundy Bancroft's "Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men". As wonderful as the book is I think he has missed a trick when he states that most abusers are not misogynists.

"The notion that abusive men hate women was popularized by Susan Forward's book Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them. Dr Forward's description of abusive men are the most accurate ones I have read, but she was mistaken on one point. Most abusers don't hate women. They often have close relationships with their mothers, or sisters, or female friends. A fair number are able to work successfully with a female boss and respect her authority, at least outwardly."

It seems that misogyny/misogynist conjures up images of a man who actively and demonstrably hates all women. After all not even a rapist can be classed as a misogynist, it seems. Dictionaries tend to define misogyny as "hatred of women" which is ambiguous and sounds almost pathological. For me, it is much subtler and more pervasive than this.

Take my first incident. This man (lets call him Bob) went on to say that not only was rape not always misogynistic but the fact that thousands of Russian soldiers raped thousands of German women at the end of the second World War proved it. They couldn't all be misogynists?

Why not? Why couldn't they all be misogynists?

Is it because they had wives and daughters and mothers that they loved? Yet there they were doing a heinous act to someone else's wife/daughter/mother.

Is it because there were so many of them? Surely not all those men could be misogynists? Because that would then open the door for all those men who really do like women but who find themselves "inexplicably" doing hateful acts towards them, suddenly being misogynists. How could that be true?

Is it because it was just a single isolated act? I think this is where both examples start to merge. A man who does one hateful act to one woman can't possibly be a misogynist. A man who treats one woman or only a few women badly can't possibly be a misogynist. Yet in the quote from Bancroft's book he actually gives a clue as to why that probably isn't true. A fair number are able to work successfully with a female boss and respect her authority, at least outwardly.

At least outwardly. So this suggests that beneath a polished surface is a bit of turmoil as to whether he respects his female boss. This is one of the keys. A misogynist has an underlying disrespect for women. He may treat his mother or sister well because they are on that pedestal of "acceptable" women. However the disrespect bubbling beneath the surface "allows" him to commit these seemingly one off acts or abuse only certain women. When Bancroft goes into more detail about abusers it is clear that a lot of them (if not all) have a previous history of abusive relationships; they talk about women in derogatory terms; they want to control their partners. Just because they may be nice/civil/outwardly respectful to some women in their life, does it mean they aren't a misogynist? There is still a pattern of disrespect and disrespect of women is a form of low level misogyny. It isn't the overt hatred that seems to be expected from a misogynist but it perpetuates the subjugation of women.

Bob may have had a point albeit he put it very ineptly in his eagerness to educate us (I am being more than a little generous there). What makes a seemingly ordinary man do such a terrible act as raping a woman? I think that this points to the other half of the definition of misogyny - the fact it is systemic i.e. society allows men to treat women badly and society sees women as less human than men. It gives them permission. This is how so many men abuse the women they are in relationships with. This is how so many soldiers raped so many women. Although the difference was that the soldiers were given explicit permission without repercussion rather than the implied permission abusers take. An important point to also note is that they were given permission to rape specifically because their victims were women. But to actually commit the act of rape they must have thought those women as lesser to themselves. That disrespect must have always been there. It was just brought to the surface.

In Bob's redefinition of rape as a non-misogynistic act he also failed to take into account of the victim's feelings and experience. I am pretty certain that the women being raped thought that the individual soldiers hated them. Coupled with the fact that there was no recourse over their violent acts would make the women feel it was misogynistic. They were raped because they were women. It has always been a special punishment for women. What is more misogynistic than that? How dare this arrogant and privileged man deny these women their experience? To a lesser extent Bancroft is doing the same. He admits society allows men to get away with abusing women yet he fails to make the leap to it being misogyny that allows that. And abusive men, by taking advantage of society become misogynists themselves.

However we are looking at an extreme and unusual act with the mass rape of German women. The average rape is common place and committed by men in pretty average circumstances. Are these men misogynists? Of course they are. The average rapist hasn't just raped one woman for a start. They are using a tool of subjugation against a woman for the purpose of power and control. These men really don't like women. It is quite simple, much more obvious than with an abuser. It is hate. It is misogyny. The clues will be there in their interactions with women.

Overall misogyny is a lot more passive than the traditional view would have you think. Disrespect, viewing women as less than men rather than out and out hatred is what drives it. Society also provides the vessel in which it grows and continues. Without that vessel it would just be individual men doing individual acts of violence and abuse to individual women.

I am not the only person who thinks that the popular definition of misogyny is too simplistic and the actual definition should be much wider than the hatred of all women all the time. Julia Gillard has prompted a rethink by the Macquarie Dictionary and other dictionaries. This is no bad thing. Misogyny is much more widespread than a lone nutcase on a vengeance trip against women. It is time that mainstream society caught up with that.

On a more positive note, not all men have this disrespect and bubbling hatred for women. I am absolutely certain that some of those soldiers refused to rape these women, for example. Just like men refuse to abuse their partners even though society will allow them to get away with it. And it is reversible. We have to believe that. Men are human. They have the capacity to love and admire and respect us too.


http://therealsgm.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/16-days-of-action-on-violence-against.html