Never underestimate the
power of the flower
Max Hastings
Page 29
Wolf-whistle ban would harm women’s rights
Making everyday sexism a crime will only trivialise harassment, create wariness between sexes and waste police time
Comment
robust that this year a man was
sentenced to 22 weeks in prison for
persistently staring at a woman and
blocking her path off a train. The law
is there, and it is being used. Where
new offences require new laws, such
as to cover the ghastly modern
phenomenon of “upskirting”, that is
fine. But when it comes to the grey
areas involving eye contact, small
talk and wolf-whistling, the police
must leave well alone. Theuncomfortable truth is that some
ugly, irritating or offensive
behaviours must always remain
beyond the reach of the law, to be
shaped instead by the slow and
grinding tools of shifting social norms,
public pressure and private shame. To
better protect women and girls the
government could encourage people
to intervene when they see a woman
or man being subjected to stares or
catcalls. Social media companies
could run smart campaigns targeted
at young men, suggesting that
harassing women is not the work of
strong men but of inadequate fools.
The approach must be to change
hearts and minds, not the law. Those
pushing for this change may be well
meaning but it would be a blow
against women’s rights, not for them.
Whoever is leading the government
pushback must keep pushing.absorb scarce police resources. Yet
just because something is a bad idea,
don’t bet on sense prevailing in this
strange age, when those in power
live in terror of being accused of
backwardness or bigotry, when the
woke tail wags the mainstream dog.
Last week Ali revealed that though
the home secretary was “very much
behind” her proposal, there had been
“pushback” from other quarters in
government. In response, No 10
stated that tackling street harassment
remained a “top priority”, and that
the government continued “to look at
where there may be gaps and how a
specific offence could address those”.
Decision-makers in government
must not fall for the lie that they can
only prove they care about protecting
women and girls by approving
foolish policies. The laws covering
harassment are already robust — soNimco Ali says street harassment is
“absolutely” a form of sexist violencecause, and gradually the wider
challenge of protecting women and
girls is undermined.
More broadly, proposals such as
this do not do wonders for brand
“woman”. We have been engaged in a
decades-long fight to be taken as
seriously as men: Treat us as equals.
Don’t patronise us. Don’t pigeonhole
us as victims or vulnerable flowers.
When campaigners suggest we are so
vulnerable we need protection in law
from a wolf-whistle, this sends an
entirely different message.
It would also inevitably have a
chilling effect on male-female
relations, inspiring not respect for a
woman’s boundaries but wariness of
what she might accuse you of.
Friendliness and flirtation, however
well intentioned, would become far
too dangerous. A cack-handed
attempt at small talk with a stranger
could land you with a large fine.
Campaigners may argue that
criminalisation would only be for
proper leerers and leches but in
practice the law would sprawl to
punish men who had intended no
harm or crossed the wrong woman.
Given the thirst of many young
people to be seen as slayers of
injustice — including, of course, the
patriarchy — can you imagine the
zealotry with which this new crime
would be reported? And the effect on
police resources? So thinly stretched
is the thin blue line that fraud is now
effectively a crime without
punishment. Those suffering a house
burglary might as usefully pick up
the phone to the talking clock as to
the local station. And yet the police
are meant to devote time to fining
men who shout “oi, oi, gorgeous!” at
passing women?
This is, in short, a very bad idea: an
unworkable waste of time that would
trivialise sexual harassment, create
wariness between the sexes andP
erhaps the best by-product
of ageing is that it is years
since I have been subjected
to the most irritating line in
the English language:
“Smiy-yal! It might never happen.. .”
Thanks to a face that looks, in
repose, like I have recently lost a
beloved pet, I got this a lot in my
twenties. Always from strangers,
always men; always with a smirk.
Back then I would have gladly
punished the offenders, and now it
seems my wish may be granted.
Nimco Ali, the government’s
independent adviser on tackling
violence against women and girls, is
keen to criminalise behaviour such
as telling women to smile,
persistently staring, cat-calling and
wolf-whistling, with the guilty
handed on-the-spot fines.
Punishing acts of “everyday
sexism” may seem unlikely but it is
already a reality in France, where
cat-callers are fined up to €750. Over
here, Transport for London has
posters on the Underground warning
that “intrusive staring” is a form of
sexual harassment and urging
commuters to report it. Last month
Detective Superintendent Sarah
White, of British Transport Police,
said: “It’s human nature to stare at
things. However, it’s very different
when someone is staring, leering or
there’s a sexual motivation. We want
to know about that staring because
that is the behaviour that suggests to
me that someone is thinking about a
sexual behaviour that supports that
staring. We will record them as
crimes and we will investigate them.”
Yes, it is now perfectly normal for
a police officer to speculate about
whether a staring man was having
impure thoughts. “But officer I was
looking at the Tube map over her
head; the Circle Line’s a nightmare, I
didn’t know whether to get off at
Edgware Road.. .” What of those so
lost in their Times podcast their
unseeing gaze rests for a minute on a
stranger’s lapel? When does a stare
become a leer and a leer an ogle?
How quickly we arrive at the
ridiculous, which is a serious
problem because it undermines the
whole cause of tackling more serious
crimes against women. Campaigners
suggest that a spectrum exists with
staring at one end and rape at the
other. “Street harassment is
absolutely a form of violence towards
women and girls,” says Ali. The
founder of the campaign group Stop
Street Harassment stretches thebracket from physically harmless
behaviour, such as “kissing noises”,
“stares”, and “non-sexually explicit
comments”, to stalking, flashing,
grabbing, sexual assault and rape.
But bundling irritations such as cat-
calling in with violent sex attacks
only weakens the force of the term
“sexual harassment”. These days if
we see “harassment” in a headline
we may well assume the article is
about a woman suing a colleague
because he complimented her dress.
The majority roll their eyes, they
become cynical about the #MeToo
propensity to take offence at
anything, they grow weary of theCack-handed attempts
at small talk could land
you with a large fine
When something is
a bad idea do not bet
on sense prevailing
Clare
Fo ge sred box
For the best analysis
and commentary on
the political landscape
thetimes.co.uk/redbox@clarefoges
the times | Monday May 23 2022 27