Why Does He Do That?: Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men (37 page)

A
TTORNEYS

Some attorneys for abusers are in a class by themselves. I have rarely seen anyone become as vicious and unprincipled in the role of coabuser of a man’s partner as certain lawyers do. Woman after woman has described to me the way her heart begins to race when she sees the abuser’s attorney at court or the jolt she feels when court papers prepared by the attorney arrive at her home.

An abuser or accused abuser of course has the right to legal representation, as anyone does. But does offering proper legal counsel mean that the attorney needs to insult and deride the woman, make far-fetched accusations against her, treat every allegation made by the man as gospel truth, and even lie at times to promote his goals? Of course not. However, such conduct is disturbingly widespread among certain defense attorneys who represent accused abusers as well as among some family law attorneys handling custody and visitation cases. Some of this behavior appears to be motivated by economics: Attorneys can build a successful practice if word gets around that they specialize in representing accused abusers. Abusers love it when they hear that a certain attorney has a reputation for “really going for the woman’s jugular,” since that ruthless orientation is in keeping with their own. Women are sometimes as traumatized by their ex-partner’s attorney as they were by him.

There is an urgent need for the creation of legal standards for attorneys who represent accused abusers, so that a sharp line is drawn between giving a man a proper chance to have his side heard in court, which is his legal right, and acting as a weapon of the man’s abuse, allowing him to cause financial and psychological damage that would have been impossible for him without the lawyer’s assistance.

T
HE
M
YTH OF
N
EUTRALITY

It is not possible to be truly balanced in one’s views of an abuser and an abused woman. As Dr. Judith Herman explains eloquently in her masterwork
Trauma and Recovery,
“neutrality” actually serves the interests of the perpetrator much more than those of the victim and so is not neutral. Although an abuser prefers to have you wholeheartedly on his side, he will settle contentedly for your decision to take a middle stance. To him, that means you see the couple’s problems as partly her fault and partly his fault, which means it isn’t abuse.

I was speaking with a person one day who was describing the abusive relationship of a man and woman, both of whom were friends of hers. “They each want me to side with them,” she explained to me, “but I refuse to take sides. They have to work out their own dynamics. I have let both of them know that I’m there for them. If I openly supported her, he would just dig his heels in harder.” She added, “People need to avoid the temptation to choose up teams” in a tone that indicated that she considered herself to be of superior maturity because of her neutrality.

In reality, to remain neutral is to collude with the abusive man, whether or not that is your goal. If you are aware of chronic or severe mistreatment and do not speak out against it, your silence communicates implicitly that you see nothing unacceptable taking place. Abusers interpret silence as approval, or at least as forgiveness. To abused women, meanwhile, the silence means that no one will help—just what her partner wants her to believe. Anyone who chooses to quietly look the other way therefore unwittingly becomes the abuser’s ally.

Breaking the silence does not necessarily mean criticizing or confronting the abuser regarding his behavior. It certainly doesn’t mean going to him with anything you have learned
from her,
because the abuser will retaliate against her for talking about his behavior to other people. It does mean telling the abused woman privately that you don’t like the way he is treating her and that she doesn’t deserve it, no matter what she has done. And if you see or hear violence or threats, it means calling the police.

H
OW
S
OCIETY
A
DOPTS THE
A
BUSER’S
P
ERSPECTIVE

Almost anyone can become an ally of an abusive man by inadvertently adopting his perspective. People usually don’t even notice that they are supporting abusive thinking, or they wouldn’t do it. Let’s examine some of the most common forms of accidental support:

•
The person who says to the abused woman: “You should show him some compassion even if he has done bad things. Don’t forget that he’s a human being too.”

I have almost never worked with an abused woman who overlooked her partner’s humanity. The problem is the reverse:
He
forgets
her
humanity. Acknowledging his abusiveness and speaking forcefully and honestly about how he has hurt her is indispensable to her recovery. It is the
abuser’s
perspective that she is being mean to him by speaking bluntly about the damage he has done. To suggest to her that his need for compassion should come before her right to live free from abuse is consistent with the abuser’s outlook. I have repeatedly seen the tendency among friends and acquaintances of an abused woman to feel that it is their responsibility to make sure that she realizes
what a good person he really is inside
—in other words, to stay focused on his needs rather than on her own, which is a mistake. People who wish to help an abused woman should instead be telling her what a good person
she
is.

•
The person who says to her: “But he’s the father of your children.”

The abusive man uses the children to entrap the woman in the relationship, saying that she is depriving them of a father by splitting up the family. But
he
is the one who is keeping those children from having the father they need, by forcing them to grow up with a father who abuses their mother. Children need an abuse-free home.

•
The person who says to her: “You made a commitment, and now you need to stick with it through hard times.”

The abusive man believes that chronic mistreatment, overt disrespect, intimidation, and even violence are not good enough reasons for a woman to want to stay away from a man. When people say to her, “You made your bed; now lie in it,” they are supporting the abuser’s value system.

•
The person who says to her: “You are claiming to be a helpless victim.”

If the abuser could hear these words being spoken to his partner, he would jump for joy. He may have said the very same thing to her. The abuser’s perspective is that the woman exaggerates the hurtfulness of his conduct because she
wants
the status of victim, attributing to her the maneuvers that he is actually fond of using himself. When an abused woman tries to tell you how bad things are, listen.

•
The person who says: “These abuse activists are anti-male.”

How is it anti-male to be against abuse? Are we supposed to pretend we don’t notice that the overwhelming majority of abusers are male? This accusation parallels the abuser’s words to his partner: “The reason you think I’m abusive is because you have a problem with men!” One of the best counters to this piece of side-tracking is to point out how many men are active in combating the abuse of women. Remember also that abused women are the sisters, daughters, mothers, and friends of men; men’s lives
are
affected by abuse, because it happens to women we know and care about.

I
HAVE GIVEN
just a few of the dozens of examples I have encountered of how people take on the abuser’s view of his abuse. When you hear these kinds of statements, draw the speaker’s attention to the fact that he or she is making the abuser’s arguments for him. Most people don’t want to carry his banner and will drop it quickly once you show them what is in their hands.

It is impossible for a community to stop abuse while continuing to assist or ignore abusers at the same time.
Protecting or enabling an abuser is as morally repugnant as the abuse itself.
This critical concept needs to become firmly embedded in our culture. Colluding with abuse abandons the abused woman and her children, and ultimately abandons the
abuser
as well, since it keeps him from ever dealing with his problem. In particular we have to bring to light the actions of those powerful, well-trained professionals who choose to join the abuser in his goals and tactics. If we can erode the ability of abusers to gain allies, they will stand alone, and alone they are easier to stop.

It often falls to the abused woman herself, unfortunately, to try to educate the people around her whose help and support she needs, so that they will understand the dynamics of abuse and stop supporting the abusive man. Much of why an abuser is so able to recruit allies, besides his own manipulativeness and charm, is his skill in playing on people’s ignorance and misconceptions and often on their negative attitudes toward women. As difficult as it is to take on, you will often find yourself having to be your own best advocate, arguing forcefully against the range of ways in which your society’s values may buy into the abusive man’s outlook, in order to gain the kind of strong backing that you deserve from all those around you.

• When people take a neutral stand between you and your abusive partner, they are in effect supporting him and abandoning you, no matter how much they may claim otherwise.
  
• People cannot claim to be opposed to partner abuse while assisting their own son, brother, friend, or partner in his abusiveness toward a woman.
  
• Everyone should be very, very cautious in accepting a man’s claim that he has been wrongly accused of abuse or violence. The great majority of allegations of abuse—though not all—are substantially accurate. And an abuser almost never “seems like the type.”
  
• The argument that “he is a human being, too, and he deserves emotional support” should not be used as an excuse to support a man’s
  abusiveness
  . Our society should not buy into the abusive man’s claim that holding him accountable is an act of cruelty.
  

L
URKING BENEATH THE SURFACE
of most women’s experience of abuse is
fear
: fear of what he will do if you stand up to him; fear of how he will react if he finds out you’ve been spending time with your friends, whom he hates; fear of what he might do to one of your children; fear that he will get you pregnant again; fear of how he may retaliate if you try to leave him.

Sometimes a woman can describe to me what she is afraid of, because her partner’s bullying and cruelty follow a pattern. You may dread his insults and his rage or his contempt and disgust. If he is violent, you may get shaky when images go through your mind of his twisted, hate-filled face as he slams his fists. At times it may seem like he could kill you—and he may threaten to.

In other cases, the fear is unnameable. You might find yourself saying to a friend: “I don’t know
what
he’ll do; there’s no way to tell with him, but he’ll do
something,
and it’s going to be bad.” Waiting for the punishment can be even harder when you don’t know what it will be. Even the abuser who has never used violence knows that there can always be a first time—and he may well be aware that you know that too. So he looks for ways, perhaps explicit or perhaps enigmatic, to remind you not to “push him too far,” because you won’t want to see what happens.

The impact of fear accumulates over time. The twentieth time a loved one scares you is not the same as the first. You become enraged, or paralyzed, or numb, or all of those at the same time. You feel like it’s harder and harder to figure out what to do.

If your partner is physically frightening or sexually assaultive, one option you can consider to gain protection for your rights and safety is to use the legal system. You can call the police to report an assault or a threat, or go to a court and ask for a restraining order (which also may be known as a “protective order” or “peace bond”). The restraining order may require the abuser to move out of the house, even if it is in his name; to stay away from you; or to have no contact with you of any kind, depending on what arrangement you feel you need.

The first time a woman considers involving the police or courts in her relationship, something inside her rebels. This is a man she loves, or at least once loved, with whom she has a history, with whom she has shared the highs and lows of moments of physical or emotional intimacy, with whom she may have children. She thinks to herself incredulously,
I am going to get a court order against this man? I am going to call the police and let them arrest him? I am going to cause him to have a criminal record, or perhaps even go to jail??
She shuts these preposterous-seeming possibilities out of her mind.
Relationship problems are solved by talking, or by seeking counseling, or by taking some time apart,
she tells herself,
not by using laws and judges and police departments.

But if the woman’s partner continues to frighten her—and it is unusual for scary behavior to stop once it rears its head—sooner or later she finds herself feeling that the situation has gone beyond what she can handle herself. The step of reaching out for legal help then stops seeming so farfetched.

Or she may become involved with the legal system without making the choice. Neighbors, bystanders, or her own children may call the police during a scary incident. Neighbors are much less likely nowadays to put their hands over their ears and pretend that nothing is happening; the traditional belief that domestic violence is a “private matter” is rapidly fading. Schools now teach children how to use 911 and sometimes even explain to children that they have a right to safety inside their homes, not just outside.

A woman who faces purely verbal or economic abuse from her partner, without the elements of physical assault, sexual assault, or physical intimidation, generally does not have recourse to the police or courts under current laws. The impact on her of her partner’s behavior may be severe nonetheless, but she will need to seek other sources of support, beginning with the nearest program for abused women.

T
HE
D
IFFERENT
P
LAYERS IN THE
L
EGAL
S
YSTEM

A call to the police or a visit to the court to seek a restraining order is a courageous and potentially empowering step. But an abused woman can also encounter some nasty surprises. Although the legal system is supposed to be her friend and protector, sometimes public officials seem to forget their job. Legal responses to abuse involve many players, each of whom has the potential to help the woman—or to drop the ball. When police are called to your home, they have a responsibility to make sure that you and your children are safe and to arrest the abuser if he has been violent or threatening. If he has violated a restraining order, the police should take him away even if he “only committed a technical violation” of the order or has some “good reason” for being there, such as asserting that you called him up and asked him to come over, or that he just wanted to drop off gifts for the children.

If the police do not arrest the abuser, or were never called, responsibility next falls to the court to file a charge. If you report to the court that you were assaulted or threatened, or that your partner broke a restraining order,
your word is evidence.
Courts can, and do, file charges on the basis of victim reports alone, but tragically they can be reluctant to do so in cases of domestic abuse or sexual assault. Courts reserve a special skepticism toward women who complain of abuse by a partner, and disparaging biases against females are still the rule of the day in some courts—even among female employees.

If the court does file a charge, the baton then passes to the district attorney. His or her job is to take the crime just as seriously as if it had been committed by a stranger and to pursue a conviction just as assiduously. The fact that the accused is your partner should make no difference or should actually lead the prosecutor to consider the offense
more
dangerous. Negotiations between the prosecutor and the abuser that fail to address the central issue of abuse—such as agreeing to reduce the charges if the abuser sees a therapist, or dropping the charges because the couple has split up “so it’s not an issue anymore”—have no place here. But they sometimes creep in.

Next comes the judge, who not only makes sentencing decisions but, unless there is a jury trial, also is the one ruling on the man’s guilt or innocence. Will the judge apply the same standards of proof used for other cases, or will he or she require a higher standard for domestic violence or sexual assault cases? Studies have shown that it is harder to convince judges and juries to convict in abuse cases, because of prejudices against the complainants as well as misconceptions about what “type” of man would commit such a crime.

A judge is also the one who grants or denies a restraining order to protect the woman. Some judges listen carefully to plaintiffs’ concerns, whereas others assume that women are lying and exaggerating. A remarkable number of judges grant restraining orders
to abusers
to use against their victims or grant mutual orders, which validate the abuser’s claim that his partner shares responsibility for causing his scary behavior.

And finally comes the probation department at the court. It is rare for an abuser to spend time in jail unless he is on his third or fourth
conviction,
which typically would mean five or ten or more
arrests.
So his probation officer becomes the person who determines whether or not the abuser feels the bite of consequences or is left to coast. I have worked with probation officers who send abusers an unequivocal message: “Domestic abuse is a serious offense. I will not permit you to get away with blaming your victim in any way, and it is up to you to do some serious work on yourself.” But I have also worked with many others who buddy up to the abuser with a wink and a nod, who bond with him in the belief that there exists an anti-male bias in the court system and who signal him that he needn’t take the abuser program seriously by saying things such as: “Just show up to your required number of group meetings and we’ll get you right off probation.”

The front doors of police departments and courthouses sometimes open into cold and adversarial worlds. Police and courts may have little training in how to respond to a person who has suffered chronic or terrifying abuse. Even if they don’t say or do anything unkind, their brusque, businesslike manner can feel like an icy slap in the face to a woman who seeks relief from psychological assault and intimidation at home. And too often, regrettably, they share the abuser’s attitudes. I could not possibly count the number of women who have said to me: “I wish those people down at the court could live my life for a day and see what it’s like.”

On the other hand a kind word, a useful pamphlet, some patient listening can touch an abused woman deeply. Increasingly I hear women say: “The police who came were so nice to me: They talked to me in private and asked me what happened, and they told me about programs where I could get help,” or “The judge said not to hesitate to come back if there were more problems or if I needed additional protection.” When an abused woman encounters humane, intelligent responses from officials who are informed on the subject of abuse, not only is her external freedom promoted but her inner feelings are validated, helping to keep her spirit alive. She walks away thinking,
Maybe everything isn’t the way he says it is. Maybe some people
do
care. Maybe I’m not so bad as to deserve being torn down all the time. Maybe he can’t fool
everybody.” And the budding belief that life
can
be filled with something other than cruelty and superiority grows a little stronger inside her.

In the pages ahead, we will look at how the abuser views and maneuvers through the legal system, trying to prevent his partner from receiving empowering assistance and striving to avoid accountability. Armed with this awareness, both individuals and communities are in a better position to press the police, courts, and prosecutors to do their jobs properly and become part of the solution rather than part of the problem of abuse.

H
OW THE
A
BUSER
T
HINKS
A
BOUT
L
AWS AND
C
ONSEQUENCES

My clients support laws that prohibit domestic abuse—as long as they are applied only to other men. Each one has a mental image of what a “real abuser” is like, and it isn’t him. In his mind, the “real abuser” is more violent and scary than he is and has a partner who is “a nice lady” who doesn’t deserve abuse. Dozens of my clients have said to me: “I’m not like those guys who come home and abuse their partners for no reason, you know.” A man who minimizes and excuses his abuse in these ways is shocked when the police arrest him or when a court orders him to vacate his home. He feels outraged at the unfairness of the system. He thinks,
With all those horrible batterers out there, why are they coming after
me?
This is ridiculous!

Since he can’t accept the idea that he is abusive, he has to find something wrong with everyone else—another example of the abuser seeing his dirty face and washing the mirror. His thinking is rife with distortions, including the following:

•
“She really exaggerated what I did.”

His first line of mental defense is to impugn her honesty and accuse her of being calculating: “She told the police I
punched her in the face,
because she knew that would make me look like a real bad guy. I only slapped her, and no harder than she slaps me.” My response to such statements is to say that just because she remembers the incident differently doesn’t mean her version is wrong and his is right; in fact, abused women typically have memories of what occurred that are clearer and more accurate than those of the abuser, because of the hyperalert manner in which people react to any danger. And even if this time he is technically right that his hand was open, what difference does it make? He obviously hit her hard enough to make her
think
that she was punched, so he is not a candidate for my sympathy. Besides, even if it was a slap, that’s enough to hurt a woman and put her in fear.

•
“The judge didn’t even want to hear about what
she
did. In court the man is automatically wrong, so the woman can do whatever she wants.”

The abuser feels justified in using intimidation “when it’s really called for,” so he gets frustrated if he finds that court officials do not find his excuses about her behavior compelling or don’t even want to hear them. He feels that if the court is going to take action against him for intimidating her, then it should simultaneously crack down on
her
for hanging around with friends of hers whom he dislikes, talking back to him when he tells her to shut up, fighting back physically when he is assaulting or threatening her, or whatever his grievances may be.

•
“The system is controlled by women.”

Every aspect of the multipronged legal system even today is dominated by males: police, prosecutors, judges, probation officers. In addition, the state legislatures that make the laws are still disproportionately male. So how does the abuser come to the far-fetched conclusion that women are somehow lurking in the shadows, pulling strings to cause him to suffer consequences for his actions when he thinks there shouldn’t be any? This absurd leap occurs for two reasons. One is that he already has well-entrenched habits of blaming women for his own behavior. So when society sends him the message that he is responsible for what he does, he just widens the scope of his blame-projecting machine to target
all
women. The second is that if he didn’t blame women, he would have to accept the fact that a large proportion of
men
are opposed to what he is doing. Cultural values are changing, slowly but surely, and abusers cannot always count on other men to back them up anymore—a fact that makes them feel betrayed so they close their eyes to it.