Scrunchies that function as cup lids that become effective shields to prevent someone from introducing something into your drink that “you did not consent to”; TikTok trends in which hundreds of women show what additions to their clothing they decide to take the subway late at night as a European Burqa; pink lipstick-shaped tasers to make them as “girly as possible”; apps like IConsent that accredit the aforementioned consent in sexual relations, or what is the same, the thousand and one Machiavellian initiatives that the anti-violence market puts up for sale in order to avoid the different abuses of power that can occur in our relationship with other people. Rather than undermining the structural forces that maintain machismo and racism, these elements are framed in a context of “post-truth” and what is coined as “credible economics”, a framework in which the academics Sarah Banet-Weiser and Kathryn Claire Higgins move to detach and decentralize the debate around feminism in the work «Credibility. Why women are not believed», edited by Barlin Libros and translated by Daniel Esteban Sanzol.
If we talk about the evolution of feminism, we cannot ignore campaigns like the
In addition, if the authors highlight something, it is that the infallible charm of capitalism and its power to smear absolutely everything would sooner or later come to the aforementioned debate. Several theorists such as Bell Hooks have historically considered whether the coexistence of feminism and capitalism is possible, since while the former questions oppressive structures, the latter governs production and thrives on these structural inequalities. Above all, the fact that misogyny has the capacity to condition the mercantilist attitude that governs the content published on the networks in turn feeds the misogynistic reactions that are undertaken against Heard or any figure close to him.
In short, and closely related to the law of “only yes is yes”, far from “good intentions”, credibility is something much more fragile and fickle, since it is as exposed to mistrust as it is to silence. In situations like the current one, where consent is called into question, treating it as if it consisted of an irreversible transaction of a contractual nature not only prevents us from understanding how the concept works, but also distances us from the reasons why it is so important for the feminism and sexual justice. Sarah Banet-Weiser and Kathryn Claire Higgins confront the credibility crisis by asking who we believe and why in the context of “post-truth”, driven by trust concerns and misinformation, since credibility cannot be “verified”. . It is not -mainly- about the facts, but about who those facts refer to and whether or not those people “deserve” the kind of recognition and solidarity that credibility offers.
If we are grateful to both authors for anything, it is their ability to offer us answers, and in this case it would be summed up quite simply: first, denying the preponderance of credibility in political debates on sexual violence gets us nowhere. Instead, digging into how this idea works—and what we need to change to be believed more—maybe it will work; secondly, understanding that machismo backbones and hierarchizes the credible economy, and in a personal capacity, care must be taken when transferring cultural debates to the legal framework is perceived as an imposition. Let’s start working from there.
