ANDREIA GALVÃO

 .

Gossip Girl e 

a cultura de opulência  

A nova versão de Gossip Girl promete um elenco LGBT+, a participação de actores e actrizes afro-americanos, todo o espectro identitário necessário para legitimar um projecto desta magnitude. No entanto, impera a questão: até que ponto a nossa sociedade precisa de ver esta história contada?

𝓟𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓶 𝓹𝓪𝓼𝓼𝓸𝓾 𝓪 𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓵𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓪 𝓪𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓹𝓪𝓷𝓱𝓪𝓻 𝓸𝓼 𝓯𝓮𝓷𝓸́𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓷𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓱𝓮𝓰𝓪𝓿𝓪𝓶 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓔𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓭𝓸𝓼, 𝓽𝓮𝓶 𝓼𝓲𝓭𝓸 𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓸 𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓪𝓼𝓬𝓮𝓻 𝓭𝓮 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓷𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓪𝓼, 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓷𝓪 𝓮́𝓹𝓸𝓬𝓪 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓻𝓮𝓫𝓸𝓸𝓽𝓼. 𝓥𝓲𝓶𝓸𝓼 𝓸 𝓪𝓷𝓾́𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓸𝓻𝓲𝓪 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓯𝓲𝓵𝓶𝓮𝓼 𝓭𝓪 𝓓𝓲𝓼𝓷𝓮𝔂, 𝓪𝓼 𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓸̃𝓮𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓽𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓮𝓶 𝓪𝓬𝓽𝓾𝓪𝓵𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓻 𝓪𝓼 𝓷𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓵𝓪́𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓯𝓲𝔃𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓶 𝓵𝓾𝓬𝓻𝓪𝓻 𝓪𝓼 𝓰𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓮𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓾́𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓲𝓷𝓮𝓶𝓪𝓽𝓸𝓰𝓻𝓪́𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓼. 𝓔𝓼𝓽𝓮 𝓯𝓮𝓷𝓸́𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓸 𝓷𝓪̃𝓸 𝓮́ 𝓷𝓸𝓿𝓸, 𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓻𝓮𝓿𝓲𝓼𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓻 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓹𝓻𝓲𝓮𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓾𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼, 𝓶𝓪𝓼 𝓼𝓾𝓻𝓰𝓮 𝓷𝓪 𝓮́𝓹𝓸𝓬𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓻𝓪̂𝓷𝓮𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓾𝓶 𝓷𝓸𝓿𝓸 𝓸𝓫𝓳𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓸: 𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓫𝓲𝓵𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓻 𝓪 𝓲𝓶𝓪𝓰𝓮𝓶 𝓭𝓮 𝓗𝓸𝓵𝓵𝔂𝔀𝓸𝓸𝓭, 𝓪𝓯𝓪𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸-𝓼𝓮 𝓶𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓭𝓸 𝓼𝓮𝓾 𝓹𝓪𝓼𝓼𝓪𝓭𝓸 𝓬𝓵𝓪𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓮 𝓭𝓲𝓼𝓬𝓻𝓲𝓶𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓸́𝓻𝓲𝓸.

𝓐 𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓾́𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪 𝓬𝓲𝓷𝓮𝓶𝓪𝓽𝓸𝓰𝓻𝓪́𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓽𝓮𝓶 𝓽𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓸 𝓻𝓮𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓻𝓮𝓿𝓮𝓻 𝓪 𝓹𝓻𝓸́𝓹𝓻𝓲𝓪 𝓱𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓸́𝓻𝓲𝓪. 𝓐𝓵𝓮́𝓶 𝓭𝓲𝓼𝓼𝓸, 𝓪𝓬𝓽𝓾𝓪𝓵𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓻 𝓮́ 𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓾𝓼𝓽𝓸𝓼𝓸 𝓮𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓸𝓶𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓭𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓲𝓷𝓸𝓿𝓪𝓻, 𝓪𝓹𝓸𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓻 𝓮𝓶 𝓷𝓸𝓿𝓪𝓼 𝓿𝓸𝔃𝓮𝓼 𝓮 𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓪𝓻 𝓸 𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸.

𝓠𝓾𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓪 𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓾́𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪 𝓮́ 𝓪𝓬𝓾𝓼𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓶𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻 𝓸 𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓽𝓾𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓸 𝓮 𝓸 𝓶𝓮𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓼𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓪 𝓲𝓷𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓲𝓷𝓳𝓾𝓼𝓽𝓸, 𝓪𝓹𝓮𝓼𝓪𝓻 𝓭𝓮 𝓽𝓸𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓽𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓪𝓼 𝓯𝓵𝓪́𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓶𝓾𝓭𝓪𝓷𝓬̧𝓪, 𝓗𝓸𝓵𝓵𝔂𝔀𝓸𝓸𝓭 𝓲𝓷𝓼𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓮 𝓷𝓪 𝓪𝓹𝓸𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓻𝓪, 𝓷𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓵𝓪́𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓪𝓻𝓪𝓶 𝓬𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓬̧𝓸̃𝓮𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼, 𝓭𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓭𝓮́𝓬𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓼.

𝓠𝓾𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓪 𝓼𝓮́𝓻𝓲𝓮 𝓼𝓪𝓲𝓾, 𝓮𝓶 𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟕, 𝓸 𝓪𝓶𝓫𝓲𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓼𝓸́𝓬𝓲𝓸-𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓵 𝓮𝓻𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓹𝓵𝓮𝓽𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓭𝓲𝓯𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮. 𝓤𝓶 𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓮́-𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓮𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓸́𝓶𝓲𝓬𝓪, 𝓮𝓶 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓪 𝓸𝓹𝓾𝓵𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪, 𝓸 𝓶𝓪𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓮𝔁𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓸 𝓮 𝓪 𝓼𝓾𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓲𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓶 𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓲𝓼. 𝓐 𝓮́𝓹𝓸𝓬𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓹𝓸𝓹𝓾𝓵𝓪𝓻𝓲𝔃𝓸𝓾 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓯𝓲𝓰𝓾𝓻𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓟𝓪𝓻𝓲𝓼 𝓗𝓲𝓵𝓽𝓸𝓷 𝓮 𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓬𝓮𝓭𝓮𝓾 𝓪 𝓯𝓪𝓶𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓚𝓲𝓶 𝓚𝓪𝓻𝓭𝓪𝓼𝓱𝓲𝓪𝓷, 𝓸 𝓬𝓵𝓲́𝓶𝓪𝔁 𝓭𝓪 𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓬𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓫𝓻𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮, 𝓭𝓪 𝓯𝓪𝓶𝓪 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓪 𝓯𝓪𝓶𝓪 𝓬𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓪 𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓾́𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪 𝓷𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓮-𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓷𝓪. 𝓐 𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓻𝓮𝓯𝓵𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓲𝓪 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓮 𝓶𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓮𝓶 𝓼𝓮́𝓻𝓲𝓮𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓣𝓱𝓮 𝓞𝓒 (𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟑-𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟕) 𝓮 𝟗𝟎𝟐𝟎𝟏 (𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟖-𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟑), 𝓮 𝓯𝓸𝓲 𝓷𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓮 𝓹𝓪𝓷𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓶𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓖𝓸𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓹 𝓖𝓲𝓻𝓵 𝓼𝓾𝓻𝓰𝓲𝓾, 𝓺𝓾𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓿𝓪 𝓮𝓶 𝓿𝓸𝓰𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓪𝓫𝓼𝓾𝓻𝓭𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓻𝓲𝓬𝓸 𝓮 𝓪𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮.

𝓐 𝓗𝓑𝓞 𝓜𝓪𝔁 𝓪𝓷𝓾𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓸𝓾, 𝓮𝓶 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟗, 𝓸 𝓻𝓮𝓫𝓸𝓸𝓽 𝓭𝓪 𝓼𝓮́𝓻𝓲𝓮 𝓖𝓸𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓹 𝓖𝓲𝓻𝓵, 𝓾𝓶 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓰𝓻𝓪𝓶𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓪𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓹𝓪𝓷𝓱𝓪𝓿𝓪 𝓪 𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪 𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓪𝓵𝓸𝓼𝓪 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓮𝓵𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓝𝓸𝓿𝓪 𝓘𝓸𝓻𝓺𝓾𝓮, 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓸𝓼 𝓶𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓮 𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓪𝓼𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓻𝓻𝓾𝓹𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮𝓷𝓻𝓸𝓭𝓲𝓵𝓱𝓪𝓿𝓪𝓶 𝓪 𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪 𝓵𝓪𝓫𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓵 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓮 𝓪𝓼 𝓰𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓮𝓼 𝓲𝓻𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓪𝓫𝓲𝓵𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓸𝓼 𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓵𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓽𝓲𝓪𝓶, 𝓪𝓵𝓶𝓸𝓯𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓬̧𝓪 𝓯𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓷𝓬𝓮𝓲𝓻𝓪. 𝓐 𝓷𝓸𝓿𝓪 𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓽𝓮 𝓾𝓶 𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓷𝓬𝓸 𝓛𝓖𝓑𝓣+, 𝓪 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓲𝓹𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓪𝓬𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓮 𝓪𝓬𝓽𝓻𝓲𝔃𝓮𝓼 𝓪𝓯𝓻𝓸-𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓷𝓸𝓼, 𝓽𝓸𝓭𝓸 𝓸 𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓻𝓸 𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓲𝓽𝓪́𝓻𝓲𝓸 𝓷𝓮𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓪́𝓻𝓲𝓸 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓵𝓮𝓰𝓲𝓽𝓲𝓶𝓪𝓻 𝓾𝓶 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓳𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓶𝓪𝓰𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓾𝓭𝓮. 𝓝𝓸 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓸, 𝓲𝓶𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓪 𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪̃𝓸: 𝓪𝓽𝓮́ 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓹𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓪 𝓷𝓸𝓼𝓼𝓪 𝓼𝓸𝓬𝓲𝓮𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓼𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓿𝓮𝓻 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓱𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓸́𝓻𝓲𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓪?

𝓐 𝓼𝓮́𝓻𝓲𝓮 𝓽𝓪𝓶𝓫𝓮́𝓶 𝓪𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓿𝓪 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓼 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪́𝓿𝓮𝓲𝓼, 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓯𝓲𝓰𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓘𝓿𝓪𝓷𝓴𝓪 𝓣𝓻𝓾𝓶𝓹, 𝓻𝓮𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓪𝓻𝓽𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓱𝓲𝓹𝓼𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓑𝓻𝓸𝓸𝓴𝓵𝔂𝓷 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓯𝓪𝓿𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓮 𝓹𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓝𝓸𝓿𝓪 𝓘𝓸𝓻𝓺𝓾𝓮, 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮𝓼 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓭𝓲𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓲𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓸 𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸, 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓻𝓲𝓭𝓲𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓫𝓪𝓲𝔁𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓮́𝓽𝓷𝓲𝓬𝓪.

𝓕𝓸𝓲 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓲𝓭𝓪 𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓪 𝓸𝓹𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸, 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓪 𝓳𝓾𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪𝓻 𝓪𝓸 𝓹𝓾́𝓫𝓵𝓲𝓬𝓸 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓪𝓹𝓪𝓽𝓸́𝓻𝓲𝓪 𝓭𝓸 𝓬𝓵𝓲𝓶𝓪 𝓼𝓸́𝓬𝓲𝓸-𝓮𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓸́𝓶𝓲𝓬𝓸 𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓫𝓾𝓵𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓪𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓿𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓪𝓿𝓪𝓶 (𝓪 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓮 𝓯𝓮𝓷𝓸́𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓸 𝓬𝓱𝓪𝓶𝓪𝓶𝓸𝓼 𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓪𝓹𝓲𝓼𝓶𝓸, 𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓿𝓲𝓸 𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓵 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓪𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓪𝓰𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓪́𝓿𝓮𝓲𝓼 𝓸𝓾 𝓮𝓷𝓯𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓷𝓱𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓸𝓽𝓲𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓷𝓸, 𝓰𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓵𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓹𝓸𝓻 𝓶𝓮𝓲𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓪𝓬𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮𝓷𝓿𝓸𝓵𝓿𝓮𝓶 𝓲𝓶𝓪𝓰𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓸𝓾 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓮𝓽𝓮𝓷𝓲𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸). 𝓥𝓪́𝓻𝓲𝓸𝓼 𝓪𝓾𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓬𝓵𝓪́𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓼 𝓵𝓮𝓰𝓲𝓽𝓲𝓶𝓪𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓶, 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓿𝓪𝓿𝓮𝓵𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮, 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓸𝓵𝓱𝓪. 𝓟𝓸𝓻 𝓮𝔁𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓵𝓸, 𝓒.𝓢. 𝓛𝓮𝔀𝓲𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓿𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮, 𝓾𝓼𝓪𝓭𝓸 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓶𝓸𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸, 𝓸 𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓪𝓹𝓲𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓹𝓸𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓿𝓲𝓻 𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓯𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓪𝓻 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓮𝔁𝓹𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓻 𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓸𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓲𝓶𝓪𝓰𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓼.

𝓔𝓻𝓪𝓶 𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓲𝓯𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼. 𝓝𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓲𝔁𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓻, 𝓷𝓸 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓸, 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓮𝔁𝓹𝓵𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓻 𝓭𝓮 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓶𝓸𝓭𝓸 𝓪 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓭𝓪 𝓼𝓮́𝓻𝓲𝓮 𝓮𝓻𝓪 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓰𝓻𝓪𝓵 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓪 𝓼𝓾𝓪 𝓮𝔁𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓮, 𝓼𝓮 𝓼𝓲𝓶, 𝓭𝓮 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓶𝓸𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓸𝓭𝓮𝓶𝓸𝓼 𝓷𝓪̃𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓼𝓪𝓻 𝓭𝓮 𝓪 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓹𝓮𝓽𝓾𝓪𝓻 𝓮𝓶 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟏.

𝓐 𝓼𝓮́𝓻𝓲𝓮 𝓼𝓪𝓲𝓾 𝓮𝓶 𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟕 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓶𝓲𝓵𝓱𝓸̃𝓮𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓪𝓼𝓶𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓮 𝓪𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓹𝓪𝓷𝓱𝓪𝓿𝓪 𝓸 𝓻𝓸𝓶𝓪𝓷𝓬𝓮 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓮 𝓸 𝓻𝓪𝓹𝓪𝔃 𝓶𝓪𝓻𝓰𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓵𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓭𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓑𝓻𝓸𝓸𝓴𝓵𝔂𝓷, 𝓓𝓪𝓷, 𝓮 𝓪 𝓲𝓽 𝓰𝓲𝓻𝓵 𝓷𝓸𝓿𝓪-𝓲𝓸𝓻𝓺𝓾𝓲𝓷𝓪, 𝓢𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓪 𝓥𝓪𝓷 𝓭𝓮𝓻 𝓦𝓸𝓸𝓭𝓼𝓮𝓷, 𝓷𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓼𝓮 𝓻𝓮𝓿𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓿𝓪 𝓾𝓶 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓯𝓵𝓲𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓬𝓵𝓪𝓼𝓼𝓮𝓼 (𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓷𝓾𝓪𝓷𝓬𝓮𝓼, 𝓬𝓵𝓪𝓻𝓸, 𝓪 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓽𝓲𝓻 𝓭𝓸 𝓶𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓮𝓶 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓼𝓮 𝓯𝓪𝓵𝓪 𝓭𝓮 “𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓲𝓯𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼”). 𝓞 𝓽𝓸𝓶 𝓭𝓮 𝓼𝓪𝓻𝓬𝓪𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓷𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓪 𝓻𝓪𝓹𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓷𝓸𝓼 𝓯𝓪𝔃 𝓪𝓫𝓼𝓸𝓻𝓿𝓮𝓻 𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓪̃𝓸 𝓪𝓫𝓼𝓾𝓻𝓭𝓸 𝓮́ 𝓸 𝓾𝓷𝓲𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓮𝔁𝓽𝓻𝓮𝓶𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓲𝓿𝓲𝓵𝓮́𝓰𝓲𝓸 𝓸𝓷𝓭𝓮 𝓪𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓰𝓮𝓷𝓼 𝓮𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓰𝓮𝓶.

𝓠𝓾𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓼𝓪𝓲𝓾 𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓪 𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓪, 𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓾-𝓼𝓮 𝓸 𝓲𝓶𝓹𝓪𝓬𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓬𝓻𝓲𝓼𝓮 𝓮𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓸́𝓶𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟖, 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓪𝓯𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓸𝓾 𝓭𝓮 𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓶 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓮𝓭𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓼𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓪𝓲́𝓼 𝓮𝓶 𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪̃𝓸, 𝓲𝓷𝓬𝓵𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓮 𝓪 𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓶𝓲𝓵𝓱𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓬𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓽𝓾𝓲́𝓪𝓶 𝓪 𝓭𝓮𝓶𝓸𝓰𝓻𝓪𝓯𝓲𝓪 𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓰𝓻𝓪𝓶𝓪, 𝓭𝓮𝓲𝔁𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪̃𝓸: 𝓪𝓳𝓾𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓻 𝓪𝓸𝓼 𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓼 𝓸𝓾 𝓲𝓷𝓼𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓻 𝓬𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓿𝓮𝔃 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓷𝓪 𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓲𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮𝔁𝓽𝓻𝓮𝓶𝓪 𝓻𝓲𝓺𝓾𝓮𝔃𝓪 𝓮́ 𝓸 𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓽𝓾𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓸?

𝓐 𝓷𝓸𝓿𝓪 𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓼𝓪𝓲𝓻𝓪́, 𝓻𝓸𝓾𝓫𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓷𝓸𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓰𝓲𝓪 𝓮𝓷𝓬𝓪𝓹𝓼𝓾𝓵𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓪 𝓹𝓻𝓲𝓶𝓮𝓲𝓻𝓪 𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓪̃𝓸. 𝓞 𝓮𝓽𝓱𝓸𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓲𝓬𝓲𝓪𝓵 𝓭𝓪 𝓼𝓮́𝓻𝓲𝓮 (𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓼𝓮 𝓯𝓸𝓲 𝓮𝓼𝓯𝓾𝓶𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓪𝓸 𝓵𝓸𝓷𝓰𝓸 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓼) 𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓿𝓪-𝓼𝓮 𝓷𝓪 𝓼𝓪́𝓽𝓲𝓻𝓪 𝓭𝓪 𝓮𝔁𝓽𝓻𝓮𝓶𝓪 𝓻𝓲𝓺𝓾𝓮𝔃𝓪, 𝓼𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓬𝓻𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓬𝓻𝓾𝓬𝓲𝓪𝓵 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓸𝓫𝓻𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓷𝓸𝓼𝓼𝓸𝓼 𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓼: 𝓾𝓶 𝓮𝓷𝓺𝓾𝓪𝓭𝓻𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓸𝓼 𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓷𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓲𝓻𝓬𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓪𝓶, 𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮, 𝓷𝓪̃𝓸 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓶𝓲𝓽𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓸 𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓪𝓹𝓲𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓼𝓮 𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓷𝓮 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓪𝓻𝓶𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓪 𝓪 𝓬𝓻𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪.

𝓐 𝓮𝔁𝓽𝓻𝓮𝓶𝓪 𝓸𝓹𝓾𝓵𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓷𝓸𝓾-𝓼𝓮 𝓸 𝓶𝓸𝓽𝓸𝓻 𝓭𝓪 𝓷𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓪, 𝓿𝓲𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸, 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓰𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮, 𝓸 𝓹𝓾́𝓫𝓵𝓲𝓬𝓸 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓪 𝓪𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓰𝓮𝓷𝓼 𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓸𝓼 𝓯𝓪𝓿𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓷𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓲𝓭𝓸. 𝓔𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓿𝓪̃𝓸 𝓼𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓰𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓿𝓲𝓵𝓲𝓹𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓼. 𝓐𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓰𝓮𝓷𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓻𝓮𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓿𝓪𝓶 𝓸 𝓹𝓲𝓸𝓻 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓼𝓸𝓬𝓲𝓮𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓽𝓲𝓷𝓱𝓪 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓸𝓯𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓮𝓻 𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓶 𝓱𝓾𝓶𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓪𝓸 𝓵𝓸𝓷𝓰𝓸 𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓰𝓻𝓪𝓶𝓪, 𝓷𝓾𝓷𝓬𝓪 𝓳𝓾𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓸𝓼 𝓪𝓫𝓾𝓼𝓸𝓼 𝓵𝓪𝓫𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓲𝓼, 𝓼𝓮𝔁𝓾𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓮 𝓭𝓮 𝓸𝓾𝓽𝓻𝓸 𝓰𝓮́𝓷𝓮𝓻𝓸 𝓽𝓲𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓼 𝓶𝓮𝓼𝓶𝓪𝓼 𝓷𝓸 𝓲𝓷𝓲́𝓬𝓲𝓸 𝓭𝓸 𝓪𝓻𝓬𝓸 𝓷𝓪𝓻𝓻𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓸. 𝓐 𝓮𝔁𝓹𝓪𝓷𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓸 𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓪𝓬̧𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓪𝓵𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓼 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓿𝓮𝓷𝓲𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓮́ 𝓬𝓻𝓾𝓬𝓲𝓪𝓵 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓪 𝓪𝓵𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓸 𝓽𝓸𝓶 𝓭𝓪 𝓼𝓮́𝓻𝓲𝓮. 𝓢𝓪̃𝓸 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓪𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓰𝓮𝓷𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮, 𝓷𝓸 𝓯𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓵, 𝓪𝓬𝓪𝓫𝓪𝓶 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓽𝓾𝓭𝓸 𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓽𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓶, 𝓲𝓵𝓲𝓫𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓽𝓸𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓸𝓼 𝓼𝓮𝓾𝓼 𝓮𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓼.

* Estudante de Ciências da Comunicação na FCSH de Lisboa; activista

IN "PÚBLICO" - 22/01/21

.