SPD wants to make “Catcalling” punishable: “we cannot tolerate”

Woman Eichwede“Catcalling” is widespread in Germany, many women have already been victims, but only a few should be familiar with the term: How would they explain what that is?
We speak of targeted, considerable, oral sexual harassment. I think the colloquial term “Catcalling” is difficult because it downplayed a massive social problem.

Happy calls, obscene gestures: Due to the current legal situation, verbal sexual harassment are difficult to punish. How come?
In short: because verbal sexual harassment in the legal sense is not an insult or personal reduction. The Federal Court of Justice found in a 2017 judgment that there is a legislative gap here.

In the case said, a 65-year-old had said to be an eleven-year-old that he wanted to “put her on her pussy”. The court released the man because this statement did not contain a “reducing evaluation of the victim” and “merely sexual or grossly sexual statements” are not covered by the criminal offense of the insult.
This gap in law must be closed. We cannot tolerate such behavior. The victims, usually women or girls, are massive. Studies show that as a result, they change their behavior and partly withdraw from public life. We have to counteract this.

How?
The victims should not change their behavior, but the perpetrators. That is why we, as a SPD parliamentary group, appear to create a new criminal offense against verbal sexual harassment-the so-called “catcalling”. Criminal law is a sharp sword, no question, so we generally have to be careful when we discuss new criminal offenses. Here, however, we have no doubt that we have a criminal behavior and the legislative gap an intolerable state that must be corrected.

Other countries are already there: in France or Portugal there are fines for Catcalling, and prison terms are also possible in Spain. What do you have in mind?
I could imagine starting with a fine first – but such questions have to be clarified in a legislative procedure. In the coalition agreement, it is agreed to modernize the Criminal Code and to see where there is a need for adjustment. In our view, verbal sexual harassment is part of it.

It was only in February that an initiative of Lower Saxony failed in the Federal Council to set “Catcalling” as a criminal offense in the Criminal Code.
We see that there is a gap in criminal law. This is what scientists and lawyers also say outside of politics. This is about significant, targeted sexual harassment, as in the case of the eleven -year -old girl. As a society, we cannot tolerate that. It is not about punishing unwanted compliments, even if they are not always beautiful. The worries that some may have here – because of that nothing should then be said – are completely unfounded. Such a polemic does not do justice to the topic.

According to studies, 97 percent of the perpetrators of “Catcalling” are men. Can a new criminal offense solve structural problems?
A criminal offense can only be a mosaic stone, but misconduct must have consequences. Especially since a social discourse can arise from this, a questioning: Why is an insult to be punishable, but not verbal sexual harassment? This discussion is important because verbal violence is mental violence – and a preliminary stage to physical violence.

Are victims of sexual attacks in principle adequately protected? In Germany, there has been a “no means” regulation since 2016 (Section 177 (1) of the Criminal Code), several EU countries have long since passed to “only yes” model …
I personally would also advocate a “only yes” regulation in Germany because it would make it easier to make evidence. The people involved need to know that they act mutually. In the “No means no” regulation, the victim must show rejection. This can make criminal consequences in the event of non-rejection, such as fear or resignation of the victim. The Pelicot case should also give us thinking in Germany. Unfortunately, I currently see no political majority in the German Bundestag to switch to the approval model.

Women in particular are increasingly sexualized attacks and hatred. In 2024, the Antifeminism reporting point counted over 650 reports, of which 558 incidents were classified as anti -feminist – a significant increase compared to the previous year. How do you explain this development?
The numbers are frightening. The queer-hostile incidents have also increased enormously. We have been experiencing a fundamental brutalization in society for years, starting with language. The inhibition threshold decreases, especially in the digital space, because it can be rushed and hate anonymously. That is why, for example, there are real rooms in which people meet again and look into their eyes, so important – also and especially in rural areas.

Around 30 percent of the reports related to digital space. Is there a lack of consistent law enforcement?
In fact, we have a lot of room for improvement. In the summer of 2024, the traffic light coalition ensured that criminal applications can also be made digitally. This was important to dismantle inhibitions for victims. Now we urgently need to get a digital violence law on the way. Even in digital space, clear rules of conduct must be enforced and victims protected.

To what extent?
Through the digital protection law, those affected should be able to proceed more easily against digital violence in court and the closure of anonymous hate accounts with punishable content should be made possible.

The case of right -wing extremist Marla Svenja Liebich, who uses the Self -Determination Act, is currently causing a stir and apparently relating to being able to sell a prison for prison through a gender change. Does the law have to be reformed?
In the present case, the judiciary is fully capable of acting. The federal states are responsible for the correctional facilities and can apply regulations that counteract this obvious abuse. I think it is wrong because of an individual case. We have no reason to go beyond the evaluation already agreed in the coalition agreement.

The law should enable low -threshold sexual self -determination, but is now obviously abused. How do you want to prevent this?
Again: In this case, abuse can only be prevented by the countries because it is about how the correctional facilities deal with it. Some countries already have corresponding regulations in this area, others do not. Even if the gender entry is “female” in this case, there are ways to transfer to another correctional facility. Due to individual cases to discriminate an entire group of people, the problem does not solve and cannot be done with us.