The shock effect of Rape trial, The 1979 film made by six RAI programmers, filmmakers and directors (Loredana Rotondo, Rony Daopulo, Paola De Martis, Annabella Miscuglio, Maria Grazia Belmonti, Anna Carini) was perhaps only comparable to the earthquake produced by the Franca Viola case, Sicilian girl who in 1966 refused a reparative marriage with her rapist after the fujitina she had been forced to undergo.. Male violence dramatically in the spotlight.
From Rape trial in which, as the advocate said Tina Lagostena Bassi girl's lawyer "the violence of justice was equal to that of the rapists"Only a few excerpts remain (see here). On Corriere della Sera of yesterday Gianantonio Stella compares the words of the mother of one of the defendants in that trial and the words of Beppe Grillo in defence of his son accused of sexual assault. Apart from the dialectal cadences, those words are almost superimposable:
"My son has done nothing wrong". said the woman. "He didn't kill this girl. My son went off to have fun. Of course she liked to have fun too... She wanted to have fun, otherwise she wouldn't have gone with my son, who had a wife and a son and she knew it.".
Stella notes that 43 years later, the arguments are the same: the victim who becomes the defendant, guilty of lying (she enjoyed herself, there was consent) and of wanting to ruining the lives of good boys or fathers of families. And that apparently history has taught us nothing.
In fact, between the desperate defence of that mother and Grillo's shouting, there are important differences. even if the words are the same. The mother does what she is commanded to do in defence of her son's honour and the family. His love is certainly heartbreaking, but here there is a self-sexist movementforgetting that one's own body is the same body as that of the raped girl, keeping oneself deaf to any resonance between herself and her -her symbolic daughter-, erase together with her in deference and in support of that ungovernable male sexuality, rbecome an effective tool of the domain as she was taught to do, sanction the girl who is shirking that task. If you are not a woman it is difficult to understand.
Grillo, on the other hand, moves in a linear fashion in the male genealogy, there is no need for any twisting, By defending his son he defends himself and the 'natural' sexuality of men. The postures are completely different.
Again: that mother desperately clings to the reporter, perhaps the only chance he will have in his life to make his voice heard and to say things that -who knows, who can ever know-. will poison her blood. She will probably end up a victim of that rape herself. Grillo's voice, on the other hand, resonates everywhere and always, it is bombastic and addresses an endless and consolidated political and media audience. to give their own unilateral version of a private fact, pointing out to public scorn a girl for whom, had she been his daughter, he would have demanded justice in an equally bombastic manner.
These are important differences, it seems to me.