BBC - Language around male violence...again

I seem to be on a mission with the BBC and their reporting at the moment. As with this article, some might call it inevitable. The problem I have with the article is part of a wider pattern of BBC reporting on male violence against women.

Peter Foster murdered his partner. He killed a woman yet the article is framed to seem actually sympathetic with him because he took his own life.

Mr Carver said Foster was "full of remorse" for what had happened, but that his death was "inevitable".

What evidence is there of remorse? So full of remorse that he tried to dispose of evidence and dumped her body. Remember this is a man who killed his partner, who had recently given birth, by "hitting Det Con Cooper over the head 10 times with a baseball bat and stabbing her in the throat." There was no remorse for Heather Cooper. The only remorse was all for himself and the fact he was caught.

The article then goes on to describe some of the trigger points in Foster's life which is understandable as it is an inquest into his suicide. But it is the way these points have been selected and the way they have been described that minimises what he did.

...not being able to see his children after his arrest had a "profound effect on him".

Are we meant to feel sympathy here? He brutally killed their mother. He shouldn't have access to them. He needed to face the consequences of his actions. This was one of them. What about the effect his actions had on his children? Did he think about the profound effect it may have had on them? The self absorption of the man can really be seen in that comment.

He said Foster had been abandoned by his mother and brought up by his grandmother.

The language here is so telling. '[A]bandoned' is such an emotive word. Did she abandon him or did she leave him in the care of his father or grandmother? Fathers who abandon their children are far far more often described as 'absent' or 'not around'.

He also had a difficult relationship with his father and suffered bouts of depression.

What does 'difficult' mean exactly? His mother abandoned him and his father he had a difficult relationship with. A bit of disparity going on there with the wording. Maximising the effect of his mother's actions on his life and minimising the actions of his father who clearly wasn't around much either as he was brought up by his grandmother.

...Foster's father was murdered in January 2009, which he had found hard to cope with.

Later that year, he was found close to death on his father's grave after taking pills and alcohol.

So he had a history of of wanting to take his life. In between which he took someone else's life. Why are we asking the question of why he took his own life but not asking why this man decided to direct his violence outwards on to someone else? And on a wider basis why men so often direct their emotions outward in a violent manner because this is by no means restricted to Foster. And we should remember, from the second BBC article linked to that Heather Cooper wanted to leave him. He promised to go to anger classes. The violence was already there before he murdered her. This was a violent, abusive man.

Prison officer Geoff Gordon described Foster as a pleasant and calm man who was interesting, vulnerable and bright.

I really feel like swearing at this point. This is a total eradication of what he did. He brutally murdered a woman. How come some are so quick to overlook that? Such privilege is rarely offered to female murderers. Would a female murderer's suicide garner this much sympathy? 10 women a week commit suicide due to domestic abuse. They certainly don't garner much sympathy and they didn't kill anyone.

Taking these excerpts that the BBC chose at face value, you would think that Peter Foster was a tragic soul who'd had things happen to him. Not someone who had taken a life incredibly violently and deprived his children of their mother. Language matters. Let's use it correctly around violent and abusive men. He was nasty and brutal.

However I do agree with the BBC and Mr Carver on one point. His suicide was inevitable because here was a man who refused to face up to the responsibility of his actions.

Separating art from the artist: Why should we?

Recently there have been two high profile cases of men who have been celebrated and allowed to continue working having committed serious violent crimes against women. In both cases it has been deemed that their work is more important than their crime. Their crimes have either been ignored or not deemed serious enough to interrupt their career.

The BFI had a "two-month retrospective" of Roman Polanski over January and February. Oh joys. On 10 March 1977 Roman Polanski was charged with the rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under fourteen. He pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse but never faced sentencing as he did a runner, to put it bluntly. The BFI didn't even acknowledge the crime in their "retrospective". Conservative with the truth, let's say.

Now, admittedly, I am not an avid "Art" fan. I like some of it, I enjoy watching films, love reading books but I will never be completely immersed in it. Maybe this is why I can't see beyond a man's crimes to appreciate his art, or maybe it is because I am a human being. However, you can see evidence of Polanski's misogyny in his films and his inappropriate fixation on young girls. Chinatown and Tess are particularly problematic in this area, not mention Polanski's relationship with Nastassja Kinski when she was only 15. The attitude and sense of entitlement it takes to rape someone doesn't just appear in isolation. It permeates throughout their life including their work.

I may not be an arts fan but I am a sports fan. On 14th February 2013 Oscar Pistorius killed his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp by shooting her 4 times. This is not in doubt. Following this killing there was a lot of disbelief and misplaced adulation and barely a mention of his victim. This eradication of Reeva and what happened to her has continued now in that Pistorius has been granted leave to compete abroad whilst waiting on bail for his trial (set to be in June). So the judge in South Africa saw fit to prioritise his career above the crime he has been charged with. Again there is a separation of the crime from the work of the man as if the two are not related.

Pistorius showed a glimpse of his sense of entitlement at the London 2012 Paralympics when losing the 200m to Alan Fonteles. Elite sportsmen often have an arrogance and selfishness which gets them to the top. This selfishness is only one step away from feeling entitlement. When all around you tell you how good you are and how you deserve to win, it will have an impact on your mindset. Allowing him to compete whilst waiting for trial is another incident emphasising that he is allowed special and preferential treatment. It does require a sense of entitlement to shoot your girlfriend through a bathroom door, four times.

You can't separate a man and his work. His work is part of him as is his crime. They don't sit in separate compartments. They overlap. Compartmentalising it is very convenient for the men who commit these crimes and for all other men who commit violence, especially against women. Seeing a crime in isolation from the man denies the connection and the pattern that these men follow. It encourages only focussing on the individual and not only the overall problem of male violence. It perpetuates the rape culture we live in, allows male violence to continue and keeps women oppressed. Ignoring men's behaviour when they commit crimes against women and promoting their work really only sends out one message: women and their lives do not matter.

Not only do we we need to name the problem of male violence but punish it and remember what these men did.

Posted with Blogsy

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