The feminist collective Nous tous 79 calls for a boycott of Patrick Bruel’s concert, scheduled for Wednesday May 15, 2024 at L’Aclameur, in Niort. Two complaints were dismissed in 2021, and three other women had denounced harassing or exhibitionist behavior on the part of the singer. Despite the abandonment of legal proceedings, Emma, Émilie and Marie-France, members of the feminist collective, justify their positions, aware that this arouses strong reactions.
The case was dismissed. Why continue to call for a boycott?
Marie-France : “A dismissal of the case would have established that he is not guilty. A classification without follow-up means that the elements are not gathered to make a decision. That doesn’t mean he’s innocent, it means we don’t have the tools to judge the case. There were two complaints filed, and three other testimonies. These are facts that point in the same direction each time, it’s quite disturbing. »
Do you question the functioning of justice?
Emilie: “Obviously, there are clearly no tools, no appropriate responses for justice. Currently, only 1% of rapists are convicted! These are matters that touch on the intimate, it’s word against word. We know, justice cannot be done without proof. But today, when in doubt, we assume that women are lying. »
What are you proposing, concretely, beyond boycotts?
Emma: “It is up to justice to address these questions. We have put things in place to collect the views of children, for example, so we can move forward. But that requires resources, political will. We want concrete things. Perhaps a good start is to do more prevention. »
Marie-France : “On a legal level, we must work on the notion of consent, which is still not included in the Penal Code to define rape. We can review the procedure, when there is a mass of complaints, with victims describing the same processes, for example. We can develop psychological expertise. We need to find appropriate answers. »
Is there not a drift towards “cancel culture”?
Emma: “Often, when people tell me that, I ask to name someone who stopped their career after accusations: no one is capable of coming up with a name. At some point, for the harassers, everything is fine. On the other hand, the women who denounce, they no longer work, they leave the artistic world. We cry about cancel culture (1), but in fact the opposite is happening. People who have experienced violence suffer. »
With this appeal, do you consider the public to be complicit?
Emma: “It’s complicated, especially with someone you adore. It is everyone’s responsibility to know who they choose to support. Roman Polanski, do we choose to continue to see his films? Why not allow other people to be on stage, to make films? At some point, we have to know how to move on, we are a culturally rich society, it has to be renewed. »
This poses a risk of slanderous denunciation, revenge…
Emma: “It doesn’t exist any more than in other cases, it’s ridiculous. The proportion of people who lie is tiny. The Me Too movement, since 2017, has encouraged people to denounce. But you have to be very courageous to do it. There are so many harmful consequences for a woman who denounces facts like that. That’s why it’s important not to let this kind of behavior happen, especially from people who then become idolized. »
Emilie: “The myth of the woman who would like revenge, it is precisely a myth. We hope to move things forward. We must stop being deaf and blind. »
(1) Cancel culture, or culture of erasure, is the practice of removing from public space figures, including historical ones, accused of facts deemed questionable. This is a controversial practice, sometimes associated with censorship.
