Overheard in the office today (in relation to Sarah Everard)

[ImFree2doasiwant]

All female environment, discussing something work related involving a murderer. Someone says that (paraphrasing) it's really annoying that everyone is jumping on the bandwagon about women being attacked when it could just as easily have been a man (rather than Sarah Everard) , would there have been the same uproar etc. Another woman appears from a different section "totally agree with you statistically men are more likely to be attacked by men. Not women". Also points out that she was white, middle class and the media doesn't report on other murders so much (fair point) . Also stated its the fault if the media thatcwomen walk home scared, with their keys ready etc.

Now I don't know the statistics, but I do know women are murdered men daily. They were very sure of themselves and I didn't feel well equipped enough to argue the cause. It was a bit "all lives matter"

Can anyone help me out here?

You could start off by pointing them here: kareningalasmith.com/counting-dead-women/

Thanks, I did see something similar doing the rounds on Facebook.

I know (I think...) that women are more likely to be attacked/killed by someone they know, and the risk to domestic abuse victims increases hugely if/when they are trying to leave.

I don't think uts just the media that causes women fear.

What "help" exactly to you want? Men are murdered at three times the rate of women, the number of men being murdered is increasing year on year, the number of women being murdered is falling year on year.

The fear is disproportionate to the risk, as a woman you are nine times more likely to die in a car accident than be murdered, you are 62 times more likely to die in a car crash than be killed by someone you do not know well. 50 times more women die of breast cancer than are murdered every year. Missing a mammogram or a smear test is more likely to lead to death than being murdered.

Sarah Everard was heavily reported not because she was white, or middle class, but because her case was exceptionally unusual. She was not involved in crime, nor was it a partner, she was abducted off the street, in the end we found out that the crime was committed by a police officer which is even more unusual. A hypothetical Steve Everard would have been safe from Couzens due to motive, but statistically less safe overall. The media reports unusual or particular emotive crimes, the public is not actually that interested in a situations where criminals kill criminals, so long as it does not spill over into civilian life.

Violence against women is an issue and our society needs to find a way to address it, but it should also not be overplayed or exaggerated as then it both increases fear and discredits the campaigners. I want the UK to be a safer place, now and in the future, for both my daughter and my son.

It's the implication that people "all the womens rights lot" are making a fuss unnecessarily, why make a fuss over 1 woman being abducted , raped, murdered, set on fire, when it happens to men too?

There was such a big thing few months ago, with women saying they had been harassed, sexually assaulted, followed, that they walked a different way, made different arrangements to get hone , were afraid, abd lots and lots of men coming out to say that none of it would even enter their heads.

Are women unnecessarily afraid? I know I've been followed while walking home at night. Had someone in a van with "dog section" written on it, try to pull me over late at night. Groped. Sexually assaulted. I don't think I know a woman who hasn't suffered sone of it at some point .