With dreary predictability, there have been calls for Olympian Jessica Ennis-Hill to apologise to footballer Ched Evans for saying (after his initial conviction for rape, which has now been overturned) that she wanted her name removed from a stand in Sheffield United’s ground if the club offered him another contract. Why should Ennis-Hill apologise? At the time of her statement, Evans had been found guilty. Even now, isn’t Ennis-Hill entitled to subscribe to the widely held view that Evans’s behaviour was disgusting?
As far as the actual case goes, there’s been a definitive legal decision, however much some people disagree with it. (Those interested in issues raised by the case might care to take a look at the Secret Barrister website, which, among other interesting observations, contends that the case did not set a precedent for women being grilled on their sexual history.) Legality aside, what Evans might find himself dealing with from now on is the wider public response to the sickening, self-justifying culture he’s come to represent and the importance of personal responsibility.
Might we be seeing a tad of double standards here?
The evidence was that the young lady in question on one day asked her new found lover for doggie style sex and harder. On the next day she asked Ched for the same. Two weeks later she asked a third bloke for more of the same.
There indeed was a time when we would have said that this behaviour was disgusting. Perhaps we should be saying it is today. But I fear that it might be unwise to insist that a gentleman is disgusting for giving a lady exactly and precisely what she is asking for.