Opinion | The numbers matter, but women’s lived reality matters more

Every time crime figures are disclosed, South Africans naturally inquire if we are making headway in the battle against crime. However, when the crime at hand is gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF), the question that becomes paramount is whether women and girls are now safer. The most recent crime data from the South African Police Service (SAPS), coupled with the latest Governance, Public Safety and Justice Survey by Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), offers us evidence of progress where it exists, yet a deep concern about the pervasiveness of violence in our society.

The findings present a dual landscape. While the Stats SA survey shows a slight improvement in perceptions of safety, particularly during daylight hours, this feeling of security significantly wanes once the sun sets, and South Africa remains plagued by alarming levels of violent crime. For those dedicated to bolstering the rights and safety of women, this is not a time for complacency or political point-scoring. It is a time for candor.

The available data does not yet allow us to definitively claim that GBVF is declining steadily or sustainably. This distinction is crucial. The South African Police Service (SAPS) statistics reflect crimes that are reported and recorded within the criminal justice system. Conversely, household surveys such as the Stats SA Governance, Public Safety and Justice Survey provide another critical perspective, enabling us to grasp individuals' experiences and perceptions of crime beyond what reaches the police.

We require both. In the case of GBVF, relying solely on police figures can yield an incomplete picture. Many instances of violence against women never reach a police station. Victims may be apprehensive about retaliation. They might rely economically on the perpetrator. They could be convinced that nothing will transpire if they report.

They may feel ashamed, traumatized, or merely drained. In some cases, the perpetrator is the very individual who should offer love, security, and protection. This is what makes GBVF distinct from the conventional understanding of crime. It is not merely a matter of policing. It is a matter of power, inequality, social norms, economic vulnerability, relationships, and human dignity.

The latest Stats SA findings underscore the persistent significance of intimate relationships in comprehending violence against women, while also exposing societal attitudes that can facilitate the normalization of violence. This should trouble every South African. If violence becomes normalized before it occurs, our response cannot commence solely after a woman has been assaulted, raped, or killed.

Prevention must commence prior to the crime. It must begin with how we nurture boys. It must begin with how we educate young people about consent, equality, respect, and healthy relationships. It must begin with challenging harmful manifestations of masculinity that instill boys and men with the notion that control, aggression, and dominance equate to strength.

It must begin with families refusing to condone abusive behavior. It must begin with communities refusing to shield perpetrators out of familial, friendly, neighborly, or influential ties. And it must begin with men speaking to other men.

Government assumes a pivotal role in this endeavor. The establishment of the National Council on Gender-Based Violence and Femicide represents an important avenue to fortify the nationwide response and enhance coordination across government and society. However, the Council must not merely become another body that generates reports and recommendations.

Its efficacy must ultimately be gauged by whether these recommendations result in transformations for survivors and prospective victims. We require a response that intertwines prevention, policing, prosecution, healthcare services, psychological support, shelters, economic empowerment, and community mobilization. Moreover, we necessitate superior data.

A key insight emerging from the latest statistics is the necessity to adopt a more nuanced approach to measuring progress against GBVF. A decline in reported cases may indicate fewer crimes transpiring. However, it may also signify fewer victims reporting. Conversely, a rise in reported cases does not necessarily imply that the situation has worsened.

It could reflect increased confidence in the criminal justice system, improved reporting mechanisms, or heightened willingness among survivors to step forward.

This is why figures must always be contextualized. We should welcome every crime reduction. We should acknowledge the efforts of police officers, prosecutors, social workers, healthcare providers, civil society organizations, and community activists who tirelessly protect victims and hold perpetrators accountable. Yet, we must never allow an improvement in one indicator to foster a false sense of security.

For a woman apprehensive about walking home after dark, statistics alone do not instill a sense of safety. For a woman ensnared in an abusive relationship due to lack of independent income, statistics alone do not offer an escape route. For a survivor sitting in a police station questioning whether they will be believed, statistics alone do not guarantee justice.

And for a family mourning the loss of a daughter, sister, mother, or wife, no downward trend in crime statistics can ever suffice if another woman becomes the subsequent victim. Consequently, our aspiration must transcend merely reducing crime statistics. We must alter the circumstances that engender violence. Economic empowerment, therefore, is not separate from the GBVF response.

A woman with access to decent work, income, housing, education, and social support possesses greater agency to make life choices and to abandon circumstances that place her at risk.