More recently, the Epstein files have raised doubts among many about gender equity and the mechanisms by which elites as a class build exclusive networks of influence, evade accountability, and obtain institutional support and legal protections. Jeffrey Epstein came from a non-elite background in the United States and sought to establish his presence in the elite circle. Very soon he entered the elite ranks and made contacts with well-known academics, philanthropists, prominent political leaders and high-profile businessmen. His parties and gatherings revealed the gory details of underage teenagers and children being abused by the prominent leaders for entertainment. The collection of documents includes victim testimonies, media and journalistic investigations, and email exchanges from high-profile individuals published online, detailing financial fraud and other crimes, as well as details of the exploitation and trafficking of children and women. This brings one back to the MeToo movement in 2017 and the flood of personal online narratives from women and minority genders around the world articulating their experiences of exploitation in various media, entertainment, academic, corporate sectors, public institutions and intimate domestic spaces.
Me too became a whispering network for women when the formal legal institutions and police system failed them. Even the internal mechanisms like ICC (Internal Committee Complaints) in various workplaces in India are more focused on preserving the reputation of the organization than providing justice to the complainants. The lack of evidence, along with the negative consequences for accusing people in positions of power, leads to the collective silence of women and gender minorities. Even informally, the burden of proof lies with the complainant, otherwise he/she will be accused of spreading false information in many workplaces. Therefore, online anonymity encouraged many women to disclose their experiences of abuse online. The MeToo movement received backlash for its extralegal resort to confessions and shaming tactics against individuals and was described by its critics as an online lynching.
In India, the #MeToo movement led to blatant hierarchy and oppression in various organizations. The list, compiled by then law student Raya Sarkar, revealed the names of academics who were held accountable for their many forms of abusive behavior.
However, in India, the #MeToo movement led to blatant hierarchy and oppression in various organizations. The list, compiled by then law student Raya Sarkar, revealed the names of academics who were held accountable for their many forms of abusive behavior. In response, some well-known feminist scholars wrote an open letter convincing people to continue to believe in due process. This led online users to denounce the practices of prominent feminist scholars in well-known institutions and the extent of their radical positions when their male colleagues were involved. These debates were made possible by online visibility and the diversity of opinions, which in turn exposed the hierarchy even within feminist circles.
The reality behind cancel culture
The backlash against MeToo has argued that men are being targeted by cancel culture, leading to the loss of their jobs, the disruption of their family life and even psychological distress. It is evident that after MeToo, there was also an increase in men’s rights activists and podcast speakers who started demeaning women and accusing them of targeting men. Men’s vulnerability is used to fuel misogynistic tirades against women and minority genders, rather than challenging hegemonic masculinity and oppressive structures in society. Although people operating in the manosphere ecosystem advocate cancel culture and blame women for the targeting and suffering of men, it is also true that in the early years of MeToo, many men remained silent and went underground without legal consequences. They were later reinstated by the same or other organizations. Louis CK, a popular stand-up comedian, said he was unaware of his behavior and was accused of sexual misconduct in 2017.
FII
This shows how everyday power relations and hierarchies can normalize the harassment of women and gender minorities. Within a few months, he got the opportunity to perform at an event. When people in positions of power participate in the exploitation of women and children, psychological distress never occurs. However, naming and shaming are often criticized as retributive justice, which runs counter to one of the feminist principles of restorative justice. The MeToo movement has exposed the normalization of exploitative practices by those in positions of power.
Finding an opening of hope within the confines of #MeToo online activism
The #MeToo movement came and failed like many ad hoc online protests that led to unequal visibility and exclusion due to the digital accessibility and social location of many women and gender minorities. The #MeToo of countries in the Global North gained greater visibility for the white women who remain employed in formal sectors and industries, in contrast to the invisibility of black women and migrants in the United States. In the Global South, exclusion is exacerbated by exposing the class, caste, region and privileged geopolitical locations of survivors. Taking these limitations into account, network activism online still provides a framework for fighting gender injustice.
The hashtags #NiunaMenos, highlighting femicides against women in Latin America that began in 2015; and the Women’s Life and Freedom Movement in Iran in 2022, which gave digital visibility to many hashtags such as #StopKillingUs and #WhyIStayed, are all initiatives to talk about gender issues and child safety on a global scale. The hashtags and associated discourse generated global awareness and linked gender issues not only within the boundaries of local regions and nation-states, but also revealed the shared experience of gendered precarity and oppression. This often led to a depersonalization of oppression through narrative storytelling to expand the personal to include political, structural inequality, and cultural bias. In the context of India, while network activism has witnessed the bias of urban middle-class positioning of women accessing the digital spaces, there are many cases where activists and users have denounced various forms of exclusion and bias online by revealing selective outrage over certain incidents while invisibilizing injustices experienced by women from the oppressed community in rural areas, for example, the Khairlanjir massacre (2006), the Unna case (2017). Hathras rape and murder incident (2020) and many other incidents of exploitation of marginalized women. Therefore, networked activism and visibility further expands gender equity by challenging the bias and privilege of visibility and media coverage of specific incidents of injustice.
Mediated visibility and justice in the Unnao rape case
Of late, the Unnao rape case has a number of hashtags, for example, #UnnaoRapeCase, #KuldeepSinghSengar and #Unnao, where justice evaded the victim and her family when the Delhi High Court granted bail to the perpetrator. The 16-year-old sexual assault survivor began protesting at Jantar Mantar along with her mother and activist Yogita Bhayana after the Delhi High Court stayed Kuldeep Sengar’s jail sentence. The perpetrator with political influence and close ties to the ruling party, the survivor and her mother relied on justice from the Supreme Court. At the same time, videos and reels are being shared in which users highlight the plight of the survivor and call on people to join the protest in Delhi. This was picked up by mainstream media channels. On December 29, 2025, the Supreme Court stayed the Delhi High Court’s order suspending the life sentence in the 2017 Unnao rape case. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)’s application led to the Supreme Court reviewing the order. The panel’s judges expressed concerns about this verdict and the legal interpretation favoring the release of Kuldeep Sengar, who is also accused of killing the survivor’s father. Digital networking creates solidarity across differences on issues of gender equality, with small acts and sustained calls expanding into a broader wave of protest and even making silence on certain issues visible in the periphery. The survivor’s pleas for justice were spread by media channels and other users who used social media to raise this issue, prompting many people to speak up for the survivor. Although the survivor’s persistence resulted in him receiving more support from people, it was the concerted effort of both online presence and offline participation that created solidarity and enabled collective and transformative action.
