Please Stop Framing Self Defense as Wrong

Martyna Ogonowska was just 14 years old the first time an older man decided he had the right to rape her. The trauma of the incident remained with her in the form of severe PTSD, and, desperate to protect herself from future harm, Martyna began carrying a small kitchen knife with her when out in public. She had reported the event to authorities, but, like a high percentage of sexual assault cases, no one was ever officially charged. Less than 3% of reported allegations of rape are ever charged in the UK.

By 16, Martyna was spiraling into depression and other emotionally unhealthy choices. She became a single mom that year and worked to get her life back on track.

Then four years after that first traumatic incident, Martyna again found herself the victim of a violent sexual attack when drunken 23-year-old Filip Jaskiewicz, whom she had only met a few days prior, grabbed her by the throat so hard that it forced her to her knees He shoved his hand under her shirt, cupped her breast, and proceeded to slide his hand up her thigh. Martyna resisted Filip’s advances, so he slapped her in the face. As he sexually assaulted and molested her, Martyna reached for her knife and stabbed Filip in the chest. He did not survive his injuries.

Martyna did not handle the situation perfectly. Rather than calling an ambulance or phoning for emergency assistance, she fled the scene and changed her clothes and cleaned the knife but ultimately turned herself into the police the next morning, handed over the knife, and explained her side of the story to authorities. I’m neither condoning nor condemning her response. Trauma is a wild thing. Fight or flight is real. I do think it matters that she chose to face the music and turn herself in. Either way, what happened next is crazy.

As a result of the debacle, the Cambridge Crown Court found Martyna guilty of murder and sentenced her to a minimum of 17 years in prison.

The judge presiding over the case told Martyna that her assailant “undoubtedly touched you sexually and was violent to you shortly before he was killed,” but he concluded that her choice to carry a knife (a crime in the UK) essentially negated any claim she had to self defense.

Then the judge gaslit her, rejecting her claim to having been traumatized by the violence perpetrated against her, and instead described her trauma as follows: “probably the combination of the effect of being moved from Poland, where you were residing as a child, to this country at the age of 12, the bullying that you suffered at school, the post-natal depression that you undoubtedly suffered following the birth of your child, and the pressures of trying to integrate into this society.”

The sentencing drew an almost audible worldwide gasp. Most of us innately know that this is not what fairness looks like. She filed and lost an appeal. I’ve been stewing over this verdict for weeks now, my hardwiring for justice deeply provoked. I began asking myself the same questions millions of women across the world were asking: Was she just supposed to sit there and take it? Were they expecting her to be able to ward off a grown man with the power of her fists? Do women in these situations have no recourse at all? Just ride it out and report it when finished, hoping against hope that this assault report will be one of the measly 3% that actually went somewhere?

I thought of Martyna as I crossed the Canadian border on our family vacation last week. Roughly 20 miles before hitting the border crossing, my spidey sense prompted me to research Canadian laws regarding self defense, as, for years, I’ve carried a small canister of pepper spray on my keychain—just in case.

I originally purchased the pepper spray en route to a contentious custody exchange with my emotionally volatile ex. At the time I was genuinely worried that today might be the day he finally snapped and hurt me. I broke out in hives every time we had to do a kiddo exchange and found myself on the receiving end of his wrath more than once. Sometimes he even physically blocked my car so I could not leave, prompting me to call the police for assistance. One time he even broke my phone so I couldn’t call for help. I was tired of living in fear, so I drove to the local sporting goods store, forked over $15, and bought the dang pepper spray. It wasn’t a gun, but at least it was SOMETHING that gave me some semblance of recourse should the proverbial you-know-what hit the fan.

So sure enough, as I Googled Canadian law, I found that I could actually be arrested if I carried the stuff across the border, so I threw it away in a Bellingham dumpster and wondered to myself, “My gosh. What do Canadian women do to defend themselves from bad men? What do they carry when they go for a run? How are they supposed to keep themselves safe?”

I voiced these thoughts aloud on my Facebook page, and the conversation elicited some fascinating responses, including one from a particularly vexing Canadian woman who routinely trolls my posts to offer antagonistic rebuttals to many of the defenses I’m sometimes inclined to offer for women.

I’m recalling her comment here because it’s basically a plug and place template for the type of gaslighting so many of us often encounter when we express legitimate concerns. The formula goes like this:

1. Deny the legitimacy of the concern. Accuse the one expressing it of hysteria or worse.

2. List a litany of concerns you consider more valid than the one she expressed, and insist that she should stop caring about the one she named and substitute these in its place.

3. Insult her intelligence and character if she persists in her original focus and complaint.

My Facebook troll essentially said that American women are being hysterical drama queens who don’t actually need pepper spray, and Canadian women are “badasses” for soldiering on without fear of bad men or demands for tools of self-defense. “The people you ACTUALLY need to care about are people you already know, not strangers,” she insisted as though she were playing the Ace of trump cards with this astute assertion and as though I would even hesitate to spray the crap out of a threat to me or my children just because he was familiar to me.

I’ve encountered this haughty dismissal of valid safety concerns played out in a myriad of ways over the last decade, often weaponized against women, who apparently, aren’t allowed to have boundaries or standards of any kind the minute they inconvenience people who want to bulldoze them.

Don’t want naked men in the locker room showers with you and your daughters? You’re obviously a pearl clutching bigoted prude hellbent on hysteria. If I were to compile receipts for every single variation of this message I’ve fielded since 2015, I could easily fill an entire print edition of the New York Times.

Of course this isn’t just true for women. I find it’s true for a ton of conservative policy positions, which are inevitably framed as hatred, prejudice, and irrational fear no matter how well-founded they are. Want secure borders and lawful, organized immigration? Express concern about the extreme volume of drugs or the humans being trafficked across the border? You must hate brown people. What you should really worry about are the rich white millionaires. (As though you can’t somehow manage to conjure healthy levels of concern about both at the same time.)

Want to carry a firearm to protect your family? You’re an extremist zealot who probably belongs on a watchlist somewhere. What you should really be worried about are the conspiracy theorist wackadoodle militia extremists threatening to blow up abortion clinics. (As though you haven’t routinely denounced extremism and violence in all its forms.)

Have a problem with sex clowns who want to read to children at the library? That’s just your thinly veiled bigotry speaking. Anna Bortion and Malestia Child only operate from the purest of motives, don’t you know? Shame on you for questioning them even though their public Insta accounts are basically porn sites. The people you should actually be concerned about are the priests and youth pastors. Come on. You know you’ve heard that one a hundred times, right? I know I have despite the reality that I spend roughly 50% of my online time denouncing abuse in the church.

Speaking of which… It’s not just the progressive left that gaslights people out of reasonable expectations of self-defense. Ever followed a Christian Twitter thread dedicated to the topic of divorce in the context of abuse? Holy Hannah, it’s bad.

I can literally say, “Hey if a man beats his wife to a bloody pulp,” she has the right (and even the duty) to divorce his sorry ass,” and, instead of being met with cheers of “Amen!” and “Yes, ma’am!.” I’m instantly greeted by accusations of heresy and demands for repentance. (No, I’m not exaggerating for effect here. I experienced this again just yesterday.) “Forgiveness covers over a multitude of sins,” one woman lectured me. That may be true, but then maybe these people should model the principles they preach by choosing to forgive the women fleeing monsters instead of condemning them for seeking safety. That could work, too, couldn’t it?

We are utterly inflicted with secular (and sacred) doormat theology that insists on viewing passivity in the face of our own oppression as some sort of righteous pursuit, even if it means enabling the wicked or allowing chaos and lawlessness to go unchecked. WHY? If ever “toxic empathy” existed, surely this is it.

The Bible says to love our enemies, but it never says we have to enable them to harm us. The older I get, the more I view hard, unapologetic boundaries as an uber important form of love, and the less patience I have for people who try to emotionally hijack the goodness of others to compel their passivity in the face of danger or injustice. “Love always protects.” That’s in the Bible, too.

I guess I’m just here to tell you that I experience zero guilt whatsoever in owning a firearm or carrying pepper spray or saying, “Heck no” to womanface or telling abuse apologists in the church to take a hike. There’s a difference between conjuring enough humility to turn the proverbial other cheek when difficult people need mercy and rolling yourself out like a doormat for everyone to tread all over till kingdom come.

Dismissing valid concerns or working to convince people that self defense is wrong is a manipulative tactic that robs humans of their God-given right to dignity. Nobody should be guilt tripped into vulnerability or left defenseless while the world’s wolves circle. We’ve got to call this tactic what it is: a cheap, controlling mind game that thrives on guilt and fear. This isn’t solely about control; it’s a sneaky way to make you question your worth.

Psalm 82:4 calls us to protect ourselves and others. No one should shame us out of that truth. You’re worth defending—full stop.

I’m working on supplementing my family’s income by raising money through subscriptions on this blog. If you appreciate my content and want to contribute to the effort by becoming a paid subscriber, I would be most appreciative of your support.