Wednesday 11 February 2015

Feminist Frustrations: "Sexism vs Chivalry vs Manners" and "Why 'Compliments' - (Consent + Context) = Harassment"

A couple of things on Twitter sparked my interest in the past week or so. The first was this excerpt from a conversation Glamour magazine had with Gillian Anderson:

Glamour: What do you get riled up about in a feminist context? 
Gillian: A lot. I have feminist bones and when I hear things or see people react to women in certain ways I have very little tolerance. 
Glamour: But don't you feel sorry for modern men? Not knowing whether they should help us with our bags and open doors for us or whether we'll see it as an affront? 
Gillian: No. I don't feel sorry for men.

I don't feel sorry for them either. Helping someone who is clearly struggling is merely being nice, holding a door open for someone is just basic manners. I could rant at great length about how fucked off I get with people who don't bother to hold the door when someone is coming through immediately behind them, or who don't acknowledge someone who has. It's got nothing to do with gender. And I'll give you a tip: a lot of people are too shy, or sometimes too proud, to ask for help when they need it. It's okay - it's actually quite nice - to offer them help. If a man sees a woman struggling, it's not sexist to offer her help. It is sexist to see a woman not struggling with her bags and take them from her with the assumption that she might and you're actually doing her a favour. Things like this aren't that difficult to work out, surely?

It strikes me as odd that men might be struggling to know whether or not they should hold a door open for women for fear of being considered sexist when they seem very willing to yell sexual comments towards women in the street. This is sexual harassment, not 'freedom of speech' as some have tried to claim. When I wrote about this issue, I stressed the importance of context - essentially, if a man yells 'nice tits!' at me when I'm walking down the street wearing a polo neck, that's harassment; if he tells me 'nice tits!' when we're stood at a bar when I'm wearing a low cut dress and a push-up bra, that's a compliment I'm actually glad to receive. You can read the full post here.

Another way to look at this is to consider the comment in terms of consent. It could certainly be argued that my choice to wear a revealing outfit gives consent for people to comment on the part of my body it enhances and/ or exposes. When I've deliberately chosen an outfit that aims to disguise or hide them though, and I'm just trying to go about my daily business, I struggle to see how the same consent could be inferred by anyone.

Abi Wilkinson wrote an interesting examination of the consent issue, referencing the feelings of a rape survivor who experiences traumatic flashbacks when she receives unwanted attention and those of Paris Lees, who revels in it. Her point is that the man making the unsolicited comment towards a woman in the street doesn't know which one she is, whether she will feel flattered by it or fearful. The rape survivor told Wilkinson that she used to enjoy "burlesque pin-up style" but now worries she might be perceived as "having 'asked for it'" if she wears certain clothes. There's an implication here that rape completely destroys a woman's sexual confidence but I don't think that's what Wilkinson is trying to say - she's merely illustrating that it's possible to experience both angles. She describes her own position:
"I've received uninvited sexual attention that I've found incredibly upsetting and intimidating. Other times - I'm slightly ashamed to admit - crude, sexualised comments from strangers have given me a bit of an ego boost. Often, it's a weird combination of the two."
If you read my first post, you'll know that's pretty much my position on it too.

Wilkinson isn't critical of Lees' enjoyment of receiving such attention - she is critical of those who have told Lees that she isn't "a 'real' feminist" and is "betraying other women" by doing so. What she does criticise is the stance that, because some women do enjoy this attention, those who do not "should 'loosen up' and stop complaining." What? Like a rape survivor who is too afraid to leave her home because such attention causes her to have flashbacks? This is where the 'freedom of speech' issue comes into play - is the right for everyone to make uninvited sexual comments more important than the right of some people who are affected by them to be protected from them? The first thought that entered my head when Wilkinson posed this question was 'the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few' (1) - sometimes I am unconscionably nerdy - but I cannot possibly argue that there's a need for people to be able to make sexual comments towards anyone, whereas there is certainly a need for people to feel able to go out in public without jeopardising their mental stability. So I agree with Wilkinson's conclusions. Spock's claim is illogical anyway. And he contradicts himself later on (2).

Naturally I then went on to read Paris Lees' original article, where she asks "I Love Wolf Whistles and Catcalls; Am I a Bad Feminist?" As Wilkinson pointed out, the answer is no, and it's wrong for anyone to suggest so. Lees' article is an interesting read and I found myself agreeing with the vast majority of it because she too recognises that it's the context a sexual comment is made in that distinguishes an ego-boosting compliment from harassment. She quotes The Independent's social media editor Felicity Morse:
"If I'm dressed up in a sexy little something... sashaying down the street... I find a catcall rather appreciative. But if I'm out jogging or running to the bus stop, huddling past a building site in the rain, I find it intrusive."
Lees describes how she loves "catcalls... car toots... random men shouting 'Hello, beautiful!'" but makes a clear statement to men to stop doing things like saying "'I'd like to fuck you up the ass' as you drive past her in the street," because the latter is clearly harassment. Whilst some women - not necessarily only rape survivors - might sometimes feel that what Lees considers "harmless fun" is frightening, I wouldn't call to ban catcalling. Lees poses the question:
"If I smile next time a man wolf-whistles at me, does that make me a bad person? What if the next person he wolf-whistles at is a woman who's been raped? What if he ruins her day?"
Lees spoke to Ellie Mae O'Hagen of The Guardian about where catcalling fits in to the broader picture of sexual violence against women in a patriarchal society. Lees struggles with the idea that there's a connection between catcalling and rape and although I'd agree it's a terrible misnomer to postulate that 'street hecklers' or the 'readers of lads' mags' I do acknowledge it as a piece of that bigger picture that we shouldn't ignore.

Lees' conclusion is that catcalling and harassment are different things but says "I don't want to make other women feel pathetic if they don't enjoy street attention." She states she is a feminist because she doesn't like "men telling me how to think or behave or experience the world, and I don't like women doing it, either." There's a suggestion in her article - from another person, I must add - that how women feel when they are catcalled is a choice. It's a suggestion I have difficulty with. Whilst I'm all for owning your feelings and not seeking to blame others when you've fucked up and feel bad about it, the line between being controversial - which might be seen as offensive by some - and being downright deliberately offensive is often a very fine one indeed.

My own conclusion is this: some women - like Paris Lees - consistently revel in this sort of attention. Others - like Abi Wilkinson, Felicity Morse and me - like it sometimes and not others. Some detest it. Even that which the rest of us might consider relatively harmless might ruin their day. Ruin their life. I think it's important to remember that that's OK. However you feel about - I like Lees' term - "street attention", that's OK. As long as you remember that not everyone feels the same. I think that men who like to catcall need to look at the women they target more closely (yes, I am actually suggesting this). They'd soon see the difference between a woman who is "sashaying", who will probably not mind and might even enjoy such attention and one who is "huddling" and will not.

That said, there is a limit. Whilst a woman might choose to wear a revealing outfit with the purpose of (or not minding) inviting attention. It doesn't give people permission to do anything more than pay her a compliment, even if that comes in the form of a catcall she enjoys. You can look, but you may not touch without permission, not without consent. Women who dress provocatively might be asking for attention but they are not asking for 'it' - that's sexual assault at best, at worst it's rape.


One thing that pisses me off whenever women start talking about things like this is those men (and women) who bring up the 'not all men' issue (3). Yes, WE KNOW. It's often difficult to tell whether those who #notallmen are men who really just mean 'not me' and support feminism or whether they're men who think you're one of 'those feminists' and are the cause of the problem. It's like when anyone brings up domestic abuse - the victims of which are overwhelmingly women - and reminds us that it happens to men too. Yes it does, but the focus on female victims doesn't mean those of us who campaign on the issue are ignorant or dismissive of its male victims... fuck. I'm about to quote Spock again and then remind you that it's not actually a logical argument and comes entirely down to fucking context again....

I have a great deal of respect for the men who do 'get it'. Those who are aware of their male privilege and support feminism. I remember the emotional response I had when I first saw Daniel Craig - who then represented the ultimate symbol of male privilege and misogyny: James Bond - appear in drag in a video created to mark International Women's Day as Judi Dench's voice over reminded us that, even after decades of feminism, women are still very much second-class citizens. That two of them die every every week at the hands of a current or former partner. That's why Domestic Abuse campaigns focus on women; because two women die every week. It is still a very powerful piece:



I like to think that Daniel Craig's participated in this because he's one of those men, as I like to think the men who tweeted the link to that catcalling video are too. In the above film, Judi Dench says to Bond "I wonder if you've ever considered what it might be like to be [a woman]?" Here's another video that shows a man being given the same (albeit uninvited) opportunity and, given that the latter part of this post is about sexual harassment, it seems particularly appropriate to share it here:



I came across this quite by accident when I was doing background research for another post and I find it quite uncomfortable to watch. I mean, I love those arms too but shit, ladies - you ask first (4)! If this were a man grabbing a woman there'd be an outcry, but this sort of thing goes unchallenged. There might well be a twelve-foot high picture of the arms the women admire so in the background but this guy has turned up wearing a long-sleeved shirt. He's not inviting that attention. Arguably, the circumstances of this being an interview which will inevitably raise the subject (although... would it, if they hadn't put that picture in the background?) means I feel it's OK to ask the question. Hell, I'd even accept one of the women seeking permission to dispute his claim that that muscle definition is the result of "a lot of make-up" but they don't. Instead, two of them decide to cut him off mid-sentence and pounce on him like a couple of rabid dogs. Women who behave like this make it really difficult for women like me to speak out against street harassment. There are men who perpetrate it who use this sort of behaviour as justification for what they do - frequently under the #notallmen banner.

At this point, it sort of feels like I'm derailing my own argument by bringing this up, but the point I'm trying to make is that it's not just women who need to speak out about such things. Men do too - and not just to point out that they aren't all perpetrators of harassment or are also victims of it. Those men with good old-fashioned manners - those kind, generous men who are willing to offer help to an evidently needy stranger who might be too shy or too proud to ask for it when they want it - need to remind other men not to worry about how they're going to be perceived. Just as Paris Lees has never come across a woman who appreciated a man describing what sexual acts he'd like to do to her from his moving car, I've never come across anyone who appreciated someone leaving a door to swing back and smack them in the face. Those Men who recognise the difference between a sexually confident woman who actively chooses to display her ample bosom to all and might like you to tell her that you appreciate it, and a woman who dresses and moves in such a way as to draw as little attention as possible to hers, who spends every moment she's out in public praying that you won't say anything. Even - or perhaps especially - if she's the same woman. Those men need to remind other men that they do need to think about how a woman might perceive those actions. It's all about context. I appreciate perhaps this isn't that straightforward, given women's differing attitudes towards and experiences of street attention, or the outdated concept of chivalry becoming confused with what amount to basic manners, but many men do seem to understand this and many of the other issues important to feminism. Does that mean I feel sorry for the men who struggle with it? Hell no!




Footnotes:

(1) Is there seriously anyone reading this who doesn't know that's from Star Trek??

(2) https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2013/09/spocks-illogic-the-needs-of-the-many-outweigh-the-needs-of-the-few/

(3) Here is an excellent explanation of 'not all men' and what it actually means which explains why it's appearance in online dialogue is often confusing for feminists: http://time.com/79357/not-all-men-a-brief-history-of-every-dudes-favorite-argument/

(4) What happens here reminds me a bit of the uninvited bump-touching that pregnant women face. Their growing bump is the equivalent of that twelve-foot high picture, it's presence means it will be noticed, commented on, but touching a woman's bump without permission is also assault. You can buy maternity t-shirts bearing the slogan 'hands off the bump' as a means of preventing this unwanted touching. Maybe someone should start making 'hands off the biceps' t-shirts....

No comments:

Post a Comment