Another woman has been murdered.
On Sunday last, according to a police press release, 29-year-old Alexis Roxanne Harris, a mother of four and a farmer, breathed her last in a drain outside her sister’s West Demerara home, having run there to escape after she was brutally stabbed by the father of her children. However, the police did not couch that criminal act in quite so concise terms. Instead, the release to the media referred to it as an “alleged murder”. Why? Surely whoever writes or vets these releases is aware, like the rest of us, that alleged means without proof. If a stab wound to a woman’s chest that causes her death is not proof of murder then what is? This is aside from the fact that there were several eyewitnesses; one was also stabbed and injured and another was threatened.
There was other disconcerting language use in the police missive (a pattern noticeable in the last few years) where after the first mention of her name, Ms Harris was referred to as “the deceased”. While she was obviously dead at the time the press release was written, there was no need to erase her identity. In addition, there is utter incongruity in phrases like “the deceased was on her cell phone” and “the deceased … sat on the stairs”, which littered the release. While it is clearly crucial to get the information out, language and sensitivity are also very important.
A second press release on Monday, in which the police informed the media that a post-mortem examination revealed that Ms Harris had sustained a fatal wound to the heart was definitely better written.
As this newspaper learned from her sister on Monday, it was because Ms Harris had feared for her life that she was on the West Demerara in the first place. The sister recounted that Ms Harris had fled her home at the end of June because her life was threatened. Ms Harris had been living at Hill Foot, Soesdyke-Linden Highway with the man who ultimately took her life, and their children. According to her sister, she had suffered 15 years of abuse at the man’s hands. If this is indeed the case, then it means that she was just 14 years old when it started; a child still.
At the risk of being repetitive, as this has been aired time and again in this column and elsewhere, it has to be stressed that violence against women and girls in all its many formats continues to be an inescapable global scourge. Outside of wars and genocide what could be more abhorrent than women and girls being battered and killed by the men in their lives who claim to love them and in some instances have vowed before God and man to honour and protect them? Nothing.
Unfortunately, arrogance, ignorance, jealousy, patriarchy, and just plain brutality have clouded the vision of some men so that they fail to see or acknowledge one simple truth. And that is the fact that there never was and will never be a good reason for violence against women and girls. It is never acceptable. It is never excusable. It ought never to be tolerated.
Governments and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) the world over have spent billions of dollars on programmes empowering women to leave abusive men, creating shelters for women and children, and providing ongoing support. In some countries, not all, large sums have also been spent on strengthening legislation and the police’s power to act. Much of this continues to be thwarted by the anachronistic gender structures that remain in place which rank women as less than men. It is disturbing that in 2024, this still manifests as men believing that the women they are involved in relationships with, are engaged to, marry and/or have children with, belong to them. Thus there is a sort of compulsion to control their every activity, and when this does not succeed to batter, maim or kill them.
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), globally, one in three women and girls aged 15 and older have been subjected to physical or sexual violence, or both, at least once in their life. Further, most violence against women and girls is perpetrated by current or former husbands or intimate partners. WHO stats at the end of last year also stated that of those who have been in a relationship, almost one in four adolescent girls aged 15–19 has experienced physical and/or sexual violence from an intimate partner or husband. The WHO also referred to regional analysis of surveys conducted from 2016 to 2019 in Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. It stated that the studies found that women aged 15–64, who were or had been in relationships with men whose attitudes and behaviours reinforce their dominance over women and perpetuate gender inequality, were more likely to have experienced lifetime and current intimate partner violence. “Behaviours intended to control women’s bodies, autonomy, and contact with others are also strongly correlated with an increased risk of intimate partner violence,” WHO said.
Calls have been made before in this column for education and awareness on gender-based violence to be introduced in schools – for both boys and girls. This is being done in some countries; Canada and France are two where considerable funds are currently being pumped into such programmes. There is no indication that any thought is even being given to the issue here. One understands that teachers may lack the knowledge and skills to address violence against women and girls, aside from the fact that they already have too much on their plates. There are, however, reputable NGOs which have expertise in spades and can introduce the subject and perhaps train teens on how to get the message across. This is very obviously a matter of life and death and therefore a start has to be made somewhere, sooner rather than later.