Observer article on women's safety

[TheBiologyStupid]

An article in yesterday's Observer by Martha Gill was about an incident in which a female gym user was attacked and fought off a man in a gym. Using the title "Women aren’t always safe, even in gyms. But fear is a good way of reining them in" (and subtitle "Lone female fights off her attacker. Is it inspiring or proof of inherent danger? Well, maybe it’s both") it discusses the way in which women's safety is talked about. Gill writes:

Isn’t it better to be safe than sorry? Does it matter if daily risks to women are exaggerated, if it helps keep them safe? Well, here’s an argument that it does matter. In patriarchies, theorists might say, violence against women in public places is not only a social evil – it serves a political purpose. It is used to police. It tells women where they are supposed to go and where they are not. When women are attacked on the streets, or at universities, or in the workplace, they understand these places are not for them.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/05/lone-woman-fights-attacker-inspring-proof-inherent-danger-maybe-both

What do women here make of the article?

What do women here make of the article

Are you a woman? What do you make of it?

I can only give my personal opinion, I don't speak for all women. I don't particularly like "women are unsafe" narratives and I know plenty of women who won't do certain things because of safety fears. I think it does irrationally limit them. I've never really felt the same despite being short (not small anymore though) - I'm very loud and I like being out at night.

I agree it is used to police women's behaviour and also distract from domestic/intimate partner violence.

I thought that lucky journalist has not had much exposure to being in a vulnerable position.

Harvey Weinstein. Wayne Couzens. All these men probably started with a bit of flashing. Which is what most women, myself included, have seen over the years.

The journalist is so naive just going to the end point of being attacked. There’s so many experiences that most women have had that they try to avoid again. Bit of groping, bit of flashing no one reports but we know we don’t want to be in that position.

But then at least one pupil gets raped inside a U.K. school every school day. That’s a lot of women carrying a lot of trauma.

There’s only one time a man ran towards me when I thought I was going to be attacked as he had a bloodied knife. I froze. I thought he was going for me but he ran past me as he was trying to kill another woman. She hid and the police got to him because he found her. Avoidance behaviour works.

I thought it was a really interesting article and chimed with things I've been thinking about this issue lately. As a woman who has never felt particularly vulnerable or unsafe, it is striking how many people have felt entitled to pass judgment or police my behaviour when I have not been sufficiently fearful. These same people will happily regale me with tales of their hilariously 'accident prone' (male) friend who keeps on getting mugged when out alone at night. The whole thing is deeply paternalistic - women are to be wrapped in cotton wool and can't be trusted to make their own risk assessments and decide their own priorities. It is in stark contrast to the message we are given after a terrorist attack - that if we change our behaviour the terrorists will have won.

I'm not sure I buy the theory entirely. I don't think our society's acceptance of VAWG is primarily driven by a desire to control women - more by a desire not to control men. All the ways to make women safer outside the home would involve restrictions on men - and we can't have that, can we?

I feel there is always so much emphasis on the woman here - and always seems to be. Not every woman could have defended herself in this situation no matter how hard she fought back, and nor should she have to. We need to be asking about the man. What made him, finding himself alone with a woman, feel that he should take this opportunity to attack her? What are his influences? Who are the people he relates to? What is the pattern of his behaviour? What is the message that we can send to other men that this is not acceptable?

Some of this is a class issue. Women living, working and travelling in places dominated by crime and anti-social behaviour will often have their fears founded by daily, observable realities.

Pus the safety money buys. Black cabs, a fuck off fund, working sociable hours and all of that.

Working evenings in South London and no money for anything but the bus wasn't 'safe'