Anti-family prevention of domestic violence

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

In 2020, the discussion continues on one of the most resonant initiatives of recent times - the draft law on the prevention of domestic violence. Earlier we published an interview with an ardent supporter of the project, State Duma deputy Oksana Pushkina. But the initiative also has tough critics. RT correspondent Ilya Vasyunin met with the chairman of the All-Russian Parental Resistance organization Maria Mamikonyan and listened to her arguments against the adoption of this law.

After the charges were brought against the Khachaturian sisters (premeditated murder), a post appeared on the Telegram channel of one of the activists, containing the following theses: “What is Mikhail Khachaturian's fault? He was simply the head of the patriarchal family … The Khachaturian family is the ideal of the traditional family … In Russia, the family is the first system of oppressing women. " Do you agree?

- Of course not. This is not a patriarchal family, much less an "ideal." This is all written in the framework of a certain campaign, which is being waged by lobbyists for the domestic violence law. Within the framework of which the very phrase "traditional family" is emphasized, is dominant in the construction of accusations against opponents of the law. And it is given some absolutely mocking meaning that has little to do with today's reality.

No need to speculate

If you listen to those who support this law, it turns out that the traditional family is a place where you can beat

- In general, the word "tradition" is incredibly distorted. In all these discussions, from the very beginning, they say: "By tradition, if you have beats, it means that he loves." This has long become such a joking expression, which is used not in the literal sense, but purely figuratively and not about some kind of family showdown. For example, some strict leader not very fair scolds an employee, and they say to her: "If he hits, it means that he loves." Although this does not mean that there are no families in which the husband beats his wife. But this move is absolutely manipulative.

But it turns out that the opponents of this law actually support assault

This is complete nonsense. To say that we are against the law because we want to be beaten in families is a rude distortion. We are simply against this law, and we know why we do not like it

They are dissatisfied with the law at once for a number of reasons. On the one hand, they say that he will not work in our conditions, will not protect women. On the other hand, they see him as a threat to the institution of the family. What are your main complaints?

- Firstly, it does not work under any conditions. When they say that it was accepted in all civilized countries, I suggest: let's look at the statistics of domestic violence in those very “civilized countries”. We find that in Germany, where the law has been in effect for almost 20 years, in Spain (about 15 years), the curve of the level of domestic violence hardly moves. And these are UN statistics, not our speculation!

In general, from your point of view, does the problem of domestic violence exist?

- I think that there is a problem of violence in general. I think that in general it should not be encouraged to show it. It cannot be so that children and adults constantly see violence on the screens, and then would not take it as a model of behavior. There is no need to speculate, saying that there is something special in the family, that a separate law must be passed for the family. It doesn't solve anything. Except for one task - it destroys, in principle, the institution of the family.

How?

- Think for yourself. For the usual conflicts in any family communication, light or difficult, troubles, sometimes, by the way, ending in violence (for example, she gave her husband a slap in the face for what he cheated on the other), according to the law, they must immediately come running and divorce the spouses. Or maybe they will make up? Or maybe they will figure it out themselves? Or, maybe they are adults who have dignity, they do not want to let some kind of non-profit organization into their lives, which will also profit from this. There will be no fools who want to marry. And the institution of the family will be destroyed in the shortest possible time, which has already happened in most of the so-called civilized countries. And our people do not want this, they want to live in a family. For him, this is probably the last place of freedom, which one does not climb into. Because we have articles in the Constitution that protect this human right to privacy. People value this piece of freedom. But this does not mean that they should use bruises!

But let's look at the situation from the other side. The husband begins to threaten his wife, from threats to action. He promises to kill her, and we know there are times when threats come true. The police come and do not react to it in any way. Here is this famous phrase: "When they kill, then we will come" …

- The lobbyists of the law have made an incredible confusion in their heads, they are hiding obvious things that, in principle, should be known to everyone, and to them, since there are lawyers in their midst, even more so. We have several dozen articles in the Criminal Code and the Code of Administrative Offenses. There are already all corpus delicti, including threats of violence, murder, etc. If an employee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs says: “Come when they kill you,” this person should be punished approximately, and not “transferred to another job”. Because he violated his duties - we also have articles for this.

Maybe due to the fact that the problem has left the "gray zone" and it is finally being widely discussed, it is the new law that will help draw the attention of the police to this problem? Appropriate instructions will appear within the system itself, the police will be more willing to respond, will not turn away?

- This is an interesting assumption, but it seems to me that if 33 laws do not work, then 34 will not change anything in the situation either. Now, if the employee who replied to Rita Gracheva's statement that this does not concern him, were punished, then, probably, many would have thought whether it was worth giving up. But that doesn't happen. This is an enforcement problem. When article 116 (beatings without causing harm to health) was moved from the Criminal Code to the Administrative Code two years ago, it began to work. Do you know why? Because the police, according to the administrative code, can detain a rowdy (who has not killed anyone yet, but for now he is only threatening, he is drunk and dangerous), take him to the police station for 48 hours, and there they have to deal with him. When the article was in the Criminal Code, the injured woman had to go the next day and apply - and only after that they could engage in a rowdy. They lie to you when they say that after the decriminalization of Article 116 there was a wild explosion of violence. No, it was quite different. The number of grave and especially grave crimes has decreased by almost 25%. There are more of these statements on the 116th - they came out of the shadows *.

Where did the 14 thousand dead come from?

Since we have moved on to statistics, I can’t help but ask a few questions. On the one hand, there are 14,000 women who die every year. This figure appeared in 2007, the last mention I saw in the news in November

- For a long time we did not understand why 14 thousand, what all this means. In the reports of the GIATs (Main Information and Analytical Center. - RT) of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, it is indicated that in 2013 304 women died in family conflicts - not necessarily at the hands of their husbands, it could be one of the relatives. 304 and 14 thousand - the difference is enormous *.

It was quite obvious to us that this was such an information and psychological attack on society. It must get used to this figure, be horrified, accept it as the truth and, proceeding from this, say: "Yes, act, accept the law under which this will not happen."

And here is where this figure came from. In 1993, there was a figure - 29 thousand murders were committed in a year. I emphasize: we are talking about all murders in general, and not just in families. 29 thousand men and women killed in total. In 1994, the UN asked Russia for statistics on women killed. And someone in the Ministry of Labor (some official who had to report) decided: if we have 29 thousand in total, then we must divide in half and say that the killed women are 14, 5 thousand. * This is such a simple fraud that, apparently, it was not even conscious, but became possible due to monstrous irresponsibility. And this figure went to the UN. Since then, we have been told all the time: "Well, this is according to UN documents!" But this was a division into M and F, although it is known that twice as many men die, especially when it comes not to the family, but to a violent death in general, so this cannot be divided into two, all the more to write that all the murders took place in the family.

We must act together with the Ministry of Internal Affairs

Correspondents of Novaya Gazeta and Mediazona studied sentences against women, and it turned out that, for example, under Article 108 (murder committed in excess of self-defense) 91% of women defended themselves at home - from their husbands or other relatives. Most of the women accused of murder were victims of domestic violence. That is, they were convicted under Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, but the verdict says that her husband threatened, rushed, threatened to kill - and she used a knife. That is, we can come to the opinion that it is the family for a woman that is an unsafe place. Is it true or not?

“No, it’s not like that. Firstly, I think that every normal woman living a normal family life will tell you that she feels safe at home, and not on the street, not in the entrance - it seems to me that this is quite obvious. Secondly, it is wrong to look only at these figures, it is necessary to look at the figures for violent crimes in general, including for women …

We are told from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, from the regions where we sent inquiries, that practically all these family conflicts occur in a state of alcohol or drug intoxication - there are about 80% of them.

Let's start fighting alcoholism? And with drug addiction. Let's rebuild the sobering-up facilities. And in general, a huge number of men who just go crazy because of this, behave indecently, have no work. Let's restore production. So that they can feel like people and not beasts, sorry … It's not that we have the worst employees in the Ministry of Internal Affairs. In general, it is a pity for them, because they do very hard and unsafe work for not the highest salary. But their hands are tied - for example, by the law on the impossibility of compulsory treatment of alcoholism and, accordingly, the absence of sobering-up centers. Here it is necessary to act together with the Ministry of Internal Affairs so that prevention is built in a smart way. Well, listen, when we have untreated schizophrenics walking the streets … We now have three destroyed things: psychiatry, the fight against alcoholism and drug addiction.

Make life hell

They will object that while all this is not done, let's pass the law

“It won't help at all. Well, there will be a man who drunk beats his wife, knowing that this should not be done. He probably knows now. Well, there will be some kind of piece of paper, some kind of prescription …

We are talking about a warrant that will prohibit approaching his wife for a while

- I recently watched an interview with one of the creators of this bill. When asked how the protection order would work (they live together), she replied: "Well, if he has money, he will buy himself another living space." Excuse me, but if there is no money? "And if not, then no." That is, the law will only apply to rich people who let go of their hands? In addition, a huge number of men for libel - not necessarily even at the request of this potential or real victim, wife, and slander of neighbors or someone else - will be thrown out into the street. Where will they go?

The project provides for a system of shelters where women with children and men who have been temporarily evicted from their living space will be able to come

- Nothing prevents you from making these shelters on the basis of applicable laws. We have a law on social services for citizens, according to which NGOs can both create shelters and provide psychological assistance. In fact, this bill is about taking care of NGOs and those specialists they will attract: psychologists, lawyers, marketers and PR specialists. After all, it will be necessary to advertise these very shelters, tell how to behave in these situations. That is, a huge number of people will be involved. And those non-profit organizations that are socially oriented and aimed precisely at this topic will turn out to be the place where quite significant financial flows will flock. They are now fighting for them.

One of the arguments in favor of the law: even after being in this shelter, a woman can become a victim of persecution. The husband does not agree that she left home, and persecutes her even there, even tries to steal from there, we know such cases

- Everything happens, yes.

So if the law works, presumably, the norm on stalking and persecution will also work

And if a man wants to come to her with flowers and make peace, then he will not be able to do this. Because someone - not even her - will say that he is following her. And you cannot tell one case from another

By the way, women sometimes chase men too …

- Yes. In general, life will turn into hell for everyone. And I see the only purpose of this law is just to turn life into hell. And not only family life, where people are officially married, but all kinds of relationships in general. The lobbyists want to register there not only legal marriage, but also some kind of relationship with the common economy. Now there are different forms of marriage, somewhere there are already guest families, etc. That is, all this should pour out to us in a wide stream in one package. And the safest thing is to have no relationship between the sexes at all. Well, probably LGBT people should even like it.

Probably, such unions will also be regulated by this law

- Probably, but we have no law that this is also a family.

Blonde behind the wheel

One of the most controversial things in the law is the concept of psychological violence. There is also economic violence, which, as they say, can also be interpreted in the broadest possible way. It all came from the Istanbul Convention for the Protection of Women

- The Istanbul Convention and decisions of individual countries are a separate and very difficult topic (this document was signed by 46 countries and the European Union. The document contains definitions of the concepts of “gender”, “violence against women”, etc. In particular, the concept of “domestic violence "Means" all acts of physical, sexual, psychological or economic violence that occur in the family or in the home, or between former or current spouses or partners, regardless of whether the perpetrator lives or does not live in the same place as the victim.”- RT). Fortunately, our Foreign Ministry has not signed the Istanbul Convention and is firmly committed to the position that it is impossible to sign, because it absolutely contradicts our Constitution and, in general, a lot in our country, including the people's idea of how life should be arranged. The Foreign Ministry is very firm on this issue. The fact is that to subscribe to this convention means to start up all the sodom that occurs in the countries that signed the document and to lose subjectivity.

For the women's movement in Russia, the law on domestic violence is part of a wide front of work to fight for women's equality. Non-recognition of a woman as an equal person is also such a traditional value in our society, they say

- Really! I have lived all my life in our society and I know for sure that women in our country have all rights on an equal basis with men, get professions and positions. Now there is talk that women are supposedly paid less than men. Well, I can imagine that the owner of some private enterprise wants to raise not a woman who is sitting with one or a second child on sick leave, but a man who is not burdened with these worries.

There is one more moment that the women's movement is struggling with - this is a disdainful attitude towards a woman ("baba-fool", "blonde behind the wheel", etc.) in advertising, culture, in films

- I don’t know, I’ve never come across it - maybe because I’m a brunette? You know, and women also have their own words about "dorks" who "lie on the couch like a log." You never know what people can say when their cultural level has been lowered and lowered for many years. Let's not "feed off" the population - and there will be no stupid jokes.

They will answer like fake jets

Will today's women's movement in Russia help solve all of the above problems?

- Today's - cannot. Because it is completely false, because it is made in certain interests for a certain concept that needs to be promoted and approved. I watch comments on videos on the Internet (ours or someone else's, it doesn't matter, touching upon this topic) - there are a huge number of feminists (as they are called, “femoks”). They have a monstrous vocabulary - from the zone, from the gateway, from the ditch. I don't know where they get it.

They speak obscenely, are full of aggression and want to prove that the entire male world is abuser. They have never been married. What a family is, most of them do not understand and do not want to know. They are young, aggressive and crammed with this vocabulary. It is a mixture of mat and foreign terms. And so they will fix something for us? What is the women's movement, what are you talking about?

We have several women's organizations that have contracted to promote these laws. In fact, a war of the sexes has already started. The word “decriminalization” of domestic violence was coined. It contains enormous lies and manipulation. Crowds of Western journalists came to us: "Your legislators allowed beat and kill in the family!" Sorry, but you probably do not understand at all the difference that exists between our, Russian legislation and yours. And it is that we have two codes. And under the Civil Code there is also a punishment, and in the Criminal Code there are a huge number of articles that describe this type of violence. But foreigners do not understand this, because they do not have these 40 articles and it seems to them that everything is allowed. Nobody allowed anything! But if the child is spanked, this is not a reason to drag the parents to court. I hope that this law (on domestic violence - RT) will not be adopted. But those who incite the war of the sexes and provoke the madness that gripped people - they must be responsible for all this. We have a fake law, don't we? So let them, like the fakecomets, answer for this.