Thoughts from the criminology team

Home » Posts tagged 'Domestic Violence'

Tag Archives: Domestic Violence

Same shit, different day

I’ve thought long and hard about whether or not to write this blog, it contains nothing new, it adds nothing to the discussion and it is borne of frustration, not just mine. Nevertheless, if the same thing keeps happening, then why not keep shouting about it, even if no-one appears to be listening.

Recently I attended an event supposedly focused on Violence Against Women & Girls [VAWG], the organisers, the venue, the speakers remain anonymous, because this is not about specific individuals or organisations. Instead, as the title indicates, the issues raised below are repeated again and again, across different times and place, involving different people, with different claims to knowledge. Nevertheless, they have far more in common than they would care to acknowledge.

In September 2024, the government announced a commitment to halving VAWG over the next decade. The announcement itself was rather confused, seemingly conflating the term VAWG with Domestic Abuse [DA] whilst simultaneously promising to ‘take back our streets’. The latter horribly reminiscent of the far right’s racists diatribe around taking back our country. But I digress, in the government statement there is no mention of sexual violence, despite Rape Crisis England and Wales’ assertion that 1 in 4 women and girls over 16 have been subjected to sexual assault or rape. Similarly, Refuge suggest that 1 in 4 women will be subjected to forms of domestic abuse across their lifetimes. The statistical data is shaky, the problems with reporting are well documented, but ask any woman, and they will tell you about their own experiences and those of friends and families. A brief glance at the Everyday Sexism Project or Everyone’s Invited will give you some idea of the scale of the violences facing women and girls.

But to return to the latest VAWG event, there have been very many of these, all following the same pattern. Crowds of women in the audience, all experts, some professional, some academic, some through victimisation, some through vicarious victimisation and of course, some of those women encapsulate more than one of those categories, they are not mutually exclusive. So how do we harness and utilise this great body of knowledge, experience and expertise? The sad answer for events like this, is 99% of the time, we don’t. They’re there to sit quietly and listen to the same old narrative from police leaders and officers, saying that the institution has got it wrong in the past, but has learnt lessons and is now doing much better. Noticeably, there are few men in the audience, only those compelled to attend by their employment, after all VAWG explicitly mentions women and girls so it must be a female problem, despite the fact that the violences are predominately carried out by men.

To really drive the message home, we have speakers who can’t be bothered to prepare an accessible presentation for their audience. Relying instead on their white privilege, their charisma and charm (think a poor parody of a 1990’s Hugh Grant in a Richard Curtis film), with their funny little anecdotes of how they met a woman who changed their view on VAWG. Or how primary school teachers are usually women, and that’s where the problems begin, they just don’t do enough to support our little boys and young men on their journeys. Similarly, mothers who don’t pay enough attention which mean their sons go onto to become these violent men. We have white women too, ones that want the audience to focus on women who have been killed by men, but who cannot actually be bothered to find out how to say their names, stumbling over any name that is not anglicised.

In the audience it is notable that there are few Black and Brown women present. Even when they are invited as speakers, they are cut short, talked over, their names forgotten or mispronounced. They are the add-ons, a pathetic attempt at inclusivity, but don’t worry they’re never the main attraction. That spotlight is always reserved for men. No wonder Black and Brown women can’t face attending, or leave part way through, they’re sick and tired of being patronised while they pick up the broken pieces of men’s violences.

So what do women actually learn from these events? They learn to keep quiet, to pretend they’re learning something, but in the breaks they get together and talk about their frustrations, their ongoing exclusion from discussions. They learn that the problem belongs to them. That not only have they got to mop up women’s blood, sweat and tears, using plenty of their own in the process, to support and rebuild women after trauma, they are also responsible for the boys and men.

It really does not have to be this way! In every community there are women of all colours, all religions, all sexualities, all nations, doing the hard work. Building each other up against a maelstrom of never ending male violence, not to mention the additional violences of racism, microaggressions and exclusion. These are the experts, these are the people with whom the solutions lie. The police have had almost 200 years to get it right, they are nowhere near, time for them to move over and let the real experts do the talking, whilst they listen and start to hear and learn!

Changing the Narrative around Violence Against Women and Girls

For Criminology at UON’s 25th Birthday, in partnership with the Northampton Fire, Police and Crime Commissioner, the event “Changing the Narrative: Violence Against Women and Girls” convened on the 2nd April. Bringing together a professional panel, individuals with lived experience and practitioners from charity and other sectors, to create a dialogue and champion new ways of thinking. The first in a series, this event focused on language.

All of the discussions, notes and presentations were incredibly insightful, and I hope this thematic collation does it all justice.

“A convenient but not useful term.”

Firstly an overwhelming reflection on the term itself; ‘Violence Against Women and Girls’ – does it do justice to all of the behaviour under it’s umbrella? We considered this as reductionist, dehumanising, and often only prompts thinking and action to physical acts of violence, but perhaps neglects many other harms such as emotional abuse, coercion and financial abuse which may not be seen as, or felt as ‘severe enough’ to report. It may also predominantly suggest intimate partner or domestic abuse which may too exclude other harms towards women and girls such as (grand)parent/child abuse or that which happens outside of the home. All of which are too often undetected or minimised, potentially due to this use of language. Another poignant reflection is that we may not currently be able to consider ‘women and girls’ as one group, given that girls under 16 may not be able to seek help for domestic abuse, in the same way that women may be able to. We also must consider the impact of this term on those whose gender identity is not what they were assigned at birth, or those that identify outside of the gender binary. Where do they fit into this?

To change the narrative, we must first identify what we are talking about. Explicitly. Changing the narrative starts here.

“I do not think I have survived.”

We considered the importance of lived experience in our narratives and reflected on the way we use it, and what that means for individuals, and our response.

Firstly, the terms ‘victim’ and ‘survivor’ – which we may use without thought, use as fact, particularly as descriptors within our professions, but actually these are incredibly personal labels that only individuals with such experience can give to themselves. This may be reflective of where they are in their journey surrounding their experiences and have a huge impact on their experience of being supported. It was courageously expressed that we also must recognise that individuals may not identify with either of those terms, and that much more of that person still exists outside of that experience or label. We also took a moment to remember that some victims, will never be survivors.

Lived experience is making its way into our narratives more and more, but there is still much room for improvement. We champion that if we are to create a more supportive, inclusive, practical and effective narrative, we must reflect the language of individuals with lived experience and we must use it to create a narrative free from tick boxes, from the lens of organisational goals and societal pressure.

Lived experience must be valued for what it is, not in spite of what it is.

“In some cases, we allow content – which would otherwise go against our standards – if its newsworthy.”

A further theme was a reflection on language which appears to be causing an erosion of moral boundaries. For example, the term ‘misogyny’ – was considered to be used flippantly, as an excuse, and as a scapegoat for behaviour which is not just ‘misogynistic’ but unacceptable, abhorrent, inexcusable behaviour – meaning the extent of the harms caused by this behaviour are swept away under a ‘normalised’ state of prejudice.

This is one of many terms that along with things like ‘trauma bond’ and ‘narcissist’ which have become popular on social media without any rigour as to the correct use of the term – further normalises harmful behaviour, and prevents women and girls from seeking support for these very not normal experiences. In the same vein it was expressed that sexual violence is often seen as part of ‘the university experience.’

This use of language and its presence on social media endangers and miseducates, particularly young people, especially with new posting policies around the freedom of expression. Firstly, in that many restrictions can be bypassed by the use of different text, characters and emoji so that posts are not flagged for certain words or language. Additionally, guidelines from Meta were shared and highlighted as problematic as certain content which would, and should, normally be restricted – can be shared – as long as is deemed ‘newsworthy.’

Within the media as a whole, we pressed the importance of using language which accurately describes the actions and experience that has happened, showing the impact on the individual and showing the extent of the societal problem we face… not just what makes the best headline.

“We took action overnight for the pandemic.”

Language within our response to these crimes was reflected upon, in particular around the term ‘non-emergency’ which rape, as a crime, has become catalogued as. We considered the profound impact of this language for those experiencing/have experienced this crime and the effect it has on the resources made available to respond to it.

Simultaneously, in other arenas, violence toward women and girls is considered to be a crisis… an emergency. This not only does not align with the views of law enforcement but suggests that this is a new, emerging crisis, when in fact it is long standing societal problem, and has faced significant barriers in getting a sufficient response. As reflected by one attendee – “we took action overnight for the pandemic.”

“I’ve worked with women who didn’t report rape because they were aroused – they thought they must have wanted it.”

Education was another widely considered theme, with most talk tables initially considering the need for early education and coming to the conclusion that everyone needs more education; young and old – everything in between; male, female and everything in between and outside of the gender binary. No-one is exempt.

We need all people to have the education and language to pass on to their children, friends, colleagues, to make educated choices. If we as adults don’t have the education to pass on to children, how will they get it? The phrase ‘sex education’ was reflected upon, within the context of schools, and was suggested to require change due to how it triggers an uproar from parents, often believing their children will only be taught about intercourse and that they’re too young to know. It was expressed that age appropriate education, giving children the language to identify harms, know their own body, speak up and speak out is only beneficial and this must happen to help break the cycle of generational violence. We cannot protect young people if we teach them ignorance.

Education for all was pressed particularly around education of our bodies, and our bodily experiences. In particular of female bodies, which have for so long been seen as an extension of male bodies. No-one knows enough about female bodies. This perpetuates issues around consent, uneducated choices and creates misplaced and unnecessary guilt, shame and confusion for females when subjected to these harms.

“Just because you are not part of the problem, does not mean you are part of the solution.

Finally, though we have no intention or illusion of resolution with just one talk, or even a series of them – we moved to consider some ways forward. A very clear message was that this requires action – and this action should not fall on women and girls to protect themselves, but for perpetrators for be stopped. We need allies, of all backgrounds, but in particular, we need male allies. We need male allies who have the education, and the words necessary to identify and call out the behaviour of their peers, their friends, their colleagues, of strangers on the bus. We asked – would being challenged by a ‘peer’ have more impact? Simply not being a perpetrator, is not enough.

St Valentines Day! Love and other emotions

This blog today is all about love…. or maybe not!  As criminologists, we tend to see things slightly different, and our perspective is influenced by functions other than undying declarations of love.   

Saint Valentine is associated with love and people celebrate the day with their special romantic person, or by pursuing any person of interest, with romantic cards.  Greeting cards, bottles of wine, boxes of chocolates, bunches of flowers, heart shaped jewellery, lovely sonnets, sexy underwear, kinky gifts and over the top romantic gestures!  All of the above are anticipated actions on this day.  Any of these will act as a demonstration of love.  In some ways the more enormous the gesture the greater the demonstration of love and intimacy to the intended special person.  Many times, we hear those in a relationship rut complaining that “they don’t even buy me chocolates anymore” a sign that love has fizzled out. 

Love is a powerful emotion, and I dare not to challenge it.  Artists have created their best work on love!  Religion has created its strongest appeal on love. People, the world over, have based their entire lives of how they feel about a person they choose to be their partner and share their lives with.  So clearly love is important! Enough for an Austrian psychotherapist to create an entire theory on love and sex.  We feel ready to go to war for love and we are completely convinced that love is the force that keeps us going. Love is strong and we feel it every day.   

Therefore, it is slightly surprising that the patron saint of romantic love is a rather fictional character!  The saint is meant to be a priest who lived in the 3rd century AD and martyred by tortured for his faith.  There was no romance involved and there were no love poems written of the time.  In fact, the Roman Catholic church did not recognise or mentioned this martyrdom at the time.  The first accounts on St Valentine appear in the 6th and later the 9th centuries, some centuries later.  Since then, the story of the saint is embellished further, until the 19th century when it becomes connected with romantic love in some tenuous way.  For example, the more recent narratives claim that before his execution he would convert and cure the daughter of his jailer.  He was also officiating wedding ceremonies between Christians which may have given him the romantic connection.  In the 19th century we have the first mass production of love tokens dedicated to the day and in the 20th, century especially post 1960s the celebration was growing in popularity and appeal.  Currently the day is a celebration that has a significant capitalist value.  It is usually a commercial success midway between Christmas and Easter.   

Some religious historians noted that in the Roman calendar in February there have been rituals and celebrations on fertility and cleanliness (physical, spiritual).  It was the time presumably when young Romans prepared for sexual relations.  Therefore, an amalgamation of the old practices and the then new religion overlap with an obscure Saint to act as the glue to connect them and reaffirm the importance of love.  Ironically the Roman citizens of the time, in particular the patricians, would not recognise such acts!  They married out of interest, connecting the wealth and power of different factions.  In those cycles love was more of a chimera rather than a reality. 

Romantic love with knights, towers, dragons and gestures of devotion will appear as fanciful tales.  Who hasn’t heard of Odysseus and his beloved wife Penelope who remained faithful to him for 20 years!  Her fidelity was not reciprocated, and Odysseus had multiple affairs and fathered several children across the Mediterranean.  Not quite the romantic story people would like to believe.  Romantic love was always a tale, with vivid twists and turns.  Love appears almost pure, undiluted that lifts those in its path.  Shakespeare wrote fantastic sonnets on love.  Some of the best things ever written in English.  Still his contemporaries did not recognise this love.  The majority of people at the time died young, malnourished and exhausted.  Those who barely survive cannot afford to embrace love.  As for those in power their relationship with love can be summed up in the old mnemonic rhyme “divorced, beheaded, died; divorced, beheaded, survived”! 

We presume that romantic love is a representation of two people having feelings for one other.  That is a nice sentiment but historically weak.  Love for women does not exist.  Not because women are devoid of emotions; quite the contrary!  Because women have been used in social transactions between men who barter and use them as part of their household.  A feminist today can recognise, despite all assurances for equality, how unequal life is.  Especially in the household!  If anyone wants to see why love is not equal only see how domestic and intimate violence is spread between gender lines.  Because St Valentine brings flowers and chocolates, but it also brings beatings and abuse.  Across the year it is during holidays and significant dates, including St Valentines that violence against women surges.  One can unfortunately deduce that love is not for women. Oh…. The irony as romantic novels and movies are presented mostly for women as “chick flicks”!    

Earlier in this post, it was said that the bigger the romantic move the better!  Who will do this big romantic gesture?  A man with chivalrous intent.  Our household data reveal that men will spend more than double on what women will spend on the day, making their romantic intent more obvious.  Perhaps men are more romantic and feel the need to satisfy that internal need.  Or maybe there are other emotions at play.  Love is very powerful, but so is possessiveness.  In a history of transactions men used women for trading, so their gestures may be a latent act of dominance, a fresh reminder of possession.  Instead of giving them chocolates, you may as well urinate all over them.  That way your beloved will have your scent and keep other suitors away.  So, this is not love but control, jealousy and dominance.  Every drop of wine, every piece of chocolate, every flower petal, is yet another link in the chain of ownership.  In case this gets misunderstood, the individual who buys flowers isn’t a villain, but the history of this kind of love is pointing in this direction.  Your partner may have the best intentions and the greatest love and regard for you, but our society has never really acknowledged the transactional relationship between men and women.  It is similar to those who speak of the evils of slavery, but with no recognition of reparations.  This love is not pure and clean.  It is the darkest form of patriarchy that controls people making them to believe in an adult fairytale once the other story of Santa Claus is not believed any more.

Romantic actions target all incomes and all ages, but of course there is a drive to get younger people, new generations of customers, on the love spending machine.  At this stage I shall write…what not to do when you are planning a romantic day!  Do not go overboard.  Love is something felt in the heart not in the pocket.  Heart-shaped products do not say “I love you” more than square or round ones!  Red is no more appealing than any other colour and of course if emotions are high, they tend to last more than a day!  Ideally do not spend any money!  In the unfortunate event that you do, do not cook your romantic meal with a sharp knife.  You may pierce the palm of your hand and end up with stitches.  Do not spread chocolate on a partner before establishing if they are allergic to any of the ingredients, you may end up in A&E.  Do not offer them wine, if they have an intolerance to alcohol, they may vomit all over your pristine bedspread. Do not write something funny or profound if they are thick and unable to comprehend deeper meanings (in that case what are you doing with them???). Love is not an idea, a moment, a day, an instant.  It is a lifetime however long or short it is. You will live in love and you will die in love. Even when you are by yourself love is in you and it cannot be defined by the actions of people around you.  Finally, love is selfless so do not try to control them, “love is a rebellious bird that nobody can tame”!