"In this article, we use the terms victim and perpetrator to refer to individuals’ actions in specific interactions, not as identity terms or as totalizing descriptions. That is, the extent to which an individual can be described as a victim or perpetrator depends entirely on the nature of their
conduct in specific instances. An individual who is a victim of violence in one instance can be a perpetrator of violence in another.
While we reject the use of the terms victim and perpetrator as totalizing, identity terms, we believe it is imperative to maintain this distinction. The word victim refers to a person who has been wrongly harmed. Perpetrators often try to conceal or avoid responsibility for their actions by obscuring the distinction between victim and perpetrator, for instance, by portraying their
unilateral, violent actions as mutual.
The Interactional and Discursive View of Violence
and Resistance
Interaction
1. Violence is social and unilateral: Violent behaviour is both social, in that it occurs in specific interactions comprised of at least two people, and unilateral, in that it entails actions by one individual against the will and well-being of another.
2. Violence is deliberate: The perpetrators of violence anticipate resistance from their victims and take specific steps to suppress and conceal it. Virtually all forms of violence and systems of oppression entail strategies designed specifically for the suppression of overt and covert resistance.
3. Resistance is ubiquitous: Whenever individuals are subjected to violence, they resist. Along side each history of violence, there runs a parallel history of resistance. Victims of violence face the threat of further violence, from mild censure to extreme brutality, for any act of open defiance. Consequently, open defiance is the least common form of resistance (Scott 1990).
Social Discourse
4. Misrepresentation: Misrepresentation is an ever-present feature of asymmetrical power relations (Scott 1990) and personalized violence. In cases of violence, public appearances are often highly misleading and the risk of inadvertent collusion with the offender is high.
5. Fitting words to deeds: There are no impartial accounts. All accounts of violence influence the perception and treatment of victims and offenders. Where there is violence, the question of which words are fitted to which deeds is crucial (Danet 1980, p. 189).
6. Four discursive operations: Language can be used to conceal violence, obscure and mitigate offenders’ responsibility,2 conceal victims’ resistance, and blame and pathologize victims. Alternatively, language can be used to expose violence, clarify offenders’ responsibility, elucidate and honor victims’ resistance, and contest the blaming and pathologizing of victims.
conduct in specific instances. An individual who is a victim of violence in one instance can be a perpetrator of violence in another.
While we reject the use of the terms victim and perpetrator as totalizing, identity terms, we believe it is imperative to maintain this distinction. The word victim refers to a person who has been wrongly harmed. Perpetrators often try to conceal or avoid responsibility for their actions by obscuring the distinction between victim and perpetrator, for instance, by portraying their
unilateral, violent actions as mutual.
The Interactional and Discursive View of Violence
and Resistance
Interaction
1. Violence is social and unilateral: Violent behaviour is both social, in that it occurs in specific interactions comprised of at least two people, and unilateral, in that it entails actions by one individual against the will and well-being of another.
2. Violence is deliberate: The perpetrators of violence anticipate resistance from their victims and take specific steps to suppress and conceal it. Virtually all forms of violence and systems of oppression entail strategies designed specifically for the suppression of overt and covert resistance.
3. Resistance is ubiquitous: Whenever individuals are subjected to violence, they resist. Along side each history of violence, there runs a parallel history of resistance. Victims of violence face the threat of further violence, from mild censure to extreme brutality, for any act of open defiance. Consequently, open defiance is the least common form of resistance (Scott 1990).
Social Discourse
4. Misrepresentation: Misrepresentation is an ever-present feature of asymmetrical power relations (Scott 1990) and personalized violence. In cases of violence, public appearances are often highly misleading and the risk of inadvertent collusion with the offender is high.
5. Fitting words to deeds: There are no impartial accounts. All accounts of violence influence the perception and treatment of victims and offenders. Where there is violence, the question of which words are fitted to which deeds is crucial (Danet 1980, p. 189).
6. Four discursive operations: Language can be used to conceal violence, obscure and mitigate offenders’ responsibility,2 conceal victims’ resistance, and blame and pathologize victims. Alternatively, language can be used to expose violence, clarify offenders’ responsibility, elucidate and honor victims’ resistance, and contest the blaming and pathologizing of victims.