Debs Grayson, A Drunk Teenage Girl, and How The Patriarchy Stops Men Helping

[EmbarrassingAdmissions]

A very thoughtful thread based on an encounter - and one that raises questions about just who the patriarchy helps and hinders in some circumstances:

Had an encounter with a super drunk teenage girl the other night that has really stuck with me. Among other things it was a textbook case of how a patriarchy plays out interpersonally and can’t be solved by a few ‘good men’ 1/
The girl had passed out on a train and travelled to the final stop. 2 young men had seen her friend leave her alone on the journey and were worried about her. They woke her up and tried to explain where she was. I clocked the situation and went over. 2/
She was scared and disoriented+clearly couldn’t get home by herself. Without discussion, we fell into gendered roles e.g. someone was going to have to touch her as she could barely stand up + as the not-man in this situation we all knew that had to be me. 3/ [cont.]

archive is easier to read: archive.is/dODxB

Original Twitter thread: twitter.com/debdebdubdub/status/1405118414578982913?s=20

Really interesting, I didn't know the rule about taxi drivers not being able to touch their passengers but it makes sense.

The poster mentions gender identity and it's odd how this even comes up. Has the teenager been male the men on the train would have been able to carry him without help. As a woman I would not have been able to even half carry most teenage boys, drunk and unresponsive, to another train seat let alone physically off the train.

The men on the train felt unable to touch the girl because of them being male and because of male pattern violence. It wasn't because of the patriarchy. Had they identified as female for the purposes of helping her (the girl), what difference would it make? There would still be the insinuation of potential harm from them to her and she would still have been frightened of them, the woman would still need to have stepped in.

For me, Debs' later comments about how plainly the men were trying to help and act (effectively) as responsible members of society and this was a situation in which understandable sensitivities precluded them from acting further on those impulses and ultimately doing their fair share as citizens.

No, I haven't carried a drunk teenage boy anywhere, but there have been times when I've left my seat to sit with one, asked for his phone, and contacted the ICE to work out where he was going and arrange for someone to pick him up. And now I'm wondering why none of the men on the train/whatever did that.

Didn't think to do it perhaps. I'm not sure that I've got an emergency contact set up on my phone to be honest.

I work on the railways, I've encountered a barely conscious young man on a late night train. I knew which stop he needed but when it came to it he was only just responsive and certainly in no fit state to get out of his seat. After speaking to Control I continued to the last station on the line where he was now sober enough to walk (though still not quite communicating coherently) and left him in the charge of the staff there to wait for the first train back home in the morning, a couple of hours later. His phone did ring just after we'd left (perhaps someone waiting to give him a lift) but I didn't manage to answer it in time.

Gracie’s story makes Gracie sound like a responsible person. I’m not quite sure what Gracie’s wider point about the patriarchy is through? Gracie is a they, I think? Gracie talks about “not a man” with respect to others like the flat mate.

Sorry misnamed Debs throughout. I wish natural language was allowed (or editing)

Didn't think to do it perhaps. I'm not sure that I've got an emergency contact set up on my phone to be honest.

I look for ICE on a phone as a reflex - even in that situation, if somebody is incoherent, or scarcely rousable. There have been times when I've been anosmic/hyposmic so couldn't be sure if they were smelling alcohol (wouldn't always work) and needed to check if they were diabetic or coming out of one of the forms of epilepsy.

I'm not entirely sure about Debs' patriarchy comment but thought that thread had some useful perspectives that illustrated the various parties involved and how they cobbled together, 'doing the right thing'.

The relative risk of being a bad agent was an interesting way of exploring this.

Slightly off the point but, if I’d been in Debs’ position, I’d have let the drunk girl crash on my floor and then get herself home in the morning, rather than pay for a cab “halfway across London” and back.

@PaterPower

Slightly off the point but, if I’d been in Debs’ position, I’d have let the drunk girl crash on my floor and then get herself home in the morning, rather than pay for a cab “halfway across London” and back.

Depending on whether or not I'd been able to speak to the girl's ICE, I'm unsure about this - I wouldn't want to alarm her when she woke up in unfamiliar surroundings* or to cause concern to the family. Although I suppose all this depends on whether she had an ICE and people who would miss her.

*I'd also feel obliged to sit up with her to make sure she didn't vomit while semi-conscious so there are many reasons I'd want to be sure she had people she knew around her (if possible).

I’m interested in what they would have done if a woman (or “not-man” to use the Tweeters preferred word) had been there. Would the men have felt the prohibition against touching her was too strong to overcome and left her there, or called the police, or tried to move her? I’m not saying there is a right or wrong answer though my preference if it was my daughter would be for someone to call the police. Just curious how that situation would have worked out on the absence of a woman / not-man.

Doh! First line should be:
So ’m interested in what they would have done if a woman (or “not-man” to use the Tweeters preferred word) had NOT been there.

I can see why the men were more comfortable not doing the touching given a woman was there, but I don't think they'd have been wrong to if Debs hadn't been there. I've been looked after by blokes before when drunk and it never occurred to me that they shouldn't have. Although they were known to me. This was a while back though. I feel we've got more anxious about this sort of thing recently?

She sort of ruined her point by trying to be performatively inclusive with the "women, non-binary and femme" comment halfway down.

If I was drunk, distressed and alone on a train and a man came to help me, touch me, and get into a taxi with me, I would feel any less vulnerable or at risk of being taken advantage of if the man said he identified as 'non-binary' or anything else.