misogyny overheard

Oxford Sexism and the Facebook Phenomenon

| UPDATED

Whether it is the 38 page hate fueled essays attacking “rugby lad” culture or “Benet’s boys” (unofficially acknowledged as bastions of misogynistic banter) liking the page, we have all heard of the group and it is undeniable that the movement and the page alike are gaining momentum.

One post which particularly struck me was the so-called ‘lock/key theory’: “I overheard a person at oxford saying that the difference between a “stud” and a “slut” was that a key that opened many locks was a master key, but that a lock that could be opened by many keys was just a shit lock.”

One of the memes posted on the well-known facebook page

But the real questions remain unanswered: does the prevalence of such a group raise awareness about severe cases of sexism and, more importantly, will it be successful in challenging the people propagating these minority views?

Scrolling through the page, one can clearly see that important and relevant issues are indeed being tackled.

Whether it is appropriate (it is not) for the Australian Leader of the Opposition to have claimed in an interview that men are “by physiology or temperament more adapted to exercise authority or issue demands” cuts right at the heart of modern sexism.

The idea that we can infer men’s superior leadership skills from their generally stronger physical basis is caveman politics and such a thoroughly unsound argument needs to be dispelled on an obvious logical basis.

There are also countless links to incredibly grim articles quoting a variety of rape statistics and comments made by comedians and other politicians.

However, I can’t help but feel that the group has lost its focus and is sidelining the issues that matter most.

How is it honestly possible, that a post of a video responding to the Australian Leader of the Opposition’s above comment on the male’s superior leadership ability given their ‘physiology or temperament’ warrants only 6 comments, whereas a woman mentioning a group of Harvard “lads” singing a lurid song about a prostitute gets 22?

Isn’t the ingrained belief of women’s inability to take on senior and important national roles is the more (perhaps even most) fundamental problem facing women today and the one that should be addressed with most vigour?

At every corner, it seems that women are interpreting behavior of quite clearly sexually repressed men trying to seem “doggish” in front of their friends as serious incidences of misogyny.

Take the guy who falsely claimed to have slept with a particular girl posting on the page: am I the only one here that attributes this behavior to his blatant insecurity?

Is it not more likely that he tells these lies in an attempt to inflate his social value as opposed to a genuine attack on women and their sexual behavior?

Am I the only one here who feels sorry for him, sorry that he honestly believes the only way he can find a girl to temporarily value him is by lying to her and claiming other girls have wanted him in the past?

This does not excuse his actions. But to categorise it with the comment of the Australian politician is an insult to the anti-misogyny campaign.

What about the case of a guy so mesmerized by a fellow student walking down Cornmarket, that he remarked he would “hit that so hard the person who pulled me out would become King of England”.

Clearly unnecessary, immature, insulting and an unhelpful objectification of women.

But to me the comment simply shows another guy who does not have the confidence to approach and try to build a connection with a girl he is truly attracted to, because deep down he feels that the most likely outcome is rejection, perhaps even instantly.

Not a misogynist per se. The best he can do is try to look cool in front of his friends.

Whilst this does not excuse the comment, it certainly makes him that bit less “sickening” and “awful” than the group portrays.

Surely, he deserves much less attention than the Australian politician.