1. Introduction
A key feature of contemporary gender politics is the renewed
visibility of feminist activism in the current media landscape, on the
one hand, and of anti-feminist backlash on the other. This dynamic has
been described by Banet-Weiser (2018) as a tension between “popular
feminism” and “popular misogyny”. Popular feminism refers to a revival
of feminist ideas and activism that is especially “tied to media
visibility, circulation, and affective embrace” (Banet-Weiser et al.,
2020, p. 4), particularly on social media platforms. In contrast,
popular misogyny refers both to the “social, political, economic, and
cultural structure” of patriarchal societies (Banet-Weiser, 2018, p. 17)
and to the more recent “reaction to the culture-wide circulation and
embrace of feminism” (Banet-Weiser, 2018, p. 3). Popular misogyny can be
understood as part of a wider trend of the revitalization of populist
and conservative politics across Western countries, which has
invigorated sexist ideas and policies in mainstream society (Rottenberg,
2019). The revival of feminist protests since the 2010s can thus also be
understood as a backlash against this institutional legitimization of
conservative views on gender.
The #MeToo campaign represents an essential case study to understand
this context of revived feminist activism and backlash in media
discourses. Starting in 2017 after the publication of investigations
against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, “the long #MeToo
moment” has corresponded to an “explosion of discourse and activism
around sexual and gender-based violence over the past decade” (Boyle,
2024, p. 2). The participation of social media users in #MeToo has been
described as “nothing short of phenomenal” and represented a “moment of
reckoning” for sexual violence activism (Fileborn and Loney-Howes, 2019,
p. 3). In the years that followed, it has been observed how #MeToo
contributed to a “transformation in mainstream common sense” in public
discourse around sexual violence (Rottenberg, 2019, p. 47; Bernardini,
2021).
At the same time, recent years have also been characterized by
intense anti-feminist discourses and policies, such as the
popularization of men’s rights and anti-“political correctness”
discourses (Corredor, 2019; Nicholas and Agius 2017). This is especially
noticeable on social media platforms, in what has been identified as
“networked misogyny”, “a basic anti-female violent expression that
circulates to wide audiences on popular media platforms” (Banet-Weiser
and Miltner, 2015, p. 172).
Thus, the #MeToo shift did not occur in a linear fashion, nor did it
happen without a significant amount of backlash. Rather, #MeToo
represented “a moment of rupture in which definitions of sexual violence
are simultaneously opened up and pulled back toward more conservative
understandings” (Fileborn and Phillips, 2019, p. 100). Much of the
public discussion on #MeToo has focused on a central axis of tension:
whether the movement has gone “too far” or “not far enough” (Boyle,
2024; Bernardini, 2025). The struggle over the boundaries, meaning and
reach of #MeToo can therefore be read as part of a wider cultural
struggle in contemporary gender politics between popular feminism and
popular misogyny.
The present study aims to analyse public responses and backlash to
#MeToo by examining a specific case study in the European digital public
sphere: the Twitter discussion that followed an “anti-#MeToo” public
letter published in Le Monde in 2018. By analysing a sample of tweets in
the week that followed the publication of the letter, the present study
aims to explore how users interpret a high-profile instance of backlash
against #MeToo at the height of its visibility. This analysis brings to
light a number of themes that are useful to understand many tensions in
current debates on gender politics, including anti-feminist backlash,
witch-hunt and moral panic discourses, and women’s and men’s claims to
victimhood.
2. Case study: Le Monde letter
The case analysed is an open letter published in Le Monde on 9
January 2018, with the headline “«Nous défendons une liberté
d’importuner, indispensable à la liberté sexuelle»” (Chiche et al.,
2018). The letter was co-written by five French women and
signed by over 100 women, mostly creative professionals, including art
critic and author Catherine Millet, who in her memoir detailed her
experiences with group sex and anonymous encounters, challenging norms
around female sexuality (Thurman, 2022), and revered actress Catherine
Deneuve. As the most internationally prominent signatory, the letter
became most closely associated with Deneuve in media coverage, where she
was often portrayed as the primary creator and spokeswoman for the
initiative.
The main message of the letter is that #MeToo has gone too far and
“led to a climate of totalitarian society”. According to the authors,
while the Harvey Weinstein accusations triggered “a legitimate awakening
about the sexual violence that women are subjected to”, the campaign
quickly degenerated into an attack on men, women, and sexual freedom.
They contend that #MeToo is animated by a “hatred of men” and that it
unfairly targets them for harmless sexual acts. Additionally, it relies
on puritan morals that reduce women to the “status of eternal victim”
and “to defenseless preys of male chauvinist demons”. As the headline
sums up, they call for greater individual empowerment in sexual
relations, since “the freedom to say ‘no’ to a sexual proposition cannot
exist without the freedom to bother”. At the same time, this view of
sexual relations between women and men has been read as conservative,
“located in the heteronormative gender binary that connects the two
sex/gender identities through heterosexual desire, in which women’s role
in society is reduced to that of a passive object of seduction” (Hajek,
2018, p. 141). The letter can placed as a part of a wider cultural
discussion on the acceptability of high-profile men’s predatory
behaviour, which predates the 2017 #MeToo hashtag but that has recently
been recognized as “the long #MeToo moment” (Boyle, 2024). In France,
this is exemplified by public discussions of director Roman Polanski,
who in 1977 pleaded guilty of drugging and raping a 13-year-old girl.
His arrest in 2009 generated controversy in the following years in
France and in the U.S., with many political and film personalities
either condemning Polanski or defending him, especially on the basis of
his artistic merits (Marghitu, 2018).
The Le Monde letter represents one of the most clearly articulated
and publicised examples of backlash against #MeToo. It was widely
disseminated by news outlets. In the context of shifting cultural
discourses about sexual violence, the letter can be understood as a
fundamentally conservative action aimed at undoing the social
transformation brought about by #MeToo. By January 2018, it was clear
that #MeToo had generated some kind of cultural shift, and the authors
aim to push back against what they perceive to be a new cultural
climate. The letter can thus be framed as an instance of a typical
narrative of “reactionary feminist politics” that claims that bourgeois
feminists are the real victims, and which is often amplified in
high-profile media outlets (Phipps, 2021). Following criticisms of the
letter in the days after its publication, Deneuve issued an apology to
survivors of sexual assault who might have been offended, but otherwise
re-stated her support for the initiative (Deneuve, 2018).
The letter also drew highly polarised responses from social media
users. The present study thus aims to analyze the international
reactions to the Le Monde letter on the platform Twitter (now known as
X).
3. Methodology
This article examines a sample of posts in the Twitter conversation
following the publication of the letter in Le Monde in 9-15 January
2018. Twitter was selected as the research platform because it serves as
a widely recognized public forum. The predominantly public nature of
posts and interactions encourages users to engage with issues of
collective interest.Twitter has long been regarded as a leading social
networking site for conversations on social and political matters,
blending news, entertainment, political discourse, and personal
communication (Papacharissi and de Fatima Oliveira, 2012; Lameiras,
2019). Previous research has highlighted the growing polarization of
online discourses on gender and sexuality, underscoring the importance
of examining these discourses within the context of digital platforms
(Arce-García & Menéndez-Menéndez, 2023). Therefore, Twitter was
deemed the most appropriate platform for this study to explore the
political, social, and cultural dimensions of the #MeToo discourse.
Research often focuses on Twitter due to its predominantly public data
and text-based content (Giglietto et al., 2012; see also Bruns, 2018,
for limitations).
The analysis draws from a broader dataset provided by the ‘Minerva’
project, which was supported by the Foundation for European Progressive
Studies and the Economia Civile association (see Zacchia et al., 2019).
Researchers used a Python-based API to collect over 2 million public
tweets posted between October 2017 and April 2018 containing the #MeToo
hashtag. A subset of tweets from this dataset was selected for the
present study. An initial sample of tweets was extracted containing the
following key words: “Deneuve”, “French”, “Monde”. The sample was
limited to the week following the publication of the letter, from 9 to
15 January 2018. Additionally, all tweets written in French from that
time period were extracted, since it was assumed that the majority of
these posts would be focused on the Le Monde letter. Overall, the
initial sample was 13,226 tweets. To obtain a smaller sample that was
manageable for close reading, a random sample of 14% tweets was
extracted. The final sample analyzed in this paper thus consists of
1,434 tweets. Reflecting the international reach of the discussion, a
variety of languages is present in the dataset. The majority of tweets
(65%) are in English, while 18% are in French. Other significant
languages include Spanish (7.5%), German (4.6%), Dutch (2.6%) and
Italian (2.2%). The focus of this paper is thus on the international
social media debate; Pavard et al. (2020) provide an analysis of #MeToo
in the French national context.
Following the ethical guidelines of the Association of Internet
Researchers (Franzke et al., 2020), only public tweets are analyzed, and
usernames are anonymized. This consideration was particularly important
given the sensitive subject matter and the expectation that users might
share personal experiences of sexual violence (Mukherjee, 2017). Tweets
in languages other than English were translated by the author.
Tweets were analysed using thematic analysis, defined as “a method
for identifying, analysing, and reporting patterns (themes) within data”
(Braun and Clarke, 2006, p. 9). The goal of thematic analysis is to
highlight “the most salient constellations of meanings present in the
dataset” including “affective, cognitive and symbolic dimensions”
(Joffe, 2012, p. 209). This approach is especially useful to understand
the process of social construction of a certain issue by given
population: in this case, how Twitter users understand #MeToo and its
backlash. The Twitter sample was read repeatedly to identify initial
codes, which were annotated with the aid of Dedoose software (2018). The
analysis generated 27 codes, which were then organised into overarching
themes. To address the research aim of exploring users’ interpretations
and debates surrounding the Le Monde letter, three main themes are
identified and presented in the next sections: discussions on the
definition of sexual violence and of #MeToo, criticisms of #MeToo, and
understandings of #MeToo as a generational and national divide.
This research has notable limitations. Since the dataset includes
only tweets with the #MeToo hashtag, discussions of the letter without
the hashtag are excluded, a common issue in “hashtag studies” (Bruns,
2020). While the letter directly responded to #MeToo and likely prompted
many users to include the hashtag, some relevant tweets are inevitably
omitted. However, given the study’s focus on the letter’s connection to
#MeToo, analyzing hashtagged tweets is appropriate. Additionally, social
media anonymity often results in fragmented or unverifiable user
information, including traditional social research variables such as
gender or age. Consequently, the study emphasizes tweet content rather
than the identity of their authors.
4. Defining sexual
violence, defining #MeToo
One of the key points made in the letter is the importance of setting
clear boundaries regarding sexual violence. The letter begins with the
assertion: “Rape is a crime. But trying to pick up someone, however
persistently or clumsily, is not — nor is gallantry an attack of
machismo” (Chiche et al., 2018). By aiming to challenge the #MeToo
discourse, the authors reaffirm a binary understanding of sexual
violence, delineating a clear distinction between rape and what they
perceive as harmless flirting. This perspective proves especially
contentious in Twitter discussions. Some users express support for the
letter’s distinction, emphasizing the importance of separating rape from
other forms of sexual interaction:
Support for Catherine Deneuve because trying to pick someone up is
not assault. In this publication, rape is denounced as a crime. There is
a kind of feminism that can become ridiculous (see inclusive writing).
Our society is Americanising. Danger. #MeToo #BalanceTonPorc (10
January; translated from French)
Other users express confusion regarding the idea put forward in the
letter, which suggests that #MeToo is calling for a blurring of the
definition of sexual violence. They argue that it is the authors of the
letter who are responsible for blurring these boundaries, as they are
misrepresenting the core intent of #MeToo:
The authors of the Le Monde letter explain that we should not forbid
sexual advances... but when did the #BalanceTonPorc, #MeToo and/ or
#TimesUp try to forbid flirting or to abolish freedom? These women mix
everything up. #CaVous (10 January; translated from French)
Have men been forced out of jobs for touching a knee or for trying to
steal a kiss due to #metoo, #BalanceTonPorc ? Curious. And come on,
Deneuve, those flirtations are problematic in the workplace. #TimesUp
[…] (10 January)
Most notably, users propose their own definitions of sexual violence,
seeking clear criteria to determine what constitutes sexual violence and
problematic behaviour. Some point to power dynamics as the central
defining element of sexual violence, challenging the dynamics omitted in
the letter’s arguments. These users draw on the classic feminist
framework of rape as a matter of violence and domination rather than
sexuality (Brownmiller, 1975). In this way, they underscore the critical
role of power dynamics in shaping the concept of consent within sexual
behaviour:
Catherine Deneuve, Rape is not about sexuality, but about power and
domination. A woman should be able to rebuff a man without reprisal.
That’s not puritanical, it’s humanity. You’re simplifying a complex
subject. #MeToo[,] A Woman (10 January)
Flirting is a two-sided game. Harassment is not. Specially when you
have two people in very unequal positions of power. That is what #MeToo
is about. Not some amateur, clumsy, innocent high school drama.
#CatherineDeneuve (11 January)
In a similar vein, some users also challenge the letter’s claim that
#MeToo represents an attack on sexual freedom. They conceptualise sexual
freedom as rooted in equal gender relations and meaningful consent. In
their view, the #MeToo movement’s fight against sexual violence and
harassment also serves to foster a more sexually free and egalitarian
society:
Whoever fights to end sexual harassment is not fighting against, but
FOR sexual freedom. Where women constantly fear for their physical and
physical integrity, there can be no sexual freedom. #deneuve #metoo (15
January; translated from German)
The #metoo movement does not repress sexual expression,
#CatherineDeneuve . They allow women and men to have a place to speak
out. Sexual freedom exists as long as it is between two consenting
adults. When there is a power structure in the workplace there cannot be
true consent. (10 January)
Another strategy that users adopt to counter the arguments presented
in the letter is by invoking their personal experiences with sexual
harassment. They follow the #MeToo initiative of sharing their stories
to illustrate how, based on their subjective perceptions, certain
behaviours should be classified as harassment. In this way, they
challenge top-down definitions of violence and rely on their own
understanding to assert the legitimacy of their experiences:
Wow, this is just insane. I’m French and support the #meToo movement.
There’s a serious difference between clumsy flirting and harassment! I’m
shocked that women could actually say that. I’ve suffered from
unrequired
insistent flirting and trust me, I felt harassed. Shame on you! (10
January)
#CatherineDeneuve I grew up in Paris. As teens, my friends and I were
harassed and molested in public, constantly. No adults believed us. It
was not flirtation, it was not sexy. It was scary and humiliating. It
needs to end. #BalanceTonPorc (10 January)
In a similar way, some users also stress the importance of listening
to the experiences of other survivors to define sexual violence. They
oppose the content of the letter, arguing that it constructs a selective
interpretation of #MeToo while disregarding the narratives shared by
survivors; this omission is perceived as offensive and tone-deaf:
Shame on Le Monde for publishing this ridiculous letter by 100
reactionary idiots who don’t listen to victims. The #BalanceTonPorc
movement perfectly differentiates between pick up and assault. It is a
global movement to help assaulted women and to LISTEN TO THEM (10
January; translated from French)
Catherine Deneuve and 99 co-signatories advocate the ‘Freedom to
molest (or to be molested)’. A resounding slap in the face for the many
women who have been molested, abused and raped. No, Ms. Deneuve, you are
on the wrong track. #MeToo (10 January; translated from German)
One of the main criticisms leveled against the authors of the letter
is that they speak from a position of privilege, which renders them
unable to fully grasp the power dynamics at play in cases of sexual
violence:
Not all woman have the financial freedom Ms. Deneuve and “We’re All
That Boys!” women have to fight back. As a
matter of fact, VERY FEW DO. For a single mom, if its between feeding
children and demanding dignity, children win every time. (13
January)
One point in the letter that attracts particular criticism is the
suggestion that a woman might not “feel forever traumatized by a man who
rubs himself against her in the subway, even if that is regarded as an
offense,” and that she might “consider this act as the expression of a
great sexual deprivation, or even as a non-event” (Chiche et al., 2018).
This statement is interpreted by some users as exemplifying the authors’
oblivious privilege, as they describe an everyday situation that, users
argue, they are likely unfamiliar with due to their celebrity lifestyle.
As a result, their opinions on the subject are deemed insignificant and
ill-advised, as they lack the familiarity or authority to comment on the
experiences faced by “regular” women:
Madame Deneuve is reclaiming the right to be bothered... We are
talking about this bourgeois who is escorted by bodyguards and who has
definitely not set foot in the metro in 100 years!
#balancetonporc (10 January; translated from French)
[…] Clearly, the authors of the Le Monde letter have never taken the
night bus at 1 in the morning or struggled to get rid of a persistent
man in a long time... #Balancetonporc (10 January; translated from
French)
This point is particularly interesting because one of the most
frequent criticisms directed at the #MeToo movement is that it
prioritises the voices of famous, privileged women (Phipps, 2019). Here,
however, #MeToo is generally understood as advocating for the best
interests of ordinary women, contrasting with the perceived detachment
and cluelessness of the French authors. As a result, users criticise the
authors of the letter for perpetuating misogyny and undermining women’s
rights, while expressing their support for #MeToo:
No surprise coming from that privileged group of misogynist women. Of
course they published w/Le Monde. Take a hike, ladies. Not interested in
your guilt tripping and shushing. I’m standing with #MeToo and #TIMESUP
despite their flaws, women will get better mileage w/ them than w/out.
(9 January)
White French women of high social status are giving lectures on
seduction vs. harassment. This is what I see here. A letter which, in
the name of sexual freedom, legitimises cultural and racial supremacy
#MeToo #Deneuve (10 January; translated from Spanish)
Another element of the letter that is taken to symbolise the authors’
privilege is the mention of the protests that took place in October 2017
against a Roman Polanski retrospective at the Cinémathèque Française. In
the letter, these protests are cited as part of a “purging wave” against
male artists; additionally, Catherine Deneuve had previously expressed
her support for Polanski. From the perspective of some users, defending
Polanski signals the authors’ lack of understanding of sexual assault,
revealing the letter’s confused definition of the varying degrees of
sexual violence. They also reiterate the authors’ inability to
prioritise the rights of women over their celebrity privilege:
Catherine Deneuve supports male privilege to such an extreme degree
she defended Roman Polanski’s right to rape kids and get away with it.
So of course she’s going to disagree with #metoo (10 January)
Ironic. Defending ROMAN POLANSKI in the same open letter that reduces
the #MeToo movement down to “stolen kisses” and “sexually charged text
messages” is exactly why #MeToo exists. #CatherineDeneuve (11
January)
As a result, some users express support for the #MeToo movement,
which they believe has been misrepresented in the letter. They provide
their own definition of the scope of #MeToo, aiming to present
it as a reasonable and legitimate movement, in contrast to the view
expressed in the letter:
*reads NYT article by Catherine Deneuve* To all the women who signed
this petition, Do some research before you attach yourself to this
stupidity. #MeToo has nothing to do with flirting. It’s about sexual
harassment, abuse, and rape. (10 January)
The #metoo movement does not repress sexual expression,
#CatherineDeneuve . They allow women and men to have a place to speak
out. Sexual freedom exists as long as it is between two consenting
adults. When there is a power structure in the workplace there cannot be
true consent. (10 January)
5. Criticising #MeToo
In the letter, some of the most widespread criticisms of #MeToo are
articulated, such as the idea that a legitimate movement has turned into
a “witch-hunt” and that it has been weaponised by angry women acting
irrationally. As a result, the letter resonates with certain users who
share the French women’s concerns about the “new” ideas #MeToo has
brought forward:
Catherine Deneuve is being praised on foreign websites like the
DailyMail, with thousands of comments applauding this letter and the
#MeToo or #BalanceTonPorc frenzy and hateful feminism. #cdanslair (10
January; translated from French)
French women have taken a slightly different stance/approach on
#metoo and it’s worth sharing. Rape is a crime, but trying to seduce
someone, even persistently or cack-handedly, is not -- nor is being
gentlemanly a macho attack. We do need clearer lines. (11 January)
Some users feel that the Le Monde letter is bringing much-needed
nuance into the #MeToo debate. They believe the conversation has taken
on an extremist tone, and the letter is seen as counteracting this with
more moderate, “common-sense” opinions:
What if #BalanceTonPorc and the letter signed by Deneuve are not
fundamentally incompatible[?] Why should they be opposed? There are
certainly two realities, can we admit it? (I am posing the question like
this, since I am not a woman...) (10 January; translated from
French)
I see the point. If #metoo was a gauge needle on a dashboard, 0 could
be everyone ignoring the problem. That’s rectified. 100 would be viewing
a hello or a query as sexual harassment. That’s not made clear. Deneuve
and the French artists have recalibrated the needle midway. (10
January)
In an interesting contrast, some users praise the bravery of the
signatories for speaking out in the letter. In their view, #MeToo is
seen as representing the dominant paradigm of political correctness that
is prevalent in society, and the signatories of the letter
are viewed as lone voices who go against the tide by voicing
unpopular opinions:
Finally some voices that are speaking out and refusing to run with
the pack. Catherine Deneuve, Catherine Millet and the 99 signatories of
the Le Monde letter are rightfully denouncing the libel, the lynching,
the willful harm and puritanism of #balancetonporc (9 January;
translated from French)
There, they have started crying because Deneuve does not want to bend
to the hegemonic discourse of #metoo (11 January; translated from
Spanish)
Supporters of the letter argue that the text articulates some of the
most widespread criticisms of #MeToo as a movement. Many users believe
that #MeToo embodies a form of feminism that has gone too far and is
unjustly targeting all men. This is evident, for example, in the
association of #MeToo with the term “feminazi”:
So a woman with common sense that states the obvious like innocent
until proven guilty and flirting is not rape is being eviscerated by the
feminazis. Who saw that coming? #CatherineDeneuve #MeToo (11
January)
There are real victims of sexual harassments, but the #MeToo crowds
are hijacking the momentum to expand Feminazism. This is no more about
harassment. It’s about emasculating the male species. I agree with Ms.
Deneuve completely. (10 January)
Similarly, words like “hysteria” and “lynching” are used to describe
#MeToo and the women who speak out through the movement:
finally, someone has started to end the #MeToo hysteria nonsense...
thanks to #CatherineDeneuve for putting things in proper perspective
[attached: link to a news article titled “Catherine Deneuve Signs Open
Letter Denouncing ‘Me Too’ Movement as ‘Witch-Hunt’” on the Rolling
Stone webiste] (11 January)
French woman absolutely spot on.Many men have been wrongly victimized
and banged in prison by lying, dishonest, deranged women stirred up by d
inane,hysterical #MeToo campaign (11 January)
In a few instances, this discourse is appropriated by nationalist and
anti-Islamic commentators. The original letter makes a brief reference
to “religious extremists,” who are grouped with “enemies of sexual
freedom” and “reactionaries” (Chiche et al., 2018). While users do not
explicitly quote this passage, some view #MeToo as part of a broader
trend of foreign influences that are detrimental to French culture. The
“excessive” feminism of #MeToo and #balancetonporc is likened to Islam
as a religion that restricts women’s freedom and harms French
values:
The #balancetonporc extremists must realise that they are validating
the ideas of the worst Islamists by putting women under a burka to
protect them from men who are all libidinous pigs (9 January; translated
from French)
Voices such as Alain Delon’s, Catherine Deneuve’s, Letitia Casta’s
and others must continue to speak out to fight against the
disintegrating government of Macron and his clique who are killing our
beautiful France. (13 January; translated from French)
One of the points in the letter that most resonates with users is the
idea that #MeToo has turned into a war against all men; the letter
repeatedly states how men are now being unjustly targeted for harmless
behaviour:
In fact, #MeToo has led to a campaign, in the press and on social
media, of public accusations and indictments against individuals who,
without being given a chance to respond or defend themselves, are put in
the exact same category as sex offenders. This summary justice has
already had its victims: men who’ve been disciplined in the workplace,
forced to resign, and so on, when their only crime was to touch a
woman’s knee, try to steal a kiss, talk about “intimate” things during a
work meal, or send sexually-charged messages to women who did not return
their interest. (Chiche et al., 2018)
On this point, users feel that the #MeToo movement has given women a
sudden and excessive power which they are wielding to attack men. As a
result, men are often portrayed as the “real victims” and those who are
suffering the most from this recent empowerment of women. The concept of
“himpathy” (Manne, 2018) is useful to understand how these discourses
aim to prioritise the defence of men:
Well done Catherine Deneuve. We must tell men – who are treated very
badly at the moment – that we love them, whether they are awkward,
seducers or machos. Against #MeTooWhatNext #metoo movement (9 January;
translated from French)
Thank you Catherine Deneuve for giving a media audience to the male
cause! Because all men are far from being all pigs and because bitches
exist too #balancetatruie #balancetonporc (11 January;
translated from French)
Some users take this argument further by claiming that the women who
participate in #MeToo do not actually have any experience of
“legitimate” sexual assault – a point which does not appear in the
original letter. According to these users, these women are opportunists
who have used their sexuality to their own advantage, and thus have no
right to participate in #MeToo:
Debate: I support this letter because I’ve always been against the
hashtag #Balance-TonPorc because there has been more revenge by little
whores than real sexual harassment. So well done to Catherine, Brigitte
etc. (10 January; translated from French)
#CatherineDeneuve and her friends are so right about #MeToo A
witchhunt started by a bunch of hypocrites who could have kept their
pride and say NO( assault and rape are still a crime) but instead chose
to f*ck their way to fame and fortune. (9 January)
6. #MeToo as a
generational and national divide
The controversy generated by the letter and the heated public debate
that followed are often interpreted by referring to two broad categories
of overlapping explanations: as a generational conflict and as an issue
of French national culture.
Users frame the polarisation of the debate as a generational divide.
Some users are open-minded in trying to understand this contrast as a
difference in values between an older generation of feminists,
represented by the authors of the letter, and the younger #MeToo
activists. In this sense, users acknowledge that #MeToo has brought on a
new mentality that contrasts with the views of older generations:
I thought Catherine Deneuve’s criticisms of #MeToo were cultural, but
given this Atlantic piece, I’m more inclined to see it as a generational
schism. (15 January)
Interesting attempt to see into generational differences on the
French women rejecting #MeToo: “I wonder if those of us who were born
later, who are fighting other battles, often underestimate the primacy
of sexual liberation in the world view of previous generations. (11
January)
It is noticeable that Deneuve, the most prominent woman among the
signatories, was 74 at the time of publication; however, the five
authors of the letter were of varying ages, ranging from late 30s to
80s. The generational conflict is therefore at least in part a cultural
construction that stems from how users perceive the values espoused in
the letter and those of #MeToo activists. Indeed, some users map the
generational conflict onto the other types of conflict that were
previously described; most notably, some users see the letter as an
expression of the privilege of an older generation, who take on a
condescending tone while being oblivious to the real problems women
face:
Respect to Miss Deneuve, but she’s clearly living in a different, a
much privileged bubble of her own. She and those women have completely
missed the point of #MeToo She is, clearly a figure stuck in the beliefs
of the French New Wave. (11 January)
Women like Catherine Deneuve are the type of white women my
grandmother side-eyed in the movement because they always centered their
white privilege above gender inequity
which made them a threat to liberation. Talk about it. #TIMESUP
#MeToo (10 January)
A group of around 30 feminists, led by politician Caroline De Haas,
published a counter-letter where they compare the signatories of the Le
Monde letter to “the annoying colleague or the tiresome uncle who
doesn’t understand what’s happening” (Collins, 2018). This comment was
widely picked up by the media and is quoted often in the Twitter sample.
Some users even adopt ageist language against Deneuve and the other
signatories to undermine their views:
Deneuve is a senile old goat who no longer gets laid: she only wishes
men would still hit on her like in her glorious past. Being a whealthy
AF, white celebrity has her
disconnected from reality. She and her cronies are no accurate
representation of France. #MeToo #BalanceTonPorc (11 January)
Sad to see how the ageing actress #CatherineDeneuve , with her face
cracking up, is seeking publicity at any cost by equalising #rape and
#sexualharassment with #flirt. Loss of memory? #MeeToo #BalanceTonPorc
[attached: two photos of Deneuve side by side, one from her youth and
one from the present day] (10 January).
In contrast, those who support the letter do so precisely because
they feel that #MeToo has brought about a new mentality that they deem
excessive. They share the letter’s call for a return to a previous
generation of common-sense attitudes toward harassment and violence:
Thank you to second-wave feminists for crushing third-wave feminists.
#MeToo and #Balancetonporc do nothing for victims. Let’s not put on the
same level rubbing in the metro (certainly intolerable) and rape. Thank
you Catherine Deneuve and the others. (10 January; translated from
French)
Another line of interpretation for the polarisation of arguments has
to do with the fact that the authors of the letter are French; the
message of the letter is therefore often interpreted, both by users and
in the media, as stemming from specific French cultural characteristics.
Both those who support and those who oppose the letter argue that their
position somehow stems from a French cultural specificity. Opponents see
France as a country where misogyny is rampant, and the letter as an
expression of this misogyny:
[...] Catherine Deneuve is SO OLD! And misogyny in France is well
known. ALL women should support other women instead of putting them down
and keep objectifying themselves. #metoo #wakeup (10 January)
Condemnation of #metoo campaign by the 10 french actresses is a
betrayal of women of France who are constantly fighting the inherent
sexism known to be widespread in French society. Badly done ladies (10
January)
Conversely, supporters of the letter believe that #MeToo goes against
French cultural values and thus see the letter as defending French
society. France is associated with stereotypes about romance and
seduction, whilst #MeToo is seen as imposing foreign American
values:
Stop to the absurd feminism defended by women who are as feminine as
Dockers. France is the country of love,
seduction, flirting. Catherine Deneuve embodies this France, Catherine
Millet has been able to describe it #BalanceTonPorc #metoo
#BalanceTaTruie #TribuneDuMonde (10 January; translated from French)
Why is it obvious to French women that the #MeToo movement is about
getting women to push away the men in their lives and act like they’re
empowering themselves by destroying everything, but not American women?
(11 January).
7. Discussion
The present study has analysed public responses on Twitter following
the publication of an “anti-#MeToo” letter at a highly visible moment in
the #MeToo campaign. The analysis reveals the tensions and conflicts
that permeate public discourse on sexual violence and feminism. Some
thematic axes in the online discussion can be identified that offer
meaningful insights into the dynamic between popular feminism and
popular misogyny within #MeToo.
The letter represents a conservative effort against #MeToo, seeking
to reaffirm “the pre-existing normative boundaries of sexual violence”
(Fileborn and Phillips, 2019, p. 107). The backlash against #MeToo that
emerges from the Twitter samples often takes the form of anti-feminist
discourse, “invoking feminist overreach, hysteria, and irrationality”
(Fileborn and Phillips 2019, p. 102). In the sample, the #MeToo movement
is often compared to a witch-hunt or is more generally perceived as a
moral panic. Anti-feminist backlash therefore emerges as an important
feature of the public’s understanding of #MeToo, which is perceived as
excessive and exaggerating the seriousness of sexual harassment. This
discourse constitutes the core argument of the French letter and is
shown to be shared by many supporters of the initiative, demonstrating
the continuing resonance of moral panic and witch hunt themes in current
cultural discourses (Phillips and Chagnon, 2021).
Public perceptions of victims and victimhood are also key to
understanding the findings in this #MeToo case study. Discourses on
victimhood are central to the Le Monde letter, which argued that #MeToo
aims to “enslave [women] to a status of eternal victim and reduce them
to defenseless preys of male chauvinist demons” (Chiche et al. 2018).
The authors argue that, by expanding the definition of sexual violence,
#MeToo is also extending claims of victimisation to a wider range of
women. This becomes a contentious point among supporters and detractors
of the letter in the Twitter sample. Public discussions of sexual
violence often entail the use of neoliberal discourse that prizes
individual responsibility and criticises victimhood (Worthington, 2020).
This reflects a wider concern with a “culture of victimhood” that began
in the early 1990s, where claims of victimisation by marginalised
groups, such as women, ethnic minorities or disabled people, constitute
an expression of weakness, dependency and lack of personal
responsibility (Cole, 2006). Such discourses are also present in the
Twitter sample, refuting women’s claims to legitimate victimhood and
instead recasting them as attention seeking and attempting to discredit
men. Thus, victimhood discourses can be interpreted as a renewed
backlash against the current visibility of feminism and anti-sexual
violence activism.
Such discourses also reflect the increasing mainstreaming of
alt-right ideas and the re-positioning of feminism and progressive
politics as intolerant and oppressive (Phipps, 2019). For example, the
infiltration of alt-right language can be observed in the sample of
tweets, with a vocal minority of users employing derogative terms such
as “feminazi” in their attacks against #MeToo. The nature of the current
backlash can thus be summarized as a “caricatured version of anti-rape
discourse that is portrayed as panicked and vengeful, which is partly a
function of scholarship on victimhood and partly a function of
right-wing polemic growing out of a nihilistic online milieu” (Philipps
and Chagnon, 2021, p. 12).
Despite denying claims of legitimate victimhood to women, it is
particularly interesting to note how both the letter and some users in
the Twitter sample retort by constructing a new category of victims: men
as the “real victims” of #MeToo. The concept of “himpathy” has been used
to describe how an accused (powerful) man can elicit a particular kind
of sympathy from the public that ends up “effectively making him into
the victim of his own crimes” (Manne, 2018, p. 210). The construction of
men as victims can be placed in a wider context of stories about white
male victimhood, which have been central to recent events such as
Brexit, Black Lives Matter, and the election of Trump (Chouliaraki and
Banet-Weiser, 2021; Phipps, 2021). In this vein, some users in the
Twitter sample contend that it is all men who are being victimised by
the public call-out on the problematic or violent behaviours of some
accused men. As Boyle (2024) notes, in these discourses the #MeToo
movement is “recast in the role of the perpetrator” (p. 80), while all
men, as well as anyone who criticises #MeToo, become victims of an
all-powerful movement. The amorphousness of these roles can be observed
in the Twitter sample: users who agree with the letter’s argument that
men are under attack do so based on an abstract claim – no real-life
examples or names are given. On the other hand, some users are critical
of the letter’s intentions in reference to the naming of known abusers,
such as Roman Polanski, since they feel that the perpetrators of actual
crimes are hard to defend. More generally, critics of #MeToo choose to
portray it as an abstract but dangerous entity, removing the experiences
of individual survivors from the narrative while maintaining that #MeToo
represents an attack on men as well as on common-sense (Boyle, 2024).
This also parallels what Phipps calls the “hand-on-knee trope” that is
often used to discredit stories of sexual violence by positioning women
as “over-sensitive” and unable to distinguish between harmless actions
and “real” sexual violence (Phipps, 2019, 14). In this sense, users in
the sample often sympathise with the letter’s claim that men have
suffered professional consequences for “touch[ing] a woman’s knee” or
“try[ing] to steal a kiss” (Chiche et al., 2018). It is unclear who the
authors are referring to, as they fail to name the men who have incurred
such punishments, while they place more emphasis on the “totalitarian”
nature of #MeToo. The claims of the dire consequences for the lives and
careers of the accused men, then, appear partly unfounded; this seems to
confirm the idea that it is the public discussion of these stories that
is most troubling to #MeToo detractors.
8. Conclusion
The present study has identified some key themes in the Twitter
discussion on the “anti-#MeToo” letter published in Le Monde in January
2018. The findings illuminate the intertwining discourses of popular
feminism and popular misogyny in the current debate on gender politics.
Expressions of popular feminism such as #MeToo are actively obtaining
visibility in the media and in the public arena; at the same time, by
aiming to challenge patriarchal institutions, they also provoke
anti-feminist backlash. This study adds to the existing body of
knowledge on the circulation of and reactions to #MeToo and related
hashtags in European contexts (e.g., Arriaza Ibarra and Berumen, 2019;
Corsi et al., 2019; Knüpfer et al., 2022) and beyond (e.g., Belotti et
al., 2023; Boyle and Rathnayake, 2020). It is recommended that future
studies should examine the transformation of both feminist and
anti-feminist discourses in subsequent iterations of the “long #MeToo
moment”.
References
Arce-García, Sergio, and Menéndez-Menéndez, María-Isabel (2023). Inflaming public debate: a methodology to determine origin and characteristics of hate speech about sexual and gender diversity on Twitter. Profesional de la información 32(1), pp. 1-18. https:/doi.org/10.3145/epi.2023.ene.06.
Banet-Weiser, Sarah (2018). Empowered: Popular Feminism and Popular Misogyny. Duke University Press.
Banet-Weiser, Sarah and Miltner, Kate M. (2016). #MasculinitySoFragile: Culture, structure, and networked misogyny. Feminist Media Studies, 16(1), pp.171–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2016.1120490.
Banet-Weiser, Sarah, Gill, Rosalind and Rottenberg, Catherine (2020). Postfeminism, popular feminism and neoliberal feminism? Sarah Banet-Weiser, Rosalind Gill and Catherine Rottenberg in conversation. Feminist Theory, 21(1), pp.3–24. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1464700119842555.
Belotti, Francesca, Bernardini, Vittoria and Comunello, Francesca (2023). Hashtag feminism straddling the Americas: A comparison between #NiUnaMenos and #MeToo. In: Boyle, Karen and Berridge, Susan (eds.) The Routledge Companion to Gender, Media and Violence, pp. 531-542. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003200871-58.
Bernardini, Vittoria (2021). Shifting discourses on sexual violence: an analysis of# MeToo on Twitter. PhD Dissertation. Sapienza University of Rome.
Bernardini, Vittoria (2025). Sexual Assault or ‘Just a Bad Date’? #MeToo and Conceptualisations of Sexual Violence in the Twitter Discussion of the Allegations against Aziz Ansari. International Review of Sociology 35(1), pp. 157-75. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2025.2450439.
Boyle, Karen (2024). #MeToo and Feminism: Weinstein and Beyond. Palgrave Macmillan.
Boyle, Karen and Rathnayake, Chamil. (2020). #HimToo and the networking of misogyny in the age of #MeToo. Feminist Media Studies, 20(8), pp. 1259-1277. https:/doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2019.1661868.
Braun, Virginia and Clarke, Victoria (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), pp.77–101. https:/doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Brownmiller, Susan (1975). Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape. Fawcett Books.
Bruns, Axel (2018). Big social data approaches in internet studies: The case of Twitter. In: Hunsinger, Jeremy, Klastrup, Lisbeth and Allen, Matthew M. (eds.) Second International Handbook of Internet Research, pp.1–17. Springer.
Chiche, Sarah, Millet, Catherine, Robbe-Grillet, Catherine, Sastre, Peggy and Shalmani, Abnousse (2018). Nous défendons une liberté d’importuner, indispensable à la liberté sexuelle. Le Monde. [Translated by Wordcrunch, January 9]. Available at: https://worldcrunch.com/opinion-analysis/full-translation-of-%20french-anti-metoo-manifesto-signed-by-catherine-deneuve.
Chouliaraki, Lilie and Banet-Weiser, Sarah (2021). Introduction to special issue: The logic of victimhood. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 24(1), pp.3–9. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1367549420985846.
Cole, Alyson M. (2006). The Cult of True Victimhood: From the War on Welfare to the War on Terror. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Collins, Lauren (2018, January 10). Why did Catherine Deneuve and other prominent French women denounce#MeToo? The New Yorker. Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-did-catherine-deneuve-and-other-prominent-frenchwomen-denounce-metoo.
Corredor, Eva S. (2019). Unpacking “gender ideology” and the global right’s anti-gender countermovement. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 44(3), pp.613–638. https:/doi.org/10.1086/701171.
Corsi, Marcella, Thissen, Laeticia and Zacchia, Giulia (eds.) The #MeToo Social Media Effect and its Potentials for Social Change in Europe. Foundation for European Progressive Studies.
Dedoose Version 8.0.35, web application for managing, analyzing, and presenting qualitative and mixed method research data (2018). Los Angeles, CA: SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC. Available at: www.dedoose.com.
Deneuve, Catherine (2018, January 15). Catherine Deneuve: «Rien dans le texte ne prétend que le harcèlement a du bon, sans quoi je ne l’aurais pas signé». Libération. Available at: https://www.liberation.fr/debats/2018/01/14/catherine-deneuve-rien-dans-le-texte-ne-pretend-que-le-harcelement-a-du-bon-sans-quoi-je-ne-l-aurais_1622399/.
Fileborn, Bianca and Loney-Howes, Rachel (eds.) (2019). #MeToo and the Politics of Social Change. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15213-0.
Fileborn, Bianca and Phillips, Nicole (2019). From ‘Me Too’ to ‘Too Far’? Contesting the boundaries of sexual violence in contemporary activism. In: Fileborn, Bianca and Loney-Howes, Rachel (eds.) #MeToo and the Politics of Social Change, pp.99–115. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15213-0_7.
Franzke, Annette S., Bechmann, Anja, Zimmer, Michael, Ess, Charles and the Association of Internet Researchers (2020). Internet Research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0. Available at: https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf.
Giglietto, Fabio, Rossi, Luca and Bennato, Davide (2012). The open laboratory: Limits and possibilities of using Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube as a research data source. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 30(3–4), pp.145–159.
Hajek, Andrea (2018). Je ne suis pas Catherine Deneuve. Reflections on contemporary debates about sexual self-determination in Italy. Modern Italy, 23(2), pp.139–143. https:/doi.org/10.1017/mit.2018.4.
Joffe, Helene (2012). Thematic analysis. In: Harper, David and Thompson, Andrew (eds.) Qualitative Research Methods in Mental Health and Psychotherapy, pp.209–223. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119973249.ch15.
Knüpfer, Curd, Matthias Hoffmann, and Vadim Voskresenskii (2022). Hijacking MeToo: Transnational dynamics and networked frame contestation on the far right in the case of the ‘120 Decibels’ campaign. Information, Communication & Society 25(7), pp. 1010-1028. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1822904.
Lameiras, Adá (2019). Invisibilización de la mujer deportista en el Twitter de los medios deportivos. Revista Comunicación y Género, 2(1), pp.33–46. https:/doi.org/10.5209/CGEN.64460.
Manne, Kate (2018). Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Oxford University Press.
Marghitu, Stefania (2018). “It’s just art”: Auteur apologism in the post-Weinstein era. Feminist Media Studies, 18(3), pp.491–494. https:/doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1446457.
Mukherjee, Ishani (2017). Case study of ethical and privacy concerns in a digital ethnography of South Asian blogs against intimate partner violence. In: Zimmer, Michael and Kinder-Kurlanda, Katharina (eds.) Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age, pp.203–212. Peter Lang.
Nicholas, Lucy and Agius, Christine (2017). The Persistence of Global Masculinism: Discourse, Gender and Neo-Colonial Re-Articulations of Violence. Springer. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60059-0.
Papacharissi, Zizi and Oliveira, Maria de Fátima (2012). Affective news and networked publics: The rhythms of news storytelling on #Egypt. Journal of Communication, 62(2), pp.266–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01630.x.
Pavard, Bibia, Rochefort, Florence and Zancarini-Fournel, Michelle (2020). #MeToo in France, a feminist revolution? In: Chandra, Giti and Erlingsdóttir, Irma (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of the Politics of the #MeToo Movement, pp.269–283. Routledge. https:/doi.org/10.4324/9780367809263-23.
Phillips, Nickie D. and Chagnon, Nicholas (2021). Where’s the panic, where’s the fire? Why claims of moral panic and witch hunts miss the mark when it comes to campus rape and MeToo. Feminist Media Studies, 21(3), pp.409–426. https:/doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2020.1765836.
Phipps, Alison (2019). “Every woman knows a Weinstein”: Political whiteness and white woundedness in #MeToo and public feminisms around sexual violence. Feminist Formations, 31(2), pp.1–25. https://doi.org/10.1353/ff.2019.0014.
Phipps, Alison (2021). White tears, white rage: Victimhood and (as) violence in mainstream feminism. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 24(1), pp.81–93. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1367549420985852.
Rottenberg, Catherine (2019). #MeToo and the prospects of political change. Soundings, 71(71), pp.40–49.
Thurman, Judith (2002, June 2). Doing It In the Road. The New Yorker. Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2002/06/10/doing-it-in-the-road.
Worthington, Nancy (2020). Celebrity-bashing or #MeToo contribution? New York Times Online Readers Debate the Boundaries of Hashtag Feminism. The Communication Review, 23(1), pp.1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714421.2019.1704110.
Zacchia, Giulia, Corsi, Marcella, and Botti, Fabrizio (2019). The complexity of #MeToo: The evolution of a Twitter campaign in Europe. In: Corsi, Marcella, Thissen, Laeticia and Zacchia, Giulia (eds.) The #MeToo Social Media Effect and its Potentials for Social Change in Europe, pp.12–37. Foundation for European Progressive Studies.
