“[V]iolence against women is a form of
gender-based violence that is committed against women because they are women.” ~ Council Of Europe
Is it okay to do harm to women for not conforming to the stereotypes
assigned to them?
Is it okay to react with violence towards women who are not being
mindful of men’s comfort, power, or feelings?
Is it okay to enforce a position of dependence or subjugation for women,
and threaten financial, physical, or emotional retribution when a woman fights
against her chains?
Is it okay for women to not know their place?
But we’ve talked about all that, haven’t we?
These should have been questions with easy answers, but those who were
so firmly against the “dangerous” Istanbul Convention failed to understand the
real issue: violence against women is specific and distinct from violence
against the person. The Convention would have combated the root of the
problem, not given a man a slap on the wrist after he had burned his
ex-girlfriend’s face off with acid.
If everything was already fine, there wouldn’t be a need to sabotage a
measure which protects women – protecting women would already be in accordance
with the country’s goals. If the tools we had in place were working, we
wouldn’t be having thousands of women trapped in abusive relationships; all the
women in our lives wouldn’t have been able to tell countless stories of
harassment, abuse, rape, or other forms of women-specific violence.
Women-specific violence.
She was raped because she didn’t let him have her in the first place –
and satisfying him is a woman’s obligation.
She was hit because she burned his dinner – and cooking is a woman’s
obligation.
She was stomped on because she asked him where he’d been – and that is
not a woman’s business.
She was locked in her room because she was tired of him stinking of
alcohol – and telling him what to do is not a woman’s place.
She had her “allowance” taken away because she spent some time out with
her friends – and having a life outside her husband’s grasp is not a woman’s right.