Everyday Victim Blaming

challenging institutional disbelief around domestic & sexual violence and abuse

This is why Martin Daubney is wrong about “laddism culture”

It's safe to say that we are not huge fans of Martin Daubney at EVBHQ what with his insistence on dismissing sexual violence as girls and women "over-reacting" and moaning about how men aren't allowed to say hello to a woman without being arrested. Daubney believes women-only spaces are "reverse prejudice" and that there is actually a "war on laddism". A member of our team recently debated him on LBC radio and pointed out that 1 in 3 women experiencing male violence is a war on women, he laughed. But, we're supposed to believe that holding young men accountable for sexual harassment, assault and rape is a "war on laddism".

This is what the war on women looks like:

Martin Daubney is RIGHT. Girls nowadays are outright crippled by basic social interaction with people they don’t already know.

They can’t do. These fragile BASTARDS can’t do. Things only get worse if the man who’s talking to her should, god forbid, obviously try hitting on her. That’s an outright emergency.

No such as rape. Why ? Because anytime you ask a woman “Did they go cops ?” they say. So it was not rape. Maybe women try dressing correctly and these sluts would not be raped.

This comment was submitted to us by a male student at the University of Liverpool who isn't a shining example of critical thinking, empathy or not being a jackass.

Just to help this delightful buckethead, here's a breakdown of the issue:

1. girls are not "crippled by basic social interaction". Girls, including 12 year olds, can't walk down the street without men making derogatory comments about their bodies or screaming abuse at them. 1 in 3 women experience domestic and sexual violence and abuse during their lifetime. According to the World Bank, women 15-44 are more at "risk from rape and domestic violence than from cancer, car accidents, war and malaria".  This is a war on women since over 95% of the perpetrators of rape and domestic violence are male.

2. If men want women to chat to women in bars, men could start by holding other men accountable for committing violence against women and girls. They could stop whining about #notallmen; stop making jokes about male violence and stop excusing violent men. Heck, they could start by understanding that men are NOT entitled to a woman's time or attention just because they want it.

3. This last point is a bit difficult to decipher: does he think rape only happens when it's reported to the police? If so, he's not the brightest chicken in the farm. And, he definitely doesn't follow the news since today's headline story in the Guardian is about a £20 000 made by the Hampshire Police to a rape victim as they charged her with perverting the course of justice instead of arresting the rapist. Thankfully, the rapist has since been convicted and a number of Hampshire police have found themselves unemployed. However, it's hardly shocking that women don't report to the police when they police won't even bother to investigate rape allegations (and we're not going to mention the whole issue of police officers who are also rapists).

4. As fond as we are of the word "slut", we would like to reiterate the statement that the only person responsible for rape is the rapist. Men who excuse or minimise rape are responsible for rape culture. And, really, if men can't prevent themselves from raping women because they happen to be wearing a pair of jeans, well, perhaps we should be locking up all the young men? After all, they are the ones committing the crime.

We're going to go out on a limb and assume this young man is rather lacking in relationships with women. We hate to be rude, but, it is probably him that's the problem.

 

Download this post as PDF? Click here Download PDF

, , , ,

Comments are currently closed.

One thought on “This is why Martin Daubney is wrong about “laddism culture”

  • Michael says:

    Just a brief point about womens’ attire. If women began to dress in more ‘religious’ attire,for want of a better expression, then there qould be outrage and condemnation – see below. It’s time men learnt that the onus of good behaviour is on them and if a woman happens to be dress attractvely and doesn’t want to engae in any conversation etc,. then remember that’s her choice. A woman is a human being, a mother, a sister, a daughter who likes to wear attractive clothes and socialise without harrassment, violence and intimidation.
    This is a link to the reference about ‘religious’ attire:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/24118241