When your abuser calls himself a feminist

When I was 26, I had what I sometimes call a quarter-life crisis. In typical 20-something form, I thought what I needed was to escape city life. To get closer to nature and eschew technology or some crap.

I subletted my apartment and hung around on some of the little islands off the coast of British Columbia doing work trade -- living in trailers or spare rooms on people's property, feeding chickens, picking strawberries, and weeding their gardens. I quickly learned that I hated chickens and doing anything resembling physical labour/being near bugs and got a job at the local cafe.

I lived in a tent for the summer. I stopped shaving my armpits and made a bunch of ugly hemp necklaces. I learned to play Janis Joplin songs on my guitar and read a lot of Anarchist pamphlets. I didn't have much money, but I didn't need much. I felt relaxed for the first time in years.

When I first met Dan, he seemed fun and smart, but he was 20 years older than me which, to a 26-year-old who'd only ever slept with men relatively close in age, seemed gross. I brushed him off as a bit of a silly middle-aged man who was trying a little too hard to hang on to his youth. He obviously liked me, but I didn’t give it much thought. I had zero plans to actually date this guy. I wasn’t attracted to him and the idea of introducing my friends to him seemed humiliating.

He hung around the cafe, took me to local parties, and pretty much became my chauffeur. I hate to admit that I felt I was the one taking advantage of him. I felt I was the one in control.

This is, of course, the trouble with not having real power in this world. We take what we can get. Women learn they have power because men desire them, but it isn’t true.

Fall came and it began to cool down, so I moved out of my tent and into a trailer. I needed to get my belongings, strewn about various friends’ houses in the city. Dan offered to get a U-Haul and help me move my things.

We stayed at the Four Seasons and ordered room service and drank expensive drinks. I'd never been around people with money, really. I'd never had money, myself. I think I believed I was being practical or something. He didn't seem to mind spending money and I clearly didn't understand the consequences of "taking advantage" of someone older and richer than I.

I slept with him one night after too many drinks, regretted it immediately and then regretted it even more when, about a month later, I learned I was pregnant. I scheduled an abortion, but suffered a rather traumatic miscarriage a week before my appointment. Dan took care of me while I recovered that week, bedridden and high on OxyContin, prescribed for the pain. Looking back, I see our relationship as one forged through a kind of trauma-bonding.

I quickly became dependent on Dan. But he was smart. He was able to engage in debates about the things I was interested in -– politics, feminism, progressive movements. He aligned himself with lefty causes and with women’s rights. He believed himself to be a progressive guy. I believed it, too.

He talked a big game about community. About how this small island community took care of its own. He told me we didn't need cops because we were self-policing. He told me that abusive men were kicked off the island by the "good men." Of course he saw himself one of the “good” ones.

He made a point of telling as many people as possible about the thousands of dollars he’d donated to the local women's anti-violence group. He would identify as a feminist and then talk over all the women in the room.

Eventually his true nature began to show through his carefully crafted persona, but he was a master manipulator and somehow I always ended up believing that either his behaviour would change or that his blow-ups were my fault. He seemed able to own his own behaviour: “I acknowledge my part in this,” he’d say, referencing nothing in particular.

He dominated every conversation and would practically foam at the mouth if anyone disagreed with him. He made excuses as to why he had a pattern of dating much younger women. Older women had already had families, he claimed. If he wanted a family (in his 50s, one presumes?) he had no choice but to date 20-somethings.

At 47, he had all but retired. Alone and without debt or obligation to anyone but a couple of cats, he now had the freedom to pursue the good life and make up for the 10 years he’d wasted sober and employed. He moved to the island, promptly returned to alcoholism, and began a rigorous routine of smoking joints outside the local café and writing letters to the local newspaper.

He had a "poor me" story, as so many abusers do. The locals, he said, had been initially skeptical of his presence on the island. Why wasn't he -- a lone, middle-aged, white man with a fancy car -- immediately deserving of their trust? The thought that anyone would question his authenticity or his good guy persona drove him crazy.

Dan was a great actor. He'd mastered the art of imitating emotion -- able to conjure up convenient crocodile tears when pity was required. He’d memorized pseudo-therapeutic language, impressing women who were accustomed to men who were emotionally disengaged.

He was also always the victim. In past relationships and in life. He was “struggling,” he always said. He described the 10 years of his life spent as vice-president of A&R at a large record label as akin to serving time in a war. Part of his backstory of victimization, he claimed he needed to “recover” and demanded everyone “be gentle with him," which meant tiptoeing around him, never knowing what might cause an outburst.

Explanations of his life were full of holes. His house was a mess and he used paper towels as dishes. He told me he had a cleaning lady who used to come once a week but she called in sick one day and never came back. He would tell me about women he’d dated or slept with, and then months later I’d learn these stories were lies. He’d laugh it off: “Oh I was just joking about that.”

Through the year and a half we were together, we broke up constantly. The nonstop lying and mind games made me feel crazy and insecure. Dan would sneak out in the middle of the night while I was asleep and come home the next morning, never saying a word about where he’d been. If I asked, he’d scream at me -- accusing me of being jealous or having “issues.” Sometimes I wouldn’t even have known he’d gone anywhere until we ran into friends the next day and they’d reference the party last night.

I’d hear all sorts of stories from others -– sometimes about him cheating with other women, even younger than me. When I’d ask him about what I’d heard, he’d track down the people who ratted him out, threatening them and spreading rumors around the island that they were crazy and out to get him. Everyone was out to get him for some inexplicable reason.

I left him temporarily after he backhanded me across the face one night. He told everyone, even me, a variety of stories in explanation: It had been an accident -– he reached for something and my face got in the way. I’d lunged at him and he’d defended himself. One woman I’d told, a friend, I’d thought, responded: “Oh but you two were fighting, weren’t you?”

Well, yes. If you call being screamed at, called a “fucking cunt,” and then smacked across the face “a fight,” then yeah. I guess we were fighting.

Still, I went back to him after that. He seemed remorseful. Remorse is a good tactic. We all want to believe people can change.

I didn’t leave for good until I found out he’d cheated on me with a 21-year-old. She told me what had happened and he quickly began a campaign to ruin her reputation. He told me and anyone else who would listen that she had pursued him relentlessly, that she was obsessed and unstable, that when he rejected her, she wanted revenge. He immediately threatened to sue us both for libel, emailing us both aggressively and incessantly.

In all this, he stuck close by the more powerful women on the island, claiming persecution. One of them said I should be ashamed to call myself a feminist. For "crying wolf."

Emotional, physical, and verbal abuse is destructive enough. When your abuser is convinced, and has others convinced, he is a supporter of women’s rights and social justice, the alienation and betrayal feels all the more disquieting.

Reprinted

Orthorexia, the new eating disorder?

Orthorexia nervosa may be a familiar term to some of you. For others, it might sound like I borrowed it from a medical dictionary. But, the reality is, we are all familiar with the eating behaviours this term describes. According to the National Eating Disorders Association, orthorexia is an “unhealthy obsession” with otherwise healthy eating. From the mass-marketing of organic produce to the popularity of “fresh” restaurants, orthorexia and its related eating behaviours are an accepted part of our daily food culture.

The first time I read the term orthorexia (admittedly, in my favourite book on healthy eating for women), was an AHA! moment. It gives the name to a disordered relationship with food that is so often perceived as a healthy one. Orthorexia is, of course, not just eating well. According to the AEDA, “Orthorexia starts out as an innocent attempt to eat more healthfully, but orthorexics become fixated on food quality and purity.  They become consumed with what and how much to eat, and […] self-punish if temptation wins (usually through stricter eating, fasts and exercise).”

For me and, I suspect, for many women, this description of a dysfunctional relationship with food sounds all too familiar. Although I recognize that orthorexia, along with other eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia, is a serious illness, like these other eating disorders, orthorexic habits can be seen in many people’s diet and eating habits.

 

Orthorexia calls attention to a disordered relationship with food that is so often perceived as a healthy one. People who exhibit orthorexic behaviours are often publicly praised for eating healthily. Similarly, a person with anorexia and who eats little may be complimented on their 'restraint' and dedication to their health. In a culture that values thinness over health, women are praised for our unhealthy eating habits.

Other aspects of orthorexic behaviour include a feeling of superiority to others as your self-esteem becomes wrapped up in your eating habits. We often use moral terminology when we talk about to the food we choose. We say that we have been “good” when we follow a diet and “bad” when we don’t. Needless to say, thinking of all eating as “bad” and not eating as “good,” is inherently unhealthy.

Our dieting habits have changed hugely in the past 10 years. Women on a diet no longer content ourselves with eating a salad and skipping meals. We have also started paying microscopic attention to the food that we do eat. Understanding more about the way chemicals in mass-produced and processed foods impact our health, we, as a culture, are turning to organic and fresh choices. Outside of supermarkets, our city streets are sprouting whole foods shops, raw and fresh restaurants and even our fast food chains are selling foods marketed at a health-conscious audience.

But, how much of a difference do these foods make? Are businesses that offer “healthier” choices just cashing in on our nutty obsessions? Not only is our insistence on organic and certain trendy health foods expensive and time-consuming, but so is our relationship to food. If, as orthorexia suggests, we are unable to eat a cookie without a corresponding desire to purge, how much of our attention to food is actually about our health at all?

Now, don't get me wrong, I do believe there are benefits to eating whole foods over processed, but the whole whole foods/organic/fresh trend of recent years seems, for many people, less about eating well than losing weight.

When I eat a balanced, fresh meal I feel good about nourishing my body. I enjoy the increased energy it gives me and the sense of connection with my body. But behind every healthy bite I hope, maybe, just maybe this will help me lose weight. My guess is, I'm not the only feminist or large lady with such problems. My friends have often heard me say that I don't know one woman who has a healthy relationship to food.

For me, the understanding of orthorexia as an illness sheds light on our emotional relationship with food. When I eat a carrot, I feel good about myself. I feel in control of my environment, my body and my life. When I eat several cookies, I start to feel that my body is my enemy and my life is out of control. The desire to eat healthy food is, unfortunately, less about being healthy, but more about controlling my body, my desires and my weight.

But, where does this leave orthorexia? What's so wrong, after all, with a preference for fresh, organic food over processed junk food? Although a fastidious attention to produce and freshness could be perceived as a healthy habit, as with all eating disorders and worrisome habits, the problem lies in the thought process behind, and the excessiveness of the behaviour. If we, as women, or as a culture, can't ever enjoy a burger or a donut without feeling compelled to purge or punish ourselves by excessive dieting or exercise, then there is something tragically wrong in our relationship to food. This is undeniably unhealthy.

I’d like your input to help me work this moral foodie conundrum out. Do we live in an orthorexic culture? I’m especially interested in how our gender dictates our relationship to food. Women often have a hugely complicated relationship with nutrition and our bodies. Is healthy eating, for you women readers, just a way to stay thin?

Lastly, for all you food nerds out there, there is a longer version of this piece on Diary of a Lipstick Terrorist, which also examines the relationship of class with food and “organic culture.”

Activist Communique: Idle No More Proclaimed Day of Action and Awareness

 

 the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Professor James Anaya, began his official visit to Canada to examine the human rights situation of the Indigenous peoples of the country.

After meetings wrap up on Sunday, the government will get a chance to respond to the report before it is presented to the United Nations next year.

*Important note from the Special Rapporteur On Indigenous Rights: 

“Information can be added by individuals and interested parties. Please be aware that, due to the large volume of requests, we will not be able to respond to all inquiries individually and not all of those interested may be able to participate in meetings. However, written information for consideration may be sent at any time to indigenous@ohchr.org. Thank you for your understanding.”

October 7 is also an important date because it’s the 250th anniversary of Royal Proclamation of 1763. Through that proclamation, the British Crown -- Queen Elizabeth is currently Head of State but at the time it was King George III -- recognized such important things as Indigenous sovereignty and land title though most of Canada, excluding most of British Columbia.

The main purpose of the proclamation was to create a system of organization to instill and enforce Great Britain’s power in its new North American empire and eventually codify -- through treaty -- its relationships with Canadian First Nations communities through trade and land agreements.

Thus, it's referred to as our version of the Magna Carta, and helped to establish the Treaty System across Canada. This is where we get the designation -- if you have ever heard of things like Treaty Three land blocks -- which was established by Queen Victoria in October 3, 1873 in mainly Anishinaabe (and some Metis) territory that spans northwestern Ontario and a small part of eastern Manitoba.

Or Treaty Five territory, established in September, 1875, between Queen Victoria and the Saulteaux and Swampy Cree non-treaty tribes and peoples around Lake Winnipeg in the District of Keewatin.

This Crown-Indigenous relationship extends to various Canadian Supreme Court decisions and Section 35 of the Canadian Constitution Act (1982) which provides constitutional protection and treaty rights of Indigenous peoples in Canada. 

And Section 25 of the Canadian Charter:

“The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as to abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada including:

(a) any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763; and

(b) any rights or freedoms that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.”

In total, Idle No More reports there were more than 63 demonstrations across 12 countries.

According to an interview with the CBC, “In just two weeks in January, Aboriginal Affairs accumulated over 1,200 pages of records on Idle No More, based on the disclosure of an access to information request."

By February 15, officials had documented 439 protests across Canada. ‘It's a really good archive,’ joked Idle No More organizer Alex Wilson.

In Toronto, over 200 people attended the rally that featured two round dances.

In Windsor, Ontario, a small demonstration occurred in the downtown core.

In Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Idle No More activists held a round dance at the University of Saskatchewan campus.

Demonstrations were also held in Ottawa, Winnipeg, with a great set of Winnipeg photos here, and Vancouver.

There were serious accusations of racism at Montreal’s rally. “In the anniversary of the 1763 Royal Proclamation, the Montreal police took down and destroyed a tipi that community members had set up as part of the Idle No More Global Day of Action. According to witnesses, police did not attempt any negotiations and moved into the camp, pushing aside a group of Aboriginal women who were gathered around the tipi."

These events are in solidarity with the six calls for change during our #SovSummer, created when Idle No More and Defenders of the Land joined forces.

1. Repeal provisions of Bill C-45 (including changes to the Indian Act and Navigable Waters Act, which infringe on environmental protections, Aboriginal and Treaty rights) and abandon all pending legislation which does the same.

2. Deepen democracy in Canada through practices such as proportional representation and consultation on all legislation concerning collective rights and environmental protections, and include legislation which restricts corporate interests.

3. In accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’ principle of free, prior, and informed consent, respect the right of Indigenous peoples to say no to development on their territory.

4. Cease its policy of extinguishment of Aboriginal Title and recognize and affirm Aboriginal Title and Rights, as set out in section 35 of Canada’s constitution, and recommended by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples.

5. Honour the spirit and intent of the historic Treaties. Officially repudiate the racist Doctrine of Discovery and the Doctrine of Terra Nullius, and abandon their use to justify the seizure of Indigenous Nations lands and wealth.

6. Actively resist violence against women and hold a national inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls, and involve Indigenous women in the design, decision-making, process and implementation of this inquiry, as a step toward initiating a comprehensive and coordinated national action plan.

For more information on Idle No More, follow rabble.ca’s extensive coverage.