 |
| Notice the length of that dress |
It is not the first time I have written a post like this, but due to recent events in the Westminster Parliament, and the reactions of some men, I believe this needs emphasising.
On Friday, 15 June 2018, the UK government attempted to introduce a Bill to make "upskirting" illegal in England and Wales. This odious practise is using a phone camera to photograph or film up women's skirts. Many women have been victims of this, including celebrity figures who have been photographed / filmed getting in and out of cars, and those pictures then plastered all over the media. LBC Radio host Beverley Turner told of exactly that happening to her. It is also done however by men to ordinary women, either for their own sexual gratification, or the pics / videos then posted on social media. Upskirting was made illegal by the devolved Scottish Parliament in 2010, and is now considered "Sexual Harm" in Scots Law.
So, 8 years late, you may think that the Conservative Party UK Government should be congratulated for trying to extend this to England and Wales. And so they would have been, had one of their own backbenchers, Sir Christopher Chope MP, not blocked the Bill from proceeding, he claims due to Bills not being discussed properly in parliament. Prime Minister Theresa May, a woman (I think), said she was "disappointed" at his actions. Disappointed that perverts and sleazy paparazzi 'journalists' (I use the word lightly) are not stopped from their disgusting behaviour? Really, Theresa? As a woman you are "disappointed"? That's got to be the most bizarre use of that word since Edward Teller, father of the H-Bomb, was "disappointed" to learn he couldn't produce a 'doomsday' bomb whose chain reaction would not stop.
Of course, it had to happen that some men would try "blame the victim" on this story, trying to claim that women would not get upskirted if they wore more conservative dress. Not least among them was Nick Freeman, a lawyer known as "Mister Loophole", due to the number of obviously guilty clients he has helped walk free from courtrooms through legal loopholes; something he is so proud of doing that he actually uses i as his Twitter name. Okay, by doing things like that, we can already see that Nick Freeman is a contemptible poor excuse for a human being. However, in responding to Chris Chope's intervention, he really sank to the bottom of the polluted pool he inhabits. He Tweeted "Whilst this is totally unacceptable conduct, if women assumed some responsibility for their attire, they would not be in jeopardy."
That's right, folks, Nick Freeman totally blamed women for upskirting.
Freeman's odious Tweet drew a lot of flak from people, not least from one young woman who put him firmly in his place. She replied "what an ignorant and thoughtless comment. Upskirting can quite easily happen even when women dress conservatively... but the responsibility still lies with the woman? This is for sure one of the top 3 stupidest comments you’ve ever made."
Well said that woman for making such a valid and important comment. And it was all the more important because it actually started "Get real dad," and was posted by none other than Sophie Freeman ~ Nick Freeman's own daughter.
So was Nick Freeman at all moved or contrite for his comments having been called out by his daughter? Not one bit of it. In fact he replied "Sophie, firstly it's most stupid and not stupidest. Secondly, please read the articles in the Press which amplify my views." That's right folks. Far from apologising and standing by his own flesh and blood, Nick Freeman instead chose to arrogantly deride her command of English on a public forum (in which he is actually incorrect), and tried to defend himself by referring her to press articles. Like the media in the UK have ever been a bastion of women's rights.
I'm not a parent myself, but it seems to me that when any daddy seeks to deride his own little girl in public, he has not only completely failed as a father, but ultimately as a human being. Shame on you, Mr Freeman.
I bring in the Twitter spat between Nick and Sophie Freeman as it underlines the entire patriarchal attitude to sexual assault upon women; that they were somehow "asking for it", and will willingly shout down and mock anyone who disagrees with their ignorant views. And their views are ignorant. The age old mantra of women would not be assaulted if they did not wear provocative clothing / dressed more conservatively, simply does not hold up to even the slightest scrutiny.
First you have to ask what constitutes "provocative" clothing. If a woman is dressed up to the point that she looks "sexy", if that 'provokes' some men, guess what? That's not the woman's fault or doing. For all anyone knows she may have dressed like that for her boyfriend or husband. Indeed, who is to say she has not a lesbian who has dressed alluringly for her girlfriend / wife? Or here's a bizarre idea, she may have merely dressed like that for her own self-esteem; to make herself look good and feel good as a result. Regardless of gender, we all do that. Go on, admit it. If you are going out, the chances are you will put on nice clothes which make you look good, and that makes you feel good as a result. And that is important, as it boosts your confidence.
And even if a woman is dressed up and "on the pull", that does not mean she is about to jump into bed with just any man, and it is not a green light for any man to sexually assault her - no matter what Jordan Peterson and the incels would have you believe. Some things are just off limits, and that includes up any woman's skirt or dress.
Then the reverse of the above is what does society deem as "conservative" dress? The strict, "Tweedy" look? Or women in no-nonsense A-line skirts, white blouses, and "death before dishonour" granny pants? Sorry (not sorry) to burst your bubbles, but there are actually guys who get off on that, and imagine being dominated by a strict woman in such attire, while other men see such women as a "challenge". How about uniforms? Could there be anything more 'conservative'? A quick look through the Ann Summers website will reveal all sorts of uniforms being sold for sexual roleplay. Or when it comes to younger girls, what of 'conservative' school uniforms? Except that ever since cartoonist Gerald Scarfe produced his first St Trinian's cartoons in the 1950s, and the movies which subsequently followed based upon them, school uniforms have been seen as "sexy". The Britney Spears song "Hit Me Baby, One More Time" even had a video based on that very premise, and again, "sexy" school uniforms are sold for sexual roleplay. Due to the popularity of such, one will even easily find porn based around girls dressed in school uniforms. Even nuns are not immune from this, and there has for decades been an entire section of the porn industry devoted to women dressed in nun's habits - as well as such being sold for roleplay. It should come as no surprise to anyone that there is nowadays even a section of the porn industry devoted to women in Islamic dress, such as hajibs, niqabs, and even burqas.
In the 1970s and 1980s, some feminists sought to cover up their bodies by wearing the most unshapely and 'unattractive' clothing possible. This included the habit of women wearing denim or serge workers overalls. Did that stop men from wolf whistling and shouting lewd comments to them? Not a bit of it. They really shouldn't have bothered, should not have had to bother, and in fact, by dressing like that, those women were playing right into the "dress conservatively" rhetoric. And what happened then? The fashion houses sat up and took notice, and started producing figure-hugging "overalls", to make them more "sexy", and this in turn led to that abject horror of 1980s women's fashion, the jumpsuit. But even those did not stop women attracting the unwanted attention of sleazy men.
Here are the facts; girls and women are sexually assaulted and raped from tiny babies to the very elderly, and all ages in-between, wearing all sorts of clothing. What then is provoking men? Damn those sexy pull-ups and, and those erotic surgical stockings! Even Christian nuns and Muslim women in full burqa are sexually assaulted and raped. The only logical conclusion one can draw from that is that attire is not and never was a factor in sexual assault.
Should anyone still disagree with any or all of the above, then ask yourself this; what are men wearing that is so very alluring, so sexy, so provocative, when they are the victims of male rape? Are those men somehow asking for it? Are they just 'sluts' who will sleep with any man, and as such the actions of the rapist are somehow justified?
Sexual assault and rape are not down to attire; they are down to toxic masculinity. While many will think of the sexual aspects of women being approached, wolf-whistled, have lewd comments shouted at her in public, being upskirted, sexually assaulted, and / or raped, they ignore the more important motives behind all of these; dominance and control. Any abuse - be it verbal, psychological, physical, or sexual - has one thing in common; the abuser is seeking power over someone less able to defend themselves, to humiliate them, and thereby to control them. The abuser is at heart a bully, and in the nature of every bully, a coward. Some men abuse women not only because they cannot control their hormones, but also because they fear their masculinity being brought into question. The men on the building site will all join in shouting lewd comments at women, because if one does not, then he is immediately not one of the blokes. That is the thin end of the wedge, and it grows from there to men thinking they can treat women - any woman - any way they want, and often do so to "prove" themselves as men.
And you guys can deny this all you want, but the very reason I write this, is because as a man I have seen and heard it for myself, many times. Even when some men are rebuffed, or think women are unavailable to them, they will condemn them as "frumps", "frigid", or even lesbians - which of course brings in the whole homophobia aspect of toxic masculinity. I well recall that there used to be a TV advert for a chocolate bar on TV, which showed two women jogging. It came on a TV in a pub once, and a bloke sitting next to me immediately exclaimed "Lesbians!" There you have it; women cannot even go for a bloody jog together, but if a man is not there, they are immediately "Lesbians!" - I kid you not. But of course, were it two - or more - men together, that would never be "Gay", would it? Heaven forfend! Just some of the fellas being real men and enjoying blokish camaraderie.
But if any guys still wish to deny this, let us assume it was any woman you are close to who was treated by other men as objects. If it were your wife or girlfriend, mother, sister, daughter, aunt, niece, or a female friend who was upskirted, and had the photos plastered all over the internet, who would you blame? The woman, or the sickening pervert who did it?
As a Scot, when I posted articles about upskirting on Facebook, I had friends ask me "What about upkilting?" Well, my reply to that was that while it would still be an offence to do that, if it were a woman doing it, no doubt the man would laugh it off, but then it is not men who have to be constantly aware of what they are wearing, where they go, at what times, and what may happen to them. It is only women who need worry about that, and that is down not to them, but to toxic masculinity which creates that situation.
I certainly do hope that the UK government get upskirting banned in England and Wales. For as we have already agreed in Scotland, it does constitute sexual harm, and the posting of photos and videos online merely serves to underline the control aspect allied to it.
The simple fact is that every woman and girl should be able to go where she wants, when she wants, wearing whatever she wants, without the unwanted attention of testosterone-filled idiots with fragile egos, who see women not as people, but objects for them to do with as they like. There's a long way to go, but Scotland has already taken a huge step towards making the streets safer for women. I sincerely hope it spreads to the rest of the UK.
First you have to ask what constitutes "provocative" clothing. If a woman is dressed up to the point that she looks "sexy", if that 'provokes' some men, guess what? That's not the woman's fault or doing. For all anyone knows she may have dressed like that for her boyfriend or husband. Indeed, who is to say she has not a lesbian who has dressed alluringly for her girlfriend / wife? Or here's a bizarre idea, she may have merely dressed like that for her own self-esteem; to make herself look good and feel good as a result. Regardless of gender, we all do that. Go on, admit it. If you are going out, the chances are you will put on nice clothes which make you look good, and that makes you feel good as a result. And that is important, as it boosts your confidence.
And even if a woman is dressed up and "on the pull", that does not mean she is about to jump into bed with just any man, and it is not a green light for any man to sexually assault her - no matter what Jordan Peterson and the incels would have you believe. Some things are just off limits, and that includes up any woman's skirt or dress.
Then the reverse of the above is what does society deem as "conservative" dress? The strict, "Tweedy" look? Or women in no-nonsense A-line skirts, white blouses, and "death before dishonour" granny pants? Sorry (not sorry) to burst your bubbles, but there are actually guys who get off on that, and imagine being dominated by a strict woman in such attire, while other men see such women as a "challenge". How about uniforms? Could there be anything more 'conservative'? A quick look through the Ann Summers website will reveal all sorts of uniforms being sold for sexual roleplay. Or when it comes to younger girls, what of 'conservative' school uniforms? Except that ever since cartoonist Gerald Scarfe produced his first St Trinian's cartoons in the 1950s, and the movies which subsequently followed based upon them, school uniforms have been seen as "sexy". The Britney Spears song "Hit Me Baby, One More Time" even had a video based on that very premise, and again, "sexy" school uniforms are sold for sexual roleplay. Due to the popularity of such, one will even easily find porn based around girls dressed in school uniforms. Even nuns are not immune from this, and there has for decades been an entire section of the porn industry devoted to women dressed in nun's habits - as well as such being sold for roleplay. It should come as no surprise to anyone that there is nowadays even a section of the porn industry devoted to women in Islamic dress, such as hajibs, niqabs, and even burqas.
In the 1970s and 1980s, some feminists sought to cover up their bodies by wearing the most unshapely and 'unattractive' clothing possible. This included the habit of women wearing denim or serge workers overalls. Did that stop men from wolf whistling and shouting lewd comments to them? Not a bit of it. They really shouldn't have bothered, should not have had to bother, and in fact, by dressing like that, those women were playing right into the "dress conservatively" rhetoric. And what happened then? The fashion houses sat up and took notice, and started producing figure-hugging "overalls", to make them more "sexy", and this in turn led to that abject horror of 1980s women's fashion, the jumpsuit. But even those did not stop women attracting the unwanted attention of sleazy men.
Here are the facts; girls and women are sexually assaulted and raped from tiny babies to the very elderly, and all ages in-between, wearing all sorts of clothing. What then is provoking men? Damn those sexy pull-ups and, and those erotic surgical stockings! Even Christian nuns and Muslim women in full burqa are sexually assaulted and raped. The only logical conclusion one can draw from that is that attire is not and never was a factor in sexual assault.
Should anyone still disagree with any or all of the above, then ask yourself this; what are men wearing that is so very alluring, so sexy, so provocative, when they are the victims of male rape? Are those men somehow asking for it? Are they just 'sluts' who will sleep with any man, and as such the actions of the rapist are somehow justified?
Sexual assault and rape are not down to attire; they are down to toxic masculinity. While many will think of the sexual aspects of women being approached, wolf-whistled, have lewd comments shouted at her in public, being upskirted, sexually assaulted, and / or raped, they ignore the more important motives behind all of these; dominance and control. Any abuse - be it verbal, psychological, physical, or sexual - has one thing in common; the abuser is seeking power over someone less able to defend themselves, to humiliate them, and thereby to control them. The abuser is at heart a bully, and in the nature of every bully, a coward. Some men abuse women not only because they cannot control their hormones, but also because they fear their masculinity being brought into question. The men on the building site will all join in shouting lewd comments at women, because if one does not, then he is immediately not one of the blokes. That is the thin end of the wedge, and it grows from there to men thinking they can treat women - any woman - any way they want, and often do so to "prove" themselves as men.
And you guys can deny this all you want, but the very reason I write this, is because as a man I have seen and heard it for myself, many times. Even when some men are rebuffed, or think women are unavailable to them, they will condemn them as "frumps", "frigid", or even lesbians - which of course brings in the whole homophobia aspect of toxic masculinity. I well recall that there used to be a TV advert for a chocolate bar on TV, which showed two women jogging. It came on a TV in a pub once, and a bloke sitting next to me immediately exclaimed "Lesbians!" There you have it; women cannot even go for a bloody jog together, but if a man is not there, they are immediately "Lesbians!" - I kid you not. But of course, were it two - or more - men together, that would never be "Gay", would it? Heaven forfend! Just some of the fellas being real men and enjoying blokish camaraderie.
But if any guys still wish to deny this, let us assume it was any woman you are close to who was treated by other men as objects. If it were your wife or girlfriend, mother, sister, daughter, aunt, niece, or a female friend who was upskirted, and had the photos plastered all over the internet, who would you blame? The woman, or the sickening pervert who did it?
As a Scot, when I posted articles about upskirting on Facebook, I had friends ask me "What about upkilting?" Well, my reply to that was that while it would still be an offence to do that, if it were a woman doing it, no doubt the man would laugh it off, but then it is not men who have to be constantly aware of what they are wearing, where they go, at what times, and what may happen to them. It is only women who need worry about that, and that is down not to them, but to toxic masculinity which creates that situation.
I certainly do hope that the UK government get upskirting banned in England and Wales. For as we have already agreed in Scotland, it does constitute sexual harm, and the posting of photos and videos online merely serves to underline the control aspect allied to it.
The simple fact is that every woman and girl should be able to go where she wants, when she wants, wearing whatever she wants, without the unwanted attention of testosterone-filled idiots with fragile egos, who see women not as people, but objects for them to do with as they like. There's a long way to go, but Scotland has already taken a huge step towards making the streets safer for women. I sincerely hope it spreads to the rest of the UK.
