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

A whole new world.

I appear to have moved into the pub. Now, I don't wish to give the impression that this has come as a complete surprise to me, we'be been planning to do so since shortly after I bought it, but still, it's sort of snuck up on me and now I'm waking up and thinking what happened? How come I'm here? The reason for this discombobulation is that this move was initially a temporary measure. Mrs Coastalblog had some relatives coming to stay, and it made sense to put them up in our house while we decamped to the flat. It's still a work in progress, but a mad week of cleaning and carting stuff around made it habitable. I had a suspicion that once we were in we'd be back and forth for a few weeks. As with many of my hunches, I was completely and utterly wrong. As it turned out, once we were here, we were here. Things moved at pace and, now our kitchen appliances have been installed, there's no going back, the old house is unusable. It's left me with slightly mi

Mad Dogs and Immigration Ministers

It is with no small degree of distress that I'm afraid to say I've been thinking about Robert Jenrick. I know, I know, in this beautiful world with its myriad of wonders, thetre are many other things about which I could think, the play of sunlight upon dappled water, the laughter of my children, the song thrush calling from the sycamore tree a few yards away from where I type this. Yet the shiny, faintly porcine features of the Minister for Immigration keep bubbling up into my consciousness. It's a pain in the arse, I tell you. A few years ago on here I wrote a piece entitled The cruelty is the point in which I argued that some policies are cruelty simply for the sake of it, pour decourager les autres . I was reminded of that recently when I listened to Jenrick defending his unpleasant, petty decision to order murals at a migrant children's centre to be painted over. You've probably heard the story already; deeming pictures of cartoon characters "too welcoming&

20

Huh. It turns out that this blog is, as of, well, roughly about now-ish, 20 years old. 20. I've been doing this (very intermittently) for twenty bloody years. And, I cannot help but note, still am, for some reason. I've done posts in the past, when this whole thing was comparatively blemish free and dewy-skinned looking back on its history and how it's changed down the years, there's not really a lot of point in doing that again. It's reflected what concerns me at the time, is, I think, the most charitable way of phrasing it (a  polite way of saying that it's been self-absorbed and solipsistic, but then, it's a blog, this should not come as a shock), it's interesting for me to look back over the lists of posts, but not so much for you, I imagine. Likewise, pondering how I've changed in the intervening years is also fairly pointless. It's painfully obvious that I was a very different person at 25 to 45, my experience of jobs and kids and marriage