Women will suffer violence until men clean up their ‘locker room chat’ 

The murder of Sarah Everard has broken the hearts of British women. I remember the first missing posters being shared on social media and I remember thinking “Oh my goodness, a friend of a friend is missing.” Then I saw it shared on another platform and another and I realised this was not a friend of a friend — it was a young women that could have been a friend or it could have been me. It could have been so many of us. In the UK, one in four women will experience domestic abuse and one in five will experience sexual assault during her lifetime. MPs have naturally described the level of violence against women as an epidemic.

The question we face time and again is how do we reduce violence against women and girls? The answer is always the same; we need to change the mentality underpinning the crime. 

A useful case to demonstrate and understand the mentality is that of Donald Trump’s notorious comments in 2017: “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything … Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.” Trump bragging about sexually assaulting women was a wakeup call. Not only the criminal content of his remarks but the public reaction to them; they were excused by Nigel Farage as “mere locker talk” and “alpha male boasting”. We were then reminded of the inequality between men and women. Yet we saw Trump win the election. Men and women did not join hands to tackle sexism and a male abuser was elected President of the United States. 

The comments made by Trump have highlighted the existence of this deep societal ill that is the uncontested existence of dehumanising discourse surrounding women. Dehumanisation can lead, ultimately, to violence and abuse but it can also materialise in the kind of intimidation we, as women, face on a near daily basis.

By objectifying women you dehumanise them. When a group is dehumanised the environment becomes conducive to violence towards that group. In fact the infamous Zimbardo prison experiment is a fine example of how the dehumanisation of a group can lead to violence. In Zimbardo’s experiment, subjects were randomly assigned to play the role of “prisoner” or “guard”. Those assigned to play the role of guard were given sticks and sunglasses; those assigned to play the prisoner role were arrested by the Palo Alto police department, deloused, forced to wear chains and prison garments. Several of the guards became progressively more sadistic and the experiment very quickly got out of hand. It was shut down for fear that one of the prisoners would be seriously hurt. The experiment showed, therefore, how an environment of dehumanisation of another group, coupled with control and authority (which I would argue is the combination present in the case of most sexual assaults and cases of violence against women) lends itself to violence. 

Around the time of Trump’s comments I suffered degradation in the form of group catcalling and intimidating behaviour. As I walked down the pavement five young men came up from behind me and alongside me. One man shouted “She has ginger hair, I love gingers,” the others laughed and joined in with “What about her red coat? I love a red coat.” “Hey, love, you’re fit,” followed by more laughing. “God I have got such a thing for red hair and red coats.” 

They were getting louder and closer, so I pulled out my phone and tried to call a friend. She didn’t answer but I pretended she had: “Hi, yes, just heading to the tube now.” Something in that short pretend conversation caused the men to drop back. I assume it was either the fear that someone else had been brought into the scene, or it that in speaking I had somewhat reminded them of my humanity and awakened, in them, some sort of shame.

When I did get through to my friend she asked me: “Where were the public?” Indeed, where were the public? Well, a few members of the public were lone males that had already stared at me as I walked past. Apart from that, the incident was completely ignored. Sadly the intimidation and fear I felt is laughed off both by victims and perpetrators. It is part of the accepted “lad culture” and, I would argue, a direct result of “locker room chat”. Sarah Everard’s murder has reminded us how at risk we are as women in the streets, and how vital it is for our survival to root out the mentality that underlies violence.

What then can be done? First of all what needs not to be done is for the behaviour to be legitimised through referring to it as “locker room talk”. Moreover, such “chat” needs an overhaul in itself. Upon asking a few of my male friends what they think of this “locker room” excuse, I have had mixed responses.  A few have chuckled and agreed that they have experienced this kind of chat, assumed women did it too and quite frankly do not see the problem. 

Just to be clear, no women I know, or have ever met, discuss how we can do anything to a man without their consent. I am not claiming there is not chat about what a man may look like, of course there is “banter” about appearances, but there is a difference between “sexy” talk and “sexual assault talk”. 

I would also say there is a difference between the odd cheeky comment and objectification being the overriding dominant discourse. Where objectification becomes the predominant conversation behind closed doors, it evidences the lack of respect towards the group being objectified and raises the risk of dehumanisation towards that group. Would constant jokes among a group of friends about someone’s skin colour be acceptable? The change in mentality we have seen towards racial discrimination needs to happen towards sexist narratives in order that violence may decrease.

What also must be reversed is the feminist trend towards pushing men out of the movement. By no means is equality going to be achieved through approaches that push certain groups in society down in order to bring others up. History has shown us — the American civil rights movement being a strong example — that when groups come together and work together as equals, then progress in equality between those groups can be achieved. It took the horrific murder of Emmit Till and the coming together of races in shared outrage to really progress the movement — not the method of “white hating” employed by Malcolm X.

I therefore call on men to clear out their locker rooms. If someone is saying they can do anything to a woman, even grab at them if they wanted to, then shut that conversation down; name and shame them. If you find the conversation constantly revolves around viewing women as nothing more than the body they inhabit, then speak out, or at the very least change the topic. For those that inhabit cleaner “locker rooms”, stand up for your kind of “locker room” and defend the women who are speaking out.

We have an opportunity to change the landscape and make a stand for equality and ultimately the safety of women. It is not an opportunity to be missed and it certainly is not an occasion where the locker room narrative can win. It is time to move forward and make the world a safe place for women to be able to simply walk home at night.

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a donation.