To wish women weren’t always presented in relation to a man

[Marvelo]

Heavens, my heart goes out to John Hunt (father of Hannah and Louise and husband of Carol, the women killed in the awful crossbow attack). But why is so much of the coverage focused on him and not the women? It’s completely irrelevant to the crime that he happens to be a commentator.

Just read an article in the Times on this-Hannah Hunt is defined in the headline as “one of the daughters of the BBC racing commentator”, the three women are then called “the family of the BBC horse racing commentator John Hunt”, then one of the women is described as “one of Hunt’s daughters” etc.

I know the media likes a celeb hook but it’s so inappropriate here (especially given the nature of the crime) to define these women primarily in relation to a man. I can’t imagine that John Hunt wants this.

It's 3 days since it happened. The suspect has only been charged within the past hour. The circumstances are likely to be unimaginable.
But it'll be off the news agenda by next week and you can then find another topic to air your pomposity.

BBC news coverage has named all three women, shown photographs of them, shown people at a vigil talking about what they were like as people and talked about the daughter's jobs/careers. So I disagree that the women are only being described as the wife and daughters of a man anyway.

My thoughts go out to John Hunt and his surviving daughter (I don't know her name, possibly because SHE wants privacy at this time.)

Its because he’s famous

I remember when the Lean In author’s husband died in an accidental death. No idea what his name was, just Sandberg’s husband tbh and that’s what the headlines said

What? I'm only saying it's news because a family member is known (not becuase he's a man) in a way that other DV cases are not. Not at all sure how that makes me pompous?

This is pretty horrible, his surviving daughter and himself are victims too.

But being referred to as 'dead woman' is fine?

He was the well known public figure so I agree it makes sense that he's the point of reference. Also for headlines it's much simpler to say "John Hunt's family" rather than "mother and daughters" (even less personal) or "Carol Hannah and Louise Hunt" (clunky and list-like).

If there is a feminist angle I suggest you consider that by taking her husband's surname and the title Mrs, Carol chose to publicly identify herself as "wife of Mr Hunt". Perhaps we should respect her choice even if it is one we would not make for ourselves.

Not that the OP bothered coming back, despite posting on a thread half an hour after creating this one...

But on the off-chance you might return, do you honestly think if JK Rowling's DH and DC had been murdered, they wouldn't be mentioned in relation to her?

I feel quite thankful that my two teenagers recognised the sexism.

Also interesting that the vote is 50:50 despite the comments being full of indignation that someone dare to broach the subject.

So what would your view be on Adele DH, or JK Rowlings DH, or any other Famous womans DH being reported on - would that be sexist if they are referred to as XXs husband???

@Marvelo what a shameful and disgusting OP.

@Puffinfoot
It's news because it's news, not because of their link to a racing commentator. It's news because of the horrific circumstances.

I agree that all domestic violence is appalling but this one does stand out for its own particular reasons, not because of who they're related to. The crime was in the news first thing on Wednesday, the names Wednesday pm. News coverage wasn't going to ignore the connection to John Hunt as it doesn't work like that. And if this case shines a brighter light on DV then something positive in the midst of horrific suffering can be a crumb of comfort somewhere, I hope.

Pompous probably wasn't the right word so I apologise for that.

Personally I think they should each be referred to primarily in their own right, and then secondarily by their relationship.

But no, it wouldn’t be sexist in that instance. (And I suspect you already know that.)

You're stretching here to find offense. He's a well known person, and they aren't.

YANBU - as soon as I heard Hunt was a (fairly minor) celebrity I thought to myself that all the coverage would be focused on their relationship to him, it's very distasteful.

Well it's always been clear that some MNetters just slap at their keypads, without giving it any intelligent thought.

Much like the OP has done.

I agree with all those PPs who are saying it's perfectly understandable in this case because John Hunt is someone who's in the public eye and if something happened to the family of a publicly-known woman the roles would be reversed but still ..... some parts of the media do seem to be forgetting the victims in this.

I looked on the Mirror website the other day and there were SEVEN different headline articles about 'John Hunt's family' but not one that actually named Carol, Hannah and Louise. That seemed out of order.

But I think the PP does have a point about cases where there isn't some "celebrity" or "public figure" hook for the newspapers to use. Then female victims are often mentioned in relation to their family, or worse, to the perpetrator.

Why not? Because sexism is on something that can happen against a woman?

If they were the daughters of a famous woman I think the famous woman would most likely have been killed too, as their mother was.

I think it's the fact they are referring to the women as John hunts family and often not even naming them. That's what I have a problem with. They were their own people and are victims of this disgusting crime they deserve to be named not referred to by their relationship to the famous male in the family. Maybe it's because he's famous not because he is male but it makes no difference to my opinion these women deserve to be named and seen as more than just his relatives

Derek Draper was well known in his own right though. I'd actually never heard of her, but I knew who he was because of his reasonably high profile political work.

I would say that's really not common though and that Kate was far more of a household name.

Completely agree with this. Reporting should be centred on the victims here. This story would be newsworthy irrespective of the connection to John Hunt, so it does the victims a disservice to focus reporting on that context.

It's not like Derek Draper/Kate Garraway because his health ordeal, tragic though it was, would not have been newsworthy (or at least nothing like the attention it had) were it not for his relationship to Kate (yes I know he was known in some circles but nowhere near a household name).

Reporting should centre the victims.

I'm all for banging the feminist drum, but you are off track on this one. Coverage I've seen is quite sensitive and reference the family of, but isn't focused on him. The fact is he is the one who is left, and what he is going through is unimaginable.

Poor bloke. He's just lost 3 family members in the most horrific manner possible and now there are a bunch of screeching harpies arguing his relevance to the reporting?
It's like being in a parallel universe!!
Somebody help me quick!!