The case of Íñigo Errejón has been the subject of intense public debate, not only because of the nature of the accusations of gender-based violence brought against him, but also because of the dilemma it poses when these accusations affect a personality who called himself the standard bearer of a series of progressive values to which he failed to respond. This situation highlights a paradox: how can we address the issue of gender violence when the figure mentioned is the one who, in theory, defends the demands of feminism? There is no simple answer to this question, but it raises a series of reflections on the coherence between word and action, especially among those who have a role of political representation, because, as society increasingly critical of abuses of power, it is necessary because the coherence between public discourse and personal actions becomes more and more evident.
Yet accusations of sexual assault against public figures like Errejón are not only serious, but detailed accounts of these cases have shown the sordid and violent nature of the reported acts, revealing an abuse of power in its most serious form. These stories expose practices of control and emotional manipulation that go beyond the private sphere, using their privileges, showing the extent to which machismo and gender violence are naturalized in all spheres. Revealing these details demonstrates not only the reality of structural machismo, but also the fragility of the barriers that, in theory, should protect victims of violence. Society, which may previously have ignored or downplayed these behaviors, is now faced with an inescapable portrayal of the effects of abuse, requiring an urgent rethink of how we respond as a community to gender-based violence. role we play in tolerating or coping with it.
