In the latter part of 2017, a movement was triggered—one which saw the solidarity of women across the world. The #MeToo campaign was looked at as a watershed moment in the fight for women's rights. After the Harvey Weinstein sex scandal, and as other big names of Hollywood fell from the pedestal, men and women wore black to the Golden Globe Awards, and spotted the sassy 'Time's Up' pin. Women and men were standing up for feminism. But in a dramatic turn of events, French actress Catherine Deneuve has sparked a furious backlash after she denounced the #MeToo campaign against sexual harassment as a “witch-hunt” against men.
An open letter signed by Deneuve and over 100 other French women, blasted the new 'puritanism wave'. In an angry response, French feminists described the letter’s signatories as “apologists for rape” and “defenders of paedophiles”. This has sparked an intense debate in France about where the lines need to be drawn.
Not just in the circles of the high and mighty, the overzealous campaign, and this backlash needs serious pondering among us mere mortals, too. It has triggered debates about what are the limits of flirtation, whether it is an offence, where does one draw the line, and 'victimisation of men'. “Rape is a crime, but flirting, even persistently or cack-handedly is not,” the letter signed by Deneuve read. That is probably one of the sentences that has caused the most outrage. The letter claimed men had been “summarily punished, forced out of their jobs when all they did was touch someone’s knee or try to steal a kiss”.
What does that really point at? That the random shoulder brush with a smile, creepy text messages, weird lunches, that hand on the shoulder, and more be taken with a pinch of salt? Is that what Deneuve meant by the 'right to bother'? Where does the 'right to bother' end? As the hand moves up beyond the knee, to the thigh? Instances like these nail it in harder that women's bodies have categorised areas—that are safe for a casual touch and that are not.
We have a problem right there, said Deepa Ranganathan who works with FRIDA The Young Feminist Fund. “Therein lies the problem—the normalising and justification of inappropriate behaviour. Any touch without consent is unacceptable.”
The letter went on to wade in murky waters: “We defend the freedom to importune, indispensable for sexual freedom,” it read. “As women we do not recognise ourselves in this feminism, which beyond denouncing the abuse of power, takes on a hatred of men and of sexuality,” the letter also stated.
“It is very hard to define the criminal intent in flirting,” said Nanditha Karthik, a Bengaluru-based student. Well, who doesn't like a fleeting flying kiss, a smile, or a passing comment? It needs to be said that women, at least a part of them, see such acts as a measure of their likeability. That said, Nanditha clarifies all is well as long as flirtation doesn't cross limits, or get physical.
In yet another line that drew outrage, the letter encouraged women “not to feel forever traumatised” by instances the writers dismissed as relatively minor forms of sexual harassment. They cited, as an example, men who masturbate by rubbing themselves against women on buses or subways. They said women could “consider it as the expression of a great sexual misery, or even as a non-event.”
In response, French women took to Twitter to recount abusive experiences in public spaces. “When I was 19, on the bus, a guy ejaculated on my coat,” Nadia Daam, a French journalist, wrote on Twitter. “I don’t know if it was a ‘non-event,’ or the expression of ‘sexual misery,’” Daam continued. “But I threw my coat away and didn’t take the bus for two years.”
“There is no victimisation of men happening. Men who have been accused of sexual harassments aren't victims, they are perpetrators,” says Deepa.
In the reply letter French feminists wrote to Deneuve, they said: “Once again they are using their high profiles in the media to make sexual violence seem commonplace. They despise the millions of women who suffer or have suffered this violence.” Hollywood director's Steven Spielberg's response to the whole mess up is bang on. “I’m sorry I don’t see it as a witch-hunt—I see it as an imperative,” he said. "...you can’t just think of this as a Hollywood problem, this is a national problem and probably a global problem.”
The debates will rage on. The movement will see a high, and a fall. But as women fight amongst themselves, what shouldn't be lost is the spirit which triggered the movement in the first place. Let's not kill that please, ladies.
