Sunday, November 27, 2011

Links of Interest

Posted by Hannah at 2:30 PM

I have some links of interest today!

I maybe MIA (missing in action) for a bit longer.  I was cleaning up, and I was moving things around that I suppose were to heavy for me.  Sigh.  Now I have hurt my back.

Certain kiddos reminded me that I can't do things that I used to do, and maybe I should take it easy.  (giggles) I reminded THEM - I'm NOT that OLD!

Sidenote:  They may have a slight point but still...

I haven't started to use my Dragon Naturally speaking either.  Ahem - so expect the normal typos and grammar mistakes!

Gaslight is a movie from 1944.  Gaslighting is a term that was taken from the movie.

The husband in the movie wanted his wife to think she was insane for his own personal motive.  He would get the gaslights to flicker at certain times, and then refuse to acknowledge they flickered at all.  He would basically tell her  that she was imagining it, and it must be due to stress, etc.   Another example was some jewelry that she had, and he removed it from where she placed it.  Then made her feel terrible because she was so careless due to losing it.

A Message to Women From a Man: You Are Not "Crazy"

This is an article written about gaslighting, and geared towards women.  Honestly?  I do believe anyone that has been experienced gaslighting will be validated by reading it.  It most certainly isn't a 'gender only' concept.

Here is a quote from the article:

Today, when the term is referenced, it's usually because the perpetrator says things like, "You're so stupid," or "No one will ever want you," to the victim. This is an intentional, pre-meditated form of gaslighting, much like the actions of Charles Boyer's character in Gaslight, where he strategically plots to confuse Ingrid Bergman's character into believing herself unhinged.

The form of gaslighting I'm addressing is not always pre-mediated or intentional, which makes it worse, because it means all of us, especially women, have dealt with it at one time or another.
Those who engage in gaslighting create a reaction -- whether it's anger, frustration, sadness -- in the person they are dealing with. Then, when that person reacts, the gaslighter makes them feel uncomfortable and insecure by behaving as if their feelings aren't rational or normal.

My friend Anna (all names changed to protect privacy) is married to a man who feels it necessary to make random and unprompted comments about her weight. Whenever she gets upset or frustrated with his insensitive comments, he responds in the same, defeating way, "You're so sensitive. I'm just joking."

Abusive people in general have a hard time admitting in the honest way when they were abusive at all.  Remember abuse is a pattern of behavior, and not an occasional 'acting like a jerk' moment.  We can all be ugly at times.

It's about the general insight our conditioning gives us into admitting fault and exposing any emotion.

When we are discouraged in our youth and early adulthood from expressing emotion, it causes many of us to remain steadfast in our refusal to express regret when we see someone in pain from our actions.
Abusive people tend to use the 'BUT' word on a regular basis.  'Okay I was a jerk, BUT'

100% ownership is not in their make up.

 Trent Dalton's award-winning feature 'Home is Where the Hurt is' 

 Australia like many parts of the world are struggling with how to handle domestic violence cases.

Honestly when you look how most places handle domestic violence - its sad to say but - they are alot like the church.  They tend not to help anyone.  

Unlike the church - at least people will talk about it.

When I read this article it reminded me of the attitudes towards domestic violence when I was growing up.  Don't get me wrong I'm not saying the USA is any better, but some of the attitudes of the past haunted me as I read this piece.

Part of the article spoke of how abusers will break their 'no contact' orders upwards of 28 DOCUMENTED times before they get their first slap on the wrist.  That sends a message to families that there will be no true accountability, and not only is the spouse uneasy but the children are as well.

Think about it.  If you have 28 documented times of contact before ANYTHING happens!  How many times were undocumented, and does this show the proper degree of seriousness of the circumstances?  I can understand why people feel helpless, and tend to give up.
Expected to be completed next year, it's the first formative review that Donna Justo, director of the Domestic Violence Prevention Centre Gold Coast, can recall in two decades.

"I think it's vital that both a civil remedy and criminal remedy sit alongside each other," Justo says, with "synchronised responses nationally".

Rosemary says the courts "need to send messages of accountability to the offenders by sentencing at the first breach of the DVO".

Accountability. Every victim who spoke to Qweekend can understand why Susan Falls killed her husband. They can understand why a woman might throw herself off a bridge to escape her violent relationship.
The people they can't understand are the boyfriends, the husbands, the aggressors, including their own.

The same question is asked by them all. "This is what I'm doing to change my life. What about him?"

"It's easier, resource-wise and in safety terms, to put the onus on victims to protect themselves from violence rather than to stop men from being violent," says Heather Nancarrow, deputy chair of the National Violence Against Women Advisory Group.

"So there's this underlying acceptance that some men are going to be violent and we better do what we can to protect women. But as a society we have to find ways to raise young men so they don't see this as acceptable."

Says Amanda Whelan: "Even if every single woman in Queensland left the violent relationship that exists, what happens to those men? They're going to find other partners. We're not changing anything."

One thing both the faith community and the secular community have in common is concentrating on the victim, and sadly ignoring the needs of the person whom is abusing.

YES the victims do need to find ways of protecting themselves - and the children.

We also need to find ways of helping the abusive person as well.  As Amanda Whelan noted - abusive people will just move to abuse someone else if we don't.

SO we protected their current victims, but we do nothing to protect their future ones.

What have we gained?  Pretty much nothing.

Abusive people are broken people.  They are hurt and they only know how to hurt others.

We as society are kidding ourselves when we only partially deal with one aspect, and ignore the other.  Does jail time have its place?  Yes.  Will jail time help in most circumstances?  Honestly I don't think so.

Yes, we have abuser programs.  Sadly, unless people want change in their lifes?  It just won't happen.  Its just like an addict.  They must WANT to quit, or we are just spinning our wheels.

Its just like a victim that doesn't recognize the danger they are in, and lives in denial.  YES we can take that person that put them in protective custody.  Unless that person wishes to face the truth?  Chances of that person returning to the abusive person is almost 100%!

The resources we have tend to be concentrated on the victims, and YES at times it takes upward of 8 - 10 times before the victim will leave for good.

Sadly, we ignore the most dangerous part of this equation.

We would have to fix this by changing societies attitude towards the denial they use when it comes to abusive dynamics.  Children would need a safe place to speak to when things are dangerous at home.  Victims would need help, and SO would abusers.

Focusing on the Jewish Story of the New Testament

 I loved the idea of this.  Jewish perspective on the New Testament

The Jewish Annotated New Testament

So what does this New Testament include that a Christian volume might not? Consider Matthew 2, when the wise men, or magi, herald Jesus’s birth. In this edition, Aaron M. Gale, who has edited the Book of Matthew, writes in a footnote that “early Jewish readers may have regarded these Persian astrologers not as wise but as foolish or evil.” He is relying on the first-century Jewish philosopher Philo, who at one point calls Balaam, who in the Book of Numbers talks with a donkey, a “magos.”

Because the rationalist Philo uses the Greek word “magos” derisively — less a wise man than a donkey-whisperer — we might infer that at least some educated Jewish readers, like Philo, took a dim view of magi. This context helps explain some Jewish skepticism toward the Gospel of Matthew, but it could also attest to how charismatic Jesus must have been, to overcome such skepticism. 

This volume is thus for anybody interested in a Bible more attuned to Jewish sources. But it is of special interest to Jews who “may believe that any annotated New Testament is aimed at persuasion, if not conversion,” Drs. Levine and Brettler write in their preface. “This volume, edited and written by Jewish scholars, should not raise that suspicion.” 

I plan on placing this on my Holiday list of WANTS!  How often do we hear at times that we need to take the Jewish culture and prospective into account when we read our bible?  YES - there are some that claim that isn't important, but that is from a place of ignorance IMO!

Jesus was a Jew after all, and he lived as a Jew.  Most of his followers were Jews as well, and they observed the Jewish culture at the time.  That culture has changed from then compared to NOW as well.  Think about it.  How often do we hear about the Jews sacrificing an animal as we read about in the bible?

Think about OUR culture now overall!  For example, my children would not even recognize a culture without email, the internet, etc.  My generation had 9 TV stations, and my parents?  They had NO TV but just radio programs.

When people state that we don't need to pay attention to the Jewish culture at the time of Jesus when reading the bible?  I have to wonder WHY they are so scared of learning about it.  It does MATTER!  The text in blue above is quoted from the article.  The Wise men that we learned about were not seen as 'wise' after all in the eyes of the culture at time.  How much else have we got wrong?  I for one want to KNOW!

Myself personally?  I want to know what else I'm missing!  YES I love history as well, but I also think we can learn the proper prospective on things as well.  Ignoring the fact that Jesus lived a Jew, and chances of him actually looking like the blue eyed handsome man pictured in our Sunday school class is false?  I don't wish to ignore big chunks of history myself.

I think the Jewish prospective, history, etc will open our eyes and hearts further.  Heck it might even stop some of the crazy stereotypes we have about each other as well.  For example, in the article the author wrote as a child she was told that SHE killed Jesus on a school bus one day.  Thankfully, she had parents - and friends I'm sure - that showed her how cruel that 'accepted' statement was at the time.  She didn't kill Jesus after all did she?  ick!  How terrible!

I hope you enjoy my links of interest!

If you enjoyed this post and wish to be informed whenever a new post is published, then make sure you subscribe to my regular Email Updates. Subscribe Now!

Thanks For Making This Possible! Kindly Bookmark and Share it:

Technorati Digg This Stumble Facebook Twitter Delicious


Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Blog Archive



Blog Of The Day Awards Winner

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Privacy Policy

| Emotional Abuse and Your Faith © 2009. All Rights Reserved | Template by My Blogger Tricks .com |