I'm not sure I understand what you're saying, Killed. Why would it not be abuse if a man is routinely hurt by his wife?
It is abuse. You misunderstood my post.
Where do you get that this is Islamically justified? Because people do it?
Divorce is frowned upon, and this is usually never the case therefore there isnt much material on it. But I doubt it would be haram to do so if it saves a marriage.
Yes and I too consider that wrong and despicable. I find no place for violence in what is to be a loving relationship. If a relationship is so far out of control that spouses must hit each other, there is no reason for that relationship to continue
It is usually out of anger or frustration. It happens to all relationships, find me one couple who havent been mad at one another. It is normal, and a woman hitting a man isnt so "despicable". No one thinks it is.
But when the tables are turned... well then thats where people pounce. Western ideals eh?
This is the part that makes no sense, and another thing which is just drastically not in line with western ideology. When I ask the imam why is the man the head of the house hold I am told because he is stronger physically, etc. etc. So when the situation is reversed and that is no longer the case, he is still the head? The woman can never achieve this? Even if she is the sole caregiver, the provider, the one who is physically stronger? She can never make orders that he must follow, but even if she is doing all of the work, she is still underneath him? I'm sorry but,, why? What is the point of that?
I may be way off in this, I admit, I probably dont know enough to make any correct judgment but I will give at least my view.
1) Most men wont like to think that their wives are the "head" of the household
2) It is, even still, not a position to be wanted in society. A man wouldnt feel like one if he was to tell people that he listens and does every little thing his wife orders him to do so
3) Decisions are not to be absurd, they need to be discussed with the couple.
The problem I have is when you said "she is still underneath him". That is far from the truth, and clearly you only even attempt to put it that way because you seem to refuse to see it from a mans perspective. That seems to be the problem, you only see this with regards to you being a woman. Not that I can blame you for that, but look at it objectively if you want to understand it.
They say that a man is the head of the house, but the woman is the neck.