Rihanna has inadvertently shined the spotlight on a taboo subject. No, not domestic violence; discussions about domestic violence have become commonplace. Rihanna has highlighted the problem that no one wants to talk about, the role of women in sustaining abusive relationships.
The sad secret of domestic violence is that it takes two people to sustain an abusive relationship, the abuser and the woman willing to be abused. Rihanna is now the poster child for these women. Rich, talented and beautiful, Rihanna has no objective reason for returning to Chris Brown, the man who battered her face, an important source of her livelihood. She’s going back because she has the psychological need to be hit again, and Chris Brown is going to oblige her. It is only a matter of time before another picture of a bloody and bruised Rihanna appears in People Magazine.
Next time, it will be Rihanna’s fault as well as Brown’s. Sure, it will be Brown who perpetrates the violence, but it will be Rihanna who deliberately has placed herself in harm’s way. Just like the motorist who hits a pedestrian bears some of the responsibility, the person who darted in front of the car at the last moment is equally to blame.
Harsh? You bet it’s harsh. The problem of domestic violence is a brutal problem with harsh realities at its root. It’s time that we acknowledge a central harsh reality: women who return to abusers do so because of their own psychological need for abuse. Until we are as willing to confront the woman’s role in domestic violence as honestly as we confront the man’s role, it will be difficult to make any progress in this already difficult area.
Rihanna’s case is particularly worth highlighting because it has none of the added motivations that are often involved in returning to an abuser. Many women in abusive relationships have children by the abuser, adding an additional emotional tie. Many women in abusive relationships cannot support themselves without the abuser, and therefore stay rather than live in poverty. Most importantly, many women are deathly afraid of their abuser, having no means to protect themselves if the abuser wishes to wreak vengeance.
None of these factors affect Rihanna. Her relationship with Chris Brown is casual and has not been going on for very long. They are not married, and they have no children. Rihanna is fully capable of supporting herself without Brown, and, more importantly, can afford to hire protection against Brown if that is necessary. So Rihanna is going back for one and only one reason: she wants to go back.
Based on publicly available information, it appears that Brown has a classic motivation for domestic violence. As a child, he witnessed his mother being beaten by his stepfather, and he was powerless to protect. Now, as the abuser, he is the powerful one, reliving the experience as the abuser, not the victim. Without serious effort and significant psychological counseling, it is difficult for such men to restrain themselves from abuse. The chances that this was his last episode of domestic violence are vanishingly small, regardless of what he says, promises or believes about himself.
The motivation for women who deliberately return to abusive relationships often centers on deep-seated insecurity. Simply put, as painful as it is both physically and psychologically, being a victim of domestic violence feels “right” and deserved. Such women do not believe, at the deepest levels of their being, that they have the right to be safe, healthy and cherished. They, too, need significant psychological help to reject the mindset that leads them to blame themselves for “provoking” the violence, and to reject the desire to forgive the abuser or believe his protestations of remorse. No doubt Brown is remorseful, but that does not mean that he won’t hit her again.
Only those close to Rihanna can encourage her to get the help she needs, and perhaps even they cannot get her to appraise her situation more realistically. Whatever happens to Rihanna, however, she has give parents a priceless opportunity to discuss domestic violence with their children, particularly their daughters.
Every girl should be taught, and must accept at the deepest part of her being, the conviction that she deserves to be healthy. No one, absolutely no one, ever has the right to hit her. There is no verbal or behavioral provocation so great that it merits physical punishment of adults, let alone adults in an emotional relationship.
Any girl who is treated abusively, either psychologically or physically, by a boyfriend should run in the opposite direction. He may appear remorseful, but it is important to understand that he will not change until he gets considerably psychological help, and maybe not even then. While it may be worthwhile standing behind a husband who makes a long term, good faith effort to control himself, there is simply no justification for standing by a boyfriend.
Rihanna is sending a message to young girls everywhere, but likely not the one that she thinks she is sending. She may believe that she is demonstrating the power of forgiveness, but, in reality, she is demonstrating the power of self-hatred. Parents should make sure that their daughters understand what Rihanna is doing, and that they should feel sorry for her, not admire her. There is never any justification for allowing a boyfriend to be abusive … never! The sooner our daughters learn that, the better.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
aliquot
Roger Fallihee
madcelt
Norwonk
John Moore
Esther AR
Salon.com
Comments
I'm not going to comment on the specific Rihanna situation, because neither you nor I nor any of the other thousands of people who've taken it upon themselves to offer her advice really know anything about her situation. But if you really want to help women who are stuck in abusive situations, try donating to a women's shelter or offering support and encouragement, rather than condemnation and castigation.
I doubt very much evidence of her continued abuse will ever again be witnessed on her face. It will take other forms.
"So an article like this, telling them that it's their fault that they get hit, will not inspire or motivate them to leave, but instead will just confirm what they already think about themselves - they are worthless and deserve to be abused."
I'm not sure about that.
I'm not writing for Rihanna, of course. She's not going to read this. However, if I thought she were, I would say essentially the same thing. First, I would emphasize that NO woman ever deserves to be hit. By definition, it is impossible to "deserve" to be a victim of domestic violence. So what Brown did was undeserved, unprovoked, and completely outside the bounds of civilized behavior.
Second, I would encourage her to look at this not as her boyfriend's problem, but her problem. He has a problem, too, but that's separate, and no one can solve another person's psychological problems. She needs to ask herself what has led her to believe that she should risk her health, her safety, and her career to be with an abuser. The answer is likely to be complicated, and difficult to access (even with professional help), but her only chance at happiness lies with seeking the answer to the question.
Finally, I wrote this primarily to highlight the education possibilities of this tragedy. It is an opportunity to explain to our daughters that no one should ever be allowed to abuse them in any way, no exceptions.
"Instead, the laissez faire attitude will only be reinforced as she meekly returns to Chris Brown's side, sending the message that it's not so bad to be abused, it doesn't really hurt that much, she deserves it, and, horribly, that it's somehow worth it."
I'm afraid that you are absolutely right.
That's a great sentiment.
Isn't it sad that the people who should be the ones teaching that lesson are instead the ones who believe they have every right to hit their child?
"Isn't it sad that the people who should be the ones teaching that lesson are instead the ones who believe they have every right to hit their child?"
No.
It trivializes the problem of domestic violence to equate it with parental discipline.
Now if you are talking about beating a child, that's in the same category as domestic violence.
I agree with the points you make, they are factors that dominate in this particular situation. It's not comparable to domestic violence at the low to middle class levels. They are not bound by financial or familial constrainsts. They are bound by their public images, they serve as role models to young people, & their decisions are influential to the ones who look up to them.
Like it or not, wealth & fame comes with a price. If they want to be Bobby Brown/Whitney Houston poster children, they will be subjected to the negative publicity that follows.
The most bothersome aspect of this sordid affair is the target of Chris Brown's punches. Each punch was a statement of hateful rage intent on maiming her face & career.
Returning to the relationship is sending a message that beatin' on a woman is acceptable in a gangsta lifestyle that's so stylish, & throw a couple trinkets her way & that bitch be back kissin' his ass.
"Returning to the relationship is sending a message that beatin' on a woman is acceptable in a gangsta lifestyle that's so stylish"
The gangsta lifestyle is despicable, but it reflects what happens when a generation of boys grows up powerless and fearful, always worried about being beaten, or watching a loved one being beaten. It feels right to finally be powerful and feared, beating up on someone else, instead of being beaten.
"The truth is, this might be more closely connected to the "every child needs a (male) father" mistake than one might think."
No, it's not, and that's one of the central claims of this post.
Strip away economic need, strip away children, strip away fear, and the women still go back. This is not the fault of "society" and society is not in a position to fix it. This is a fault of the mindset of the women themselves.
You can put up all the shelters in the world and it's not going to make much of a dent if you don't address the underlying psychology. Women go back because they believe that they DESERVE to be beaten.
"I agree that the abuse will likely continue, but it won't be to her face. You don't have to pick up a baseball bat or use your fist to hurt someone."
That's true, but the fact that he witnessed his mother being beaten is an important risk factor making it more likely that he will physically beat women.
I also regret that the focus has been mostly on Brown. This is a teachable moment for boys AND for girls. Rihanna is send precisely the wrong message.
What is your solution, Amy? How do you propose to restore the self-esteem of women (or anyone) who tolerates abuse, to the point where they even understand they *have* a choice? The callousness in this post is astonishing.
There is never any justification for allowing a boyfriend to be abusive … never!
Every girl should be taught, and must accept at the deepest part of her being, the conviction that she deserves to be healthy.
There is no verbal or behavioral provocation so great that it merits physical punishment of adults, let alone adults in an emotional relationship.
I doubt very much that Dr. Amy has the answers. No one does - b/c, as Amy points out, we don't have the discussion in the way that we should, that focuses on the responsibilities of all involved parties. That's what forums like this are about, isn't it? To discuss the issue, and see what we can learn about how to resolve it better than it is being resolved now. Because I don't think anyone can argue that Rhianna's case is pretty dispiriting - she has no reason to go back to this guy. No children, no financial dependency, no lasting commitment - and yet, she IS, willingly, walking back into the company of an abuser who has not had the help he needs to provide any sort of reassurance he can, in fact, stop. Understanding her complicity in her future abuse is an issue that affects us all, isn't it?
"Rhianna's case is pretty dispiriting - she has no reason to go back to this guy. No children, no financial dependency, no lasting commitment - and yet, she IS, willingly, walking back into the company of an abuser who has not had the help he needs to provide any sort of reassurance he can, in fact, stop. Understanding her complicity in her future abuse is an issue that affects us all, isn't it?"
That's the heart of the matter. I wish that compassion could solve problems, but it can only give us the motivation to seek solutions.
There is likely something in Rihanna's background that has led her to this decision. Her parents are divorced. Perhaps the loss of her father in her life was extremely traumatic. Perhaps she decided that if she ever had a man in her life, she would never let him go. Who knows?
Regardless of the cause in this particular case, it can serve as a teachable moment for parents everywhere. Rihanna has made a very serious mistake. Girls need to understand that no one should ever be allowed to abuse them.
It's all about power and control. By taking herself out of the abusive situation, she's taken the control from him. He wants it back, and many times will go to extreme lengths to get it.
It's not so simple as Dr. Amy implies. Many abused women know this.
"It would be best for society to focus on men not to become abusers. But lacking that, women must find ways to protect themselves from those who do.That is the issue. Talking clearly about it, and acknowledging women's responsibility, despite the challenges, is essential."
Absolutely.
It would be wonderful if we could convince men to stop abusing women, but it is equally effective to convince women not to tolerate abuse.
As we know, abuse of women has a long and honored history in most of the world. Until very recently, women have been treated as property even in our own society. For literally thousands of years women have been taught that it is their job to accept abuse. It is not surprising that we have failed to completely turn it around in only a few decades.
We all need to make sure our nieces, nephews, granddaughters, sisters, and sons know this vital comment, "Every girl should be taught, and must accept at the deepest part of her being, the conviction that she deserves to be healthy. No one, absolutely no one, ever has the right to hit her."
"it leans a little to that "it's the woman's fault" myth. At the same time, you make all the valid legitimate points."
It's not really her "fault" in the sense that she is making the decision after completely thinking it through. She IS making the decision, but she lacks the introspection to understand why she feels drawn to make such a choice.
If she's like many women in similar situations, she is rationalizing it as love for the man who hit her. It is really about disliking herself, not about loving him.
Thanks for the kind words.
I am troubled by the use of the word complicit to describe abuse victims. That comes perilously close to the language and mindset that abusers use to justify their own actions. There is a world of difference between having an emotional predisposition for abuse, and "asking for it." That is the slippery slope I was trying to point out.
I am also concerned about the underlying message of this post. Would reading it make a battered person feel better about themselves, and more empowered to choose differently? Or would they feel further shamed, and thus more likely to perpetuate the cycle? I think the latter. Worse, I think that is the point of it, conscious, or un-.
"I am also concerned about the underlying message of this post."
The message of this post is that a beautiful, talented wealthy woman returning to an abuser is pathological. There is no healthy justification for it. Therefore, we need to understand the type of pathology that leads a woman to return to a man who beats her.
You seem particularly concerned with the idea of "fault." It has nothing to do with fault. It has everything to do with psychopathology that requires professional treatment.
This is patently false. You are out of your depth here, Amy.
See Stewie13's post for some better info, at "http://open.salon.com/blog/stewie13/2009/03/01/my_response_why_women_return_to_their_abuser"
Unless and until people acknowledge that domestic violence involves psychopathology on the part of BOTH abuser and abused, we will not make any meaningful progress in solving this very serious problem.
As I said above, many people seem obsessed with "blame" and "fault." It's not about either. It's about finding the root causes in BOTH partners and addressing them.
I also agree that there in the case of two adults there is plenty of psychopathology to go around. But the responsibility for a violent act should be put where it belongs - with the person who perpetrated it.
"But the responsibility for a violent act should be put where it belongs - with the person who perpetrated it."
It does. However, the responsibility for returning to the abuser rests with Rihanna or any other woman who returns. That's what this post is about.
We just say hey it's all about forgiveness, forgive and forget, forgive and move on but nobody ever talks about an appropriate way to forgive. As if forgiving someone means continuing to love them AND take the abuse. No, no, no. Our misguided attempts at forgiveness can have such awful consequences. Somebody needs to teach this young lady about appropriate forgiveness. And sometimes it ain't about forgiveness at all but about the fact that the boyfriend is an abuser and she needs to get away from him. It's not about loving him or forgiving him and (god help us) 'understanding' him. It's about getting away from him and this, THIS is what we need to teach our young people.
"It's not about loving him or forgiving him and (god help us) 'understanding' him. It's about getting away from him and this, THIS is what we need to teach our young people."
That's the most important point. It surprises me that many people think that forgiveness means going back to the abuser. They are entirely separate things. You can forgive someone, believing that they cannot control their actions, but that does not mean that you must place yourself in harm's way to demonstrate your forgiveness.
I would liken it to the difference between forgiving someone for being an alcoholic and buying them liquor. The former in no way requires the latter.
"I know of too many women who left those abusive relationships and were stalked, found, and abused again"
Sure, but that's not a problem for Rihanna. So why is she going back?
"There is likely something in Rihanna's background that has led her to this decision. Her parents are divorced. Perhaps the loss of her father in her life was extremely traumatic. Perhaps she decided that if she ever had a man in her life, she would never let him go. Who knows?"
This is what Rihanna must work on to get herself psychologically healthy and get away from the likes of Chris Brown, who is himself damaged by what he witnessed in his childhood. It's tragic all around.
On one hand you seem to be saying that Rihanna has options(she does) that other women don't have. And then in one comment you seem to lump all victims of domestic violence together.
But you are right on the money... Rihanna has no business going back and tragically, if she stays with him, we may be posting about something much more serious.
Abusive relationships have a dynamic that is almost impossible for most of us to understand. Both abuser and abusee are victims of this crime. Many abusers are survivors of abuse. Most have never been treated for the psycological damage. They strike out at those they love to protect themselves from the pain that they experienced themselves. This doesn't excuse their actions. It might help stop them.
Domestic violence is not strictly the domain of men either. Many are victims of physical violence. We don't here much about it. The stigma for men who are victims is too great. There are few if any shelters and even less treatment and education. Society doesn't allow for men to be victims, it says that all men are strong and able to defend themselves.
When we segregate violence by gender we miss the root of the problem. When we stigmatize psychological treatment we effectively remove the only real avenue for victims to see the reasons for their behavior and how to stop it.
As for Rhianna, unless Chris Brown and she both get help then I have no doubt that not only will this happen to her again, odds are that it will be worse. It's a shame that our culture spends so much energy promoting violence and revenge. If it invested as much exposure to the real consequences of violence we might be able to convince our children that there is a better way.
The part I have trouble understanding IS that pathology of the abused. I don't think Mom or Dad just teaching you the basics of self-esteems is necessarily the "go to" answer. Some people slip into abusive relationships. I've seen them happen to otherwise healthy individuals. I think its a weird type of long-term degrading and brainwashing that takes place - a sickness that could affect any of us, even though we'd love to say "no way, not me."
I actually wish we'd teach our children some martial arts and self-defense. Feed them on Buffy and not Britney. Women can be formidable physical entities and not punching bags. Martial arts beat Mom and Dad's talk on self-esteem, in my opinion. Women can be so utterly physically helpless sometimes...its disturbing! We're not dolls. Learn something about how to fight back!
I know, I know...domestic abuse goes far beyond martial arts. But, in my opinion, martial arts is pretty damn deep. It hits on the self-esteem factor, the self-defense factor and the physical "I'm not a China doll" factor.
"Forgiveness has about as much relevance in a situation like this as do donuts or the feeding habits of sperm whales or migratory habits of dodo birds, which is to say none at all."
That make me laugh!
For me, too, forgiveness would have nothing to do with it, but I recognize that for some people, and in some religious traditions, forgiveness provides comfort to the person who forgives.
The key point is that forgiveness, for those who wish to give it, does not mean that the person goes back to the abuser. We can understand and forgive an abuser for feeling compelled to relive his childhood, this time as the abuser, not the abused. At the very same time, though, we can advise the abused woman not to even contemplate going back to him unless he gets prolonged and intensive psychological help.
"And then in one comment you seem to lump all victims of domestic violence together."
While each case is different, most have a common thread: the abused woman feels that the abuse is somehow "right."
The title posed the question: Is Rihanna asking to be beaten again? My answer: Rihanna is not asking to be beaten again. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that Brown has promised that it will never happen again, and Rihanna desperately wants to believe him. In the absence of anything other than a promise, though, and it is inevitable that it will happen again and Rihanna thinks that she must take that risk. It seems reasonable to her that a lover would attempt to bash her face in and love her still. That's not reasonable at all, and she needs to find out why she believes something so unreasonable.
"When we stigmatize psychological treatment we effectively remove the only real avenue for victims to see the reasons for their behavior and how to stop it."
That is the central truth of domestic violence (and many other psychological problems). It is a terrible shame, because real help is available.
"Getting a little more attention myself on OS as of late and sometimes the deeply recalcitrant responses can make one want to retreat."
Hang in there. There is something about the anonymity of the Web that encourages the absolute worst behavior. Try not to take it personally (easier said than done, I know).
"Unless you are very familiar with the two individuals in person, to attempt to psychoanalyze them based on what you've read in news clippings is a huge mistake."
We cannot know exactly what is going on in this particular situation. However, I look upon it as an opportunity for public education of young men and women.To me, psychological problems are just a subset of medical problems. Both can be improved by publicizing them, asking questions, and pondering outcomes.
Domestic abuse is ugly and painful to look at, I get that. However, it is not your place to use her as an illustration as such.
This subject touches me deeply. I believe you are assessing this subject spot on. I know from experience that it takes a lot of work to develop a secure sense of self-worth and value. Lack of self-worth draws you to abusers--it is a dance that both take part in.
"Second, I would encourage her to look at this not as her boyfriend's problem, but her problem. He has a problem, too, but that's separate, and no one can solve another person's psychological problems. She needs to ask herself what has led her to believe that she should risk her health, her safety, and her career to be with an abuser. The answer is likely to be complicated, and difficult to access (even with professional help), but her only chance at happiness lies with seeking the answer to the question."
So true.
Look at the terms you used, "Next time it WILL be Rihanna's fault" and "Rihanna IS going back for one and only one reason: she WANTS to go back" (emphasis mine). All of that assumes you know what's in her heart and mind. While I don't care if you speculate away, to use such absolute terms is false. It's important to keep that in mind. It devalues your overall argument.
Even more than that, and I speak from experience, is that we do believe, if we were abused as children, that we deserved it, and that we can *earn* the right for it to stop. We also have the deepest possible need to believe in our parents, and we transfer that to the Significant Abusive Other, as an adult. Hence, "forgiveness." Oddly, there is a kind of "zen" that develops...the ability for our "love" to keep bouncing back, despite horrible behavior from the one we love. We are giving them the thing we want, and cannot have--a feeling of unconditional love. And I believe too that this mutated "forgiveness" (paradoxically) is the only "power" we think we have. As we go back, we are saying not only, "I forgive you," but also, "I have the power to change this. THIS time, I will come up with the one thing that he needs that will make him stop." Dr. Amy, I disagree with your assertion that she goes back out of a need to be abused. She goes back out of a need to believe that she has a power to finally stop it. It looks crazy from the outside, and it is absolute delusion--but this (codependence), oddly, is her only source of self esteem.
The abused woman, I believe from experience, ironically feels a sense of control when she goes back. I also believe that we are acting out over and over the wish to believe in our mom and dad, if they were the original abuser and abused. We show our love to them, perversely, by becoming them.
I am happy that so many here get that none of this is about fault or blame. Obviously, we have to incarcerate dangerous people, to keep them from doing harm in society. But to believe that this is punishment that will redeem them is to miss the point. I am happy that so many here also get that forgiveness is not about staying in the line of fire--once the forgiveness comes from a healed, rather than raw and oozing place, it is simple empathy.
I think one of the saddest things we humans do is forget that a situation can be bad and harmful, without it being any one person's fault. Pinning the blame for generations of a pattern of abuse on the person currently acting out the symptoms is like ritual scapegoating. It is as if we believe that if we point the finger of condemnation at that person, very much like the "pods" in Invasion of the Body Snatchers, with a loud hiss and an outstretched arm, we will excise that one aberrant person, and it will be over. We have a society that is steeped in violence. Violence won't stop until we know how to heal every element that supports it.
"She goes back out of a need to believe that she has a power to finally stop it. It looks crazy from the outside, and it is absolute delusion--but this (codependence), oddly, is her only source of self esteem.:
That's an equally, if not more compelling explanation of what is going on. Significantly, it is a way of understanding the situation that doesn't place "blame," but, instead, offers an opportunity for ending the violent co-dependence.
"Using that leaked police photo from TMZ is an invasion of Rihanna's privacy, not to mention a cheap and transparent shock and awe tactic used for the purposes of boosting the wow factor of your blog."
Even if that were true, and it's not, you are simply shifting the focus away from the central issue onto a trivial issue. The central issue is the need that some women feel to return to an abuser. It's not "love," and it's not "forgiveness," it's a deep and dangerous need that victims of domestic violence must explore.
I don't care if you have taken it upon yourself to declare this an opportunity to educate the public. The fact of the matter is, most of us, especially the ones most vulnerable, have already seen what abuse looks like in the face of a friend or family member. Yes, Rihanna is a public figure and as such she gives up many rights to privacy that you and I enjoy. However, in this matter she is a victim. Do celebrities also give up victim's rights? Are there absolutely no limits? What about medical records? If she decides to speak out on this issue then more power to her. I find it sickening though that the public has decided to become judge and jury on this as if anyone is qualified to do so.
And please do not accuse me of being on the side of the abuser or discouraging a dialog on this issue. I am only pointing out what should be an obvious conclusion in a "civilized" society: Let Rihanna, the VICTIM, decide to what extent this issue should be in the public eye.
ur
Your right in your post, and you're wrong.
The wrong part is you make this look like the only one who does the abusing is the man. When you look at pictures like her's what you see is that men, in general, hit harder then women.
There are lots of women who abuse men. A lot more of it is emotional than physical which has more to do with muscle power than anything else but abuse is abuse. Look at the growing Cockold community.
The problem with female on male abuse is the injuries are not as bad and there is a point were men will say anything other than I was beat up by a woman.
We have violence centers for women. We have federal laws for violence against women. What is there for men? Until we decide it's just domestic violence and treat it all the same, we will always have it.
Other than that, you are right on target.
I disagree that victims' rights is a trivial issue.
And, your central issue should have been strong enough to stand on its own.
Your choice of subjects never ceases to amaze and educate me! And your writing is compelling. In Rihanna's case, I simply cry. We humans are so complex, and life for some is so tough. No matter what the reason, it is painful to contemplate the fate of so many women in the world today. And so many do not know the cause of their problems or how to rescue themselves, nor do they know the resources available. In many cases the resources are difficult or inadequate. It's tough. Thanks for posting this!
"The wrong part is you make this look like the only one who does the abusing is the man."
I didn't mean to leave the impression that abuse occurs only at the hands of men; I'm sorry if that is how it came across.
"Let Rihanna, the VICTIM, decide to what extent this issue should be in the public eye."
Why? How does it benefit Rihanna to allow her to hide the reality of domestic violence. Isn't that merely colluding with her to deny what is going on?
IF she returns to her boyfriend wouldn't we want to ask her ..
"why"......is he all of that and a bag of chips?...does she think she could never find anyone like him again?...does she not want HIM to find another relationship??...very multi-layered but in the end this adage still holds and agees with your post..with a change or two..
"Hit me once, shame on you.......Hit me twice..SHAME ON ME."
When the story of Rhianna and Brown broke I also heard she had a previous history of being in abusive relationships. I truly prayed someone in her family, friend or work associates would reach out to the beautiful and talented young woman NOW and help her preserve the good in her life before she destroys it herself through dangerous choices. No one did step forward and it appears she and Brown may have returned to the "old familiar habits" rather than seeking new and healthier ones, for Rhianna her behavior is known as the "Battered Woman Syndrome".
Both Brown and Rhianna need prayers and help to break a destructive cycle of domestic violence before it is too late and the damage can not longer be undone. Whether these two stay together as a couple or move on to other partners the harmful behaviors of domestic violence will follow both of these young people without serious counselling.
That said, abuse is an incredibly hard habit to break. Basically, you would be more on target to parallel Rihanna's incomprehensible choice here with that of a heroin abuser who has just overdosed, been brought to life, is released from the hospital and is getting high again within a few days.
The decision to return to an abuser/ abusive situation is upside-down frontal cortex functioning--something's not right there. As a doctor you have an opportunity to use your training and experience and intellect, to write a brilliantly insightful post on why women who know better, who are wealthy, beautiful, have resources, and no children with an abuser is yet returning--just as women who are in the opposite straits return.
If this is a serious question you raise, and I think it is, who better to turn it in on itself and do some deep-thinking and analysis than a doctor in medicine? The reasons women give for why they return have little to do with conscious reasoning, it's deep-seated, it's biochemical, it's complex brain functioning and ingrained neural pathways. Rihanna's example just points to the futility of looking at this issue in a simplistic and obvious manner. I hope someone can provide the sort of brilliant insight that this insidious disease deserves. Until then, we will all speculate and sit in judgment. And nothing will ever change.
"What I came up against was the violence was not just the problem of my assailant, it was my problem in the choices in men I was making. That was the key for me, "Why did I make those choices". A length period of counseling helped to unravel my own problems, and provide me with the clarity to make healthy choices about selecting a partner."
There it is, the truth, and very powerfully stated by someone who has been there.
"That said, abuse is an incredibly hard habit to break. Basically, you would be more on target to parallel Rihanna's incomprehensible choice here with that of a heroin abuser who has just overdosed, been brought to life, is released from the hospital and is getting high again within a few days."
It often seems that way, doesn't it?
There is one very big difference, though. Heroin addiction has a physical component, and all the insight in the world may not give a person the strength to deal with the physical component. In contrast, the key to escaping domestic violence (or avoiding it in the first place) is purely psychological. Commitment to therapy and to understanding one's own motivations can be enough to break the cycle.
"The only thing a free person "has coming" is access to their freedom, irrespective of their "bad decisions"."
You've missed the point. I'm not the one who thinks that Rihanna deserves to be beaten; Rihanna is the one who thinks she deserves to be beaten. I'm asking why SHE believes that.
"My point is, your words are the words of the abuser, and they have unintended consequences."
Really? Where's your evidence for those claims?
Domestic abuse organizations are going to have a really difficult time dealing with this situation. We can talk all we want about the victim and his/her reasons for returning to the relationship, but the unanswered question is all about the abuser. Prevailing opinion on the Rhianna situation is that she needs to walk away and not look back because he won't change for her. But the real question is whether we believe he can EVER change, for her or anyone else. Do we really think that abusers cannot be rehabilitated? Or is it possible to view the situation as similar to addiction - where a person is always in recovery, but can make progress to the point where they are trusted not to use again (despite the temptation). Or can a person be completely cured?
Incidentally, the lady who said that MLK "was asking for it", was not in favor of it. She was just using the language of abuse that was familiar to her. No one "asks for it" ever. Your conduct at all times should be as though she was not asking for it. The unintended consequence is that it may be perceived by others as less of a reason to help. That is bad influence for a good purpose.
You asked the question, "where is your proof", regarding the statement that it is language of the abuser. Part of the point is that it is not about you. An open-minded responsible, response would be, "I can see how that is possible". Or something of that nature. No matter how juicy and salacious, the problems remains centered around the victims. That is the first priority. Having something snappy to say about it is not always the best choice. Do no harm, Amy.
How do you know any of that? There are few known facts about what happened and yet you you jump to conclusions and use this blog to further your own men-are-evil agenda. We simply do not know what happened, and to say that what happened was undeserved and/or unprovoked is ridiculous. I've seen a woman, in sudden anger, pick up a bottle and smash it over a man's head from behind. Should he have just smiled and walked away, if he hadn't been crumpled on the ground with blood gushing from the wound? It's known that Rihanna threw a fit because another woman dared speak to Chris. How do you know that in a jealous rage, she didn't punch him in face? I know that if any woman did that to me, she'd get one right back. This nonsense that all situations are the same, and that woman can wreak violence and remain untouched is utter BS. The obviously posed in the worst possible way photo, doesn't show much more than a slap. Certainly not a punch to the face from a man twice her weight. If you want to further the cause of domestic abuse, stop jumping to man-hating conclusions and look at real instances of abuse where the facts are known. Then you have support from everybody.
""you're asking for it" is abuse pathology language."
Why are people so afraid of the truth?
The pathology is returning to an abuser, not the language used to describe it.
I don't think she deserves to be beaten. She thinks she deserves to be beaten. Pointing that out in no way means that she does deserve it.
"How do you know any of that?"
That's easy to answer. ANY TIME a man beats a woman about the face, the attack was BY DEFINITION undeserved, unprovoked, and completely outside the bounds of civilized behavior.
She won't get it, but that does not excuse you for the ignorance of your post. A lot of study has gone into the psychology of the abused and the abuser, and even with all that information easily available, your article still manages to perpetuate myth.
As for Rihanna, it's not her job to be the poster child for the abused. Her life is her life to live, not for the public to pick apart, analyze and criticize. Eventually she may come to the realization that Chris Brown isn't going to change, that all her dreams of a peaceful life with him will never come true, but none of the commentary--particularly false-to-fact commentary--is going to bring that day any sooner.
"A lot of study has gone into the psychology of the abused and the abuser, and even with all that information easily available, your article still manages to perpetuate myth."
What myth? It's a well accept psychological theory that women return to abusers to meet their own pathological needs.
There's also something very odd in suggesting that "There is no verbal or behavioral provocation so great that it merits physical punishment of adults, let alone adults in an emotional relationship." in a week when we've also seen a teenage girl brutalized by a police officer (supposedly an upholder of our laws) for having a minor tantrum, and we know that this officer will face no real punishment for his actions, like the dozens of others we see across the year. Until society holds all of it's members to some minimum standards for what merits violence, it seems unreasonable to expect people to be able to teach this lesson.
I was raised in and around chaos and violence and for that reason, I have educated myself and all of the different factors, psychological, social, economic, biochemical, physical, behavioral, cognitive, etc. and it is just understood that you can't single out any one factor of human behavior especially in regards to compulsively self-destructive behavior and not recognize that there is a lot more going on then a wealthy, successful woman going back to her boyfriend and asking: "will you please beat me again? please?"
It is widely known that Rihanna's father was a cocaine addict and alcoholic and that this created marital and family problems--of which Rihanna doesn't go into detail, but drug abuse in the home isn't a bed of roses. Parents divorced and by her teens Rihanna is known to be a partier and promiscuous.
If the question is about why Rihanna might make such a frontal cortex error regarding the return to an abusive environment the answer no more lies in the 'purely psychological' than it lies in the clouds around in the sky.
You are right about the solution commitment to therapy and insight into one's own motivations. Absolutely. But how do you get someone in that mindset to commit to their well-being? THat's where the question is.
Listen guys -- if your dad didn't tell you that, let ME. Although it is inexcusable for anyone to hit anyone else, it is NOT SELF-DEFENSE if your 105 lb girlfriend slaps you, and you respond by beating the crap out of her to the degree that she can't appear at a public concert. I think it is essential to note in this situation that Rihanna is a star who was set to appear at an important awards ceremony in just a couple of hours; the assault was clearly planned to make her performance in public impossible.
Lots of times rambunctious toddlers and small children hit or slap their parents. This should not entitle a parent to beat and slug a small child. It's proportionality, and basic decency -- you don't beat up on people who are physically smaller than yourself.
People have mentioned the societal pressure for the victim to return to her abuser. I think they are missing some points. First off, I think most adult female victims like Rihanna are actually being pressured to LEAVE, not to stay and forgive. The question perhaps ought to be why they refuse to listen to the many family and friends who want so badly to protect them.
I see a couple of factors here: Many people come from a bible-believing, Church-led background that has forgiveness as one of its chief dogmas. Forgiving your attacker makes you feel "Christian" and like you are doing the right thing, being right in God's eyes. There is also a motif of sacrifice; forgiving DESPITE the pain and fear...in other situations, this would make you heroic in stature.
There is also the social stigma, very high in the black community, of not wanting to be a "bee-yotch" -- a rude, mean, aggressive woman whose type is relentlessly ridiculed on the media (think of Madea). If you want to think of yourself as feminine, charming, lovable....then you will go a long way not to be the "bitch", the ugly complaining jealous woman who is emphatically NOT lovable.
In the black community again, there is are powerful media images and role models of successful strong women....WHO END UP ALONE...and often childless. Think of Oprah Winfrey, Condoleeza Rice, etc. Rich, powerful, respected -- sexless and alone. This can make a young woman feel her choice is not "dump the abuser, find a nice guy" but "be a strong minded bee-yotch, and you'll end up a lonely woman".
Of course, there are white women and other minorities who feel these things, but it is especially strong in the black community.
Another factor, lightly touched on here, is that many men (of all races and backgrounds) feel very strongly that they have the right to discipline an ADULT WOMAN COMPANION as if she was a child. They have been enculturated to feel their role as a man -- provider, authority figure, bigger, stronger -- also makes them sort of a guardian, or parental type. Therefore a woman who "misbehaves" -- who sasses you back, who criticizes you in public, who embarrasses you in ANY way...or who has somehow slacked off in terms of cooking, cleaning, childcare, or her appearance....that woman has HUMILIATED YOU and your rage at humiliation becomes the license to hit. When the victim returns, head down, forgiving you, maybe begging YOU TO FORGIVE HER (for being a bee-yotch), then the cycle is complete, the man in once again in a position of authority, the balance is restored.
I think most of us, if not all, get a great deal of this from the parent-child dynamic, even if our parents did not engage in any physical abuse between themselves. After all parents do have the right in our society to physically discipline children, and set standards for their behavior, and often physical discipline is used to control non-physical misbehavior -- spanking a child who sasses you. We accept corporal punishment -- many speak out to defend it -- but it isn't often talked about as a catalyst and model for adult-on-adult abuse patterns, which I firmly believe it is.
The most success we have as a society is when we directly confront abusers, even if the victims are silent and forgiving. This is what works in domestic abuse, and it works in date abuse cases like this one: we must prosecute the abuser, because the victim often will not. Chris Brown must go to jail and his sentence should be comparable to that of anyone who got into a bar fight, or roughed up a neighbor. In other words, we should not go lightly on him because this was his "bitchy girlfriend", or because she's a rich performer who can (supposedly) afford bodyguards.
Lastly, I'd like to leave you with something my ex-husband said, 20 years ago, as he walked out the door on our 10 year+ marriage: he told me "I'd really like to hit you....BUT, you are just the type of woman who would call the police!"
He intended to hurt me with that statement, but actually it's the biggest compliment he ever paid me.
"Another factor, lightly touched on here, is that many men (of all races and backgrounds) feel very strongly that they have the right to discipline an ADULT WOMAN COMPANION as if she was a child."
The "right" to beat one's wife has been a prominent feature of almost every culture that has ever existed. Indeed, the right to MURDER her (honor killings) is still accepted in many parts of the world.
Until relatively recently, most women had no choice but to go back to a man who beat them. In most places in the world today, a woman has no choice but to go back to a man who beats her.
What's remarkable is that even when some women do have the opportunity to leave, they go back.
Today this violence is against the law. This gives us a helpful model to offer intervention to help stop the progressive arc of domestic violence. Rihanna is the victim of a crime, not just twisted love. In the state of New Jersey where I live, the police are mandated to press charges against the batterer and offer the victim advocacy services for her or his safety. When I am that advocate, I show the victim something called the Power and Control Wheel. It details how relationships tilt toward violence in specific areas and stages. First the abuser may use: threats and intimidation; attempt to isolate the victim; control all the money; the children as pressure points; harm pets or damage valued objects. Next comes humiliation and other emotional abuse. Last is physical abuse, perpetuated by an attacker who has been emboldened by the green light of permission he thinks he has been granted by a victim incapable of stopping the downward spiral. Remember that the victim is continually told that she has caused and deserves this treatment. And even though a relationship may not seem of long enough duration to run through all these cycles, the abuser is masterful in seizing control early and degrading his victim with the skills of a matador. Survival instincts kick in for the victim, but rational thinking about her self and the situation is often blurred.
Like many abusers, Chris Brown may offer heartfelt apologies and flowers. A diamond engagement ring may soon sparkle on Rihanna's hand. But the gift she needs most is a gift he can't give her--counseling to understand that healthy love doesn't turn violent, but criminals often do.
Our daughters, mothers, and grandmothers need to see how they have been conditioned to accept an act that society deems a crime. There's nothing "nice" about being battered. There is nothing nice about excusing it. If you are lucky enough to survive domestic violence, forgiving it ensures that another victim will take your place. That act of violence is then on your conscience, no matter how 'conditioned' it is.
I believe that many things in our society contribute to making these types of situations worse, not the least of which being our recent tendency towards anti-intellectualism. Ugh! Smart people bad! Ugh-ugh! The thuggish, uneducated persona that the media seems to love so much is truly damaging to males and females of all walks of life. One of the behaviors this image suppresses in us is self awareness; not so much the awareness of how we present ourselves to the outside world (it actually enhances that) but the awareness of who we are and our mental health.
I'm unusually self aware; being told at six that you're genetically predisposed towards certain psychological disorders (and developing a few of them) can do that. I know how my mind works, I know how it works with my medications and I know when things start to change.
Most people do not have the benefit of understanding how they think. The little bit of psychology we're taught in high school is hardly more than a history of the field. While history is important, it isn't actual psychology. However, I think that knowing some basic human psychology (how we think, what neural pathways are, how they work and how we can change them) can help people to be more self aware if taught in the proper manner.
Being self aware, knowing how our minds work, how we think and why we act, can help us figure out if something has gone wrong before it's too late. I'm an educator, and though I teach toddlers, I'm quite aware of the difference education can make. I spend eight hours a day trying to teach pure energy how to exist in society. With every new word they learn, with every choice I see them consciously make (do I bite my friend for the car or use my words?), I'm seeing the building blocks of a new personality. I KNOW education can make a difference.
The question is: when does it come too late?
"It details how relationships tilt toward violence in specific areas and stages. First the abuser may use: threats and intimidation; attempt to isolate the victim; control all the money; the children as pressure points; harm pets or damage valued objects. Next comes humiliation and other emotional abuse. Last is physical abuse, perpetuated by an attacker who has been emboldened by the green light of permission he thinks he has been granted by a victim incapable of stopping the downward spiral..."
Understanding this progression is incredibly important. Severe physical abuse does not happen when someone "loses control." It is part of a pattern of behavior. It does not stop after the abuser apologizes, and it does not stop when the abused woman goes back to him. It can only be stopped when both parties make their effort to understanding why they do what they do.
"Being self aware, knowing how our minds work, how we think and why we act, can help us figure out if something has gone wrong before it's too late."
That can make all the difference in the world.
This is something I've read a little about. It seems that humans in general resist change, even when change would be better. So, for someone who grew up in a abusive/violent/unhealthy environment, it is actually EASIER (psychologically) to seek out the same kind of environment that you are used to than to seek out a better one. It's not a conscious thing, of course, but a sub-conscious pull to situations and people you are used to, that you are comfortable with, even when that is violent/unhealthy. The fear of the unknown is a powerful force, and when you are completely unaware that you're allowing your past experiences to dictate your future "choices" in mates etc., then you are pretty much destined to keep repeating it.
Hmm, so how exactly is it that you know exactly what a "slap" looks like on a woman's face, versus a punch or two? Because I've grown up seeing it, and I find it rather unlikely that the damage pictured above is the result of "just a slap." Considering that the damage shows up on both sides of her face and mouth, I find it quite hard to believe that it came from a single slap. In fact, I've been slapped by a man more than twice my weight (my step-dad) and it was hard enough to bust my lip, but I still looked nothing like Rihanna does in this picture (and I have pale, ivory skin, which makes every little bruise/blemish very noticeable). And how is shooting a picture straight on somehow done to make it look the "worst" it can? Would you prefer some make-up and creative lighting to make it look "nicer"? Well, too fucking bad. Covering it up isn't helping anyone (except for the abusers).
I will agree with you that there are situations where a man can defend himself against a woman...I most definitely do NOT believe that a man should NEVER hit a woman. I hate hearing stories of a man getting hit over the head with a frying pan in what was only verbal argument up to that point, and then pushing the woman down to avoid being hit again, and then HE is the one who has charges filed against him. I think that is BS. But if a woman embarrasses you, sasses back, or even slaps you, that does NOT call for a few punches to the face!
I know of women who, as you advocate, courageously left abusive relationships and rebuilt their lives admirably. On the other hand, I know one who woman who was beaten and hospitalized by her alcoholic husband then went back to him to help him conquer his demons. He is still fraught with guilt over what he did over 15 years ago, but the two of them have rebuilt their lives and I can only applaud their accomplishments.
Rhianna may very well be walking right back into her abusive partner’s fist. Or she may not. I personally cannot judge her actions and cannot understand why so many people feel otherwise.
I have messaged you some material I requested from the Support Network for Battered Women (snbw.org). I hope you will read it and make the appropriate corrections. It would be helpful to survivors and future survivors everywhere.
I'm not buying it. You can deliver a baby and diagnose whether someone's able to conceive. Let that not somehow delude you into thinking you are the next generation of Dr. Phil.
This was offensive. How dare you suggest that someone's socio-economic status overrides their capacity to deal with a subject so complex as abuse.
Let me play Doctor in your light. "Female circumcision curtails promiscuity"
I did, of course, take some psychology
Women, by the way, should not wear mini skirts, or they may be raped.
I agree with Dr. Amy about telling kids not to accept domestic violence. One of my mother's stories is about my grandparents. My grandfather was an alcoholic, my grandmother ironed people's clothes for a living. My grandfather came in, drunk, and said he wanted his lunch. When he didn't get it, he said, "Woman, you want me to beat you?" And my grandmother picked up one of her irons off the coals and said, "Come ahead. I'll change your face so your own mother won't recognize you." He decided to eat out.
My grandparents were poor, uneducated lower class people from El Salvador, and my life is lightyears away from theirs. I've never had to change anyone's face, because I was innoculated as a small child against domestic violence. The one time someone pushed me, I packed up and left for good that night. It works to tell your kids.
It's not that I think it's motivated by any kind of malice. Domestic abuse is a frustrating problem that's difficult to solve, and we'd all be better off if the victims could regularly be persuaded to leave their abusers.
But it's not always that simple, and even in the case of the wealthy and famous, domestic violence is caught up in problems of power and emotional dominance.
I don't know the specifics of Rihanna's relationship and neither does the author. But that domestic violence could happen to someone independently wealthy should be strong evidence that the problem isn't nearly so simple.
Blaming the victim is a simple answer to a complex question, and it's the wrong one.
"Why are people so bothered by it? Are women such fragile babies that nobody can tell us to take responsibility for ourselves? Why is this particular type of self-destructive behavior special, so no one is allowed to say "you must be getting something out of it, whatever that is."
Unfortunately, some people seem to think that being supportive of battered women means supporting ANY choice that they make. They imply that abused women are child-like, incapable of acting as moral agents, and incapable of being active in their own lives.
We're never going to solve the problem of domestic violence unless we acknowledge and address the fact that domestic violence in the problem of BOTH partners. That's not because a woman in a violent relationship deserves to be beaten; it's because women who stay in violent relationships have an emotional need for those relationships.
It is impossible in for women in violent relationships to change the men. Anyone who beats a woman about the face is going to do it again; allowing a woman to pretend otherwise is counterproductive. Women in violent relationships can only change themselves. They must get away, period. There is no healthy way to rationalize or justify anything else.
Women who choose to return to violent relationship are unhealthy and we should shout that out loud and clear.
"Blaming the victim is a simple answer to a complex question, and it's the wrong one."
And pretending that asking women to take responsibility for their own actions is "blaming the victim" accomplishes nothing. In fact, it is worse than nothing, because it deliberately diverts attention from the real pathology.
You can pretend all you want the domestic violence is a "man's problem" but that won't make it so, and it won't help a single woman avoid a single beating. Only getting away makes it stop.
If these women were in any kind of condition where that's the easy, rational response, they wouldn't get into abusive relationships in the first place. You're applying the standards of a normal, psychologically healthy person to victims who are anything but.
To use an extreme example, we wouldn't blame a habitual self-mutilator for being sent to a mental hospital. We wouldn't say, "it's all his fault. If he'd just stop hurting himself he never would have got in this mess." The man is sick. He doesn't make rational choices. We can't act like his decision to cut himself up is the product of a thorough, rational decision-making process.
The pathology of victimhood in domestic violence is similar. The decision to stay with an abusive partner isn't made by a rational mind that carefully weighs the facts. These people are psychologically damaged. For many of them, it goes back to serious problems in childhood.
I agree. Abused *should* leave their abusers. In many cases, they don't. The problem I have with this post is its tone of complacent simplicity. You're converting the choir. Perhaps an abused does feel some type of pyschological need to be abused. Most addicts don't use because they have no other options. They just are unable to see them. Judgement becomes clouded under any kind of psychological duresse. I'd suggest that an abuse victim returns hoping that one day the abuser will love them enough to stop beating them.
Of course, I know that rarely happens. Hell, you're an MD, you know that rarely happens. However, I would invite you to write yourself a prescription for 20mg of oxycodone and take it regularly for four months daily.
And then write a blog telling yourself you should stop.
And then wonder why the hell you just don't.
"The pathology of victimhood in domestic violence is similar. The decision to stay with an abusive partner isn't made by a rational mind that carefully weighs the facts. These people are psychologically damaged. For many of them, it goes back to serious problems in childhood."
That's precisely my claim.
But the claim is wrong. Here, from Salon's own Broadsheet is a the far less mythological viewpoint:
http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2007/06/11/abuse/
And quoting from the OUPBlog linked to the Broadsheet article:
http://blog.oup.com/2007/06/violence/
"Because women have such ready access to rights and resources in liberal democratic societies, it is widely assumed that if abusive relationships endure, it is because women choose to stay, a decision that seems counterintuitive for a reasonable person. The logical explanation is that women who make this choice are deficient psychologically or in some other respect. Yet researchers have failed to discover any psychological or background traits that predispose any substantial group of women to enter or remain in abusive relationships. Battered women do suffer disproportionately from a range of psychological and behavioral problems, including some, like substance abuse and depression, that increase their dependence and vulnerability to abuse and control. As we will see momentarily, however, these problems only become disproportionate in the context of ongoing abuse and so cannot be its cause…"
Anyone who has ever been in an abusive relationship can tell you that an ultimately abusive partner starts out being loving, nurturing, generous and protective--essentially, a dream come true. The process of abuse will destroy even the most "normal" person--no one seeks out an abusive relationship, but once entrapped in one, getting out is very hard to do.
For me, the key to leaving was the understanding that none of the abuse was about me. Period. I could've been anyone, and he'd have done (and, as a matter of fact, did) the very same things. (He never hit me, although he did throw things. Having broken a prior girlfriend's jaw and realizing that physical violence could cost him his license to practice law, he stuck to extreme emotional and verbal abuse.)
I like the analogy with oxycodone. Maybe there is some aspect of addiction or habit that's important for the abused woman to understand. Substance abusers also accept gradually worsening conditions, a progressively greater proportion of suffering to pleasure. What I know about drunks and addicts is that they don't stop because you gently try to compensate for their unfortunate childhoods. They stop when they decide to, generally when they hit their bottom. All you can do is refuse to enable.
The fact that there is an abuser seems to be obscuring the fact of a woman's responsibility to herself and her kids. Yeah, he's a monster, he should be locked up, just like that white powder should be flushed. But given that he exists, that she has a strong and toxic relationship with him, what ought she to do?
There's nothing wrong with discussing this topic at length, but all the sympathy in the world from those of us not in abusive relationships isn't going to protect a woman from a man's fist. I once got a midnight call from a friend whose husband beat her up in front of a bar and left her there. Apparently, this was their pattern--they get drunk, he beats her, she wears extra makeup to work, until the next time. I hopped in my car and took her home. I called her the next day and said it was the last time, if she ever got drunk again with her husband, do not call me. Maybe this nudge helped, maybe she'd had enough, but she kicked him out.
As Dr. Tuteur points out, this is a situation where the usual factors are not an issue. Rihanna isn't married to Chris Brown, she has no children, she has plenty of money, she can hire bodyguards, her career won't be hurt by her leaving him, and her family doesn't want her to go back to Brown (but are supportive of her either way).
This is the ideal situation to study, because it's one of the few in which the cause can be isolated. Yet posters keep trying to glob back on those factors that we know can be removed in this situation. That's not helpful.
Gosh, I have to point this out. You speak about the psychological form of addiction as though it's mere peanuts compared to a physical addiction. I beg to differ. Psychological addictions are always physiological in nature and require time and work to rectify. Just off the top of my head, I'm imagining the cocktail of neurotransmitters and hormones saturating Rihanna's brain in response to what she believes is true love. For example, there is the bonding hormone, Oxytocin, that is released during orgasm. It bonds a woman to her lover the same way a mother is bonded to her child. It's the same hormone. That's just the beginning. I'm sure serotonin and dopamine are involved as well.
You are right that therapy is a way to break a psychological addiction, especially a deeply rooted one that was formed in childhood, but you're gravely mistaken if you think someone can walk into therapy, snap their fingers, and walk out cured of their psychological problem. "Understanding one's own motivations" can be a monumental task and may involve YEARS of therapy to resolve. It's a philosophical and existential journey to reorganize the internal mechanisms of the Self.