In the chronicle, five women share their experiences and impressions of how the legal system handles violence; experiences gathered via a large network of mothers subjected to violence in Denmark. It caused a riot in the public debate. And “Politiken” hurried up and apologized for the chronicle.
But the reaction to a TV-program about harassment against contact parents recently, the result was almost the opposite: Suddenly, the debate took it as proven that “thousands of women lie”. And no one got busy apologizing for these statements even though there is no documentation for them.
This situation illustrates well which world violated women in Denmark experience. When they talk about the violence and the assault they are subjected to, the whole world gets busy trying to shut them up. It is a common experience in the Network that the victims are advised NOT to say a word about violence in the State Administration or in courtrooms. It just makes you look untrustworthy, they say.
Men with psychopathic traits often feel more violated than others. And they have a pronounced need to shut their ex-partners up. Even if it means they then limit her right to speak in the public room, even about general matters.
They really like to initiate defamation cases, both against ex-partners and against professionals who dare comment on their behavior or on their personality traits. We find that defamation cases is a commonly used method to shut up victims of violence. Even professionals who give statements about violence or sexual assault is pursued by these cases.
We encourage the politicians to review the laws on defamation, because there are threatening the freedom of speech for victims of violence. And they make it impossible for professional to give statements in support of the victims.
In the Network Mom, we cannot and will not accept that women subjected to violence are not allowed to use their freedom of speech and get swamped by defamation cases if they speak up.
We are very puzzled by the fact that those who disagree with us constantly attack the messenger in stead of examining and relating to what we disclose.
You are not allowed to say or even imply that a person is a psychopath before a psychiatrist has diagnosed this. Well, it just so happens that the psychopath will never let himself be tested voluntarily.
When several professionals independently of each other state that a person has certain psychopathic behavioral patterns, one should actually not be able to win a defamation case until this has been tested by a psychiatrist.
In the Network Mom, we support mandatory testing for psychopathy in these cases.
It seems to be the ONLY way the victims can recreate a life of freedom, safety and dignity.