For the first time ever, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) has upheld a complaint on the basis of sexism

[IwantToRetire]

Might not be the most earth shattering thing ever, but thought it should be noted as a first.

Of the 25,100 received, IPSO investigated only two complaints about Jeremy Clarkson’s column about Meghan Markle in The Sun – those from the Fawcett Society, the UK’s leading gender equality membership charity, and the WILDE Foundation. Today, we announce that Fawcett’s complaint has been upheld.

Since it was established in 2014 IPSO has never upheld a complaint about sexism – and that changes today. This landmark decision is a real opportunity for our media to catch up with what women have known for years – misogyny and hate are not acceptable and they can no longer be dressed up as satire or banter. Misogyny that normalises violence, and coverage that blames women who experience violence, have no place in our biggest national newspapers, or anywhere in our society. Today’s decision will help to elevate the state of public discourse about women and tackle misogyny in our media. Editors must take note and ensure their processes are fit for purpose in the twenty first century. There must be a thorough and transparent investigation into how on earth these toxic comments made it onto the pages of one of our biggest newspapers.

Full press release https://www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/news/fawcett-complaint-about-clarkson-column-upheld-on-basis-of-sexism

Thanks for this. Great if it goes some way (any way at all) to making misogyny unacceptable in public speech.

'The Fawcett Society....the UK's leading gender equality membership society'

I'm not holding my breath in excitement here, to be honest.

Not a win for free speech. Also, the newspaper was not fined so it's pretty meaningless.

And IPSO can bugger off because they compel the speech of news outlets to say he/she when reporting about rapists.

*she/her

It's typical of the Fawcett's lack of impact on issues relating to women - after the event and a pointless exercise.
It was a vile piece.
The Sun withdrew it.
Clarkson apologised.

Should he have written it? No. But is he allowed to write it? Reluctantly, he is under the terms of free speech.
There's so much the Fawcett Society could be doing in terms of the diminution of women's rights. To pick this issue seems an odd choice to put it mildly.

And yes - an organisation like IPSO that compels the press to lie to the public about the sex of rapists, paedophiles and sex offenders is of no use in a democracy.

I think maybe those responding have missed the point.

It is the first time that a newspaper has been found to have been sexist.

As I said in my OP, not that earth shattering, but given that women aren't thought to be important enough to be deserving of protection from hate on the basis of their sex, its amazing that IPSOS even has an inkling what sexism is.

And quite honestly its irrelevant what else Fawcett may or may not do, but at least they (along with the Wilde Foundation) took action.

What would be good is if more organisation and individuals started challenging how women are written about in the media.

I don't think we've missed the point at all. Why would any of us be pleased that IPSO & Fawcett can suddenly spot sexism when neither organisation can accurately identify what a woman is and both engage in deceiving the public.

I suppose it's progress - the principle has been established and in its way it's a landmark. Let's hope it isn't the only case in which sexism or misogyny is officially censured.

the principle has been established and in its way it's a landmark

Exactly!

That's just reducing the actual issue, ie a breakthrough in terms of sexism being officially acknowledged, because the wrong sort of person / organisation achieved that.

Its just childish. Women's rights overall still need to be fought for.

If you are saying no we should all sit on our hands and do absolutely nothing to preserve or enhance women's rights until all groups sign up to our view point, even more women's rights than those already lost, will go down the drain.

It is possible to do both.

Yep. This - highly pervasive - 'purity imperative' is so self-defeating, it feels like a fifth column operation to undermine feminism. We should take our wins where we find them, build on them whenever we can.

It is a good thing. MM is a woman who gets far too much grief.

I think she's a pain in the arse and a grifter, @elgreco. Sorry!
But criticism of her as a person is different from sex-based insults to her as a woman. And that's the point here.

I must say I was surprised (and pleased) when I saw the reporting was about complaints of sexism - given that it has been decided that misogyny is not a hate crime.

What would be good is if more organisation and individuals started challenging how women are written about in the media.
The press release says 25,100 did challenge this. What would be good is if IPSOS now started investigating more than 0.0000797% of the complaints it receives.

It's great news. We should all make more official complaints about sexism.