They line up in front of a courthouse in southeastern France, from morning to evening, and have gathered in the thousands in cities across the country. They hold signs reading, “one rape every six minutes,” “not all men but always a man,” and “giving in is not consenting.”

They chant: “Rapist we see you, victim we believe you.”

Women across France are rallying in support of Gisèle Pelicot, a 72-year-old reluctant icon whose husband is on trial in the city of Avignon for systematically drugging her and inviting dozens of men, 50 of whom are now his co-defendants, into their home to rape her over nearly a decade.

The shocking case has sparked what many women in France call a long-overdue reckoning over “rape culture” and systemic sexism in the way the judicial system handles sexual violence.

  • Fox@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m not out to debate the statistics of “REAL problem” with you. I’m pointing out that it’s counterproductive (and I believe morally wrong) to tell survivors they’re unworthy because their abuser was a woman. I get the feeling some people care more about gendering this issue than they do about about victims of abuse.

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah literally no one is saying that a victim of sexual assault is unworthy of anything because their assaulter is a woman and not a man. We’re talking about the issue of men thinking it’s okay to sexually assault because it’s almost never fucking prosecuted.

      Bringing up the statistic of female perpetrators is simply a way of deflecting the responsibility of men to acknowledge and hold accountability to their fellow men who commit sexual assault.

      I’ve said it elsewhere in this thread but this is exactly the same as the gun enthusiasts bringing up mental illness statistics as a way of absolving guns of their role in gun violence.

      • Skates@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Thread has a photo of a sign saying “not all men but always a man”.

        Bringing up the statistic of female perpetrators is simply a way of deflecting the responsibility of

        No. Bringing up the statistic is a way of correcting an intentionally skewed view that is vilifying men for no fucking reason. If you’re gonna be a dick about things, don’t go crying when you get shafted.

        • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 month ago

          Since men are the primary perpetrators it’s not skewed not even a little bit. Yes, there are women who commit sexual assault but the number of women who do it is such a small percentage as to be almost statistically insignificant compared to the number of men who do.

          Men commit sexual assault every single day and barely 5% of them get prosecuted for it. And every person who claps back with this idiotic argumentative excuse that “women do it too” is just feeding into a system that has made this world completely unsafe for women.

          • Skates@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            men are the primary perpetrators

            the number of women who do it is such a small percentage as to be almost statistically insignificant compared to the number of men who do.

            Men commit sexual assault every single day

            barely 5% of them get prosecuted for it.

            Citation needed

            Listen, it’s very obvious we’re not on the same page. You’re responding to a comment thread that contains a comment literally contradicting most of your points, and you’re not being rational about it. You’re spouting wild claims with little regard for backing them up - it’s as if în your head, they’re axioms and not only do they not require proof, but invalidating them would mean the rest of the world crumbles. And I’m sure for you, that’s true.

            All things considered, continuing this “discussion” brings no value to either of us. Have a good one.

            • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              17
              ·
              1 month ago

              Citation needed

              Yeah, this just told me everything I need to know. I didn’t even read the rest of your comment. I’m just going to downvote you and move on.

              • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                My guy, he provided numbers and sources while you’ve been arguing from an emotional standpoint only.

                Take a deep breath.

                • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I have provided numbers and sources all throughout this post on several other comments. I don’t feel like reposting it everywhere constantly. In fact the one he was asking for a “citation” on is literally in the article which they clearly did not bother reading. And nothing I say is actually going to change his view or the other people who are downvoting me. And I am absolutely certain they are downvoting me because of their “feelings” and not because of any data. So you can try to high road me but you just sound like an ass.