Simple debt question

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, mel b3 said:

i know that you think you know more than anyone on such matters lloyd , but ive seen more than enough of real life to know exactly how it works thankyou.

list what you want lloyd , i have no interest whatsoever in your professional theories . 

ill be quite blunt , i made my mind up about the type of person that you are not long after you joined the site , the post when you wanted to get revenge on a young female housemate , who you spoke about in the most derogatory way  , my mind was made up then , as to your character as a man , and youve written nothing since to change my mind . you may well have qualifications and lots of theory to work in a caring profession , but that doesnt mean that you actually care.

im not going to get dragged into a facebook style slanging match , so im out of this thread now .

What makes you an expert on it Mel? 
 

Considering I help people flee violent partners on almost every shift and sort out emergency housing, I wouldn’t exactly say it’s a “professional theory” ... 

 

I don’t know what post you refer to, having an annoying flat mate is far from uncommon, someone making jokes but not taking action is hardly a crime, but your really clutching at straws there aren’t you. 
 

The fact Henry is asking for help and you’ve been nothing short of incredibly rude when not even knowing the full facts I think says more about your character than anyone else’s on this thread. 

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, Lloyd90 said:

What makes you an expert on it Mel? 
 

Considering I help people flee violent partners on almost every shift and sort out emergency housing, I wouldn’t exactly say it’s a “professional theory” ... 

 

I don’t know what post you refer to, having an annoying flat mate is far from uncommon, someone making jokes but not taking action is hardly a crime, but your really clutching at straws there aren’t you. 
 

The fact Henry is asking for help and you’ve been nothing short of incredibly rude when not even knowing the full facts I think says more about your character than anyone else’s on this thread. 

So what your saying is, you've got a skewed view on such matters as your constantly dealing with a one sided proplem. Your very condescending at times. 

[clangerman]

let’s cool it before wrath from above arrives and shuts it or nobody will get a say 

[Lloyd90]

16 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

So what your saying is, you've got a skewed view on such matters as your constantly dealing with a one sided proplem. Your very condescending at times. 

Not really, we only have the side of Henry on this thread. 
 

To come onto this thread and pick a fight with him just shows some very off reasoning. 

[12gauge82]

11 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

Not really, we only have the side of Henry on this thread. 
 

To come onto this thread and pick a fight with him just shows some very off reasoning. 

And that in itself tells me all might, or might not be as it seems. Reading many of henery's post on here, although he is obviously intelligent and writes very well, he often views things in a very strange way and often likes to see the offender as the victim which doesn't give me much confidence that all is as he has written, especially when the other side isn't here to give their version of events.

Mel has made some very good points and I to find it a bit twisted that someone wants to know they'll be okay if their partner dies, but doesn't sound too bothered about them other than that. 

[Lloyd90]

17 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

And that in itself tells me all might, or might not be as it seems. Reading many of henery's post on here, although he is obviously intelligent and writes very well, he often views things in a very strange way and often likes to see the offender as the victim which doesn't give me much confidence that all is as he has written, especially when the other side isn't here to give their version of events.

Mel has made some very good points and I to find it a bit twisted that someone wants to know they'll be okay if their partner dies, but doesn't sound too bothered about them other than that. 

Fair enough. 
 

Let’s not all fall out about it please, enough bickering ruining good threads. 
 

Not meant to be condescending, apologies if I offended anyone. 
 

I’ll leave this thread at that. 

[12gauge82]

44 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

Fair enough. 
 

Let’s not all fall out about it please, enough bickering ruining good threads. 
 

Not meant to be condescending, apologies if I offended anyone. 
 

I’ll leave this thread at that. 

Agreed my appoliges also if I've come across as rude 👍

[henry d]

11 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

 

Mel has made some very good points and I to find it a bit twisted that someone wants to know they'll be okay if their partner dies, but doesn't sound too bothered about them other than that. 

 Busy at the moment but I will get back to you today.

Mods, please keep this open so I can reply.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Yes indeed, so far anyone who has been a little demanding has not gone too far and as with everything there are two sides to every story.

Viewpoints differ and ultimately discussions can be spoiled or even locked when it goes too far.

 

Watching for more developments..............

[ehb102]

13 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

 

No one else’s business, look the other way. Don’t get involved. I didn’t see any bruises or black eyes 👀. 
 

 

Lovely bit of 1950 there. 

Coercive control is torture. It causes Post Traumatic Stress Disorder of a complexity and depth that I doubt any of you will ever experience. It is the physical equivalent of being under enemy fire for years. 

Never mind the General Licence, seems a lot of folk need to check out the law on domestic violence.

 

[WalkedUp]

Really difficult one regarding intervention. Whilst the red mist would descend for me and want to knock some sense in, I would also remember that sisters vent/moan to each other more than they tell the good stories and happy times.

On balance I would ensure that your wife and you are available to help and support her, but perhaps only provide counsel if it is requested. 

[12gauge82]

4 hours ago, WalkedUp said:

Really difficult one regarding intervention. Whilst the red mist would descend for me and want to knock some sense in, I would also remember that sisters vent/moan to each other more than they tell the good stories and happy times.

On balance I would ensure that your wife and you are available to help and support her, but perhaps only provide counsel if it is requested. 

"Whilst the red mist would descend for me and want to knock some sense in" 

Well that doesn't surprise me, not just dogs you go around loosing control with then! 

[henry d]

Ok.

Firstly apologies, re-reading my posts I do seem to be painting him in a bad light and my SIL does seem to be just looking to be just in it for herself. My apologies, I am just putting down some of my thoughts here I will explain/expand on what has happened over a quarter of a century.

"Dave" and "Lyn" were very happy to start with, but not long after retirement from the RN he got bored and needed to do something, which included both drinking and getting a job in catering. Lyn was originally in the NAAFI and then became a manager of a major cleaning company in a naval base, she has had 3 or possibly 4 different companies and consolidated her different pensions into a pepp (iirc) which isn't doing well and she needs to be changing it or sorting something else out to provide for her old age. Dave has had a 22 year pension from the RN and a job which entailed shifts. He was earning, but spent it on expensive clothes and boozing. Lyn struggled a bit as her job doesn't pay much even if she was a manager. They split the mortgage 50/50 and he paid for shopping and she the bills, he cooked (mainly) and she cleaned the house and did the laundry. Sounds pretty much like most domestic situations?

The drinking and spending soon exceeded his income and rather than stop it he took out a loan and got credit cards. Eventually they maxed out and he had to come clean as he could not get any more credit. She stumped up, it started again slowly, but he put a slant on it by buying her handbags, and perfume which she saw as kind of him, but it appeared to be just masking his money spending. As this got worse the drinking increased so that he had blackouts and was working while still drunk from the previous day. She cleaned him and the house up after the blackouts. He apologizes by buying more handbags or perfume. She has a wardrobe full today. After he maxed out more cards they had to get a loan on the mortgage saying that they need a new bathroom, which they did, but borrowed twice what was needed so that the debt was almost cleared. Shortly after this Lyn had her gallbladder removed. Dave slowly started again, but she was a nag trying to keep his spending in check which he resented, calling her names and constantly going on about her weight. He knows she has to have a low fat diet due to her gallbladder but she keeps finding him putting cream and butter into her food. His drinking continues in the same vein but he has two major blackouts which ended up with him in A&E who tell him to stop drinking. He is good for a while but is soon back to his normal levels, but eventually gets a major headache for 3 days and she makes him go to hospital, he has had a stroke and has stents fitted. 

Through all of this she is worried senseless about him and nothing else. He was fortunate not to have any physical problems from the stroke and after a short time is back to work and he said to her just prior to speaking to the doctor/consultant that he was looking forward to having a few beers afterwards! Fortunately he said he has to stop drinking and smoking but Dave is not happy but does comply. 

Now he has no boozing he turns to spending money on all sorts and now five years later he is back in debt. However he is clever, he now asks her to get the shopping as he has stents fitted and they live in a maisonette up two flights of stairs, so she does, but he forgets to pay. Initially Lyn didn't remember to get him to reimburse her but she found she was dipping into her savings which did remind her, but only after many months, occasionally he would get it delivered, but just enough to keep her from suspecting he was being devious. 

She is totally besotted with him and although she knows he is devious and mentally cruel to her she can't see a way out of this situation as he is close to maxing out the credit again, they have an increased mortgage and the only money is her meagre pepp.

If he dies she thought that she would be responsible for his debt which is why she mentioned it to my wife and she asked me. I asked here because of the breadth of knowledge that there is here.

There is a lot more going on that I am not willing to share here but I assure you that in no way are we bullying anyone, nor are we taking sides, both of them have been offered advice and signposted external agencies that may help. 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Well done Henry D

[mel b3]

7 hours ago, ehb102 said:

Lovely bit of 1950 there. 

Coercive control is torture. It causes Post Traumatic Stress Disorder of a complexity and depth that I doubt any of you will ever experience. It is the physical equivalent of being under enemy fire for years. 

Never mind the General Licence, seems a lot of folk need to check out the law on domestic violence.

 

i wasnt going to weigh in again on this thread , but i thought that liz's post deserved a reply.

im starting with the assumption that most people know the basic difference between right and wrong. 

nobody in their right mind , can think that abusing their partner is acceptable . physical , mental , or emotional abuse , is disgraceful, and has no place in the present or past , yes it happened , and will most probably always happen , but its just wrong .  im no  psychiatrist , but i would imagine that coercive control would come under the mental abuse umbrella.  but as far as im aware liz , nobody in this thread has said that it is , or ever was , acceptable in any way. i think that it is wrong no matter if it is a man abusing a woman , or a woman abusing a man , or same sex couples , nobody should feel abused.

i happen to believe in marriage , and i believe that a couple should be a couple , to the exclusion of all others  , and they should look after each other in every possible way ( yes i know that many people dont see marriage this way) , and that doesnt mean that either party cant have friends , or have a close relationship with family. i also believe that when youre married , youre married , and cheating in any way is very very wrong , very disrespectful , and if you get caught , you deserve all you get , in a marriage , loyalty is everything ,  but maybe thats just me being old fashioned.

i wont go too far on the issue of interference , but my thoughts are , if they need to talk , listen , if they ask for an opinion , give it , if help is asked for , give it .

if a friend or relative of mine was being mistreated by a partner , my advice would be for them to explain how they feel to their other half how they were feeling , if that made no difference , my advice would be to leave them  , and if help was needed , id be there every step of the way , and in every way possible.

 

 

[ehb102]

16 hours ago, mel b3 said:

i wasnt going to weigh in again on this thread , but i thought that liz's post deserved a reply.

im starting with the assumption that most people know the basic difference between right and wrong. 

nobody in their right mind , can think that abusing their partner is acceptable . physical , mental , or emotional abuse , is disgraceful, and has no place in the present or past , yes it happened , and will most probably always happen , but its just wrong .  im no  psychiatrist , but i would imagine that coercive control would come under the mental abuse umbrella.  but as far as im aware liz , nobody in this thread has said that it is , or ever was , acceptable in any way. i think that it is wrong no matter if it is a man abusing a woman , or a woman abusing a man , or same sex couples , nobody should feel abused.

 

 

You're wrong, and I wish you weren't. Men as a class don't recognise coercive control and domestic violence. Why should they? The difference in situation between the sexes is that is comes with a whole heap of power imbalance that men are deeply resistant to recognising. 

Let's look at some recent evidence. Just this week it was reported that a third of young men don't see punching a woman as a form of domestic violence. It's reported here: https://womensagenda.com.au/latest/1-in-3-young-men-dont-consider-punching-a-form-of-domestic-abuse-according-to-new-white-ribbon-research/

Also "44 percent of them believed non-consensual sexual activity as also beyond the confines of what constitutes ‘domestic violence.’" 

I'm not going to write any more, because some men have the empathy to think about what it's like to be physically less strong in a world full of predators. Yes, there are lots of good men out there, but it's bloody hard to spot the bad ones at the start. Actual physical violence is the least of a woman's concerns in a relationship of coercive control. It's not just about hitting. It's a very clever form of torture using forms that probably wouldn't work on a man, simply because males are socialised very differently. Of course it doesn't work on every woman, and it will work on some men, but we are seen as gender non conforming and a bit odd, undesirable, strange. I'd rather be considered un****able by certain kinds of me, thanks.

Appreciation to all those men who don't think women should be either ****able or invisible.

[Lloyd90]

41 minutes ago, ehb102 said:

You're wrong, and I wish you weren't. Men as a class don't recognise coercive control and domestic violence. Why should they? The difference in situation between the sexes is that is comes with a whole heap of power imbalance that men are deeply resistant to recognising. 

Let's look at some recent evidence. Just this week it was reported that a third of young men don't see punching a woman as a form of domestic violence. It's reported here: https://womensagenda.com.au/latest/1-in-3-young-men-dont-consider-punching-a-form-of-domestic-abuse-according-to-new-white-ribbon-research/

Also "44 percent of them believed non-consensual sexual activity as also beyond the confines of what constitutes ‘domestic violence.’" 

I'm not going to write any more, because some men have the empathy to think about what it's like to be physically less strong in a world full of predators. Yes, there are lots of good men out there, but it's bloody hard to spot the bad ones at the start. Actual physical violence is the least of a woman's concerns in a relationship of coercive control. It's not just about hitting. It's a very clever form of torture using forms that probably wouldn't work on a man, simply because males are socialised very differently. Of course it doesn't work on every woman, and it will work on some men, but we are seen as gender non conforming and a bit odd, undesirable, strange. I'd rather be considered un****able by certain kinds of me, thanks.

Appreciation to all those men who don't think women should be either ****able or invisible.

 

Excellent post. 
 

The suggestion that someone who is a victim of domestic violence / co-erosive control should ask their abuser to sit down and tell them “what your doing it hurting my feelings” is not only borderline ridiculous but also highlights why so many people who are in these situations get ignored and have had such trouble getting help and recognised for such a long time. 


It must be nice to live in a world where things are so simple...

 

Things like controlling finances, putting her down about her weight whilst also smuggling high fat things into her food, and all those other behaviours are incredibly toxic and manipulative. 

[henry d]

3 hours ago, ehb102 said:

You're wrong, and I wish you weren't. Men as a class don't recognise coercive control and domestic violence. Why should they? The difference in situation between the sexes is that is comes with a whole heap of power imbalance that men are deeply resistant to recognising. 

Let's look at some recent evidence. Just this week it was reported that a third of young men don't see punching a woman as a form of domestic violence. It's reported here: https://womensagenda.com.au/latest/1-in-3-young-men-dont-consider-punching-a-form-of-domestic-abuse-according-to-new-white-ribbon-research/

Also "44 percent of them believed non-consensual sexual activity as also beyond the confines of what constitutes ‘domestic violence.’" 

I'm not going to write any more, because some men have the empathy to think about what it's like to be physically less strong in a world full of predators. Yes, there are lots of good men out there, but it's bloody hard to spot the bad ones at the start. Actual physical violence is the least of a woman's concerns in a relationship of coercive control. It's not just about hitting. It's a very clever form of torture using forms that probably wouldn't work on a man, simply because males are socialised very differently. Of course it doesn't work on every woman, and it will work on some men, but we are seen as gender non conforming and a bit odd, undesirable, strange. I'd rather be considered un****able by certain kinds of me, thanks.

Appreciation to all those men who don't think women should be either ****able or invisible.

 

2 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

 

Excellent post. 
 

The suggestion that someone who is a victim of domestic violence / co-erosive control should ask their abuser to sit down and tell them “what your doing it hurting my feelings” is not only borderline ridiculous but also highlights why so many people who are in these situations get ignored and have had such trouble getting help and recognised for such a long time. 


It must be nice to live in a world where things are so simple...

 

Things like controlling finances, putting her down about her weight whilst also smuggling high fat things into her food, and all those other behaviours are incredibly toxic and manipulative. 

👏