Morgan’s response to stalking allegations, a reversal that is typical in violent situations

“Turning it around is one of the classic responses of abusive and mistreating men when they are exposed publicly,” she says. Carlotta Vagnoliactivist and writer, commenting on the response of Morgan to the story of the stalking complaint filed by Angelica Schiatti. The singer-songwriter wrote: «Today they like monsters, if I were the monster you would like me. You don’t like me because monsters don’t like angels. May the angels stay with me».

«For centuries in a patriarchal society like ours it was very easy to believe the voices of men who tried to discredit the women who had denounced them. We have always found ourselves believing the men who said that the women who had denounced them had done so for other reasons: for fame, for money, for blackmail, to assume positions of power, to have some advantage. The “angel-monster” reversal was given 10 to 1 by Snai and we could easily expect that Morgan would make a move like that.because that move is still the only effective one, in quotation marks: culturally we tend to never believe women who report violence.”

Why use the words “angels” and “monsters”?
“A discrediting and violent language, to say the least bestial, dehumanizing, is not an exceptional language that only he uses: it is always used in these situations of violence. But the language of the whole story of the messages sent by Morgan to Schiatti (in the trial documents, ed.) is emblematic.”

In what sense?
“The language is emblematic because it is very clear how in all the messages of this type that abusers and mistreatment send to their victims, the woman is not conceived as a human being but as an object of property. And there is the need to destroy her socially with “revenge porn”, that is, the non-consensual sharing of intimate material, but also with violent language, precisely. With respect to the woman who is the victim at that moment, the abuser wants to have control. All the part of the messages about stalking and the desire to discredit her within the workplace is precisely the desire to dispose of the survivor’s life as one pleases. For years, for centuries, it has worked very well as a technique, fortunately in recent years things are changing”.

However, the trial is only starting now, four years after the complaint and despite the fact that the “Red Code” had been activated: how is this possible?
English: “This happens because there is not only a rapid understanding of the urgency of some phenomena of male violence against women, but also because there is no adequate training for the bodies that should protect the voices of women who report. Therefore, at an institutional level there is a sort of anachronism: if culturally we understand that there is a need for speed, promptness, urgency, and above all precautionary measures of removal, in short something that can protect, from an institutional point of view we are still very far from achieving this precisely because there is no adequate preparation. Endless procedural procedures, as in this case, in which after four years there have still been no hearings, are the consequence of drifts that in other cases are very violent, in the worst cases femicide: it seems almost obvious to me to have to remember that many of the women killed by femicide in recent years had already reported their abusers, but this was of no use because the precautionary measures that should be triggered automatically were not used and implemented. And this leads to distrust in the justice system, a very serious problem, because fewer women report and more women are at risk of their safety and their own lives.”