Sexual street harassment in Brixton

[ViolentPanda]

No, tbf I have never complimented a random man on the street. Maybe this makes me a sexist?

The fella says that he has been complimented on a particular T-shirt at festivals and the Lambeth Country Show and he fully appreciated it each time. Mind you, he did make a Bender costume for Boomtown last year so I suspect he's a bit of a secret exhibitionist.

I feel inspired to make a "Crispy = Bender" t-shirt made.

 

[Vintage Paw]

AS's 'sexism' (heh) raises a good - and bleedingly obvious - point though:

that this harassment is a problem in the way that it is because it trends in one direction. To some extent the content (or intent) of what men say to women isn't important; women are the targets, the people to be appraised, accosted, pursued, consumed. The handful of examples where it might be a group of women eyeing up a guy shouldn't be used as evidence that 'they can give as good as they get' or that they objectify men too, or whatever. The majority of this behaviour, the trend, the problem, is men -> women. That's the context we have to view this in first and foremost, so as to keep sight of why it can be viewed as a larger social problem even if it's a benign, friendly remark.

(And the reason AS doesn't compliment men in the same way is part of that - women are the ones to be complimented on their appearance, and (straight?) women do it as often as men, but in different and often non-threatening and non-sexualised ways.)

(I'm editing this a lot, sorry. I personally don't really like it when women talk about my appearance either. I put that down to my own problems, I bristle in an evil strident feminist way at the idea that we are somehow conditioned to tell women they are pretty, when why should it fucking matter what someone looks like? Perhaps I should just take the compliment. But I don't like it. I have trouble divorcing it from why it happens.)

 

[ViolentPanda]

Whether we think of ourselves as feminists or not, whether we have been in the past or are regularly subjected to sexism, and no matter how aware of it we are, we're all still creations of our environment, and as such I think it's inevitable we will do certain things that are prescribed by gendered bias, unfortunate as that is. At the very least, recognising that is useful though.

We're all subject to institutional as well as environmental factors that militate toward us "taking up" certain default subject positions (what we might term "the commonsense view") that we only move away from via exposure to difference, and if we wish to. I'd argue that much the same can be said of racism.

I wouldn't go as far as to say that makes you sexist. The expression of power dynamic is different, even though it's informed by the same root causes.

More of a pre-disposition toward it, created by environmental influences, than an active practice, then?

 

[ViolentPanda]

AS's 'sexism' (heh) raises a good - and bleedingly obvious - point though:

that this harassment is a problem in the way that it is because it trends in one direction. To some extent the content (or intent) of what men say to women isn't important; women are the targets, the people to be appraised, accosted, pursued, consumed

I understand what you're saying, but surely the content and intent of what is said is part and parcel of the objectification, in that it functions reduce the target to an object of appraisal, molestation, pursuit and consumption?

The handful of examples where it might be a group of women eyeing up a guy shouldn't be used as evidence that 'they can give as good as they get' or that they objectify men too, or whatever. The majority of this behaviour, the trend, the problem, is men -> women. That's the context we have to view this in first and foremost, so as to keep sight of why it can be viewed as a larger social problem even if it's a benign, friendly remark.

Even as a benign, friendly remark, it's still the operation of patriarchy and, less broadly, a significant indication of the asymmetric positions of men and women in terms of social equality.

 

[Vintage Paw]

We're all subject to institutional as well as environmental factors that militate toward us "taking up" certain default subject positions (what we might term "the commonsense view") that we only move away from via exposure to difference, and if we wish to. I'd argue that much the same can be said of racism.


More of a pre-disposition toward it, created by environmental influences, than an active practice, then?

I think I use environment as shorthand for anything external to us that has an influence on our make up, iyswim, so yes, institutional, etc. My vocabulary is often limited in these discussions, so I use what I have to hand. But yes, I'd say it's the same for many things.

I'd be wary of giving the passivity of environmental factors too much power here though. Individuals are still responsible for their actions. It's not one or the other. An understanding of how environmental factors (which actually include the actions of others) shape and reinforce and enable and encourage certain behaviours and beliefs is important, crucial, but agency shouldn't be taken away from people as a result.

Free Will versus Determinism. The very concept of that opposition always annoyed the hell out of me. Posing that question might be an interesting thought experiment, but it bears little relation to the realities of lived experience (god I know some think that phrase is wanky, but sometimes it fits what I mean).

 

[Vintage Paw]

I understand what you're saying, but surely the content and intent of what is said is part and parcel of the objectification, in that it functions reduce the target to an object of appraisal, molestation, pursuit and consumption?




Even as a benign, friendly remark, it's still the operation of patriarchy and, less broadly, a significant indication of the asymmetric positions of men and women in terms of social equality.

The bolded part has always been my position. Perhaps I have problems explaining myself, my apologies. That post was meant to highlight that even before we get into the content or intent of what is said, the very fact that men are able to or encouraged to say things to women whereas the opposite is not true means that there is a power imbalance. It wasn't to say the content and intent isn't important. Just that even comments that are benign or intended to be friendly can still legitimately be taken as problematic because that imbalance exists.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

I wish that was the case but its not.

Otherwise you would be able to post something that I said that was apologist, sexist or racist directly instead of talking about how things 'seem' or what you assumed. Because those things are affected by group dynamics whereas words are easily quoteable and are not so much.

Kizmet, that's not popularity, it's past experience of having the same bloody arguments! And I'm already feeling like I'm ready to introduce my cranium to the external structures of my house.

Vintage Paw, who obviously has more patience than me today, has already given you a detailed description of why the undertone of what you were saying was apologist. You dismissed it by saying it wasn't what you meant. Well, there's two things that are going on then. The first, and the more generous explanation, is that you're not very good at articulating your true views. The second is that your views are implicitly more dodgy than you recognise.

Anyway fuck this, I'm not wasting any more of my Sunday afternoon on this. I will not be responding to you again on this thread. I value my head and my walls too much.

 

[Kizmet]

I'm not saying cliques don't exist. I'm also not saying that they never exist.

I'm saying that your personal theorisation of a clique that exists to distract and diss you is the product of an arsehole.
A shifty-looking arsehole.

I never once said it exists because of me.

Anyway drop it now. Its boring.

 

[JimW]

As luck would have it, I got an unsolicited compliment off a young woman tonight. Not entirely out of the blue, she was already talking to friend of mine when I popped in to see him at his bar. No dodgy dynamic at all, and not even pertinent to the thread (bar that thing of it being done in an entirely non-dubious manner) but first time it's happened in a couple of years so thought I'd brag!

 

[Gramsci]

No need for sarcasm, Thora. I agree that solutions are often local and community based, but very often the work is done behind the scenes. As a community activist, I have learnt that it doesn't always help to discuss these things on a very open and widely read forum. That is because it can lead to a hyping up of the problem, misunderstanding and increased tensions.

Do not quite understand this.

If solutions to an issue like sexual harassment are to be local and community based how can they be dealt with "behind the scenes"?

I have found this thread illuminating as its not somethings, as a man , that affects me.

So having it openly discussed is useful.

 

[Vintage Paw]

Do not quite understand this.

If solutions to an issue like sexual harassment are to be local and community based how can they be dealt with "behind the scenes"?

I have found this thread illuminating as its not somethings, as a man , that affects me.

So having it openly discussed is useful.

I'd agree with this. Just because there's a danger of things being misunderstood etc. doesn't mean they shouldn't be discussed. It means that we should try harder to ensure there are no misunderstandings. Otherwise you lock down debate simply because it might get awkward and messy. These things are awkward and messy, and precisely because there is so much room for misunderstanding it's important to make sure it's all out there, so we can talk about it.

 

[Gramsci]

What would be your ideal way of me writing about this issue for a local blog?

You could preface the article with research on sexual harassment in London. Such as the YouGov poll.

Then try relate that to womens experience in Brixton as being typical of London as a whole.

You also might want to contact the local police to see what what there policies on this issue are.

You might want to try to contact an academic who has done research on this.

Social research is different from asking people to come forward with there personal experience.

Though it appears there has been little research on sexual harassment.

The subject is not widely discussed but the fact is that it is a routine, everyday occurrence for younger women. There is no research on the prevalence of sexual harassment in the UK, nor on its impact, although some ongoing qualitative research in London is beginning to find that the impacts are very wide-ranging – from increasing women’s fear of crime and making them change their behaviour, to affecting body image and choice of dress.

BTW be good idea if the article you are writing is in the Bugle as well as the Blog. As would reach more people.

 

[S A Villarino]

You could preface the article with research on sexual harassment in London. Such as the YouGov poll.

Then try relate that to womens experience in Brixton as being typical of London as a whole.

You also might want to contact the local police to see what what there policies on this issue are.

You might want to try to contact an academic who has done research on this.

Social research is different from asking people to come forward with there personal experience.

Though it appears there has been little research on sexual harassment.



BTW be good idea if the article you are writing is in the Bugle as well as the Blog. As would reach more people.

Thank you for this. I find this very helpful - was going to structure the piece with the first two points you mentioned above. Want to include something about what you can do e.g. local police, so I'll see if I get a response from them. However, I don't think harassment is really going to show up in police stats because no one really reports this low level kind of stuff. We can really only go on Yougov/Hollaback etc. Also, more widely what people can do e.g. everydaysexism project. Not sure if I have any leads on social research though....

 

[Smyz]

That yougov report mentions that Lambeth council ran a campaign about this.

A good example was the 'Flirt/Harass: Real Men Know the Difference' poster campaign by Lambeth council in partnership with the Metropolitan Police, which conveyed a no-tolerance message.

Could ask the council for more information --and use the poster as an illustration.

 

[Rushy]

just the opposite I'd have thought. Anyone who doesn't view this behaviour as problematic is justifying oppressive and sexist projection of power. That, at least, is the tone of almost every post in this thread, and in every other thread, conversation, article. Almost, not quite, as your post and those you cite demonstrates.

Yet from observation that is not universal. Plenty, ime the clear majority, of such interactions lead to the woman looking uncomfortable and obviously getting away as quickly as possible, and the bloke looking crestfallen. Some don't though, sometime the woman being called out to responds in kind and appears to positively enjoy the experience. I don't know if she really does, or if she's acting or if it's simply a defence mechanism.

I observed an incident the other week, where a bloke called out to a woman as they went up parallel escalators at the tube. After a brief exchange of loud, sexualised banter at the top they both laughed and went on their separate ways. It appeared they both enjoyed themselves, as did some but not all of those who overheard it. Only a few seconds of banter, there's no great conclusions to be drawn from it, but it struck me as a ritualised acknowledgment which made both of them glow slightly.

Yesterday, on the tube, a bloke leaned over and asked the gooner the score. When told Arsenal lost 4-1, and the ref was the 12th man, he said "you'll get no sympathy from me, I'm spurs, you deserve everything you get". A little bit of back and forth, with giggles. It brightened the day. Again ritualised, and again not quite an obvious analysis about the power relationship involved.

Either of those interactions could have turned very wrong very quickly. In either case the 'target' of the remarks might have taken offence, might have argued, insulted, got angry, or might have shrunk away in uncomfortable embarrassment. In each of those anecdotes the initiator of the exchange chose someone who appreciated the banter (or at least, so it appeared). Many of the anecdotes on this thread are from women who did not appreciate being chosen (or picked on) for banter. There is, in my view, no reason why they should.

I wouldn't for a moment seek to justify oppressive and sexist projection of power. Nor would I want someone to start bantering at me about football when I'm sitting on the tube (whether having just been thrashed at home or not). Yet in both my anecdotes the recipient appeared happy with the interaction.

I can't help wonder how the would be initiator of banter is supposed to know who will react well and positively and who will take umbrage.

As my post on the first page implies, this is my take. Outside of the extreme examples and genuine threats/abuse, it's not as simple saying that blokes are taking a power trip. A regular poster earlier mentioned having felt uplifted by a stranger saying "Good evening" and then after they passed "I was just admiring you". It was welcome and I can understand why. But I can also understand that someone might be made to feel uncomfortable by the same comment. In fact, how the same person might be made to feel uncomfortable by the same comment from a different person or even just on a different day.

I've lost count of the number of times I've seen a guy make what I would consider to be a high risk remark like "hey sexy lady" in the street and, even after a sometimes not very favourable initial reply, very quickly engage in a two way flirty conversation in the middle of the day and even the exchange of numbers. I often see ladies keep on walking past but with a big grin. It seems to me that in many cases it is about trying to get noticed (and I'm not suggesting that only those who are lacking in confidence and attention want to be noticed) rather than a power trip. And it is pretty common place around here because, from what I have seen, many women respond positively to it.

 

[Smyz]

A lot of the women who do respond positively have been groomed by a sexist society to believe that their self worth depends on being attractive to men. Older women are much less likely to tolerate disrespectful approaches --as I think a few people have pointed out on this thread.

 

[Rushy]

A lot of the women who do respond positively have been groomed by a sexist society to believe that their self worth depends on being attractive to men. Older women are much less likely to tolerate disrespectful approaches --as I think a few people have pointed out on this thread.

A lot? Or all? If not all, what are the other reasons that women react positively?

 

[Smyz]

A lot? Or all? If not all, what are the other reasons that women react positively?

They all grew up in a sexist society. How many do you think are immune to the pressures by the time they get to puberty?

Older women are the only people who can tell you how their attitudes have changed over time --and why.

 

[Gramsci]

A lot of the women who do respond positively have been groomed by a sexist society to believe that their self worth depends on being attractive to men. Older women are much less likely to tolerate disrespectful approaches --as I think a few people have pointed out on this thread.

I agree with Rushy here. Its not as simple as a power trip. The Council campaign was about the difference between flirting and harassment for example.

To say women respond positively because they have been groomed is getting into the false consciousness argument.

 

[Thora]

I don't know about anyone else, the the polite/pleasant/admiring comments I have had have been far outnumbered by the whistles, shouting, boob/cock comments, general abuse, approaching or following me (particularly when I have my child with me). So ime, while some men might be genuinely trying to flirt, the majority are not (or are doing so really inappropriately eg. kerb crawling a woman with a baby to get her number).

 

[Smyz]

I agree with Rushy here. Its not as simple as a power trip. The Council campaign was about the difference between flirting and harassment for example.

To say women respond positively because they have been groomed is getting into the false consciousness argument.

I said "disrespectful approaches"and I was responding to someone who was wondering why disrespectful approaches sometimes get a positive response.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

.

That yougov report mentions that Lambeth council ran a campaign about this.



Could ask the council for more information --and use the poster as an illustration.

Yep, I was going to mention this @S A Villarino - Lambeth did a campaign around rape a few years ago [http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/KnowTheDifference/index.htm] and more recently (Oct 2012) did a campaign around sexual harrassment [Women's Safety Charter - which they tried to get bars & clubs etc to sign up to http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/95...ng-groped-in-nightclubs-Brixton-beckons.html], as well as re-running the 'Know the Difference' campaign at Christmas time: http://lambethnews.wordpress.com/20...l-violence-ahead-of-expected-spike-in-crimes/

Might be worth trying to speak to the relevant officer(s) at the council as they will probably be well versed in it.

 

[Rushy]

I said "disrespectful approaches"and I was responding to someone who was wondering why disrespectful approaches sometimes get a positive response.

To be fair, I did not define them as disrespectful approaches. I'd be very hesitant to label a comment as disrespectful solely because someone takes offence. As the first paragraph of my post sets out, I'm querying the intention and subjectivity of offense (and excluded obviously abusive or threatening contact). Comments may not be intended offensively and may or may not be interpreted as being offensive - different communities, cultures and individuals will probably have very different norms.

I was interested that your response said that a lot of women who do respond positively have been groomed by a sexist society to believe that their self worth depends on being attractive to men. By saying a lot you seemed to imply "not all" but you then appeared to correct this to suggest that you mean't all women do so because as all women have been groomed. Have I understood that correctly?

 

[Smyz]

All women have been groomed. Not all women respond positively to being cat-called.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

.

@S A Villarino here's a thread from the time of the launch of the Women's Safety Charter last year http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/brixton-womens-safety-charter.299787/

 

[Rushy]

All women have been groomed. Not all women respond positively to being cat-called.

Fair enough. I can see you're not comfortable with my question and I respect that.

 

[Thimble Queen]

Having been on the receiving end of sexual street harassment it has felt very much about power. Not just power but also humiliation and showing off to mates/bravado. I mentioned this earlier in the thread.

Also I discussed this with the researcher that was doing the study on sexual street harassment and she said that these were common themes brought up by other participants too.

Rushy Gramsci

 

[weepiper]

Have we had a woman who's taken issue with it being a power trip yet? Only it seems like a lot of us perceive it to be about that, and a couple of men have disputed that it is.

 

[Thora]

It's quite interesting that a thread that started off about sexual harassment has become "maybe it's banter/flirting/interactions that is taken the wrong way". It doesn't seem to me that there is actually a big grey area or fine line - most of the unwanted attention directed towards women that has been noted on this thread is aggressive, humiliating or threatening.

 

[stethoscope]

It's overwhelmingly felt about men exercising their power over me when this stuff happens. And the unsolicited sort of stuff being primarily talked about here is very different to the what is genuine pleasant comments you sometimes get from what I usually find are older men (and hark back to more 'old fashioned' values).

The occasion where I actually stood up and made a quick retort back to a guy's verbal and sexual abuse near my flat when I was back in Stratford, he proceeded to follow me almost up to my doorstep. Whilst he did so, he didn't say anything else, or try and physically assault me, but just did his best to intimidate. It worked.

Numerous times I've had a man say something to me on the street as I'm passing, sexually-oriented and 'complimentary' (that is, a compliment on his terms), and when I've ignored, the torrent of abuse comes straight after - 'fucking ignorant bitch'. If this isn't wielding power because you haven't reacted subserviently to them then what is it?

And when being perceived as trans/queer is also part of that equation, that sexually-oriented/gender-based dynamic soon breaks into homophobia/misogyny - whether you react or not. Regardless of the initial comment ('nice legs sexy', wolf-whistle), then follows the accusations that 'you might be a man', 'didn't fancy you anyway ugly bitch'. Very much again, the male perpetrator employing a power dynamic to express that you are lesser than him/don't conform/meet 'his standards'.