Janay and Ray Rice and Why Women Stay in Abusive Relationships

[Landlord]

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/09/09/3564896/janay-rice-cycle-abuse/

 

 

 

“When we solely focus on whether a survivor stays with or leaves their abusive partner, we place all the responsibility on the survivor rather than holding an abusive partner accountable,” Chai Jindasurat, the programs coordinator for the Anti-Violence Project, told ThinkProgress. “Intimate partner violence is about power and control, and leaving can be an extremely dangerous and frightening option for survivors.”

 

In fact, according to research conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice, the victims who leave their abusers are actually in even greater danger than they were before. Statistically, separating from an abuser increases a victim’s risk of being killed by 75 percent. Black women specifically account for a disproportionate number of intimate partner homicides, and half of these victims are killed while they’re in the process of leaving their abuser.

 

 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ethlie-ann-vare/he-hit-me-and-it-felt-lik_1_b_5781606.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000046

 

 

 

I usually tune out when the newscast segues into sports, because there's only so much space in my skull, but this particular story was at the intersection of sports and gender politics, so I listened. The commentator was outraged about the brief, two-game suspension of Ravens' running back Ray Rice received after he beat his then-fiancée unconscious -- on camera -- in a casino elevator. You get a five-game suspension for smoking a joint, he gasped, and that stuff's practically legal!

I don't care about the length of the suspension nor do I give a crap about the Ravens (they're from Baltimore, apparently). What I noticed was the then-fiancée part. "Well, at least she had the brains to walk out before he beat her to death," I thought. Then I heard the reason that she's his then-fiancée: Not because she left him, but because she married him the day after a grand jury indicted him on charges of aggravated assault. Janay Palmer -- her name is rarely mentioned in all these Ray Rice stories; it's Janay -- is his then-fiancée only because she's his now-wife.

Why, then, does an abused woman stay with her abuser? I don't speak to this as a family court judge, or a social worker, or a marriage and family counselor. I speak as a woman whose first husband beat her black and blue, and who nonetheless stayed with him until we were forcibly separated by the State of California, because men and women go to different jails.

I know why I stayed. I know why many other women have stayed, because they told me.

What do you guys think about this? Keep in mind that 99% of us are dudes, will never experience being the victim of relationship abuse in a way that can relate to Janay or any woman. I think it's unfair and unkind to make claims about it being about money, or to call her a nut, or anything that focuses on her response moreso than his action. The psychological and emotional effects of abuse are absolutely bonkers and I think need to be approached with a lot of caution and grace, because usually the people suffering from it are convinced that it isn't a problem, and if they realize the threat they are terrified of it.

[QMany]

“When we solely focus on whether a survivor stays with or leaves their abusive partner, we place all the responsibility on the survivor rather than holding an abusive partner accountable.”

Is anyone not holding Ray Rice accountable (other than the NFL and the PD)? No one is "solely focus[ing]" on the survivors decisions; Ray Rice is getting rightfully grilled over this. There is no excuse for domestic violence. It doesn't mean you can't also question their decision to stay with the abusive partner. I understand there are great difficulties in leaving, but that doesn't mean staying is the right decision.

[knapplc]

You gotta just discount everything the abused says in these situations.

 

Domestic violence, and the manipulations both physical and psychological that accompany them, are fundamental, deep-brain things. A five-minute analysis isn't going to adequately put a person in a mindset to understand.

 

Basically, if you haven't been in this situation, or been a party to it, and you aren't educated on this... you just gotta take the word of the people who are. It's not your normal life stuff. It's all wonky, and you have to step back from opinion and just trust on this one. This one thing, that you don't prejudge or try to logic your way through. You just don't know - 100% 4real.

[NUpolo8]

 

“When we solely focus on whether a survivor stays with or leaves their abusive partner, we place all the responsibility on the survivor rather than holding an abusive partner accountable.”

Is anyone not holding Ray Rice accountable (other than the NFL and the PD)? No one is "solely focus[ing]" on the survivors decisions; Ray Rice is getting rightfully grilled over this. Their is no excuse for domestic violence. It doesn't mean you can't also question their decision to stay with the abusive partner. I understand there are great difficulties in leaving, but that doesn't mean staying is the right decision.

Yeah, don't do what Qmany says.

[Count 'Bility]

Real eye opener guys. Thanks.

[QMany]

 

 

“When we solely focus on whether a survivor stays with or leaves their abusive partner, we place all the responsibility on the survivor rather than holding an abusive partner accountable.”

Is anyone not holding Ray Rice accountable (other than the NFL and the PD)? No one is "solely focus[ing]" on the survivors decisions; Ray Rice is getting rightfully grilled over this. Their is no excuse for domestic violence. It doesn't mean you can't also question their decision to stay with the abusive partner. I understand there are great difficulties in leaving, but that doesn't mean staying is the right decision.

Yeah, don't do what Qmany says.

Profound thoughts.

 

What really am I saying that you disagree with? So you are saying you shouldn't question a decision to stay with an abusive partner? So do you condone staying with an abusive partner?

[Vizsla1]

Any truth to the rumor the police gave the NFL the tape over 5 months ago and the police received a thank you from the NFL?-- If true- kinda sad that they (NFL) said this week was the first they were seeing the tape of the incident.

[NUpolo8]

 

 

 

“When we solely focus on whether a survivor stays with or leaves their abusive partner, we place all the responsibility on the survivor rather than holding an abusive partner accountable.”

 

Is anyone not holding Ray Rice accountable (other than the NFL and the PD)? No one is "solely focus[ing]" on the survivors decisions; Ray Rice is getting rightfully grilled over this. Their is no excuse for domestic violence. It doesn't mean you can't also question their decision to stay with the abusive partner. I understand there are great difficulties in leaving, but that doesn't mean staying is the right decision.

Yeah, don't do what Qmany says.

Profound thoughts.

 

So you are saying you shouldn't question a decision to stay with an abusive partner? So do you condone it?

I'm saying you should listen to Knapp's advice, admit you have no freaking idea what you're talking about, and learn to conjugate your "there's" before you to drop your scorching hot take.

[QMany]

Sorry, grammar nazi. I mixed one up, I'll edit it for you. That definitely makes your points, or lack thereof, correct.

[knapplc]

Let's keep this civil. We allow a *bit* more edge here in P&R than in other forums, but there are still limits.

 

Please take disagreements to the Shed.

[Landlord]

 

“When we solely focus on whether a survivor stays with or leaves their abusive partner, we place all the responsibility on the survivor rather than holding an abusive partner accountable.”

Is anyone not holding Ray Rice accountable (other than the NFL and the PD)? No one is "solely focus[ing]" on the survivors decisions; Ray Rice is getting rightfully grilled over this. There is no excuse for domestic violence. It doesn't mean you can't also question their decision to stay with the abusive partner. I understand there are great difficulties in leaving, but that doesn't mean staying is the right decision.

 

 

 

The quoted sentence isn't technically accurate, and you're right, but you understand the sentiment behind it. Especially in public discourse, the fact that the abuse happens is so much more dramatically concerning then the nuances that make an abused person not leave, that it does almost no good to question why she's sticking around because it gives people the opening to lose sight of what the real CRIME is.

 

It's the same thing with rape. Any time someone asks if the woman was asking for it by what she was wearing or by getting drunk or whatever, all the sudden even if it's only for a second and only in the mind of one person, the crime of rape is ignored or even excused and that's not okay. The way you prevent rape is for people not to rape people, not to change clothing or not drink or have a buddy system. The way you prevent abuse is for people not to abuse others, not for people that are abused to be the ones that have to free themselves.

 

 

It's not just that there are difficulties in leaving, although the difficulties can be enormous. A lot of the time, the person doesn't even want to leave. Their brain has been manipulated and their paradigms so twisted that they see the abuse as love, or they become addicted to the chemical reactions to it, or they think they have to help their abusive partner, or any number of reasons.

 

So, no, it's not the right decision to stay, but that person is in no position to actually have the ability to make good decisions. In no way, shape, or form are they equipped to do what is best for themselves. It's also not a bad thing to question why they're staying, but for you or me, as random unrelated persons, it's not beneficial and so really what's the point? The job of finding out what's going on in their head should fall on the people actually involved in that person's life that have built trust, that love them and are actually in a position to step in and help them when they can't help themselves.

 

 

 

 

tl;dr you're not factually wrong, but you're getting a lot of backlash because this is deeply personal for a lot of people and an extremely complicated and incredibly heavy reality, and you're coming across as being unsympathetic and ignorant. Not saying you are, because I think you're a good guy added all up, but it's coming off that way at any rate.

[Landlord]

Nonetheless, it’s hard for people to find sympathy for the victims who don’t leave. “The view that leaving is the answer to domestic violence is so strong that is has become the standards by which victims are judged,” noted a 2008 report produced by the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence. “Leave and you are worthy of the full range of services and protection. Stay and the resources may be limited.”

 

That’s exactly what’s going on with the current reaction to Janay Rice — and, on top of that, the judgment about whether she’s a “real” victim is likely also being compounded by racial factors. The trope of the “strong black woman” may make outside observers more likely to assign her blame for playing a part in her abuse.

 

“I think there’s an expectation that if a black woman was hit, she either did something to cause it or she’ll be strong enough to leave,” Racine Henry, a therapist and doctoral candidate at Drexel University who focuses on intimate partner violence pertaining to black women, explained in an interview with the blog For Harriet this week. “It’s almost like we can’t be victims. We can’t be innocent victims in the way that women of other races can be.”

[Count 'Bility]

I have a legit question. Forgotten in all the NFL and Goodell talk is, with this tape, when is Ray Rice going to be arrested and have his ass thrown in jail? I mean, it is a crime right? Or does she actually have to be the one to press the charges?

[StPaulHusker]

So what do we do?

 

Shaming Ray Rice isn't going to make her leave.

 

Shaming her isn't going to make her leave.

[Creighton Duke]

 

 

“When we solely focus on whether a survivor stays with or leaves their abusive partner, we place all the responsibility on the survivor rather than holding an abusive partner accountable.”

Is anyone not holding Ray Rice accountable (other than the NFL and the PD)? No one is "solely focus[ing]" on the survivors decisions; Ray Rice is getting rightfully grilled over this. There is no excuse for domestic violence. It doesn't mean you can't also question their decision to stay with the abusive partner. I understand there are great difficulties in leaving, but that doesn't mean staying is the right decision.

 

 

 

The quoted sentence isn't technically accurate, and you're right, but you understand the sentiment behind it. Especially in public discourse, the fact that the abuse happens is so much more dramatically concerning then the nuances that make an abused person not leave, that it does almost no good to question why she's sticking around because it gives people the opening to lose sight of what the real CRIME is.

 

It's the same thing with rape. Any time someone asks if the woman was asking for it by what she was wearing or by getting drunk or whatever, all the sudden even if it's only for a second and only in the mind of one person, the crime of rape is ignored or even excused and that's not okay. The way you prevent rape is for people not to rape people, not to change clothing or not drink or have a buddy system. The way you prevent abuse is for people not to abuse others, not for people that are abused to be the ones that have to free themselves.

 

 

It's not just that there are difficulties in leaving, although the difficulties can be enormous. A lot of the time, the person doesn't even want to leave. Their brain has been manipulated and their paradigms so twisted that they see the abuse as love, or they become addicted to the chemical reactions to it, or they think they have to help their abusive partner, or any number of reasons.

 

So, no, it's not the right decision to stay, but that person is in no position to actually have the ability to make good decisions. In no way, shape, or form are they equipped to do what is best for themselves. It's also not a bad thing to question why they're staying, but for you or me, as random unrelated persons, it's not beneficial and so really what's the point? The job of finding out what's going on in their head should fall on the people actually involved in that person's life that have built trust, that love them and are actually in a position to step in and help them when they can't help themselves.

 

 

 

 

tl;dr you're not factually wrong, but you're getting a lot of backlash because this is deeply personal for a lot of people and an extremely complicated and incredibly heavy reality, and you're coming across as being unsympathetic and ignorant. Not saying you are, because I think you're a good guy added all up, but it's coming off that way at any rate.

 

So much of this discussion is based around a few very disturbing assumptions:

1. Mrs. Rice (the woman who married Ray Rice) has some kind of mental issue or condition that would cause her to want to stay with her husband.

2. We/society/the State know what is best for Mrs. Rice and for every person who is in a situation that may somewhat resemble this one.

3. Mrs. Rice’s own words and feelings are obviously moot if she is comfortable staying with this man.

For as much as people are saying that we, as people who have never been in such a relationship can never understand the mindset of the “abused” who wish to remain in such relationships, I have one question: how do you not only understand the mindset, but are at the liberty to explain it, in some cases, in a somewhat patronizing manner?

 

What I saw in that video looked horrible. A man who is in better physical shape than 99.9 percent of people on the planet not only hitting, but spitting on someone. The fact that the person is his now-wife makes things even more confusing. However, I also know some things about the people involved.

1. Mrs. Rice is obviously attracted to the hyper-masculine archetype that Ray Rice embodies.

2. Mrs. Rice received a pretty ho-hum degree from a pretty ho-hum university.

What possibilities can I infer from these realities?

1. Maybe this activity was a precursor to some kind of intimate activity that was to occur back in the hotel room? Maybe it got out of hand, but Mrs. Rice may have a preference for rough and degrading behavior. Nobody should judge her for this, but people should not rule this out, either.

2. Mrs. Rice may have grown accustomed to the cars, money, etc. that goes along with being with an NFL all-star and may be scared that by Ray Rice being essentially kicked out of the NFL that all of the luxuries that she is used to are now gone.

Are either of these possibilities the truth? Who knows, but they are as good of guesses as anyone who attempts to discount Mrs. Rice’s words, feelings and preferences.

The part about not questioning these kinds of actions and likening them to rape is the most disturbing. In an attempt to avoid “victim blaming” we are sending mixed messages that will undoubtedly lead to more incidents of this kind. When our buffoon of a vice president tells America that it is “never, never, never, never, never, the woman’s fault” no questions asked, what kind of message does this send? Hope your crazy ex-girlfriend never puts a gun to your head or attacks you with a knife because if you defend yourself, well, hey, there is NEVER a reason to hit her.

When we don’t question how and why these events occur and blindlessly blame the alleged “aggressor”, what are we learning? NOTHING about the true cause of the activity and we are sending a message that any kind of irresponsible behavior is A-OK because we can never blame a victim. Don’t teach your kids to look both ways before crossing the street; if they get hit by a car, and didn’t look we CAN’T victim blame. Don’t teach people proper responses to active shooters in a building. Just teach mentally disturbed people not to go on rampages. Having to alter any kind of normal activity to account for possible, uncontrollable/unforeseen consequences is NOT the solution and is a form of victim blaming.

When we don’t question how and why these events occur and blindlessly blame the alleged “aggressor”, what are we teaching? That if something bad happens to a certain “empowered” “independent” and “strong” class of people they suddenly are no longer any of the previously used words and that society and the State not only knows what is best for them, but will ensure that everyone else agrees with the sentiment. Any personal beliefs and rationale should be discounted as, in Mrs. Rice’s case, her words are coming from someone who is not thinking clearly and who has adopted a victim’s mindset.

As I said before, the video looks horrible. I wish we lived in a world where nobody attacked anyone, yet alone people smaller and more vulnerable as this kind of bullying makes me sick. However, the more we defer to societal beliefs and the State to dictate the best course of action and continue to promote a negative connotation with “victim blaming” I GUARANTEE you that such activity will continue to rise .