Right-wing writers blame and defame a female barrister - proving her point
‘Sometimes it’s hard to be a woman’ – so sang the bard of Tennesee, though as she must have known at the time, this rather understates matters.
Working in more or less any profession, a person can turn to a female colleague (assuming they have any) and hear tales of regular harassment and abuse, up to and including threats of physical violence, from perfect strangers, simply for their being a woman.
The internet has amplified this problem, empowering every keyboard misogynist to say what they would be too gutless to say in person.
One such victim is Charlotte Proudman, a brilliant human rights barrister studying at Cambridge who I’m proud to count as a friend.
Sick of yet another message from a man she did not know, this time a creepy remark about her picture on networking website LinkedIn, from a male lawyer twice her age, she told him where to get off and shared the exchange on Twitter.
As she wrote: ‘How many women @LinkedIn are contacted re physical appearance rather than prof skills?’ The lawyer in question, legal partner Alexander Carter-Silk, issued an apology, claiming incredibly that all he meant was she had a very ‘professional’ photograph. (Nice try, Alex.)
After the story was picked up by the newspapers, our favourite right-wing columnists saw a case of political correctness gone mad (hasn’t PC gone mad enough to be sectioned by now?) and pounced.
In a full-page column previewed on the front of the Daily Mail, Sarah Vine basically says women being reduced to their looks is no problem, accusing Charlotte of seeking publicity as a ‘short-cut’ to furthering her career. This defamation is compounded when Vine writes:
“Isn’t she supposed to be some hot-shot human rights lawyer? Well, go and defend some real victims of inequality, dear, instead of bleating about some slightly off-colour message.”
If Vine had done her own job, even a cursory look at LinkedIn would detail Charlotte’s work defending vulnerable women, campaigning against FGM and forced marriage, and taking on pro bono work in the Middle East, Pakistan and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
In other words, it’s not either/or. She would just like to be able to work without being harassed by creepy men.
For this she is denounced as a careerist minx, uploading an ‘enticing’ photo then abusing a clumsy admirer for personal gain, on the front page of a national newspaper. How disgraceful.
Vine’s chosen term for women supporting Charlotte online, ‘Feminazis’ – a charming invention of right-wing US radio thug Rush Limbaugh – brings us on nicely to Limbaugh clone Rod Liddle in the Sun.
As if seeking to prove her point, Liddle not only says it’s fine to comment on a woman’s looks, but goes on to exercise the right himself, by insulting Charlotte’s appearance. He adds:
“If you don’t want people to comment, you silly mare, then don’t put your picture up.”
No doubt Liddle thinks he’s being clever by writing a piece that dismisses sexism while expressing it, but as usual, he just looks a fool.
Odious as these columns are, they do an inadvertent service to the cause they attack, by proving exactly why Charlotte’s actions were necessary.
They show how many would still rather train their guns on the victims of sexism rather than the perpetrators: His career shouldn’t suffer, hers should.
The implication is that men are entitled to practice sexism, but women should refrain from complaining (or fighting back) – that is, if they know what’s good for them.
In other words, it’s her fault for being a woman in the first place.
The Mail’s news coverage, published next to Vine’s piece, leads with the Twitter jerks who say this episode might damage Charlotte’s career. In reality, any law firm worth working for would be lucky to have her.
The take away question from all this ought to be not, ‘Who would want to hire a feminist?’ but rather: ‘Who would want to work for a sexist?’
Until that’s the case, the struggle for equal human rights will be disfigured, and our newspapers’ reflection of the world will remain the same ugly picture.
Adam Barnett is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow MediaWatch on Twitter
DONATE to support MediaWatch here.
Sign up for our weekly email by clicking here.
85 Responses to “Sexism is not the fault of career women who complain about it”
James Riddick
Out of principle, I don’t like censorship.
Unless it affects national security, which I don’t think this does, why should posts talking about facts be removed just because some find it uncomfortable. As such, here is my original post
—————
As a regular reader of the site, I was saddened to read this article.
I’m afraid I know Charlotte and I think it is fair to say she is a troubled person. For example, she once wrote a letter to her own Grandmother the nastiest, most vicious letter designed to cause as much hurt as possible just before her Grandmother passed away.
In the letter she told her Grandmother how much of a failure she was in her life, and how that Charlotte was the only member of her family who was successful. Whatever the rights and wrongs of a situation, imagine how spiteful and selfish you would have to be to write such a letter to an elderly lady.
I just hope that Charlotte gets the help she needs and that the reputational damage to her accuser isn’t permanent.
Jon Jones.
Thanks Lizzie. That was where I found about it too. I’m no fan of the Daily Mail but the source doesn’t change the facts.
Now Proudman seems to have moved into a `comments on a business based social media site should follow different rules to the comment rules made on the social media sites most of us use. Bullshit! It’s either sexist or it isn’t.
Do we really live in a world where it’s not OK to say to someone that we find them attractive? If that is the case the future of Human procreation is pretty much screwed.
Sexism is not giving members of the opposite sex the same opportunities and rights. Saying you find someone of the opposite sex attractive isn’t.
I ask you this Proudman – If it was a Gay woman that had sent you that same message what would it be? Sexism?
How about a Trans-gender person? Sexism?
How about artificial intelligence? Sexism?
Anon
Carter-Silk: ‘Hey, nice picture.’ Proudman: ‘Lick my arse. In public’
GOOGLE=HOURLY=JOBs/$98/h/PAY
$98/HOURLY SPECIAL REPORT!!!!……….After earning an average of 19952 Dollars monthly,I’m finally getting 98 Dollars an hour,just working 4-5 hours daily online… three to five hours of work daily… Weekly paycheck… Bonus opportunities…Payscale of $6k to $9k /a month… Just few hours of your free time, any kind of computer, elementary understanding of web and stable connection is what is required…….HERE I STARTED-TAKE A LOOK AT…….dp…….
➤➤➤➤ http://GoogleSpecialBucksJobsCloudOnnetCenter/$98hourlywork…. ⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛
brianmacker
She’s also a hypocrite because she had in the past contacted men online with comments like “hot stuff”, “sexy” and ‘oooo lalala!’