The response to Sarah Everard’s murder requires neither misogyny nor misandry | Sam Hall
Her Majesty’s Constabulary has recently been shaken to the core as it emerged that one if its own, more recently found patrolling Embassies in London, has been charged with the murder and kidnap of 33 year old Sarah Everard.
This tragic turn of events, comes amidst a wave of negative anti-police sentiment in the wake of the policing of Black Lives Matter protests and over-zealous officers handing out £400 worth of fines to two women going for a stroll five miles from home – all because it was ‘not in the spirit of lockdown’.
The reaction of some politicians to Sarah’s murder is a telling insight into how some on the left preach misandry: feelings of hatred towards men. Men are now perceived as so threatening that an absurd 6pm curfew is required to keep women safe – or at least according to one Green Party Peer.
Like every awful incident, context is key. At 9pm on a dark London night, Sarah began her 50 minute walk home from Clapham to Brixton. She was last seen on a doorbell camera on the A205. At this juncture, it is worth pausing and reflecting that in December 2020 alone, there were 942 street level crimes in Clapham – of which violent crimes ranked second after anti-social behaviour. At 159 incidents that is roughly three per week. This is a sobering thought when we recall Sarah’s final moments.
The situation is worse in Brixton. In the same month, there were more than 1000 crimes of the same type; 230 of which were violent – roughly equating to 4 per week. These are the areas Sarah was walking from and to. She did so alone.
In the dozens of time I and female friends have visited London, a place where our families live and grew up, we have never once walked alone at night. We certainly never done so for 50 minutes. Blaming Sarah or all men for her murder is not the right answer. But it should not deter us from asking questions: what sensible precautions could she have taken? How could she have kept herself safe?
We will never know why Sarah decided to walk instead of taking public transport. Perhaps the biggest tragedy of all is that she did not stay at a friends until morning. Nobody should have to live in fear and be afraid of getting home safely. But this is Sadiq Khan’s London. In the real world – so distinct from the virtual one – sticks and stones might not break your bones, but guns and knives will. Words might not hurt you, but strange and dangerous criminals will.
What is interesting and so often under-reported I that this is not the first time young women have been caught out in dangerous areas. It simply doesn’t fit the narrative to suggest that some individuals put themselves at greater or lesser risk independent of anybody else. We are living in a time when individuals desire liberty without order. Such a demand has serious consequences and it often takes tragic moments in the life of our country for the national consciousness to be stirred.
Take the case of Norwegian, Maren Ueland and Dane, Louisa Vesterager Jespersen, both in their 20s, who were traveling in a remote area of Morocco together. They were brutally killed by four men with allegiance to ISIS. Could their deaths have been prevented? Had they have travelled by a different, less remote, route would they be alive today? It may appear empowering to stroll headfirst into the Moroccan mountains or around the streets of Soho with your best friend, but doing so without reasonable caution and prudence – and perhaps sheer common sense – can have tragic consequences. Feelings of empowerment and entitlement to do whatever you want are poor instruments of defence against those who want you dead.
The present discourse on this issue predictably blames all men. Critics of this view will argue to the contrary; but the attack on masculinity and the very reality of being male has been underway for some time. On the one hand, we argue violently for men’s mental health and well-being and that we should be kind; but on the other, we give undue credence to the narrative that all men are monsters and should be unilaterally held with suspicion. Many men are not confident to walk home alone on a dark night through crime-ridden streets and areas of London, or other major cities. Therefore, you cannot blame all men for the crimes of a minority who not only exploit the risks women decide to take, but also the the cosy world that has become our virtual reality during the pandemic.
Like many others, Sarah Everard will have been lulled into a false sense of security, or paradoxically, one of terror: where simple activities like going to the pub; or taking a walk; or getting home safely descend into occasions of tremendous dread. We cannot blame all men for this predicament anymore than we could blame Sarah for what she was wearing.
Many people will be searching for somebody to blame in their efforts to deal with this difficult moment. It is unfortunate that it will not suffice to only be angry at the individual who murdered Sarah, or the environment that made it possible. Rather, it is easier to vindicate dangerous communities and a break down in law and order by viciously attacking men. Yet there are people who are responsible: The killer. Khan’s London. Victims of lockdown derangement.
The majority of men cannot bear the burden of the crimes of the minority. As we mourn Sarah’s sad and preventable death, let us continue to fight for tough law and order – thereby keeping our streets safe, so that all people can enjoy the liberty of walking home safely. I hope Sarah’s murderer spends the rest of his days behind bars at Her Majesty’s pleasure.
If you liked this article and want to help our organisation expand, please consider donating.
