Just like when I’ve been catcalled or groped in a bar, being stared at suggestively or threateningly in public has made me feel dirty, naked – like I’ve done something wrong by merely existing. It makes me question myself – the way I look, the way I hold myself, the way I live. It makes me feel unsafe.
To discourage accountability for sexual harassment – and yes, I shall stress again, intrusive staring with sexual intent counts as such – is to take even more power from women and other vulnerable groups as they try to make their way through daily life.
Sexual harassment is defined by Rape Crisis England & Wales as “unwanted sexual behaviour that makes someone feel upset, scared, offended or humiliated”. Staring, leering or suggestive looks are all considered as examples of sexual harassment.
Further to this, the organisation states that the person being subjected to this behaviour should be the one defining what is happening to them, but it seems others are looking to take it into their own hands.
We saw this within a different public discussion of sexual harassment when it was announced earlier last year that cyberflashing – sending an unsolicited sexual image to somebody digitally, over Airdrop or WhatsApp for instance – is set to become a criminal offence. Some have criticised this development, questioning if it should be made illegal.
One critic posted on Twitter: “Have the people behind the Online Harms Bill never been on dating apps? People sending pics of their bits without asking first is grim, but to be made illegal? Really?”
What critics miss when questioning the seriousness of issues like cyberflashing and unsolicited (and threatening) staring in public is that sexual harassment is not limited to catcalling in the street through words, and groping in bars. If an action isn’t asked for and causes someone considerable distress, why shouldn’t it be punishable?
To deny facets of sexual harassment like this their significance is – like so many elements of the patriarchy – putting the responsibility on the vulnerable, and potential victims, to do the work of explaining and distinguishing inappropriate behaviour, instead of those who are actually performing said behaviour.
It signifies a lack of empathy at other people’s discomfort and their boundaries.
We shouldn’t have to wait for voices to be raised or for bodies to be groped before we take action. To be told to accept this kind of behaviour is to give potential abusers – or at the least complete strangers – unwanted access, a claim to your safety and security that they do not deserve.
Although certain “casual” actions may appear to be vague, ambiguous or unworthy of criminal charges to those in a position of male privilege and power, they could be the deciding factor for whether someone more vulnerable feels safe. It’s time for us all to stare this threat full in the face.