Is this an odd/slut-shamey comment? (Re Penelope Davis)

[Amethyst24]

"Nicola Crawford, a close friend of Mrs Davis, who had a number of failed relationships before meeting her husband, said she “wouldn’t hurt a fly”.

From the Telegraph. Irrelevant, isn't it? Unless they're implying that the man who's been arrested was a former partner of the victim?

I noticed the same thing in The Times and argued with DH about it. It said something like "Married in May after a stream(??) of failed relationships.

I always find the term 'failed relationship' bizarre. Who is to say that a short term relationship wasn't a great success? Why not say 'short-relationships'?

Maybe, like you say, it is a signal that there may be men out there with a grudge. I didn't like it though.

She was a friend of friends. She was, by all accounts a lovely woman, friendly, kind, liked a laugh and a joke, worked hard.

I have no clue why her fucking the entire band of the Coldstream Guards every night of the week before she married would have any bearing on the fact that she was stabbed, multiple times and three men have now been arrested.

Pisses me off, sorry.

With my journalist head on, I'm thinking that the papers all want to appear to know what happened, or they do but aren't allowed to say. With my feminist head on, I think it's dreadful reporting.

If a man was stabbed in a random attack, it wouldn't be reported as, "Father of many, Joe Schmoe, who had a string of failed relationships behind him..." Even though that's true of many man who are victims of violence.

Also, she had a job. Okay, she worked in Sainsbury's and perhaps she wouldn't have defined herself by her work. But if it were a man, it would be reported as, "Joe Schmoe, a construction worker..." Whereas she's "mother of five".

A quick glance at the Relationships board on this site emphasises the fact that the length of time 2 people have been together can be pretty meaningless when it comes to "judging" the quality of a relationship and i include myself in that. (ive put judging in inverted commas because i dont think we should be judging other peoples relationships at all.) And the judgement does mostly seem to be reserved for women.

Sorry i meant i include my relationship in that.

My brain seems to have dropped down into my arse this week

They have got their bloody priorities wrong these journos Her private life is fuck all to do with why she was brutally murdered.

So, if you're a woman, having 'a string of failed relationships' behind you is the murder victim equivalent of a man being 'a known associate of drug-dealers' when it comes to determining how much you might have deserved it.

Surely anyone who didn't marry their childhood sweetheart has 'a string of failed relationships behind them'? It's such a loaded turn of phrase for such an ordinary lifestyle.

Again, to be fair, when I first heard the news of her murder, I assumed it was DV. It's possible that journalists are assuming the same, with or without more information, and in that context her relationship history would be relevant - but only one chapter of it.

Because it's a fact that a woman is far more likely to suffer violence at the hands of someone she knows, so, again, her "string of relationships" could be relevant. Whereas men are more likely to be killed by strangers, aren't they?

She'd been married for six months, apparently. So sad.

Even if it was dv, a 'string of relationships' isn't relevant - the only relevant one is the one with the killer.

If you travelled regularly in taxis and were attacked by a taxi driver, the drivers for all the previous journeys wouldn't have any bearing on the attack, if that makes sense as an analogy.