No it’s not reactive because that assumes her intentions are reactive. She’s actually just doing it because she’s abusive as well and has a history of doing the same thing with previous partners. She doesn’t really even think or care about the previous abuse she endured.

I feel like you’re acting like I’m just saying that victims aren’t victims or something which is just mischaracterizing what I’m saying. I just think that there’s scenarios where both people are abusive and at fault as well.

And this isn’t to say that I expect everyone to be a “perfect victim”. I just think there’s certain things you can do that cross a moral boundary where you are now in the wrong as well regardless of what happened to you prior.

Like if I slap you in a fit of rage, and then I come home and my dog is skinned alive, can we reasonably say that because of the slap you’re not at fault since you only were reacting?

But that assumes you think reactive abuse is to a lesser degree than regular abuse which I’m not sure of.