Where interaction ends and violence begins

To begin with, I want to define two concepts.

What is violence?

Any form of influence of one person on another in order to force him against his will to do what the first needs. The key points here are «any form», «purpose» (i.e. intentionality) and «against will». I do not believe that a necessary condition for the definition of violence should be, as the WHO definition says, «injury, death, psychological injury, developmental disabilities or damage of any kind.»

What is a personal psychological boundary?

The line between «me/mine» and «not-me/other». The “I/mine” is completely and undividedly subject to the ownership of the bearer of this “I”, and no one else can dispose of it. Another thing is that people have personal boundaries of different widths and, accordingly, different ideas about what they can dispose of and what they cannot. For example, if formally my personal time/place does not feel like “mine”, then someone else can easily take over my time/place, and I will not resist. Protected (aggression) is only what enters the psychological boundaries. If they are terribly tight, then in the life of this person it is very easy to push. In extreme cases, «I/mine» does not even extend to formally one’s own body.

• Physical abuse in a couple: 5 things we don’t know about

In a discussion for many partners, it is often a real discovery that they BOTH took an active part in creating an uncomfortable situation, if there was one. There were practically no “victims” and simply “rapists”, with the exception of that example with a complete disregard for the response of a woman, where the roles were clearly defined. And so — a rigid division into «good» and «bad» was not always possible to carry out. The answers to the above questions varied. And they provide clues as to where healthy interaction ends and violence begins. There are several options.

1. Hypersensitivity to foreign boundaries

In this case, people do not come into contact with another person at all and do not indicate their interests / needs directed at the other, because they are afraid to make him uncomfortable. «Hypersensitivity» is often possessed by people who have lived for a long time with those whose personal boundaries are exaggerated and any «extra» movement of the others was perceived as an attack. Hence the habit of squeezing oneself and «hyperrespect» of others, completely suppressing one’s own initiative. As a result, there are leaky personal boundaries that are easy to crush or ignore, because the other person is uncomfortable with them.

• Why Women Fantasize About Rape

2. Ability to contact at the border

Two people are approaching, their personal boundaries are colliding, and they make it known. Here is mine, and here is mine, here are my desires, and here are my desires. There is a normal demarcation, «lapping». It is possible, however, only when both partners talk about themselves, their needs and desires, and at the same time have a choice of which needs of the partner they are ready to satisfy and which they are not. During contact, people constantly test each other’s boundaries. For example, doing something that you find pleasant for another without asking them is a boundary test. If the other reacted with anger, you definitely crossed the border, “did good”, and here it is important to step back and decide where the line will be drawn. But what happened is not yet violence, it’s just a violation of personal boundaries, which can happen to everyone from time to time.

As an example, I will give a story with a ridiculous and very uncomfortable gift. A grandmother gave her little granddaughter a live rabbit, without any regard for the fact that the mother would have to take care of the rabbit. Which she did for several years, but is this situation violent? Mom did not refuse to accept this rabbit, choosing the joy of the child, and not her own needs. There is nothing pleasant in this situation, but it is not violence: there was a choice to refuse, however, the price for it was quite high, and the borders at that time were not marked. It should be taken into account that the situation of choice can be false: they seem to ask you about something, but the answer is ignored and the person still acts in his own way. So, contact at the border sometimes leads to the fact that we violate other people’s borders, and this is normal. Violations do not do only one who does not come into contact at all.

There is another way to approach. When both partners, approaching each other, ask: “How can you be at such a distance? Can I get closer?» In ordinary life, this means paying attention to the experiences and needs of the other. How to make a partner unhappy? Forget that he has his own territory and in this territory he sets the rules himself. You can try to agree on new rules, but do not push through. From the moment of pushing through (begging, ignoring), the dialogue stops and violence begins.

3. Ignoring well-defined alien boundaries

If someone clearly expressed: “this is possible with me, but this is not possible”, and the second one continues to do (or try to do) what he wants, then violence begins from this point. And there are no other options here. “I don’t want sex today” — “Well, okay, what does it cost you!” From the moment you said «I don’t want sex!» — all further attempts to have sex are attempts to invade a territory that is closed. Why it is closed (why the person does not want sex) is another question, and with the ability to make contact at the border of both partners, it can be resolved. And defensive aggression here is a normal and natural reaction.

«Blessings» often also become forms of violence. I know a story in which a father decided to “do good” to his daughter, and when she was on vacation, in two weeks, a team of workers hired by her father completely redecorated her apartment in accordance with her father’s ideas. No one asked her daughter, of course, whether she wanted it or not, and she had no choice — to accept or not to accept. She was confronted with a fact. The father simply satisfied his need at the expense of his daughter. In fact, this is a symbolic rape, that is, penetration deep into the personal (even intimate) territory without the permission of the victim, and even in her «unconscious» state. In this case, the boundaries were clearly marked, and they were violated. Food violence, financial violence — any form of interaction in which one of the partners does what he wants with the other, ignoring the will of the other, is violence. Tactless remarks and comparisons, depreciation, unsolicited advice — all this, being a violation of personal boundaries, is not violence in itself, but it becomes violence when it was directly said: do not compare me with Zhenya or Sasha, it offends me. I do not want you to give me advice, if necessary, I will ask.

One of the border zones here is flirting. The rapprochement of a man and a woman implies penetration beyond the boundaries, and sensitivity to each other, to reactions to each cautious step towards, is very important here. And simply grabbing a woman or a man for «interesting places» leaves no choice and is violence with all the ensuing reactions to it. The partner does not always have the opportunity and resources to resist or respond in time, but there is always the opportunity to directly indicate your attitude.

• «A society that ignores the violence of the past commits new violence»

4. Undefined or unmarked personal boundaries

One of the partners or both cannot clearly indicate their attitude to this or that fact. For example, a man wants sex, and a woman in response very vaguely says “maybe”, “we’ll see”, “well-uh-uh”, “probably”, and so on. And non-verbal messages are also dual. These vague words and gestures mean neither refusal nor consent, and, in fact, the interpretation is at the mercy of the initiator of sex. And he can interpret it from positions that are desirable for him, which is natural. “Yeah, you need to be more persistent, she is waiting for this!” (She did not indicate what she was waiting for.) It is not clear where the flags are. In the absence of direct feedback, people often begin to look for some external criteria that would allow them to understand a partner. And among them there may be stereotypes about the “correct” male or female behavior, cultural norms (offer three times — refuse twice, demonstrate modesty, agree on the third), advice from friends and girlfriends. Orientation to external criteria does not lead to anything good: not real people are in contact, but walking stereotypes. Is the man’s continued initiative then violence? No. He chooses a variant of action acceptable to him in uncertain conditions, sometimes even based on past experience: when, having shown initiative, he did not meet with a response, but having stopped showing it, he suddenly encounters resentment …

There are various reasons why it is difficult to define your boundaries. Someone is afraid of offending, someone is simply afraid for their life and health because of past experience. Someone manipulates, plays their games. And someone simply cannot find a psychological resource to resist violence or to mark their borders, so the very fact of knowing how to protect their borders may not help. Acquiring these resources is often the task of psychotherapy.