Gender-based violence within couples frightens us. At this point, seeing an aggressive sequence of a man towards femininity through, for example, social media, leaves us in an awkward place and we feel that something we have to do but what can be done? On Saturday night a Twitter post with a snippet of a live between singer Michael Bublé and actress Luisana Lopilato generated thousands of comments. In it, the Canadian aggressively shakes his wife who inadvertently interrupts him. The images are strong, the feeling of discomfort is inevitable. “We can’t keep quiet, he’s a violent one and something needs to be done,” he reads on Twitter about it. As a result of that and other video fragments, you can see how the bond between the couple, at least in that context, is strained. Bublé’s reactions to Lopilato’s actions terrify and the level of social outrage marks something positive: the denaturation of sexist violence. Still, the way in which this issue was dealt with and dealt with is, at the very least, irresponsible and dangerous. Why? Isn’t such a mistreatment very good to make visible? Is it not valid to help a person in a situation of violence? Don’t we have to say anything? There are answers to all these questions, but first it is important to clarify a few things. In a situation of gender-based violence, those who work with this problem prioritize what they want, need and want the person in such a sequence. The voice of the bad call (later we will try to explain why bad call) victim, must be priority and essential when making a complaint. The video, which was retorted thousands of times, is one of some alive that the couple makes from their social networks to chat with their followers and followers during quarantine. The truth is that the actress did not upload the images in pursuit of reporting her husband. Ergo suddenly and without warning exploded Luisana’s phone with notifications from thousands of unknown people warning her that her partner was a violent person and that she deliberately had to separate. When a woman makes a complaint in a police station, what usually happens is that, during the procedure, she has to expose the situation of abuse experienced again and again. I mean, you have to go back several times, which, in principle, you want to leave behind. This is called revictimization, generating in those who are in a situation of violence, without escape, an instance of repetition of the act that they need to forget. The same goes for the media, for example, when they post photos of beaten women or scenes of violence. In this case, what happened in the networks with the video matches this infernal loop that needs to be avoided. Still, Bublé’s visibility of aggression generated an otherwise interesting debate and many unanswered questions: What to do in such a situation? How do I act if I’m not inside the couple but I see there’s violence? To understand this, Filo.News spoke to Veronica Misseri, a worker on line 144, about what to do when we detected such actions. Infinite networks? Yes, but limited
“Many times, things that have to do with a good intention to report that something is not right, such as what happened in this case from the networks, although it is valid because it is good to make it visible, then it becomes a denunciation situation where we can all talk but there is no background reading. In any situation of violence one does not advise to make a complaint or a scrache on social networks, unless this is one more way to accompany a situation that has already been faced from other areas and instances”, explains Misseri.” The line that works is the positioning of women in violence. Respect your times. Sometimes it is necessary to stand as a interlocutor who can help speed up those processes, yes, but only speed them up, not act without your consent,” she adds. How? Can’t I tweet or expose that what I see seems violent to me? As a power, you can and, indeed, as that happened, this note exists. What we should ask ourselves, in any case, is what we look for when we do, what the purpose is. Because a lot of times that can hurt salt and from our computers or cell phones, there’s not much we can do about it. “In the face of any situation of violence where we decide to get involved, we can’t do it by issuing pure opinions, which is what happens in the networks, if you want to help seriously, do you? We when we lab down these situations, the first thing we do is see their journey and history and enable listening. I believe that social networks allow visibility and put into words something that was previously naturalized but they have the limitation that in itself, in the face of a specific situation, there is little they can do”, explains the specialist. Of guilt and responsibilities
Luisana Lopilato uploaded a post and in almost all comments she is being swept away and attacking ELLA because she does not accept the mistreatment of the MARIDO. What a joke these things give, they didn’t understand shit.— Mer (@serramechi)
April 12, 2020
While everything that social media touches takes on a dimension of complex superficiality that mixes funny memes with harsh comments and deep readings, gender-based violence within couples is a sensitive subject. In our country a violent male kills a woman every 26 hours and almost 70% of those femicides are committed by couples or ex-partners of the victims. That is, seven times and ten times, the consequences of such aggression are tragic. Getting out of a violent bond is, those who work with these kinds of problems on a daily basis, a sensitive issue that must be addressed with the greatest care. “Firstly, that exposes the person who is in a situation of violence who also generally lives with his aggressor,” says the specialist, adding: “On the other hand, because often those interventions go along the lines of co-responsibility. Because the woman, in this case Luisana, would have to be leaving it to Bublé as there is a clear situation of violence according to what is seen and, if she does not leave it, she is responsible for what is happening to her.” So, as good as our comment has on Twitter, we end up blaming who we want to help. “We must understand that in the face of every situation of violence there is not a single form of intervention. So the first thing one has to do is come up with a kind of plan, ideally in conjunction with that person. If a third party is contacted, we always prioritize that the person who is going through that situation can communicate, without neglecting the accompaniment and advice”, explains. Breaking the circles of violence
Why does it matter so much that the person starring in the situation is the one who wants to report it? “We care a lot about reinforcing, in addition to listening and containment space, tools. Then there always has to be the will of the person going through that situation because it is the only way that exit is effective. Since we work on building ties in general, beyond the emerging of the specific situation, so that that person can think of links far from violence. Not because they are responsible, but for them to start assuming which situations of violence do not correspond and that perhaps otherwise naturalized,” says Misseri. The work is ant.’ Slowly and without overwhelming the person involved, who work to help get out of these kinds of situations, do a thorough job. Whether so that femininities can escape without getting hurt enough that, if possible, they are never in a similar bond again. But all these care when it comes to dealing with an issue like this, this time they didn’t matter. The “public person” label earned the actress a day full of aggression, mockery and revictimization. It’s just that people saw violence and jumped the second. Outrage, a little welcome and a little uncontrolled, was also trending and interpretation by thousands of users regarding the videos, meticulous. The point is that the views of third parties on such issues can hinder any progress. Also, to believe that we know what the other person needs without even giving him a voice is to return them to a place of vulnerability from which we seek to leave. So, what? Do we have to shut up? “It’s one thing not to be quiet and it’s another to see what the goal of talking is. It seems to me that this couple’s videos are triggers for debate about violence, the issue is about when they are limited to a particular link. One can make an interpretation of the general, because these situations are experienced by millions of women and femininities in the world. Now, pointing out in the link that this couple has seems to me to contribute nothing. In fact, the person in violence feels attacked because he is being held accountable for that bond he holds and often that helps to hinder the actions that can be done. It’s very delicate to take it lightly,” she says. But what’s the limit? Do I always have to ask the person? What if that person doesn’t want and is at risk for their life? Well. This is where the boundaries get blurry because it’s not an equation. Each case, as Misseri referred, is different and each situation deserves a different treatment and accompaniment. The things to keep in mind are a lot of them and it doesn’t always trigger the same. “It is also important to understand that all this does not mean that in the face of a situation of risk, if the person does not want to be helped, we must give up. Lol Many times, when life is in danger, you will not be able to work out the will of the person at that time, but then, in the short and long term,” he says. From passivity to action
Uof the most widely used words during this whole debate was “victim.” When we talk about gender-based violence, we can’t escape that label. The woman who is enclosed in a dangerous and aggressive bond is “victim” of that situation and that statement, which is repeated over and over again, is tattooed on the forehead of the one who crosses these links without choice. Unless. Yes. It’s time to question that word too. Which means, the burden it brings and how difficult it is to take the reins if from the statement almost canceled the possibility. “The concept of victim is not going to describe a person in a situation of violence, because it just takes away the necessary part of autonomy. The word victim is very much associated with care. She is not a victim of violence, but is a subject going through a situation of violence. By talking about violence, we make it possible to think about the transformation of this situation. Otherwise it’s like a conviction, something that touched him, and I don’t think it’s that way. Just as one can be found in a violent link, it can also come out,” she explains clearly. Empowering, taking the tools that belong to us in those kinds of sequences, is the task. Be active subject to rights and recognize us as such, key to being able to leave such links. “It seems to me that the concept of a situation of violence enables the possibility of transformation. The concept of victim is also very associated with that femininity that the otre needs to get out of that situation. And while it is true, the woman in violence is going to need otres, it will not be because she cannot alone but because the problem she is going through is not of her own responsibility and her particular link, but has to do with a discourse that not only supports that situation she is going through but, in fact, encourages it. The word victim is associated with the same speech that we question when we intervene in situations of violence,” he says. Sometimes issues that have to do with language are minimized by the situation that is particularly pressing. The situation of gender-based violence in our country, while advancing on rights, in practice remains a genocide on account. And just as what is not named, does not exist, what is named conditions and sets limits. “It seems to me that the same can be understood by saying victim to person in a situation of violence, but the reality is that language also contributes to making things visible or invisit that in fact are not so. It is not a dialectical whim, it has to do with a positioning in relation to the intervention. We believe that those who are in a situation of violence have the possibility to decide on their life and that is essential, both for those we accompany and for those who need to get out of this spiral of such complex aggression,” he concludes.
In this note:
