This commentary was originally published in TODAY on 22 September 2020.

Research has shown that freezing is one of an array of reactions that may occur during a traumatic event. It is an instinctive, involuntary response programmed into our bodies to help us survive threats to our safety.

Various forms of temporary paralysis, including a reflexive reaction known as “tonic immobility”, are common in animals. They may go numb, limp or become unable to make a sound when faced with danger. They have also been observed in soldiers during battle.

Yet when sexual violence survivors say that they froze during their assaults, their accounts are routinely rejected.

In a recent case, a man was acquitted of molesting another passenger on a flight, in part because the judge found it “entirely unbelievable” that the woman had not drawn attention to the incident while it happened.

She reported that she “froze”.

The judge said: “She could offer no credible answer to why she had not alerted a crew member, or simply got out of her seat and freed herself of the torment.”

While we are not questioning the outcome of the case, we are compelled to point out the fallacy in this argument that it was unlikely for the woman to not have reacted more conspicuously.

Freezing kicks in when it becomes apparent that a victim can neither defeat (“fight”) nor escape (“flight”) the source of danger. While fight and flight have the benefit of being visible, a person freezing may appear to not do anything.

This may be why some find freezing so difficult to parse as a reaction to violence.

Yet freezing has its bodily logic: Going physically, emotionally and mentally numb is our attempt to protect ourselves from feeling the full extent of the trauma.

Ultimately, what is important to remember is that freezing is not a conscious choice. It is impossible to predict whether it will kick in, no matter how “prepared” we think we are.

When the erroneous belief that freezing is implausible becomes a factor in a sexual assault case, it invariably undermines the plaintiff’s credibility — a true disservice and a deterrent to survivors who are unsure whether to come forward themselves.

To improve the trauma literacy of the justice system, the Association of Women for Action and Research has recommended that a specialist court be set up for cases of sexual violence and that basic trauma training be mandatory for all personnel involved in such cases.

If we can prevent this ignorant argument from being trotted out once more in court, we are hopeful that we can send a clear message to survivors who are too often plagued with confusion and guilt over freezing and who think that their bodies have failed them.

That message is: Do not blame yourself for however you reacted during your assault.

Your body did not betray you; it was designed to ensure your survival by whatever means possible. The fact that you are still standing means your body did exactly the right thing to keep you alive.

Kelly Leow, Communications Manager, AWARE