The Silent Cry -The Judgement of Kristen and Women
The mind can only take so much abuse and then it starts to compensate.
Women throughout history have taken various abuses. Physical, emotional, psychological. On one level, coping mechanism cause women to do things that are not the norm. I have been thinking about Kristen since the story broke. I have listened to various scenarios and television “experts” and have heard enough explanations as to why she “brought the Governor down”.
She mentioned she had been abused. Her reaction or what is perceived as one, in our society, is textbook. Take the power back from the male.
Women who have been abused at a young age usually have few options that will bring relief. They can bury the pain until it never surfaces or they can choose to relive it.
Both actions are rewarded.
By reliving the pain, she can change the outcome by taking control of it, prostitution and cry in silence. If but for a little while she is capable of having power over men, she seizes it and it becomes a temporary balm, until the next time. The reward is the psychological control over men and monetary gain. This woman feels she is more honest than her married counterpart. She is “free” to see whom she pleases and has reduced the relationship to sexual with a man and decries the false role women are forced to play in marriage.
The woman who chooses to bury the abuse may marry or commit as if everything is fine, and function by rote despite the inner turmoil she feels. Nothing is ever satisfying to her psyche, but she lives her life as if all is well. She forever waits for a shoe to drop and fears she will unravel. Her coping is to always stay busy. She could be the soccer mom or church volunteer that is always so very helpful. Never knowing her pain, because she will be rewarded for hiding it. Her family might sense an underlying sadness, but overall she is an attentive wife and lover and mother. Crying in silence.
How many women endure this kind of pain?
Men do not see it, or choose not to, and are afraid of it because they bear a responsibility for it, indirectly. The common dialogue in this world allows for commentary such as ” She deserved it”, What was she wearing”, “she is crazy”, etc. The enlightened men allow for the discourse but remain mute when a woman is branded. Honoring a woman is not something that is done although the motions are gone through. As long as she plays the prescribed role and doesn’t cross the line, she is allowed to stay in the game.
The minute she decides to take charge of her own destiny, she is condemned, called insane, not believed, or worse, dismissed. So the need for secrecy is apparent in our culture.
Kristen and women like her, bypass the particulars and go straight for the secrecy. The pain is turned into pleasure , and that is the insidiousness of patriarchal rule. She is privately rewarded and publicly reviled. Her counterpart, the married woman, is publicly rewarded and privately ruled.
Women are also taught that the reward is not self actualization, but a man. She is taught to be in competition with, not in kinship with, other women. She is taught to look at her sister as a possible hendrence to the dream, the male. Add abuse to that and you have a woman so repressed and suppressed that independent thought is all but gone. She goes through the motions without too much in- depth analysis. Subliminal messages abound for women to not rock the boat, be more feminine, act like a woman, no need to act like a man, why give up your feminity?
An aggressive female is threatening and that is the problem with Kristen. She is the epitome of what men desire but secretly fear. She is liberated but oppressed. Can one be both? With all of the mixed messages women receive, of course.
She survives , but at what cost?
To understand Kristen is to understand all women, to understand all women we have to look at the roles men play in our culture. The servitude, yes servitude that women necessarily find themselves in.
It is a servitude of the mind. If a woman dares to compete with a man on the same level, then she is seen as bitchy, nasty, desparate or the ever popular “butch” tag. While a man is seen as strong, commanding and decisive for the same behaviours .
A wounded woman, is seen as delicate and fragile, one not to be taken too seriously. A woman who hides it, same script, different payoff. She must be “handled” or worse, taken care of. The tragedy is she starts to believe it.
A wounded man is a wounded warrior , a hero, one to be admired. He is considered important, noteworthy, to be taken seriously. His experiences are shared and noted.
The desparity is palpable.
Kristen is either the Walking Wounded or a Hero or Mentally Ill or an Aberration.
Good Girl or Bad Girl. Legitimate or Illegitimate. A Lady or a Whore. A Woman or a Fallen Woman.
Women need each other but the societal norms teach them to shun each other. One must ask what constitutes abuse? Is it all of the roles designed for women?
We know there are two Americas.
Are there two types of women abused by America?
First, I agree that people do suffer and women are more often subject to abuse than men.
However, I do disagree with some of your claims. In particular, you assert that:
“To understand Kristen is to understand all women, to understand all women we have to look at the roles men play in our culture. The servitude, yes servitude that women necessarily find themselves in.”
That does not seem accurate. While some generalizations can be made from any individual to any other, understanding her does not seem to entail understanding of all women (unless you are presenting a view like that of Leibniz in which the whole universe is mirrored in each being and hence can, in theory, be read from it). She is an individual with different experiences, values, choices, and thoughts that differ from other individuals-be they men or women. To say that she can stand in for all women is to say that all women are somehow essentially alike because they are women. This is to deny each woman her own individuality and, in a sense, her identity. This sort of view is a hallmark of sexism and racism-to see a gender or a “race” as a monolithic entity such that any member stands for any other. as such, I have to disagree with this. I must, of course, confess to being an individualist rather than a collectivist.
Based on what you wrote, your motives seem laudable. As you say, there is much that is wrong with how people are treated in the world. Much should be done to rectify that. However, presenting things in terms of men being cruel oppressors and women as the perpetual victims does little to help the situation.It is also a terrible oversimplification of reality.
One final point-the evidence seems to be that the woman in question was not abused. She apparently came from a well off family and it seems that her tales of abuse were fabricated. As such, she is hardly the ideal example to support the claim that women are forced into such situations by abuse. Sadly, there are all too many examples that would serve as accurate examples of this (such as the women who are forced into sexual slavery).
Comment by Michael LaBossiere — March 22, 2008 @ 10:52 am
Thank you for your thoughts. While there is truth in the uniqueness of any one individual, the seductiveness of individualism comes with a price.It can be devisive.It is a luxury an oppressed group can ill afford. The common experience of women world wide has been fashioned by patriarchy.This is inescapable.
As far as whether she made it up or comes from a cetain class, it serves to prove the point that women have prescribed roles. Within those roles are acceptable reasons for pursuit. If she had not been abused then she felt the need to say so or not be labeled a monster, her words, not mine. This alone gives a window into the mindset that women have for centuries walked lockstep into the few roles “allowed”.
Comment by zacca — March 23, 2008 @ 2:15 am