Enactionism provides a framework for understanding how cultural support builds for changes in how abuse and violence are viewed. Foley (1997) explains the overwhelmingly tacit nature of our shared meanings, in other words, the weight of old habits, through Bourdieu's (1977, 1990, as cited in Foley) idea of habitus, defined as a “set of dispositions which incline agents to act and react in certain ways … which are regular without being consciously coordinated or governed by any ‘rule’” (Thompson, 1991, as cited in Foley, 1997, p. 13). Habitus, which Foley calls the “grounding of our cognition” (p. 13) guides without determining behavior; it is pre-conscious and pre-reflective. In other words, habitus is knowledge embodied in individuals and formed through the multiple modes of communication between individuals and members of social groups. When we can interrogate what a social communication means and articulate explicitly how we comprehend a communication—for example, when a first-year composition teacher leads students through a rhetorical analysis of any communication medium—that explicit knowledge is yet still infinitesimal—like a head of hair on a mature body of “subsidiary and tacit knowledge" (p. 14). Unless the enactionist mechanisms for cultural change embedded in conception of habitus are understood as Foley intends, this body of tacitly understood communications appears as intransigent as the Rocky Mountains.