Beyond #MeToo, a radical break?

April 3, 2018

Article, Europe, Gender, Nonviolence, Social issues, Sexual violence

The phenomenon of denouncing sexual violence is legitimate, of course. But how can we take a further step and take advantage of the enthusiasm to propose concrete avenues of action?

Why is sexual violence against women – homosexual, transgender and other people – so widespread? What are the root causes of this violence? How do we – women and men – perpetuate these behaviors and, more broadly, the system and culture that underlies this violence? And, finally, what can we do to profoundly change the situation? Beyond the "buzz" of the #MeToo campaign and its counterparts in several languages (#BalanceTonPorc in French or in Spanish #AMíTambién), having toured the world since the end of October 2017 [see box], here are some questions that such a phenomenon inspires us, in the quest for an open, inclusive and continuous dialogue, which can lay the foundations for radical change. Sexual abuse and other violence against women The flood of denunciations of harassment and sexual abuse against politicians, actors, artists, journalists, and other men in positions of power in recent months does not reflect a phenomenon new or unknown to women globally. On the contrary. According to UN Women, globally, nearly 35% women have suffered physical and/or sexual violence by an intimate partner, a loved one or a stranger during their lifetime. Depending on the country, this figure can go up to 70%. In European Union countries, for example, 40 to 50% women experience unwanted sexual advances, physical contact or other form of sexual harassment in the workplace . Despite the fact that for years, women have been fighting against this violence, discrimination and inequalities linked to gender in different spaces and environments of action, this violence persists, supported by a culture of sexism and a patriarchal system. What is particular in the case of #MeToo is that, galvanized by Hollywood celebrities, with the help of the massive use of social networks, the campaign appears as a sort of megaphone, making visible thousands of cases and , to a certain extent, allowing women to “break the silence”. But, what would happen if these denunciations did not come from “super-stars”, but from “voiceless” and powerless women? The #MeToo In the age of social networks, the #MeToo campaign brought together 1.7 million tweets in more than 80 countries at the end of October 2017, only a week after Hollywood actress Alyssa Milano launched the first denunciation of harassment and sexual abuse on the part of by Harvey Weinstein, the famous film producer. However, the hashtag was originally conceived by African-American activist Tarana Burke in 2006, when she was meeting with African-American women who were victims of sexual abuse and violence, reflecting on her own experiences. . Beyond #MeToo, a radical systemic change Indeed, one of the limits of the #MeToo campaign is that it highlights, through the media, the dominant voices – those of famous women, registered in a position privileged social voice, often to the detriment of other voices. For feminist academic Nancy Fraser, it is not enough to demand gender equality for professional women and their advancement in positions of power, at work for example. . We must also focus on change and equality for the majority of women – peasant, indigenous, black women, across the world. According to her, this will not happen without a profound transformation of the institutions and structures that support neoliberal capitalism, without a real questioning of social hierarchies “which are designed to favor a minority over the majority, men over women, the rich over the poor.” Women cannot simply “climb the social hierarchies”, they must demand their surpassing . At the cultural level, to overcome sexism, it is essential to question the dominant forms of masculinity and the conditions – the power and privileges conferred on men in society – which allow the reproduction of these behaviors and its different forms of expression, from the most insidious to the most violent. Although it is important to identify those responsible for gender-based violence, individualizing this responsibility and focusing attention on a few cases – as has often been the case in recent months – risks trivializing the scale of the problem and the recognition of its systemic nature. From reaction to dialogue Thus, it would be a question of going beyond reactions on social networks and thus taking advantage of the “buzz” to begin an inclusive dialogue – men and women – and constant in different spaces which can help us to deconstruct and overcome relations of domination, by amplifying voices and perspectives, by interconnecting struggles and by questioning our own prejudices and sexist values, often internalized, to build more just and equal institutions and structures – both within both in the private sphere and at the collective level. What if we wrote… in a slightly more inclusive way? Inclusive dialogue begins with certain very concrete aspects of our daily life, which profoundly influence our ways of acting, thinking and constructing our reality. Among these, writing plays a fundamental role in the construction of the collective imagination. Today, it is the subject of debate! With a French language which favors the superiority of the masculine over the feminine, there would therefore be no place for parity? Inclusive writing (or “epicene”) is a movement which aims to put an end to this inequality, by promoting – for example – agreement based on gender or proximity, as well as a plural adapted to the context of the sentence. Some refractories loudly brandish the well-known law of “masculine prevailing over femininity”. However, far from being immutable, it only historically appeared in the 17th century! The stakes are high, because these various proposed measures aim to ensure equal representation between women and men throughout our readings. Because only mentioning farmers, workers or demonstrators in a brief or a story is to de facto invisibilize their female colleagues who experience at least the same realities, the same struggles. We will mentally interpret two different stories: between “the demonstrators won their case with management” and “the demonstrators won their case (…)”, two very different mental images may appear. These nuances may seem subtle and yet so decisive. So, could we talk about human rights, instead of human rights? The choice of words and syntax is important, the options proposed are numerous. Some prefer to use the “midpoint” in order to remain inclusive. We would therefore speak of teacher, President... Certain institutions, such as theCatholic University of Louvain for example, now recommends encouraging this use! This choice is far from unanimous, some speak out against a complexity of the French language, a lack of unnecessary readability or superfluous effort. If everyone at least agrees that language and the use of words is authoritative, we must therefore be able to assume this weight and re-examine the consequences of our own speeches, our own daily words... Angela Ocampo

Attachments

Beyond Mee Too, a radical break

Notes[+]

Notes
↑1	UN Women “Facts and Figures: Ending Violence Against Women”.
↑2	Quoted in Myriam Omidi. “The Many Faces of the #MeToo Backlash”. Public Seminar. January 2018.
↑3	For more critical perspectives on the campaign and the questions it poses, see: “ Where Freedom Starts: Sex, Power, Violence #MeToo » a report from Verso Books.