Quote:
Originally Posted by Socialite
I'm pretty sure jfrog was being facetious.
|
Nope it was a very serious question to scotty. You see scotty's only hope of explaining why women with a choice would choose to get beaten is that they are stupid. I mean who would choose that?
However the problem is far to common and even experienced by otherwise intelligent women to take the simplistic approach of calling beaten women stupid.
What does all this mean? It means that scotty's analysis of beaten women having a choice to stop the beatings isn't true. It means that there is something like a gun pointed at their head that forces them to take the beatings. Except it doesn't have to be a real gun pointed at their heads. The gun can take the form of a death threat or a number of other things. Why? because all the gun does is represent a fear of death. However, there are other fears that can compel people just as strongly as the fear of death. Therefore my conclusion is that beaten women don't have a choice, at least until they reach a breaking point or have some of their fear taken away by outside forces such as friends or family.
In short scotty's view is that since a person has a choice to leave abuse at any time then that person effectively caused their own damage to themselves. I think I've shown why such a view is WRONG when applied to beaten women. I also think that similar reasoning can be applied to religious figures/organizations that damage people.
Linear Mode
