This submission highlights the inadequacy and danger of the use of the notion of “consent” in the definition of forms of VAWG. Focusing on the absence of consent risks reinforcing a system that disadvantages victims while providing perpetrators with additional avenues to evade responsibility.
A more adequate way to understand VAWG and effectively protect the victim would be founding the legal definitions of forms of VAWG on the ways through which the perpetrator selects the victim usually exploiting vulnerabilities or a relation of dominance -, and the strategy put in place (such as physical, emotional and psychological violence, threat, coercion, duress, deceit, surprise, coercive control, exploitation of the victim’s sideration or involuntary paralysis, promise of a remuneration or reward, etc.).
