Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 61,774
Thank you for your replies. I think you both raised the same point, the ability of the woman to get out of the marriage. In Castro's case it is the extreme case. As I pointed out the chains are visible. But in cases where the woman is abused the chains are still there, just invisible. This makes it even worse as these women cannot show their chains to people. That is what I meant by "for one reason or another".
Who exactly do you imagine these enslaved women got to show their chains to? You know, their actual chains, not metaphorical ones.
Metaphorical chains can be terrible things, I do not deny that, but they really aren't the same. They do not make it impossible for a person (and let's not imagine that metaphorical chains only apply to women) to leave an abusive marriage. What they do is make it emotionally painful enough to leave that the person chooses not to, but they still have a choice.
As for beginning voluntarily, yes they do enter something voluntarily, but the woman may have no idea what their husbands are going to be like. If the man is abusive can we say the woman entered the relationship voluntarily? Or was it another relationship she agreed to enter?
I don't disagree on that point: if the behavior of the spouse fundamentally changes after marriage, then the person has not voluntarily entered into that situation. I'm not making the distinction based on how the situation was entered into, but on the possibilities of leaving it. They can still leave, even if they find it emotionally difficult to do so.
I want to make it clear that I'm not blaming those who do not, I'm merely pointing out that there still is a fundamental difference between an option existing and no option existing. And the fact that physical captivity is far worse doesn't mean that what you're describing isn't still very, very bad.