Forgive me, for this is going to be a redonkulously long post! It took me forever to type up.
First, to
Lillewyn. Welcome back!
Lillewyn
Although, most of those really weren't Edward's fault directly.
Very true. I merely stated that to draw attention to the fact that, before Edward, Bella was never in danger. Her life was normal, and she did not need protecting from anything. In fact, she took care of her mother, who told her she was born as 35 year old adult. She was responsible, mature (or so we're told). Before Edward, she was mostly independent. After Edward, not so much. I'm sorry I did not clarify before.
Lillewyn
James decided to hunt Bella on his own, not because of Edward.
That's where we differ in opinon. It seemed to me that James hunted Bella not just because she smelled good, but because Edward was so protective of her. James wanted to rob Edward of what James percieved to be
his property.
James
"I suppose you're going to tell me that your boyfriend will avenge you?" he asked, hopefully it seemed to me.
[...]
"Hmmm. Well, our hopes differ then. You see, this was all just a little too easy, too quick. To be quite honest, I'm disappointed. I expected a much greater challenge. And, after all, I only needed a little luck."
[...]
"I'm sorry, but I just don't think he'll be able to resist hunting me after he watches this. And I wouldn't want him to miss anything. It was all for him, of course. You're simply a human, who unfortunately was in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and indisputably running with the wrong crowd, I might add."
Unfortunately, I don't own the book, only a PDF. (No one will buy me a copy, and I'm sure as hell not giving her any of my hard earned money.) For this reason I can't give you an accurate page number. However, these quotes are all from the chapter in Twilight titled "Hide-and-Seek". As that last quote in particular demonstrates, James really WAS hunting Bella because of Edward.
Lillewyn
You didn't mention any of the things that proved the opposite of the whole point of this board, though.
Oh, didn't I? I apologize; allow me to clarify my reasonings.
Lillewyn
Like how he was (and all from Jacob's perspective) when he thought Bella was going to die because of being pregnant.
Regardless of the fact that the baby was killing her, he did not discuss the idea with her. He presumed he knew better than her, and acted accordingly. That's why it's abusive, EMOTIONALLY abusive and controlling. He is dictating how her life should go, without consulting her. Nevermind that she wanted to die for her child, that wasn't important to him. It's her life, and her body, her choice. Not his. He did not care about her desire to carry the child to term. All he could think about was himself - that he could not bare to loose her. He has a right to be concerned, not a right to make her choices for her. Let him plea with her to change her mind, let him beg. But he should not ask Jacob to procreate with her. Even though they are married, her body is hers and hers only. He does not own it, therefore he cannot share it. If I were Bella, I'd be serving him a divorce notice for that kind of unexceptable behavior.
Lillewyn
He only told Bella that they would 'Take care of the problem' because he assumed she would be frightened for her life. [...] She asked for help from Rosalie not because she was frightened for her own life, but for her child's. It says in the book that she could see that he didn't understand how she felt about the whole thing, not that he didn't care.
They do not communicate. This is a problem, because in healthy relationships, lovers do communicate. He did not ask her how she felt. Once again, he assumed he knew, but he was wrong. On the flip side of things, she did not inform him of her desire to keep the child, but felt that she needed to run to someone else for protection for it. She told Rosalie more than she told Edward, and her and Rosalie aren't exactly the best of friends. Do you not see what's wrong with that picture? They're married; communication should flow between them as easily as water. And yet there is nothing. That isn't a healthy relationship.
Lillewyn
He didn't intentionally give her bruises.
In matters of abuse, intent has nothing to do with it. Very few abusers intend to abuse their SO.
Lillewyn
And the occurance of such a circumstance was because Bella only agreed to marry him if he would have sex with her.
And she would only be turned if she married him. Also, he would ONLY have sex with her if she married him first. That's Edward: 2, Bella: 1. This has been said before: Marriage should never be used as a bargining tool.
Lillewyn
He was very worried and reluctant, being afraid that he would hurt her. He was remorseful and angry at himself when he realized that he'd hurt her.
Remorse is a natural part of what's known as the "Cycle of Abuse". Yes, he genuinely feels sorry for what happened, BUT he did it again. (I'm sure you will now be accusing me of setting him up for failure either way. If he had sex with her, he would hurt her, but if he denied her that's not being a good husband. Damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. All I can say in response to that is hey, I didn't write Breaking Dawn. I'm just calling it like I see it.)
Lillewyn
And it's not like she hid them because she didn't want someone to know he 'abused' her, seeing as they were the only ones on the island.
Ah, but they weren't the only ones on the island. What about the housekeepers, or do they not count as human beings simply because they are hired help? And this is what Bella says in regards to what she's wearing, "...an unfamiliar white cotton dress that concealed the worst of the violet blotches..." If it isn't an issue, why bother trying to conceal the bruises?
Lillewyn
No, pimping her out would be asking Jacob for money in exchange for Bella's 'services'. Edward was asking Jacob to offer Bella sex in exchange for her life. And it wasn't even so much for the sex as for the child. Edward knew she wanted a child, and was trying this as a last-ditch effort (causing himself alot of pain) to save her life without hurting her by denying her a child. He had Jacob ask her, rather than forcing the decision, and he accepted her decsion when she said no.
Okay, so the word pimping was a bit strong. However, like I said earlier, he should not have even gone behind her back in the first place. She didn't even know about his intent. It would be different if they discussed it
together and came to that conclusion
together, but they did not. There was no 'they'. There was Edward, cutting her out of the equation once again.
And now, on to
XoConcreteAngelXo.
XoConcreteAngelXo
Yeah he gave her bruises and said they WONT do that again.
And then he went back on his word and did it anyway.
XoConcreteAngelXo
He refuses and shes the one that manipulates him to do so. So THAT is her own fault.
This raises an entirely different issue: All women in Twilight are portrayed as either weak, ineffectual/silly, only existing for babies, evil, or any combination thereof. In this particular instance, Bella is playing the part of the sex-craved seductress who chips away at the oh-so-noble male's will. But that is another thing all together, and has little to do with the debate at hand.
XoConcreteAngelXo
So he was thinking of ways she could have aone without dying.
It's not really what he thinks but the way he goes about acting on it. See above. It's her choice; if she want's to throw her life away for her child, then he should respect that. And he should have at least talked to her about it, instead of presuming to know what she wants and/or what is best for her. Carlisle is a doctor, he was merely giving her options. He also isn't her husband. See the difference?
XoConcreteAngelXo
He helped BEFORE he met bella. It's in the first book.
Where in the first book? Could you please provide quotes to prove this? Did he volunteer at the homeless shelter? Tutor other kids in school? Go to political protests or write to his senator over issues he felt needed to be addressed? Refuse to eat endangered predators? Did he lecture his bretherin about wasting food at lunch just to seem like they're fitting in? The answer to those last two are a resounding "No".
XoConcreteAngelXo
And Bella had to constantly watch over her mom because her mom was like a child. Does TAHT make bella abusive?
"Her mom was like a child." Remember what I said about Meyer portraying women as ineffectual or silly? That applies in this case too. We cannot determine if Bella was controlling (let alone emotionally abusive) toward her mother because there isn't enough information. The story starts as she's leaving her mother. However, it seemed to me like she wasn't giving her mother a choice in the matter, and that Bella believes it's in her mother's best interests if she leaves. Sound familiar? So, it is hinted at a yes. Again, there is not enough information to make an accurate judgement.
XoConcreteAngelXo
Just as YOU all THINK he is abusive.
Why is this a problem? Are we not allowed to voice our opinions as well?
XoConcreteAngelXo
And I have read TONS of "quotes" on here that didn't actually happen...They said it to make it look like Edward wanted Bella to feel bad for him and put the blame on herself for his death if he were to kill himself.
It isn't just the suicide claim, you know. What about what he did to her truck? Watching her through her window without her knowledge or permission? Taking her stuff and hiding it? Did we make all that up? If it was one thing, it wouldn't be a problem.
But that's just it. It isn't one thing; it's lots of things.
XoConcreteAngelXo
And since when is it abuse to deny someone sex?
has this to say:
"An abusive relationship is an interpersonal relationship characterized by the use or threat of physical or psychological abuse (see battered woman syndrome). Abusive relationships are often characterized by jealousy, emotional withholding, lack of intimacy, infidelity, sexual coercion, verbal abuse, broken promises, physical violence, control games and power plays." (Emphasis mine.)
