elbows
Well-Known Member
Domestic violence *is* different to other violence. It comes with a large helping of long term emotional abuse, control and a fundamental context that make it hard for the victim to escape. DV is a particular kind of evil, and common enough - let's not diminish it by claiming any physical assault on a woman is dv. It isn't.
The phrase 'abuse of intimacy' sprung to mind when I read that.
What happened - and exactly what happened is yet to be determined - but if you take a worst case scenario, what happened was bad enough in its own right. It doesn't need hyperbole.
Yes. It's not just issues of hyperbole here though, its what happens when this sort of thing is seen as political violence. I am not well read on political violence or whether there are any well-known theories about where boundaries often sit regarding things like attempts to justify the violence. All I know is there are some obvious and not terribly controversial examples where we would tend to find people celebrating the footsoldiers of certain specific political movements getting a good hiding. Away from these more obvious examples where plenty of people are prepared to assume that people will cheer, for examples, fascists who were looking for trouble finding it and losing, or violent resistance to state violence, I dont see all that much routine discussion about where people set the limits. I assume people must have earnest discussions about this when deciding whether their campaign/movement should distance itself from the violent incident and what support, if any, to provide those facing legal action over events. But I've never been privy to such a discussion myself, and am quite ignorant.