this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
913 points (96.5% liked)
Memes
1479 readers
2 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
While I did, originally, post my comment with the word 'beating', I edited it within 30 seconds after my 'wait a minute, better check that' routine kicked in.
Please note the word 'abusing'.
I made that edit in under a minute of originally posting this.
You made your reply approximately 3 hours later.
...
Abuse is often more than just physical impacting a person with some object.
Screaming, shouting, persistent gaslighting or threats... forcing spouses into sexual acts they don't want to have, etc etc.
If you wanna stick to ... Brigham Young University, named after a polygamist child-rapist domestic terrorist cult leader, whose cult persists today via massive gaslighting of its adherents and doctrinal denial of its historical past... some asshole who works at the 'Polygraph' Institute, a private, for profit 'college', mainly dedicated to training people how to use a nearly entirely scientifically discredited form of accurately detecting lying...
Go right ahead.
I'll stick to 40% being an accurate number for physical and non physical domestic abuse.
You can keep licking the boot if that's what you're in to.
...
I used to work for a DV shelter.
We accepted women, and families, who were never physically attacked... all the goddamned time.
I suggest you reevaluate your username.
It uses language coherently so im gonna guess prosecutor or fed. Your guess?
Edit:The way it disguises its bullshit to lie with facts and opportunistically abuses ambiguities and meaningless bullshit nobody would even notice, like the post timings, has me leaning hard to prosecutor. Even the slimiest fed wouldn't be that good at re-narrativizing shit. So strange to catch a vile thing like that in the wild.
As well as their alt account, Saryn.
Look at the rest of this comment thread if you haven't already.
EDIT:
It's funny, they're like... using some of the vocab and phrases of like a rabid tankie or shitlib, but they're clumsy with it.
Like they think they're going to basically shame/intimidate me into ... just completely flipping on, or abandoning my position.
Shit works better with a captive, in person audience, with credible threats of violence or deprevation, lol.
Saryn... Isnt that the name of the 'positioned as your rival, actually been a husk for years' antagonist of the first 'mass effect' game? And isn't your character especially in the first game sort of an autonomous cop?
Dang, I haven't played ME1 in ages, but ... yes, but its spelled 'Saren'.
I know right? Almost long enough for me to forget how fucking grindy it was.
And i read some of it's stuff. Yeah. 'Denatured tankie' and 'denatured shitlib' are definitely in the style.
Gotta appropriate and debase the language to achieve full orwellian dominance.
Less language more patterns and values. It's neat to see in such a safe sterile form, where even it knows we wont believe its threats.
I suggest you don't parrot bullshit alarmist statistics in service of your ACAB narrative. When the narrative takes priority over the facts, you stop being someone worth taking seriously.
This is also straight-up false. The figure in that survey didn't come from the participants' definition of "abuse", but from the surveyors creating their own nonsense definition of domestic violence, that not only includes singular acts no reasonable person would classify as domestic violence, but treated relationships where it was the cop committing the 'domestic violence', and where the cop was the recipient of the act(s), identically.
Imagine telling a cop whose spouse is abusive to him that they "freely admitted to abusing" the spouse, because that ridiculous survey just put all of the relationships containing their criteria into the 'domestic violence bucket'.
You're just a bigot rationalizing the propagation of bad data.
Bottom line: If that figure wasn't bullshit, it would have been replicated in the FORTY YEARS since it came out. You are literally using the same tactics as people who claim vaccines cause autism, based on desperate clinging to that one study by Wakefield that was completely debunked decades ago.
Who do you think you're kidding? You don't believe that raising one's voice ONE TIME to one's SO is enough to consider one a 'domestic abuser'. Nobody believes that.
You know what I wrote. You very conveniently, and very deliberately, left off the 'single instance' part on purpose. Your disingenuousness is pathetic, especially when the evidence of your strawmanning is right there in black and white, just above your comment. You should be ashamed.
Funny way to end a comment chock full of denial and narrative-clinging, despite the actual data. Only one of us is letting their personal biases take precedence over the facts, and it's not me.
Please don't hurt me officer.
I'll do whatever you say, just please don't hurt me.
So, just gonna let you know, ... I presume Mr. ObjectivityIncarnate... you got so emotionally charged in your response that you both began and ended your raging rant here with the same quote... I didn't realize it would trigger you that hard, you being all objective and such.
I guess this way come as a shock to you, but abusive relationships can often go both ways.
Further, back in the 90s, the terms 'domestic violence' and 'spousal abuse'/'abusive relationship' ... they were not as well defined as they are now, 35 years later.
Which is again why I used the word 'abused', which, in the context of psychology terminology, is in fact broad enough to encompass that 40% stat, while the modern term 'domestic violence' is not.
Its good to try and use as objective terms as possible, yes?
Now ... you've again exposed that this is an emotional issue for you, by being the first in this conversation to name call me, ad hom me.
A bigot? Really?
Am I bigotted against police?
Are you offended by my objectively correct characterization of Brigham Young and Mormons?
... Are you a Mormon Cop, lol?
Oh my goodness, all caps, like you're trying to scream at me through the screen...
Maybe not one single time, but yeah my threshold for getting screamed at by someone is very, very close to one, after having been raised in such an abusive family environment that I now have (C)PTSD. Never got physically beat, but, as I said, there are many other ways to be abusive.
A lot of those women I helped get into DV shelters are of the same opinion.
......
... You also seem really hung up on this 'single instance' thing.
Yeah, a single instance of abuse... is abuse, a single instance of it.
Do... does abuse ... only count to you... if someone does it a certain number of times?
Like if I punch you in the face just once, that isn't battery, but if I do it, I dunno, 8 times... now it counts as abuse?
I suggest you inhale and exhale, slowly, 3 times, hold each breathe as long as you can... helps me calm doen when I'm having a PTSD flashback, also just generally works with anyone to help recenter yourself, calms you down.
Projection.
There isn't even a single exclamation point in my response to you. I emphasized a few things in all caps instead of italics only because it was easier to do on the input method I was using at the time. But, as you did in the rest of what you wrote in response to me, narrative (in this case, 'this cop-worshipping bootlicker is contradicting me, how dare they') comes first, then you try to squeeze everything you see into a structure that fits that narrative. Classic 'I didn't mean to cut him off, honest mistake' vs. 'that guy cut me off because he's an inconsiderate piece of shit' duality.
He destroyed you and you're in toxic denial.
Or rather, he didn't destroy you - he just refuted and debunked your claims with well reasoned arguments and knowledge.
Thing is: anyone with some experience in sociology (and a modicum of critical faculties) will immediately doubt the notion that 40% of cops (or most any other group of people for that matter) abuse their partners. That's just not how humans work. We know because we've studied ourselves literally millions of times.
You'll get over it. But much more important than that - hopefully realize that intellectual honesty is exactly what we need in times such as ours.
Cops are more likely to score higher on PPI scores than the average person.
PPI meaning Psycopathic Personal Inventory. There are different exact variants of this test, but they're all a long series of questions asked by psychologists to assess and score how much of a psycopath someone is.
Roughly one third of all Americans have been in an abusive relationship at least once in their lives... and its often the case that people who have been in one, end up being in multiple.
Again, where 'abusive' has a broader definition than just physical assault or rape.
Which... it does, in psychology.
So uh... 40% of cops abusing their partners isn't really ludicruously, implausibly higher than that number for the total population.
Abusive relationships are unfortunately quite common and even generally normalized in much of society.
I could throw a bunch of links to papers at you, but, seeing as they are easily websearchable, I don't feel the need to.
...
Also, you have a fairly sparse comment history, and those comments are ... oddly timed, typically occuring in bursts, seperated by weeks or months.
So... either you have a very, very strange engagement pattern with lemmy, just by chance...
Or you are an alt account.
Which would be especially ironic as using an alt account to pose as another random person who suddenly drops in to what had up to this point been a one on one discussion... is a very disingenuous, manipulative thing to do... you know, like something an abusive person would do?
No amount of rationalization or intellectualization is going to change the basic facts of the matter.
I don't have an alt account on lemmy or anywhere else for that matter. I actually work for a living. And it's related to sociology, which is how I know you are talking out of your a**.
You are delusional and hardcoping. Get out more. You don't need to be "right" as much as you think you do. In fact, no amount of being "right" will ever come close to the benefits of being wrong. As long as you realize them.
Best of luck, friend.
I'm sure it does.