Domestic violence – I suppose it’s worthy of discussion, although not something I’m personally that interested in. Many reasons for that, but one is that I rarely hear it parsed objectively and unemotionally. And I have personally seen a wide range – if not the full spectrum of DV.

My first point is about the term “abuse” itself. When I was younger it was essentially to be “verbally rude”. Now it seems it has become a catch-all term for any kind of wrong or “perceived” wrong behaviour.

Terms should always be clearly clarified before, or during discussion. Many households exist in what could be described as “low-level conflict”. This can be anything from rows, silent-treatment, to what one may term light physical altercations.

These are often jointly provoked and engaged it, and typically don’t escalate to requiring “intervention” – or only minimally. It can happen for a number of reasons and for different time spans - and yes, as they grow and mature together, many couples get beyond this.

Secondly, it’s routinely discussed as something men do to women, which even if physical abuse is preponderously against women, is simply not the case. And often women are given a free pass when it comes to their abuse – verbal or physical. That doesn’t help anyone.

The term domestic violence captures all relationships, not just marriage. And of all domestic arrangements, marriage remains the safest for women and children.

Female/female relationships are the most violent, followed by male/male, then male/female unwed, before you get to marriage proper. Talking of DV as if it’s something that occurs in marriages only, is again skewed at best and damaging at worst.

But my main concern is around divorce. Many jump from “abuse” to “divorce” – as if one is the logical outcome of the other. The next step is to condemn the stigma around divorce, and demand that divorce be de-stigmatised.

Divorce is stigmatised for a reason – and rightly so. Tying abuse to divorce is like tying abortion to rape. As I stated above, lots of what may be termed abuse does not warrant divorce. And, lots of divorces have nothing to do with abuse per se.

Under the rubric of de-stigmatising divorce for “abuse victims”, there is the risk of de-stigmatising divorce as a whole, which weakens the marriage institution.

We already see the escalating numbers of what are frivolous divorces, compounded by ill-founded marriages, as if divorce is “not a thing”, then marriage itself loses its gravity, and is not entered into with the right degree of sobriety.

Then there are the long-term outcomes. As much as many portray divorce as a neat solution to DV, it is never that simple – and I speak specifically about where kids are involved.

Divorce always damages kids – how badly may vary. Tropes like the “kids just want their parents to be happy”, or the “kids will be happier if I am happy”, are just that, mindless tropes. Children are happier if their parents stay together and attend to their needs. Yes kids are selfish and blinkered – although not as much as some adults it seems.

Not only does it damage them in the moment, but the damage can be deep-seated, even generational, as it goes on to affect how they form and engage in relationships and their views on marriage.

And beyond children, walking away from a marriage is not that simple. It’s akin to bereavement and psychologically very hard to deal with. Even with financial independence and a decent support system, the future can be very bleak.

So yes, it’s worth enduring, and worth seeking a solution to a troubled union – even if “abuse” is part of that trouble. The question should be around how long and at what point.

So I guess another reason is that I personally feel efforts are best focused on preparing people for marriage, to minimise the probability of abuse and divorce as an outcome. And I say marriage, as I have no truck with domestic arrangements outside it.

Not saying there are no benefits in DV crusades or campaigns, by all means, carry go, but at least try not to hamper the efforts of marriage advocates by valorising divorce.

Please don’t quote me stupid.


TV

EfemenaXY:


It should never get to the point where one or the other resorts to blows just to get their point(s) across. Not everyone can hold back when hit. For some, retaliation is an instant, reflex action - and you don't need to be told how dangerous this could be for the woman at the receiving end. All it takes is just one punch landing on the wrong spot, at that could be it for her.

Don't get me wrong, disagreements are bound to crop up in any relationship, but how it's handled is what counts - the true test of maturity more like.

When such a situation arises, one or both partners should immediately diffuse the situation by walking out. Don't slug it out till it gets to the point where tempers are running so high that blows get lashed out. Additionally, whoever throws the punch should be reported. I know in the UK, once the police get involved, the man would be taken out of the house and forced to cool his heels for the night in a cell. Having the possibility of a criminal record will definitely "help" him have a re-think of ever laying a finger on his spouse again, no matter the provocation, and has proven to be a deterrent for many would-be-domestically-inclined-abusers.

For what it's worth, I think it should work both ways - why? Because strange as it may sound to many, some men are, and can be the vulnerable ones in a relationship.

there's a Yoruba addage that institutionalizes violence especially domestic violence. It says you don't sue a person to court,leave the court and expect to be friends in other words women are afraid that from court to divorce and the ones afraid are those that depend 100percenent on their husband for everything financially. And they feel they're old unattractive and so no one will employ them or marry them.where do theh want to start their lives after the husband sends them away soon after he's released from prison.hence divorce can only be a little convenient for a woman that has a source of income. How about those who don't. Is it the women Non governmental organisations
or court or friends that adviced her to report her husband to the police that will provide a roof over her head or give her a job

For people going through DVs, they first need to to look inwards to determine if they are in anyway 'triggering' (not causing o) the violence themselves. Some women's sharp mouth can provoke the meekest angel to acts of domestic violence.

@kimoni, I'm sorry, not in a million years can I agree with this. Someone who isn't prone to violence won't abuse anyone regardless of provocation. Besides we know abuse is a continuous thing. If that person can continuously be provoked to keep lashing out violently at others, then it's time they realize the problem is them not the other person triggering their wild side.

As for being peculiar to naija, when I say something like this happens and we do nothing, it's not because I don't know it happens in other places but it's because my main concern is naija and is always my point of reference.

Nice job Ewuro4.

@onegai and thorpido, couldn't agree more.

@tearoses was the girl on nairaland? That guy is one serious time bomb waiting to explode. Maybe she thought he was acting a James Bond movie. How blind can anyone be?

@TV01
Yea I was getting to the part where domestic violence is not only restricted to married relationships. One bit at a time as I'm not online at a stretch to post all the various angles at once.

Besides from the beginning of the thread, we have tried to show that abuse isn't the prerogative of one gender but if you also have ways of making the discussion more objective and non biased (if you think it still is) pls I'd appreciate that. The truth is that I feel very hurt for any man who can't express his pain because he's expected to man up and not show weakness. I don't think it's natural and I also believe it leads to expressions of unnecessary aggression because of long suppressed emotions. So pls more objective points are welcome:

About Valorising divorce, I don't think anyone preaches divorce for frivolous reasons like you're trying to make it look. When the other option is death, then that's the right message to preach.
It doesn't then mean such a person is trying degrade marriage. From where I stand even I would think that upgrades marriage in itself because the underlying message is that marriage should be beautiful (even with it's ups and downs) and not some scary bondage one can't get out of when it becomes horrible.

@Cococandy:

A thread was opened a while back on if people would marry products of single homes and a lot of posters said no.

If an abused spouse knows his/her kids will be discriminated against martially in future (most Nigerian parents see their kids' marriage as a personal achievement ), why would he/she leave?

Honestly, we need to understand the law of cause and effect.

If a woman endured 30yrs of abuse from her husband, celebrated and probably a marriage counsellor, why should her daughter leave an abusive husband? Why should her son learn to resolve conflicts without his fits?

In a bid to over-compensate for his father's abuse, What if he gets stuck with an abusive woman?

I know a couple who counsels marriage and the husband cheats like sex is going out of fashion. What advise will such a man give people who come for counsel? What advise would his wife give?

I know a married lady whose father calls regularly that all men cheat So when her husband cheats, she does shakara, he begs and they are back to status quo. Tomorrow we will complain if her daughter decides to stick to a cheating boyfriend... afterall, mama stayed with papa.

Honestly, our parents failed us martially. Yes, they grew old together however, the quality of marital relationship is zero.

I am sure going to the roots to counsel pre-teens and teens will go a long way.

Some young adults are damaged beyond repair.

cococandy:


@kimoni, I'm sorry, not in a million years can I agree with this.

It's ok, like Kanwulia(with due permission) rightly said, Nairaland is not for agreement of opinion.

Someone who isn't prone to violence won't abuse anyone regardless of provocation.

Nothing can be further from the truth. There is something called provocation and it is well recognized in law, where provocation is said to have triggered violence, it changes the dynamics of the case. Speak to any legal person..

Again I ask, is the victim always and entirely blameless in every DV situation?

Besides we know abuse is a continuous thing.

Not necessarily. As with every other crime, there are always 'one time' or 'only time' offenders. Some people have abused their partners once, sworn never to do it again and have rightly kept to that promise. It doesn't always happen but it surely does happen.

If that person can continuously be provoked to keep lashing out violently at others, then it's time they realize the problem is them not the other person triggering their wild side.

the word 'others' changes what we are talking about here. If a person is violent against several people, then the problem is most likely with him and most likely not "others". But is that the focus here? [/quote]

SAMBARRY:
Iya o kanwuliajara over to you. I refuse to allow this videos spoil my day

So bad is the case, the month of October is dedicated to it, just LIKE CANCER!

Na wah for BEASTIES oh!

@bukatyne true that. Also in line with what tearoses them have been saying. Parents have a big role to play in helping their kids turn out normal. Of course they can't solve all problems like this by raising them right since there will always be that one that wants to get lost at all costs. But they can certainly try to set the right examples and standards for their kids to aspire to to in adulthood.

Kimoni well we will probably eventually agree to disagree but before that, I just want to make sure you're not misunderstanding me or my opinions. I don't prescribe everyone leave a marriage the moment their partner isn't acting right.

Speaking of domestic violence/abuse the victim knows when they no longer feel safe with their partner and that's when to call it quits. There's no defined number of times it must happen before they know it's no longer safe in there. For some it's the first time that scares them out of their boots, for others 10times won't do it.
So we can't really "say give her or him three chances and if they attack you again, then leave."
It's all about when one no longer feels secure or safe with their partner.

Also abusers don't always act violent to everyone around them. When they lock in on a victim, that person becomes their means of letting out while they act all nice and courteous with others outside making the victim seem paranoid when they voice out. It's all part of the mind/power or control game.

About the victims being somehow responsible for it, I see it as I see those comments like "dress well so you won't be raped". It takes away from responsibility where it belongs.

Thanks for your contributions.

What can I say??
Until you pass through it you won't be able to say for sure why women stay in abusive marriages.
I was a victim for a little bit over 3 yrs, I was beaten up and humiliated all the time, I tried running out of the marriage but my mom won't hear of it, I went to the police but I was sent back home, d police told me it was a family matter. At a point I realised he wld kill my baby if I didn't leave him, the love I had for my son was wat gave me the courage and strength to run away from home. I ran back to my parents empty handed and till today I'm still struggling to make ends meet but I'm happier and feel safer this way.

Just read your story now.
Very sad indeed.
Glad for you now.

kkjoy:
What can I say??
Until you pass through it you won't be able to say for sure why women stay in abusive marriages.
I was a victim for a little bit over 3 yrs, I was beaten up and humiliated all the time, I tried running out of the marriage but my mom won't hear of it, I went to the police but I was sent back home, d police told me it was a family matter. At a point I realised he wld kill my baby if I didn't leave him, the love I had for my son was wat gave me the courage and strength to run away from home. I ran back to my parents empty handed and till today I'm still struggling to make ends meet but I'm happier and feel safer this way.

Coco something else that came to mind could be the pomp and feferity that people subscribe to for the wedding day.
An average Naija wedding these days costs millions and planning takes months. Some Make up artists charge as much as 150K for the day and the latest trend is dressing up for pre wedding photographs

Could it be that people get carried away by wanting to showcase the wedding of the year than looking closely at the person that they are trusting the rest of their lives with.
Cos when you do think about it, you are trusting your happiness and your kids happiness and peace of mind on this one person that you have chosen.
.
Maybe I am old school,. but it seems that so much time and energy is spent on the "wedding" and even when people have nagging doubts, they are caught up in the preparation and the money spent that they just continue and hope for the best.
Weddings these days cost more than it cost to send your child to uni.
Whats more important . . a beautiful wedding day or a beautiful marriage?

Dont get me wrong, weddings are beautiful events but its so easy to get carried along and miss the whole point if one is not careful.

kkjoy:
What can I say??
Until you pass through it you won't be able to say for sure why women stay in abusive marriages.
I was a victim for a little bit over 3 yrs, I was beaten up and humiliated all the time, I tried running out of the marriage but my mom won't hear of it, I went to the police but I was sent back home, d police told me it was a family matter. At a point I realised he wld kill my baby if I didn't leave him, the love I had for my son was wat gave me the courage and strength to run away from home. I ran back to my parents empty handed and till today I'm still struggling to make ends meet but I'm happier and feel safer this way.

Remain strong dear. You will be fine.

kkjoy:
What can I say??
Until you pass through it you won't be able to say for sure why women stay in abusive marriages.
I was a victim for a little bit over 3 yrs, I was beaten up and humiliated all the time, I tried running out of the marriage but my mom won't hear of it, I went to the police but I was sent back home, d police told me it was a family matter. At a point I realised he wld kill my baby if I didn't leave him, the love I had for my son was wat gave me the courage and strength to run away from home. I ran back to my parents empty handed and till today I'm still struggling to make ends meet but I'm happier and feel safer this way.

All the best for you. You did the right thing. It is sad nobody was there to support you. You can be very proud that your child was more important to you than what other people say. RESPECT!

bukatyne:

Dont want to quote your whole post
You are right, the older generation endured and stayed, however I sometimes question, did they know any better?
Could they have been happy in their own way?
I often wonder about this.
Not DV pls.
What were their aspirations back then? children or husbands? . . .or just being a Mrs.
The downside I see sometimes though is when these mothers turn their sons into their husbands and take control of their sons marriages and lives which isnt good.

back in the day, when you got married it was a deep thing. Families carried out investigation on the other side and you knew the person and the family you are marrying. These days people just meet and get married pam! I also think that there was more support back then than now. Now family's are smaller, busier and far flung.

@kkjoy, it is well with you. I pray that you rise up and you smile again.

tearoses:


Dont want to quote your whole post
You are right, the older generation endured and stayed, however I sometimes question, did they know any better?
Could they have been happy in their own way?
I often wonder about this.
Not DV pls.
What were their aspirations back then? children or husbands? . . .or just being a Mrs.
The downside I see sometimes though is when these mothers turn their sons into their husbands and take control of their sons marriages and lives which isnt good.

back in the day, when you got married it was a deep thing. Families carried out investigation on the other side and you knew the person and the family you are marrying. These days people just meet and get married pam! I also think that there was more support back then than now.

Honestly I don't think it was like that o. I know they did some investigation but it was more like they forced a man to go back to his village and marry to make things easier and more homogenous. And it didn't always work out (countless marriages to quote to that effect). I know some relatives, one had a Yoruba girl he liked but was forced to go back to village to pick a wife (or his mother threatened all sorts) and the marriage crashed and he went back for his Yoruba girl.

And DV existed: there are examples of women being rescued from their husband's in the 60s and 70s whilst living in England. Buchi Emecheta comes to mind. They didn't call it divorce, relatives just went to get their daughters and return bride price before a corpse was sent back but the stigma remained.
However, before colonialism, in the era of local gods, to be fighting physically with your spouse was a crime against the peace of the village and carried fines to dissuade it. It seems Christianity made things worse as it defined Marriage differently from what they were used to. I mean, when they believed in the vengeance of Ifa, people were scared but the watered down Christianity we practise now allows people to do as they like without fear of repercussion. Dowry was paid to show the symbolic value of the woman coming into your life, if the value of the dowry was small it was because it was to show the man that the woman he's getting is so priceless, he can't afford it so her family gave her to him as a gift. But our watered down modern (colonial era) religion didn't translate this properly and made it seem like the woman was bought and paid for like chattel and the man could treat his chattel as he wished (including beating it left, right and centre when he wished to). I read that in Igbo culture there existed a method for a woman to leave her husband (including a place for her to stay, under the roof of a female head who was assumed to be her "new husband", I can't remember the exact name of the procedure). If you killed your wife with beating, you would be hounded out of yur community and the village towncrier would be sent to neighbouring villages to inform them of tour crime (that's if you lived). Enduring and staying came with Christianity.

tearoses:
Coco something else that came to mind could be the pomp and feferity that people subscribe to for the wedding day.
An average Naija wedding these days costs millions and planning takes months. Some Make up artists charge as much as 150K for the day and the latest trend is dressing up for pre wedding photographs

Could it be that people get carried away by wanting to showcase the wedding of the year than looking closely at the person that they are trusting the rest of their lives with.
Cos when you do think about it, you are trusting your happiness and your kids happiness and peace of mind on this one person that you have chosen.
.
Maybe I am old school,. but it seems that so much time and energy is spent on the "wedding" and even when people have nagging doubts, they are caught up in the preparation and the money spent that they just continue and hope for the best.
Weddings these days cost more than it cost to send your child to uni.
Whats more important . . a beautiful wedding day or a beautiful marriage?

Dont get me wrong, weddings are beautiful events but its so easy to get carried along and miss the whole point if one is not careful.

We are back full circle...

What does a person want to experience in marriage that is an worse than what his/her mother or father passed through? (Maybe rituals sha)

Why should a person bother his/her head with nagging thoughts when what will be will be?

Could it be that people get carried away by wanting to showcase the wedding of the year than looking closely at the person that they are trusting the rest of their lives with.

@ tearoses but absolutely.

tearoses:


Dont want to quote your whole post
You are right, the older generation endured and stayed, however I sometimes question, did they know any better?
Could they have been happy in their own way?
I often wonder about this.
Not DV pls.
What were their aspirations back then? children or husbands? . . .or just being a Mrs.
The downside I see sometimes though is when these mothers turn their sons into their husbands and take control of their sons marriages and lives which isnt good.

back in the day, when you got married it was a deep thing. Families carried out investigation on the other side and you knew the person and the family you are marrying. These days people just meet and get married pam! I also think that there was more support back then than now. Now family's are smaller, busier and far flung.

If they were happy, we will not have a lot of damaged adults today.

Considering the fact how people say today's ladies are lazier, maybe older women had other aspirations.

Besides, I don't think aspiring to be a Mrs. only is the problem (afterall, if the marriage was sweet, it would have given the kids a model to look forward to)..... it is staying in terrible marriages at all costs and bringing forth damaged offsprings that is my issue.

Besides I thought their investigations was to see if there were thieves, strange/premature deaths, ritualists, madness, epilepsy etc. and not really character flaws because I doubt abuse in all forms was seen as a character flaw.

bukatyne:


If they were happy, we will not have a lot of damaged adults today.

Considering the fact how people say today's ladies are lazier, maybe older women had other aspirations.

Besides, I don't think aspiring to be a Mrs. only is the problem (afterall, if the marriage was sweet, it would have given the kids a model to look forward to)..... it is staying in terrible marriages at all costs and bringing forth damaged offsprings that is my issue.

Besides I thought their investigations was to see if there were thieves, strange/premature deaths, ritualists, madness, epilepsy etc. and not really character flaws because I doubt abuse in all forms was seen as a character flaw.

Its very complex
Some people can actually see the mistakes and dont want to go down the same route their parents went
and some people just carry on doing the same things they saw their parents doing . . . BAU

Probably the mindset and expectations then was different too for all parties.
My discussions have moved on from domestic violence now and I am just talking in general

I think you misunderstood my first post

Onegai:


Honestly I don't think it was like that o. I know they did some investigation but it was more like they forced a man to go back to his village and marry to make things easier and more homogenous. And it didn't always work out (countless marriages to quote to that effect). I know some relatives, one had a Yoruba girl he liked but was forced to go back to village to pick a wife (or his mother threatened all sorts) and the marriage crashed and he went back for his Yoruba girl.

And DV existed: there are examples of women being rescued from their husband's in the 60s and 70s whilst living in England. Buchi Emecheta comes to mind. They didn't call it divorce, relatives just went to get their daughters and return bride price before a corpse was sent back but the stigma remained.
However, before colonialism, in the era of local gods, to be fighting physically with your spouse was a crime against the peace of the village and carried fines to dissuade it. It seems Christianity made things worse as it defined Marriage differently from what they were used to. I mean, when they believed in the vengeance of Ifa, people were scared but the watered down Christianity we practise now allows people to do as they like without fear of repercussion. Dowry was paid to show the symbolic value of the woman coming into your life, if the value of the dowry was small it was because it was to show the man that the woman he's getting is so priceless, he can't afford it so her family gave her to him as a gift. But our watered down modern (colonial era) religion didn't translate this properly and made it seem like the woman was bought and paid for like chattel and the man could treat his chattel as he wished (including beating it left, right and centre when he wished to). I read that in Igbo culture there existed a method for a woman to leave her husband (including a place for her to stay, under the roof of a female head who was assumed to be her "new husband", I can't remember the exact name of the procedure). If you killed your wife with beating, you would be hounded out of yur community and the village towncrier would be sent to neighbouring villages to inform them of tour crime (that's if you lived). Enduring and staying came with Christianity.

Good History Lesson
Im serious


Christianity did its bit, so did civilisation.
Cant count the number of threads I have read here where people are complaining of sextapes, sex chats, facebook lovers and the lot.

tearoses:


Good History Lesson
Im serious


Christianity did its bit, so did civilisation.
Cant count the number of threads I have read here where people are complaining of sextapes, sex chats, facebook lovers and the lot.

Ah no, History is important. Because if you don't know where you're. coming from, you don't know where you are going. my elderly father constantly said that to me.

When I see young men on NL saying that their mothers got cheated on, beaten with hand, with koboko, slapped into submission, thrashed onto her knees, infact they used the stick they use to pound yam on her forehead and she was glowing in utterly happy submissive Nigerian wife, I get angry. Because that is a bloody lie. If more people knew their history, they would know the current situation is abnormal and fighting it would be part of returning to your roots, not adopting some "white man philosophy to Africa".

when I was 10, I remember my mum and relatives crying over one of their friend's daughter and her abusive husband. They were insistinh her mother go get her. My father went to UK in the 70s to save his cousin. Nowadays the answer is "go to church, fast and pray, endure". 2 decades later, they've rewritten history and we all accept it because we don't know how it was handled in the past. Go to your village and ask any elder what will happen if you decided to start exchanging punches with your wife early in the morning (the number of yams, kolanuts and alligator pepper you will forfeit will make settle your gbese sharply next time).

Even polygamy was a matter of choice, not a right like they tell people nowadays. Same with Homosexuality, it's not new in our culture.

The reason no-one will win the fight against DV is that you are all painting it in modern terms. If you start from the angle that in our culture it was actually a bad thing with repercussions, you will get farther in moving people's minds to where you want. Tell them to return to the "Good, old days" when men valued their wives and their society. Tell them that in those days, it was normal for there to be an equal number of wealthy men AND women, not like now where history has been rewritten to say only men were rich. That women had power and influence in politics, not like now where if women come out to protest an injustice, people wi start insulting them to go to their homes.

But ignore me sha I'm just talking

Onegai:


Ah no, History is important. Because if you don't know where you're. coming from, you don't know where you are going. my elderly father constantly said that to me.

When I see young men on NL saying that their mothers got cheated on, beaten with hand, with koboko, slapped into submission, thrashed onto her knees, infact they used the stick they use to pound yam on her forehead and she was glowing in utterly happy submissive Nigerian wife, I get angry. Because that is a bloody lie. If more people knew their history, they would know the current situation is abnormal and fighting it would be part of returning to your roots, not adopting some "white man philosophy to Africa".

when I was 10, I remember my mum and relatives crying over one of their friend's daughter and her abusive husband. They were insistinh her mother go get her. My father went to UK in the 70s to save his cousin. Nowadays the answer is "go to church, fast and pray, endure". 2 decades later, they've rewritten history and we all accept it because we don't know how it was handled in the past. Go to your village and ask any elder what will happen if you decided to start exchanging punches with your wife early in the morning (the number of yams, kolanuts and alligator pepper you will forfeit will make settle your gbese sharply next time).

Even polygamy was a matter of choice, not a right like they tell people nowadays. Same with Homosexuality, it's not new in our culture.

The reason no-one will win the fight against DV is that you are all painting it in modern terms. If you start from the angle that in our culture it was actually a bad thing with repercussions, you will get farther in moving people's minds to where you want.

But ignore me sha what do I know...

Thats down to civilisation again . . .that's the culprit too
How many people even go back to their villages and farms these days
Some kids only see village life in Nollywood
jet age

Money has also changed things
Respect is now about who is the richer
Back in the day it was by age
Today if a adenuga beats his wife, which village elder can call him to order?

Some time ago according to his wife a senator beat her black and blue
He is still in Govt riding around and spending tax payers money
Nothing happened.

So many things have changed my dear
and so many things have gone wrong
to unravel it all is a big task
it is well

Hnn

cococandy:
@TV01
Yea I was getting to the part where domestic violence is not only restricted to married relationships. One bit at a time as I'm not online at a stretch to post all the various angles at once.

Besides from the beginning of the thread, we have tried to show that abuse isn't the prerogative of one gender but if you also have ways of making the discussion more objective and non biased (if you think it still is) pls I'd appreciate that. The truth is that I feel very hurt for any man who can't express his pain because he's expected to man up and not show weakness. I don't think it's natural and I also believe it leads to expressions of unnecessary aggression because of long suppressed emotions. So pls more objective points are welcome:

About Valorising divorce, I don't think anyone preaches divorce for frivolous reasons like you're trying to make it look. When the other option is death, then that's the right message to preach.
It doesn't then mean such a person is trying degrade marriage. From where I stand even I would think that upgrades marriage in itself because the underlying message is that marriage should be beautiful (even with it's ups and downs) and not some scary bondage one can't get out of when it becomes horrible.

My first two points were about why I tend to avoid DV discussions generally. I wasn’t querying those two things per se. Having said that, you did make a good attempt to ensure non-bias, but that didn’t do much to help the general tone – fingering men – as the thread progressed.

As for an explanation of terms, there was none forthcoming, but more on that later. My main concern was how marriage is typically implied as the setting and divorce as the solution.

Abuse spans a spectrum. From what may be considered low-level – not to condone or otherwise encourage it or any abuse/violence – that a couple may manage or work trough.

At the other extreme, is the kind of abuse that may lead to serious harm or damage to an individual and collaterally affect children – psychologically or physically - due to its scale or its scope.

Whilst all levels of abuse should be remediated if at all possible, it is the more extreme cases that the “D” word should even be mentioned – even then it should be done in context.

The most violent relationships are female to female, followed by male to male, then male to female unmarried (co-habiting and non-cohabiting), then male to female married.

DV encompasses all relationship types and is by both sexes, and though many instances may be of married male/female couples, that is primarily due to the overwhelming preponderance of this type of relationship - not it's "inherent abusiveness" or "state of bondage".

Now, to married male/female couples and divorce; firstly, the binary is not necessarily death or divorce. As I noted there is a spectrum and for most of it, divorce simply does not have to come into play.

Secondly, there are myriad other measures up to and including separation. And it is worth noting that some faiths – o.k. Christianity – do not necessarily give leave to divorce on grounds of a blanket “abuse” ruling.

It’s doubly worth noting that Christianity also counsels the proper way to enter into marriage. This should mean extreme cases of abuse are rare. That many claim to be “Christians”, or consult “pastors”, is an indictment of individuals, not Christianity itself, and not call for vilification of the faith.

One should be fully versed in the marriage tenants of whatever, faith, culture or worldview they hold too - not owning that prior to marriage means you'll likely be outsourcing issues during marriage.


By failing to be specific about degrees of abuse, neglecting to make a distinction between marriage and it's relativel safety compared to other domestic relationships, not emphasising the correct approach to marriage and prescribing divorce as a solution without nuance – having been neither specific nor distinct to begin with - not only is divorce being valorised as I stated, but marriage itself is being diminished.

As mentioned, my gig is marriage and marital foundations. With unnuanced discussions of this nature, it’s too easy for some to read without the depth required and form the wrong impressions of marriage, abuse and divorce. No beef, I had to point that out.


TV

As I was saying

Just yesterday I. Went visit a family I have come to consider my own at the town I work... and I met the eldest daughter at. Home ( instead of her husband's house), lots of drugs by her side... she. Said her husband hit her on the chest so hard she couldn't breath foor almost a minute and is still in severe pain days later, so she finally left him. I said " no, you should have stayed until he killed or. Maimed you"... Now before you crucify me, I was being sarcastic because the first time he hit her to my knowledge I advised her to leave... The first time a man hits you and you stay, you have automatically given him a license to pound you whenever he feels the need to vent or just put you in your place... she was like she can't just leave because Yoruba tradition frowns on that kind of behaviour... my dear ladies, NO man and I mean NO man who hits. His wife or gf and gets no repercussion avoids. Hitting her again in the future... it's like programmed behavior, he hits you, you stay... he automatically goes for the slap next tim he should have just walked away or at most scold you... if he hits you RUN AWAY!!!

Sorry for the longarse sermon sha

SAMBARRY:
Hnn

That thing u posted isn't true! I have met people who love nothing about themselves, it doesn't subtract from the love I have for them. I even tend to love them more. If u think otherwise, elucidate in non less than 500 words...

cococandy:


@kimoni, I'm sorry, not in a million years can I agree with this. Someone who isn't prone to violence won't abuse anyone regardless of provocation. Besides we know abuse is a continuous thing. If that person can continuously be provoked to keep lashing out violently at others, then it's time they realize the problem is them not the other person triggering their wild side.

As for being peculiar to naija, when I say something like this happens and we do nothing, it's not because I don't know it happens in other places but it's because my main concern is naija and is always my point of reference.

Can DV be a one off incident

youngice:

Can DV be a one off incident

i guess .
That would be rare though because most people that got hit once usually got hit another time.

cococandy:
i guess .
That would be rare though because most people that got hit once usually got hit another time.

I read an article about a guy who was dating a girl that he was older than with 9 years, he was Intent on marrying the girl, they were out and about for a few months, they had a normal couples argument and she slapped him , he warned her not to try it again, the guy said that the girl hits him during most of their arguments.
On a faithful day they for the party of one of the guys colleagues , the girl was misbehaving so the guy cautioned her and she slapped him at the party.
The guy quietly left the party , when the girl came home she started begging the guy, he replied that he had forgiven her but he wants to teach her a lesson, he used his belt to beat her blue black .and told her that she shouldn't mistake self control for weakness,

So she was the abusive person in the relationship to start with.
Are you asking if what he did in retaliation counts as abuse.
Technically it is 'self defense' I guess. although it doesn't meet the total requirements to be defined as such because it was pre planned. But her own violent attitude beget that.

It does have the potential to become abuse if he begins to see violence as a way of solving any disputes between them.

youngice:

I read an article about a guy who was dating a girl that he was older than with 9 years, he was Intent on marrying the girl, they were out and about for a few months, they had a normal couples argument and she slapped him , he warned her not to try it again, the guy said that the girl hits him during most of their arguments.
On a faithful day they for the party of one of the guys colleagues , the girl was misbehaving so the guy cautioned her and she slapped him at the party.
The guy quietly left the party , when the girl came home she started begging the guy, he replied that he had forgiven her but he wants to teach her a lesson, he used his belt to beat her blue black .and told her that she shouldn't mistake self control for weakness,