the side-effects of the right to anonymity for abuse victims

[Amoregentlemanlikemanner]

I was noticing the dignified response from Sammy Woodhouse to the shootings in Christchurch which the perpetrator attempted to dress up as revenge.

Here is it in case you haven't seen it.

"Sammy Woodhouse
‏ @sammywoodhouse1
Mar 15

My thoughts go out to all the victims killed today in New Zealand.

Such an evil act.

As a Rotherham survivor, I would like to add a message from me and my family. This was not done in our name. ❤️❤️❤️
46 replies 381 retweets 2,198 likes"

I couldn't help thinking:

• how often abusive men have carried out crimes to "defend women"
• how anonymity is the norm and so it's quite rare for someone like Sammy to have their response heard/foregrounded.

I don't claim a proper understanding of the rights and wrongs of the whole anonymity thing but it would be great if we could find a system where other Rotherham victims were able to speak out and have their voices heard (even if under a pseudonym if need be)

Anonymity and discretion plays a central part in a victim's healing process.

It was great for Sammy Woodhouse to speak up, but I would never put anyone under pressure to speak publicly about the abuse they've suffered unless they feel doing so will help their own healing.

Don't forget with Rotherham there was a double (or triple) whammy that many victims did speak out, frequently, but they were completely disbelieved, victim-blamed and brushed off and no one helped them, so why should they suddenly be expected to get on Twitter to defend a completely atrocious act in a different country.

^not defend fgs
Decry.

thank you I hear what you say and don't dispute it