Subtle objectifying in the upskirting debacle

[ChipsForSupper]

Today at work I had to research various articles from different media sources regarding last week's news story about the "upskirting" bill being rejected after MP, Christopher Chope's, objection to the passing of a private member's bill.

Nearly all of the articles were, to some degree, critical that this bill was not passed and definitely reported upskirting as a bad thing which was demeaning for women. However, nearly every article/news-site/blog etc also showed a posed picture of a woman's skirt and legs - generally quite a pretty skirt and attractive legs. There were no posed pictures of aggressive looking men holding cameras.

So, even when reporting how terrible it is that women are objectified - the images accompanying this outrage are objectifying and titillating. And, of course, the emphasis on the these pictures implies that this is all a problem in the first place, not because men are predatory, but because women are just so attractive - it can't be helped, really. Unavoidable.

Yes I noticed this - article I saw had a snap which which was from low down showing legs and up skirt (not all the way).

It's bizarre. Can't they see how tone deaf it is?

I do not get the , aggressive looking man comment.

I do not get the , aggressive looking man comment.

Really? Well, I suppose it could have been a depiction of a sniggering boy -I don't know exactly what sort of pathetic people indulge in 'upskirting'. The point is, if they had to have a photo with the piece, why choose one which further objectifies women?

Well, most of the articles seemed to spout the view that upskirting is an act of aggression - it's unacceptable and makes victims feel as though they have suffered from some form of aggression. But instead of an accompanying image showing an aspect of this aggression - such as the aggressor holding the camera used to upskirt in the first place, most images showed a sexy image of legs. This subtly alters the emphasis of the article away from the perpetrator and puts it back onto the victim. Plus, ironically, the articles purport to disagree with upskirting, saying it is a bad thing, but then show you an image that is very close to the type of image it is supposedly against.

I don't know how else to explain it really!

You explained it perfectly well.

Yes op I noticed this too and it really bothered me.

You certainly did. I explained this to my dad, who didn't understand what the fuss was all about, being of the generation that 'admires' a pretty woman walking down the street, views it as a compliment and for some reason thinks that upskirting is the same order of behaviour.
The tweet about women dressing appropriately so this wouldn't happen is an Outre example of why this needs to be criminalised, and the suggestive pictures accompanying the reporting are the flip side to the idea of covering up - there's no focus on the violation aspect, it's all a bit Carry On Camera.
We're still trying to wrap our heads around consent as a society, and we're not doing very well.

I do not get the , aggressive looking man comment.

Are you assuming it's happy, nice, smiling, well-adjusted men sexually harassing women in this way? Really?

Yes, one I saw on the bbc was not far off upskirting itself.

They could have shown a man's shoe with a shoe-mounted camera on it. It would shift the blame back to the perp and educate the reader about the tactics used.

Good spot about it always being a beskirted woman shown, I'd not conciously clocked that.

Great observation and deserving of a newspaper article if any journalists are reading...

It's the usual DARVO that the media use - they really need to be called out time and time again as these images form part of the social gas lighting of "its the woman's fault"

Thx for raising the issue

There were no posed pictures of aggressive looking men holding cameras. Excellent point.

When watching the news after the bill was rejected, I saw some news footage of CCTV of men caught in the act of taking a photo up a woman/girl's skirt. I realised it was the first time I had seen it. I expect the majority of the people who saw it found it abhorrent.

Unless someone had taken the time to read the accounts of females who have been victim to this act, many might wrongly assume 'upskirting' refers to the photographing of women's underwear when they wear skirts that are extremely short, or when the wind catches their skirt, or paparazzi catching the shot when female celebs get into their car. When you see it for what it truly is, caught on film, no-one can deny the crime is carried out by agressive, perverted, creepy men.

I agree we need the media to more readily put out the image of perverted, predatory men and stop illustrating their stories with women's/girls' bodies.

Oh dear. I googled for shoe cameras and got to Object%5D Gizmodo, which in turn took me to a vendor's online catalogue. Can anyone think of a benign use for a camera concealed in a toilet brush? I can't.

I might start another thread this evening, once I've analysed what I've found and how it would be abused in practice.

I have not seen on the TV or in the newspaper any images of up skirting, so I am not entirely sure what it is or how it is done.
Can someone explain what is involved.
Of course I have a rough idea what it means, but how would someone do this without it been obvious ?.

They could have done something useful and showed the different types of cameras voyeurs use, to educate readers.

The media report most crime against women this way, thus undercutting any good the actual words might do.

Vicky1990

lmgtfy.com/

They could have done something useful and showed the different types of cameras voyeurs use, to educate readers.

Hum... there would probably be some who'd see that as a 'how to' lesson.

Crow. What is that link, it doesn't seem to be working.
It has just occurred to me, and I have seen nothing about it in the media that that up skirting has not been discussed as having male victims.
For example men's kilts, I have seen many times on the TV women lifting up a mans kilt and pictures been taken.
Also in the press the other day a boy wearing a skirt to school as it was to hot to wear trousers.
Shouldnt they also be protected by any future laws, I think any law should include victims of eithr sex or gender, and perpetrators of either sex ot gender should be punished.

Our friendly poster is back to what about the men all over the thread.

This happens to schoolgirls, when the police were asked, of the forces that kept records (not all of them), the youngest victim was 8.

I know that you are only really interested in derailing threads about things that happen to women with WATM, BUT,

Do you care when it's children who are the victims rather than adult women? Does that tip things for you a bit? Even if you struggle to see why so many of the violations that happen to adult women are any kind of issue at all.

And no I'm not going to link or quote you have been all over the boards for ages and it's fucking tedious. "These women have been raped isn't it awful?" "Well sure but we need to talk about the impact on men".

Whatever.

Sorry - youngest victim police had had a report about was a girl aged 10.

But, what about the men, am I right?

"Upskirting" is illegal in Scotland and the law is neutral on sex of victims.

So the majority of kilt wearers are covered.

I can't imagine a law in the UK would be sex specific either.

But you don't really care about that do you, a little googling would have told you all this.

For ther others on the thread

I watched question time last nigth and this came up, a female panelist said that she didnt' want a law against this as laws like this infatilise women, she and her friends can look after themselves, and it was becoming illegal to touch a woman on the arm (rough summary).

Where do they get women like this?

There was a teacher taking photos up the skirts of the girls in his class, police said they couldn't prosecute as it fell between the cracks in the existing laws (which is why a change is wanted). Why does this woman think this is OK? What does she expect the girls to do, I doubt they even knew to start with. What do women like this get out of saying yeah sex offences against women and girls should be dealt with by them, it's not a police matter. Are there any crimes that are more common to be male on male that she wants off the books?

It was someone called Ella Whelan

twitter.com/Ella_M_Whelan?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

I don't use twitter but that was the first link that came up.