Psychological violence: because C’è Posta per te made a mistake with Valentina and Stefano

He made her pick up the chips that fell to the ground, and if she objected, he crushed them. If she parked he insulted her as incompetent. Not to mention the education of the children and the cleaning of the house: solely and exclusively her duty, from which he was excluded because he “worked”. Like her. The very sad story that seems to come from another era but which is instead very current – and probably very widespread – of the story of Valentina and Stefanoprotagonists, among other guests, of the Saturday 7 January episode of You’ve Got Mailraised a great social indignation, also led by Chiara Ferragni and Fedez, who commented: “For us, he is toxicity personified.”

As always happens during the Mediaset broadcast, on one side of the studio sits a person who has a request or a message to bring to another, summoned by the editorial staff of the p

program: the two parts are divided by an envelope, which opens or not depending on whether the guest decides to fulfill the request or the message of the other party. In the case of Valentina and Stefano, the envelope was opened, with a sort of “happy ending”: she had gone on the show to ask him for “forgiveness” for a betrayal. Originated, as has been gutted in the long debate, from the continuous mortifications of her husband.

To Valeria Fonte, activist and feministauthor of the book It kills the tongue anymore (DeAgostini) on gender discrimination that passes through language, released last October and creator of Instagram profile valeriafonte.pointwe asked to help us understand because such a story cannot be reduced to pure television entertainmentand above all what kind of mobilization is activating about this affair.

«Let’s start from the fact that the program setting has only one purpose: and no, it’s not “to open
envelope”. Rather it is allowing those who stay at home to enter private human dynamics
looking through the keyhole. Betrayals, love stories, family quarrels, illnesses
they become the matrix of a visceral and all-encompassing entertainmentwhere every detail becomes
essential to allow the supreme judge, the public, to understand who is right and who is right
injustice. In less constructed terms: he profits from personal affairs. The flaw in the story of
Valentina and Stefano, however, is clear. It’s not a private story, or rather, it stops being so in the
moment in which it becomes the representation of a systemic phenomenon in relationships
abusers: psychological violence.
“Opening the envelope” means bargaining, finding compromises, understanding each other, empathizing,
start over. The error lies upstream: making a story of psychological violence a story like
many, where points of view exist, compromises, negotiations. It is left to the public there
ability to decide which side to take, when in fact there can be no subjective thoughts
in the face of an objective dynamic of violence. The very fact that the television machine asks
to the public, in situations like these, to judge who is wrong and who is right dismantles
the most urgent need of recent decades: not to leave room for free choice, but to take
a clear, clear-cut position against psychological abuse.
We believe that psychological violence, because it lacks swollen faces, is less invasive And
all-encompassing, but it is, of course, false. We seriously think that if violence is not seen, then
does not exist: as in this case. And I will say more; or we think that she is the stupid one, who wants
be with a man who deeply humiliated her for sixteen years, or let’s shift the focus to
treason, unforgivable and far more serious (they say).
And Stefano, her husband, says it clearly: “The quarrels that took place before the betrayal were
nonsense”. But let’s evaluate whether this minimization is correct. De Filippi, in the preamble
to the story, he tells how he, during a home episode, asked Valentina to
pick up some chips from the floor. She refuses, saying she’s doing something else, and asks
Stefano to do it for him. Stefano decides to step on the chips and says: “Do it yourself
learn to do what I tell you”.
There are many examples of “nonsense” told by De Filippi. The car was
badly parked by Valentina? Stefano throws his son’s seat in the air. Does the offspring not want to do homework? Blame Valentina, who is not a good mother, appealed with adjectives such as “Cogliona”, “Stupid”, “Useless”.
A preamble to psychological violence without swollen faces, but with a component of
precise psychological humiliation. De Filippi, however, decides to tell it as a story
whatever. No scruples. No stance. Humiliation and mortification
are normalized. De Filippi’s impassivity appears incredibly alienating, who
he talks about control, power, dehumanization as if he were talking about the lunch menu. The stretch plus
distressing is this incredible impartiality.

Why can’t such a story be exploited simply as it is by television?

«People who suffer psychological violence cannot be allowed in any way to
become an object of evening entertainment. Unless they decide it themselves,
as in this case. Valentina’s decision should not be invalidated. She shouldn’t be infantilized
describing her as “the one who doesn’t know what she’s doing”.
The point, however, is another: why does Valentina want to go back with Stefano? Let me rephrase: because
Is there a pattern where you always go back to the abuser at some point?
It is unethical (and shouldn’t even be legal) for a television program to be followed by
four million people can choose to enter into a negotiation between the abused person and
abusive person. Voluntarily deciding not to protect this woman is a catch
position clear: You’ve Got Mail stands on the wrong side, in the name of the god Share.
Television has a pedagogical-popular role. It is culture, as music is culture, i
books, social networks. It is not true that irresponsible entertainment is “an old thing to which we are
you’ve gotten used to it for a while” . The task of those who prepare the material that will be broadcast for months is
that of sifting, inch by inch, the contents. They are thoughtful choices.
“Irresponsible” is someone who does not evaluate the consequences of their choices. The television
count crowded productions. Has anyone evaluated the consequences of this choice?
We have once again allowed one betrayal to mask sixteen years of violence.
And we did it by putting her in the dock. We told the audience that
you can turn a blind eye to some things. Until we get dead.”

What would have been a clever way to tell this story?

“Does not exist. This matter had to be dropped from the lineup. It is not true that Mediaset’s production does not know what psychological violence is and does not know what the means can be to protect a person who has lived it for a whole life. In fact, he consciously chooses to ignore these premises and to let Valentina implement one of the textbook behaviors, once the couple’s relationship, in a violent relationship, goes into crisis: prostration. We apologize for our mistakes and go back to where we are used to: sitting on the nails. In fact, we ask those who suffer psychological violence to “try again”, to try to understand, to try, to dialogue, to retract. Stories of violence are always stories of compromise, and opening the envelope, in this case, was. But can we really hope for a compromise? Can we allow those who suffer violence to choose humiliation?
Requests for help are not always explicit, and we must not fall into the error of
describe Valentina as a little girl who doesn’t know what’s best for herself. She knows it, she does
we anticipated above. And she knows it so well because after Stefano chose to make her
scorched earth around (family, friends, colleagues, telling about adultery) could not do
nothing but going back to the only one who could take it back. I call it a “punitive ride” what
the abusive man puts it in place whenever he needs to make sure the woman doesn’t
make a life again. Not mine? Never anyone’s. The aim is to isolate the woman, making her obliged
to return to where it had been wanted: in his hands. It is not uncommon for those who experience psychological violence to let themselves be convinced, by hearing it, that they are worth less, that they deserve less, that they are nothing, if not close to the man we consider, at that point, better than us. The purpose of television cannot be to stage a story without these coordinates. The very formulation of this account is incorrect: it is wrong to put Valentina on the side of those who apologize, it is wrong to leave him the position of victim of the story, it is wrong to force the bargaining. It’s never just chips, it’s never just insults, it’s never just nonsense. It is always and only power. A systemic and repeated scheme of demolition of the human: Valentina is not a person, she is a mother who irons, cooks and looks after the house, while he, quoting it, sits on the sofa watching a film. And this year too begins with the same patriarchal bullshit of all years, legitimized by the mass media”.

Why did you appeal to Mediaset? What reactions has it received?

“I was told that the solution, in these cases, is to turn off the television and ignore. But
can we ignore a social phenomenon that educates the public about this? Mediaset must
take a stand. The private circles and social bubbles in which we have it are no longer enough for us
let’s tell each other. We need this outrage to turn into
something else: an admission of guilt. We have to ask ourselves what Mediaset cares about most, and me
I say the answer is: the public. Losing it or outraging it is what forces production to
backtrack, usually. We need to focus on this now. You have to annoy, talking
their language”.