Strictly star’s girlfriend: he called me a psycho
As the Strictly curse bites, Rowan Pelling looks at the boundaries of physical betrayal in relationships and what can and can’t be forgiven
THE girlfriend of Seann Walsh, the Strictly Come Dancing contestant, has left him and accused him of branding her a “psycho” when she voiced suspicions about his relationship with his television dancing partner Katya Jones.
In a damning statement which is likely to force his exit from the BBC One show, Rebecca Humphries alleged that Walsh was a controlling character who had subjected her to “inappropriate, hurtful behaviour”.
She said he had flatly denied a romantic relationship with Jones, until they were photographed kissing outside a London pub.
The statement, published via social media, began: “My name is Rebecca Humphries and I am not a victim.”
She said: “Those pictures were taken on October 3rd. It was my birthday. I was alone at home when Sean [sic] texted at 10pm saying the two of them were going for one innocent drink.
“We spoke and I told him, not for the first time, that his actions over the past three weeks had led me to believe something inappropriate was going on. He aggressively, and repeatedly, called me a psycho / nuts / mental. As he has done countless times throughout our relationship when I’ve questioned his inappropriate, hurtful behaviour.”
After her accusation of “gaslighting” – a term used to describe a man who manipulates a partner into doubting their own sanity – she encouraged other women to seek help, in words that echo the Metoo movement.
She said: “This whole business has served to remind me that I am a strong, capable person who is now free; and no victim. I have a voice and will use it by saying this to any woman out there who deep down feels worthless and trapped with a man they love: Believe in yourself and your instincts. It’s more than lying. It’s controlling.”
Ms Humphries suggested that Walsh had embellished his name, pointedly referring to him as “Sean(n)”.
She said: “It’s incredibly good of Sean(n) and Katya to apologise in the media. I have received nothing other than the support of my family, friends and a host of strangers on the internet who all wanted to make sure I was OK.”
She added: “It’s important also to recognise that in these situations those who hold power over you are insecure and fragile, and their need for control comes from a place of vulnerability. I think it certainly does in Sean’s case. Despite everything, I hope he gets what he wants from this. I’m not sorry I took the cat, though.”
Walsh and Jones, who is married to fellow Strictly professional Neil Jones, had dismissed their encounter as a drunken mistake. They planned to use an appearance this week on the Strictly spin-off show, It Takes Two, to make an apology and appeal to viewers to keep voting for them. Bookmakers William Hill made them 11/8 favourites to be evicted on Sunday.
Last night, Ms Humphries retweeted domestic abuse charity Scottish Women’s Aid, which backed her statement.
Yet again two stars of Strictly Come Dancing appear hell-bent on proving the notion that dancing is a vertical expression of a horizontal desire. The comedian Seann Walsh and his tango partner Katya Jones were filmed outside a pub sharing the kind of smooch that smacked of the last slow-dance at a boozy teenage party.
After both put out abject apologies via Twitter – the married Jones (whose spouse is also a Strictly dancer) tweeting plaintively, “it was a one-off mistake after some drinks. I love my husband and we are very happy together…” - Walsh’s partner, Rebecca Humphries told a very different story, suggesting that a: she had received no such apology, and b: that it was far from a “one-off ”.
“Those pictures were taken on October 3rd,” she wrote in an open letter she posted on Twitter last night. “It was my birthday. I was alone at home when Sean texted at 10pm saying the two of them were going for one innocent drink. We spoke and I told him, not for the first time, that his actions over the past three weeks had led me to believe something inappropriate was going on. He aggressively, and repeatedly, called me a psycho / nuts / mental. As he has done countless times throughout our relationship when I’ve questioned his inappropriate, hurtful behaviour.”
As the fall out of this unsavoury tale will no doubt continue to unravel, it raises the sceptre of gaslighting - a type of emotional abuse, named after the 1938 play Gaslight, which featured a husband manipulating his wife into thinking she was losing her mind.
But it begs the question for the rest of us, in otherwise loving relationships: where do we draw the boundaries of betrayal? We live in shifting times, where even people who aren’t celebrities can feel unprecedented levels of temptation, whether that be Facebook friends, school reunion sites, Twitter followers or the more blatant allure of Tinder.
The rules change with every generation. There was a time when a lunge meant pistols at dawn. Then another age when a shifty fondle was suppose to be sucked up, because women’s emancipation was viewed as a rejection of chivalry. Nowadays we live in a febrile atmosphere where bad behaviour is quickly called out and a hundred Facebook and Twitter “friends” you’ve never met will advise you to ditch the “cheating rat”.
The truth is different couples will have very varied levels of tolerance – and emotional honesty. We will no doubt hear much more about Walsh’s behaviour in the next couple of days, and the stories emerging last night certainly paint a more complicated picture than first imagined.
However, when it comes to simple drunken flirtation for the rest of us, I’ve long remembered a wedding from my mid-twenties where the bride’s champagne-sodden married sister snogged a family friend on the crowded dance floor. As almost every guest was a London medic, whose standards or party behaviour were more rowdy than most, the clinch in this instance was greeted with gales of laughter and the sister’s husband was summoned to take his errant spouse home.
The scenario was boozy, messy and proof of the fact that sometimes a wayward kiss can be indeed “a one-off mistake.” Now I’m 50 I must confess I’ve observed such scenes a number of times and feel a third of the marriages in Britain would probably be dissolved if one drunken snog was a hanging offence. Although this view will clearly depend a lot on your cultural background, creed or ethical sensibilities. And also the wider context of a relationship.
Sensitivities will clearly be far more delicate when two people haven’t been together that long. Yes, there are those who declare they’re not jealous and sign up for polyamory (consensual non-monogamy) from the get-go, but most of us simply aren’t cut from that cloth.
I’ve always felt the first seven years of a relationship are so intense and interwoven that the thought of your best beloved sharing a steamy look, touch, embrace or even email with another is pure torture. The story is rather different after several decades of matrimony. I would be frankly astonished if my lovely husband of 23 years now had the energy or opportunity for any indiscretion, drunken or otherwise.
Are there guidelines that work for couples when dealing with attentive non-partners? I think there are a few that should be followed. Never offer your phone number when an email address is more formal. Emails can’t lead to intimate texts, breathy exchanges on Whatsapp or – worse still – pictures on Snapchat.
And never indulge in any exchange that you’d regret if your beloved read it on your mobile. Always tell your other half who you’re meeting and why. If you feel resistant to this, question your motives. A flirty lunch isn’t a crime, but a flirty supper is usually dangerous. (A friend says the success of his 30-year marriage was down to the fact his wife and he could lunch with whom they wanted, but never went out solo for the evening.)
If you do get so drunk you commit an indiscretion, admit to it at once. Most reasonable people understand booze can lead to folly. A full and frank confession also means your other half can take back control – generally by requesting you don’t meet the partner-in-crime again. In short, always treat your beloved’s heart with the same care and consideration that you expect for your own.
A bruised heart can recover, a broken one may never heal.
‘Emails can’t lead to intimate texts, breathy exchanges on Whatsapp or pictures’