Edward Cullen - Abusive Boyfriend (Eclipse SPOILERS)

Your opinion?

I knew it all along.	61.8%	[ 1576 ]
Good points, but I'm not convinced.	15.4%	[ 393 ]
You're wrong, and I will post my rebuttal.	11.5%	[ 293 ]
But it's True Love!	11.4%	[ 290 ]
Total Votes:			[ 2552 ]

[Kale Delvar]

Hi. Let me qualify myself. I have a Master's in English Lit. Now then. Let me dissect what you just said.

Props, however, for writing an intelligible argument.

RiletFan

First off.... This is kinda absurd to even have this discussion because it is fiction and you can't put real life reasoning and behaviors to fictional characters. Secondly, you cannot compare Bella and Edwards relationship to a real life relationship because it could never happen,sadly. cry .


So judging them by real life standards is very unfair. In real life people have depth and there is always more to what we say and do ... in a fictional world with fictional people the people do and act as the writer chooses. That is not saying that Stephanie Meyer chose for him to be abusive as most of you think, rather it just affirmed that he is from a different time period the Bella is from and they did things rather differently then. He was responsible for her well being. He loved her and had to do everything in his power to keep her safe...her Guardian Vampire. If you want to read more about why Edward does the things he does you can go to Stephanie Meyers website and read Midnight Sun, it is a partial novel about Twilight from Edwards account.

Actually, looking at range of literature in the whole of history, you're kind of wrong there. Fictional characters must have depth or else you can't care about them. They're uninteresting, they're boring, they're like cat vomit. The reasons why Shakespeare has lasted as long as he has is because his stories echo and reveal human nature, they have depth to them that's more than what we see. Literature, and GOOD writing reflects the world back at us, no matter the setting, so that we can connect with the characters and get involved with them.

When you read or listen to writers talk about their craft (good ones, at least) they often will talk about how the characters are real to them. That they aren't just words, but living breathing people with their own desires, wants and opinions on things. Writers spend hours upon hours upon days upon months coming up with reasons and backgrounds and personalities of their main characters to make them human. It may never end up written in the book, or if it is, it might have been cut, but it's likely it's there.

Looking at his reactions in the beginning of Midnight Sun, you can hardly call that from a different time period's POV. He casually talks about murdering twenty people so that he can take Bella off into the woods and eat/rape her. No one put him in charge of Bella's well being, but himself. Bella certainly didn't need it before she came to Forks, why does she need it now? And this is even before the other vampires are mentioned. There is absolutely no reason for Edward to stay in Forks. He's rich, he's got several degrees and fully capable of taking care of himself. He realizes that being around Bella is a danger and instead of listening to it, he puts himself and her, the person he supposedly cares about, in danger.

When Edward was turned, he would never think about being with a woman alone. It was improper. Plus, beating your wife in his time was perfectly acceptable behavior. Women were no more than property and he treats Bella as such. The thing is, why would Bella even allow this sort of thing to happen to her. She capitulates far to easily to him without a protest.

RiletFan

Moreover the thing with Mike is jealousy, but would you not be jealous and angry if you could read the minds of the other guys who liked your girlfriend and had thoughts you believed to be ungentlemanly? Who also could replace her with another girl with the drop of a pin? Someone who though she was interchangeable, better but still interchangeable. How would you feel about that person?

Mike has about as much character as dried oatmeal, I'm sorry. His only purpose there is to give Edward an excuse to act jealous. However, in Twilight, Mike appears to show concern for Bella, thinking that maybe she might be in danger. As for replacing Bella with a drop of a pin? It'd be rather silly of him to continue to pine when it's been made clearly obvious that Bella doesn't want him. Jessica is obviously interested in him, and maybe he was even interested in her before Bella showed up.

RiletFan

The sneaking in her window was sweet, I think.And also a necessity because the longer he was away from her the harder it was to control his thirst for her. Remember she was not a normal human, she smelled way better than anyone had in his whole existence. Painfully better.

Sneaking into anyone's room without their permission is not sweet or romantic but instead, a clear disregard for Bella's privacy and self as a person. No matter what the reason. A *****, stalker or a rapist could and do give the same exact reasons that Edward does. The woman smells better/looks sexier/whatever than anyone else in existence, the longer I stay away from her the harder it is. I had to be there. I had to touch her. I needed her. I wanted her. Only her. I had to have her. I had to rape her. I had to kill her. She was asking for it.

How exactly is that sweet?

RiletFan

The suicide thing was a little rash I will admit but he couldn't, wouldn't live with out her, there was no reason for him to exist if she didn't. That was his plan from the get go...that he would stay with her for as long as she wanted him and then when she got old and died he would to end his existence, whether they had been together or not. So why is it controlling...how does that fit into your abusive roll. It had nothing to do with making her feel blame for his death nothing like that at all. It was him not wanting to exist if she didn't, that's romantic. heart Plus, he didn't know Bella would feel anything about his death because, after all, she was dead. So he thought anyway.

He didn't let her choose to tell him to go away. He went away on his own, thus manipulating her emotions and making her feel guilty that she made him left.

RiletFan

The scaring her thing was necessary as well. He wanted her to be afraid of him. He wanted to make her stay away like other humans did. to protect her. He didn't want to kill her but he wasn't strong enough to make himself stay away from her. But he thought if he could make her stay away from him his feelings on the matter wouldn't matter.
And when he did finally leave he did that for her as well, he thought she would deal with it better if there were no reminders of hi or his family so she would forget, after all, she was human and couldn't fell as strongly as he did, right?

He didn't take her belongings then either...he put them under her floor boards. 4laugh

He obviously didn't want to scare her, or else he would have actually scared her. And this only shows that he's being selfish. HE wasn't strong enough to stay away from her and he didn't care enough to leave. He chose to interact with her. If he really wanted to protect her he wouldn't have gone anywhere near her. By saying he's trying to scare her away, he's acting like he's being self sacrificing and everything, but he's not actually doing what he says he's trying to do: Protect her.

RiletFan

He was a little obsessive and over protective but he had waited his whole life and existence for her. he had been alone for over 100 years and nearly 50 year with 3 other incredibly in love couples....that's bound to cause some attachment issues. He didn't want to spend one more second without that. She was his world. The only thing he wanted and she wanted him too, that supprized him so he didn't want to lose that before she realized she didn't want him. which he was sure she would and he wanted her to , as well. he wanted her to keep her soul because he thought that he didn't have one that vampires couldn't have one.

There is no reason why Edward couldn't have left and struck out on his own when he felt like being with three loving couples was getting to him. Except for the fact that then he wouldn't have been in Forks to have met Bella etc. etc. etc.

RiletFan

So.. there are a lot of things Edward is but abusive in any way is not one of them. He was her GUARDIAN VAMPIRE so to speak. He had to protect her...sometimes from himself, the best way he knew how. She was breakable and human! What else could he do?

She didn't need a guardian in the first place. And you know, there's more than one way to abuse a person beyond physically. And saying you're in love with someone also doesn't prove that you're not abusing them.

There are lots of men who say they love their wives, and maybe they do I don't know, but they still abuse them. Physically and emotionally.

[Guma-chan]

Wow Kale Delvar. Your good. I mean really good. I had argued in here before hand against shmeiliarockie and i was able to last awhile. I lost the debate but I was still able to last. If I went up against you however... lets just say that I would not be visiting this thread again. I would not be able to come up with a good argument to top yours. Just saying, Props to you for coming up with such a good argument. biggrin

[RiletFan]

About saying the characters have no depth... I'm sure you are all thrilled by my choice of words...But characters in a book or movie or anything else fictional just don't have the same depth as a real life person has plain and simple. The writer can spend all the time in world to try to make them as real as possible but she can never give them as much depth as a real person.

Quote:

He shouldn't be jealous. He should trust her. There is no such thing as jealousy if there is a place for trust.

Why shouldn't he be? Have you never been jealous?
He did trust her he just didn't like the things Mike thought about her. He wasn't jealous that she was talking to him, he was jealous of Mike's humanity. That he could touch her and be for her something Edward himself could never be. He was human...something that Edward really wanted. It wasn't all about Bella, but some of it was, he felt Mike was a rival... and he didn't even know it was jealousy at first.. it was something that had never happened to him..before Bella.

Quote:

He still kept her away from her friend. That's wrong.
And, then, he forced her to keep away from himself, which is also wrong

.

I didn't say it wasn't wrong... It just isn't abusive. It was just bad behavior, a mistake if you will. And once he sees that he doesn't have a problem with it.
Leaving her wasn't wrong...he way he did it was. He didn't force her to stay away, he forced himself to stay away and he reasoned with his family that it would be easier that way... mainly for Bella but for himself as well.

Someone.. I don't know who... said that he should have never come back from Denali(Alaska), that he only did because of Bella, which is untrue..He came back despite Bella being in Forks. He came back because he didn't want to be a coward and he thought that running from his thirst was cowardly. He had spent so long fighting the monster within and he didn't want it to win and running was like admitting that he was that monster.

Quote:

Romantic!?! No, please don't tell me you just said that...
The suicide was rash and unnecessary. If he couldn't live without her, then he's just a pansy. Romantic is keeping on with your life and doing what your dead spouse/girlfriend would have wanted you to do...LIVE YOUR LIFE!

No that would be realism... Go on with your life... Live every second to the fullest...do everything that the other person won't be able to do.

what is romantic then?
Most every love song or poem or anything that is place in the romance category has a similar story. once another person exist to the other, everything else just disappears the whole world could end and it wouldn't matter, time stands still. They want nothing more than that person,right?
So... with that in mind...how can you say that the opposite...not wanting to exist if that other person exists...is not just as romantic. Romance and reality are hardly ever fall hand in hand.

Quote:

Okay, how is that cute at all? I'm not like, arguing that point that you think it's cute, I'm just honestly curious. I'd be bawling if my boyfriend left and hid all my things and I never knew where to find them.
SM defends his actions here by saying if Bella really wanted to remember him, she could've gotten the artifacts under her floor boards. WHAT???!!! She didn't even KNOW they were there! Who even thinks to look under the floor?!
Anyway, scaring her is still a tactic of abuse and it's wrong. So is forcing her to stay away from all the Cullen's; her friends. Would you like that?

What I think is cute about that is... well... that he still has no idea the depth of Bella's feeling... that he is so blind to how she truly feels about him. that he still doesn't see that she is just as capable of the loving him the way he loves her. Maybe cute wasn't the right way to put it but... I've seen that same thing with my own eyes and I find it adorable how blind people can be about each other. That's just me I know but...

Everyone is still going on about the window thing and I can see how some people would feel that that is an overstep of boundaries, but it all depends on the way each person identifies their boundaries really. I for one would not mind if someone I cared about did it... neither did Bella. It just depends on the person it's being done to.
So make all the statements you want about 'how it doesn't matter what the other person thinks or feels because it just wrong.', after all someone else deciding what is right for another is all right, right?

and to Kale... thank you for the props. Also yes I am very aware that there is more than one way to be abused.. I've seen it my whole life. My mother and my aunt and my sister where all in some form of abusive relationship and I watched the things they went through.
With that said... I still can not agree that Edward is abusive...a little misguided, maybe.
He is obsessed with Bella but not in a dangerous way; The same that Bella is obsessed with him.
He tries to stay away but he isn't strong enough..he knew he wouldn't be...Alice told him that...but he tried nonetheless to stay away from her( with out leaving his family) so he could change the future that Alice saw... he didn't want her to be a vampire.
I never said he wasn't selfish...he was very selfish and self serving... he tried very hard not to be but that is what all of the vampires in these books are...self serving. Well maybe besides Esme and Carlisle.They weren't to an extent.

Bella did need protecting from herself. In Twilight..awhile Bella was in the hospital after being attacked by James, the doctor does mention all of the healed injuries in her x-rays. Also, as a mother I would not have believed that my daughter fell down some stairs and through a window had she not been extremely accident prone. Her mother didn't think twice about this and Bella says herself that she is clumsy, which is why she didn't want to go to prom or the dance. She was to embarrassed to be seen falling all over herself or hurt someone else...like in gym. She would not subject other people to herself. She knew she was a danger to herself and possibly others.


Also... this is a big deal to me....saying that these book influences young girls is shocking to me. I have always had a problem with people blaming books or music or games or anything of that nature for the actions of others. People make stupid decisions all the time and just because some of you think that there are abusive and masochistic undertones to these books does in no way connect to the fact that some young girls may go and find an abusive man. That is unfair. The same as it is unfair to say that Marilyn Manson or Grand Theft auto can influence hostile behavior for some. It depends on a person, the things that they do are a part of their personality. Part of what makes them different than someone else. Good or bad.

[shmeiliarockie]

RiletFan

Everyone is still going on about the window thing and I can see how some people would feel that that is an overstep of boundaries, but it all depends on the way each person identifies their boundaries really.

Not true. It's illegal in every State. And for good reason.

RiletFan

I for one would not mind if someone I cared about did it... neither did Bella.

Ah, but when he started doing it, she hadn't even spoken more than maybe twenty words to him. It was impossible that she actually cared about him when he decided to violate her right to privacy. Therefore, it was wrong of him.

Your sentimentalism is clouding your ability to be objective here.

RiletFan

No that would be realism...

You've pretty firmly established that you think reality is teh suck.

RiletFan

every love song or poem or anything that is place in the romance category has the same story. once another person exist to the other, everything else just disappears the whole world could end and it wouldn't matter, time stands still. They want nothing more than that person.right?

First, I say, "prove it". Prove to me that every love song or poem says this, because I don't believe it.

Secondly, relationships are only healthy if they're an equal partnership.

RiletFan

Also... this is a big deal to me....saying that these book influences young girls is shocking to me.

Here is all the proof you need of that, dear.


Edit: Hi, Guma-chan! Good to see you back!

[bePeterPan]

RiletFan

About saying the characters have no depth... I'm sure you are all thrilled by my choice of words...But characters in a book or movie or anything else fictional just don't have the same depth as a real life person has plain and simple. The writer can spend all the time in world to try to make them as real as possible but she can never give them as much depth as a real person.

I'm not talking about movies here anyway. I will agree, most movies today, the characters have no depth, yet the movies do extremely well? Why is this? Because people today don't want to have to think. Only in old films or in movies like Dead Poet's Society, movies directed by Wes Anderson, or films converted from very good books (i.e. Lord of the Rings) do characters have depth.
Characters need depth, or else they are unbelievable. I'm sorry you like your book characters fake with a side of no humanity.

I think Kale Delvar went over this with you as well.

RiletFan

Why shouldn't he be? Have you never been jealous?
He did trust her he just didn't like the things Mike thought about her. He wasn't jealous that she was talking to him, he was jealous of Mike's humanity. That he could touch her and be for her something Edward himself could never be. He was human...something that Edward really wanted. It wasn't all about Bella, but some of it was, he felt Mike was a rival... and he didn't even know it was jealousy at first.. it was something that had never happened to him..before Bella.

To be honest I can't remember a time I was jealous about anything having to do with my fiance. I love him so much, but that also means I trust him. He also gets asked out on many dates, and I'm sure that means the girls who ask him think he's quite attractive and want some things from him, but I'm not jealous. He's mine, so why should it bother me?

RiletFan

I didn't say it wasn't wrong... It just isn't abusive. It was just bad behavior, a mistake if you will. And once he sees that he doesn't have a problem with it.
Leaving her wasn't wrong...he way he did it was. He didn't force her to stay away, he forced himself to stay away and he reasoned with his family that it would be easier that way... mainly for Bella but for himself as well.

It's manipulation and it's abuse. It's forcing someone to do someone against their own will.

RiletFan

what is romantic then?
every love song or poem or anything that is place in the romance category has the same story. once another person exist to the other, everything else just disappears the whole world could end and it wouldn't matter, time stands still. They want nothing more than that person.right?
So... with that in mind...how can you say that the opposite...not wanting to exist if that other person exists...is not just as romantic. Romance and reality are hardly ever fall hand in hand.

What shmeilia said. And this:
I have been in love. I'm also in love right now. But he's not the only thing I want out of life. He's the most important person in my life, and also my best friend, but I wouldn't kill myself if he died. Time doesn't stand still, I'm sorry to say. I'm not much of a sappy romantic (and don't use that as a reason as to why I don't like Twilight...Twilight sucks all over itself) and don't believe in dumb movies like The Notebook.
Either way, it's another use of manipulation to say you'd die if one left. That leaves them with NO CHOICE! Who'd want to be the cause of someone's suicide?

RiletFan

Also... this is a big deal to me....saying that these book influences young girls is shocking to me. I have always had a problem with people blaming books or music or games or anything of that nature for the actions of others. People make stupid decisions all the time and just because some of you think that there are abusive and masochistic undertones to these books does in no way connect to the fact that some young girls may go and find an abusive man. That is unfair. The same as it is unfair to say that Marilyn Manson or Grand Theft auto can influence hostile behavior for some. It depends on a person, the things that they do are a part of their personality. Part of what makes them different than someone else. Good or bad.

Well this is just all goes back to the argument of What Makes a Person Who He Is? Environment or genetic wiring? It's both. And when anyone is around something long enough, they are influenced by it. It's been proven many times. There are plenty of girls I've heard around school who say they want a man just like Edward. So this teaches them that there is an ideal man out there and there is no give-and-take in a relationship. A relationship is built on equal parts. Equal parts keeping care of the house and kids. Not always equal in providing for the family, but I'm okay with that.

[hermie_the_frog]

Okay, Breaking Dawn Spoilers. (I can't do the white thing, so I apologize.)

Spoilers

Spoilers

Spoilers

....

...

...

Was I the only one that was disturbed at the results of Edward and Bella's first sex? I've been looking through the later pages to see if anybody mentioned this...but no.

That to me was the chapter with the most hints at the abusive relationship. They have sex. Bella presumably bleeds since it's her first time and we girls do that during our first time. She gets bruised. Edward takes out his fustration on pillows. Bella can't remember a thing and is so dang buzzed that she doesn't care. She's also trying to cover up the bruises later "so she won't upset him." As my sister put it, "If he buys her something really nice to make up for it I'll scream."

[Aldorel]

We've got a person with academic qualifications in here? Sweet! Great arguments, Kale.

Kale

Sneaking into anyone's room without their permission is not sweet or romantic but instead, a clear disregard for Bella's privacy and self as a person. No matter what the reason. A *****, stalker or a rapist could and do give the same exact reasons that Edward does. The woman smells better/looks sexier/whatever than anyone else in existence, the longer I stay away from her the harder it is. I had to be there. I had to touch her. I needed her. I wanted her. Only her. I had to have her. I had to rape her. I had to kill her. She was asking for it.

How exactly is that sweet?

That just needed to be said twice.

Also, saying that Edward is allowed to watch her sleep because he's her boyfriend is faulty logic, because he wasn't her boyfriend at the time. The fact that she turned out to be OK with it doesn't change the fact that she didn't give permission ahead of time.

However, I must point out that this:

Kale

He obviously didn't want to scare her, or else he would have actually scared her.

Is faulty, because he actually did scare her in the meadow, at least until he turned his dazzle-powers on.

Quote:

Someone.. I don't know who... said that he should have never come back from Denali(Alaska), that he only did because of Bella, which is untrue..He came back despite Bella being in Forks. He came back because he didn't want to be a coward and he thought that running from his thirst was cowardly. He had spent so long fighting the monster within and he didn't want it to win and running was like admitting that he was that monster.

Which is why he (subconsciously) convinces himself that Bella is his only possible hope for salvation - since denying his thirst for her is defeating the monster - leading him into a deep co-dependency with her, and creating the needy behavior that spirals into abusive behavior because he only ever learned to value her as a symbol, never as a person. He doesn't love her - he needs her. And you can't love what you need. For love to exist, there has to be free will.

If Meyer had written it that way, it would have been a half-decent book.

bePeterPan

Either way, it's another use of manipulation to say you'd die if one leftdied. That leaves them with NO CHOICEa huge burden of responsibility hanging over them, which limits their free choice! Who'd want to be the cause of someone's suicide?It's enough to be responsible for your own life without knowing you'll take someone else down with you.

Fixed, so no one can say "he only said he'd kill himself if she died, not if she left."

Now, the one thing I have to thank SM for is showing me that suicide is *not romantic.* The scene in NM was so stupid and pointless that I realized that going out the R&J way is just, well, stupid and pointless. With that in mind...

Rilet Fan

No that would be realism... Go on with your life... Live every second to the fullest...do everything that the other person won't be able to do.

what is romantic then?
every love song or poem or anything that is place in the romance category has the same story. once another person exist to the other, everything else just disappears the whole world could end and it wouldn't matter, time stands still. They want nothing more than that person.right?

More than wanting that person, you want that person to be happy. And if it's mutual, the person you love wants you to be happy. That means that if your love dies, you should do what they'd want for you and try to live your life to the fullest, even if that's hard.

Example 1 (non-romantic): In Ruroni Kenshin, around the end of the Kyoto arc,Aoshi goes on a vengeance spree because he thinks that'd make his dead teammates happy. Kenshin has to remind him that his friends would really rather that he make himself happy, and that Aoshi is hurting his friends' memory by using them as an excuse to cause himself and others pain. This is similar to suicide because either way, he's trying to throw his life away for his friends, which is bad.

Example 2 (sort-of-romantic): In Buffy Episode 100, "Once More With Feeling" Spike tells Buffy "You have to go on living so at least one of us will be living." Right there: I care about you, so please live for me even if you don't want to live for yourself. (Not that he's really better than Ed when it comes to healthy relationships, but at least he usually knows what he's talking about.)

In both cases the circumstances are slightly different, but the message is the same, and it's powerful. Despair and suicide is the easy way out. Facing the new day takes courage - and it's the right thing to do.

Rilet Fan

So... with that in mind...how can you say that the opposite...not wanting to exist if that other person exists...is not just as romantic. Romance and reality are hardly ever fall hand in hand.

Wrong. Romance + Reality = Real Love.

[IDUNNOGAWD]

Simply not read the book? The series is horrible now, anyways.

[shmeiliarockie]

IDUNNOGAWD

Simply not read the book? The series is horrible now, anyways.

The world WOULD be better off if no one ever read the series. Unfortunately, the people who need to stay away from it (young girls) are the ones reading it. And that's why I want to speak out about it.

The old "don't like don't read" argument doesn't make sense. How would I know that I don't like it if I don't read it first? I went into it with a fairly open mind (I had heard about the ridiculous sparkling, though) and came out loathing it.

[laxxx10]

Quote:

They're also vampires who see people as food. Food they don't eat, but food nonetheless. Also they were more concerned with protecting themselves and not Bella, yes.

The vampires were the only people that could save Bella. Technically, a shapeshifter/werewolf could have physically saved Bella, but definitely not as easy. A shapeshifter/werewolf would not have phased infront of those people anyway, so he wouldnt have saved her either. How does the fact that Bella is food that they dont eat have anything to do with saving her? Of course they were more concerned with protecting themselves and their secret than protecting Bella, except for Edward of course. Edward saved Bella and even put himself and his family at risk by doing so. His family didnt care about Bella the way that Edward did so of course they were more concerned for the safety of their family. If you had to choose, wouldnt you be more concerned with the safety of your family rather than the safety some girl that your family member says he loves.

Quote:

However, this doesn't mean that it doesn't apply to any of the other people in the crowd. The only reason why it didn't happen is because Meyers wrote the crowd to be a bunch of cardboard stand-ups who don't act like real people. Perhaps Mike could have felt the same way?

It doesnt apply to anybody else in the crowd because nobody else in the crowd had the physical ability to save Bella. The people in the crowd do act like real people, HUMANS not vampires, how could they have saved her? Perhaps Mike could have felt the same way as what? Im not really following what youre saying, you arent making much sense.

Quote:

I don't see any expressions of true feelings beyond, "You smell good"

This may be because that is what you are looking for in the books. I dont know if you have read Midnight Sun or not, but it does show more of Edward's feelings. But if you really didnt see any true feelings other than, "You smell good" than you are either just looking for that in the books and discarding/ignoring the multiple parts that show their feelings for each other, or you cant make the distinction between different feelings.

Quote:

Um... so the previous sixteen odd years of Bella's life hasn't proven that she's not that accident prone or in need of a guardian? I mean, she was able to go to get around Phoenix by herself without anything disastrous happening to her. I think Phoenix is a lot more dangerous than Forks. Why does she suddenly now need a shadow. Especially since there hadn't been any indication that she's accident prone before it. Saying you're accident prone and being accident prone are two different things all together. He doesn't need to keep her safe.

How can you possible say that Edward does not need to keep Bella safe? He saved her from a car smashing her, he saved her from being raped, and he saved her from vampired hunting her. Do you think Bella could have lived through any of the without the help of Edward? Absolutely not. Although the vampires that hunted Bella were because she was exposed to them, but if Edward hadnt saved her twice before then, she wouldnt have been alive to be exposed. As Edward told Bella, it seemed like her number wasnt up in Phoenix, but it looks like it is in Forks. She moved to a town where there are 7 vampires and her blood sings to Edward, then almost gets smashed by a car, and raped or even killed by those men. Bella does not think of herself as accident prone until Edward points out all of the incidents, and she really is.

Quote:

He was doing it without her permission. And he was ALSO breaking and entering. Which is against the law, especially when Bella didn't know about it. He was breaking and entering into the Police Chief's HOUSE.

You have never done something without someones permission? Dont say yes but it wasnt against the law because that is separate part of it. It wouldnt really be breaking and entering if Bella knew about it, so its not really especially since Bella didnt know. Because Bella didnt know made it against the law. So are you saying that you would think it was more acceptable if it was a teacher's house or house of a store owner, but just because it was the Police Chief's house it was worse?

Quote:

Bella has all the appropriate responses of a marshmallow. Not only that, but since she is portrayed as thinking it's okay, she'll give readers the idea that it's okay. Not only that, but it's romantic, when in fact it's dangerous.

You can think that Bella has the appropriate responses of a marshallow, but that is her response and you cant just disregard her feelings toward things. Thinking that things are okay is part of her "appropriate responses of a marshmallow" as you would put it. Do you base your life of of books? Most people who read books dont base serious life decisions on books they read. If you read a book about a fugative, does that mean that its showing the reader that being a fugative is okay? No, just because you read something in a book does not mean that people will do it, even though the character in the book accepts it.

Quote:

That also bothered me. After all, she barely knows Edward. Not only that, but Edward keeps on telling her he's dangerous. And like an idiot child her response is always, "OKAY!" and she does nothing about it. She doesn't have normal people responses.

She is getting to know Edward and realizes that she is falling in love with him. Bella does not say, " Ohh yay I'm in love with someone who is very dangerous!" It simply doesnt bother her that he is dangerous. She isnt more attracted to him because he is dangerous, it has no effect on her.

Quote:

She has no hobbies. No friends. No friends from her time in Phoenix. She has the supposed flaw of being klutzy but we never see her act like this, except in gym and even then it's over-exaggerated. Her father supposedly has the same extreme klutziness, but I don't think he'd have been able to make to the position of Chief if he were.

Her mother was her best friend. Bella is a socially awkward introvert. It also explains many times that she has always had a hard time connecting with people, that she was never on the same page with people from school and even her mother, and that she didnt act like a teenager. So its not surprising that Bella did not have any real friends in Phoenix, which can easily result in not having hobbies. She acts like a klutz in gym like you said, when she is walking in the woods at First Beach she falls multiple times, and she says that she is a klutz at dancing. He does not have the amount of klutziness that Bella has, but it does mention that he does not have great balance. Yes, Charlie is the Cheif, but he is in Forks. Bella even said that Charlie never had to use his gun or even get it out. She called Charlie one day and said that the past few days have been boring and all they did was play cards. Being the Chief of Forks obviously does not require the same expectations as the Chief of New York City would.

Quote:

Once she sees Edward, her entire world becomes Edward. Edward. Edward and Edward. She becomes obsessed with him to such a point that she willingly goes off with someone who has told her that he needs a reason to bring her back alive and finds nothing wrong with this. (In regards to the scene where she and Edward go to the meadow.)

How does the fact that Bella becomes obsessed with Edward mean that Edward is abusive? In Midnight Sun, it lets you know what Edward was thinking and that he just said that to Bella because he hoped she would take it as a joke, and he didnt want to say what he really thought at the time, which was something about how much he loved Bella. Im not sure of the exact quote.

Quote:

Yes, I know, he didn't kill her and felt that he could restrain himself, but if you also recall, Edward's siblings were taking BETS on if he would kill her or not. They actually thought it was a possibility. If they actually cared enough for their cover or Bella's safety, they wouldn't have allowed Edward to go with her.

Again, the fact that Edward's siblings were taking bets does not have anything to do with the argument of whether Edward is abusive. It was always a possibility that Edward could kill Bella, but it became a slimmer possibility every day. When did I say that they really cared about Bella's safety? They did not know her and Alice was the only one that cared but knew that she couldnt stop Edward from going. It was also easy to cover up if Edward did happen to slip and kill her, unlike when he saved her from the car, that was harder to cover up. If he did kill her in the meadow, nobody knew Edward was there, she could have simply gotten lost or been killed by a bear or something.

Quote:

Let us say that perhaps, yes, Edward does - or says he loves her. And maybe does even think that he loves her.

That still doesn't stop him or disqualify him from being abusive.

I am not trying to say that well if Edward(or anyone for that matter) loves someone enough that means they have the right to abuse them. I am trying to prove that Edward isnt abusive! I know that abuse is not right, and that it is a terrible thing to do. I know from personal experience, and it is just obvious that abuse is not right, so I would not try and say that abuse is okay. What I am trying to prove is that Edward does not abuse Bella.

Quote:

He may not physically abuse her. But he does mentally.

Yes, that is quite obvious. I know that we are talking about emotional abuse here! He obviously does not physically abuse her, so that really had nothing to do with what you said early.

[laxxx10]

Quote:

The world WOULD be better off if no one ever read the series. Unfortunately, the people who need to stay away from it (young girls) are the ones reading it. And that's why I want to speak out about it.

Just because a young girl reads something in a book does not mean that she will go and do it. You are thinking that just because a girl reads it, she will do it or will try to do it. Especially since most of the events in the book could never happen, at most a girl would probably just daydream about it.

[Guma-chan]

shmeiliarockie

The world WOULD be better off if no one ever read the series. Unfortunately, the people who need to stay away from it (young girls) are the ones reading it. And that's why I want to speak out about it.

I don't really understand why we young girls need to stay away from the book. I mean most people don't even realize that Edward is being abusive. And it's not like we're gonna go looking for an abusive boyfriend if we don't realize he is being abusive. Even if I did know he was being abusive, I wouldn't go looking for an abusive boyfriend. I admit, I have zoned out and started thinking about what it would be like to have a vampire for a boyfriend but that doesn't mean I'm gonna go looking for a vampire to date.

[Kale Delvar]

laxxx10

Quote:

He may not physically abuse her. But he does mentally.

Yes, that is quite obvious. I know that we are talking about emotional abuse here! He obviously does not physically abuse her, so that really had nothing to do with what you said early.

Actually, this is EXACTLY what we have been talking about the entire time.

Notice we've never said anything about her being physically hurt by Edward, but instead the fact that he constantly takes away her privacy and choices. This is not physical abuse. This is emotional abuse.

Thanks for finally agreeing.

[Aldorel]

Guma-chan

I don't really understand why we young girls need to stay away from the book. I mean most people don't even realize that Edward is being abusive. And it's not like we're gonna go looking for an abusive boyfriend if we don't realize he is being abusive. Even if I did know he was being abusive, I wouldn't go looking for an abusive boyfriend.

It's exactly because people don't know he's abusive that they go looking for relationships like this. It's because they look at the books and say "Isn't that romantic?" instead of "isn't that creepy and wrong?" and they go looking for a "romantic" boyfriend.

Not everyone will. But some people will. And that's a problem.

Someone mentioned violent video games - well, there are enough people out there saying "it's not good to shoot people" that it prevents mentally sound gamers from thinking "I should go shoot people." Consider us the people out there saying "it's not good to hand your free will over to your SO" so readers don't think "I'm going to go hand my free will over to my SO."

laxxx10

It doesnt apply to anybody else in the crowd because nobody else in the crowd had the physical ability to save Bella. The people in the crowd do act like real people, HUMANS not vampires, how could they have saved her? Perhaps Mike could have felt the same way as what? Im not really following what youre saying, you arent making much sense.

But if they were physically able to save her, many of the people in the crowd - including, possibly, Mike - would have risked their own security to save her. (Remember - it'd be problematic if the Cullens were revealed, but probably not physically dangerous to any of them.) Therefore, Ed's rescue of Bella from the van would certainly be classified as a Good Act, but not an Act of Great and True Love.

laxxx10

How can you possible say that Edward does not need to keep Bella safe? He saved her from a car smashing her, he saved her from being raped, and he saved her from vampired hunting her. Do you think Bella could have lived through any of the without the help of Edward? Absolutely not. Although the vampires that hunted Bella were because she was exposed to them, but if Edward hadnt saved her twice before then, she wouldnt have been alive to be exposed. As Edward told Bella, it seemed like her number wasnt up in Phoenix, but it looks like it is in Forks. She moved to a town where there are 7 vampires and her blood sings to Edward, then almost gets smashed by a car, and raped or even killed by those men. Bella does not think of herself as accident prone until Edward points out all of the incidents, and she really is.

One near-miss in a parking lot does not generally mean that a person is more likely than usual to be in dangerous situations. There is no real reason that Bella would have been in danger, so really, there was no reason that Edward should've been stalking her that night. It wasn't his job or his right.

It's nice that he was there to save her. But saying that he did the right thing stalking her that night because he ended up (probably) saving her life is like saying that if I tie someone up and leave them in their basement, and as a result they're safe at home when their office burns down, I did the right thing tying them up - even if I had no real evidence that the office fire was going to occur. And I really don't think that a jury would buy that excuse.

The end does not justify the means.

laxxx10

You have never done something without someones permission? Dont say yes but it wasnt against the law because that is separate part of it.

How about if I say "Yes, but it was still wrong"? (And frankly, I'm just assuming that I have done so at some point, because I can't remember ever, say, reading someone's diary without their permission, which would be a roughly similar invasion of privacy.)

Or: If it was without permission and against the law, that makes it more wrong than if it's just without permission? Just like breaking and entering, even if you don't take anything, is more wrong than reading a diary that you found lying around?

laxxx

It wouldnt really be breaking and entering if Bella knew about it, so its not really especially since Bella didnt know. Because Bella didnt know made it against the law.

What are you saying here?
1. If Bella knew about it, it wouldn't be breaking and entering.
2. It's not breaking and entering, since Bella didn't know about it.
These two statements make no logical sense. If it's not breaking and entering if Bella knew about it, logically, it is breaking and entering if she didn't know about it. Therefore, since Bella didn't know about it, it is breaking and entering.

3. Because Bella didn't know, it was against the law.
True, but that's helping our case, not yours.

laxxx10

So are you saying that you would think it was more acceptable if it was a teacher's house or house of a store owner, but just because it was the Police Chief's house it was worse?

Nope, just dumber.

laxxx10

You can think that Bella has the appropriate responses of a marshallow, but that is her response and you cant just disregard her feelings toward things. Thinking that things are okay is part of her "appropriate responses of a marshmallow" as you would put it. Do you base your life of of books? Most people who read books dont base serious life decisions on books they read. If you read a book about a fugative, does that mean that its showing the reader that being a fugative is okay? No, just because you read something in a book does not mean that people will do it, even though the character in the book accepts it.

Except that if Bella's inappropriate responses are seen as appropriate, that will increase the chances that a reader will behave similarly, will react similarly to an emotionally abusive boyfriend. It might not on its own change readers' behavior and expectations, but it will contribute in a big way to the culture of "romance" that says it's OK for a (hot) guy to be - and act - jealous and controlling, to climb into strange girls' rooms at night.

Also, I think shrockie has posted a link showing that in at least one case, a girl has made major life decisions based on these books.

For that matter, there are at least two or three books that have had a major impact on the way that I think, and that changes how I act. And that is actually perfectly normal - books are primarily a way of exchanging ideas. Some of those ideas stick.

laxxx10

She is getting to know Edward and realizes that she is falling in love with him. Bella does not say, " Ohh yay I'm in love with someone who is very dangerous!" It simply doesnt bother her that he is dangerous. She isnt more attracted to him because he is dangerous, it has no effect on her.

And that's problematic. She's not considering her own needs, her own personal safety, here. That is not something you want in a relationship - it can't be a healthy relationship if you can't consider your own needs.

laxxx10

Quote:

Once she sees Edward, her entire world becomes Edward. Edward. Edward and Edward. She becomes obsessed with him to such a point that she willingly goes off with someone who has told her that he needs a reason to bring her back alive and finds nothing wrong with this. (In regards to the scene where she and Edward go to the meadow.)

How does the fact that Bella becomes obsessed with Edward mean that Edward is abusive? In Midnight Sun, it lets you know what Edward was thinking and that he just said that to Bella because he hoped she would take it as a joke, and he didnt want to say what he really thought at the time, which was something about how much he loved Bella. Im not sure of the exact quote.

You don't joke with your date about killing them. Especially when you just started dating, don't know each other well, and are perfectly capable of actually ripping their spine out without even thinking about it.

And the fact that Bella is obsessed with Edward just makes it a generally even more dysfunctional relationship. Although it is certainly easier for an abusive relationship to survive when the victim is completely isolated and obsessively idolizes the abuser, it doesn't mean that he is necessarily abusive.

That's what we've got the rest of the arguments on this thread for.

laxxx10

Again, the fact that Edward's siblings were taking bets does not have anything to do with the argument of whether Edward is abusive. It was always a possibility that Edward could kill Bella, but it became a slimmer possibility every day.

When did I say that they really cared about Bella's safety? They did not know her and Alice was the only one that cared but knew that she couldnt stop Edward from going. It was also easy to cover up if Edward did happen to slip and kill her, unlike when he saved her from the car, that was harder to cover up. If he did kill her in the meadow, nobody knew Edward was there, she could have simply gotten lost or been killed by a bear or something.

Well, they certainly risked a whole lot protecting her from James. I'd say that they cared - at the very least, they didn't want to see Edward moping for another hundred years. Or killing himself.

But the fact that they were taking bets does indicate that they thought there was a significant danger - and if they thought there was danger, Edward should've taken the hint and taken some real precautions. Like asking one of the family members to come along and chaperon. The fact that he doesn't do this is disturbing.

laxxx10

I am not trying to say that well if Edward(or anyone for that matter) loves someone enough that means they have the right to abuse them. I am trying to prove that Edward isnt abusive! I know that abuse is not right, and that it is a terrible thing to do. I know from personal experience, and it is just obvious that abuse is not right, so I would not try and say that abuse is okay. What I am trying to prove is that Edward does not abuse Bella.

Except that you and others keep trying to tell us that Edwards' actions are explained/excused by the way he feels about her. But if it's possible to abuse someone you love, then we really just need to look at Edward's actions to determine if he's abusive, not his feelings. And his actions are pretty darn condemning.

[cap_gun_girl]

Um, jaocb sexually asults her by forcing himself on her and he mentally and emothionaly abuses her. And he is a *****, you shall all find out eventually~