Tuesday, 10 November 2009

My Thoughts on... Rihanna's Interview

By now you will have seen my post on the CB Interview; and here is footage from the R interview.

As previously mentioned, one of the bones of contention with me regarding this issue was the grassroots/ low level implication that either she deserved what she got (a provoked attack) or that she should have shut up and too her licks (instead of 'snitching').

Excuse me, but don't I matter? Am I not worth anything? What is up with this 'snitching' business? If a man (or anyone for that matter) beats the crap out of me, I should drag myself home quietly, patch myself up and keep my mouth shut because if I tell someone or call the police - I am a snitch??? Fer real?

I can imagine and identify with the turmoil R must have felt in the aftermath, if I cooperate with the police or testify against him in court, people will accuse me of trying to ruin his career. I can imagine that being in the same industry, she would understand what a blow 'this sort of publicity' would have been to someone like him; but at the end of the day, that was not her responsibility to bear.  It was his choice to 'snap'/'lose control'/whatever and as such his responsibility to bear those consequences however detrimental to his career/public image.

Watching her speak, you can see at times she is still very 'annoyed' by the whole thing. It IS embarrassing, especially when you have some women laughing and saying "Well, if it were me, he could've never beat me like that" (implying R was weak or stupid or that something was wrong with her that CB would beat her but not them). Or what about men and women in the community who claim "A lil hand never hurt nobody", when clearly it did.

Historically, domestic abuse in our communities has been high, why this is I don't know. I'll leave that to people like the Mongoose Chronicles to postulate upon. However, frequency does not make it right.

Just as I can see that CB was a kid trying to find his way, I can see the same elements in R. They were young and growing together in a very public way. When things fell apart it also happened in a very public and humiliating way. I can't imagine having to deal with that.

R also fell into the trap many women fall into: after a random act of violence they return to their lover thinking (hoping) it was just that one time and it'll be all good from here on in. Unfortunately for many women, they don't get another chance at freedom; many lose their lives and it seems that only once they are dead to those around them think "oh well, maybe we should have listened or been more supportive, but I never thought he'd kill her..."

I am glad for both of them that R is still alive.

She mentioned that in their relationship they had both become dangerous for eachother because the relationship had started to border on 'obsession'. At least they (she?) can recognise that and hopefully avoid those signs in future.






















14 comments:

Anonymous said...

She is so brave to do this interview. So so courageous, especially because she is not totally out of it yet. It is still happening for her, you can see that.

What they said, to her, about the fact that him shoving her and stuff, that was part of it. That really upsets me, because, I had that, maybe a bit more at times, maybe a bit less at times, but when I would tell people, they'd say that it wasn't abuse, because he never hit me. But, now I see actually, that it's not so much the action itself, it's the fear. It's the physical fear, the knowing you are helpless and that the outcome of what happens is totally in his control and he could just snap your neck right now if he wants, that is the abuse.

It makes me sick. It was very hard to watch her having that interview, because it is so clearly still with her.

Anonymous said...

I DO love the 'F love' quote!

A Male Perspective said...

CB repeatedly apologises in public makes no neg comments about her.
CB releases new song (hard as shite) in comeback attempt she decides now sametime she shud now speak...meanwhile she in vidz sticking up middle fingers n dress like a slut.
Both of them cudda walk away or shud been advised to part ways as this wasn't first fight.

Who hit who first? CB was driving.

Men suffer violence as well esp women who like to hit first but don't expect to get hit back.....hhhmm

Best luck to them both hope they get back together and prove every1 wrong.

Anonymous said...

She seems to be a very intelligent and well spoken young woman. I think that she made the right decision this time around. She has come to the realization that "love IS blind." Jeremiah 17:9, the heart is treacherous...you can't follow your heart as the saying goes, it will often lead you done the wrong path. Better to what you KNOW is right as opposed to what FEELS right.

Anonymous said...

* Correction *
She seems to be a very intelligent and well spoken young woman. I think that she made the right decision this time around. She has come to the realization that "love IS blind." Jeremiah 17:9, the heart is treacherous...you can't follow your heart as the saying goes, it will often lead you down the wrong path. Better to do what you KNOW is right as opposed to what FEELS right.

Bajan Lily said...

@ A Male Perspective.
Thank you for your comment.

You should also read read my other post re: CB's Interview, it will place some of my thoughts in perspective as this is a continuation.

1. CB has never said that R hit him... ever.

2. This isn't his first comeback single, debatable as to whether
it's 'hard as shite' but he has done his interviews so why shouldn't she be able to do hers? Seeing as how she is releasing her own single I am sure her PR people felt this was as good a time as any - the usual business fluff.

3. Re men suffering violence, I acknowledge this occurs but I'll leave that debate up to the Mongoose Chronicles. I can't see how in a boxing match: if a featherweight goes up against a heavyweight - it's not a 'fair fight' but some of y'all men weighing in at 200lbs wanna beat kill a woman weighing in at 100lbs and justify it by 'she hit me first'. Read the previous post - you will see that I can understand the initial 'you hit me, I hit you' mentality but I don't excuse any escalation ON EITHER side beyond that.

http://mongoosechronicles.blogspot.com/2009/10/can-we-be-clear-once-and-for-all-on-who.html

Mr Jarvis said...

I agree with you whole heartedly. There is no way a fight between a cruiser weight and a featherweight could ever be fair. Yet men try to justify their actions by saying she hit me first, or the verbal abuse was overwhelming. My reply is simply "MAN UP".

Years ago I was dating a very intelligent young lady who was beautiful, but our relationship was bordering on obsessive. She would provoke me and say hurtful things, all because she was not getting her way. Her way being a wedding ring. Eventually we broke up, but since I am a patient man I tried. Rather than return abuse in kind, I would go out and play basketball (take my frustrations out on the ball, and once a group of four men), but I absolutely believe that there is nothing which would justify me hitting a woman, whether it be in anger or play.

Men need to MAN UP, and walk away from bad situations. If CB had done that his career would still be alive and kicking today.

Anonymous said...

a very short comment... Of course Rhi hit Chris! Obviously he was quite shocked and embarrassed about that.

Anonymous said...

Excuse me. But most of these comments seem slanted towards the bias that if a man receives abuse from a woman, that he should simply MAN UP. I could [rightfully] insert a series of expletives in direct response, but I shall not. I will question, how exactly does one MAN UP? Is that simply another way to bunker down and meekly accept abuse in any form or fashion? Someone else stated that they would never hit a woman. Good for you! I suggest that you write "pacifist" on your forehead with a Sharpie and go play in traffic. Things like abuse and rape are about one thing and one thing only: POWER. A reason that 90 lb women continue to daily abuse 180 - 250+ lbs men is that people unconsciously take the side of these women when they look from the outside and brand it ridiculous. In many cases of abuse the physical size involved is just coincidence. Women don't need size to be an abuser. No one does really. [Check out Wing Chun - a martial art created by one of those 90lb women]. Often women acknowledge that size is not in their favour. But it doesn't have to be, because it is about POWER. Women can withhold sex, threaten to take away children, refuse to cook or threaten to poison food, be verbally abusive... various kinds of abuse. OR a woman can find some fella with "Pacifist" inked on his forehead with a Sharpie and beat on him know that all he is going to do is MAN UP. Because nobody will believe that a 90lb woman beat up a 200lb man.
The great trick is when the Devil convinced the world that he doesn't exist.

A Male Perspective said...

Do u really want me to believe that you are justifying/defending a 100lb woman that flying up to a 200lb man?

I notice and agree the man shud walk away so can't the 100lb woman do d same....maybe she take motivation from the boxer Haye and feels d bigger man can b beaten down.....

both parties shuld learn to walk away or/and look 4 new partners.

What I don't like is the portrayal of Rhian like she d only victim and she angelic....I am sure we all agree there was/is more to it.....but don't play d public OR maybe d public shudnt b played...

Bajan Lily said...

@AMP
All I am saying is that would not be a FAIR fight. If you and your girl are the same size and wanna do nonsense i.e. from your perspective, your girl feels 'she could do bad' and as a man you don't have the unction to walk away then what happens next is on both of y'all, you are assaulting eachother; but it's not OK to hit FOR EITHER OF YOU.

However, if allegedly irritating behaviour, repeated mistakes, questioning about fidelity etc is received as provocation and the provoked person gives the perceived 'offender'; a smack down I believe that is ABUSE. I am referring to the latter in both of my posts.

As stated before, I will not speculate about what may have happened, which is why it I have avoided this particular topic for so long. I am basing my comments on what is public record: whether everyone chooses to accept that this is all there is to it or not. I just can't be commenting on the speculative because if it ever comes to light that the speculative was inaccurate - all resulting opinions will also be incorrect and unfair.
I've tried to see it from both sides and give fair time to both - it's interesting that the CB post attracted hardly any comments...

Anonymous said...

@ AMP re: 100lb v 200lb 'match'
Are you saying that if the man did something like bring home an STD to the woman and she 'flew up' to him in a rage - (clearly not expecting a fist fight or a beat down) - she deserves what she gets next (if he throttles her?)

Bajan Lily said...

@Anon - 08:33
I think we all need to take a good look at what we are referring to as 'abuse'. I DO NOT condone it from either side.
As a rule of thumb, we would encourage the recipient of abuse to leave the relationship for the sake of their safety.
However, I will have to disagree with you if you are using the term 'abuse' to refer to I dunno - a teenage girl punching her boyf in the arm for looking at another woman (assuming the punch caused no pain or damage - if the force applied was intended to break his arm that is something else). I think DV has a lot to do with intent. Is the intent to hurt, humiliate, subjugate, kill? Was it a thoughtless lapse in judgement/loss of control?

A man on the receiving end of DV - whether physical or emotional has as much right to WALK AWAY (i.e. escape) as a woman, he shouldn't feel he has to 'man up and take it' at all - that's not acceptable.

I think that mostly comments which take a particular perspective on this/these issues (you know what I mean) are developed from a particular state of mind in terms of cultural acceptance and norms (particularly in the Caribbean). If we assume that in this region, SOME women are comfortable hitting, scratching, punching men, then it becomes harder to sympathise with those women who are being abused because 'we' will assume she did something to provoke the attack(s) - and THIS is what I have issue with.

The fact that SOME random acts of DV are NOT provoked, the fact that SOMETIMES a partner can lash out at another for what seems to be no reason at all possibly because he/she is dealing with stresses in another area of their life and handling it badly. As I said in my CB review - CB doesn't talk about what made him snap but he is making an effort to ensure it does not happen again, which I think is commendable. In my utopia, this is the focus of such events 'preventing it from happening again' as opposed to pointing fingers at who provoked whom, or declaring that the 'victim' is to blame.

Anonymous said...

"I really can't think of anything to say in CB's defence (sorry guys).

I think the who hit who first argument is irrelevant when one person sustains the level of injuries that Ri did; and yes one can be driving and deliver a blow at the same time."

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails