Should I Delete That? - ‘Woman killed’ - but by who? Dismantling the media spin on male violence

Episode Date: May 18, 2025

Words matter and the way we use them can either uphold or challenge harmful systems.This week we’re joined by Sydney - the co-founder of This Ends Now, a not-for-profit dedicated to preventing male violence against women and girls through reframing conversations. Sydney tells us how language plays a powerful role in shaping our understanding of sexism and male violence and how changing the words we use can help dismantle the patriarchy.We dive into their powerful ‘Red Pen’ campaign, which calls out the victim-blaming, misogynistic language too often used in headlines and police reports and corrects them to advocate for responsible reporting.Our chat with Sydney was fascinating, and really opened up our eyes to how simple changes to the language we use can make a huge difference - and felt particularly important off the back of our conversation with Laura Bates last week. Do go back and listen to that episode if you haven’t already. Follow @thisendsnow__ on Instagram Read more about all the work of This Ends Now at https://www.thisendsnow.co.uk/ Read the Words Matter Reporting Guidelines hereIf you'd like to get in touch, you can email us on [e-mail] Follow us on Instagram:@shouldideletethat@em_clarkson@alexlight_ldnShould I Delete That is produced by Faye LawrenceStudio Manager: Dex RoyVideo Editor: Celia GomezSocial Media Manager: Emma-Kirsty FraserMusic: Alex Andrew Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You see so many headlines where it's woman was killed, woman sexually assaulted on canal path, woman sexually touched at bus stop, you know, who is doing that? We're not talking about the perpetrator. Hello and welcome back to you should I delete that. Words are powerful and language shapes our understanding of reality and when we fail to name male violence, we allow it to be normalized. In today's episode, we spoke to Sydney, the co-founder of this ends now about how changing the words we use can reshape how society responds to sexism and male violence. This Ends Now is a not-for-profit organisation committed to preventing male violence against women and girls through reframing conversations around feminism and dismantling patriarchy.

Their Red Pen campaign aims to raise awareness of the misogynistic and victim-blaming language used in police and media headlines when reporting on instances of male violence by taking a red pen and correcting them to advocate for responsible reporting. Our chat with Sydney was fascinating, super informative, and it really opened up our eyes to how simple changes to the language we use can make a huge difference. As a heads up, this episode contains some references to male violence and sexual violence. Here's Sydney.

Hi, Sydney. Thank you so much for coming to talk to us. We have teed this episode up already. in Thursday's episode just gone, but we really wanted to do this on the back of Laura's episode last week. We ended up chatting in DMs and felt that it was really important.

We can't just look at the issue of male violence in the sort of one quite terrifying and specific way that we did with Laura without taking a step back and looking at where we are societally and we thought what better way to do that than to explore the language that we're surrounded by, which is why you're here today.

So thank you so much for coming. Can we ask, I guess, to start about This Ends Now, about why you started it, about its mission and, like, how it's going? Yeah, I mean, firstly, thank you so, so much for inviting me on. It's just amazing to be here. But yes, I mean, this ends now. Our mission is to prevent gender-based oppression, but more specifically male violence against women and girls, by reframing conversations around feminism and dismantling patriarchy. So that's a bit of a mouthful. But we break that down.

And our Words Matter campaign is really all about the language we use in every day kind of conversations. And we've worked with the police and we have our Red Pen campaign on social media as well, which I'm sure I'll talk a bit about. But in terms of how this ends now came about, so I, so my day job, I'm actually a solicitor for a maternity rights charity. So I give like free employment and discrimination advice to pregnant women. new parents. So this ends now was set up separately to that. Basically, I used to run a voluntary blog called Fem Legal and we used to critique the gendered nature of the law and policy and stuff. And it was through that that I met my co-founder Nikki, who is a runner and I'm a runner. And we basically both linked up and were both from Stroud, which is like a small

activist town in the southwest. And unfortunately, in the summer of 2022, there were a series of incidents of men raping and sexually assaulting women. And it was through that and the basically very victim blaming reporting by the police and media that we decided to stage a protest. And it was off the back of the protest that this ends now came about because we basically wanted to shift the narrative from women's safety and what women can do to keep themselves safe onto prevention and how can we as a society be more mindful about our language and actually prevent gender-based oppression and male violence from happening in the first place. that's very cool

sorry that's very waffling no really cool that's a really cool like origin story if not a little bit depressing that that's what you I mean because there's so many parts

there's so many strings to your bow and it's like you're fighting fires on every front it's like oh I've got to help here oh god I've got to help here as well yeah and life can feel very depressing at times because especially with the media at the moment like all the news

about the US and Trump and reproductive rights and all sorts it can be such a stark landscape. And I think, you know, this is why we try and say with Words Matter and our red pen campaign, everyone can make a difference by just shifting the way that they talk about male violence against women and girls, even calling it male violence against women and girls. It's controversial, unfortunately. Like the Vogue sector, the violence against women and girls sector calls itself Vogue. I used to work for a national domestic abuse charity.

And it's very much, I think now they're starting to identify it and talk. about it as male violence, but in the sector still, it's very passive. And there's loads of reasons for that. But I think we have to name the issue to then start to prevent it. And I think people often say, you know, how do you know it's male violence? And the statistics tell us it is, you know, a man kills a woman every three days in the UK. We know that 90, I think it's 98% of perpetrators for sexual offences in England and Wales are men. So it's a really important issue. And, you know, We wouldn't say in relation to like drink driving, it's a pedestrian issue. So why do we say violence against women and girls is a women's issue?

That's such a good point. It's such a good point. Why do you think, why do you think that the language is gendered like that? What do you think the reason is? I think there's lots of reasons. The first one is we live in just such a patriarchal society. So I think our media, police, institutions, we all just brush it under the carpet. and don't acknowledge that it's an issue of male violence because ultimately patriarchy

relies on silence. I think the reporting which will come on to really normalises it. You know, you see so many headlines where it's woman was killed while walking her dog. I think that's the first headline we might discuss. You know, woman sexually assaulted on canal path. Woman sexually touched at a bus stop. You know, who is doing that? We're not talking about the perpetrator. we're actually just, yeah, insinuating these things happen in a vacuum.

And they're often really victim-blaming. You know, people start to think, well, why was she in a park at night by herself? You know, why was she drinking? What does she do to provoke that kind of violence? And so I think as a society, we've got a lot, a long way to go to try and shift those conversations. Do you think the thinking behind it is it makes it more palatable? Yes. And I think...

Woman killed... you know, women sexually assaulted in part rather than man assaults sex. Do you think it makes it more palatable for us? It makes us feel less comfortable, more comfortable with, I'm trying to... I don't know. I think for a lot of people, especially with the kind of narratives around Andrew Tate in cell culture, which links to Laura Bates' work, I think a lot of people are worried about isolating men from the conversation and they want to bring men into feminism and being

allies which is so so important um and i think people fear you know if we start calling it what it is i email violence we're talking about all men which we're absolutely not doing you know it's very nuanced and i think a lot of people struggle to understand that nuance or maybe that's doing them a disservice perhaps not understand but we just don't want to acknowledge it as a society it also does feel more passive like i suppose in the way that like you know the news is very anxiety inducing as women we have this innate fear unfortunately we have this innate aware of of the threat to our lives, with the threat to our safety, I wonder that we, it wouldn't end up, I don't know,

I'm completely putting words in mouths or whatever, but I wonder that like for a long time, like scary things weren't for women to think about. Like, oh, you little things, don't you worry about this. It makes it more, rather than causing us all to get a bit hysterical. Like, let's not be silly. If it keeps it all quite passive, I wonder that that's not part of it as well. But obviously, like, the roots of this, it's like the people that have owned the newspapers

have been owning them for generations and years and these, they're institutions, right? Like, it's not like, it's not easy to unpick it and to change it now. Definitely, yeah. And there's lots of work being done in the sector, which is fantastic. But that's why we really went to the police first with our Words Matter reporting guidelines because we know that the media pick up police press releases and they basically just make them worse, they sensationalise it even further because it's all about clickbait and getting views or likes and clicks.

In that case, sorry, just that completely goes back on what I'm just thinking there, my previous thing about it being passive. Yeah. That's actually the complete opposite, right? If we are doing it for clickbait. So if that's the case, is it because victim blaming is more clickable? Absolutely. I think if you see a headline that says, I'm trying to think of a really good one.

one now, but, you know, horror at woman who was tied to chair before she was raped and murdered. I mean, someone is more likely, unfortunately, to click on that story than, in my opinion, if it just said man raped and killed woman. And I don't know why that is. I think we, again, the issues we've already talked about, we struggle to, like, confront it as a society, I think, but definitely words like horror or tragedy or legend, I think, was the one on your story, Describing someone as a legend. Yeah. Well, that's how this episode came to be,

the French actor, who the Daily Mail described as a French legend. Yes. Accused. No, not accused, convicted. But that's not the fucking takeaway. The takeaway is he's a movie legend. Never mind.

Convicted with a couple of sexual assaults. Like, don't dwell on that. Let's look at his movie catalog. Well, it completely minimizes it, right? 100%. It minimizes the violence that has happened and the effect that it has on the victim or survivor. Yeah, because he's a legend.

Yeah. Like, they've maintained. his status like that's the first that's it yeah it's that's the first word that's the first that's the he's a legend yeah this has happened to a legend yeah he's still upheld as a legend yeah and it's like poor him his life's been ruined his career has been rid realistically it won't be no it's fine um he said himself he's going to use this to channel channel and you know into his his art his acting he's going to use the lawyers to inspire him having watched the lawyers he will be buy it to take that if he ever plays a lawyer in a film.

It's a game. It's getting to a point where it does just feel like it is just a game to them. It's so depressing. Going back to the Words Matter campaign that you took to the police, what does that mean? Yeah, so going back a little bit to the origin story, one of the headlines that we saw, the police press release was about a woman who, well, the headline read very passively, a woman had been sexually touched on the canal in Stroud.

and there have been others, I think they referred to a serious sexual assault that took place in Gloucester Park, for example, and essentially we just said this is really, really passive, it's victim blaming, it's steeped in misogyny and patriarchal norms, like we need to do something about this. And there was actually a community meeting that was held in Stroud after these incidents. It was off the back of that, that we were speaking to the police and saying, do you have any kind of language guidance for this situation? And there's a lot of work going on with Operation Ceteria and other big kind of national schemes that are working on language. But that's the officers more generally my understanding is anyway.

But we were looking at actually, we know the issues with the media. They pick up police press releases. Do your external communications teams have any guidance? And the answer was no. So we've basically created the words matter reporting guidelines, which I'm really pleased to say are now live. So they're published. You can access them on our website so that this ends now website.

and it's with Gloucestershire Constabulary and the Office for the Police and Crime Commissioner that we've developed it with but they will hopefully be rolled out nationally and essentially the top three takeaways are to avoid victim blaming use the active voice, not the passive voice and to name the crime.

Well done. That's really cool. Really cool. To explore what that means linguistically, what does the passive and active language, can you give us a differentiation or a distinction of what that would mean and what that would look like.

Definitely. So the example I always use is like a simple active sentence would be man kills woman. The simple passive sentence, so flip that round, would be woman was killed by a man. Okay. But what we actually see in headlines was just woman was killed. They dropped the agent altogether. They drop the perpetrator. And I think you can clearly see from man kills woman to woman was killed.

One is quite strong. It's active. It's putting the onus and holding the perpetrator. to two account. The other is, it begs questions. Like, women was killed. Well, where was she? What was she doing? What was she wearing? Was she drunk? You know, obviously other factors, like victim blaming narratives play into that. So what we mean by that is, including the location. So at bus stop, for example, or in dark alley. Like, we know that these incidents don't just happen in dark alleyways by monsters who are perpetrating these crimes. It's men everywhere, unfortunately. Not all men,

but it's enough men and so doing that and talking about it in that way or reporting on it in that way is just not accurate. You're so right, it makes it sound like it's the alleyways fault or the bus stop's fault

more than the man's. Yeah. How receptive were the police to the words matter guidelines? Fairly, yes. I think like any institution there's a lot of red tape. There have been a few setbacks

which has been really disappointing but on the whole, they've been okay and we as like part of the process for creating the guidelines we had an internal consultation phase where we bought in different members of the police and not just the external communications teams but others and we then had an external consultation phase where we spoke to charities and like former editors and you know lots of different people to get their views on it so it's gone through quite a rigorous process to get here hence why it's taken like a very long time. It's taken two and a half years, but we are a voluntary organisation, so that's

kind of another factor. But yes, on the whole, the police have been pretty good. I think unfortunately, there's still a long way to go. And even recently in press releases, they still like to refer to it as Vogue, Violence Against Women and Girls, despite us working with them for the past couple of years and saying, you need to call it male violence. We know it's male violence. Sorry, I've got a million question. Is there a really important? Is there a really? A real question. Is there a reason that they can't, is it because they're innocent until proven guilty that they can't say man kills woman until they know for sure that the man killed the woman? Yes, I think there's a lot of issues around contempt of court or fears of contempt of court. So for example, if it's in

the early stages, they do, sometimes the police will be vague and they have to be. Where someone has been accused or convicted and the court has said it's murder, manslaughter, rape, sexual assault. You can use that language. But until then, I think there's definitely a fear by institutions, especially the media that they don't want to get it wrong. They don't want to open up any sort of like legal action against them. So if it was breaking news, like if a woman was killed, this wouldn't even be in the news because it happens so often, but if a woman was killed at a bus stop, would the headline have to be until there was a conviction? Would it have to be woman was killed? Because that's the only fact that we have. I think potentially it depends on

Obviously, each case is different. If, and again, it depends on evidence like CCTV and things, if the police are aware that it was a man who killed them and not another woman or any person really who's done this or perhaps a dog attack, you know, that someone hit the news. You know, if the police are aware that it is a man who's done this, then they should be reporting on it as man has killed or man kills woman because that's not an offence.

To kill someone is not the legal terminology, so it's fine. Okay. Is my understanding. Do they have to say allegedly? Yes. Yes. That's the other thing. Has that got to be in the headline?

The short answer is yes. I think normally to cover their own backs, they will say allegedly yes, especially if they don't have all the evidence, perhaps, or they're still investigating. So you do see man allegedly kills a woman or man allegedly rapes or sexually assaults woman. And I think allegedly is such an interesting word because it's automatically kind of making people think,

well, it's just alleged. It's grunting doubt. Yeah, and it feeds into those kind of really harmful narratives about false allegations and women lying about sexual violence. Which they don't really do. Exactly. I think a good statistic is always that as a man, you're 230 times more likely to be raped than falsely accused of rape. I want that tattooed.

You said that you spoke to some former magazine or newspaper editors. Were you able to speak to any current ones? I'm wondering how receptive they are to these to these guidelines and whether receptive because do they worry that it means less clicks for them as you know they can be less as sensationalist with their headlines and so we have had over the last couple of years a few specific journalists get in touch or we've we've been quite active like we actually wasn't quite a protest but we took our red pen campaign to the daily mail offices so the headquarters in london and we stood outside and we basically handed out a sheet with problematic, misogynistic daily mail

headlines and asked the members of the public to take our red pen. I've actually got one. Hang on. We've got these The Sends now Red Penss. Amazing. There we go. And it's red ink. So we actually handed these out and got members of the public to correct them. And unfortunately, we weren't able to speak to anyone from the Daily Mail on the day. I'm so surprised. So I think from our perspective, the kind of success story with this campaign is more individual people coming to us and saying, oh my gosh, I just didn't see it until you pointed it out, like how bad this is. But in terms of your point around the media, they're just, I think as you probably have experienced, and they will correct headlines when they're called out very specifically.

You know, they might then issue a new. Quietly, though. Quietly, yes. Like, yeah, behind the curtain on that like I've often called out the mail for headlines in the past and when I do I sometimes hear from the journalist I regularly will hear from a journalist saying it's not my fault I didn't write the headline and as a journalist I think both you and I will say I wish that was better known that we don't write the headlines so sometimes I'll write a column or I'll write something and then I see the headline on I'm like oh my god that is not that's just going to get me shit So I do appreciate, particularly at the mail, I think what they tend to do, in my opinion, is they get their juniors who are, I mean, bless them, they're in student debt from trying to make it in journalism. The mail is pretty much the only one making any money, so able to pay anyone.

So they'll go and get a job there. They write these stories that are like, I mean, like a hundred a day or whatever, crossing their desk. They write them really quickly. They send them to whoever, and the editor will put a headline on them. And when the, when someone like me calls the headline out, it's those journalists that caught the flat for it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Their names to it. And often it won't be anything like what they originally wrote. I mean, they might as well just have it all done by AI at this point. But like it won't be anything like what they've originally written. They'll then, and the headline will, they won't get approval. You don't. I mean, you'd have to be someone very, very like held in high regard to get to get headline approval.

And I have to negotiate that for sometimes really, really hard. if I try and do something specific and very rarely will I get it. So that's a consideration for people that it's not often the journalist. But very often with the mail, if I call out a headline, like I've heard from editors in the past, they'll give me a ring and be like, please take your post down. I'm like, please take your headline down. Yeah, you first.

Yeah, exactly. Let's play a game of chicken. But I hear the same thing a lot from people at the mail being like, it's really not our fault. It's the editors and it's the headline writers. I think a lot of these media institutions are still. run by men predominantly like high up anyway is my understanding there's a lot of men who are sort of signing off these headlines like you say it's not the individual journalists who are

actually doing it but you know we've had people say yeah but a lot of these articles are written by women so what's the problem surely it can't be it can't be bad you know these women are writing these articles and I think there's so many issues there in relation to kind of internalize misogyny and them not perhaps realizing the harm that they're causing with their language and feeding back into this idea of success and clickbates. Clickbaits is that even a phrase? Clickbaitee content. Like, you know, they want to rise up. They want to do well. And it might be that they do have control. I don't know. It sounds like they perhaps don't have control over their headlines. But if they do, that might be a factor, you know, to get ahead to do well in the industry.

It's what sells. Yeah. And they do need to do well. If you put your entire life into a job, into a passion you know we know it if you want to be a journalist like the stuff you have to do and i hate to say that i think like pains me to say that i think that's why the daily mail has done so well because they've kind of gone like like fuck the consequences fuck why no else things we're just going to we're just going to create stories and headlines that we know people are going to click no matter the consequences and i think now think later exactly i think that's why they've done that is sadly why they've done so well they will just take it down And if they, you know, it's like, it's, what's the apologise?

Ask permission later. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. If you, if you contact the mail as someone written about or whatever and complain, they will take it down quite often or they will change the headline. So it's like they, they do have it. But it's like, well, we'll do that if we have to.

We'll engage our hearts if we have to. We'll get the, we'll get the links first. Yeah. And I just think the number of them being pumped out where it's just so passive, woman killed woman assaulted it's just like even if you get one taken down there's so many others out there if we take a step back from violence against women can we look at or talk about the sort of language used about women in general not looking at women as victim of crime but like female celebrities again citing the male or any of these sort of like click baity magazine

headlines do you see a connection with the way women are spoken about in general and then how we're spoken about as victims. Definitely, yeah. I think the way we talk about gender in general is so binary and it goes back to like stereotypes. And unless you fit those binary stereotypes of what it is to be a woman or what it is to be a man, for example, then society doesn't like it.

You know, if you subvert any of those, you're a problem. Obviously, yes, my instinct is to talk about crime. But more generally, if you think about the phrase like working mum, like that's used quite a lot. And I think that's really problematic. because what are you insinuating with that that most mothers don't work and you're different because you're a working mum?

Are you insinuating that care, work in the home is not work? Like, it's just, you wouldn't say a working dad or I think it's less common. So I think from that angle, yes, I think there's problematic words like bitch and slut and all of those really derogatory terms that are used that have so many connotations to them that you wouldn't necessarily use in relation to men.

But yeah, you're right, in relation to celebrities in particular, I think they are absolutely vilified by the media. Often, I mean, I'm very much generalising here, but I think there's just so many standards women have to meet. And I think it's interesting just in relation to, you know, the Sweaty Betty, this is really a tangent right now, but the Sweaty Betty campaign about, what's it called?

Wear the Damn Shorts. Oh my gosh. I mean, that really resonated with me from a language perspective because where the damn shorts, I grew up being called all sorts of names as a kid, like Thunder Thighs, things like that. I did not wear shorts as a child or as a teenager and I ran a half marathon in 2017 and didn't wear shorts. I ran one on Sunday to raise money for The Sends Now and I wore shorts because of that campaign and because of it.

Yay. That's so cool. So good. And because I believe words matter and actually, you know, thunder thighs is just such a nasty phrase that it was young boys that would use it as like a derogatory. term. But I think women, it links to body positivity. It links to all sorts of things like fatphobic language, just general sexist, misogynistic language. So there's just so many layers to it. And I think it all comes back to patriarchy and how we live in a society that's built by and for men predominantly. And, you know, linking back to crime, we've got this triangle of violence where the language we use, the cat calling, those things are the bedrock of sexual assault.

rape and femicide. Catcalling is such problematic language. I've never thought about it until you just said it. Yeah. What even is it? Do you know it's root? I don't know. It's a specific root actually.

And again, a really good book to read would be word slut. I think it's Amanda Montel. I apologies if I got that wrong. But she basically dissects all of these really kind of key terms like bitch and slut and catcalling, things like that and looks back at like, you know, centuries of language. Where did it actually come from? have we, like how is that language evolved? But cat calling's a really interesting one. I mean, it's public sexual harassment. Yeah. Call it what it is. I think it's sensationalizing something

that is a really serious problem and an epidemic. So onto your red pen campaign, which you started in 2003. Yes, that's right. Yeah. Can we do a live red pen session? Yes, absolutely. You've provided us of the list of headlines. And I think it would be really useful to go through these and for you to explain why they're problematic and how they could be fixed. Because I think, I mean, reading that list, some of them are glaring and blatant. And it's like, well, I can obviously see what the problem is here. And I think some of them will slip the net for a lot of people. And, you know, like you say, like language does, like, it matters so much. It shapes our belief systems and and our reality

and I think it's so important for us to fix this and it's so cool what you're doing so can we do a live live repent session? Yeah definitely which one do you want to start with? Can we start with woman dies after attack while walking dog? Yes so this is a BBC

headline it was from last summer I believe ultimately the first thing to think when you're looking at a headline like this when she starts with woman dies is that it's completely passive. I mean there's absolutely no mention of the perpetrator there. And actually in this one, woman dies after attack while walking dog. I mean, I was sent it from someone who knows our work, but they said to me, if I didn't know your work, I would think this is actually a dog attack. Like,

there has been a lot in the media about dogs attacking people. Like, what actually is it saying? And I think it's just downplaying the fact that this is male violence against women and girls. She also dies. Like, dies. Like, she just killed. She didn't just die. She didn't just die. He just died.

Someone made her die. Yeah. She just died. She just died. It's just so flippant, isn't it? It was a 45-year-old man from the Ipswich area in case anyone wants to know who killed her. It's so frustrating as well, thinking about the dog attack thing. So often, like, you're right, we hear about dog attacks all the time.

And I always know it's a dog attack because it's like, dog kills this. Dog kills this. Yeah, yeah. Where's the man? Where's the man? Yeah, we're willing to do it with so many other things, just not. male violence against women and girls. Can you fix that for us, please?

Yeah, I mean, all we would say is man-killed woman. The perfect idea. And this feeds back into this conversation just quickly around, is that going to sell? Well, no, because they'd have to write it 15 articles a day, and for SEO, that wouldn't work. Yeah, yeah. I'd be like, oh, sorry, the headline's already been taken 14 times this morning.

Exactly. And I think that just proves the problem. You know, it's so prevalent in our society. All these articles will just read, man kills woman, man rapes woman, man guilty of sexual assault. Yeah, not much variety. No. Okay, next one.

Vile rapist uttered six, seven word threat to lone teen after park attack. This was in the express. God, where do you begin with that one? I honestly, I'm hoping you could do this because I don't know. So, in relation to the words matter guidelines that we've developed with the police, It applies to the media as well. So top three tips, we're thinking, avoid victim blaming. So the victim blaming part of this specific headline, I think, is the latter half of the sentence.

So lone teen after park attack. Firstly, you've got park attack. Again, did the park attack her? I don't know what's really going on there. The second point is this idea of lone teen. Like, why were they alone, you know? Where were her parents? Yeah, where were her parents?

Why the hell was she in a park by herself? like, you know, really victim-blaming and problematic. Would you say the same thing if it was a young boy? Potentially, is it gendered? I mean, these are all big questions. I think there's a huge thing around women's safety and, you know, the media saying, I think there was an article fairly recently

about how women shouldn't be going out in parks in the winter to run, for example. You know, I think it feeds into all of that. And then going back to the top tips, use the active voice. While they do mention the perpetrator, you know that is positive in a way it is totally victim-blaming and fairly passive so I think again sensationalist language vile rapist are you saying that other rapists aren't vile like what implications does that have um and then this uh sick seven word threat I mean that's sensationalizing

and minimizing the crime that's happened in my view so we would just red pen that it would literally be man raped girl because I think actually if you look at the article she was 15 from memory and I think this is another problem with these articles they banned around the term teenager say child yeah man raped she was 15 yeah her gender's irrelevant she's a child yeah since sarah everard we've have to be you know we have seen a shift in language which is good about how we need to be careful that we don't just paint these out as lone wolves, bad apples, like it's just monsters because it's meant, you know, it's not just monsters, right? But I always think when it's something like vile, vile rapist or whatever, it's like, well, that just makes him a monster, which he is a

monster, but he's also, I don't know, it kind of sets him apart in a way I don't love, but I don't know if I'm reading too much into that. I completely agree with that. And I think, if you think about the Giselle Pellico case, you know, there were thousands of men in these online forums, you know, it's not all men, but it's enough men. And by demonising these individuals as monsters, you're not recognising and acknowledging that this is an epidemic of male violence against women and girls. Yeah, so well said. Oh, I don't even want to read the next one out. Yeah. Woman drank six Jaeger bombs in 10 minutes on the night she was raped and murdered. The son. The son. The sun. Yeah, this one was a couple of years ago, but it's one that we always

bring up because it's just so blatantly victim-blaming. I mean, the fact that she was drinking has absolutely nothing to do with the crime. You know, if a man wants to perpetrate violence against women, he's going to do it. Like, it's not the responsibility of the victim or survivor ever. And to insinuate such by, you know, mentioning clothing, drinking. It's just so irrelevant. And leads to victim-blaming and people thinking, well, women lie about these things and just fuels these really harmful narratives. So in that situation, again, it would just be man, raped and murdered woman.

This upsets me because it was so recent. It will upset me, but the whole coverage of this case has been so vile. Crossbow murder case, BBC Star's daughter, tied to chair and shot dead with Crossbow alongside Sister, The Mirror. Yeah, the coverage on that was particularly, horrific and I think Laura Bates touched on these cases, you know, the rise in crossbow killings. And even that, talking about crossbow killings, it's male violence against women and girls. Men are picking up crossbows and deciding to go out and kill women, often because, you know, in these

situations, in this specific case, you know, she rejected him and he killed her. This one is particularly problematic because crossbow murder case, whilst yes, it's factually accurate, a crossbow was used. And that can be in the headline. I think crossbow murder case, that phrasing is a little bit sensationalist in itself. I think BBC star's daughter. Again, this word star is very sensationalist in my view. And I think referring to her as his daughter, i.e., in relation to him as a person, she, her identity is lost there. I mean, he killed three women. Carol Louise and Hannah Hunt, name them. You know, this is not hard stuff. I appreciate some of it's nuanced, but the way that they've phrased this is very sensationalist in my view, you know, tied to chair and shot dead with crossbow.

All of these details can be included in the body of an article, for sure, but, well, if they're relevant and if they're presented in a way that isn't victim-blaming. But the way the headline's written is particularly bad. Alongside sister. I know, like this is a little afterthought. Oh, yeah. Oh, by the way. TV stars are the daughter, if we're going to just have them as extensions of him.

Yes. That makes me feel so sick. Next one. Football's bravest wag, exclamation mark. The loyal wife who stood by misogynist Joey Barton and even withdrew her damning evidence against him when he lost his temper and drunkenly attacked her at their London mansion. Daily Mail. I mean, I don't think I can even rewrite this one because I'm not sure what. they're trying to say. But I think...

No, I'm struggling, actually. They've written the article, to be honest. Yeah. I mean, so many questions. Why is she brave? Firstly, what is she brave for, you know, what they insinuating? Is she brave for standing by him?

Is she brave for withdrawing her, you know, evidence against him? Is she brave for staying with him? Like, what are they saying with that particular phrase? I'm not sure. And again, the football's bravest wag It's just so clickbaity in my view. And then loyal wife, you know,

because women are supposed to be loyal wives. It's very much going back to that conversation around stereotypes and fitting into those boxes. You know, she's a loyal wife who stood by a misogynist. Interesting that they actually pointed out that he's a misogynist because the media tend not to like to do that, as we can tell from all of the kind of passive headlines. So that's kind of interesting.

And then the latter half, kind of, you know, withdrew her damning evidence against him when he lost his temper and drunkenly attacked her at their London mansion. I think there's a lot of issues here in relation to people lose their temper all the time. They don't then attack and kill women. You know, this is an active choice he has made to perpetrate violence against her. And I think they're downplaying it there. And I also think the drunkenly attacked many people drink alcohol, many men drink alcohol and don't attack their partners you know it's it's really excusing sounds like he's fallen down the stairs yeah yeah definitely tripped oh oopsie um also two headlines above sorry the woman who drank six

yager bombs yeah look what happened to her when she drank and look what happened to him when he drank yeah and i think the london mansion like it's just irrelevant and also like what does it add dehumanizing yeah like it's not relatable is it it's not it's that's a very good point yeah it's yeah it's a very good point yeah it's not making them relatable. It's something that just doesn't happen to everyday people. This isn't an epidemic of male violence. This is a random, very specific, very good example of a famous person who has done this. So really, you know, if they're going to talk about it, they haven't used her name once.

Georgia Barton, she's her own person. They also put her against everybody else. Like, football's bravest wag that instantly puts her against all the other wags. All the other wags, yeah. It's just quietly like putting them down. down. Look at you cowards, leaving your husbands and whatever else. Graduate with first class degree jailed for raping woman twice, the Stroud News and Journal. So I'm from Stroud and Gloucestershire. So this one was particularly kind of interesting to see.

And it was in 2023 around the time that we started this red pen campaign. The main point with this is obviously graduate with first class degree. Why mention it? What are you insinuating with that? I think. are you implying his life is ruined now you know he's got this first class degree he was going on to do such wonderful things you know why would you do this um i think this one's an interesting one i think people um when we've read pendant on social media people have had different things to say about it um and some people think actually it's important to include that to show that it's lots of people that, like the everyday person, people at university, all sorts of people that can be found guilty of rape. I don't know.

People across all kind of social demographics. Yeah, it transcends class, that kind of thing. So again, this is what I mean. It's very nuanced. It's not as simple as every headline has to just read, man, raped or found guilty of raping woman. But there is nuance. Is this relevant? I would argue not. I mean. Not if you're not going to include anything about her. This is the other point. I think, you know, the media never mentioned the long-lasting impact that sexual violence has on victims and survivors

and how that can really impact people for a very long time. It's always about the man who's had his career or ruined or his future ruined. And I think that's how I read that headline in terms of he's a graduate with a first-class degree. He had his hopes and dreams ahead of him, his whole life ahead of them. Yeah, it's like, look, she got in the way. Yeah. He had to rape her, didn't he? Just ruin everything.

It does make you, like I know like I'm being flippant, but it does make, like, after a while, you do just start thinking like that. Just goes to show how, like, our society just doesn't take it seriously. That's why it's easy to be flippant about it. The next one is also quite rough. Teenager sobs and dry heaves after he's found guilty of raping three school girls. Yeah, I mean, that's a horrific case.

And if you read the article, um, when he was found. guilty he's 18 so it again it's it's man um and school girls oh we love the phrase school girls not you know referring to um girls in that way is just really kind of disgusting like it's not relevant um teenager sobs and dry heaves after he's found guilty of raping three school school girls it should just read man found guilty of raping three girls or three children you know yeah

well I mean sorry I just get a second because after he's found guilty it's like oh look what we found buying the sofa guilty verdict whoopsie yeah

I'm like oh no we found this dessert like oh no and he's like he's so upset because we've just found this well because he got caught right

yeah oh my God just to add two of his victims were 15 and the other was 14 so children children so children

school girls as well is so insidious because it's like it's the biggest porn search whatever yeah exactly and also he's why not call it and then him a schoolboy yeah there's a lot i've literally never i think i've ever read schoolboy written anywhere i don't think i've heard that since like someone deciding like oliver twist era like a charles dickens character oh the schoolboy with his pack lunch it's so horrific in itself that like schoolgirl is

one of the top search porn terms is like literally puts a knot in my stomach Sorry. Yeah, it's like the phrase revenge porn. There's just so many problems with that. You know, revenge implies that they've done something to deserve it because it's revenge on them, which is never the case. So true. Yeah, that's so true.

I've never thought about that. Yeah, and porn is supposed to be consensual. This is not, you know, it's sharing of, well, it's image-based sexual abuse and it's non-consensual sharing of those images. So the way we talk about it, bad it really matters. And I know there is a lot of work to shift that term revenge porn, but it's the legally recognised term. The government use it. It's the same with indecent images of children. I mean, that is a horrible phrase. I hate it. Indecent implies they've done

something wrong. You know, it's child sexual abuse. So there's lots, and this is where I think our legislation really needs to change policy, everything. It's not just the media and the police, but this is a good start. So for people listening who want to help you, who want to see this change, see the government take it more seriously, see the police and the media change their practices, what can they do? So I think the first thing is do get involved in our red pen campaign. Like when you see misogynistic victim blaming headlines, call them out. You know, you can send them to us, we will red pen it. And when I say we read pen it, as I said, it's nuanced. We don't just go, right, here's a template, we chuck it back out. We deliberate it. We talk

about it as a team and we come to a conclusion because these are difficult issues. So, you know, feel free to send us anything and we can red penit and credit whoever sent them in and post it back up on social media. But I think, yes, in your own lives, if you can just change your language, shift it slightly to identify that it's men perpetrating these crimes. That's always a good first step. I think just being mindful of the language we use, like the words, bitch, slut. I mean, there's arguments around reclaiming words and women using the word bitch and things like that. And I think, as I say, it's very nuanced, but just be mindful of your language. Pledge to do better and call out harmful language when you hear it, whether that's in the workplace, with friends, et cetera.

And we do have some exciting stuff coming with the sense now that I'm not allowed to talk about, sadly, but just keep an eye on our socials. And there will be ways that you can get involved, for sure, in terms of that lobbying piece and calling for real change. That's very exciting. Okay. We'll wait to hear. and we can keep up with you on social media. We're going to put all your links in the show notes. Thank you so much for joining us today, Sidney.

I think it's been really informative and helpful and probably very illuminating for a lot of us and super vital work. So thank you so much. Thank you. I'd just like to say final thing. Of course. If I could do like a quick takeaway of this ends now,

I think what we want to say to people is just we need to shift the conversation from pepper spray to patriarchy and prevention. I think people love talking about women's safety and what women can do to keep themselves safe. We need to flip the narrative. And that was actually, I think prevention, not pepper spray was something that one of our volunteers came up with,

so I'd just like to credit them on that. But it's so true. We do need to just start talking about this in a completely different way. Love that. Thank you so much. Thank you so much inviting me on. Should I delete that as part of the ACAST creator network? Thank you.