I woke up, like every day, listening to the radio news. In Melilla, a man has killed his 22-year-old ex-girlfriend and committed suicide. The 32-year-old woman who was hospitalized in Zaragoza after receiving the knife from her former husband has died. In the Sanfermines of Pamplona/Iruña another woman has been reported to have been raped, with a total of twelve complaints of sexual abuse or assaults at parties. The Government of Navarra repeated the usual sentence: “These are the cruellest consequences of inequalities between men and women.”

I grew up pessimistic. Feminists and, in particular, feminist journalists, have fought to make violence visible in the media. Not only the extreme violence within the couple, but also the violence we live in in different contexts, including summer holidays. It is clear that visibility has been achieved, but the sound of many media brings fear and pain to us: another murder, another rape... Journalists call violence a scourge and often report with astonishment: “How to stop this incomprehensible massacre?” they say. The rhetorical question is that in the majority of the media, the most consumed, the background critical reports are not common. Now many criticize the “wild environment” of the sanfermines. Meanwhile, in the festivities of any town there are multiple assaults and sexual harassment, and in Vitoria-Gasteiz we have seen that on many occasions the victims are met with institutional and media violence.

Here are two excerpts from an article written by anthropologist Mari Luz Esteban in Berria: “The public accumulation of adhesions against violence has a major influence on raising awareness. But does ‘media saturation’ not produce any negative effect or collateral damage? (...) That the idea that is manifested is that women, in short, we are not able to deal with these everyday situations with ourselves, and that we are obliged to seek the support of the State, the media or the feminist movement. That is, to feed the custodialization of women, even if they fill the leaves and leaves at the expense of empowerment”.

In other words, media saturation can facilitate or block collective action. Depending on the melody, according to the analyses, it can increase disappointment and frustration. According to the Global Media Monitoring study, in the Spanish State media, women are only the protagonists of 28% of the news, but they account for 51% of the news of crime and violence. Therefore, if the media does not radically correct androcentrism, the message is: “That women are nothing more than victims, that is our main role in society.”

I have also remembered the danger of guarding by knowing that in Sanfermin’s sucking many policemen have been put in place. When the alternative media looked at the photos of the txupinazo (men touching women's bodies and pulling clothes), we wanted a change of consciousness and attitude, not a repressive response. Increasing social control over sexual assaults?

A thousand concerns. I have pessimism.

Finally, I have read the column of Angel Erro (also in Berria). He says that the previous institutions wanted to keep silent the violence of the sanfermines to defend the good reputation of the festivities. This year, however, the news reports have had to make a live connection with the mobilisations against the Sexist aggressions. The party has become a solidary and vindictive act.

Yes, it is true that not accepting the leap in Pamplona’s policies and social conscience generates more disappointment and is unfair. The road is long, but we are taking firm steps.

Well, I feel more optimistic.