Gisele Pelicot, a 72-year-old woman who had retired to a small village in provincial France, has become a heroine not only to compatriots, but to people thousands of miles away, rightly saluted by global leaders and ordinary citizens alike. In refusing anonymity and insisting that the trial of her ex-husband and other men for raping her be held in public, she has forced a broader recognition that “shame must change sides.” Her extraordinary courage and composure shone through the grim hearings.
For almost 10 years, Gisele Pelicot’s husband of decades drugged and raped her, and sedated her so that dozens of others could rape her at his instigation.
Dominique Pelicot was caught by chance after a security guard caught him filming up women’s skirts at a supermarket, prompting police to seize his computer equipment. However, he has since admitted an attempted rape in 1999, after police matched his DNA to a sample from the scene, and is under investigation for a 1991 rape and murder that has similarities with that incident. He denies involvement.
Yet while Dominique Pelicot is one of France’s most serious sexual offenders, he is in one sense typical: Most offenders are known to their victims and many are their partners. The scale of the trial also made it clear that sexual predators are not rare or anomalous. Fifty more men stood trial and were found guilty; about 20 more have not been traced. Those were ordinary men of all ages and backgrounds, including a nurse, a journalist, a fire officer and truck drivers. Several experienced childhood sexual abuse, but others described idyllic upbringings.
In the words of the Pelicots’ former daughter-in-law, abuse is a “banality,” because “abuse is everywhere.”
The case raises hard questions about France’s culture and its legal system. The necessity of consent is not inscribed within the law. Yet women around the world could easily envision that apparently unimaginable crime happening in their countries, their neighborhoods — perhaps even their homes.
Although Gisele Pelicot has reminded women that the shame lies with their attacker, not with them, her abusers have yet to absorb that lesson. She appeared surely irreproachable to even unreconstructed observers: a married pensioner who had been attacked while unconscious and whose husband admitted to orchestrating the rapes, with men he often met in a chatroom entitled “without her knowledge,” in crimes captured in graphic videos.
And yet most of her attackers denied rape and their lawyers asked her whether she was a swinger, exhibitionist or alcoholic; why she was not angrier with her husband; why she did not cry more in court.
One perpetrator said that he “had not paid attention” to whether she had consented; another that “the husband had given me permission.” The wife of one suggested that “because I refused him [sex] all the time, as a man, he had to look elsewhere.”
In other words, although the reckoning Gisele Pelicot has forced is remarkable, it is only partial. Campaigners and Pelicot’s children have expressed disappointment that sentences were as short as three years, with two sentences suspended.
Gisele Pelicot deserves our gratitude. However, although she is a survivor and a campaigner, she is also a victim who lives with the lifelong consequences of four sexually transmitted diseases and who has described herself as “totally destroyed.” And although her courage has inspired so many, no woman should have to be that brave or that strong. The politicians who have applauded her must now make good on her demands for change by ensuring justice for other women and addressing the culture that enables such crimes.
In September 2015, Russia intervened militarily in Syria’s civil war, propping up Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship as it teetered on the brink of collapse. This was the high point of Russia’s resurgence on the world stage and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ability to tilt the war in al-Assad’s favor helped make him a regional power broker. In addition to enhancing Putin’s stature, the operation led to strategic gains that gave Russia leverage vis-a-vis regional and Western powers. Syria was thus a status symbol for the Kremlin. Putin, who sees Russia as a great power on par with the US and China, attaches
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
With Washington substantially off-guard in power transition, China’s supreme leader, Xi Jinping (習近平), is intensifying an anti-corruption campaign against the top military leadership. At a glance, the move seems to be consistent with his emphasis on the necessity of enhancing military preparedness for a possible full military invasion of Taiwan, because the military is required to be well-disciplined without corruption. Looking carefully, however, a series of purges of several top military leaders since last year begs the question of what dynamics has worked behind the anomaly. More specifically, general Wei Fenghe (魏鳳和) and his immediate successor, Li Shangfu (李尚福), were removed as People’s
In the weeks following the 2024 US presidential election, I have received one question more than any other from friends in Taiwan — how will Donald J. Trump’s return to the White House affect Taiwan and cross-Strait relations? Some Taiwan counterparts have argued that Trump hates China, so therefore he will support Taiwan, according to the logic that the enemy of one’s enemy is a friend. Others have expressed anxiety that Trump will put pressure on Taiwan to dramatically increase defense spending, or to compensate the United States for allegedly “stealing” America’s semiconductor sector. While I understand these hopes and concerns, I
RSS