Angry Mob

ray

Without trying to spoil a later post, I assume you are talking about the Mail blaming the victim? And I agree, the more rabid newspapers love to blame the victim – for dressing provocatively, for being sultry or alluring, for having more than one glass of wine or just for owning a pair of breasts without due care or attention.

My theory is that it’s not totally a blame the victim situation, it’s because (at least in rape cases) they aren’t allowed to door-stop the victim or report every graphic detail. So in revenge on the law they hint at and guess at and imply what actually went on.

This is not to say that they aren’t scum for doing it though, because they are.

Kathryn Dowd

You are normally spot-on with the Mail, but I’m afraid in this case there is genuine stupidity at work at the University. PZ Myers has blogged about this case – Dr Evans has actually been cleared of sexual harrassment relating to the incidents prior to the bat-fellatio article by the investigation that took place. He was able to dispute his colleague’s claims successfully, by providing emails from her contradicting how she had claimed to have behaved. Specifically she said that she made it clear that his behaviour was unwelcome, and that she stopped socialising with him after one particular incident, when he had an email from her saying how much she had enjoyed the party that the alleged incident took place at, and inviting him to go out with her and her husband again. Given that there was evidence that those claims were fabricated, it’s really quite bizarre that her acount regarding the bat article was taken at face value. Literally what he is being punished for is showing her the bat article – an academic peer-reviewed paper that is relevant to an ongoing debate he says they had been having about human uniqueness. She actually requested a copy of it after he showed it to her, she says to get rid of him – though I can think of better ways of doing that – but he thought because she was genuinely interested. It really does seem that the only thing he is guilty of is not being a mind reader, and failing to interpret ‘could you give me a copy of that?’ as ‘I’m disgusted and offended that you showed me this article’. The investigation even accepted that Dr Evans had no intention to offend or distress her. So it is rather bizarre that he is the one being sent for counselling and monioring for two years – it seems that teaching her how to respond clearly to situations she finds uncomfortable would be more useful!

Daniel

Kathryn, I don’t doubt for a moment the veracity of your reply and you’re clearly better read on this case than I am. However, this article follows the persistent tone of many tabloid newspapers, especially the Daily Mail, that sexual harassment is frivolous.

They love to highlight seemingly false claims such as this and to pour scorn on women awarded large sums of money in genuine cases. To them, ‘sexual harassment’ is one of these horrendous new PC terms. “There’s nothing wrong with a bit of a joke in the workplace. Back in my day, people just got on with the job. It’s only a bit of fun, isn’t it?”

No matter what the outcome, it always seems to be the woman’s fault in the Mail’s mind. I’m sure that the casual but venomous misogyny that runs through this and other such articles throughout the print media does nothing to combat, and perhaps contributes to, the low report rate of rape and other sexual offenses. Of course, the Mail will tell you it’s because of our terrible criminal justice system.

Kathryn Dowd

Yes, I know. And hate the Heil for its sexism as much as anyone. But even a stopped clock is right once a day, and we can’t assume that a story is completely incorrect just because it is in The Daily Mail and they have reported on it in their usual disgusting fashion.

Ugh. I think I need to go and take a shower, after typing that.