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.

  • Noble Shift@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    I can tell all of those commenting on “Not all men …” this: Those women don’t give a shit what you think. So 4% aren’t men, you know what, it might not be technically correct, but it’s certainly close enough.

    Also you sound like the “All Lives Matter” folks.

    Let it go.

    [Edit - Jubus you frail scared little men, I’m speaking of a woman with a sign, not political policy / policy enforcement / law. Go get a therapist and stop spinning out of control on a random comment on a random article on the random fucking internet you pussy bitches.]

    • Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Dafq is wrong with you. You just chose to ignore and invalidate a horrible experience of thousands, if not millions, just to defend a random person’s Sign? Maybe take a step back and think again.

    • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      Ooh good, only 4%? I’m an anomaly and deserve to be categorized with the aggressors instead of the victims because while I am the victim of two different women I happen to be a male, so fuck me!

    • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Certainly close enough says the expert. And then someone in the other thread explains how the legal definition is so fkd up it essentially excludes male victims. Tell me about real sexism here.

      But you know what? It shouldn’t fuckin matter either way, because if it does to you, you’re the problem.

    • Resonosity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Yeah I also saw the similarly to ALM in the comments of this post.

      Yes, women also abuse men (and also other women), but the vast majority of cases that appear before a judge involve men as the perpetrators. I’d want to tackle the big problems first if I have to prioritize cultural (and sexual) progress of a society.

      But I also recognize bias exists at pretty much every level of this process, inside or outside of a courtroom. I think we should still value evidence over hearsay, as was demonstrated in a case like Depp v. Heard, yet show compassion for victims because they need to feel safe to speak up, no matter the gender.

    • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      The heck you mean “close enough”, 4% is not within margin of error, and even then this is a grave accusation to lump on an entire demographic.