North Yorkshire Police Commissioner Philip Allott’s comment that Sarah Everard "never should have submitted" to the false arrest by her Police Officer killer is both profoundly disturbing, yet also deeply revealing.
However clumsy his words, this attempt to lay even a grain of blame on Ms Everard, the victim of a heinous crime, should be seen for what it is – an indication that we still have a serious problem with how we talk about, understand, and deal with violence against women and girls.
How such violence manifests varies significantly and ranges from misogyny, sexual harassment, coercive control, domestic violence, sexual exploitation, female genital mutilation, "honour" crimes, and even political violence.
Yet at its heart violence is an expression of power, control, and objectification, which can result in significant psychological trauma and physical harm. Whilst Allott’s words are a tasteless reframing of the age-old victim blaming question of “why didn’t she just leave?”, as a society we have a shared responsibility to understand the reasons why Ms Everard and victims of such violence find "just leaving" nigh on impossible.
READ MORE: Wayne Couzens given whole life sentence over kidnap and murder of Sarah Everard
The Istanbul Convention defines psychological violence as "seriously impairing a person’s psychological integrity through coercion or threats", and whilst coercion and threats can also be physical, psychological violence does not produce any physical bruises or scars to "evidence" a pattern of violence. This can be disorientating and plays into the tactics used by perpetrators to instil a belief that the violence only exists in the mind of the victim.
A 2019 report on Psychological Violence by Safe Lives set out a glossary of such violence including grooming, gaslighting, "crazy making", and stonewalling or more colloquially – "the silent treatment". In that report one victim talks about their difficulty in accepting such acts as violence.
“You didn’t feel like it was violent because the... for me, I didn’t have hands on me – I had no bruises.”
But the violence is all too real.
It becomes the victim’s normality, a world of shame, guilt and self-blaming where the victim can lose all sense of themselves becoming progressively dehumanised and believe their own needs to be invalid. They exist in a world of subjugation to the perpetrator and as a person, they no longer matter.
Deliberately making anyone feel less than human, that their happiness, their hopes, dreams and safety does not matter is an inexcusable act of violence.
READ MORE: Scots language poet Len Pennie leaves Twitter after vile abuse
Thankfully organisations exist to help women, girls and also men, traumatised by such violence to seek help and rebuild their lives. I have long been a supporter of the work of such organisations and no more so than Fife-based Saje Scotland and their Freedom Programme.
Allott’s ill-chosen words indicate that as a society we have much work to do to address violence against women. We must collectively resolve to never tolerate the blaming of victims or denigrate anyone’s concerns as invalid.
When we witness such acts of violence, at home, in the workplace or in public life we have a shared responsibility to name it and challenge it.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel