Yesterday afternoon, the lady who does the domestic chores at home did not show up for work. Today, when she came in, I asked her what happened. She said her husband was (a) drunk and (B) sitting outside his mother's house (with whom they don't even get along)
So, she had asked him why he was not at their own home. He simply got up and thrashed her so hard, she fell to the ground. Then, by-standers and her mother in law (!) intervened and the assault stopped.
This is not new in this world. Wife-beating (in most cases, it IS the wife who receives -- the weaker sex and all that) is supposed to be 'quite normal' and not restricted to certain sections of society.
What amazes me is the tolerance of the women at the receiving end and people around. How come there are no rage murders by the wife -- when she is assaulted, loses it and finishes her husband off for good? I am sure there are a few such cases but only a few. Amazing that there are so many many women out there who think it is ok to be hit. Even educated ones!
Of course, that brings us to the uncomfortable topic of violence in general.
Anyways...sticking with the heading 'domestic violence', even whacking kids is domestic violence, right? But then how about the old saying ' spare the rod and spoil the child'? Does that mean that kids can be whacked now and then in order to discipline them? Is that OK?
Perhaps one of the first things we should be taught in school and the same reinforced in college, is that we should not hit anybody at all. Period. No raising of hand. I really don't remember having learned such a lesson, but perhaps it is much more relevant today with flying tempers, stressful lives, nuclear families and terribly intelligent and aware children?
Such a thin line between a whack and a wham. Such a thin line between irritation and rage. Such a thin line between sanity and insanity. And such a thin line between verbal assault and physical abuse.