Laura Bates of the Everyday Sexism project in the film “Shouting Back” by Dan Reed.
Show Hide image

Everyday Sexism speech to the UN: “Sexism and sexual harassment is not a ‘women’s issue’ – it is a matter of human rights”

To describe sexism, sexual harassment, and sexual violence as “women’s issues” side-lines and reduces them, neglects male victims and lets perpetrators off the hook. One in three women on the planet will be raped or beaten in her lifetime.

A little less than two years ago, I started a project called Everyday Sexism, which invited people to share their daily experiences of gender imbalance. I started the project because when I tried to talk about sexism, I was told again and again that it wasn’t an issue any more – that women were equal and I needed to lighten up, and stop making a fuss about nothing.

Twenty three months later, over fifty thousand people from all over the world have proved those arguments wrong. They have demonstrated unequivocally that everyday sexism is a very real and serious problem, affecting the lives of women and girls, men and boys, often on a daily basis. The stories we received came from people of all ages, nationalities and walks of life.

We heard from a schoolgirl who was so young when she first experienced serious sexual harassment, that when the men who shouted at her referred to her genitalia, she didn’t even know what they meant. From a female engineer who was dismissed in the workplace as a “cute little girl”. A designer whose boss told her he would never employ an unattractive woman. A doctor who was told by a senior consultant to sit on his lap if she wanted his help interpreting an x-ray. A man who was ridiculed by his colleagues for wanting to share parental leave with his partner. A sixteen-year old girl who said it didn’t matter what she did with her life, whether she became a teacher or a doctor, because she felt that as a woman, she would only be a success if she was “sexy” and “hot”. A student who suffered groping from her lecturer in silence because she wanted to excel at programming. A child who experienced systematic abuse from a family member but was disbelieved when she tried to speak out. An elderly woman who carried the burden of her rape in silence for her whole life, because society had taught her it was her own fault.

The stories revealed that for many women sexism combines with other forms of prejudice, resulting in a kind of double discrimination. Like the disabled woman who was asked to do a pole dance around her walking stick; the transgender women who regularly suffered extreme abuse in public spaces; the woman who was told she was only hired so there would be a “sexy Asian in the office”; or the woman who described repeated, aggressive sexual advances from men offering to ‘turn her straight’ when she went out with her female partner.

What the testimonies reveal, again and again, is that these varied experiences of sexism, harassment, assault, discrimination and rape are not isolated incidents, but exist on an interconnected spectrum. The same ideas and attitudes about women that underlie the more “minor” incidents we are often told to brush off or ignore are also at the root of greater inequalities and incidences of sexual violence. For example, the same words and phrases used to a woman who was catcalled in the street were also directed at a victim of sexual assault. A woman who tried to ignore her harasser found that he followed her home and assaulted her on her own doorstep. Women trying to succeed in the male-dominated environment of politics have to contend with a media that objectifies them, reporting on their bodies and clothes instead of their policies.

The treatment of women in one sphere has a clear knock-on effect on behaviour towards them in other areas.

So, to reflect an inter-connected set of problems, we also need a joined-up solution. It won’t work to take measures to increase the representation of women at the top levels of business and politics unless we also challenge the media’s repeated presentation of women as dehumanised sex objects. It won’t work to tackle workplace discrimination, if the moment people step outside the office they exist in a public space where sexual harassment continues to be accepted as the norm. Our efforts to tackle gender imbalance will be more effective if they take into account the way that sexism intersects with other forms of prejudice.

This problem is like a mosaic, and no individual, organisation, or government can solve it alone. But the different solutions are as varied and diverse as the different manifestations of everyday sexism, and each one of us has it within our power to play a part in changing the landscape.

Individual governments can ensure that strong, clear legislation is in place to criminalise and penalise domestic and sexual violence and all forms of discrimination. But they can’t magically change the cultural normalisation of sexism. What we need is a major societal shift in our attitudes and behaviour towards women, so that political and legislative efforts translate into real impact on the ground.

Businesses can address sexual harassment and gender imbalance in the workplace with zero-tolerance approaches, staff training and victim-centred reporting processes. Schools and can educate young people about issues such as consent and healthy relationships and Universities must react decisively to incidents of sexual assault on campus. Families can address issues around sexual assault and respect for others with both boys and girls. Organisations can support this work by providing resources, materials and training.

And individuals have a vital role to play in helping to combat the normalised, socially ingrained sexism we all encounter on a regular basis. By shifting the way we perceive and treat women in our own sphere, we have a knock on impact on the way they are treated elsewhere.

Taking responsibility for this change falls to each one of us, whether it is a university student challenging “banter and jokes about rape on campus, a colleague taking a stand against workplace discrimination, or a bystander intervening when they witness sexual harassment in the street. Men who perhaps rarely witness sexism or harassment and are largely unaware of the problem because they would never dream of perpetrating it themselves can play a vital role in helping to combat it once they have been made aware. The focus should not be on dictating how victims should react in a given situation, but working to prevent the situation from arising in the first place.

Within this process the importance of listening to women’s voices is paramount. For centuries, women have been silenced – through ridicule, dismissal and fear. Countless Everyday Sexism Project entrants specified that this was the first time they had ever told their story. Many described trying to speak up, only to be told they were probably overreacting, or imagining things. Some had reported serious workplace harassment to a human resources department, only to be told to get on with it if they wanted to keep their jobs. Some spoke of hiding sexual abuse for the sake of family honour. Others had spent years finding the courage to speak out about rape, only to be asked “Had you been drinking?” “What were you wearing?” “Did you lead him on?”

Often it is women themselves who are best placed to direct useful action to combat gender inequality. Grassroots projects that put local ownership and knowledge at the centre of their initiatives can inform and support the work of bigger organisations. Although the entries we have collected from our 18 project branches around the world suggest that many experiences of gender inequality are universal, culture and context also mean that there are different unique challenges to overcome in different areas and at different times. What helps to combat the problem in one community will not necessarily work as a “one size fits all” solution. Listening to women’s voices is crucial in finding the way forward.

But this issue is not just about women. It is not a “women’s issue”. It is a matter of human rights. To describe sexism, sexual harassment, and sexual violence as “women’s issues” side-lines and reduces them, neglects male victims and lets perpetrators off the hook. One in three women on the planet will be raped or beaten in her lifetime. For many women, sexism and sexual harassment are simply an accepted part of everyday life. These are problems of epidemic proportions, yet they are often so normalised that they become part of the wallpaper. Tackling gender inequality is in everybody’s interest, and it must be everybody’s responsibility.

We can’t do it alone. Our voices are loudest when we raise them together.

Now watch “Shouting Back” by Dan Reed, a film about the work of Laura Bates and the Everyday Sexism project:

“Everyday Sexism...” by Laura Bates will be published by Simon & Schuster on 10 April

Getty
Show Hide image

The toxic new right-wing media will outlast Trump even if he’s impeached

Fox News and a network of smaller outlets have created an alternative version of reality. That ecosystem might prove more durable than the US president. 

An early end to Donald Trump’s presidency looks more feasible than at any time in the 117 days since his inauguration.

The New York Times revealed on Tuesday that FBI director James Comey – who was fired by Trump a week ago – wrote a memo recording the President’s request he “let go” an investigation into links between Michael Flynn, Trump’s pick for national security advisor, and Russia.

Already there is talk of impeachment, not least because the crime Trump is accused of - obstructing justice - is the same one that ended Richard Nixon's presidency.

But with a Republican-controlled Congress the impeachment process would be long and fraught, and is only likely to succeed if public opinion, and particularly the opinion of the Republican voters, swings decisively against Trump.

In another era, the rolling coverage of the president's chaotic, incompetent and potentially corrupt administration might have pushed the needle far enough. But many of those Republican voters will make their decision about whether or not to stick with Trump based not on investigative reporting in the NYT or Washington Post, but based on reading a right-wing media ecosystem filled with distortions, distractions and fabrications.

That ecosystem – which spans new and (relatively) old media - will be going into overdrive to protect a president it helped elect, and who in turn has nourished it with praise and access.

On Monday, BuzzFeed’s Charlie Warzel took a forensic look at how a new breed of hyper-partisan right wing sites – what he calls the "Upside Down media" – tried to undermine and discredit claims that Trump disclosed sensitive security information to Russian officials.

The same tactics can already be seen just 24 hours later. Notorious conspiracist site Infowars talks of “saboteurs” and “turncoats” undermining the administration with leaks, mirroring an email from Trump’s campaign team sent late on Tuesday. Newsmax, another right-leaning sight with links to Trump, attacks the source of the story, asking in its web splash “Why did Comey wait so long?”. GatewayPundit, which published several false stories about Hillary Clinton during the election campaign, appears to have ignored the story altogether. 

As Warzel points out, these new sites work in concert with older media, in particular Rupert Murdoch’s ratings-topping cable news channel Fox News.

Fox initially underplayed the Comey memo’s significance, switching later to projecting the story as a media-led attack on Trump. At the time of publication, the Fox homepage led with a splash headlined: “THE SHOW MUST GO ON Lawmakers vow to focus on Trump agenda despite WH controversies.”

Fox acts as a source of validation for the newly established right-wing sites. Once Fox has covered a story, smaller sites can push further and faster, knowing that they aren't going too far from at least one outlet considered respectable and mainstream. If anything should make the UK value the impartiality rules, however imperfect, which govern its broadcast news, it’s Fox’s central role in enabling this toxic mix of misinformation.

These new media sites have another weapon, however. They understand and exploit the way internet platforms - in particular Facebook - are designed to maximise attention. They have found that playing on very human desires for stories that confirm our biases and trigger emotional responses is the best way to build audiences and win fans, and they have little compulsion abusing that knowledge.

This isn’t just a Trump or Fox-related phenomenon. It’s not even just a right-wing one. In both the US and the UK left-wing hyper-partisan sites with a tenuous relationship with the truth have sprung up. They have followed the same playbook, and in most cases the same advertising-based funding model, which has worked so well for the right. Emotive headlines, spun stories, outright fabrications and an insistence that “the corrupt mainstream media won’t report this” work just as well in generating clicks and shares for both ends of the political spectrum.

The main difference between the two political poles is that the right has benefited from an ideologically and temperamentally suited president, and a facilitator in Fox News. 

Of course the combined efforts of this new media and the Fox-led old may still fail. Trump’s recent transgressions appear so severe that they could break through to even his diehard supporters.

But if Trump does fall, the new right wing media ecosystem is unlikely to fall with him. 

0800 7318496