In “Digital Feminist Activism,” Kaitlynn Mendes and Jessica Ringrose write:
““As scholars, we must also be mindful of which voices are absent, and in this chapter we have attempted to draw attention to issues of power and privilege which shapes the ways certain testimonies are listened to, ignored, or (dis)believed. Further work is necessary to theorize the limits and constraints of forging feminint counter-publics in terms of what discourses and experiences fit, or are recognized and legitimated in relation to sexual violence, and what do not….
In “Digital Feminist Activism,” Kaitlynn Mendes and Jessica Ringrose write:
As scholars, we must also be mindful of which voices are absent, and in this chapter we have attempted to draw attention to issues of power and privilege which shapes the ways certain testimonies are listened to, ignored, or (dis)believed. Further work is necessary to theorize the limits and constraints of forging feminist counter-publics in terms of what discourses and experiences fit, or are recognized and legitimated in relation to sexual violence, and what do not. (48)
In your understanding of #MeToo, which “testimonies are listened to” and which are likelier to be “ignored, or (dis)believed”? Do you think it’s possible to forge a more inclusive “feminist counter-public . . . in relation to sexual violence”?