Your Kindle Notes For:

No Visible Bruises: What We Don’t Know About Domestic Violence Can Kill Us

Rachel Louise Snyder

Last accessed on Thursday February 20, 2020

9 Highlight(s) | 0 Note(s)

Some highlights have been hidden or truncated due to export limits.

Yellow highlight | Location: 102 Note | Location: 102

I’d studied fiction in graduate school, but gravitated toward nonfiction soon after because I understood almost immediately that nonfiction was a more direct source of change. I was pulled toward hidden corners of the world, to disenfranchised people, because I knew in some small measure what it felt like to be an unseen, unheard person, what it felt like to grieve beyond what you thought your body could absorb.

Note:

Yellow highlight | Location: 2,764 Note | Location: 2,764

In the pedagogy of ManAlive, the male role belief system is what society tells men to expect. In group, Jimmy or Sinclair or whoever is leading will often stop and ask the participants to offer some examples of the male role belief system: man does not get disrespected. Man does not get lied to. Man’s sexuality does not get questioned. Man is the authority. Man does not get dismissed. Woman should be submissive, obedient, supportive to man.

Note:

Yellow highlight | Location: 2,767 Note | Location: 2,767

When a man’s belief system is challenged, he goes into fatal peril and that is the moment where violence is a choice. ManAlive uses a kind of hokey phrase for this moment: when a man’s “inner hit man” comes out and his “authentic self” disappears.

Note:

Yellow highlight | Location: 3,263 Note | Location: 3,263

Calling shame “an epidemic in our culture,” Brown cites the research of James Mahalik at Boston College, who studied what our ideas were of gender norms across American society. For women those norms involved “nice, thin, modest, and use all available resources for appearance.” For men, the norms included “show emotional control, work is first, pursue status, and violence.”

Note:

Yellow highlight | Location: 4,009 Note | Location: 4,009

He says how they all learned as little kids that boys don’t cry. “Our dad or mom said, ‘Don’t cry now. Shake it off,’ right? Why not? It hurt. Why not cry? What’s wrong with crying? Boys didn’t get to cry because they were in pain, falling on gravel, but my daughter? Man. She was scooped up and held and kissed, and my son was told to stop crying.” He shakes his head. “Now, with the education I got, I’m like, ‘Come here, little man. I feel like crying with you. I know that hurt. It’s okay. Cry.’ ”

Note:

Yellow highlight | Location: 4,013 Note | Location: 4,013

He talks about how he grew up believing women served men because he watched his grandmother and his female cousins all make the food and bring the food and clean up the food, and the boys sat watching the ball game. What were they all being taught? And now he’s a grown man and he knows, because he had to learn, how to feed himself, how to make his own damn omelet. “I had no concept of appreciation,” he says of his past girlfriends, of Kelly. “I never had a bad partner. I had a bad attitude.”

Note:

Yellow highlight | Location: 4,206 Note | Location: 4,206

Did Dorothy have time to remember that fateful day when she was fifteen years old and she met a boy who claimed to fall in love with her at first sight? Did she blame that young version of herself? Did she consider how her culture pushes little girls toward love, tells them love conquers all? Did she ever wonder why we don’t tell more stories of love’s defeat? I don’t believe love conquers all. So many things in this world seem more powerful than love. Duty. Rage. Fear. Violence.

Note:

Yellow highlight | Location: 4,586 Note | Location: 4,586

“The Constitution tends to frown upon punishing prospective behavior,” Ronald S. Sullivan Jr., the director of the Harvard Criminal Justice Institute, told me. “We punish past behavior that’s been proven. Here we’re keeping people in jail because we think they’ll be dangerous.” But Viktoria Kristiansson, an attorney adviser for AEquitas, cited the importance of the dangerousness hearing, claiming it “automatically provides a different context for a judge to analyze the evidence.”

Note:

Yellow highlight | Location: 4,646 Note | Location: 4,646

In Crawford v. Washington the Supreme Court ruled that cross-examination is required of witnesses at trial unless a witness was unavailable (e.g., sick or dead). The court said that a defendant had the Constitutional right to face his accusers, that testimonial statements by witnesses who did not appear at trial were hearsay. And hearsay was not admissible.3 This meant victims who were too terrified to appear in court but were otherwise healthy could no longer allow prosecutors to use their statements.

Note:

Would you like to take some notes?

You haven’t created any notes for this book yet. You can add or remove bookmarks, highlights, and notes at any location in a Kindle book.

Learn more about notes and highlights

Sorry, we''ve experienced a problem. Please try again.