The politics of naming: victims, survivors and plain dead women

The 2011 report sets out findings in detail, including the prevalence of domestic violence. According to ABS, '15 percent of women had experienced physical or sexual violence from a previous partner and 2.1 percent from a current partner since the age of fifteen'. Contrasted to this, 4.9 percent of Australian men 'had experienced violence from a previous partner and 0.9 percent from a current partner since the age of fifteen'.

The ABS also found 1.6 percent of women experiencing sexual violence in the twelve months prior to the date of the survey, '81 percent of those experiencing sexual assault', with 21 percent of incidents relating to a previous partner. The survey confirmed women as overwhelmingly more likely to experience physical violence from a current or previous partner:

'Overall, 31% of women who experienced physical violence in the past twelve months were assaulted by a current and/or previous partner, compared to 4.4% of men …'

The Australian component of the International Violence Against Women Survey found 'over a third of women (34%) who had a current or former intimate partner reported experiencing physical and/or sexual violence since the age of sixteen …' As for current relationships, for Australia 9-11 percent 'reported experiencing physical or sexual violence from their partner at some point in their lifetime'. Additionally, 37-40 percent 'reported experiencing at least one type of controlling behaviour', this 'most commonly' comprising 'name calling, insults, put downs or behaviour that made the woman feel bad'.

In light of these statistics, is it 'wrong' or 'attention seeking' for women to speak up? Why should women be singled out in this way, when no one suggests men who complain about violence against them are seeking publicity, putting themselves into a category of 'victim', or seeking victimhood identity?

Is it wrong of a woman who has been raped or assaulted to say so – and to say by whom? Is it wrong to say she is a victim, when she has been victimised by these crimes? When she lives to tell the tale, is her voice raised wrongly in denunciation of the perpetrator?

Is she making herself a victim, or is it the perpetrator who has done so? Who is to blame: the raped woman or the man who raped her?

In other areas of the law, no one contends that those bringing to light their victimisation are to be chastised for doing so. Nor is it said they are 'turning themselves into victims' or that naming the responsible party is wrong.

When Mr Amadio and Mrs Amadio sought redress through the courts for being misled as guarantors for their son's inability to manage his borrowings, they were not subjected to attack on the basis that they ought not to have used the legal system. The bank contested their case, but public protest was not raised against the Amadios. No commentators said they had 'made themselves into "victims"'. Nor was it said that blaming the bank was an act taken to gain notoriety for themselves, or to glamourise their predicament. It was not contended that the Amadios simply should accept the loss of their home to the bank, and that to raise issues in court about their age, family relationship and non-English-speaking background was to trade wrongfully on their identity.

Consumer protection and trade practices laws exist to ensure that those who are unfairly taken advantage of by finance providers have an avenue through which their losses can be recognised and ameliorated. Civil laws exist to enable individuals who suffer in this way to speak out and take action. Criminal laws exist so that if the wrongs endured go beyond the civil sphere – to fraud or extortion – the state can step in when those who have been victimised speak up.

Civil laws exist so that those who have suffered any form of tortious wrong can claim redress through civil courts. Where these wrongs constitute crimes, the criminal law enables the state to step in when those victimised come forward.

The idea that women voicing concerns about being victims and survivors of violent crimes directed at them as women are somehow 'trading' on this as an identity runs directly against the feminist call for recognition of 'the personal as political'. Assertions that women are turning themselves into victims ignores the reality: crimes of violence make victims, and those committing crimes of violence are responsible for that victimisation. A woman raped does not make herself a victim: the rapist does.