Skip to main content

But just where do you draw the line, precisely?

Coverage of the possible serial killings in Suffolk has afforded me a certain grim amusement over the last couple of days. The manner in which it's been reported is akin to a breathless schoolgirl informing her mum that Johnny's asked her to the formal. "But Mum, he's murdering hookers!"

Seriously, it's just so fucking overexcitable. From the slew of maps and graphics to the tediously ineivitable tagging of the killer(s) as the "Ipswich Ripper" (which seems wildly innapropriate given that the only method of death of which we've so far been informed has been asphyxiation). The tabloids (and, sadly, the Independent) have collectively wanked thremselves into a frenzy over a story which I cannot help but point out is, at it's very essence, the story of five dead women. Retreat to first principles. Killing. People. Is. Wrong.

Except they're not being defined as people, are they? the victims are being defined as prostitutes, as ludicrous a display of semantics as if five men were killed, all of whom played badminton in their spare time and it was trumpeted that the killer had an aversion to shuttlecocks. Certainly the killer(s) is/are targeting streetwalkers, but why do they have to be defined in the press as such? They are women. Dead women. Just doing a job.

Aha, but it's somehow, intangibly, their fault, isn't it? Women eh? Wandering around with their legs and their breasts, allowing us to look at them, they should all be locked up. Eh? This is the crux of the problem, a culture which sees no problem in the Lynx advert mentioned below likewise sees no problem in stigmatising some of the most vulnerable members of society. The old sex as commodity line is sold time and time again but it's one way traffic. Prostitution is the less publically acceptable face of male sexuality. Whilst it's fine and dandy to gaze at FHM's glossy High Street Honeys, or have a swift J Arthur on your lunchbreak to "Nikki and Dawn: together for the first time!" in Nuts or whatever and it's fine and dandy to be a High Street Honey or Nikki or Dawn the slightly more honest physical paradigm interface is well, not to be discussed.

Personally I don't know that one can exist without the other. I do suspect that in our hypersexualised society it's impossible to have a rational debate about our attitudes towards the opposite sex as the pitch has been so impossibly queered (pun unintended). The one thing I do know is that the press and public attitude towards these poor murdered girls stinks to high heaven.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The last day of the county season

 Look, I never claimed to be cool. As a a cliched middle aged male, I have a number of interests which, if not exactly niche, are perhaps not freighted with glamour. Not exactly ones to set the heart racing. I yearn not for wakeboarding, my cocaine with minor celebrities days are well and truly behind me, you are unlikely to catch me writing graffiti under a motorway bridge. I do cycle, but only as a way of getting from point A to point B, you are unlikely, you will be relieved to hear, to see me purchasing lycra and or/doing triathlons. I like going for a nice walk. I'm fond of a good book. I have a deep attachment to county cricket. Yes, that's right, county, not even the international stuff which briefly captures the nation's fleeting attention once in a blue moon. County cricket. Somerset CCC to be precise, though I'll watch / listen to any of it. The unpopular part of an unpopular sport. Well, that's the public perception, the much maligned two men and a dog. N...

D-Day Dos and Don'ts for Dunces

Oh Rishi. Lad.  You have, by now, almost certainly become aware of the Prime Minister(for the time being)'s latest gaffe, as he returned home early from D-Day commemoration events in France, in order to "concentrate on an interview" which, as it turns out was already pre-recorded. There's been a fair bit of outrage, the word "disrespectful" is being bandied about a lot.  The word I'd use is "stupid". It is often said of the Brits that we have no religion but that the NHS is the closest thing we have to one. This, I think, is incorrect, because the fetishisation of WWII is to my mind, far closer to being our object of national veneration.  I understand why, last time we were relevant, fairly straightforwardly evil oppo, quite nice to be the good guys for a change, I absolutely get why the British public worship at the altar of a conflict which, I note, was a very long time ago. I think it's a bit daft, personally, but I understand it. So you...

The three most tedious food debates on the internet.

 I very much only have myself to blame. One of the less heralded aspects of running a business is that one is, regrettably, obliged to maintain a social media presence, it's just expected. And, if I have to do it, I'm going to do it very much in my own voice, as I don't tend to have time to stop and think when I'm bunging something on Insta. It seems to have worked okay so far. But, as a man better versed on the online world than he would prefer, I should have known better than to stick up a picture of our bread rolls, fresh out of the oven. In my defence, I did preface said picture by saying "one of the most tedious debates on the internet is what these are called...". Doubtless you've seen the argument somewhere, it's one of the workaday tropes that shithouse FB pages use to drive engagement. Need a few thousand clicks to raise the profile of your godawful local radio station/page about how everything was better in the past/shelter for confused cats?...