Los adjuntos

Quite apart from these experiences of chaotically abusive communication from/with their partners, many women also described communication with others, for instance family, friends and support agencies which was similarly variable. Sometimes this took a positive form, with the women experiencing acceptance, belief and support, thus ratifying their victimization and legitimizing their rights to assistance. Angie notes, for instance, that her abuser’s mother had no hesitation in accepting her claims of violence from her son, a validation that was hugely reassuring. As she recalls,

I spoke to his mum once about it and she actually saw my body, you know, it was just covered in bruises this particular day and she said to me “you leave that mongrel bastard now” (Angie).

In other instances though this was far from the case, with most noting at least one instance of deeply damaging negative communication – sometimes of the ‘direct’ type recommended by Scheff. What can also be seen as happening here is the ratification and legitimization of their partner’s rights to abuse them. Angie again provides a clear example as she describes telling her father about leaving her partner, to be met with the comment “well if you weren’t such a bitch to live with he wouldn’t have left you”, a clear indication of who he felt was to blame for the abuse within that particular relationship. In other examples, with similarly negative results, Anita and Julie recall efforts to gain help and support from their partners’ families.

I had to make sure I was home, before he got home. Because, if I didn’t, that would guarantee a hiding and I had to have the washing and everything done, and a meal almost on the table. Now if he came home and the washing machine was going, or the dryer, or even the hair dryer…or because I was prettying myself

up, or drying my hair, that would be disturbing for him. And I discussed it with his mother and she, you know her advice to me? “Well, he listens to a chainsaw all day, so the last thing he wants to hear when he gets home is another machine, so Anita, get your shit squared away, and don’t have a machine going when he’s home” (Anita).

I went to his family for help – Can anybody help me? You know, and the sun shined out of his arse and he was a real little, you know, he was the good-guy, [they said] you must be getting something from him. They blamed you for a lot. “He wasn’t like that before” That’s all that they wanted to see. That I … he’s got a big family, he’s got step-brothers and sisters. I went to each family member and I think that there would have been about eighteen brothers and sisters. So one particular sister, whose got a Dutch husband – she’s really nice, but I stopped going there for a couple of months because she said “well, you must be doing something, because he’s not like that, my brother” So I said well that’s fine. And she wondered why I stopped going there (Julie).

Many participants also noted instances where more passive, indirect responses from others served to de-legitimize their claims of abuse or stave off requests for help and support. Despite this lack of direct communication or engagement, these women clearly understood the meaning of what was being conveyed to them. These instances frequently took the form of others accepting at face value threadbare and unlikely explanations for bruising or injuries, as April and Rachael recall;

I could make some fantastic stories up! Write them all down. What I don’t get is how my parents didn’t know about it. I mean if my daughter came home covered in the bruises that I had – the amount of doors I walked into! They didn’t think twice about it. Maybe they just didn’t want to know. I remember once I had like this massive bruise down one shoulder and my arm, and I went to the doctor and told him I’d been robbed outside an ATM machine. I mean how stupid is that? (April).

I went to the doctor’s a few times but I made excuses about what my cuts and bruises and stuff were from. Even said that I’d been in a pub fight. Oh…and one time I had a jug of hot water poured on me and that was just my own clumsiness I told them. So that was, yeah…I don’t think they believed me but… (Rachael).

Unsurprisingly then, communication, especially direct and honest communication, was not a strategy easily embraced by participants. As the excerpts above illustrate, the results from such open and frank communication were unpredictable at best. Many women also described instances in which such a form of communication with their partners or even some outsiders had the potential to be massively dangerous. This is clearly illustrated by Ruby as she describes the result of attempting to obtain legal protection from her partner.

I’d had a order taken out on [husband]. And when the man came to serve it, and I said to [bailiff] ‘he’s coming around the corner’, and he said ‘well, you go inside I’ll do it out here’. And I went in and I was sitting at the table with

[daughter] I think, and he [husband] walked in and just slammed my face into the table. I consequently ended up with broken bones in my face (Ruby).

As Ruby’s experience suggests, in some cases the idea of approaching others for help was an extremely hazardous move and for many women discussion of resolutions to the violence such as separation, therapy or legal intervention with their abusers was, at best, a very frightening prospect. This was a fear backed sometimes with very clear

understanding of potential consequences. Communication in instances such as these was generally crystal clear to all members of the family. As Nancy recalls,

we were always told, don’t think you can ever bring the Police into this house because if you do that’ll be the end of your lives. And I think that my daughter really felt that that was as extreme, that, as it, where it was going if she did bring the cops back in that she wouldn’t live that day, or the rest of that day (Nancy).

Some women faced additional complications in attempting to communicate with others outside the relationship. For Laura the process of obtaining help escaping an intensely violent relationship was made even more complex because the couple lived with his family and she was employed in her partner’s family business, making planning and secrecy of paramount importance. Here she describes frightened conversations with a friend who’d offered assistance.

I said ‘I can’t do that. They just wouldn’t let me do that. I can’t do that, can’t you see, I can’t just walk out of that house because they’ll have me’ and it literally was an escape. We had to time it to the second when nobody would be around so that I could get away. So we planned it to the nth degree. What time of the day he had to come and pick me up so that I could escape. And with one little bag full of undies, one change of clothes, I walked out of that house and I was scared for weeks that I would be found….the whole journey and for weeks after I was afraid for my life that I would be found (Laura).

Secrecy around their escape was something noted by most of the women, with some also requiring Police assistance because they were terrified of the consequences should their partner become aware of their plans. Communication for these women was a virtual impossibility, entailing what was to them a life-threatening potential. Theresa took the opportunity to run when her husband left for work the morning after a particularly violent incident. As she recalls,

He lost it - totally - mentally, and I just couldn't take any more. And that's when I ended up in the Refuge - got the Police and that. Because I just said he's got guns and things and I just can't take any more of that, you know. And, I mean, the kids had to be hidden, taken to school and picked up and that. He was really quite - he was going to take them to Australia and things like that….. I had to [go to Refuge] because there was, he had guns and things. Had to have the guns taken off him - he tried to shoot me and things like that (Theresa).

In summary then, communication for these women was a far more nuanced, complex and fluid concept than that described within Scheff’s framing. Even in its most commonsense meaning, as a description of everyday verbal interaction, communication was problematic for most participants. Most frequently, communication within their relationships was primarily reduced to a one way process, an ongoing flow of directives, criticism and abuse from their partners. It was, for them, often impossible to engage in open and direct communication with their partners. More often they found themselves forced into

secretive, evasive forms of communication in order to preserve the safety of themselves and their children. Most understood the risks involved in direct communication, with their abuser or to others about the abuse, with many requiring absolute secrecy to make their escape. Almost as difficult was communication with others outside the abusive relationship. Most experienced at least one instance of being disbelieved or having their appeals for assistance and support pushed aside or dismissed. All experienced receiving clear, if not always explicitly spoken, communication that they were somehow to blame for their victimization.