SS: That’s problematic on many levels, but for one thing, they’re often the creators of violence, and they represent the U.S. government, which is the largest creator of violence in the world. So when the people in charge of stopping violence are also the perpetrators of violence, these words cease to have meaning.

AR: I see the way violence loses meaning when control over it is given to perpetrators of violence, but why do you think the conflation of physical violence and non-physical-stuff-that’s-often-called-violence is dangerous?

SS: You can see the problem when you look at shows like Law and Order: SVU or celebrity profiles in People with ‘I was stalked’ narratives. They almost have the same story of a purely innocent non-participatory victim and a purely predatory perpetrator and the answer is the police. But reality is not like that. We’ve evolved this idea that if you try to find out what’s actually happening, you’re blaming the victim. We have this understanding that any participation a person has in exacerbating problems means it’s their fault, which is wrong. In order to be eligible for compassion, people feel they need to be purely innocent and victimized, which prevents conversations about how violence happens. 

Frankly, most of the problems in the world are caused because people don’t know how to problem-solve. When you look at women and violence, many of their first experiences of violence aren’t with a partner — they happen at home as a child. If you grow up in a family with a lot of violence, you’re not going to have the tools to problem-solve. You’re more likely to escalate than diminish problems. It’s not blaming these women; it’s just a fact. What I’ve found in my research is that male supremacy and traumatized behavior can manifest in similar ways.