Understanding the Dynamics of Abusive Relationships

[Mrs.Tigersoap]

Women in abusive relationships can stay until they die because they are so good at lying to themselves.

You can say that again. A colleague of mine was in an abusive relationship and was brutally murdered by her husband two years ago.
Except for those who were really close to the couple, nobody suspected anything. My colleague hid it really well and was such a strong and independent woman, nobody would have believed that she could be in such a situation. And yet... :(

 

[paralleloscope]

Exactly. How can you "mindfully examine the nature of your relationship" when you are being subtly manipulated not only by the other, but by your own craving for stability?

From my own experience in an abusive relationship (though a friendship) I started to recognize my own body language, how it in his presence would become submissive and fearful, either ready to flee or immobilize, despite my conscious story was that I am safe in the relationship. That's what got me observing what psychological dynamics were actually going down, and eventually broke loose from a greater hold of having submissive relationships. Of course it wasn't as simple as that, but that's were I discovered the lie, since the mental narratives were too buffered towards protecting the illusion that everything was fine.

 

[Nienna]

The conviction that an abuser is just wounded and needs to be loved to be fixed is what keeps lots of people (mostly women) in abusive relationships. And pathological individuals will use this "super empathy" as Sandra Brown calls it, to maintain control over their target. As Martha Stout pointed out the "poor pitiful me" routine is one of the favored control tools of the psychopath. They achieve "duping delight" playing it and pulling one over on the abusee. And the truth is, it works pretty well because there is nothing harder for an empathic person to do than to say "no" to someone who is deliberately evoking their pity.

Then there is also the abuser who tells the abused that they love them and that's why they do what they do. Or on the opposite side, they tell the abused that they are lucky to have the abuser because no one else would have them. Previously, the abuser has made the abused feeling so unworthy that they will actually believe this to be true and, thus, stays with the abuser fearing that no one else would ever want them.

Also, Sandra Brown has said in her books that psychopaths target intelligent and successful women who do fall for them.

 

[Mrs.Tigersoap]

Another book to add to the list is Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them by Susan Forward.

 

[Adaryn]

These two short movies illustrate pretty well the dynamics of (psychologically, in particular) abusive relationships:

_http://nofilmschool.com/2013/01/fred-et-marie-arri-alexa-film-domestic-violence/

 

[Jasmine]

It's interesting how this topic swayed to the attention of the abused victim. I was at first more concerned with the perpetrators underlying defects specifically how this original article exposed the underlying element of "insecurity" as the motive for abusive behavior. And I found it fascinating that the behavior sited in the article could resemble psychopathology at face value and without more knowledge and observation fool someone into labeling them a psychopath. Just to be clear, my concern is not with mistakenly labeling a psychopath. rather, the ability for a layman to clearly define and perceive who they're dealing with. Going around labeling everybody as a psychopath is just as bad as trying to "normalize" psychopaths. Thus confusing less knowledgeable people, and taking a short cut to a quick label instead of a true distinct analysis. Obyvatel nipped my concerns in the bud by dissecting this article and logically refuting the articles claim that "insecurity" was a driving force of abusers. The article gave examples of insidious behavior from a pathological abuser which I believed to have come across in my own life and which I myself labeled at the time as "insecurity" issues. And I do believe underlying insecurity would motivate such insidious behavior and is still a viable factor in such cases as the article depicts. However, as Obyvatel points out, the article is a major contradiction to the bigger picture of pathological behavior in abusive relationships.

This by Obyvatel was extremely helpful to me and I hope to others reading:

Nope. Many abusers are not suffering from any sense of inferiority. Many abusers exhibit a great desire in having the dominant position in a relationship. This is due to power drive. Diagnosing the drive for dominance and power as being caused by a sense of inferiority can at best be said to arise from a faulty "natural world view" in Lobaczewki's terms (discussed here ) characterized by projection.

Original article:
The fear that feeds that insecurity has two fronts: fear of not being lovable, and fear of appearing weak. The paradox here is that the abuser is, in fact, weak, which is why s/he abuses -- to maintain a sense of control -- in the first place. The perceived inconsistency on the part of the abuser by the victim is that the victim is not submitting to the abuser's domination.

In many cases, the abuser is as weak as a cat when it dominates a mouse. Aggression comes in two varieties - predatory or instrumental and reactive. Predatory or instrumental aggression is deliberate and meant to satisfy a desire for dominance. It is characterized by a lack of anxiety. Reactive aggression is a reaction that is driven by a perceived threatening situation and is characterized by high levels of anxiety.

When confronted with reality after an incident of inappropriate aggression, someone who was using reactive aggression would likely suffer from guilt and shame. One who used instrumental aggression can become embarrassed or make a show of the same at having been called out - but there will be little shame or guilt.

Original article:
The pathological need to control on the part of the abuser and the pathological need for attention on the part of the victim is a match made in heaven. We are all just a bunch of neurotic habits that tend to find a fit with our opposite to create a psychosocial balance. Abusive relationships are one of the most extreme cases of this dynamic.

Interesting conception of heaven followed by the biggest lie (in bold) perpetrated by modern psychology on human society. The first step would be to theoretically recognize this lie (that we are all a bunch of neurotics) and then practically learn to recognize the signs of what is not neurotic. There are aggressive and character disordered personalities who neither think the same, act the same or are motivated by the same things as a typical neurotic personality. I am not trying to say that it is a simple matter to recognize these differences. Reading Simon's "In Sheep's Clothing" and "Character Disturbance" would greatly help in providing the foundation in this topic.

In practical terms, it makes sense to start with labeling behavior and actions correctly. That means instead of saying "psychopath", it is better to label actions and behavior as pathological. In case of relationships, it makes sense to confront pathological behavior and stand firm. In such cases, it is important to evaluate the tangible situation and actions rather than theorize about intention of the other person. Whatever may be the intention behind pathological behavior by a boss/friend/spouse/parent/child, the focus should be on the inappropriateness of the behavior and clear and direct steps to address and mitigate the same in future. Following good communication skills (like those outlined in crucial conversations ) is important to give the relationship a fair chance and assuage one's own feelings of guilt about doing wrong or not doing enough. If it is shown through subsequent actions that a mutually acceptable common ground is not reachable in the relationship, then a choice would need to be made, whether it be about new and different boundaries in the relationship or terminating it altogether. While making the choice, it is not necessary to know for sure if the other person is a psychopath or agonizing over such a diagnosis but acknowledge the pathology in the behavior and incompatibility of expectations. OSIT

We want to stay clear of all pathological behavior altogether. Recognizing any and all pathological behavior is to our advantage. And "labeling behaviors and actions correctly" is our weapon. Trying to personally diagnose or quickly slap a label of "psychopath" on the abusive boss or partner isn't near as powerful as becoming intimately familiar with the underlying behaviors, actions, and characteristics of pathological behavior in general and especially psychopathology, for our protection of either/or.

Depends on the person I suspect, but the knowledge and understanding of the mechanism can only help. The coercion continuum is also known as the force continuum, and many people from physicists to police officers are aware of it as it applies in their domains so it's existence is not contestable. That's a good thing.

Thank you buddy. I did some research on the coercion continuum, and it really was an eye-opener for me! It wasn't until I familiarized myself with that concept did I fully understand the complete mind job that the victims undergo. Before, I felt a need to place full responsibility on the victim for their actions and decisions to remain in an abusive relationship. It's not that cut and clear. The victim is swooped-up and almost left helpless in way of retaliation in the wake of a determined abuser using methods of coercion.

With that said, I want to point out, after reading about the coercion continuum and then understanding more the dynamics in play of abusive relationships, my compassion leaped by bounds for the victims, so did my pity.

I was wondering, is the victim now eliciting the same pity from me as their perpetrators elicit from them? After this thought occurred to me, (speaking in the direction of the 4th way) I had the instinct to subdue my compassion for the victim down to a minimum, and eliminate all pity. I felt that the hyper-compassion and pity was not a useful expression of my emotions, to the contrary. And I felt that the victim is facing personal life lessons of their own need for spiritual growth in their level of reality, and it's not my place to pity them.

I would appreciate any feedback on how others perceive this way of thinking.

Thanks again Buddy for your valuable insight on this issue. Your feedback was very helpful.

 

[Aiming]

Women in abusive relationships can stay until they die because they are so good at lying to themselves.

You can say that again. A colleague of mine was in an abusive relationship and was brutally murdered by her husband two years ago.
Except for those who were really close to the couple, nobody suspected anything. My colleague hid it really well and was such a strong and independent woman, nobody would have believed that she could be in such a situation. And yet... :(

And then there is also the other side to it:

It also happens that women in abusive relationships who read about extreme cases like the above, will then dismiss the signs or minimalize them, telling themselves that "it's not so bad" and then keep excusing the abusive behaviour from their partner. And in continuing to lie to themselves, there can sometimes be an internal death.

For example, an abuser may say to his partner "oh, why don't you just shut up and do something for a change instead of whining all the time?" The woman will interpret this in a critically correcting way as "he loves me so much, he's always encouraging me to get out there and do things on my own..."

To just about anybody with two firing neurons, a man who tells his partner to "shut up" is treating her with contempt no matter how he excuses it or how she explains it to herself.

Yes, and the longer the woman continues to critically correct what her partner is doing to her, the more the little perceptions she might have already been having about his pathological behaviour, will be watering down, and, without being aware of it, her belief in her own System 2 narratives will consolidate more and more. In this way, an independent woman can become dependent while not being aware of it, and as a consequence can develop increasing insecurity in terms of her intellectual or otherwise worth.

Another thing to keep in mind, as was noted already, is that abusers are not always psychopaths, but the effects of his behaviour are still the same, so it is not the diagnosis per se that is important, but the effects of his pathological behaviour on the partner and the measures that then need to be taken for self-protection.

 

[Buddy]

I had the instinct to subdue my compassion for the victim down to a minimum, and eliminate all pity.

All I can say is that I've been on the receiving end of abuse in an abusive relationship. In my right mind, I would appreciate your compassion but I would resent your pity. Reason being is that I already sense the indignity in the situation and a person's pity feels like heaping more indignity on top of it all.

From an experience view, it feels sort of like: 'either do something to help me or leave me alone' and I know that may sound strange, but that's the best way I can explain it from my own experience.

 

[Bluefyre]

Pity and compassion seem like two sides of the coin to me, having experienced both in my life. Pity separates as pity seems to lack empathy feels like a form of condescension or even "I'll feel sorry for you and glad that I'm not in your position". Compassion comes from a sharing between people who have had similar experiences, feeling of empathy and remembering what helped them and gave them strength when they were gathering the courage to leave an abusive relationship, or had left and felt like empty shells after being gutted emotionally and spiritually. My thoughts FWIW.