I also think we need to be able to call behavior shitty without getting bogged down in meta discussions about abuse.
People learn how relationships should be, in part from how public ones are talked about, and there should be a clear message that acting like Jonah makes you shitty and that's the kind of relationship that needs to end.
I thought the same way about some of the edge "me too" cases. Even non-assault can be shitty behavior that is shitty to do and should be described as such.
I was in an abusive marriage for a time. She wasn't intentionally abusive and it was all emotional abuse, but I cannot let those 2 facts erase the harm that continued to happen and turned into a pattern of abuse that left me hurt and emotionally isolated.
In my opinion, abuse happens whenever someone in a relationship (which will necessarily and naturally have power disparities of various kinds) causes excessive harm to the counterpart(s) of that relationship compared to the context of the situation and who is at fault. You'll notice that a lot of things become abusive in that context, such as simply being quick-to-anger while interacting with your partner at home after a tough day out of the home. You are abusing your partner by forcing them to handle your heightened emotions despite having almost no influence over nor causing those emotions.
That being said, it doesn't become an abusive relationship until there's a clear pattern of this kind of behavior repeatedly that minimizes the power of one or both partners to stop or mitigate those situations. In some ways that example of abuse above, being quick-to-anger, is also a call for help, so even instances of abuse aren't always a sign a relationship is faltering or toxic. Successfully navigating the abuse and handing out grace to those we love that hurt us (even slightly) is part of the experience of love itself, and is a necessary in fostering growth in those we bond with.
Often, what it means to be in a long term, committed monogamous relationship is finding ways to help and mitigate those moments of abuse to prevent them from becoming patterns (or breaking those patterns that have formed through general life) working with your partner. When that fails, the relationship needs to end. Where many people struggle and end up stuck is when to give up and admit that the abuse definitely won't stop until the relationship ends.
Willingness plays a part, but often that "willingness" is closer in practice to a coping mechanism than true change. It takes sustained changes in patterns of behavior and thought, which takes time and tremendous effort, to break abusive patterns. From my experience, most abuse patterns are reinforced by other relationships (or lack thereof) in that person's life as well, so that "willingness" must include lowering the importance of that abuse-enabling relationship.
In truth, that willingness of the abuser is only half the battle too. If they want to change but you're not willing to put up with ongoing abuse as they struggle through it to improve and you constantly give them backlash instead of compassion, that willingness doesn't get them very far on their end.
It's tough. We all carry our life's baggage to relationships and sometimes that baggage is heavier for some partners than others and we end up hurting each other, sometimes catastrophically because of it.
I wonder if a useful definition of abuse is for it to mean you need to leave the relationship. If you don't need to leave, it's not abuse? Not a full definition, clearly, but an aide to where to draw a line when labelling behavior.
Our society's problem is tolerating waaaaay to much abuse, the Jonah Hill stuff has been a great Convo.
I also think we need to be able to call behavior shitty without getting bogged down in meta discussions about abuse.
People learn how relationships should be, in part from how public ones are talked about, and there should be a clear message that acting like Jonah makes you shitty and that's the kind of relationship that needs to end.
I thought the same way about some of the edge "me too" cases. Even non-assault can be shitty behavior that is shitty to do and should be described as such.
Completely agree. Especially as it's so difficult to define abuse and almost impossible, except in cases of physical abuse, to tell from the outside.
I was in an abusive marriage for a time. She wasn't intentionally abusive and it was all emotional abuse, but I cannot let those 2 facts erase the harm that continued to happen and turned into a pattern of abuse that left me hurt and emotionally isolated.
In my opinion, abuse happens whenever someone in a relationship (which will necessarily and naturally have power disparities of various kinds) causes excessive harm to the counterpart(s) of that relationship compared to the context of the situation and who is at fault. You'll notice that a lot of things become abusive in that context, such as simply being quick-to-anger while interacting with your partner at home after a tough day out of the home. You are abusing your partner by forcing them to handle your heightened emotions despite having almost no influence over nor causing those emotions.
That being said, it doesn't become an abusive relationship until there's a clear pattern of this kind of behavior repeatedly that minimizes the power of one or both partners to stop or mitigate those situations. In some ways that example of abuse above, being quick-to-anger, is also a call for help, so even instances of abuse aren't always a sign a relationship is faltering or toxic. Successfully navigating the abuse and handing out grace to those we love that hurt us (even slightly) is part of the experience of love itself, and is a necessary in fostering growth in those we bond with.
Often, what it means to be in a long term, committed monogamous relationship is finding ways to help and mitigate those moments of abuse to prevent them from becoming patterns (or breaking those patterns that have formed through general life) working with your partner. When that fails, the relationship needs to end. Where many people struggle and end up stuck is when to give up and admit that the abuse definitely won't stop until the relationship ends.
How much do you think the willingness of the potential abuser to change/get better/sacrifice for the relationship influences whether or not to leave?
Willingness plays a part, but often that "willingness" is closer in practice to a coping mechanism than true change. It takes sustained changes in patterns of behavior and thought, which takes time and tremendous effort, to break abusive patterns. From my experience, most abuse patterns are reinforced by other relationships (or lack thereof) in that person's life as well, so that "willingness" must include lowering the importance of that abuse-enabling relationship.
In truth, that willingness of the abuser is only half the battle too. If they want to change but you're not willing to put up with ongoing abuse as they struggle through it to improve and you constantly give them backlash instead of compassion, that willingness doesn't get them very far on their end.
It's tough. We all carry our life's baggage to relationships and sometimes that baggage is heavier for some partners than others and we end up hurting each other, sometimes catastrophically because of it.
I wonder if a useful definition of abuse is for it to mean you need to leave the relationship. If you don't need to leave, it's not abuse? Not a full definition, clearly, but an aide to where to draw a line when labelling behavior.
Our society's problem is tolerating waaaaay to much abuse, the Jonah Hill stuff has been a great Convo.
Yeah, you need to leave but you haven’t. I like that.