Don't you think you ought to use more recent papers as your reference sources? Or is this deliberate cherry-picking of information; selecting these out-dated papers simply because they support the opinion you had already formed. I'm sorry to say that this article reads like a badly disguised justification of your own personal opinions, but I see what you thought you were trying to achieve. However, ignoring facts that do not suit you e.g. the majority of women (and their children) who are murdered by partners, or ex-partners, are killed for leaving, trying to leave or wanting to leave - this is currently 2-3 a week in the UK. Deciding to cease being a victim, as you believe, led to them becoming the ultimate victim.

You propose a poor and false dichotomy, insisting there are only 2 ways for the blame to lie/people's thoughts to lead, only one of two direction that YOU have decided are the ONLY directions. This is simply awful thinking, and your paper is based on this false black and white scenario. It is because of this type of reason that psychology is belittled and deemed a pseudo-science.

Why don't you join us here in the 21st century and read some recent publications. In the true scientific fields (e.g. physics, medicine, etc), including my field, there is a limit of using articles produced in the last 5 years. I think you should try it too.

More Posts