Media Framing of Domestic Violence
Posted by abby on December 30, 2009
I was feeling fairly laid back the day after Christmas, until I came across this headline while perusing People.com: Charlie Sheen Arrested for Domestic Violence. Honestly, I hear about this kind of thing so often that I’m a bit immune to it, but I was absolutely disgusted this time by how People magazine managed (and is continuing to manage) the dissemination of information surrounding this case.
First of all, it jumped out to me that he was arrested on Christmas morning at 11:20 am. That fact alone set my cheeks ablaze with rage. How dare he hit his wife on Christmas?!? Really, domestic violence is wrong any day, but it feels especially vile to me on Christmas morning. Personal rant aside, I continued to read that he was booked on second degree assault, with no mention whatsoever of what this entails. I did some Google sleuthing and came across some information on the website for Colorado Attorney Kevin Churchill (he was booked in Aspen, as he and his family were vacationing there for the holidays). In addition to explaining the exact wording used by Colorado lawmakers when determining the difference between first and second degree assault, “intentionally” caus(ing) bodily injury to another by means of a deadly weapon,” Churchill provides his own clarification for the above legalese. He says, If there was “Heat of Passion,” in other words, you were provoked by the person into committing the assault, then the DA may choose to file the Second Degree Assault as a Class Six Felony, instead of a Class Four, thereby reducing the possible penalties” (emphasis author’s own). Really? Why am I so surprised? Of course a lawyer would repeat the same vomit inducing beliefs of the court. We don’t know yet whether or not Charlie Sheen will be booked on a class six or class four felony, but we do know that according to family friends who were with the couple the night before, both parties were drinking. I want to ask ‘so what,’ but I know this is all it could take for them to reduce his charge. Gross.
Further, the author of this story on People’s website called the abusive incident a “scuffle.” How is assault with a deadly weapon a scuffle? It’s not, plain and simple. Talking to my coworker about this, she brought up a very valid point. Whether he had the gun pointed at her head or the knife at her throat or if he was doing something else with the weapon to cause her injury, it was intended to threaten death. Which brings me to another point; the next story on People’s website read like this, “Charlie Sheen and Wife to Undergo Counseling.” NOoooooooo!!! You do not undergo couple’s counseling when you are experiencing domestic violence! This is so basic; domestic violence is not about losing control of emotions. It is about power and control and set up. He planned this- he set it up. A man does not just keep a gun around and then randomly hit you with it when he loses his temper. He had that gun there on purpose so he could threaten her. I know this is truth with every fiber of my being.
Ugh. At least Sheen has returned to Los Angeles while Mueller has stayed in Aspen. No formal charges have been filed yet, but they are apart. I wish that were the end, but true to form, People delivered once more. In a story posted two days ago, Michael Y. Park captioned a photo shown of Brooke Mueller walking to her car in Aspen with the following vitriol “Oh the weather outside is frightful…but a post-holiday outing in Aspen, CO., is delightful for Brooke Mueller- even after her husband was arrested following an alleged domestic violence incident on Christmas day. Prancing through the posh resort town, Mueller, 32, sported…a big grin that belied the family dispute that spoiled Christmas just days before.” Really? You think she was “prancing?” WTF?! And p.s. So what if she was? Obviously we need to know two things; A. Brooke is who we should be watching at this point and B. How dare she slip a smile after her husband beat her up? Maybe she lied about the whole thing. That is the subtext. Am I right or am I right?
Even though the way this was handled so very precisely models everything that we learn about DV 101 and the culture we live in that perpetuates it, it still pissed me off so bad. I feel angry and helpless- I mean, I don’t buy People magazine and I don’t think many people that read this blog probably do. What impact can we make by pulling our money? We could write letters to the editor and I would suggest we do that. Also, if you live in Colorado, please never consider using Kevin Churchill as your lawyer. More than just putting this bandage on the situation, however, I hope it motivates us to continue educating each other about what domestic violence looks like. We need to stop fooling ourselves through tricks of language and photo-ops. This asshole beat up a woman, his wife, with a deadly weapon. We can’t polish that up and make it pretty again. And despite how ugly it looks, we also need to be brave and educate the young women in our lives. Whether you have a blog that reaches teenage girls or you mentor young women, or you have teenagers of your own, please show them these stories and explain what happened and why it is wrong. Tell them the warning signs to look for, tell them they have services they can access and above all, believe them when they disclose. A listening ear does more to empower than you might realize. Together, we can take steps to prevent this from happening to more young women. It might seem an insurmountable problem now, but take it from this survivor- it isn’t.
Comments
1 | as long as you are "reporting" on hearsay (which is inadmissible in court, anyway), you might want to include that his wife may have initiated the assault - please note that I did not say "also assaulted" because I am not intending to imply self-defense - I am intending to imply that not all abusers are men. Not all information detailed in People magazine is "fact." Not all attorneys publicly release "facts" of DV cases (as well they shouldn't), but rather present hypotheticals as facts so that their client can be publicly perceived as innocent.
ALL charged persons are innocent until PROVEN guilty. And I am sorry, but who are YOU to say that "counseling" isn't what they need??? Did People magazine also speak with the confidentiality-bound therapist and report on the style and subject matter that will be undertaken in their counseling?? Every survivor AND abuser has the RIGHT to explore their options for healing, support, learning, and self-advocacy. To assert that there are only SOME forms of post-incident action that are useful or "that work" is egotistical and ignorant.
I'm sure that People feels good that their reporting has resulted in another convinced reader, and I am very thankful that there are passionate advocates for the rights of survivors and the public perception of domestic violence that are willing to voice their KNOWLEDGE to break down stereotypes. But your musings are short-sighted and downright offensive.
A C|December 30, 2009|
2 | I think this is a great opinion piece from one of the PWCL bloggers.
The way I read the piece was that couples' counseling is not recommended. Experts in the treatment of domestic violence batterers and advocates of survivors recommend separate counseling when domestic violence is present in a relationship. Counseling is of course a great resource for many people, but research has found that often couples' counseling can be more traumatizing for the survivor since often abusers are very manipulative and charming on the outside. The reports are that the two in this relationship are seeking couples' counseling.
We appreciate everyone's different opinion on this matter. I'm glad to hear how people feel about the reporting since it can be taken so many different ways and since this hasn't been tried in a court of law yet. I do believe, personally, that his history of violence against women speaks volumes about this incident, though.
Kelsey P.|December 30, 2009|Portland, OR
3 | In fact, I did include the reports that her behavior has been called into question surrounding this incident of assault. In the article that reported that the two may attend couple's counseling, a friend of the couple is quoted as saying that both parties had been drinking. What I know, however, is that calling into question the behavior of the survivor when it comes to reporting on a dv case is a common tactic used by media sources as well as people in the general population who wish to separate themselves from the possibility of the crime happening to them. The logic goes- if I protect myself, if I jsut don't get drunk, if I just don't hit him, he won't beat the crap out of me. I choose to believe that there was absolutely nothing she could have done to "initiate" or "provoke" this assault. The cycle of domestic violence (http://www.domesticviolence.org/cycle-of-violence/) has been well researched and documented. I can surmise from my knowledge of this pattern as well as my personal experience that this pattern was and is present in Brooke and Charlie's relationship. My case isn't hurt either by the fact that he's been arrested previously for domestic violence (see the post made on our Facebook page a few days ago by Kelsey).
Furthermore, I do KNOW, not believe, that couple's counseling is not recommended for survivors of domestic violence. Like I mentioned above when linking to the cycle of violence wheel, research has proven time and again that abusers do not just happen to get out of control and hit their partner. There is a cycle to the abuse- a set up- a period of planning- that leads up to the incident of abuse. Couple's counseling is often one more tactic of the abuser, a stop along the wheel on the way to setting her up once again. Whether he buys her flowers or takes her to counseling or any number of other actions, it isn't long before he begins to rationalize his behavior, fantasize about hurting her again, plan it and set it up and then execute the plan.
Abby|December 30, 2009|
4 | I like how you gave us suggestions on how to deal with incidences like these when we see DV in the media. Having sons I think it is equally important to show these articles to young boys and men and take to them about violence against women and why it is wrong. We also need to be teaching them the tenants of a healthy relationship and give them tools to express their thoughts and feelings.
Ally|December 30, 2009|
5 | You make a very good point, Ally. I'm glad you mentioned that, because I often focus just on what we can do to help young girls change the pattern. It really shouldn't just be on them, however. I've talked before to friends about how great it would be if we could have a "healthy relationships" class in junior high or high school that would be required for kids before they graduate. A girl can dream, right? 
Abby Yates|December 30, 2009|
6 | i don't know if it's just me, but i'm kinda happy she was "prancing" (or whatever you want to call it) after the cops dragged away her abusive husband. the snarky victim-targeting tone of the rest of the sentence aside, of course (how DARE she not mourn for her abus--err, husband??). good for her.
i hope more survivors of DV are able to "prance" (or whatever they want to do, whatever they want to call it) if and when their abusers get arrested. it seems important, especially since justice through the justice system is still such an impossibility in so many cases for so many reasons.
ethan|January 06, 2010|pdx
Add your comments!
< < Back
