Gender violence occurs anywhere, crosses all social strata, occurs at all ages, yes.
But there are differences depending on the spaces in which it occurs.
This Monday, on Calle de Serrano, in Madrid, Fernando Miguel González Castejón, Count of Atarés and Marquis of Perijáa, murdered her wife, a friend of hers, and then committed suicide.
He did it with one of the pistols from his small arsenal, even though he had neither a gun license nor one registered in his name.
He did have a history of gender violence, with a restraining order from his sister and his current mother;
and an already inactive case in the Viogén system for mistreatment of his partner in 2018, in front of their daughter, who is now 10 years old.
When the case became known, just 48 hours ago,
Is there less perception of gender violence in the higher economic classes or in the so-called nobility?
Does it operate differently?
Both specialists and existing data point to an affirmative answer: there are specific characteristics.
However, as with other issues in this field, the analyzes and figures are either not up to date or have never been collected.
It happens with the socioeconomic level of the murderers, for example, and in part, it happens because the first approaches that were made to sexist violence already reflected that there were no differences, that it occurred in any home in the world, and that variable has never been included in the statistics or reports that are officially published by any body.
The latest from the General Council of the Judiciary on victims of sexist violence, for example, notes in the section on "characteristics of the aggressors" that "the data from the judicial files is not sufficient to draw a profile of the aggressors that incorporates specific circumstances. socioeconomic or psychopathological elements that could help define more accurately the existence of guidelines, behavior patterns or attributes of the relationship potentially triggering situations of violence.
Age, nationality, the situation in which the relationship was, usually appear, whether or not suicide occurred after the murder or if they surrendered after committing it.
And, as that document also adds, the characterization of the aggressor's profile "is based on the exploitation of statistical data devoid of subjective elements."
However, they exist.
Miguel Lorente, forensic doctor and former delegate of the Government against Gender Violence, explains that years ago, when he analyzed in a general way the issue of complaints by economic strata, he saw that "those from the highest levels reported more crimes against property and property and those of lower strata, more injuries”.
He has a double explanation: “On the one hand, because they have more goods and properties to worry about, obviously, but also because denouncing violence generates a bad image that is less valued at these higher socioeconomic or sociocultural levels.
They prefer to avoid conflicts and resolve through economic issues and not in a more public way that places them before their own in a negative way.
In that second part of the explanation is "the bottom" of the question: what is seen and what is not.
Because although the expert made a general review, he "applies to sexist violence," he says, like any other violence.
“Why do so few cases of these social classes transcend, if we want to call them that?
Because just the fact of transcending is already negative, not only for the aggressor but for the victim”.
Lorente recalls that one of the reasons why women do not report, according to the 2019 Macro-survey on Violence against Women, is because of shame.
11.4% do not do so for that reason.
Victoria Rosell, the current delegate of the Government of that area, points to the main reason for not doing it.
"For the case of violence in the current couple, 47.2% mention having solved it by themselves," she reads in the macro-survey.
The experience of this jurist is that, when she practiced, medical reports from lawyers or doctors passed through her desk: “She does not attend to social classes or professions.
What we do see is that there is a certain deficit of alarm and warning, as if having more economic means implies that help is not needed to get out of the violence”.
That 47.2% who believe that they can solve it alone is, according to the delegate, "a false perception" that "occurs more extensively among those who see themselves as having more possibilities."
Although "for these victims the housing or economic resources to get out of these relationships are more easily accessible, that does not mean that they are safe."
Rosell believes that in part this may be linked to "that kind of extreme liberalism in which the need for state aid is not perceived, even in these circumstances."
However, she adds, "restraining orders, support and comprehensive protection of institutions are for all women."
In his experience, the "informal" agreements that can occur more commonly between couples without economic problems are not always fulfilled.
“It is better that institutions, security forces and bodies, justice mediate, to protect them and their sons and daughters.
Because an abuser can never, never be a good father, ”she insists.
Mercedes González, the Government delegate in Madrid, agrees on this, stating that “any window of opportunity is the best time to benefit from the protection” of justice, of the police.
He knows that it is "difficult and complicated and hard", but he believes that it is necessary to persist in the complaint, not by the victims, but by "society, the family, whoever knows what is happening or believes that something it's happening".
Bring violence out of the shadows “before it's too late”.
The basis and stereotypes of violence
Behind "all the prejudices that exist around that violence", Lorente recalls that when acting against it, either as an institution or as a society, "it is done from those prejudices".
Also the victims and the abusers.
He says so because of the details of this latest murder, which is being investigated as male violence.
In 2018, the National Police mediated a discussion that was taking place in the street between the aristocrat and his wife, with their daughter in front.
He yelled and insulted her.
The agents detained him and she stated that she “used drugs and alcohol”, that “sometimes her character changed” and that “from time to time” she received pushes and hair pulling.
She didn't think it was serious.
According to the macro-survey, the second most common reason given by women for not denouncing their partners, 37.3%, is that they consider that what happens is of “very little importance”.
At that time, the National Police acted ex officio against the count, but she did not want to file a complaint or go to court, as three out of four women murdered for sexist violence do not: for fear of the aggressor, of not being believed or of the consequences that you can have for your sons and daughters.
The first thing that Lorente refers to is "the construction of the idea that they are usually behaviors that men carry out after consuming alcohol or drugs or that they have some mental pathology."
Hence he "killed her after a strong argument" or "had drunk them".
Even in court rulings, she explains, "those circumstances are presented as if that were alien to the violence itself, as if there were no complex construction."
That “are ways of approaching the understanding of what is produced”, but the origin of the violence is not 20 beers or a gram of cocaine, “it is machismo”, Lorente points out.
And there is also "that kind of responsibility of women, as if their behavior was to blame for the violence, as if they could have avoided it by behaving differently."
These details, "important" to learn more about how sexist violence occurs, "are not important when it comes to officially communicating the murders, because they reinforce these stereotyped ideas."
When violence is known, "you see that they are not determining factors, that is why we call them social, because they may have to do with the way of proceeding, but not with the act of proceeding."
Differences also in relation to the level of training
According to the 2019 Macro-survey on Violence against Women, the largest and most up-to-date report to date in Spain, there are also differences in relation to the level of training when reporting.
Women with university studies are the ones who report the least, 14.1%, with "a lot of difference" compared to the rest of the groups.
"If you look exclusively at the reporting of violence in past couples, in general the same pattern is repeated, but the distances between those who report the least and those who report the most are greater," says the macro-survey.
15.3% of women with university studies had filed a complaint compared to 32.8% of those with primary education or less: “This result shows that, although in general women with primary education have a higher prevalence of intimate partner violence than women with university studies, they also denounce this violence to a greater extent”.
The analysis of that report alludes to the fact that this “may be due to the fact that women with less education suffer more serious episodes of violence, or because they have a greater economic dependence on their partners that makes them file a complaint in order to access public aid, among others. other possible reasons.