Sentence with pedagogical value

The sentence that has sentenced the footballer Dani Alves to four and a half years in prison for raping a 23-year-old girl represents a valuable example of the progress made in the recognition of women's rights and the legal and social changes necessary for their achievement.

The Barcelona Court considers it proven that Alves sexually assaulted the victim and that he also did so using violence in the toilets of a booth at the Sutton nightclub, in that same city.

That a sentence incorporates the feminist framework of consent – ​​a word that appears 27 times in the text – demonstrates the extent to which something has changed in a country in which, like in so many others, the law did not offer women adequate protection.

The recognition that the aggression not only took place without the consent of the victim, but with the “use of violence” illustrates how advancing the law is necessary so that women can defend both their physical integrity and their freedom of action.

“For the existence of sexual assault, it is not necessary that physical injuries occur, nor that there be evidence of heroic opposition on the part of the victim to having sexual relations,” the ruling eloquently states.

The ruling has a clear pedagogical value because it places at the center of its reasoning the framework of “only yes means yes” included in the sexual freedom law, while illustrating the decisive evolution of justice in line with theories of consent.

But also because, this time, the judgment has been made on the aggressor and not on the attacked woman.

In addition to that, the woman's word and anonymity have been respected in a case in which the aggressor was, in addition to being older than her, a well-known millionaire soccer player.

These elements have been traditional factors of inequality that perpetuated hierarchies of power and abusive behavior of those who thought themselves above the law.

In general terms, the sentence represents an example of how little by little social and legal barriers to the attribution of responsibilities in the field of sexual abuse have been eliminated.

And how we can move forward towards achieving impartial gender justice within an egalitarian society in which the victim dares to report acts committed in a public place that also has a protocol to deal with them.

Some reactions – to which the victim's lawyer has understandably added – have shown their discontent with the fact that the court has imposed on Alves practically the minimum sentence provided for by the sexual freedom law.

There has also been an attempt to assert the prejudice that this is due to the fact that the footballer had bought part of his freedom by having a fortune sufficient to compensate the young woman.

That reparation, however, is a right established by law.

Blaming the victim for having accepted her would be returning to the old paradigm of the “good victim,” which dictated the behavior that could be expected from a raped woman to be believed.

However, at a time when there is an attempt to demonize feminism as responsible for the loss of privileges of some men or the origin of their life dissatisfaction, the widespread reception that this sentence has had seems rather to show a society that has decided combat stereotypes and rape myths as well as positions that promote punitive punishment.