Sunday, March 15, 2009

Did you leave your brains on your desk, or was it bashed out?

Online editor of Straits Times, Joanne Lee, wrote such a stupid, moronic piece of goondu (silly) junk that left me aghast and disgusted.

Appalled to be precise. First I have politicians who claim to be qualified psychiatric doctors enough to call an opposition party leader lunatic. Now I have editors who are qualified Aunt Agonys enough to give domestic violence advice to public.

I bet she must have left her grey matter on her desk when she wrote it! Perhaps her boyfriend had bashed her on the head hard enough to write in such a concussed state.

By gawd, she is the _EDITOR_, mind you! Not just some freelance, or small-fry journalist! Doesn't it make anyone wonder about the quality of journalism the msm (mainstream media) has been dishing out these days? Why would anyone want to pay to read junk anyway? And to think I had just blogged about it here and here.

And it has to be Straits Times again? Wow... these days they seem to be desperate for readers thus these controversial articles to boost their readership.

Stupid is as stupid says, dear Joanne Lee.

It’s like saying maybe a wife should change her attitude towards sex if her husband had raped/violated her. Afterall, the husband had provided for the family so she should change herself to suit his needs. What a dumbo statement!

At no point, even provoked should a man hit a woman. Period.

So just because a driver in front of me provoked me, I can come out and bash the daylights out of him so that he can LEARN something from my bashing?

Gee, are you nuts?!! Just look at the picture and you say it's semi-ok? Or do you have to write some moronic commentaries to get paid? Wake up your idea and get a life!

Here is what Joanne Lee wrote. You make your own judgement, readers.

---
Was Rihanna semi-responsible?
March 13, 2009 Friday, 06:08 PM

Joanne Lee looks at her own experience with dating abuse.

I ONCE dated a guy who hit me.

Not in the full-on Chris-Brown-biting-Rihanna's-ears kind of way, but we'd argue and he'd get so worked up, he'd punch the wall and shove me around a little. (It'd usually be a one-off punch because he was inherently a decent guy who knew it was wrong to hit anyone.)

Domestic/dating abuse has obviously blown up in the news since the R&B stars' violent episode last month came to light and Chris Brown was charged in court this week. Oprah Winfrey dedicated her show to the two of them and, while sending her love to the two, also said: "If a man hits you once, he will hit you again."

Initially, the condemnation all over the Internet and media was against Chris Brown. A man raising his hand against the weaker sex is just something absolutely socially unacceptable.

But a second strain of judgement has surfaced, turning against Rihanna, saying: Yes, she might be a victim but she also probably provoked Chris Brown to violence.

Domestic abuse social workers would absolutely dismiss this secondary reaction, and I don't purport to know the natures of Chris Brown or Rihanna at all, but I can understand why some people would think the victim is not entirely blameless.

You see, my ex was Chris Brown's age, 19 (give or take) at the time. We were young, we had tempers and we had not the maturity to control those tempers. When he hit me those few times, I'll freely admit, I had a part to play in the outcome.

When I was younger, I was argumentative and it didn't help that I had a way with words - twisting words, to be precise. If he got frustrated and ended up hitting out at animate (me) or inanimate objects (mirrors), I honestly can't say it was entirely his fault.

Was this the case in Rihanna's situation? I don't know. Is it the case in all domestic abuse situations? Absolutely not. Some men just cannot control their violence and there is nothing to be done for it except for the woman to leave the monster to protect themselves and, God forbid, their children.

But what I do know, is that in my case, I contributed to his anger - which is why I forgave him time and time again (not that there were many times) and did not leave him. When we broke up in the end, it was for entirely different reasons.

As far as I know, he's now happily married, a father and doing well in his career. As for me, I think I've learned to bridle my tongue and be a more give-and-take kind of partner. (And I stress, give-and-take. Not give-and-give.)

So my humble advice to anyone out there facing mild cases of domestic/dating abuse is this: If you can help the situation by changing yourself, perhaps that's something to try if you truly love the guy.

Operative word: MILD.

If he's saying "I'm going to kill you", arm-locking you and biting your ears, no matter how much you look within yourself to try to improve your relationship, I really doubt your man is going to grow out of his temper tantrums.

Rihanna, leave the dude already.

21 comments:

soojenn said...

You couldn't have phrased it any better. An editor? not any junior staff writing such a moronic piece?

I am quite positive she left her bashed out brains splattered on the table she was writing on, for this article.

What messag is is driving... my god? Her ex is probalby sniggering all the way.. on reading this piece of trash.

Controversial article... this is more like a brainless article from a bimbo. Perhaps a bimboo would have done better.

"At no point, even provoked should a man hit a woman. Period."

- WELL SPOKEN. She should keep such ridiculuous "humble" advise to herself. If she likes to stay on in a relationship after being hit, (and change? my god - what in the world is she getting at?) irrespective of if there was any provocation, so be it. being an editor of an online MSM, one would expect responsibility in making such advise?

It makes one wonder if she is mature, enoug? and compentent for tat matter.

Anonymous said...

why do you need to insult her even as you disagree with her views?

hate the sin, not the sinner. or have you forgotten, child of god?

Kaffein said...

Dear Anon6:58 AM,
"Hate the sin, love the sinner."

Nope, I have not forgotten.

Hope you have also not forgotten that young church sheep are also reading the article? Imagine a teenage who had been abused by her boyfriend reads that article. Thinking she is also at fault, she keeps mum and tries to change herself. Taking no more, she commits suicide.

Right. Hypothetical? I think not.

As one (aka editor) who has influence over the media readership, one has to exert an even greater sense of responsibility when giving advice.

I do not think I had 'bashed' her brains out but rather pointedly revealed that she was clearly off the mark. To even 'advocate' that it is partially her fault for her ex-boyfriend for hitting her is absurd. I would have have thought she would champion against relationship violence. However she chose to stand down and asked victims to look at themselves instead.

That's clearly not right.

In a parallel analogy, how would you deal with a 'fake' pastor from Nigeria (example only!) who had conned many churches into giving money to him and his fake ministry?

Hate the sin, love the sinner?

Yes, but I'll still expose him and pursue the matter because it's the congregation's money and justice still has to be served. To keep quiet is also to do greater injustice to the other churches who might be conned by him in future.

That's just wisdom.

If she writes such an article, expect such responses from the blogging community.

Cheers,
Kaffein

Anonymous said...

question: so you are saying that jesus would have no problems repeating these words of yours: "Stupid is as stupid says, dear Joanne Lee."

or would he have put it differently?

Kaffein said...

To Anon3:54PM,

I'm not Jesus.

Kaffein

Kaffein said...

You can also read my further comments to Joanne Lee here.

Kaffein

Kaffein said...

For the sake readers to see the whole picture, I'll post my comments in Straits Times here.

Comment #3162

Kaffein
March 17, 2009 Tuesday

Dear Joanne,
Thank you for responding to our comments. Look I'm not here to 'flame' you but I think you have it all wrong.

You responded:
"Please do read my blog again. I stressed that my ex only hit out a couple of times, and they were very MILD cases because he stopped after one hit, knowing he was wrong."

Against what you initial wrote:
"So my humble ADVICE to anyone out there facing MILD cases of domestic/dating ABUSE is this: If you can HELP the situation by CHANGING YOURSELF, perhaps that's something to try if you TRULY LOVE the guy."
(caps all mine)

Mild cases will often lead to more abusive ones. Many of these cases include verbal abuse and lowering of victim's self-esteem and respect. And how long do you think a victim (mild or not) can endure before it gets overboard?

By the time, it's usually too late because the victim has totally lost her self-esteem. It ALWAYS start off small.

I'm glad you got out of it, but I don't think you had it wiser.

Let me give a better piece of advice:
If you love the guy, LEAVE him. NOT change yourself! Even better, REPORt him so he can get all the HELP he needs. You are doing a great JUSTICE to all the OTHER GIRLS who get attached to him after you.

Cheers,
Kaffein

Kaffein said...

Comment #3167

Kaffein
March 17, 2009 Tuesday

To bluebelle,
I don't know if you are her friend but it doesn't matter.

Again take note that this is what she had written initally which led to this barrage of negative responses. Perhaps it's a mis-statement but it had already been read by thousands. And this is a blog catered for responses.

She wrote:
"So my humble ADVICE to anyone out there facing MILD cases of domestic/dating ABUSE is this: If you can HELP the situation by CHANGING YOURSELF, perhaps that's something to try if you TRULY LOVE the guy."
(caps all mine)

It's ok to share one's experiences, blog about it. However once you publish an advice through a mass media, it's adds a whole different dimension to that statement and less of just a personal advice. If the general feel of the public is against it (which we can already see), then be prepared to get 'flamed'.

Flippantly saying "Let's move on" (which an elite is infamously quoted by the blogsphere community) is saying "I don't own what I'm saying/doing, I don't care about it and there is nothing you can do".

I'm sorry I don't buy that.

Let me reiterate: I'm not saying Joanne Lee is careless. I believe she is courageous and confident enough to respond to us. And I respect her for it. Yet it is not for me (or you) to close her statement. The blogging community will.

As for me the matter is closed. I wish her well and I am extremely glad she has moved on in her life.

Regards,
Kaffein

---
Comment #3169

Kaffein
March 17, 2009 Tuesday

Correction:
Bluebelle did not say "Let's move on".

That was my imply that to about the closure of Joanne's statement.

Apologies,
Kaffein

Kaffein said...

Bluebelle's response:

bluebelle
March 17, 2009 Tuesday

i'm not her friend, kaffein. it doesn't take a friend to see that she has been unduly criticised.

i'm just someone who feels that some of the criticisms agnst her are unjustified. in fact, some of the comments are plain nasty (e.g. "you are destined to get abused again.") was that necessary? like someone has pointed out, these responders are perpetuating a different sort of abuse through their words.

i do agree with some of your points, kaffein. i certainly wasn't referring to you when i talked abt the "judgemental" pple in my post. i guess what i hope to offer is a more balanced point of view.

if everyone were to wash their hands and give up on friends and family who have anger management probs (like prob her ex has), then it would be a very sad world, wouldn't it?

personally, i agree with joanne up to a point. i would try to help out of love, but if the person persists in his or her behaviour and it escalates, i would walk away. i think perhaps tt was what joanne meant, but it just came out the wrong way.

Anonymous said...

you're the very portrait of the abominable christian -- a self-righteous twat!

Anonymous said...

dear kaffein,

i didn't ask if you were jesus.

i asked if you could imagine jesus using the same words you did in calling joanne stupid. you are called to be the salt of the earth. search your conscience: does living according to christ amount to calling a fellow human being these names?

Kaffein said...

To Anon2:42AM who wrote:
"you're the very portrait of the abominable christian -- a self-righteous twat!"

I'm glad we are all in the 'self-righteous' boat together - both you and I.

That's why we need a Saviour.

Cheers,
Kaffein

Anonymous said...

"I'm glad we are all in the 'self-righteous' boat together - both you and I.

That's why we need a Saviour."

that's just swell. in the event he doesn't show up for you (rev 3:16), i'll see you in hell :)

Kaffein said...

To Anon2:50AM who wrote:
Anon>i didn't ask if you were jesus.

Kaffein> Yeap, that's why I won't answer anyone about what Jesus will say. And I won't try to presume or assume :)

Anon> i asked if you could imagine jesus using the same words you did in calling joanne stupid.

Kaffein> "Stupid is as stupid says/does" is a line from Forest Gump the movie which I had quoted. If you see the movie, it is not saying the person is 'stupid'. It is saying that was a very stupid, or silly thing the person has done.

Anon> you are called to be the salt of the earth. search your conscience: does living according to christ amount to calling a fellow human being these names?

Kaffein> Tell me, which education background are you from? What is your GP grade? Are you an introvert or extrovert?

Then tell me again:
Is the ST blog article and the author behind my writing in question, or are you questioning my intergrity and Christian faith?

For I perceive that no matter what I say, my Christian faith will be lacking in your sight. So I'm not going to try to justify my written article.

However that said, one's conviction cannot be imposed on another. Just because you don't smoke doesn't make you justified to tell another Christian that he/she shouldn't smoke. Just because you don't wear mini-skirts (I assume you are a female) doesn't make another Christian who does a lesser being. We are all justified by faith in Christ irregardless of what we do.

Let me return it back to you:

Have you ever cursed someone in your heart? No? What about taking office supplies, or photostating personal materials? Of course, using the office phone, or email for personal use is acceptable? What about gossiping or bitching another person?

Are you living according to God's standard?


Of course not! That's why Christ came down to save me. Save us. And I don't ask a person if he/she is living according to Christ.

Gee... I think I fall under the worst sinner category in your perception coz I've done all those 'sins' mentioned above. According to the bible, I'm on equal terms with an adulterer and also a murderer. See James 2:10.

You see, Anon2:50, there is no end when you point the finger at me. I stand by what I have written, and there is no questioning of my Christian faith. They are separate matters. For it is God who justifies. It is also Christ who lives and works in me so that I can be alive in Him.

It is not I that live, but Christ who lives in me. Because if I live for him, I will surely fail.

In conclusion, do differentiate the subject concerned (which is the ST's blog article and the author who stood by her beliefs) against personal agenda (my Christian faith, etc).

Regards,
Kaffein

Kaffein said...

Kaffein wrote> "I'm glad we are all in the 'self-righteous' boat together - both you and I.

That's why we need a Saviour."

Anon 11:00AM wrote> that's just swell. in the event he doesn't show up for you (rev 3:16), i'll see you in hell :)

Kaffein replies>
That's just as swell. In the event He already showed up for us and we have accepted Him (John 3:16), I'll see you in heaven.


John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Oh just in case you have missed out, here's verse 17 for your reading.

"17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."

Cheers,
Kaffein

PS. Gosh, I do love a biblical debate. If you want, you are welcome to write to me at kaffein.nated@gmail.com. Let's not wash the dirty linens in front of readers.

Monkeysee said...

Am I the only person to find the notion that "A man should not hit a woman" simplistic and archaic? Why just limit it to a man hitting a woman. What about the other way around? What accords a woman more protection than a man by blind default?

Any person in an abusive relationship should get OUT. Doesn't matter if it is a man hitting a woman, a woman hitting a man, man hitting man or woman hitting woman.

Sheesh.

Anonymous said...

i am sorry but i must decline.

a theological debate would be of no use either to you or me.

kind regards.

Kaffein said...

Monkeysee wrote:
"Am I the only person to find the notion that "A man should not hit a woman" simplistic and archaic? Why just limit it to a man hitting a woman. What about the other way around? What accords a woman more protection than a man by blind default?"

Kaffein replies>
Well, hitting anyone, be it man, or woman, or child, or even dog out of anger is a NO-NO. A few times, my missus slaps me on my arm or shoulder to remind me or forewarn me with "Why did you go do that?!"

I do not consider it abusive. But I never hit her to get my point across though at times it's so frustrating.

Anyway, when I wrote this article, it was in response to Joanne Lee's article where she condoned a man hitting a woman even though it was mild (in her article she described as shoving, a punch or hit).

I believe the matter is settled with the general feel that hitting ANYONE is wrong. And I'm sure am not speaking about caning used on rapists, molesters, or child-abusers, etc though I do support such extremem measure for crimes of this category. Well, that's another subject and topic.

Cheers,
Kaffein

Kaffein said...

To Anon4:01AM who wrote:
"i am sorry but i must decline.

a theological debate would be of no use either to you or me.

kind regards."

Indeed. Calling me an abominable Christian is of no use to you or me either.

We can still disagree with opinions but rest in His love for us.

In His love,
Kaffein

Anonymous said...

but i never said i was a christian.

although you might have seen why i chose NOT to be a christian :)

Rachel Chung said...

Anon

with you as a posterboy (or girl) for the naysayers, I am glad I bat for the other camp.

And don't worry about what Jesus would say about that. I shall consult him myself during prayers :)