Belen Rodriguez, guest of Francesca Fagnani at Beastssaid that her worst flaw is that of being aggressive and abusive and that she has always beaten her boyfriends, Stefano De Martino most of all. There is so much to say about this statement from Rodriguez that I would overlook the obvious: it is a serious statement, which should not even remotely make people laugh. Not even smiling.
View this post on Instagram
Having said that, I would like to point out that – whenever we talk about the violence of a woman towards a man – there is a tendency to underestimate the seriousness of the facts. The only way we often have to shine a spotlight on the seriousness and danger of these facts is to bring up violence against women: «What if a man had done it?». Here, let’s start by saying that it is worrying that, in order for one violence to be recognized, it is necessary to delegitimize another.
You may wonder why I talk about delegitimization, I’ll explain it to you straight away: when we bring up gender violence to identify violence against men, we inevitably end up talking (incorrectly) about “violence against men” as a systemic fact and here we end up stumbling into the first, profound flaw. Not only that: gender violence becomes a weapon, that is to say a phenomenon that is useful when it serves to validate another (which, however, is not a phenomenon).
Because gender violence is systemic and violence against men is not
Let me explain even better: there is a clear difference between violence against women and that which men can suffer. Violence against women is systemic because it arises from a social structure that for centuries has assigned men power and control, and women subordination and silence. It is rooted in culture, language, institutions and media, which normalize inequality and justify abuse. It is never an isolated fact, but the product of a system that educates domination and punishes female autonomy.
Violence against men is not systemic because it does not derive from a system of power built to oppress them as men. Men can suffer violence – and it must always be condemned – but there is no cultural, economic and political structure that discriminates against them based on their gender. When a man is a victim, it is for individual or circumstantial reasons, not for a collective plan that limits his freedom, rights or social representation. Women, however, suffer violence in a context that reflects and perpetuates historical inequalities of power.
Violence against men and patriarchy: there is an entire society to educate
But then why does a man beaten by his girlfriend make you laugh and you need to ask yourself «What if a man had done it?» to recognize its severity? The point is always the same: it’s called patriarchy. Yes, because – in case it wasn’t yet clear – patriarchy not only limits and condemns women’s freedom, but does the same with men who don’t fit into a precise pattern. Patriarchy not only defines who holds power, but also what it means to be a “man.”
Masculinity is reduced to a rigid model: the man must be strong, dominant, confident. Anyone who breaks this mold is belittled or ridiculed. This is why a man beaten by his partner often causes laughter: society does not recognize him as a victim. Patriarchy produces violence and humiliation for everyone, but in different forms. For women, it is systemic and daily; for men, although not systemic, it is accompanied by shame, especially if it is reported, revealing that the problem is not the single gesture, but the culture that surrounds it.
Here, rather than asking ourselves «What if a man had done it?», we should ask ourselves: why do I recognize violence against men only if I compare it to gender violence? The answer is simple: because we are all deeply and dangerously steeped in patriarchy.
