Monday, June 23, 2014

The World Cup Is Anti Feminist Apparently

Oh no, what to do now?

In one of the passages explaining the anti-feminist nature of football Sylvia Murray Young writes:

Paul Gascoigne led a generation of males to sport the "Gazza" haircut, yet his popularity was only mildy dented by the sight of his partner Sheryl skulking past the paparazzi with a face swollen and bruised by his fists. Ched Evans was convicted for raping a drunk teenager, but incredulous fans started the #freeched hashtag and outed the victim. Football fans themselves create a demand for the trafficking of women and girls into prostitution.
The stories of a surge in trafficking of prostitutes is a factoid of dubious provenance, but it is true that some prominent footballers have treated women appallingly. However it is surely a bit of a double standard to condemn the whole of football for the actions of a handful of individuals.

When Lord Saatchi grabbed his wife round the throat did it prove that the art world is hostile to women, when the Socialist Workers Party covered up a series of rape allegations against their senior members did it prove that left wing politics is inherently misogynistic?

It seems to me that football is being singled out like this because it is largely played by working class men who are unlikely to be in the target demographic for listening to professional grievance mongers.

2 comments:

JohnM said...

when the Socialist Workers Party covered up a series of rape allegations against their senior members did it prove that left wing politics is inherently misogynistic?

You're not comparing like with like.

The other two examples were of individuals who indisputably treated a woman badly. To be equivalent the statement should read "when a senior party figure allegedly raped womenn did it prove ...". This is significant because the second part should now be: did football institutions cover up, did arts institutions cover up, did the SWP cover up. That's a category difference.

"Did an individual err" does not prove anything about the institution. "Did the institution err" does.

So the SWP was acting in a wholly misogynistic way

Ross said...

John- the SWP was, but we couldn't infer from their behaviour alone that the whole of the radical left was misogynistic, just that the SWP is.