Questioning the "from victim to survivor" narrative

[firecat]

via moominmuppet

http://eminism.org/blog/entry/291
"Reclaiming 'victim': Exploring alternatives to the heteronormative 'victim to survivor' discourse"

The article discusses the rigidity of societal narratives around people who have been subjected to violence. I quote from it below the cut-tag.


Excerpt:

The society views victimhood as something that must be overcome. When we are victimized, we are (sometimes) afforded a small allowance of time, space, and resources in order to recover–limited and conditional exemptions from normal societal expectations and responsibilities–and are given a different set of expectations and responsibilities that we must live up to (mainly focused around getting help, taking care of ourselves, and recovering). “Healing” is not optional, but is a mandatory process by which a “victim” is transformed into a “survivor”; the failure to successfully complete this transformation results in victim-blaming and sanctions.

This is really useful for me right now because lately I'm very aware that many societal narratives don't accurately describe my experience.

Comments

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

Weirdly enough, it was the movie Napoleon Dynamite which put me onto the idea of natural processes, and how much they get left out of the usual narratives.

The movie is about natural maturation, rather than healing-- but I noticed that it isn't the usual story.

Mild spoilers:

N lbhat zna frrzf hafcrnxnoyl hfryrff naq naablvat ng gur ortvaavat bs gur zbivr. Ur znxrf fbzr tbbq pubvprf gb trg n unccl raqvat, ohg vg'f nyfb whfg gung ur'f tebjvat hc.