On July 31, The Newspaper of Catalonia: “A 30-year-old Senegalese has died in a fight. Three individuals have attacked in the middle street in the middle of the day of light. Since the victim had a history of drug trafficking, it may be the reason for the aggression.”

In the news, the journalist reports in her first paragraph that the aggressors have “Spanish nationality”, according to Interior. In such cases, it would be useful to know why the victim has given more importance to the origin of the victim and to reflect on its effect.

1 August. La Vanguardia: “One of the aggressors of the murder of Salou has been arrested.” Third paragraph: “The victim had been living in Salou for ten years, frequenting locals around the well-known Carles Büigas Avenue, where a quiet and educated person has been described. However, according to other sources, it was a trapezoid of drugs”.

Now, imagine that the protagonist of this news, the victim, is the woman. It's clear that the treatment is inadequate, right? As for the Machistan murders, the tendencies constantly criticized by feminists are repeated: Instead of saying “they have killed him”, saying “he has died”, giving weight to the opinions of the neighbours (front) (“he was an honest/normal/quiet person”), blaming the victim (in this case with emphasis on drug trafficking), or defining the news as “done”.

In this case, despite the fact that both the black victim and the aggressors are white, it is not mentioned at all that this could be a crime of racial hatred.

Three days earlier, on July 28, we published an article in Pikara by feminist sociology professor Rosa Cobo. In Sanfermin, a number of men dress with machistan slogans or are adorned, wrote: “The response of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Navarra is not understood [not to see an offence]. If the users of sheets and t-shirts were other historically oppressed groups, Jews, blacks or immigrants, I would like to know what the answer would be.”

Many times I hear this statement from the feminists: “If there were 60 racist or homophobic killings every year, society and institutions would not accept it.” This logic is a great ignorance. Do you not know that immigration legislation and xenophobic policies have caused many more people to die on the European coasts? Do you really believe that racist and LGTB hate crimes are further criminalised and condemned in both Spain and France?

In the last decade, dozens of deontological codes have been published to improve information on male violence. Laws against violence against women have been developed both in the Spanish State and in many autonomous communities. The feminist movement in Euskal Herria has been able to make sexual violence visible on public holidays and to develop numerous protocols and campaigns against it. Racist and LGTBphobic aggressions remain hidden. During the Sanfermines there was a homophobic attack (probably many more) and it was only published by LGTB magazine Shanghai.

Moreover, the arguments “if they were immigrants”, “if they were homosexual”, are androcentric. The intersectional view is necessary so that the feminist discourse is not ethnocentric and heterosexist when it comes to denouncing and denouncing sexist aggressions and Machistan violence.

Using this kind of odious comparisons to strengthen feminist discourse is really clumsy and painful. A feminist discourse that is not anti-racist is really clumsy and painful.