Gisele Pelicot, the 72-year-old woman whose case culminated in the conviction of 51 men, including her husband, is rightly celebrated as a hero. The public Avignon trial, attracting global attention, was possible due to Pelicot’s willingness to be identified as the victim of her husband’s crimes: drugging her and facilitating sexual assaults by other men. For her bravery and conduct during the trial, she’s been lauded as a symbol of resilience and courage.
While Pelicot embodies these qualities, her case might not become the hoped-for catalyst for other rape survivors to come forward. Unlike most sexual assault cases, Pelicot’s was exceptionally clear-cut. The strength of her case might inadvertently raise the bar for proof, potentially deterring others from reporting.
The Pelicot trial was remarkable in many respects. She had been married to her assailant, Dominique Pelicot, for decades before he began secretly sedating her and soliciting men online using the term “sans le savoir” (“without her knowledge”). Numerous men, many married themselves, participated in the assaults, even when she was clearly unconscious. Her deteriorating health, including hair loss and memory problems, went undiagnosed for years.
Only after Dominique Pelicot was apprehended for upskirting and police discovered videos of the assaults on his computer did Gisele learn the truth about the decade-long abuse. At trial, many of the men claimed they believed they had her husband’s consent, a defense the court rejected.
The court found 50 defendants guilty of rape, two of attempted rape, and two of sexual assault. Dominique Pelicot, who confessed, received the maximum 20-year sentence; others received sentences up to 15 years. Large crowds attended, many displaying support for Pelicot and echoing her declaration that “shame must shift” from victims to perpetrators.
Data from the U.S. Department of Justice indicates that fewer than half of all sexual assaults are reported. While reporting has increased recently, the societal shame associated with sexual assault remains a significant barrier. The #MeToo movement has encouraged more survivors to come forward, yet a simultaneous backlash from men claiming unjust accusations creates a narrative that the system is biased against them. The result: continued doubt surrounding survivors’ testimonies and persistent hesitation among women to report.
Pelicot’s exceptional bravery should not overshadow the fact that her case was unique and exceptionally strong. Her age, career, and complete unawareness of the assaults—she wasn’t a young woman at a party, a sex worker, or anyone capable of consent—set it apart. The evidence was overwhelming. Most sexual assaults lack such clear, irrefutable evidence (Dominique Pelicot left a digital trail). For most women, coming forward might invite skepticism and victim-blaming.
Ideally, no woman should need to be literally unconscious to avoid accusations of complicity. Yet, the reality is that survivors face accusations of encouraging the assault, not resisting enough, sending mixed signals, or consenting then changing their minds. Pelicot’s case, however, was exceptional; her behavior played no role whatsoever.
After the trial, Gisele Pelicot expressed concern for her children, other affected families, and all sexual assault survivors. She acknowledged the struggles of unrecognized victims and expressed hope, stating her belief in a future of harmony, respect, and mutual understanding. This, too, demonstrates remarkable courage.