Not so sweet F.A

If anything better sums up the offensively hypocritical contortions of some of those who purport to champion woman’s rights, then to me it is the case of Luis Rubiales.

Quite rightly, Rubiales, the head of the Spanish F.A, has faced fierce criticism for days after he grabbed Jenni Hermoso by the head and kissed her on her lips during the Women’s World Cup final trophy presentation. How he has reacted following the incident is a textbook example of what not to say or do when one finds oneself in the middle of a firestorm of outrage of their own making. Basically, not doing anything to make it any worse. It didn’t’ seem possible that he could, but he did, claiming on Friday that “The kiss was the same I could give one of my daughters,”

Appalling as his actions were – and they were – I can’t help but compare his justified vilification by the British press, with the treatment that Karen White received. And if her name doesn’t ring any bells, well, that kind of makes my point.

White entered the UK prison system as transgender. However, despite dressing as a woman, the 52-year-old had not undergone any surgery and was still legally a male. She was also a convicted paedophile and on remand for grievous bodily harm, burglary, multiple rapes and other sexual offences against women. In September 2017 she was transferred to New Hall prison in West Yorkshire. During a three-month period at the female prison she sexually assaulted two other inmates.

The Rubiales incident presented a very simple narrative. In addition to being seen live by millions on TV and therefore not requiring any detailed analysis, it had the added benefit of not being controversial. By that I mean that it was instantly understandable who was the villain and who was the victim, but also fitted into a pre-existing narrative; a man in a position of authority abuses a younger woman.The story wrote itself and he media piled in. They’re still at it, a week after it happened and show no sign stopping anytime soon.

The case of Karen White is much more complex for the media. There is the whole issue of transgender politics to carefully navigate. The media are acutely aware of the need for caution when reporting on transgender issues lest they become part of the story themselves. Because facts are something some trans activists take exception to, and are not averse to rousing a Twitter mob to right a perceived wrong. So no lead items on the news, none of the usual suspects writing endless articles querying why a man was judged as suitable to be housed in a woman’s prison. Indeed, and this to me is the most troubling aspect of the whole sorry affair, hardly anything regarding the complete abnegation of any duty of care towards the two victims by the prison service. A prison sentence is meant to be a deprivation of liberty, which is fine but it seems to me that the rights of two actual women were less important to the authorities than a kowtowing to an ideological travesty.

So yes, whilst are not entirely without the media are to blame for choosing to run and run with a story that kind of speaks for itself, are we the public just as, if not more guilty? Algorithms and other technological wizardry allow media organisations to gauge which stories we read – and by extension ignore – and tailor their content accordingly. Thats why click bait is called click bait.

Unfortunately, I can’t see any of the situations – men behaving badly, the reporting of such – ever changing