Feb 23
I’m not convinced that aliens don’t walk among us
(Thanks to Helluva for linking to this)
Ah, the Smoking Gun — while they usually just manage to dig up dirt on celebrities (because who among us doesn’t want to see the mightiest of the American Dreamers brought down to the level of the trailer park?), this time they’ve posted something really interesting: Travis Frey’s marriage contract.
Travis Frey, if the newspapers are to be believed, is a shitheel of the highest order. Iowa man, my age, two kids. But let’s not even bother with the fact that he’s been arrested on charges of kidnapping his own wife or downloading child porn; that’s all alleged anyway, and not fact. It would be wrong to convict a man in the press, before he’s had a right to fair and impartial trial.
No, in this case, let’s just go with that contract. Seriously, you need to read it. Go on; I’ll wait. Feel free to chuckle, giggle nervously, or vomit. All are valid forms of self-expression when confronted with something like this. I wonder: which was Ruth Frey’s reaction when she received this? I’m going to guess giggling and vomiting simultaneously.
How old do you imagine this contract is, though? How long has she been living with this? Okay, the news reports say she didn’t sign it, and good for her. I think if you can sign something like this with a straight face, there’s something seriously wrong with you. Seriously. No more chuckling, for the moment. Okay, we’ll toss in an exception for the rare deviant couple who embrace the whole alternative lifestyle / BDSM thing; but again, I’m going to question your stability. That’s just me, though. What do I know?
I do know that this sort of thing makes for a cute joke. And I’m not going to say that it wouldn’t be amusing — this is the sort of sick humor that is right up my alley on a bad day. And I’d like to think that my wife and I would laugh about it, maybe over a glass of wine or two. And that she wouldn’t refuse to sleep with me ever again, or Bobbittize me in the middle of the night. And most importantly, that she would throw the damned thing away when the laughter was done, maybe even shredding or burning the evidence so damning of my immature sense of humor.
What? It’s not a joke? Really? No, stop — you mean someone would actually have the nerve to present this to someone with any level of seriousness? You’ve got to be kidding me.
Seriously?
Okay, Frey — that’s pretty fucked up. Not hard to explain, by any stretch of the imagination: low self-esteem, bad communication skills, and some sort of power trip need. But damn, man, the more I hear about you, the more I think maybe you should have counted yourself lucky to have ever gotten married in the first place and left it at that.
And Ruth — woman, what are you thinking? Look, you’ve got kids with him, you’ve been married to him for some time (I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt and pretending that the marriage contract is something that he handed you just recently), but still… There are women reading this ready to kick me in the head just for joking about this being a joke. Surely you can muster a little integrity and pride up for yourself, get a little angry, and tell this guy that he’s on the sofa for life, at best. Yeah?
It scares me to know that people like this — both the crazy domineering type and the kind that need love and companionship so badly that they will put up with behavior like this — are not only out there in the world, but probably in far greater numbers than I’m willing to consider. I know that there are different strokes for different peeps and all that jazz, and I’m okay with that. But damn, folks, really?
I’ve been asked if I can ever imagine myself married again. I’m not stridently opposed to the idea — if it’s important to the woman I’m with, it’s something I’d consider for her. But in general, I’m not a fan of marriage; it’s a social contract, for one thing, that is based largely in religious foundings, not really my cup of tea. But the other thing stems from my romanticism: the idea that every morning, that person lying next to me is still there because she wants to be, because she loves me, is one of my favorite ideas ever. Much better than knowing that they’re staying because someone else expects them to.
Plus, who wants to feel even remotely guilty when you file for divorce because your husband turns out to be some skeezy spineless wormboy?
February 23rd, 2006 at 1:15 pm
It’s easy to blame the victim for not standing up for herself, but that’s not fair. Victims of domestic abuse and rape shouldn’t blame themselves, but their attackers.
February 23rd, 2006 at 1:19 pm
So you don’t think that there’s some blame to be taken for inaction? At some point, yeah, I think you have to point a finger that way. Not to take away from the rage that should be placed upon the attacker — no, this is a separate little bit of guilt to throw around.
But this is all easy for me to say, innit?
February 23rd, 2006 at 1:44 pm
If your ex-wife had been injured or killed in the clinic bombing, would she have been to blame for failing to work someplace safer? Clearly, it was a riskier place to work, and clearly she knew what she was getting into.
Victims of violence deserve sympathy, not scorn, a helping hand, not a skeptical or critical look.
February 23rd, 2006 at 3:09 pm
Let’s make it a bit more applicable: should you continue to stay with someone romantically, in spite of signs of instability and the very real potential for violence, do you still feel 100% in the right when the violence finally happens?
If you’re walking down the street in a known bad part of town, waving hundred dollar bills around and screaming “I’m rich,” are you really surprised when you get robbed?
I understand that it’s a fine line that leads to a slippery slope, but then again: I just don’t care. If trouble can be avoided but the warning signs are ignored repeatedly, my sympathy for the victim is diminished, no matter how cold that sentiment may be.
February 23rd, 2006 at 3:48 pm
This attitude is all too prevalent in today’s society, and makes it that much more difficult for victims of rape and domestic abuse to come forward.
Someday, someone close to you may be attacked or in an ugly abusive relationship. (Chances are, someone close to you already has been.) That loved one may face the same criticisms and judgments from strangers — I pray you are not so quick to defend them and forsake your loved one.
And I hope no one gave you such hogwash when your car was robbed.
February 23rd, 2006 at 4:15 pm
It sounds to me as though this is a black and white issue for you (correct me if I’m wrong) — an all-or-nothing sort of thing. Either you blame all the victims (which I’m not) or not at all (which is bullshit). I think, too, that you’re confusing the issue, or totally misunderstanding or misrepresenting my point. Would I ever tell anyone who has been raped that they were asking for it? No, but you bet your ass I’ll tell people who are asking for it that they might very well be walking into a situation where they might (probably) be raped.
Your attitude — that the victim is totally without affect on the situation — utterly depowers the non-criminal element, and also opens the door to raging inexcusable stupidity.
I know people who have been assaulted, raped, and murdered. Do I think Alan deserved what happened to him and Tera because his first wife was a sociopath, or that Emily was to blame for opening the clinic that morning because she worked a dangerous field? No, and I think I’m making it reasonably clear that I don’t. In fact, Emily (and other clinicians) take good precautionary measures BECAUSE they recognize the signs that there are pro-life extremists wwatching them. Alan saw the signs that Jessica is crazy, and did the best he could legally do to get away from her.
But let’s say that I left cash sitting out in my front seat. Pretty stupid, yeah? Hell, let’s throw in some drugs. I shouldn’t have them, but let’s say for the sake of argument that I’ve for an eightball, and I’ve left that on the seat, as well. To keep the cash from blowing away. And we both know that the people in my neighborhood are short on cash and more than happy to find a good powdery escape, as it were. Doesn’t excuse the broken glass or the missing stereo, but goddamn, you know what? I didn’t take all the precautions I should have, and yeah, I’m a little bit to blame.
No, you’re right, I shouldn’t have to take those precautions. I should be able to walk down the street waving money around, or to be a hot girl who dresses seductively and walks into a hole-in-the-wall bar. But I’m more aware of the world around me than that, and I’m smart enough to know that, while things shouldn’t happen, they do.
Ignoring the world around you and any signs that it tries to give you makes you part of the problem, no matter how wrong the other person may be in their actions. *This* attitude is nowhere near prevalent enough, if you ask me; it’s always totally someone else’s fault, and personal responsibility is left to rot in the closet with common sense and logic.
February 23rd, 2006 at 5:21 pm
I don’t believe it’s purely an intellectual decision for someone in an abusive relationship to stay or leave it. Many factors are involved, and a tendancy by society to place partial blame on victims has allowed criminals to escape unpunished. Plenty of “smart” people have been victimized by others.
I also don’t believe I advocated ignorance, only empathy. Maybe that woman didn’t have someone like you in her life to warn her and “open her eyes” about that deplorable situation. Does that increase your tolerance of her ultimate decision?
You’ve studied criminal psychology, so you know that an immoral person can use more than violence to “win” in a confrontation or relationship. The threat of violence, the threat of poverty, the threat of abandonment — all can be potent psychological tools in keeping someone in line. If he had been using these against here, would that increase your tolerance of her ultimate decision?
February 23rd, 2006 at 5:54 pm
1) No decision about a relationship is purely intellectual. Never said it was.
2) Would you really need someone to “warn” you and “open your eyes” in this situation? This particular situation? Really?
How much am I joking when I say that Darwin was a smart man? No one will ever know.
3) A lot of my commentary is humor (debatable on the definition of humor; fine). I’m not sure where you started taking me so seriously, but a lot of this is reading (from my POV) as overly senstive and reactionary. I’m not intolerant of her decision without a grin on my face.
But honestly, since this seems to be a binary issue with you, yes or no: empathy for a victim is an all-or-nothing proposition.
There’s no right answer, but “yes” is wrong.