broadcastinghouse r4(11 Posts)
Grr. Claire fox on radio 4 just there. Worried that we are in danger of demonising all men and all behaviour as a result of the js scandal. That everyone (women) gets groped at some point and that you might want to deal with it by slapping the guy but it doesn't make it a wider problem seriously? Also that we're in danger of seeing "banter" - that bloody word again as just as bad as sexual assaults etc. Just so dismissive of the culture that must inevitably must lie behind these disgusting abuses.
Can't quite figure it out really - does she want groping and casual sexism to continue in case we offend men's sensitive egos by telling them it's unacceptable? There was an article on the guardian online this morning written by a female TV producer outlining the continuing existence of a deeply sexist culture and the effects on women of this banter and casual groping - can't link as on phone but worth a read.
It's the whole "it's personal not political" bollocks isn't it. Because it is too scary to think that ingrained sexism is systemic.
I mean she says that it is systemic and then denies it all in one sentence. That's quite a feat . Denial is her friend.
Also, just this summer, we had the case of Brand demanding a crew member show him her breasts before he would continue working. But despite the wide reporting of the matter and the lack of denial that it happened, no one (except the poor crew member) has to live with the consequences. There was a tiny bit of hand wringing in some of the press, but Brandt continues to work as ever, the producers and directors are not held to account for allowing sexual harrasment on their set. It's all just accepted as "a bit cheeky".
Claire Fox is sticking her head in the sand.
fork IMO the BBC encourages its presenters to use a 'devil's advocate' form of house style for reporting serious subjects, but this backfires after a while, as no one is quite sure if the journalist stands by that confrontational statement. I wish the journalists were allowed to express their own opinions more, so we'd know what they really meant, I'm never quite sure if it is the presenters question or if it is the producer telling them to ask something.
Two things...I will never understand the mindset of women who care more for men's feelings (worried they will be demonised) than they do about the women who are the ones who are actually being truly victimised! Well, I guess it has something to do with aligning themselves with the more powerful group so that they don't get victimised by these men themselves, so I see they are cowardly and weak. But the damage these women cause makes me so angry.
Secondly, just reading the Guardian article and how prevalent harassment is, I wonder if maybe we will see the beginning of the end of dopey men trying it on with colleagues. Surely the Jimmy Savile scandal will mae them think twice at least??
Thing is Claire Fox was a guest, not a presenter and those were her views, expressed quite freely and clearly as a result of her choice of focus on the newspaper review section of the show
Oh, I see exactly what you mean now . I'd assumed Claire Fox was the presenter.
Surely as this type of 'low level' harassment is so endemic, dealing with it by slapping the hand away just deals with it on a personal, once off basis. That man may not then be slapped away the next time, due to the victim's fear of losing a job etc and he then assumes he can continue with his inappropriate behaviour.
Most workplaces have guidelines in terms of appropriate / inappropriate behaviour. Maybe the BBC etc need to update their HR statements, it cannot be acceptable for this to be part of the culture any longer.
the Anne Robinson interview that your article linked to has the following quote:
" Looking back, we used to keep lists of men who weren't safe in taxis, "NST", and those who were "NSL", not safe in lifts, they were a bit quicker with their hands than NSTs."
Then she later goes on to say:
"(Sexual harrassment) It's not something I came into contact with. And if I had, I just wouldn't have put up with it. But that's me. The conspiracy of silence at Stoke Mandeville is far more distressing than the fact that Liz Kershaw didn't have the sense to say "Stop" when someone groped her in a BBC studio. What disappoints me now is that girls leave school and university with decent brains and qualifications, but at no point along the line has anyone taught them a few tricks of the trade, whether it's negotiating a salary or how to deal with a predatory male.
She clearly has no idea what sexual harassment actually is! And then goes on to suggest that women should be trained to deal with 'predatory males'- why do women insist on blaming the victims of these crimes instead of putting the blame on the perpetrators
You have all said it very well: victim blaming, siding with the powerful perpetrators... Life as usual in the status quo
LOL this person Claire Fox is the Director of the Institute for New Ideas ( what a laugh) .....well she yabbered on an on about not demonising all men and how we are all 'over reacting specially the 'feminists' she actually said that!
Not once did she come up with a 'New Idea' on how we should all react or deal with the problem of male harrassment sexual assualt violence and rape.....
Hey Claire better close your office down your obviously trading under a false premise!!!!!!
Join the discussion
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.