Exciting Outcome of FiLiA Panel on Non-State Torture (NST) 

Sally: Hi, it's Sally Jackson here. I'm a volunteer and trustee at FiLiA, and I'm really pleased today to be joined by some of the brilliant women that spoke at FiLiA 25, and have been doing some amazing work since October, and wanted to catch up and tell us all about it. So, if I start with some introductions and just looking, if we start with you, Linda McDonald, lovely of you to join us, and can you tell us a little bit about your work, Linda?

Linda: Thank you, Sally. I'm a grassroot feminist nurse, retired nurse, from Nova Scotia, Canada. And along with Jeanne Sarson, one of the other participants, Jeanne and I, for 33 years have been working and supporting women who have survived non-state torture, a term that we coined. And we have, we've helped some women heal, we've done a lot of social activism and lobbying for legislation, and public speaking all around the world, including at the United Nations and at FiLiA. And our goal is to see a law on non-state torture in every country in the world before this is over, and healing care that really supports the women and the crime that they've been subjected to as either children or women. That's pretty well in a nutshell. 

Sally: Thank you. Yeah, and we'll hear a bit more detail of what that looks like as we go through the podcast. Elizabeth, could I come to you and again, if you could just tell us a little bit about your role, that'd be great.

Elizabeth: Yes. Hi Sally. Hi everyone. So I'm Elizabeth Gordon. I'm an artist and an activist and I live in London, UK.I met Jeanne and Linda, oh, 2009, when I was searching for some healing for the non-state torture I'd survived when I was a child, through my childhood. And it's been important for me to speak about how it's possible to heal from non-state torture. And that's taken quite, many, years of relational feminist support.And now I use my art in activism to raise awareness and speak out about non-state torture, so that we have more visibility and can name it as a crime. 

Sally: Brilliant. Thanks Elizabeth. It's great to have you here. Marianna, I come to you. 

Mariane: Hi Sally and hi everyone. It's a big pleasure to be here with all of you. So my name is Mariane De Cunha. I'm also a grassroots activist, lawyer, feminist lawyer, and also a researcher. And I've been working as an expert on violence against women and girls for several NGOs, a bit across Europe and also in Latin America. And I have also done quite extensive research on non-state torture and have been an active voice for the categorisation of forms of violence against women as non-state torture.

Sally: Lovely. Thank you. To you, Jeanne. 

Jeanne: Thank you Sally, and everyone who will eventually listen to all our voices and our experiences. So, to add to Linda, I will just say, also like Mariane, we've done research on non-state torture, gathering the voices of women, individual women. And what becomes amazing is that when women from many countries of the world tell us all the same story, we are creating collective knowledge. Because so often women think they're the only one, because, of course, of the isolation. But when we develop collective knowledge, we develop evidence that state actors are going to have to eventually give into us. So that's the other thing we do. Plus, I do a lot of writing because it's really very important that we record, I guess, the experiences, because often activists don't have enough time to write and to categorise, so the developments get invisibilised.

So we've, Linda and I, made that commitment that we'll do writing. So, I do the writing and we edit everything that we do, and we've had to self-publish, because what we're learning is the editors don't like to say a lot about violence against women and girls. So, we're breaking the silence that way too.

Sally: Thank you Jeanne. Okay then, so we've mentioned non-state torture, but I wonder if to start with and to set the context for any of our listeners who haven't heard you speak before, weren't fortunate after to come and hear the panel that you did at FiLiA this year. Perhaps Linda, could you define for us, what non-state torture is, and I think perhaps specifically look at why is it that we're using the term torture, and other places we hear terms like abuse or harm or et cetera. But why is it important to use the term torture? 

Linda: Thanks, Sally. This is the definition that Jeanne and I started and it's evolved into a definition that others have contributed to, including Fulfil, which was a project in Europe around migrant women and the torture that they were subjected to, the non-state torture that they're subjected to. So non-state torture is torture that occurs in the domestic or private, in relationships, perpetrated within families, human trafficking, in prostitution, pornographic exploitation, by violent groups and gangs, dismissed as social, cultural, traditional or religious acts, and can be committed during migration, displacement, and in humanitarian or civil unrest. So that's really the bedrock of the grassroots science, the foundation of all the work. What comes from that starts with the definition, and it's a new term for people often, and we call it non-state torture because it's not perpetrated by the state. State torture is crimes that are perpetrated by police or the military or by prisoners of war that are subjected to it.

Non-state torture are all those everyday persons that subject the same acts of torture, it's just that it's a different perpetrator. So, that's why we call it non-state torture. And historically, the committee against torture only thought of men when they were defining what torture was, in society in the eighties. And so we have a patriarchal discriminatory framework that really emboldens the idea that torture only happens to men. So, what we've been trying to do, and many others have joined us, is to say that no, that's not true. That torture happens to women and children, in the home or in private places like hotels or huts or anywhere, warehouses, anywhere where the crime occurs and that it shouldn't just be designated to men.

That's discriminatory and that's patriarchal. And it's also misogynistic. It's saying really that women and children aren't important enough (for) their crimes to be named torture. So, it's misnamed as assault, aggravated assault, kidnapping, different crimes like that. But it's not really given the accurate term. Because the same actions occur in non-state or state torture like electric shocking, water torture, drugging, gang raping, all the forms of deprivation, the same classic torture crimes happen to women and children. Instead of water torture in an embassy for instance, they'd tie a man down and put a cloth over him and pour water on him, in the home or in a hotel they'll put a woman or little girl's head in the toilet, dunk her under the tub.

But it's the exact same crime and it causes the same terrorisation and the same physical responses of being terrified of near death. So, what we're saying is, it's time for the world to recognise that indeed, women and girls and boys, because boys are tortured as well, children, that they're subjected to non-state torture and it's equally as devastating a crime.

Sally: Thank you. That's really clear and in some ways just still astounds me that that discrimination, in that it's so clear that if it happens from a state actor, it's very clearly torture, but the same behaviours happen to a woman in her home and it's not recognised at that level. So, thank you for that, Linda.

If we could move on. We were really pleased for you all to join us at FiLiA last year, and we had such positive feedback about the session itself and how powerful it was. A lot of women recognising things, that feeling when you know something and no one's verbalised it before, and then you hear it and suddenly things make sense.

And that was certainly some of the feedback that we had from your session. What sort of conversations and things happened at FiLiA that's helped you to move forward?

Elizabeth: I was very moved by how supportive women were attending our panel and speaking, as I did, as a woman who had survived non-state torture in my childhood, I've never had a standing ovation before when I've spoken. And I felt recognised and listened to, and I found this a really healing experience. I felt the ovation too as support for all women and girls who've been non-state torture victimised, and that I could feel from the feedback that there's more knowing, more recognising that non-state torture is a crime that needs to be named.

That was very exciting and very heartening. And then the day after our panel, we'd told everyone that there would be a strategy meeting. So, we looked for a place at lunchtime on the Saturday to sit down, and of course it was absolutely brimming with women absolutely everywhere. So, we looked around and found a space to sit to do our follow up strategy meeting and in the end, we found a space right next to my art in the art exhibition, which actually, oh, it just felt very fitting and I was very moved. And there we were, sitting by my art, having our first meeting. And to know that legal resources and support around non-state torture is growing, and that's where, that's where something began.

Sally: Oh, you're teasing us. So, we don't have listeners waiting too long, if we move on to Mariane, can you tell us about that ‘something’ and some of the ideas that came out of that strategy meeting that you've been taking forward since then? 

Mariane: Yes, of course. Following up on what Elizabeth was saying, this was an idea that indeed emerged in FiLiA, and I can give a little bit of a context because it was actually, of course, it's an idea that is being built collectively, but it was an idea that I had before our strategy meeting. And of course, this network, the idea for the network was building a space, I would say a safe space, a space of sisterhoods, because I think that's one of the reasons why we could develop this new idea for a network, because it indeed results from a space of feminist mobilisation, of collaboration, and collective resistance of course, that's what we want to build. And of course, on a more personal note, as I mentioned, I'm a feminist lawyer and I am from Portugal and my experience witnessing non-state torture and of course work that Linda and Jeanne paved the way on, on non-state torture, but on also due to my work as leading an NGO that works on preventing and combating femicide.

I've seen too many times the state not being able to protect the women, and quite a lot of my colleagues, feminist lawyers, before the court, experiencing difficulties in gathering literature on this topic. So that was my first idea. How can we make a space to connect women around this topic? How can we create, as Jeanne mentioned, collective knowledge and evidence to give visibility to all the torture, all the non-state torture that women undergo.

So this was the base of the idea that of course, we are still developing, and we will explain more during our event on the 3rd of February. So, to just guide you through our goals, uh, the idea is to create a feminist person/victim-centred space for non-state torture, for non-state torture victimisation/traumatisation informed, a space for healing, and of course, as I mentioned, gaining political recognition. One of the second and most important goals that we have is also to support feminist lawyers and advocates, of course, while they're defending the survivors before court. So, to gather in different languages and in different countries, all the materials that we can to support women.

And so that's why we also say that this is a global movement. It's a global movement that will indeed spread knowledge in all these countries about non-state torture. Another goal is building a feminist legal centre that is, of course, connected to what I was saying. For now, this will be an online library that will allow everyone interested in the topic, legal experts, activists, to consult, so we can bring together legal materials, research on women and girls, non-state torture victimisation.

So what we want to create, once again, is collective knowledge about the topic. Another very exciting idea that we also developed is the creation of something innovative, a documentary project that we already started to conceive the idea, but it will take us the next year to develop. So, we will conduct interviews during this year, and hopefully by next year when we have our in-person events next year, sorry, no, this year already - in November, 2026, we'll organise a one day in-person gathering in Lisbon. That will also include a feminist art exhibition. So, I think we're all very excited because even though the official launch will be the 3rd of February, we'll also have an in-person gathering that will allow us to present our goals, our ideas, and meet the lovely women that will also attend the event.

Sally: It sounds like that is gonna be some event, and I'm sure women will be listening out for more details as to how they can join that. And we will also be sharing details about the launch so that women can find out more information about that. Thank you, Mariane. Elizabeth, Mariane just mentioned around the art exhibition as part of the event, and I know obviously art is such an important part of your life and your healing.

Can you tell us a little bit about how you see feminist art’s role in both resisting torture, but also reclaiming some of that dignity and supporting that healing journey? 

Elizabeth: Yes. I'm very excited about the feminist art exhibition we will have in Lisbon. Very excited. An art exhibition that is about the recognition of non-state torture as a specific form of violence and a crime against women and girls.

From my experience, I can say that through my healing process, I used drawings first to tell. I was saying with my drawings, this is what happened to me. Can you see? And what I drew was witnessed, then witnessed with the right words, naming the torture victimisation that I had depicted. So my drawings, along with the words to name the torture victimisation meant that I could heal.

And this is how I felt respected and how my dignity was honoured. I'd also been repeatedly told and threatened never to tell. Die if you tell. No one had told me I couldn't draw, to tell. So, my first act of resistance was drawing to tell. And from then on I've been making art and using it in activism that tells, it breaks the silence and it's immediately visible.

It's my fight back and it gives me some informal justice. So, my art makes visible the non-state torture of women and girls who have no words, in law in the UK and in many other countries around the world, yet, to name the crimes of the torturers. So, I'm pleased that the feminist art exhibition will provide a talking point for the viewers and the artists.

It's relational and so a space to engage, to learn and build our collective knowledge around non-state torture. I'm very excited, as you can hear. 

Sally: Yeah. And I think it's so important that I've been blessed to be able to see some of your art, and I think one of the important things is, it's another level that the learning comes through.

You can read stuff, you can listen to stuff, and et cetera, but there's something about the visual presentation that that enables that learning on a completely different level. That's really powerful. So, thank you for sharing what you do, 'cause I know it's really important. So, can we move on and talk a bit about the law and I know you've mentioned before that you're trying to develop this legal justice framework specifically around non-state torture.

Can you tell us what you think you will need to have in place to get there? Excuse me. Perhaps Jeanne, if we start with you? 

Jeanne: Around the legal framework. I was thinking about that, and it really goes along with Linda and my stand around non-state torture victimisation/traumatisation informed care, because a legal framework means there's a crime being committed.

That somebody has suffered a crime, somebody has been victimised. And when you have that perspective, then it takes away the issue of blaming the person who's been victimised, which if we don't recognise that a crime has been committed, the way patriarchy has evolved, it has blamed women over and over again.

Either they're not believable or they're lying, or children are lying, or there's something mentally wrong with them. They're crasy when they try to tell. So it's really important with a legal framework that we identify the crime that's being committed. And when we identify the crime, we expose the MO of the perpetrators.

And that's what's so important about having research on collective knowing. Because when women from Australia or New Sealand, or Papua New Guinea or Canada or the US are all telling the same story, that makes collective legal evidence. And Linda and I developed a questionnaire around non-state torture, around the victimisation look using the language that women have told us what happened to them and what Elizabeth just talked about, the issue of art. That's a way of telling the story too. So, there's many ways to develop a legal framework, from a feminist perspective, if you will. Not from a patriarchal perspective, but from a feminist perspective that women and girls are equal human beings and have the right not to be subjected to torture.

And we have to show that with collective knowledge. So, in Canada, just to give you a few examples, we've been watching case studies and seeing if some of the judges have used the word torture, even though they can't charge the perpetrators with torture. And we do have some examples of children that were victimised and the judge has said, this amounts to torture, but they still have to do aggravated assault, for example.

But also the other thing we've had to challenge our government, there was an example where they did research on looking at prostitution and what women, how they describe what their victimisation was. And for one example, we knew that one woman had talked about torture. And when the government put out their report, they didn't mention the torture.

So we had to go back in, with the woman's consent and say, you have to redo this. And they did. So, then you create a legal document that becomes part of building the evidence. And I just wanna share a recent experience. Linda and I were part of the round table of the Federal Minister of Justice, and when they were presenting their final outcome of having multiple civil society meetings, they put up a PowerPoint, PowerPoints talking about how much they'd learned and what was important. And on their PowerPoint, number four, they had a list of government reports that they were saying were really helpful. And two of them was the report from the commission on, we had a mass shooting a couple years ago, and the commission was responsible to look at forms of violence against women and girls, and Linda and I were part of that commission and presented a report and gave oral statements. And when their final report came out, which they said they learned not to look away, when we looked at the report, they hadn't said one word about non-state torture. 

They really, really more or less said, that's just not even worthy of talking about. So, I was able to- and then there was another report that they said on that PowerPoint, it was just recently released from the ombudsperson's office who done a research on sexualised violence, and here again, we sent in a report on non-state torture and sexualised victimisation. And not a word was in that report either. So here it offered an ideal opportunity, because there were many people, including the ombudsperson, for me to say, they absolutely silenced non-state torture, and I called it legal discrimination. That becomes a tool when we speak our truth and say, okay, we're gonna name this bias, that the reports you're putting out are biased. They're not telling the truth, and we have to hold you accountable. So those become tools that we can use.

Sally: Thank you, that's really helpful. And Mariane, perhaps as the lawyer, I can come to you and ask, are there currently specific legal tools that we can use to push that framework, or other developments that name violence against women, non-state torture, as torture? 

Mariane: Yes, definitely. And here I would like to focus, as you were saying, Sally, about the importance of legal frameworks on non-state torture, so naming torture, and particularly for survivors of non-state torture and their healing process as it was mentioned already. So, my starting point, I will use a few legal concepts, so bear with me. But we do need to be coherent with the language that we use and words matter. So, it is important that we stick to these legal concepts.

So my starting point will be the legal norm that prohibits torture, because this norm hails from one of the most fundamental values of democratic societies, and it is indeed a clear manifestation of dehumanisation as it humiliates, intimidates, diminishes, and isolates the victims of any dignity of their self.

As Jeanne and Linda mentioned in their book, Healing, a very important element about the concept of torture is the intention to keep the victim in a permanent state of fear, based on an unpredictable violence, and seeking to destroy her capacity of resisting and autonomy, of course, with the ultimate goal of achieving total control.

So we know that the legal prohibition of torture is included already in many treaties and conventions under international law, we have the United Nations Convention Against Torture, but we also have the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. But for now, I would like to focus on a particular treaty.

I would say it's one of the most important ones, as it recognises, in an expression used by Catherine MacKinnon in a 1999 article, are women human? But it indeed recognises that women are human and have human rights. And that's why the Universal Declaration On Human Rights is often referred to as the Magna Carta.

And for everyone listening out of curiosity, this Universal Declaration was drafted in 1948 by Eleanor Roosevelt, former US First Lady, and she led this initiative. And as mentioned in Jeanne and Linda's book, Healing, many extraordinary women contributed to this, and that's why it allows us to move away from men's rights, to human rights, to finally women's human rights. And until today, this declaration is one of the key foundational treaties of international human rights law. And I would say that it remains highly relevant. And once again, out of curiosity, it has been translated in more than 577 languages. Nevertheless, it continues to dismiss non-state torture as a violation of women and girls' rights.

So in that sense, we have indeed a long way to go. Regarding violence against women it's very interesting to understand that only after 1993, after the World Conference on Human Rights, we had finally a recognition of the concept of violence against women as being upheld by a treaty. And that hasn't happened before.

So this was not a concept used in international human rights bodies and frameworks. So, this is also very important and something that I would like to mention. Regarding the concept of torture, we also know that torture has historically been interpreted from a male centric point of view, where a prisoner is subjected (to) torture at the hands of the state, and of course, it ignores systematic forms of violence, the continued violence that women endure, and of course the violence that they suffer in a widespread way. Within families, human traffic, prostitution, pornographic exploitation, and by violent groups and gangs. So, the question remains, how about the violence suffered by women and girls? Because nobody wants to talk about torture, and that's the problem. And of course that would entail questioning a system that preys on women, a system that denies justice, and a system that also tells women, we will not protect you.

Instead we'll either abandon or actively terrorise them. And this is what we called institutional violence, which is another form of state torture, besides, of course, the non-state torture that we already mentioned. Despite all of this there has been, as you asked me, Sally, some positive developments (in) international law. I can say for example, that in January 2008, a UN special rapporteur on torture has submitted a report that highlights that three particular forms of violence; domestic violence, female genital mutilation, and human trafficking, that due to their level of atrocity may amount to torture. Days later, the UN committee against torture also issued a general comment number two, which is a milestone achievement addressing forms of violence against women as torture.

So these are indeed positive developments. Nevertheless, we need to do more. Talking about a specific example of the categorisation of forms of violence against women as non-state torture, I would like to talk about a specific case of the European Court of Human Rights. It's called Volodina vs Russia.

Just to give you an understanding of where we stand, in terms of jurisprudence and case law on this categorisation, to present shortly the facts: the applicant, Mrs Volodina, she's a Russian national, and she alleged before the European Court that the Russian authorities had failed to prevent, investigate, and prosecute acts of domestic violence.

Ms Volodina started a relationship with the perpetrator in 2014, and since then, she had undergone countless violent episodes ranging from severe beatings, including while she was pregnant, abduction, assault, stalking, and death threats. As mentioned by the European Court, Ms. Volodina suffered a brutal kick to her stomach that led to the premature termination of the pregnancy.

The European Court of Human Rights found a violation of Article third of the convention that prohibits torture, in tandem with Article 14, which is also very important because it prohibits discrimination. So, this is very often that the court in these cases combines both articles to conclude if there has been, or not, torture.

Nevertheless, despite everything that Ms. Volodina had to go through, the courts did not qualify this as torture per se. So, the court said that this was an inhumane treatment, but could not amount to the most severe pain and suffering, which is torture. So just to give you an understanding, and this is where the legal concepts come, torture is the most serious type of treatment.

Then we would have inhumane treatment and then degrading. And of course, it's the degree of suffering that is the main difference between these three types of acts. Three different acts. So, torture being the most serious one. The inhumane treatment as treatment that causes actual body harm or intense mental suffering, and then degrading treatment involving humiliation, debasement, as opposed to physical and mental suffering.

[So this is all concepts that are specified in the convention. Of course, and just to conclude, this is, in my view, it is a missed opportunity. The court's ruling could have advanced further women's rights and could have said that this is, we're talking about torture per se. We need to do more.

It is imperative that countries continue to adopt legal frameworks that uphold violence against women as non-state torture. And as we all said before, naming torture is essential. We need to name the patriarchal misogyny, that is key. And accountability. And to conclude, indeed, knowledge is power. And as Linda and Jeanne mentioned in their book, Healing, it is healing for survivors to know that non-state torture against women remains globally ignored in most countries. And it is a crime and it's never their own fault. 

Sally: Really important points. Thanks Mariane. And yeah, it's astonishing isn't it, that we make these small steps forward, but we're still up against that barrier of, it seems, an admittance that actually what women are subjected to is as serious as what men are subjected to. That seems to be the bit that the states just weren't… really balk at allowing, but I'm sure with women like you on it, we're gonna get there. 

Mariane: Thank you. 

Sally: When we've been talking, we've talked about non-state torture, victimisation and traumatisation informed care. And we often hear, and I would say perhaps particularly in the UK now, the term trauma informed care being used a lot.

Can you tell us a little bit about the difference in those, and specifically with the work that you are doing, how the feminist approach to healing challenges some of those more patriarchal and medicalised versions of healing. Perhaps Jeanne, if we could come to you for that one. 

Jeanne: Thank you, Sally, because, I find, it's a key issue for me because from a feminist perspective, naming is critical.

We know that we have to name, and that's what we've all been talking about. So, when I take that term, non-state torture, victimisation, traumatisation informed care, when you look already of what we've already said, Linda gave a definition. So NST, that's, she's already told everyone now, what that means.

That's the naming. The victimisation is a crime. We've been talking about the legal aspects. That word victimisation is telling us that there's a crime being committed. No question. Trauma, traumatisation, does not mean on itself that there's been a crime committed. You can have trauma for an accident.

Maybe you were in a car accident and lost your leg. You have grief and you have trauma, but you, if the accident was a true accident, you have not been victimised. So, if it was a drunk driver, like my mother was killed by a drunk driver, so she was victimised, a crime was committed, and that's how the case would go forward.

I had grief, I had trauma, if you will, because I grieved the fact that she was killed very suddenly by a drunk driver. So those words mean something very different if you take them one by one. And we've already talked about most of that, but I'll go back to Elizabeth now. When she talked about drawing, if you go to her conversation about drawing, she was telling us that she was drawing about the crimes that was committed against her, the victimisation, and then the healing comes into the consequence of the crime. So, if somebody stole your purse and you wanted to say something, you'd be talking about, that somebody stole your purse.

That's the victimisation. How do you feel about it? The trauma? You know, I have no money now. I've lost all my belongings, because they took everything that I had, my key to my apartment and whatever, and how vulnerable I feel. So, the importance of that is that if we're saying we are listening to the women who are talking about their victimisation, we have to make sure that their voice of the crime is committed, is listed. So, Linda and I developed a universal questionnaire on non-state torture, a global one, because what we've learned, that the questionnaire applies to children who were victimised in families, non-state tortured, it applies. Women who have been in prostitution have answered the questionnaire and told us about the victimisation, the non-state torture, and pornographic victimisation, it's the same thing. They're telling us that they were tortured. So, the naming is critical. So, when we developed our questionnaire, we took the language that women were using.

For example, if you talk about physical torture, in this case, physical non-state torture, it would be, I was severely beaten. I was kicked. I had brain injury because I was hit on my head. I was water tortured. I went unconscious. Those are the forms of naming the crime that was committed against them. And when you acknowledge that someone has been victimised, it takes away blame. Because the perpetrators, their MO, this is another reason we have to use, the language to explain the crime, it exposes the MO of the perpetrator. So, it puts the blame on the perpetrator almost immediately. Now, Mariane just mentioned the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and what we have seen when we show women and share with women, that Article five of the Universal Declaration says very clearly, no one shall be subjected to torture.

That's a human right violation, and that's a form of victimisation. So, we've seen women shift almost immediately to say, oh, so that was something done to me. And we had a woman say, for 30 years she was going to trauma-informed care, and nobody ever told her she had suffered a crime. And she's saying to us, now I understand that it's not my fault. It was something that was done to me, and now I understand why it's taken so long for me to heal, because it was torture. So, if we're going to do research and have collective knowledge about a crime, we have to make sure that we're using the language that tells the world and will tell the legal system this is a crime.

I'm concerned if we don't use and identify that we have to name the space clearly that victimisation has occurred and it belongs to the perpetrator, that the patriarchal misogyny will keep going because women are hospitalised and the perpetrator comes in and says, okay, they're really crazy. And the pathology continues and continues.

In the process of creating the questionnaire, what we've learned, it develops clear language. Because, for example, with the poly drugging, women can, their memory is fuzzy because of the drugging. So, you have to clarify that. So, the questionnaire develops clearer language. It also defines the severity of the crime that was committed against them.

If, and people want to, we're talking about gaining legal justice, so you have to have a clear victim impact statement, that's about the victimisation, that's about the crime. So you have to name the crime so that women can claim their own voice about their truth, which is what Elizabeth was talking about too, about the drawing.

It also, when they see the questionnaire and the list, there's 48 items on it with space for them to add more, it helps deconstruct the normalisation because if you were born into a relationship, a family relationship, that was torturing you day in and day out, you have to normalise it as a child in order to survive.

Because as a child you can't survive on your own. So, it's a very unique and amazing process that the body and mind develops a way to normalise what's happening to you. So, you can't just automatically de-normalise it. You have to have concrete examples of what the crime is, so the questionnaire helps show that it's not normal, that it's a crime.

Also shows that there's a risk if you continue to connect with the perpetrators, because that's a relationship, that's a solid relationship. So, in healing, you're having to break that. But that helps them understand the risk. And the idea that we've all talked about the fact that we're developing a collective knowledge.

So that's why it's so important for Linda and I to name that it's non-state torture, victimisation, traumatisation informed care. And just for one second, I want to add that in our time, we have to know that we've also named and identified that men and women can be perpetrators of non-state torture.

It's not just men. We made that distinction way back in 1993, we decided that we had to hold any person, whether they're male or female, accountable. So I want to bring in a new word, femi-misogyny that Linda talked about because we're talking about feminism, that women have to understand that they were born in patriarchy and we're all conditioned by patriarchy regardless of who we are.

In the process of our work, we know that feminist women have also been harmful to women who were victimised by non-state actors. And we have a bit of a woman's story in Healing, where the woman was confronted by a therapist who was really supporting a male professional perpetrator who was perpetrating sexualised victimisation of the women he was seeing, and this woman in particular.

So we have to also be very truthful. Linda and I say, we have to be truth tellers. And patriarchy, and anybody including femi-misogyny, anyone who practices misogyny have to be held to account. So, thank you for the question because it's an important one for me. 

Sally: No, thank you. And that was, that's really interesting. And it struck me as you were talking, that the naming and the approach not only supports that healing process for the person that's been subjected to non-state torture, but it actually also enables holding the perpetrator to account because you then have the language and et cetera to take that forward.

So it works on both levels. So, it's so important that we adopt that way of working. And you mentioned just then, Jeanne, the book Healing. And we've talked about your books a little bit as we've been chatting through, but I wondered if perhaps you could just give us a little bit more detail. I know there's two books so far that Linda and Jeanne, you've been able to produce, Women Unsilenced and also Healing.

Could you just give us a quick preview of what both of those books are about and then really importantly, how women can get hold of them. 

Jeanne: Do you want to go ahead, Linda? 

[Linda: Women Unsilenced is our first book and it really is about un-silencing the women's voices that have come to us and our knowledge base, our scientific grassroots knowledge base about non-state torture and what the crime involves and what the victimisation is, what the traumatisation is, and all of our models.

We developed a huge framework, a science-based framework, feminist grassroots about what non-state torture is, the implications of the social formation model that Jeanne developed. So, people tell us that it's a groundbreaking book for them to read. The second book is Healing, and it's a story about a woman that Jeanne and I supported that I met as a care coordinator with Home Care.

She was acting out and was labelled as a difficult client, and the nursing care, the nurses wanted to refuse her care, so I resisted that as a care coordinator, advocated for her, and asked her why she was so angry. And what unfolded was we listened for two years, four hours, every second week on our days off

from our regular work and Lynn unfolded her story of how she was tortured and trafficked by her husband and three other men who were his goon friends. So, it was a criminal and formal network, and it's her story, it’s her own voice, as we listened and helped her clarify it over those two years. People tell us it's profound and we're very thrilled that - Lynn is no longer with us, but it was her dream to have her story out, and her story is concrete proof that women can indeed heal from non-state torture. 

That's why the healing is so important and how she got herself back was the healing by telling her story. And I can read you, people sometimes are cautious, they don't want to read the stories of non-state torture, it can get a little uncomfortable, but knowing that it has a positive outcome, it's a story that ends in joy really. And this is one of the women that read the story. She sent us a review of it a little bit. The book is a powerful testament to the value of bearing witness to pain, to healing, and to the quiet, hard-won victories that come from reclaiming oneself.

I felt genuine joy reading the final chapter of Lynn's story. Her courage, strength, and resilience are profoundly moving. I found myself cheering every step she took as she worked to get herself back, each moment reflecting a determination that feels both hard earned and deeply inspiring. And that's exactly what Lynn's story does, I think, and it was just a thrill for Jeanne and I to be with her on her journey and help guide her to really her own healing because she, in the end, had to fight the battle to reclaim herself.

How you can get our books is, you can get them from our publisher, Freeson Publishing, but you can also get it from Amazon, from bookshops, from Google books, from different places online. And in our local province or in Canada, you can get the book from Indigo. It's a huge national bookstore, so you can order it in, it's in their catalogue.

We also have copies that we can sell as well. So, we had to self-publish as Jeanne said, because publishing is really still patriarchal and sadly, even feminist publishers resisted publishing our book. That's always been a hurt for me. And so, I keep saying it, because we were told that the stories were too gruesome to tell.

That's so disrespectful to the women, and that's why the victimisation is so important because that's what victimisation is. The telling, the stories of the victimisation. They have to be told for people to understand the crime and for women to heal from it. Mm-hmm. So that's about our books. 

Jeanne: Can I just add a little bit there?

Sally: Of course. 

Jeanne: I wanted to say for Healing, I'm not sure if people are realising that the cover is the drawing of Alexandra and another woman we supported. That's her drawing. She was born into a family that non-state tortured and trafficked her, her father was the main perpetrator. The foreword is by Elizabeth. Elizabeth's already introduced herself. And it's most holistic, that we could make a book that is all of women's voices. I know that there, in between some of the chapters when I was writing, I brought in some science that was done by men that were really supportive because I want to say that we know that some of the women have been able to gather their humanity too, because they had caring partners in their lives, and some of those partners are male. And for Linda and I often it has been men who have supported us. I want to be fair, and also I'm a mother and I have two sons, and for me to say that it's all men who are cruel is an injustice.

So I think we have to really think clearly about who we are as persons and to make sure that we understand what the Universal Declaration has said. That, yes, we are all equal as persons and we have to come together to work together to make sure that our species does not continue to do the horrors that we inflict on each other.

So, and I just wanted to say that, and Linda said the book Healing is also a woman's journal. She couldn't write it herself, but it is her story. So, it's to me, a very feminist book. So thank you for those few words. 

Linda: And can I add about why the storytelling is so important in this personal and the political? Is that okay to do that? 

Sally: Please do. Yeah. 

Linda: Okay. So if you look at the storytelling from a woman's perspective, that's been subjected in her life to non-state torture from, maybe from the time of a baby, 'cause we're talking about babies that could be non-state tortured, right up to adult women. Of course patriarchy, inflicts a lot of blame as Jeanne has mentioned.

But it also inflicts a lot of shame. And the shame and blame together really silence women. And the way to undo that is by telling your story, whether in one-to-one with a counsellor or a friend or whomever, and that brings freedom. And that's really the liberation, the human rights, to know that it's a human rights violation.

The storytelling is crucial for women, and it helps women to organise the crime that they've been subjected to, to organise the victimisation. So, they have a beginning, a middle, and an end like every story does. So, it's not all muddled up in chaos in their mind. So, they get clarity of mind, and that brings freedom as well, because of course, what happens with the patriarchy is we pathologise women.

We only wanna hear about the trauma. Don't tell me the story. We only wanna know how that victimisation has affected you. So, you're locked in your mind with all this victimisation, spinning around in your mind and affecting your body. So when you tell, it de-pathologises. It reframes it as a human rights violation, as a crime and not a mental illness.

That's the key because most women still do believe that they're mentally ill, even though they've been subjected, victimised to a crime. And it tells the women, you're not alone. Because as the stories are flowing out more and more, like the Me Too movement and the Epstein stories, that's what's happened because enough women have gone into the victimisation of their crime. Now, politically, human beings, we know scientifically that we learn through stories.

That's how we learn and that's how we change behaviour. So, as we get more and more stories out about non-state torture, people are listening to the stories, they're starting to understand the crime, and they're starting to get motivated to care about the injustice of it. And that's really important for social changing. 

For social transformation, so that we have a movement, a revolution, as we're talking about, a women's revolution where we all join together in rage around these horrendous stories that have to be documented for herstory forever so that we don't go back into the invisibilising. And so I just, it's really important that we unsilence it and that includes the truth, as Jeanne said.

That's why I did coin the term femi-misogyny because right from the beginning, the stories, if we believe the stories, and I do wholeheartedly, the women were talking about other women, not that they were enacting it as oppressed group behaviour because that's some of the patriarchy that women are subjected to.

There is an oppressed group behaviour response. But these were intentional perpetrators equal to men, not organised with men, organised in groups as women only. So that has to be part of the storytelling as well for transformation so that we get beyond the myth that all women are carrying, whether you're a feminist or not. So that's my little soapbox. 

Sally: Yeah, thank you for adding that. It's so important and I think, I always think we can understand how powerful women's stories are with the effort that the patriarchy puts into silence them. If they weren't so powerful, they wouldn't put that amount of effort in. And it's always good to speak to women like yourselves that are supporting women to have that voice and share those stories.

as we've said, we can get hold of the book. So I just wondered as well, are there any other resources that you have in the pipeline or that will be available for women to learn a little bit more about this? 

Jeanne: I've been, it's written really, it's Women's Storytelling and Healing Guide: Torture of Non-State Actors around the world because it is a global reality.

We have a PowerPoint that we show the global reality and people are often quite shocked because really it's millions of women and girls. It's not just a little segment here or there. It's millions of women and girls whose victimisation has been invisibilised, normalised, pathologised. It just goes on, of women blaming, girl blaming.

Linda and I have been talking, trying to condense, if you will, some of the skeleton of the grassroots science that we had to develop because it began with the first woman who came to us back in 1993, who just started talking about torture and we knew nothing about torture and torture recovery.

There was no literature, there was not even recognition that non-state torture victimisation existed. So, we had to develop the science and it was a very painful process. So how do we help society now? Women who want to care, women who themselves can help heal themselves. So, writing and have written, it's really, we're editing it now.

It's about 35 pages, and that includes end notes. So, it's about 30 pages. Trying just to get the nuts and bolts of the skeleton of recovery of what non-state torture, victimisation, traumatisation care means. And then we thought if people have this, if they have questions and then they can contact us, but at least it becomes a guide to offer to people.

So thanks for the question there. Sally, 

Sally: I think that's gonna be really practically useful to women that are working in the field. So it's really good to know that's coming. So, thank you all so much for your time today talking about this and really excitingly, letting us know about the launch of the network for non-state torture coming up on the third.

We'll put details of that along with the podcast so that women can book onto it and be part of that next stage taking forward. And hopefully also perhaps come along and see you in Lisbon in November to the in-person event. That'd be great. I just, yeah, look forward to that. Fabulous just to see women again, won't it? I just wonder, are there any sort of final thoughts before we finish that you wanted to add? 

Linda: I wanna thank FiLiA. 10 years ago, I get moved when I think about this because I remember when Lisa-Marie messaged me, we were in at the UN and she said, and we were in Geneva, and she said, would you be willing to come and speak at FiLiA? And 10 years ago we were, Jeanne and I were still banging the brick wall of patriarchy, the titanium wall of torture, non-state torture, I call it. It's a titanium wall. And so it was a reach out from England. It was thrilling for Jeanne and I to go and to be with Elizabeth and Jackie Jones at that time. And then 10 years later to come back with a group of women, all lawyers, young lawyers that are motivated to stand with us and for FiLiA to create that space for us and for us to have time together, to sit together, for the idea, Mariane’s idea, of the network against non-state torture.

We couldn't have done any of this without you as feminists in England. And I'll be forever grateful. 

Sally: Yeah. And absolutely our honour too, the learning that we've undertaken since meeting you has been enormous. We really cherish that information that you've shared with us. 

Mariane: If I can just add something for Linda and Jeanne it was the 10th year, for me it was the first FiLiA.

So I was truly a pleasure and I hope it's the first of many. And it will forever be, in my heart, of course, the first FiLiA, and where this idea for the network emerged. And emerged from, once again, from a spirit of sisterhood and collective effort of all of us. So, I look forward to continuing developing this idea.

And I just wanted to say that we're a powerful group of women, and it's not patriarchy that will stop us. Patriarchy and misogyny won't stop us, and we'll keep advocating for non-state torture and to disseminate collective knowledge about non-state torture. 

Elizabeth: I just want to say thank you to FiLiA, and I remember the 10th year,it's been 10 years and it was 10 years in 2025, and we've been sharing our shining light moments and our memories of FiLiA as Linda put it, bright in Brighton. Very bright, lots of good transformation. Thank you. 

Sally: Yeah. It's been wonderful to have you along and safe for sharing your art. I know that's been really powerful for a lot of women to be able to see that. So thank you Elizabeth. 

Jeanne: And, for me, Sally, what this podcast means is it means we're practicing a feminist perspective. We're naming very clearly the issues, the human right violations of non-state torture that occur. And the fact that you are contributing to that naming is absolutely critical. I deeply thank you for the practice, the feminist practice of naming in the podcast.

Thank you very much. 

Sally: It's absolutely our pleasure. And as Mariane alluded to, I think a really good place to finish on is that recognition that sisterhood is powerful, and together we will overcome this. Thank you all so much for your work. We really appreciate it. 

Linda: Thank you as well. 

Jeanne: Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.

Bye-bye.