Journalism of Courage
Advertisement
Premium

Decoding and promoting bystander behaviour: Actions to address violence against women

Breakthrough launched the Ignore No More campaign in partnership with Uber India in March 2020 and concluded it in March 2021 with a comprehensive study on Bystander Behaviour. 

Bystander intervention is a critical tool for preventing violence against women in public and private spaces.

Promoting positive bystander action to address violence against women has been a consistent focus area for Breakthrough. From the Bell Bajao campaign, which encouraged people to intervene in cases of domestic violence by taking simple actions like ringing the bell to its most recent Ignore No More and Dakhal Do campaigns, bystander action has been at the centre of their work.  

Breakthrough realised that, for it to be able to achieve this goal, it is essential that they better understand the factors which motivate bystanders to intervene or prevents them from doing so, especially in the context of violence against women. The lack of existing literature on the issue, especially in the Indian context, further confirmed their rationale for undertaking the study. 

Breakthrough launched the Ignore No More campaign in partnership with Uber India in March 2020 and concluded it in March 2021 with a comprehensive study on Bystander Behaviour. 

What is bystander intervention? 

Bystander intervention is a critical tool for preventing violence against women in public and private spaces. Bystander refers to individuals around a survivor when an act of violence against a woman is committed and has the potential or capability to act. Intervention represents any positive non-violent action (sans morally prescriptive codes) taken by a bystander to immediately stop an act of VAW.

Speaking up and its ramifications

Why do people intervene? 

People who intervened provided a number of reasons for their actions: 

Onil, a Mumbai-based participant and social worker spoke about how the processes towards setting up a sexual harassment cell in office and conversations with one of his female colleagues helped him first  think about the notion of ‘consent’. This turned out to be instrumental as it propelled him to read extensively around the concept and how  it was key to gender rights. 

How have people intervened?  

Story continues below this ad

From an ‘active’ bystander perspective, intervention strategies and methods were influenced by multiple factors such as gender, age, socio-economic standing, gender rights awareness etc. Participants who had experience of intervention shared interesting methods of helping survivors. Often, speaking up and reprimanding the perpetrator had a huge impact in terms of stopping the incident. Other immediate kinds of intervention included: 

  1. Swapping seats with survivors/victims: The importance of quietly dealing with a situation of gender violence was important, particularly from the perspective of the survivor.
  2.  Giving one’s mobile number to connect later (particularly involving cases of intimate partner violence wherein the woman might need time to reflect on her next step)
  3. Taking the survivor for medical help.
  4. Physically escorting someone home when she is being harassed. 
  5. Resorting to violence or employing patriarchal scripts like “Don’t you have a mother, sister at home?” 

A few of the participants were also drawn to some other methods adopted as redressal mechanisms for the long haul. A long-term intervention strategy shared by 30-year-old teacher Shakeel in Delhi involved community mobilisation. On being told by his female students about their difficulty of getting to school owing to eve-teasing on the streets around the institution, he and some of his colleagues came together to patrol the streets around peak hours. They also roped in the help of the cops and ensured regular patrolling. He says that it helped the girls get to school with a feeling of security.  

 

The role of bystander action in enabling a survivor to speak up

Story continues below this ad
Respondents (female and others) were offered three possible reasons in the survey,

Male and female bystanders: Is there a difference in approach?  

There is also an interesting difference in the way men and women responded and intervened. Most men spoken to talked about the perils of being a ‘stranger’ while intervening for women unknown to them. Other passive bystanders questioned, often aggressively, the intervening man’s “right” to speak up for a girl who was clearly not related to him. Some men also discussed concerns over their safety as an important factor. This reality motivated some male bystanders to assume kinship or romantic relationships with the survivor to gain the ‘credibility’ to intervene. 

Some men also talked about the difficulty of dealing with survivors who weren’t vocal about what was happening to them. A few highlighted how the situation turned messy when, despite their intervention, some women failed to acknowledge abuse had happened. A male bystander talked about how such an experience had prompted him to think of ways to quietly deal with a situation without bringing attention to a victim, hence the rationale for his  strategy. This is in contrast with a similar scenario in which a female bystander intervened a lot more overtly. On witnessing a girl being harassed by her male co-passenger in a shared auto 22-year-old Aruna directly confronted the perpetrator.  

Reasons for intervention

In terms of women themselves dealing with sexual violence in public transportation they talked about using everyday objects such as safety pins as armour. Women travellers also demonstrated camaraderie with other fellow female co-passengers by strategically and quietly asking victims to move forward or aside without bringing attention to them. Avoiding potentially dangerous or violent situations is a common survival strategy employed by women while travelling. 

Story continues below this ad

A male bystander related how such an experience had prompted him to think  of ways to quietly deal with a situation without bringing attention to a victim hence the rationale for his strategy. This is in contrast with a similar scenario in which a female bystander intervened a lot more overtly.

Reasons for intervention in public transport

Survey results: 

 

Those who intervened* and why? Those who didn’t intervene and why?
  • 54.6% of respondents said that they had intervened in an incident of violence against women in a public space.
  • 5.3% respondents observed the discomfort of the woman/girl facing violence. 
  • 67.7% respondents said that their intervention resulted in the violence stopping. 
  • 45.4 % respondents said that they have not intervened in an incident of violence against women.
  • 38.5% respondents said that they did not intervene because they did not know what to do. 
  • 31% of them said that they were worried about their own safety.
  • 11.5% of them feel that they would be dragged into police/legal matters.

What can we do to promote bystander intervention? 

Story continues below this ad

The study was conducted with support from Uber India and IKEA Foundation.

Read the full report findings here: https://inbreakthrough.org/bystander-report/

From the homepage


📣 For more lifestyle news, click here to join our WhatsApp Channel and also follow us on Instagram
Tags:
Edition
Install the Express App for
a better experience
Featured
Trending Topics
News
Multimedia
Follow Us
Bihar Election ResultsNitish factor propels NDA towards Bihar sweep, Tejashwi fails to retain strongholds
X