Validation & The Justice Need (2)
Knowing the Signals
Why do we hesitate to offer meaningful validation that names injustice?
In our work, we know there are multiple perspectives to every story. We may wonder: what if the version I’m hearing is manipulated in some way? What if I’m inadvertently colluding with someone who is positioning themselves as the victim but in fact causing harm? What if I’m being biased?
Expressing justice does not equate to abandoning fairness, due process, or curiosity. It’s not about polarising one party as a villain and the other as a saint. There’s simply a line where neutrality can be about protecting ourselves ahead of helping others.
People don’t just need to know that we heard what happened to them. As much as possible, they need to know what we think about what happened to them.
To help us navigate this tension, there are signals that can guide us in whose story to affirm. For example, the person causing harm is usually:
Focused on their own needs and image at the exclusion of the other person’s experience (self-focused)
Avoiding repair and hiding behind systems and system language
Minimising, reframing, or silencing what happened
Positioning the other person as the problem and signalling themselves as the victim
Applying broad labels without details (‘they were over the top’, ‘there were red flags’)
Denying agency and claiming helplessness (‘I had no choice’, ‘they pushed me to this’)
Performative: saying the right and expected things to look good but not actually doing them
Misrepresenting harmful behaviour as healthy boundaries
Using strong emotions to draw reassurance and sympathy
Seeking to control the narrative rather than engage with the impact.
The person who has genuinely suffered an injustice is usually:
Concerned about fairness and repair ahead of their own needs or image (other-focused)
Worried about speaking up and getting help
Overanalysing what happened to figure out where they went wrong (self-blame)
Taking on disproportionate responsibility for the situation
Seeking ways to restore the relationship and address conflict
Showing confusion, self‑doubt, or hypervigilance
Providing specific details rather than broad labels
Feeling silenced and doubtful about what they can reasonably do
Minimising their experience and emotions
Presenting as lost, tormented, or unsure about the narrative.
While validating someone’s experience may involve a risk, it can help them stop looping on what happened and move forward. In fact, it can be one of the most helpful things we do for those who have been hurt by others, particularly when the person causing harm refuses to make things right.
And if we make a mistake in naming an injustice, we can always correct it with care and accountability.