When survivors of domestic abuse share their stories, they are often met with an outpouring of reactions from friends, acquaintances, and even strangers. Many of these come from a place of care and outrage. Yet some fall into a familiar pattern: “If it were me, I would have walked out.” “I’d have slapped him across the face.” “I’d have told him exactly where to shove it.”
To the person saying this, it can feel like solidarity, a way of rejecting the abuser’s behaviour and siding with the victim. But for those who have lived through coercive control, these kinds of “would have” responses are actually unhelpful responses to abuse. They erase the complexity of surviving an abusive relationship, where every choice is calculated against the threat of retaliation.
A Story That Reveals the Misunderstanding
Not long ago, I shared a memory from my marriage on social media. My then-husband had declared that I was “not allowed” to have wine with dinner because it would set a poor example for our young son. At a dinner party, when a friend offered me a glass, I accepted. A few minutes later, I noticed my wine wasn’t served in a wine glass like everyone else’s, but in a coffee mug. I soon learned that my husband had instructed her to serve it that way.
It was an intentional act of humiliation. Later that night, when I told him I would make my own choices, he warned me there would be consequences, clearly involving our child as part of the punishment.
When I posted this story online, the replies poured in: “I’d have grabbed a proper wine glass, poured it in, and stared him down while I drank.” “I’d have smashed the bottle over his head if he spoke to me like that.” “I’d have cracked a joke in front of everyone and embarrassed him right back.”
I understand the impulse to imagine the abuser being put in their place. People want to picture justice in the moment. But these unhelpful responses to abuse ignore the reality that standing up to an abuser rarely ends the conflict. More often, it sparks a cycle of retaliation that leaves the victim wishing they had stayed silent.
Living Under the Threat of Retaliation
Inside an abusive relationship, resistance is never a simple, spontaneous act. It is a draining, ongoing calculation — a cost-benefit analysis repeated daily, sometimes hourly. Survivors learn to carefully measure each step, knowing that any perceived defiance could trigger harm.
The punishments are designed to restore the abuser’s control. For some, this means brutal physical violence, and tragically, many have lost their lives for far less. For others, the response comes in less visible but equally destructive ways: calculated humiliation, relentless insults, days of silent treatment, threats to take or harm the children, cutting off access to money, sabotaging work opportunities, or spreading lies to friends and family to isolate the victim further.
This ever-present threat means survivors are constantly deciding whether resistance will lead to worse consequences than compliance. To outsiders, compliance might look like weakness or acceptance. In reality, it is often a deliberate survival strategy to reduce harm.
To leave for good, victims usually need to plan secretly, making sure the abuser suspects nothing. That often means playing the role of compliance — even appeasement — while laying the groundwork for a safe exit.
How Abusers Exploit Their Partner’s Reactions
One of the greatest risks in resisting is the way abusers twist a victim’s reaction to strengthen control. What is often referred to as “reactive abuse” — though more accurately called reactive defence — happens when someone, after relentless provocation, finally cracks. They may yell, break down, or even lash out physically in a moment of despair.
Abusers deliberately provoke these situations and then weaponise them. They might record the reaction, stage it so others witness it, or later claim it as justification: “See? This is why I treat you this way.” They may spin it into a smear campaign with friends or family: “If only you knew what she’s really like.” In court, they might use it to argue for custody or seek a restraining order.
The fallout can be severe. Friends or relatives may turn away, believing the abuser’s version. The survivor, branded as “unstable” or “crazy,” can suffer further anxiety, depression, and self-doubt. Above all, the abuser’s control is tightened. Knowing that any defence will be used against them, the victim learns not to push back. This is why many of the dramatic actions described in “would have” statements — slapping, shouting, storming out — can dangerously backfire.
Why “I Would Have…” Sounds Like Judgment
For someone who has never lived with the constant threat of punishment, it is easy to imagine a bold reaction in the moment. But when a survivor hears, “I’d have told him off,” or “I’d have walked out straight away,” the hidden message often lands as: you were weak, or you failed to do enough.
Even if unintended, that undertone can sting deeply. Survivors may feel feel as though they’re being judged for not doing what the other person imagines they would have done — without recognising that such a move could have escalated danger. For people already burdened with self-blame fostered by their abuser, these unhelpful responses to abuse add another layer of shame and isolation.
They also highlight the gap between the survivor’s reality and the outsider’s fantasy. No matter how carefully risks are explained, some people underestimate the consequences survivors were navigating every day.
What Survivors Truly Need to Hear
The most supportive words are not about what you think you would have done. They focus on validating the survivor’s experience.
Instead of offering a “would have” scenario, you might say, “That must have been humiliating and hurtful,” or, “He put you in an impossible position, and that’s not okay.” Acknowledging that the issue was not wine or any trivial detail, but about control and power, helps the survivor feel truly seen. Telling them, “I believe you, and I’m here to listen,” offers safety without judgment or pressure.
Changing the Conversation Around Abuse
Transforming the way we respond to survivors means recognising that abuse is never a clash between equals. It is a system where one person creates consequences for any sign of independence or resistance. From the outside, defiance may look like a triumph. From the inside, it often means weeks of punishment.
Replacing “I would have…” with compassion and curiosity allows survivors to open up more freely, without fear of being judged. It acknowledges that what might look like passivity was often the wisest, safest choice for survival.
Survivors need people to understand that every decision they made was shaped by the looming threat of harm, and that staying alive and protecting their children was the greatest act of courage.
Featured image: Unhelpful responses to abuse can have a lasting impact on victims. Source: LIGHTFIELD STUDIOS / Adobe Stock.
