More survivors are coming forward - so where’s the cultural change?
Me too. I’m not sure how many times I’ve said that, or people I have spoken to, supported and advocated on behalf of and alongside have said that in the past few years.
An article published by the ABC stated that more survivors are now coming forward, and are being believed. We know that the barriers to reporting, such as victim-blaming cultural barriers, and not knowing the process or being concerned about the toll of reporting are all alive and well. But one of the biggest barriers is that nothing would be done if a complaint were made. The emotional, physical and psychological burden or reporting outweighs the small possibility that action will be taken, or that it will lead to broader change.
This is why neither of us was surprised to hear that Brittany Higgins had been admitted to the hospital for her mental health. Saddened, angered that lessons had not to be learnt? Yes, but surprised no.
The responsibility of preventing sexual violence and harassment still lies squarely with the targets.
Australia may have a more socially conscious electorate, but we do not have the leadership in major institutions to lead the transformation that is required to prevent violence and harassment in places of work, study and in the home. Recently the AFL was highlighted as a toxic and unsafe place for women to work, despite committing to programmes like Our Watch or White Ribbon. Scott Morrisons Government took over a year to endorse the recommendations of the Respect at Work programme following both recent and historical allegations involving parliamentary and government staff.
The responsibility of preventing sexual violence and harassment still lies squarely with the targets. While the government has taken time to meet with activists and survivors including Australian of the Year, Grace Tame, consent education advocate Chantel Contos and Brittany Higgins, the approach of relying solely on activists and survivors to lead change, rather than develop and implement robust actions plans is tiresome. These three women have elevated public discussions through their bold advocacy which is vital for any change, but the buck does not stop there. Real change requires resources, ongoing commitment and a clear path forward. Concerns should also be raised about the expectation that lies on these women’s shoulders. Rosie Batty has documented time and time again the impact of her advocacy and weight of expectations of all Australians to ‘fix’ a structural issue like family violence. This is not a trauma-informed approach, nor is this sustainable.
There have been organisations, experts and activists working in the space of sexual violence, gender-based violence and family violence prevention for decades but is unclear who the ‘experts’ are that have been engaged in federal government inquiries and informing government strategy. Increased transparency over such engagement and development is vital to building public trust and confidence that action is being taken. So whose practice and expertise has been taken into consideration? Or is the national strategy to provide a platform to survivors without the required support to prevent re-victimisation and re-traumatisation?
The Respect at Work recommendations, Our Watch pilot programmes and the academics, activists and charities that have been supporting survivors for decades understand the challenges and welcome the increased public attention and engagement in the issue, but the goal cannot be raising awareness - it must be how do we stop violence and abuse before it starts? As the body of work shows this is not a question with a silver bullet response, it requires long-term, sustained engagement and it requires challenging all forms of inequity and disrespect, particularly towards marginalised groups. This requires individual reflection and behavioural change as well as systems-level change. It’s hard, which is perhaps why the government is prioritising short-term wins like providing a platform to individuals but allowing them to carry the weight of the work rather than invest in long-term solutions.
Yes, the federal budget allowed for financial funding for prevention efforts (an olive branch to women voters following the high profile examples of sexism and rape culture within government). But unless the inquiries lead to the implementation of recommendations and long-term commitment, instead of the launch of small task and finish groups and further inquiries, the change that Australian’s need, that marginalised communities need, won’t come.
Some of the solutions seem straightforward and even attract the response “of course, we should be doing that”, but seeing the action through is challenging. The solutions require individual accountability and systems-level change. It is hard to encourage people to ask themselves how they are contributing to systems of power and privilege that contribute to inequality and result in the extreme of rape and murder. Because getting people to acknowledge their own discomfort, let alone take responsibility for their actions and unlearn problematic attitudes and behaviours is hard. However, this is just as necessary as governmental and organisational systems change. We need both to prevent abuse. The shirking of responsibility needs to stop.
In Australia we have the research, we have the data to inform necessary change, what is needed now is the political will and organisational resource to implement the various recommendations and do the work. Remember this next election.
