My last post, Domestic Terrorism, recognized the similarity between prisoner of war brainwashing and intimate partner psychological abuse. We usually think of domestic terrorists as perpetrating gun or other violent crimes against people they may or may not know. A definition of terrorism is “violence or intimidation inflicted on civilians to achieve political goals.” These goals may be to silence people or ideas.
This goal is very like that of abusers who limit the freedom of their partners.
Recently I watched a program that stimulated my thinking further. Channel 3000’s For the Record produced “Pushing Back Against Hate” in which Neil Heinen interviewed “We Are Many – United Against Hate” Founder & President Masood Akhtar and Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne.
Heinen’s comment that “hate shows up in so many forms, so many different ways, some subtle and some shockingly blatant . . .” led me to see the connections between hate crimes and intimate partner violence (IPV). I believe the differences and commonalities help inform how damaging partner abuse is.
An obvious difference lies in the emotional intimacy involved. IPV relationships begin with attraction and love that becomes overwhelmed with abusive tactics, leaving victims either feeling hated or like they don’t deserve to be loved. Such harmful acts are even more damaging in intimate relationships because we presume kindness and love and wonder if we did something wrong. In addition, the abuse often isn’t very visible to others, so this makes it more difficult to hold partners accountable. Those who commit hate crimes don’t share emotional connections with their victims, and their overt actions are crimes with more prominence that bolsters negative attention and accountability.
The motivations for partner abuse and hate crimes are different and similar. Hate crime perpetrators want to eliminate their victims rather than insure an ongoing relationship. With IPV, the motivation is to maintain power and control in the relationship. Victims commonly feel like prisoners and sometimes have suicidal thoughts as a way out of their suffering. When victims leave, however, the motivation of power and control may extend to killing them. “If I can’t have you, no one can” is the ultimate control tactic.
I see four common beliefs that underlie IPV and all types of violence against others in our society. They are listed below along with a brief illustration:
1. Power is finite & must be hoarded.
If someone has success and personal power, this feels threatening to those with this belief. It’s as if there is only so much power. This leaves no room for cooperation, mutuality, and finding ways to have power together.
2. Power comes from power over others.
This follows from a belief in finite power. Holding that belief leads to thinking the only way to insure their power is to exert it over others, otherwise they will over power them. The mindset: “I’ll do to you before you do to me.”
3. Differences are threatening.
Those with this conviction believe there is only one right way, and they can’t accord those who disagree any respect. They take others’ different viewpoints as personal attacks. They assume that it means they aren’t loved or respected enough. If they aren’t getting their way, they also believe they are being controlled.
4. Some people have greater worth.
All three previous beliefs lead to dividing the world into those who are entitled to freedom and resources and those who aren’t.
(See my blog post “Coercive Controllers’ Beliefs and Treatment” for more on their beliefs.)
These beliefs lead to all forms of discrimination with resulting limitations in freedom and resources. They affect women, non-majority races and religions, and those seen to have different sexual preferences and identities.
Many IPV victims feel triggered by hate crimes as well as instances of incivility in society because they resemble their partners’ behavior so closely.
