Connect with us

International

Pelicot case: turning point for social shame to fall on the aggressors?

The brutality of the sexual violence suffered for a decade by Gisèle Pelicot has generated a resounding social rejection. However, his courageous request that shame change sides, from victims to aggressors, is far from being a reality in a society in which sexual assaults are daily and women are discredited.

There were at least ten years during which Gisèle’s husband drugged her at night and offered his body to other men on the Internet, who arranged visits to the conjugal home to rape the woman. More than fifty aggressors are accused, including the husband, who recorded and stored the aggressions on his computer and whom Gisèle believed was “a cool guy.”

Shame: from victims to abusers?

After learning of the violence suffered, and convinced by his daughter, Pelicot has asked that the hearings of the trial be public, has shown his face and has requested through his lawyer that his case serve to change sides: from the victims to the aggressors.

Shame, silence, questioning and discredit have been elements that have historically deepened the revictimization of those who suffer sexual violence, so that the sentence requested by Pelicot can ignite and extend to all cases?

The director of the Women’s Foundation, Marisa Soleto, explains to EFE that society only reflects when an event of extraordinary gravity occurs.

Advertisement
20250701_dengue_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

“Statistics show a figure of violence against women in European society that can reach 40% of the female population. It seems that we need events of extraordinary gravity to be ashamed of what is an everyday event for millions of women in Europe,” she says.

“What should scandalize us is habituality”

“What should scandalize us is the habituality and frequency; as long as we have this habituality and this frequency, we are not safe from the fact that from time to time a fatal event occurs (…) It does not seem that society is about to react in the appropriate way,” he continues.

The spokeswoman of the Federation of Progressive Women Blanca Esther Aranda emphasizes that “we are in a patriarchal culture that continues to treat women as liars and hysterical and in which men have not unlearned their complicity with the culture of rape.”

In addition, this “sexist society considers women as less valid and their word is worth less.”

In this sense, the lawyer expert in defense of victims of sexual crimes Nahxeli Beas points out that society continues to blame the survivors (“that woman will have done something to trigger the violence received”), focusing on the victim and thinking that only certain women can suffer this violence, “when it is more than proven that they cross all social strata.”

Advertisement
20250701_dengue_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

This reality is aggravated when the victim does not show the behavior that society considers impeccable. In the event that she is conceived as a perfect victim, “pity”, fragility is poured on her and infantile.

Complicit society

That punishment results in his shame, something that in turn has a direct impact on his silencing. Thus, society is complicit in the aggressors, underlines the lawyer, who recalls that one in four girls suffers sexual abuse in childhood: “It happens in our families and we have to be able to look it in the eye.”

“As a society we have a responsibility: we always think that those responsible are the aggressors, when we don’t think it’s women or alcohol, and we have to think that we all have a relationship with this violence,” says Beas.

“How many times do I not have a user in the Association of Assistance to Sexually Assaulted Women (AADAS) who comes to tell me about some facts and tells me that some friend, neighbor or co-worker does not want to testify because they do not want problems. The lack of social involvement reaches that level,” says the expert.

From the Association of Women Jurists Themis, its vice president Pino de la Nuez affirms that the denial of sexual violence exists in society, as well as the intentionality of hiding and not making these situations visible.

Advertisement
20250701_dengue_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

Neither monsters nor sick people

In Soleto’s opinion, treating the case of France as an extraordinary fact makes it difficult to take measures of social and cultural change to eradicate the real problem, which is that “sexual abuse of women is implanted in culture in such a way that there are certain people to whom it may seem normal.”

Aranda indicates that it is not assumed that the aggressors are normal men, not monsters: “They are men who have normalized absolutely desictable behaviors. An explanation is sought for something exceptional when unfortunately the data say that sexual violence is continuous and devastating,” he says.

And therefore, “men must break the silence” and “denounce the violent behavior of other men.”

The AADAS lawyer denounces that the stereotype of monstrosity is still in force, “when it has long been shown that sexual violence is not associated with any pathology.” “We must analyze why we continue to build a masculinity in which sexual violence is necessary,” he reflects.

Extreme cases like that of France, Beas points out, far from pointing out sexual violence as structural, everyday and transversal to women’s lives, from putting the structures of patriarchy in check.

Advertisement
20250701_dengue_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

Gisèle’s courage

The experts recognize the courage of the French victim. Aranda believes that her phrase that shame changes sides will be “history of feminism” and Soleto extols her willingness to be in solidarity with all the victims who feel shame and do not dare to denounce.

Now, they insist that the survivors cannot be required to behave heroicly or that it falls on their backs that shame turns sides towards the aggressors. It is something that society must achieve.
“We have to stop putting the weight on women,” Beas concludes.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
20250701_dengue_300x250_01

International

U.S. strike in Caracas killed 32 cuban security officers, experts say surprise was crucial

Two days after a U.S. military attack on a military complex in Caracas, Havana confirmed that 32 members of its security forces were killed in the operation, some of whom were likely responsible for protecting Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. The Venezuelan government also reported that 23 of its own military personnel died during the assault.

Of the Cuban dead, 21 belonged to the Ministry of the Interior, which oversees intelligence services, and 11 were from the Revolutionary Armed Forces. No official information has been released regarding potential injuries.

Experts consulted by AFP agreed that the element of surprise was the key to the success of the U.S. military operation, which was meticulously prepared over months and kept entirely secret. “Cuban intelligence … convinced the Maduro regime and its security agencies that the United States would never attack Venezuelan territory,” explained José Gustavo Arocha, a former Venezuelan army officer and expert at the Center for a Secure Free Society, a U.S. defense think tank.

Fulton Armstrong, a former U.S. intelligence officer and Latin America researcher at American University in Washington, also highlighted the failure to anticipate the attack and to detect U.S. helicopters entering Venezuelan airspace, noting that even a five- to ten-minute warning could have made a significant difference for the guards and for Maduro.

U.S. forces additionally benefited from “incredible” real-time intelligence provided by stealth drones to monitor movements of the Venezuelan leader, according to experts. A highly sophisticated combat team was deployed, and analysts believe the order to “fire to kill” was likely given.

Advertisement
20250701_dengue_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

Paul Hare, former British ambassador to Cuba and Venezuela, added that Cuban intelligence also underestimated the extent of U.S. access to internal cooperation within Venezuela’s security apparatus, contributing to the operation’s success.

Continue Reading

International

Report: Vatican mediation included russian asylum offer ahead of Maduro’s capture

The Vatican reportedly attempted to negotiate an offer of asylum in Russia for Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro before his capture by U.S. forces last Saturday, according to The Washington Post.

The U.S. newspaper reported that Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin spoke with U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See Brian Burch about a supposed Russian proposal to grant Maduro asylum. A source familiar with the offer said that what was proposed “was that he would leave and be able to enjoy his money,” and that part of the plan involved Russian President Vladimir Putin guaranteeing Maduro’s security.

Despite these diplomatic efforts, the United States carried out a military operation that resulted in Maduro’s capture and detention, along with his wife Cilia Flores, who are now being held in New York on narcoterrorism charges.

The Washington Post also noted that U.S. President Donald Trump may have invited Maduro to Washington for in-person discussions about safe conduct, an offer that Maduro reportedly declined.

Continue Reading

International

Pope Leo XIV warns of rising “war enthusiasm” in global politics

“War is becoming fashionable again, and war enthusiasm is spreading.” Pope Leo XIV delivered a somber assessment of international politics on Friday, sharply criticizing the growing reliance on force by nations at a time when his country of birth is increasing military displays.

While offering New Year’s greetings to the diplomatic corps, the U.S.-born pope — who also holds Peruvian nationality — delivered one of his strongest speeches to date, denouncing the “worrying weakening of multilateralism” and the emergence of what he described as “war enthusiasm.”

From the outset of his address to ambassadors accredited to the Holy See, delivered in English, the pontiff lamented the rise of a “diplomacy of force, by individuals or groups of allied states,” at the expense of dialogue, warning that such trends threaten the global order established after World War II.

“Peace is no longer sought as a gift or as a good desirable in itself, or as the pursuit of ‘the establishment of an order willed by God, one that entails greater justice among human beings.’ Instead, it is pursued through weapons as a condition for asserting one’s own dominance,” the head of the Catholic Church said, without directly naming any country.

His remarks come amid ongoing conflicts between Ukraine and Russia and in the Gaza Strip, and against a broader international backdrop marked by European concerns over a potential U.S. takeover of Greenland, the autonomous Danish territory, a scenario that could threaten the cohesion of NATO.

Advertisement
20250701_dengue_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow
Continue Reading

Trending

Central News