As of: February 16, 2024, 7:00 a.m
By: Veronika Macht
Comments
Press
Split
Violence against women – the new EU directive wants to take stricter action against this.
The crime of rape is not taken into account.
(Symbolic photo) © Fabian Sommer/dpa
A conversation with Steffi Irmscher-Grothen, head of the BRK women's areas, about the EU violence directive and its effects.
Erding – In Germany, the sexual criminal law has been in force since 2016 with the principle “no means no”.
For an assault to be punishable, it no longer matters whether violence was used or threatened.
What is crucial is that the victim did not want the sexual act.
In Sweden or Spain they say: “Yes means yes”.
Sex must be explicitly consented to in order for it to be considered consensual.
Responsible for women’s areas at the BRK: Steffi Irmscher-Grothen.
© BRK
Women's rights activists in particular had hoped that this principle would be valid across Europe from the new directive on combating violence against women, which the European Union (EU) has agreed on.
But while female genital mutilation and forced marriage, stalking and bullying on the Internet will be punished more harshly in the future, the crime of rape is not taken into account.
For Steffi Irmscher-Grothen, this is “a slap in the face for every woman”.
Our conversation with the head of the BRK women's areas also shows how complex the topic is.
Ms. Irmscher-Grothen, what is your general assessment of the new directive?
The directive itself is great because it is intended to provide something uniform: all EU countries have the opportunity to react uniformly in prevention and prosecution.
Except for rape.
Right, and that's a slap in the face to every woman.
There is an EU regulation for everything.
But there is no agreement on this great good that every human being has - protecting their own body.
It's difficult to find a line in the EU.
Why is that?
My news
“Welcome to Bavaria”: Söder welcomes Kamala Harris to the security conference – first impressions from the reception reading
Emergency situation in Austrian airspace: Passenger plane has to land at Munich Airport
Oberding: The birth of moss grenade reading
When entering Munich Airport: Passenger hides dead, roasted animal in luggage
After the fire in Erding: Photo Zeiler moves to read around
Plan, cut, save, read
Individual countries have different views, laws and criminal prosecutions.
To a certain extent, it's understandable that you can't just impose something on everyone.
But the fact is: the protection of millions of women is at stake.
According to the principle “no means no,” even a simple “no” from the victim turns the perpetrator’s action into a crime. What's the problem with that?
Provability is the big difficulty that we also have here in the counseling center.
That women who have experienced sexual violence are always obliged to prove that they said “no”.
But they would also have this obligation if “Yes means yes”.
That's right, that would also have to be clearly defined.
For example, whether even a smile counts as consent.
Both have advantages and disadvantages, although the focus is always on the fact that there should be clear consent.
This is not possible in many cases, for example when administering co-drops.
Some women are in shock and afraid.
Many people just endure it so that it is over quickly.
These are the subtleties that make this law difficult.
Nevertheless, “Yes means yes” would definitely be the better principle.
Germany – together with France – has opposed the tightening of EU law. Federal Justice Minister Buschmann was widely criticized for this. Right?
In general, I would have liked to have received pros and cons from the opposing parties.
That it would have been clearly explained what was behind the reluctance and that various aspects had to be taken into account.
Basically, I would like victim protection to be more present in Germany.
Sometimes we are really desperate: We want to support the women and give them the best possible advice, but we keep getting thrown in the way - for example when it comes to helping them find therapy places.
What needs to change in your eyes?
A lot of things have to change in society.
That lewd comments and misogynistic jokes are not acceptable.
That short skirts or deep necklines are not an invitation.
It is important that society is made aware.
Like for example?
For example, through prevention, and the sooner the better.
Ideally, this should start at school to make young people aware that certain language, facial expressions and gestures can constitute sexual violence.
Girls must be strengthened, whereby cultural aspects and role models must also be taken into account, for example those with a migration background.
Do you have concrete ideas?
Projects in schools such as self-defense courses, contact points for girls and boys, for example as part of school social work, respect coaches for young people, media education, and parents also have to be brought on board would be important.
I think it would be good if these things took place in everyday school life.
But there isn't enough money for that.
Perpetrators and victims should also have equal rights to therapy places, and prisons and women's shelters should have fairly regulated funding.
There is a big imbalance there.
If a woman has experienced sexual violence – what happens next?
The women have to go to one of several specific clinics in Munich to be examined for forensic medicine, for example to the Rechts der Isar Clinic.
This is not possible here in Erding.
If the woman decides to file a report, she goes to the police.
However, in Germany only ten percent of victims report the crime because they also have to endure an insane ordeal.
What do you mean?
A lot of questions are asked - such as what clothes and underwear the woman was wearing.
Some of it is so intimate that the women regularly break down.
You have to justify yourself, get naked again.
We accompany many when they give their statements to the criminal police.
The longest interrogation I was part of lasted four hours.
And then only eight percent of the perpetrators are convicted, but the suffering for the victims continues.
In what way?
A big problem is so-called post-separation violence, i.e. violence by the ex-partner.
This can be online hate speech, insults, stalking or counter-indications.
Proving this is incredibly difficult, as is developing the strength to take action against it.
What could help?
We need a law protecting against violence that clearly defines the consequences that can arise after acts of violence: psychological, physical, sexual and economic violence.
And the topic should be more in the public eye.
Every third woman experiences sexual violence in her life.
This is happening right here, right among us.
And yet it is a taboo topic.
There is always a public outcry - like after the kissing scandal involving the Spanish footballer.
But that quickly wears off again.
The topic must be permanently present in people's minds without becoming overstimulated.
Violence should not be a private matter, even if it happens within your own four walls.