Guillaume ended his life on Tuesday, February 9, 2021 in his student room in Nanterre. He was 20 years old. Born after the year 2000. His thing was to laugh, to go and flower the federated wall at Père Lachaise and to organize marches to counter the Manif pour Tous. It is also there that I met Guillaume, in a demonstration, a Pride de Nuit, I believe. Or was it because he was spoofing me all the time on social media telling me that I was “An Eric Zemmour not even known and vaguely on the left”.
Guillaume was a sort of gold leaf, as delicate as it was precious, as light as it was shiny. It was even in this inestimable fragility that lay one of the foundations of his power. I don’t think he knew that very well – but he didn’t care because he had struggles to fight. Guillaume was a tireless activist who always despaired of the parties, unions or associations he approached, blaming them for the lack of horizontality in their organization and often their lack of courage.
READ ALSO ON REGARDS.FR
>> How do you get men to stop raping?
Guillaume was an activist and a homosexual – not necessarily a homosexual activist, moreover. But it turns out that the construction of his political identity coincided with the discovery of his sexual identity in late adolescence, at the turn of the acquisition of legal majority. This double scaffolding which always begins in fragility immediately placed him in a position of extreme vulnerability in a world of domination. Admittedly, since he was 18, Guillaume was an adult and, as such, he deserved to be considered equal, even when one was twice his age. However, it is further evidence that his status as a young, racialized homosexual man from a working class background in the provinces placed him in a position of obvious prey. Especially since the violence of which Guillaume said to be the victim is rape.
As the waves of #MeToo, #MeTooInceste and #MeTooGay, intimacy, and especially sexuality, is not exempt from domination. Of classes, genders and races. And these dominations don’t end on the front porch to the bedroom door. We can go further: sexuality can even be the crucible. However, this is precisely what Guillaume claimed to have been the victim of. His emotional or even material dependence on his attackers at a time when he had just arrived in Paris and where he had difficulty finding accommodation, his situation of dominance in the face of people in a situation of relative power in his party and in the left, the novelty of his relationship with the body and sexuality: all this should have alerted the couple composed of Victor Laby and Maxime Cochard whom he accused of rape three weeks ago, via Twitter – and this , despite the difficulty that this awareness sometimes requires.
The response he received following his public testimony also continued to follow the same pattern borrowing from highly problematic dominations: the accused split a concise statement, categorically denying the facts, and announcing their intention. to file a defamation complaint. If indeed they were not aware of committing rape, was it necessary to immediately initiate legal proceedings which placed them once again in a situation of domination? What about a framed dialogue to try to understand how Guillaume came to such a conclusion? Without equivalent resources, Guillaume himself had not even thought of getting closer to a lawyer. Then arose the question of filing a complaint on his part. But that required going up against two institutions which we know have little appetite for investigating this type of business.
When a person talks about the sexual violence they have suffered, they are often terribly alone in the face of the onslaught that follows. Yes, you have to be brave to speak up, but speaking does not necessarily liberate. On the contrary, it can sink dangerously into a downward spiral.
To the police and judicial machines has been added the media machine. The Parisian in the lead, the innuendo from photographs of Guillaume and his alleged attackers began to multiply in articles and especially on social networks to distill the idea that the victim had lied. When a person talks about the sexual violence they have suffered, they are often terribly alone in the face of the onslaught that follows. Yes, you have to be brave to speak up, but speaking does not necessarily liberate. On the contrary, it can sink dangerously into a downward spiral.
And Guillaume was not ready to face it – in truth, no one is. This is precisely where the structures of our society should act. To accompany, to surround, to help. One of its structures, close to both parties, the French Communist Party demanded, immediately after the accusation, the withdrawal of Maxime Cochard and Victor Laby from all their responsibilities within the PCF Paris. Only, Guillaume found himself facing journalists who requested him and facing social networks which generated their flow of support but also accusations of members of his “communist” political family. This is where our whole society has failed. This is where, in the name of Guillaume, she must not fail tomorrow.
Guillaume, I don’t know where you are, certainly nowhere, but may the earth be light for you. I never believed that the legal battle you were about to wage could have led to anything. But, and I know you were sensitive to it, there is also the struggle. The political struggle. So that we finally collectively open our eyes to the unbearable violence of our unequal relationships. And that comrade (I hate that word but you called me that, so be it), we will fight for that to happen, even if it means tearing, even if it means tearing out the eyelids.
Pablo Pillaud-Vivien
–
