I haven’t been in a violent relationship, but I’ve read a fair amount on why people frequently don’t leave.
One piece is that physical abuse is commonly accompanied by emotional abuse—the abuser keeps saying that the abusee is to incompetent to live on their own and too unattractive to get another mate. It’s not uncommon for people who feel they are in an inferior position, whether because of violence or just because the other person sounds very certain, to accept that sort of assessment.
There are women who stay because the man is the best father they think they can find, and leave when they realize he’s abusing their children.
I’m being gender-non-specific for most of this because, while men are apt to have more financial resources to leave and perhaps less reason to fear extreme violence, the emotional dynamics aren’t too different.
Sometimes the abuse has built up slowly. People can be very bad at judging how bad a situation has become, especially if the problems are intermittent.
Sometimes the abuser is inconsistent—alternating abuse with intense apologies and/or affection. This can make the abusee confused, especially if they’ve bought into the idea that “love” excuses everything. Not just the abuser’s claims of loving them, but that they feel love for the abuser means that the abusee shouldn’t care about their own quality of life. This isn’t just personal pathology, it’s part of the culture.
Also, abusers are apt to isolate their victims from friends and family, thus making practical and emotional help with leaving less likely.
While it’s fading, it’s not uncommon to believe (sometimes for religious reasons) that family stability should completely trump personal quality of life.
It’s financially difficult to leave.
Abusers are apt to become more violent (sometimes to the point of murder) when they feel abandoned.
I agree that it isn’t necessary to have been abused to understand, but there are different kinds of understanding.
There’s the “that makes sense to me” sort of understanding, and there’s the appreciation of feeling, detail, and implication which comes from living through a thing.
I think “you just can’t understand” has a least a few sources. One is giving up if the second sort of understanding can’t be conveyed. One is not yet having a confusing and painful situation clear in one’s mind. Another is dealing with people (and they aren’t rare) who ask painful questions without listening to the answers.
I largely agree. Using your terminology, my dispute is with those who refuse to attempt to convey the first sort of understanding, simply because they can’t convey the second sort of understanding. (Or, more generally, those who use the impossibility of passing on a high, unreachable standard of understanding, as a reason to make no attempt to communicate it to a weaker standard.)
I make a hobby of explaining things and I’m fairly good at it. I just came up with my two kinds of understanding theory when I wrote that comment.
I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect most people to have a handle on what sorts of understanding there are. If anyone knows of a system which includes the idea, please let me know.
What I’m hoping is clear is that if someone tells you “you just can’t understand”, it may be more about their ability to explain or willingness to expend patience rather than an absolute barrier.
The practical and emotional reasons why people don’t leave abusive relationships aren’t a secret—I can believe you thought you had to figure it out for yourself (and thank you for trying—many would have just stopped at the idea that those who don’t leave are weak or foolish) because the “you can’t understand” contingent implied strongly that there were no sources of information to be had.
Actually, googling on “why doesn’t she leave” turns up quite a bit, though some of the first few hits says it’s the wrong question.
I haven’t been in a violent relationship, but I’ve read a fair amount on why people frequently don’t leave.
One piece is that physical abuse is commonly accompanied by emotional abuse—the abuser keeps saying that the abusee is to incompetent to live on their own and too unattractive to get another mate. It’s not uncommon for people who feel they are in an inferior position, whether because of violence or just because the other person sounds very certain, to accept that sort of assessment.
There are women who stay because the man is the best father they think they can find, and leave when they realize he’s abusing their children.
I’m being gender-non-specific for most of this because, while men are apt to have more financial resources to leave and perhaps less reason to fear extreme violence, the emotional dynamics aren’t too different.
Sometimes the abuse has built up slowly. People can be very bad at judging how bad a situation has become, especially if the problems are intermittent.
Sometimes the abuser is inconsistent—alternating abuse with intense apologies and/or affection. This can make the abusee confused, especially if they’ve bought into the idea that “love” excuses everything. Not just the abuser’s claims of loving them, but that they feel love for the abuser means that the abusee shouldn’t care about their own quality of life. This isn’t just personal pathology, it’s part of the culture.
Also, abusers are apt to isolate their victims from friends and family, thus making practical and emotional help with leaving less likely.
While it’s fading, it’s not uncommon to believe (sometimes for religious reasons) that family stability should completely trump personal quality of life.
It’s financially difficult to leave.
Abusers are apt to become more violent (sometimes to the point of murder) when they feel abandoned.
Thanks, that’s a helpful summary. (And, regarding the topic, I don’t that explanation requires one to have been abused to understand.)
You’re welcome.
I agree that it isn’t necessary to have been abused to understand, but there are different kinds of understanding.
There’s the “that makes sense to me” sort of understanding, and there’s the appreciation of feeling, detail, and implication which comes from living through a thing.
I think “you just can’t understand” has a least a few sources. One is giving up if the second sort of understanding can’t be conveyed. One is not yet having a confusing and painful situation clear in one’s mind. Another is dealing with people (and they aren’t rare) who ask painful questions without listening to the answers.
I largely agree. Using your terminology, my dispute is with those who refuse to attempt to convey the first sort of understanding, simply because they can’t convey the second sort of understanding. (Or, more generally, those who use the impossibility of passing on a high, unreachable standard of understanding, as a reason to make no attempt to communicate it to a weaker standard.)
This living with people thing is complicated.
I make a hobby of explaining things and I’m fairly good at it. I just came up with my two kinds of understanding theory when I wrote that comment.
I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect most people to have a handle on what sorts of understanding there are. If anyone knows of a system which includes the idea, please let me know.
What I’m hoping is clear is that if someone tells you “you just can’t understand”, it may be more about their ability to explain or willingness to expend patience rather than an absolute barrier.
The practical and emotional reasons why people don’t leave abusive relationships aren’t a secret—I can believe you thought you had to figure it out for yourself (and thank you for trying—many would have just stopped at the idea that those who don’t leave are weak or foolish) because the “you can’t understand” contingent implied strongly that there were no sources of information to be had.
Actually, googling on “why doesn’t she leave” turns up quite a bit, though some of the first few hits says it’s the wrong question.