Proving the female columnist rule

Spare me the Home Office-backed ‘safety app’: it wouldn’t have stopped my attacker
Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett

Because it wouldn’t do anything for me, me, me, then it’s a universal that it won’t do anything for anyone.

Ho Hum.

25 thoughts on “Proving the female columnist rule”

  1. Because it’s an app from the government it won’t do anything for anyone*. It might also give some an unwarranted sense of security that encourages them to take risks that they wouldn’t otherwise, thus actually increasing the likelihood of an attack. So correct for all the wrong reasons, which is pretty good by Gruan standards.

    *apart from a few useless middle managers in an equally useless outsourcing firm.

  2. ’ If you don’t reply, it sends a notification to one of your “guardians” (a friend or family member, not patronising or loaded language at all)…’

    What would she prefer they be called?

  3. ’ how sad it makes me to think of all the women out there saying firmly to their little girls: “Knee him in the goolies, gauge him in the eyes, scream as loud as you can.”’

    *sighs* Well, it IS the dear old Grauniad….

  4. @Julia Indeed… The eyes is stupid. Too small a target. I teach ’em to go for the throat. And the knee..

    Along with the bit of common sense that using crippling/lethal techniques gets you into Trouble if used out of spite, of course. But when your opponent has already abandoned any attempt at “civilisation”, it’s utterly useless to do the Marquis of Fantailler thing.

  5. “Only structural change will stop misogyny”

    Sorry, but this is the structural change that *you* (and the sisterhood) wanted. To get away from “The Doll’s House”, to not pass from father to husband. To play being at girlboss, even though you will never commit to a level to get there.

    Young women aren’t supposed to walk home alone in the dark. Our ancestors would be baffled at this behaviour. And really, nothing has changed. OK, CCTV and DNA testing, but men can physically overpower women. The UK women’s karate champion is on record as saying that her skills mean nothing against men, simply because of his reach.

    Also, worth mentioning how the Guardian hates Uber and cars, even though these are the safest ways for women to travel.

  6. Perhaps all women should carry automatic shotguns. And as the girls mow ’em down in their thousands, the blokes’d have to carry them too.

    The fact is that life sucks. Sorry ladies.

  7. Rolled up Cosmo or Marie Clare to the throat or nose. And don’t swat the bastards with it, shove it as hard you can.

  8. What BoM4 said, but also: karate is useless. Most martial arts are bullshit, especially the yie-arr Jap-slapping wire-fu variants.

    In the science of beating up other men, tested in MMA, we now know that it’s the likes of boxing and wrestling that “work”. Boxing because it teaches you how to strike, how to block, dodge or (hopefully) not immediately fold when you’re punched in the face. Ground grappling because that’s where most fights end up.

    Even so, if there’s three of them, or the other guy has a knife and you don’t, you’re probably fucked. You’re very not likely to defeat multiple or armed assailants, Steven Segal is a big fat liar and his movies are fiction. Best option in those scenarios is always to leg it, even if you’re a big strapping lad like Dolph Lundgren circa Rocky IV. Ask Goliath.

    Rhiannon bitches and moans about “structural change”, she might as well demand the Moon be painted purple. There’s no structure supporting sexual assault, unless she means Border Force. Even if we stop importing semi-retarded rape aficionados from shithole countries, we’ll never get rid of our homegrown Peter Sutcliffes and Wayne Couzenses. Some men are just evil.

    The wife was watching a documentary about Sutcliffe (funny how women enjoy stories about serial killers) and feminists were doing the exact same pointless cry-dance in the 1970’s. Nothing has changed. All the candlelight vigils, bra burnings and furious denunciations of sexism in the world won’t stop bad men doing bad things to weaker people when they get the chance. But maybe the cry-dance is the point, maybe this is another one of those things women don’t actually want you to fix. If they were serious they probably wouldn’t still be feminists.

  9. Bloke in North Dorset

    Rolled up Cosmo or Marie Clare to the throat or nose. And don’t swat the bastards with it, shove it as hard you can.

    When I was travelling used to carry a copy of the Economist for that same reason. As you say, jab it hard in to the nose if you can, you might miss and hit an eye which will be just as disabling. The solar plexus is an option and what we were taught on one of the few unarmed combat sessions I did while in the army, unless its Beerbelly McBelly, but then you could probably out run him.

  10. When crappy fantasy films, from crappy fantasy books, like 50 Shades of Grey, are seen and bought, in their thousands, by women, there will always be inadequate male morons who will think that this is what women really want.
    About 20 years ago, as a serving Police officer, I helped our Divisional Crime Prevention officer in giving out rape alarms to women – simple items that could be clipped onto clothing which, when a Ford or tag was pulled, have out an extremely loud and high pitched sound. The last thing a rapist, or sexual pervert wants is to be noticed by other people, and I imagine (because I’ve never tried it) it would difficult to obtain, or maintain, an erection with a high powered screech in your ears. Sadly, these were stopped due to budgetary controls. Perhaps it’s time to bring them back?

  11. Rape alarms… Yeah… those were fun… 😀
    Many a handbag/backpack that went off unintentionally during lectures. Many a prank played because the things are so damn noisy and easy to hide.
    And so stupidly fragile a good stomp would shut them up…

    Invention of the century, those… [/sarc]

  12. The eyes is stupid. Too small a target. I teach ’em to go for the throat. And the knee..

    Allocation of limited resources. A slip of a lass isn’t going to make much impact on a burly knee or no-neck throat. But an eye is an eye and an angry, scratchy, pointy girly finger with an assault nail will do damage, especially after a previous application of dirt and gravel if available.

    Of course, all of this makes little difference if some great, homicidal maniac comes after you with a bunch of loganberries.

  13. Only structural change will stop misogyny

    Of course, it’s also worth considering whether structural change promoted misogyny.

    It’s a long time ago since I intervened to persuade a drunken bloke to stop pestering a woman on the tube. Nowadays she’d just complain that she had two blokes on her case. Sad.

  14. Only structural change will stop misogyny

    Of course. It’s ALWAYS ‘structural change’, a.k.a permanent rule by people who read the guardian.

    ’If you don’t reply, it sends a strongly worded letter to the Guardian’

    Better

  15. @ Steve “Steven Segal is a big fat liar”

    Watching Segal’s latest movie, I wondered why the fight scenes were filmed in slow motion. Then I realised they weren’t.

  16. Watching Segal’s latest movie, I wondered why the fight scenes were filmed in slow motion. Then I realised they weren’t.

    Sounds like the experience of watching women play cricket. “Fast” bowling, lol.

  17. Dennis, With A Beretta In My Pocket

    What would have helped is a gun.

    Yeah, but all you Brits can get your hands on is a narwhal tusk, and they look like they’d be a bitch to get into your purse.

  18. So now the Graun has decided that safety devices are patronising. Maybe it should tell Uber after it’s spent so much on providing safety features that just aren’t there for traditional taxi rides. Maybe it should tell Sadiq Khan after he went to such lengths to ban Uber for being much better than traditional taxi rides, but not much better enough.

  19. “Because it wouldn’t do anything for me, me, me, then it’s a universal that it won’t do anything for anyone.”

    Nah. She (it?) just needed a few more sous in her handbag, so she wrote some tossed-off (ooo!) words and as usual the publisher she sent it to was eager for clicks and so published it and (probably) paid her something.

    To be clear, I agree that your characterization of female article writers is a good approximation.

    But my claim is that it’s an act. She doesn’t really *think* anything on this. But she got her name out there again. Baye’s Theorem says this increases the conditional probability of getting her name out there again. And of getting paid.

    And that’s all it is.

  20. She just as easily could’ve written, “Calling 911 and blowing a rape whistle wouldn’t have stopped my attacker, so I think the government should mandate gun ownership.”

    See hun? Works both ways.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *