Blind

BBC

Handout

‘Was it as glamorous as it looked? No!’

ITV/ Shutterstock

‘I had no idea why I picked Sue – it was just eenie meeny miny moe’

Handout

‘Blind Date Wedding of the Year’

Handout/Alex and Sue Tatham

ITV/ Shutterstock

‘I am just lucky to have picked her’

Handout/Alex and Sue Tatham

This article discusses the important issues underlying the #MeToo movement that has spread across the globe. On the one hand, the #MeToo movement has succeeded in gaining cross-border support for victims of sexual harassment, so that victims do not feel alone and have the courage to speak out. However, the #MeToo movement has not yet fully succeeded in reaching all groups. This article will explore why this massive online campaign has not truly reached those who need it most: victims without internet access, without digital devices, or who are technologically illiterate. As a result, they remain unable to voice their experiences of abuse and receive the support they need.

The #MeToo movement has indeed succeeded in changing the way we view, understand, and even produce new regulations in many countries.  This demonstrates the power of the internet.  However, the reality is that millions of victims living in villages, remote areas, or from poor families still feel alone. This is why this article will discuss the three main obstacles that have prevented #MeToo from being fully successful: limited digital access, inequality in technological capabilities and security, and weak direct activism in the field.

In my opinion, #MeToo is still far from successful. Success in changing laws has not been followed by success in helping those with proven limitations.  These three main reasons will be discussed in more detail in this article. #MeToo was initially successful because it spread quickly on the internet.  Platforms such as Twitter can connect people from all over the world. That’s amazing! However, this initial success mainly occurred in developed countries that have cheap and fast internet. This means that the movement reached more wealthy, educated people living in big cities. This shows that the movement was biased from the start because it only focused on issues faced by internet-savvy people. This was also evident when #MeToo, which had been around since 2006, only went viral and spread worldwide when Hollywood actresses started using #MeToo on social media in 2017.

Access barriers directly undermine the success of #MeToo. The movement fails to reach all those affected by abuse who live in villages, in conflict areas, and those who are technologically illiterate and lack financial resources. It is not only these disparities that set them apart, but also the lack of support and justice that is part of this difference.  Victims without a signal, without a cell phone, or without data do not have the tools to know their rights. This situation is a very common problem for many people.

This failure results in “solidarity poverty.” According to a study by Amalia, A. R., Raodah, P., & Wardani, N. K. (2024), “In low- and middle-income countries, 300 million fewer women than men use mobile internet.” This shows that the issue of access is not only a geographical problem but also an economic and gender issue.  Because they lack the ability to speak out, the #MeToo movement does not truly represent all victims, but only those who have the privilege of being connected.

In addition, there is also a gap in digital literacy and security that will become a second barrier preventing victims from successfully participating in the #MeToo movement. Victims who are technologically illiterate do not know how to use social media safely and anonymously. Furthermore, they lack knowledge about how to store digital evidence so that it is not lost. They do not understand privacy regulations, the dangers of doxing (spreading personal data), or cyber attacks. This ignorance causes them to fear speaking out even more than they fear the perpetrators.

In many countries, this issue is made more difficult by the threat of retaliation through legislation (e.g., defamation laws/cybercrime laws) that can be used against victims and lead to revictimization (ICJ, 2023). When victims speak without legal representation or digital literacy, they risk being perceived as lying. Victims in large cities have better digital safety nets than those in remote areas. This is why “Solidarity with Quotas” emerged. Only those who are digitally literate and financially secure can speak up, while others remain silent out of fear.

Due to these limitations, the #MeToo movement around the world has been dominated by issues occurring in large offices, elite campuses, or among public figures.  In line with the criticism expressed by PUSAD Paramadina, the #MeToo movement in Indonesia is considered to have not yet reached a wider audience, as the discussion is still limited to those who are literate in social media and come from the middle to upper classes (Kartika, 2019). This criticism is not only relevant in Indonesia, but also in many other countries.

However, the problems with the #MeToo movement are not limited to the internet.  The failure of activism to change offline behavior is also a weakness. Solidarity on the internet can indeed raise donations and spread information, but it often fails to translate this momentum into equitable direct assistance.  The digital resources and extraordinary public attention received by this movement have not been wisely allocated to the areas most in need. This shows that digital activism often focuses only on the most popular topics but has no real impact on the most vulnerable victims.

Despite the large number of new laws passed as a result of #MeToo, integrated service centers, shelters, and legal services are still concentrated in capital cities or large cities.  Victims who are not within reach of these services must face significant distances and costs to obtain justice. This situation shows that inequality in access to protection is still deeply rooted.  This is in line with research published by Jurnal Perempuan (2024), which states that Online Gender-Based Violence (KBGO) is not an anomaly, but a continuation of gender-based violence that has been entrenched for centuries in patriarchal systems. Therefore, gender inequality will only persist in the real world if the struggle is only carried out in the online realm and is not balanced with the provision of real services for victims.

Three major issues hindering the success of the #MeToo movement are limited access, limited digital capabilities, and a lack of direct participation in the field. This shows that a digital struggle without real interaction risks losing sight of its main goal: justice for all victims, not just those connected to the virtual world.

The world has been changed by the #MeToo movement. However, the world it has changed is one that is connected to the internet.  Millions of other women continue to struggle in silence, in places where there is no signal and no courage.  Meanwhile, some people still cannot access it. This movement has raised awareness around the world, but there are still people who are left behind, hindered by digital poverty and the gap between those who have access to technology and those who do not.  Digital justice should not be limited to viral hashtags or phone screens. In truth, solidarity is not just about thousands of posts or supportive comments. Rather, it comes from the courage to step into the real world, listen to those who are unheard, and ensure that protection is available for both those who can reach the network and those left behind. Because true justice does not require popularity to be seen, and true solidarity is measured by how far we collaborate with those who are most silent, not by how much we speak.