“It Takes Two to Tango” – Not When it Comes to Abuse

The phrase “It takes two to tango” is often used to describe relationship difficulties, implying that both people are equally responsible for the problem and its solution. In cases of domestic abuse, this idea is dangerously misleading. It suggests the victim shares the blame, or that both parties need to “work on” the relationship. In reality, this myth minimises the abuser’s responsibility and pressures the victim to fix something they didn’t break.

Dr. Emma Katz, a leading academic on coercive control, put it clearly in a presentation at the Royal College of Psychiatrists in 2019: “The ‘it takes two to tango’ belief… must be challenged because only the perpetrator is responsible for coercive control.”

The abuser deliberately engineers a situation where the victim’s choices are constrained, their voice is silenced, and their actions are constantly monitored or punished.

Abuse Is About Power, Not Conflict

Domestic abuse is not poor communication, mutual misunderstandings, or two people “clashing.” It is a pattern of domination in which one person exerts power and control over another.

One common form is coercive control, a sustained campaign to erode a victim’s autonomy. This can include isolation, surveillance, threats, financial restriction, intimidation, and manipulation. These tactics are deliberate and calculated to strip away independence and self-worth.

Unlike ordinary relationship challenges, which involve two people working through disagreements together, abuse is entirely one-sided. The goal is not resolution or growth, but domination. In healthy relationships, both partners have equal power and mutual respect. In abusive dynamics, that balance is gone — one person holds control, the other is left increasingly dependent and fearful.

Why “Mutual Abuse” Is a Misleading Term

The phrase “mutual abuse” is sometimes used to describe situations where both partners have shown aggression. But in coercive control, there is always an imbalance of power. As Emma Katz (2022) notes in Coercive Control in Children’s and Mother’s Lives, what may appear to be conflict is not mutual disagreement but “the highly unequal power dynamic… that precludes the possibility of mutuality.”

Victims may sometimes fight back or lash out in fear, but this does not make them abusers. These reactions, often called “reactive abuse”, are better understood as reactive defence: a natural human response to sustained emotional, psychological, or physical torment. Abusers may provoke these responses deliberately, then weaponise them to portray themselves as the victim.

Without considering context, especially who holds the power, authorities risk mislabelling victims and protecting perpetrators. “Mutual abuse” language gives abusers a convenient cover, allowing them to say “we were both toxic” to blur the truth, escape scrutiny, and deepen the victim’s confusion.

How Abusers Hijack the Narrative

Abusers often exploit the belief that both partners are to blame. Phrases like “we both did bad things” are meant to seem reasonable while avoiding accountability.

In legal settings, this tactic can derail justice. By claiming “we were both abusive,” abusers muddy the waters for courts, professionals, and even the victim. This framing reinforces the false idea that abuse is about poor communication or incompatible personalities, instead of one person committing harm against another.

Recognising this manipulation is essential. Survivors need to know that blame-shifting — whether by the abuser, the courts, or bystanders — is part of the control strategy. Professionals must be trained to detect when an abuser is reframing the story to maintain power.

The Danger in the Therapy Room

The “it takes two to tango” myth can be especially damaging when it shapes couples therapy. This approach assumes shared responsibility and the ability to work together to resolve problems. In coercive control, that assumption is not only false but dangerous.

When abuse is treated as a relationship problem, therapy risks empowering the abuser. They may dominate sessions, manipulate the therapist’s perception, and present themselves as reasonable while undermining the victim. The victim may be pressured to make concessions that further erode their safety.

Abuse is not caused by poor communication. It stems from one person’s decision to dominate. Therapy that ignores this reality risks deepening the harm and shielding the abuser from accountability.

The Responsibility Lies with the Abuser — Always

At the heart of this issue lies a simple truth: the responsibility for abuse lies entirely with the abuser. It takes two people to build a healthy, respectful relationship. But as Karen McAndless-Davis, author of When Love Hurts, observes, “It only takes one person to destroy a relationship.”

Victims are not at fault for being abused. They are not to blame for staying, for hoping things would improve, or for reacting in distress. Every survivor is doing their best to endure a situation they did not choose.

Victim-blaming remains widespread, often in subtle forms. Survivors are asked, “Why didn’t you leave?”—a question that reveals a misunderstanding of how abuse works. Many remain because they are afraid, financially trapped, isolated, or manipulated. Others try to appease the abuser to avoid further harm. None of these responses make them responsible for the abuse they suffer.

Some survivors may have vulnerabilities — trauma histories, disabilities, or unmet emotional needs — that make them more susceptible to manipulation. But vulnerability is not the same as responsibility. Blame must rest with the person who chose to harm.

When we dismantle the myth that “it takes two to tango” in abuse, we take the weight of responsibility off victims’ shoulders and place it where it belongs — on the abuser. Only then can we create space for real safety, justice, and change.

Featured image: It takes two to tango does not apply to abuse. Image source: Grustock / Adobe Stock.