Friday, March 6, 2009

About Chris Brown and Domestic Violence, from a boxer's perspective

“If someone loves you, then the only response that s/he has when angry with you is to simply cut off communication. In other words, s/he does not speak either to or with you. The thought of violence from either side, is never an issue... if someone initiates violence towards you, regardless of their relationship to you, whatever you thought your relationship was, you were wrong – and you better make that person be the one who screams for the cops.”

Dear friends,

Back in the Fall of 1997, I attended a conference at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, that was focused on the effects of the, at the time, newly-legislated welfare reform on domestic violence. In other words, the main concern was: Would women stay in an abusive relationship, since they would no longer be able to get help (welfare) for their children. In order to contribute to the dialogue, I delivered a short paper there that was based upon my experience as a boxer.

The main point of my thesis was, and still is: Batterers are weak men who delude themselves into thinking that they are champion boxers, for a moment, when dealing with females. For instance, when a boxer confronts an opponent, that fighter does not just say to himself or herself, "I'm gonna knock this person out." Rather, s/he is thinking, "All right, I'm gonna move side-to-side, then jab to the belly, and come up and jab to the head." Or, “I’m gonna weave under the jab (of the opponent), then come up and hit him/her with a left hook on the chin.

Boxing is about "controlled fear". Both fighters are aware of their possible defeat, so they come out with their hands up, in order to protect themselves. They never come out with their hands by their sides (i.e., down). It's all about control.

Moreover, as the rounds go on, each fighter is trying to gain control of the space (i.e., the ring), so that the opponent can be more easily controlled. If the fighter is more of a “runner” like, say, Muhammad Ali or his daughter Laila, then, in order to control the space, one must be a slugger or “banger”, like Joe Frazier or his daughter Jackie and “cut off the ring” (i.e., get the person against the ropes), if success is the intention. So, in boxing we say, “You fight a boxer and box a fighter.”.

Otherwise, if not “cut off”, the runner will dance around and dart in and out, landing punches. Either way, each boxer must be patient, in the face of danger, and use a variety of techniques in the attempt to attain control.

Likewise, the man who normally seems like such a nice guy, and who, in fact, seems like the most unlikely person to be a batterer, suddenly, sees himself as a boxer. In other words, in a dispute with a female, he finds himself in a situation where he feels that he can "control" the situation with violence, if nothing else is working. After all, usually, women are not socialized to "hit" much less hit back.

So this normally “nice” guy, suddenly, in his own mind, turns into Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier, or Mike Tyson for that matter. Just as the boxer thinks about the next move by saying, “I’m gonna hit the chin with a right cross and come back with a left hook.”, the batterer, either standing, or in the case of Chris Brown sitting with whatever kind of look on the face, says to himself, “If she says that again, I’m gonna knock her upside her head.” In other words, he feels that he is in "control", like a boxer is against an opponent. To be sure, that same guy (batterer) would never think of doing that with another male (unless the guy was half his size and had a docile personality). But at this moment, he is “in control”.

So Chris Brown is a loathsome coward. Can he change? We should hope so. However, he should do that with someone other than Rihanna, the young girl who comes from the land of my grandparents. The fact that he has so quickly resorted to another form of control to “win” her back is both pathetic and sad on Rihanna’s part, but that pitiful fact is also true of all of her male relatives and so-called “friends” who have allowed Brown to be able to walk around without crutches still.

In any case, he should, at least, be tried for “obstruction of justice”, since it is unlikely that she will testify against him now, since he has, deliberately, conned her into keeping him out of the slammer, by getting her to “reconcile”.

Finally, as I teach and have taught each of my students (some 2600 - with over 500 of them female) and have been doing so for a living, since 1988, “If someone loves you, then the only response that s/he has when angry with you is to simply cut off communication. In other words, s/he does not speak either to or with you. The thought of violence from either side, is never an issue. However, if someone initiates violence towards you, regardless of their relationship to you, whatever you thought your relationship was, you were wrong – and you better make that person be the one who screams for the cops.” Dig? That is what I taught my son and both daughters (the youngest has sparred with Jackie Frazier), starting all three - now adults - on each of their second birthdays.

G. Djata Bumpus

0 comments: