Rethinking Coercive Control

Abstract

The critical appraisals of Coercive Control focus largely on what my analysis implies for intervention, a matter to which the book devotes only limited space. In this reply, I reiterate core concepts in the book and acknowledge that much more work is needed to translate the realities of coercive control into practical legal and advocacy strategies. I review how coercive control differs from partner assaults and so why it merits a distinct response; the extent to which coercive control targets gender identity; the wisdom of complementing the focus on violence with an emphasis on male domination, sexual inequality and personal liberty; what this implies for shelters and the law; why sexual inequality differentiates coercive control from female partner abuse of men; how sexual equality can be both cause and antidote for coercive control; why I think an affirmative concept of freedom is essential to grasp the human rights violations inflicted by coercive control; and what it means to “story” coercive control by integrating women into the larger liberty narrative on which our national identity rests.