Victim Blame: Not about victims, not about blame

By Dr Amy Beddows

Recent research into professional responses to survivors of sexual violence show that the process of victim blame is more complicated than assumed. While awareness campaigns and training focus on ending the direct blaming of survivors for men’s violence, focus group discussions with women suggest that the negative treatment they experience from services is less about victimisation than structural equalities and extend far beyond blame.

In 2010, I was working as a sexual violence victim advocate in California, supporting women and men in the first few hours after the crime was reported. In addition to providing emotional support and information on the resources available to them, this role required me to smooth over the difficult aspects of engaging with police and forensic nurses during a fraught, distressing, and confusing time. I noticed that while police were often polite and understanding, victims still said that they felt blamed for what had happened to them and I realised that this had little to do with the attitude or intention of individual officers. While speaking with victims or waiting for them to complete the forensic examination, officers have to stand with their arms crossed due to the kit attached to their belts: gun, handcuffs, flashlights, notebook, etc. While their words and actions conveyed respect, sympathy, and even outrage on behalf of victims, their body language communicated judgement and blame. As one young woman told me of the male officer in attendance, “I feel like my dad is disappointed in me”.

My experiences as an advocate led me to research victim blame. From my career as a therapist, I was familiar with the tendency for victims to be blamed for the violence enacted upon them. In some roles, practitioners are encouraged to pro-actively tell clients that what happened to them was not their fault because self-blame is a common response to sexual violence and – sadly – many aspects of society are quick to reinforce this judgement. While it is (mostly) accepted that rape and abuse are horrific experiences for anyone to be put through, it is a sad truth that victim blame is still a pervasive process, even among the professionals and organisations best positioned to support survivors of these crimes. So far, attempts to improve the experiences of those who disclose sexual violence have only targeted specific blaming comments and behaviours and are mostly focused on individuals. This restrictive approach misses the big picture and has had little positive impact.

To better understand victim blame and the ways this social process is experienced by victims and survivors, I undertook PhD research at the Child & Woman Abuse Studies Unit (CWASU) at London Metropolitan University. I ran ten focus groups with women who were in contact with Rape Crisis centres across England and Wales, to hear their experiences of engaging with services. What I found from the over 20 hours of group discussion was that the issue is far more complex than the concept suggests and while an easily understood short hand like ‘victim blame’ is helpful for calling out problematic discourses, it overlooks the lived realities of survivors.

More than blame, women described a range of dehumanising responses from GPs, police, counsellors, support workers, social care staff and criminal justice professionals. Women were disbelieved, silenced, humiliated, objectified, retraumatised, mocked, and disrespected by professionals across healthcare, criminal justice, voluntary and social care sectors. Additionally, women felt that their degrading treatment was a response to who they were rather than what had been done to them; their experiences suggested that professionals were reacting to the structural inequalities of gender, race and ethnicity, immigration status, age, ability, sexuality, and class more than their ‘status’ as victims and survivors. This was demonstrated by the fact that some professionals treated women poorly, regardless of whether they knew they had experienced sexual violence.

My research showed that victim blame as a concept is insufficient on two counts: negative responses towards survivors are not about victimisation and are far more than blame. More useful concepts for understanding these processes are victimism (coined by Kathleen Barry inFemale Sexual Slavery, 1979) and responsibilisation (Rose, 2000). Essentially, these processes work together to ensure that however women report gendered violence or ask for help, responsibility is forced upon them rather than the men who abuse them, the professionals who fail them, or the society which enables these crimes.

Another interesting finding from the group discussions was the different aspects of agencies through which disrespect and dehumanisation are communicated. While the words and actions of individual staff could be damaging to women, they also described policies and processes (such as invasive medical procedures, long waiting lists, complex application forms), physical environments (clinical spaces, broken equipment, lack of comfort or basic courtesies), and expectations of organisations (mistrust in police or social services, knowledge of medicalised NHS framing of violence and trauma) which made engagement with agencies harmful rather than helpful. This gives us a roadmap for (re)creating services which can provide meaningful spaces and interactions for women and offer respect, value, and dignity to all survivors. While specialist organisations such as Rape Crisis are already operating this way, they are the exception across sectors and organisations.

I am hopeful that a deeper understanding of so-called victim blame can move us away from restrictive and individualised framings of gendered violence and recognise the pervasive and devastating social issue which amounts to a public health crisis in terms of prevalence and impacts. Positive change is possible, and even small changes within services can improve the experiences of survivors and tell them that they are valued, they deserve support, and that they are not responsible for the actions of violent men or the failure of services. As professionals, it is the least we can strive to do.

References

Beddows, A. (2022) “Everything, it was everything”: Victim blame, victimism, and responsibilisation. PhD Thesis: CWASU, London Metropolitan University.

Barry, K. (1979) Female Sexual Slavery, New York University Press: New York, USA.

Rose, N. (2000) Government and control, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 321-39.

Author bio

Dr Amy Beddows is a therapist, researcher, and consultant on violence against women. She completed her PhD in women’s experiences of victim blame in 2022 and has written articles on gendered violence as well as research briefings for organisations who wish to enact positive change. She has a special interest in the role that media can play in reinforcing or challenging the cultural contexts of gendered violence. She lives in Edinburgh where she works as a trauma therapist. She is online @amyeaston19 (on Twitter) and you can also find her at https://amybeddows.com/.