Clinical practice · Exile and violence

Relearning couplehood after exile and violence

Around a table, some fifteen women. They are asked what kind of man they would want in their lives. One of them replies: “Me, I want a man who eats spicy food.”

The sentence might raise a smile. Yet it says something very precise: a man who eats spicy food is a man who will love my cooking, who will recognise what I prepare for him, who will agree to share what I am. Eating the same food is already being, in some way, of the same world. Behind a seemingly anecdotal criterion lies a complete theory of the relationship: cultural connection, recognition, mutual care.

This scene is told by Ivy Daure. A psychologist and systemic therapist, she facilitates a support group at the Maison d’Ella, with exiled women who have survived violence.

More and more women on the roads of exile

First clinical observation: asylum applications from women have soared. On the roads of exile, one meets more and more women, younger and younger, sometimes already mothers back home. Women who have been subjected to genital cutting, beaten, forced into marriage, repeatedly raped. Women caught in a form of intrafamily violence that we sometimes struggle to think, so completely does it escape our categories.

And yet these women find the energy to leave.

Ivy Daure insists on this point: leaving is not only a flight, it is an act. A tremendous energy mobilised to tear oneself away from a system of violence.

The clinician who receives them therefore encounters two things at once: the trauma, and the resource that made it possible to break free of it.

The silent risk: replaying here what was fled over there

This is perhaps the most unsettling point of the testimony. These women arrive in France after being mistreated in their countries of origin. What kind of men will they meet here?

The clinical observation is blunt: forming a couple here can become the return of the abuse once endured. The same mechanics fall back into place. The woman at the man’s service. The woman there for the man’s pleasure, her own desire and wishes coming second, or not counting at all.

From a systemic reading, nothing surprising: a relational pattern does not stop at a border. Migration changes the context; it does not dissolve the relational grammar that has been learned.

The therapeutic work then consists of a genuine relearning of the relationship. An entirely new path for these women, which they must build step by step.

Two levers emerge in this work.

The migratory experience itself

As a rupture that opens up possibility.

Meeting other women

Who are waging the same struggles: the group as a laboratory for another way of being in a couple.

The anchoring group: rejoining the world of ordinary people

The group facilitated by Ivy Daure bears a name worth pausing over: an anchoring group. To anchor is to fasten a cargo down securely so that it withstands the voyage. The image is a beautiful one for women whose crossing has torn everything away.

The stated aim: to help these women rejoin the world of ordinary people. No grand programme of psychic reconstruction. Finding a place among others again, in the ordinariness of life. For someone who has known the unthinkable, the ordinary is a horizon.

It is in this group that the limits of the couple relationship can be addressed. With the support of the others, some women dare to say: “Me, I don’t want men in my life any more.” Others formulate their criteria, like that of the man who eats spicy food. Each position becomes sayable because it is heard by women who know.

Amour Monstre: cards for saying the unsayable

Ivy Daure offered the women of the Maison d’Ella the game Amour Monstre. The set-up is simple. The cards are laid out on the table. A question is asked. Each woman chooses a card and explains her choice.

First question

Which card represents the relationship with your violent partner?

The answers come, carried by the images:

  • “I was not recognised.”
  • “I was not heard.”
  • “This violence damaged me.”
  • “It was not love, I knew that, but it was the only thing I received.”

That last sentence concentrates years of clinical work in itself. It states the relational trap in all its complexity: violence received not because it was mistaken for love, but because it was the only bond available. The bond above all, even a toxic one. This is exactly where the systemic gaze finds its relevance: it is not the person who is pathological, it is the relational configuration that left no other place.

Second question

Which card represents the relationship you would like to have?

And there, something very moving happens. The women describe relationships where I feel respected, where the other can hear me, where I can voice my needs. Relationships of mutual care, without violence, with kindness. Nothing extravagant. The vital relational minimum, which for them represents a continent to be discovered.

The group ends by choosing a shared card, the one that embodies the way of being together they want to uphold: a quiet little monster, offering simply tenderness, love, peace, soothed relationships.

To go further

If you would like to discover how the floating object Amour Monstre is used, in an online course: VIEW THE TRAINING

What this clinical work teaches us

Three things, at least, for practitioners.

1

The anecdotal criterion is a way in

The apparently anecdotal criterion is often the richest way in. The man who eats spicy food says more about a person’s relational theory than many a questionnaire.

2

Repetition is not a fate

The repetition of the violent pattern after migration is not an individual fate but a relational dynamic, and it can be worked on as such: through the group, through mediation, through the building of concrete alternatives.

Further reading on this site

The card acts as a third party.

Finally, that projective tools such as Amour Monstre make it possible to say what a direct question would render impossible. The card acts as a third party. It carries what speech alone would not carry.

How to cite this article

Besse, J. (2026, July 4). Relearning couplehood after exile and violence. Complexe Systémique. https://app.complexe-systemique.com/en_GB/articles/relearning-couplehood-after-exile-and-violence

Discussion

Comments 0

Log in to join the discussion. Log in

  1. No comment yet. Start the discussion.

Cart

Your cart is empty.