Beyond the Headlines: Gisèle Pelicot
Trigger Warning: This article discusses mass rape and sexual abuse, which may be distressing or triggering for some readers.
In my inaugural QBR Politics and the World article, I explored the ongoing imbalance regarding women’s involvement in global conflict resolution despite how deeply conflict affects them. While significant in its own right, this was primarily a top-down perspective of the ways in which politics casts women and girls aside.
This article takes a different approach, one from a grass-roots level. It is easy for women and girls to feel disconnected from politics when much of its operation is far-removed from their daily lives. Sometimes, however, it is the actions of one individual that can offset a chain of events, disrupting the status quo and eventually revolutionizing long-standing narratives.
In this case, that one individual is Gisèle Pelicot. This edtorial draws upon the unfathomable reality of her life. It will look at France’s historical attitudes towards rape and sexual violence, the facts of the Pelicot case, and the highly publicized trial. Following this, we will delve into what makes this trial so distinct, as well as its potential to reform the longstanding ideology of rape culture that ails France but more importantly, the world as a whole.
France Pre-Pelicot
Europeans, and the French in particular, are notorious for their laid-back outlooks on romance and sex. They tend to differ from North Americans when it comes to relationships and intimacy, viewing them in shades of grey, rather than black and white. Consequently, these blasé attitudes influence scenarios lacking romance and consent, often involving rape and sexual abuse. In France, rape and sexual violence is quite pervasive; in a representative sample survey conducted by the French government in 2022, 270,000 women disclosed being victims of sexual violence, including rape or sexual assault, and an additional 1.14 million women reported experienced non-physical sexual violence such as harassment. Despite these high incidence rates, occurrences are grossly underreported with only 6 percent of victims filing a report with police after experiencing sexual violence and 2 percent following non-physical sexual violence. Worse, a staggering 94 percent of cases were dismissed.
Various cases over the years have spurred discussions in France over what qualifies consent and rape. In 2018, a controversial case of a 29 year old engaging in sex with an 11 year old girl was difficult to present as rape, as the current definition in France defines it as being characterized by violence, coercion, threat, or surprise. Taking matters into their own hands, more than 140 public individuals spoke out against France’s outdated attitudes around sexual violence, urging lawmakers to step up and make changes promised during their campaigns.
It also comes as no surprise that these instances are so widespread and moreover, tolerated, as public figures in France themselves have their predilections on full display with little to no shame. Of the many that can be referenced, most publicly is Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former head of the International Monetary Fund and former front runner for France’s presidency, who has made headlines over the years with charges relating to orgies, some of which involved non-consensual acts, and most notably, his alleged raping of a hotel maid in New York. Strauss-Kahn, later acquitted of charges, vehemently asserts that all of these acts were engaged under consensual parameters.
France During Pelicot
Shocking. Vile. Horrifying. Disgusting. These are terms that have been used by the media but barely capture the nature of a case that has seized the attention of nations around the world. Gisèle and Dominique Pelicot, were what one would assume, a happily married couple of fifty years with three adult children and grandchildren. Behind the scenes was a much more sinister reality. 71 year-old Dominique Pelicot is standing trial, charged with drugging his now ex-wife and enlisting upwards of 80 men to rape her while photographing and filming the acts, and saving it to a file on his computer titled “abuse.” He orchestrated this reign of terror for close to ten years via an unfettered, anonymous website notorious for convening illegal activities called Coco, under a chat forum titled “Without Her Knowledge.”
His crimes only came to light after police investigated further, having caught Dominique filming up women’s skirts in public. Police were unprepared for what they found: swaths of images and videos of Gisèle, unconscious from being slipped sedatives in her food and drink, being raped by numerous men. Gisèle, unaware of any of this, saw the manifestation of these attacks in the form of frequent health issues, such as memory loss, exhaustion, and gynecological problems.
There has since been international attention on France following the start of one of the most shocking rape trials of the twenty-first century. The trial unfolded over a span of three months, concluding with a five-judge panel delivering their verdict on December 20th. It will undoubtedly be written about in the legal and history books for years to come.
The Profile of Dominique Pelicot and His Fifty Co-Defendants
Of the 80 men taped raping and assaulting Gisèle, more than 50, ranging in age from 26 to 74, have been identified, charged and stood trial alongside Dominique. Breaking down the charges, 49 were faced with charges of rape, 1 with attempted rape, and 1 with sexual assault. Each faced the possibility of up to 20 years imprisonment if found guilty. It comes as no surprise that most of these men are not model citizens. Nearly half have criminal records with previous crimes running the gamut from domestic violence, sexual violence, drunk driving, and possession of narcotics. Many are husbands, boyfriends, and fathers, which one would think should deter them from such abhorrent behaviours.
Pelicot has pleaded guilty to the charges brought against him. As for the others, a scant few outright admitted to rape and have expressed remorse. Other defendants fiercely maintain their innocence, conceding that in the eyes of the law, rape was committed; however, they should not be found guilty because of externalities. The most popular defence is that they too are victims, having been manipulated as they were under the assumption that the consent of Dominique Pelicot was sufficient, or that the couple was engaging in a consensual sexual game in which Gisèle feigned being asleep.
Furthermore, nearly all of the accused divulged details of their pasts, discussing traumatic childhoods, poverty, and their own experiences with sexual abuse in a feeble attempt to at best exonerate themselves, or at the very least, mitigate responsibility. Others took an alternative route, referring to their religious underpinnings to demonstrate their respect for women and rejecting their characterization as a rapist. All assert that they were ignorant to the concept of consent.
These last-ditch efforts are trivial, irrelevant, and obscure more important matters. What should be discussed is how these atrocities occurred for nearly ten years in a town of 6,269 people, and yet was not widespread knowledge? More troubling is the possibility that it was known and yet no came forward. As for the men involved in these crimes, why didn’t they report it themselves, especially those who testified being aware of the sinister nature? Why did it take the fluke of diligent police officers to uncover these injustices? How long would this have gone on for if not for this? The list of questions is never-ending and yet it appears that none can be appropriately addressed.
Trial by Media
The widespread dissemination of the abominable acts masterminded by Dominique Pelicot and participated in by his co-defendants is intentional. Defying the common customs of rape going unreported or proceedings being carried out in private, Gisèle opted to have her first and last name publicized. This decision has been viewed as courageous by all, but in Gisèle’s eyes, a necessary action to cast a much-needed spotlight on the pervasive rape culture in France, with the aim of protecting future victims. Gisèle testified, “When you’re raped there is shame, and it’s not for us to have shame, it’s for them.” Forgoing her right to remain safeguarded, Gisèle instead chose to embrace public probe and scrutiny in the hopes of ensuring that history does not repeat itself. This has forced perpetrators and society to turn their accusatory pointed fingers inward, and atone for the beliefs and attitudes that have constructed an environment which normalizes these occurrences.
In another act of bravery, Gisèle and her lawyers heavily advocated for video documentation of her rapes and assaults to be shown in court. This came after a judges’ prior ruling that displaying the clips and videos in court was “shocking and indecent,” and that their presentation only be to lawyers involved in the case. Gisèle and her lawyers countered this, drawing upon the potential the videos have to protect other women and girls. It is the very shocking and indecent nature of the videos that is needed to confront the public: to see the violence, callousness, and disposability of women as projected in the treatment of Gisèle. One must ask how the replaying of the acts is too much for the public but somehow is permissible for Gisèle to have lived through and continue to live through?
The World Reacts
The very essence of this public trial has sparked something in the masses. In a show of support for Gisèle, several marches and demonstrations across France were organized, mobilizing hundreds of individuals, as well as daily onlookers who applauded Gisèle as she arrived and left the courtroom. This trial and the fortitude Gisèle has shown has struck a chord within the populace of France, galvanizing their frustration with the ineptitude of the laws meant to protect them, but most importantly their objection to the nonchalant attitude towards issues around sexual and gender-based violence. This has had a trickle-down effect, reaching all corners of the world. Gisèle, her story clearly resonating with many, has received an overwhelming amount of praise and show of solidarity from women and men.
The Significance of Gisèle Pelicot
While the facts of this case detail the heinous acts of Dominique and his co-defendants, they are ultimately peripheral actors. Beneath the miasma of this trial, is a courageous and determined woman. This story may have begun with a depraved husband and equally depraved individuals, it does not end with them; rather, it ends with Gisèle. What cannot be overlooked is the wreckage that rape leaves in its wake, compelling a 72 year old woman to take on this plight, albeit one that she had no choice in, to evoke much needed change involving rape culture rhetoric.
Gisèle is not your typical rape survivor. Diverging from the stereotype around who and what constitutes “normal” or “typical,” she is an older, once-married grandmother. She has even been referred to as “pure” by one of the defendants. There has always been the incendiary discourse that to protect against rape and sexual violence, women should constrain themselves, including dressing modestly and behaving in a decorous manner. Gisèle brings those ostracized voices to the forefront, demonstrating that this can affect anyone. The case also disturbingly reinforces the faulty assumptions made of assailants; they are not always those you encounter in a dark alleyway past midnight. Sometimes, the monsters live within your house and invite their counterparts in with welcome arms.
This trial brought to light the increasingly utilized method of “chemical submission” to facilitate acts of rape and sexual violence. Chemical submission is best understood as an assailant drugging their victim, rendering them incapacitated and unable to protect themselves. In this case, Dominique was able to continue his heinous acts for almost 10 years by slipping anti-anxiety medication into Gisèle’s food and drink, stripping his wife of a fighting chance against what was perpetrated against her. While being a survivor of rape and sexual abuse due to chemical submission is a role that was forced upon Gisèle, she is nonetheless determined to take up arms, giving herself and other survivors the autonomy that they were stripped of.
The Ubiquity of Rape Culture in France
The recounting of these appalling crimes has nonetheless still garnered responses rife with misogyny. Shortly after the trial began, Louis Bonnet, the mayor of Mazan, the town where Gisèle and Dominique once lived together and where many of the rapes were carried out, came under fire for his trivialization of the case. When speaking about the case Bonnet said, “There were no children involved, no women were killed, the family will have a hard time but they can rebuild. After all, nobody died.” This pontification speaks to the degree to which these antiqued ideas permeate French society that in the face of a case steeped with such barbarity, no harm no foul in Bonnet's eyes. That this case did not cause him to stop and give pause exemplifies everything wrong with rape culture.
Discouragingly, men are not the only ones with these outdated attitudes. In what one may argue is exercising their right to mount a vigorous defence, lawyers of the defendants are routinely accused of aggressively questioning Gisèle, and laying the blame at her feet. Going so far as to question her lack of emotion throughout, challenging her character, sexual preferences, and the periods of time in which these occurrences lasted. This raises the question of who is on trial here? Dominique and the other fifty men? The treatment of Gisèle points to otherwise.
A closer look at the laws around rape and sexual violence in France belies the mountainous battle to be faced. In spite of the inroads made by feminists and women’s advocacy groups globally, France remains stuck in a time-warp. In France, “...any act of sexual penetration, of whatever nature, committed on the person of another by violence, constraint, threat, or suprise is a rape.” When criminal codes, one of the highest extents of the law, do not take a firm stance by a lack of robust definition, it serves as the nucleus for these occurrences. This is hardly an exonerating factor for Dominique and the others. However, when the mechanisms looked upon to prevent and when necessary punish, are inept, the resulting impunity comes as no surprise.
Comparing and Contrasting the Canadian Connection
Sadly, this backwards ideology is prominent across Europe, a continent notorious for its laissez-faire attitudes towards sex. There has always been much acrimonious back and forth over reaching a consensus of a definition of rape. The widely cited defense of not realizing that Gisèle’s lack of consent rendered the acts rape, is at worst a blatant disregard for it.
As of October 2023, only 14 member states comprising the European Union enforce a consent-based notion of rape. Germany and Austria for example, currently employ a “no means no” understanding; this places the burden of proof upon victims to demonstrate their verbal refusal. Feminists and activists in France are pleading with the French government to instate a definition advocating for a “yes means yes” or the basic understanding that “sex without consent is rape.” This conception challenges the “no means no” by considering nuances including the presence of alcohol or drugs, initially going home with someone, the clothing one wears, or if victims have not explicitly said no.
Rape culture is coined “culture” for a reason as it goes beyond a single or even handful of events. It is widespread and knows no bounds, indifferent to ethnicity, age, class, sexuality, or religion. Often, when cases as vile as the Pelicot case emerge, the resulting shock instills a sense of unfathomability as to how it could occur, but at the same time is coupled with the notion of “not in my backyard.” This however is predicated on a falsehood. The truth is, and doesn’t take much probing to realize, that these cases are everywhere – no country is immune.
Sexual misconduct, assault, and rape are the tip of the iceberg; all are facets in the arena of violence against women that culminate in tragedy when left unchecked. Canada, a country that prides itself upon its progressive ideology around gender and equality, has its own shameful past and present that has long been plagued with an epidemic of sexual and gender based violence, going both unnoticed and underreported. Domestic violence calls are known amongst police as one of the most dangerous and unpredictable calls to receive, and scenes to arrive at. Yet, these issues rank low on political agendas, seldom given the attention they deserve.
Canadian law is distinct with its’ definition in that sexual assault is categorized and demands separate and specific punishments. Assault can best be understood as when, “without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly; he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; or while openly wearing or carrying a weapon or an imitation thereof, he accosts or impedes another person or begs.” Not to mention, the Canadian Criminal Code outlines instances in which consent can be considered moot including scenarios where another person gives consent, the victim is incapable of giving consent, an individual is in a position of power or authority, the victims expresses verbally or physically their not wanting to engage or continue to engage in sexual activity.
France Post-Pelicot
With both sides having presented their case, the Pelicot trial officially came to an end on December 19th. In an unprecedented turn of events, all 51 men were found guilty on differing charges. Dominique was given a 20 year sentence, the maximum term available having being found guilty of aggravated rape, attempted rape of another defendant’s wife, as well as his taking and possession of elicit and inappropriate photos of his daughter and daughters-in-law, who he claims to have never touched. As for the other defendants, 46 were declared guilty of rape, 2 of attempted rape, and the last 2 of sexual assault, all given sentences varying from 3 to 15 years. Worth noting is that those given minimal sentences are due to be released shortly having served time prior to the start of the trial and at least 15 men have appealed their convictions. Despite sitting through the testimony of Gisèle, and the utter wreckage that these acts have created in her life, those appealing are steadfast in their belief that they did not rape her, using Dominique or their ill-informed conception of rape as a scapegoat for their inexcusable behaviour.
Some may argue that given France’s current definition of consent and rape, these verdicts can be seen as a win having ensured that there is some degree of accountability. The truth of the matter is justice still has not been served in its entirety. When there continues to be deniability instead of acceptance of these verdicts, those appealing are merely sorry for being caught, not necessarily sorry for the crime committed and certainly do not bear any responsibility or have sympathy for the devastation inflicted on Gisèle. Furthermore, there are still 21 assailants who remain unidentified by authorities. 21 individuals who are aware of their role in such abominable acts, and somehow are free to go about their lives. This leaves the question of how many more individuals are out there?
It would be overly optimistic and arguably naive to say that the end of this trial renders rape culture in France a figment of the past. Will outcomes elicit meaningful change in the years to come, or will they be ad hoc measures, the product of mounting public pressure? Only time will tell.
Conclusion
It does not take a deep analysis to arrive at the conclusion that the archaic notions that inform rape culture and the pernicious ways in which it seeps into the cracks of society is everywhere and worse yet, is tolerated. Gisèle Pelicot serves as a reminder that sometimes the most unassuming and everyday woman holds the power to evoke much needed change. There is power in politics but most importantly there is power in the people. Throughout the Pelicot trial, numerous accounts of Dominique Pelicot’s reaction to testimony have surfaced, ranging from averting his eyes to covering his ears. Gisèle Pelicot on the other hand, does not have this luxury. Whether or not justice has been truly served, she must summon the inner fortitude to go forward, rebuilding everything she has been robbed of.
Let this serve as a cautionary tale: these issues can no longer be ignored, they must be confronted and addressed. Until they do, these stories will be told again and again.