Open door: The readers’ editor on … unthinkingly sexist descriptions of women | Chris Elliott

Women don’t need to be introduced by their association with their brothers, fathers or husbands

The Guardian’s online Everyday Sexism blog ranges far and wide but readers have picked up on three headlines closer to home that they think might fit that column’s description.

Here is the first, about a headline, later changed: “Please be more thoughtful about how women are described. They should not be introduced or identified through their association with a man. The offending headline, ‘Spanish king’s sister to stand trial on tax fraud charges’, accompanies a story about Spain’s Princess Cristina (23 December 2014).

“Her title is Princess, not ‘Spanish king’s sister’. By that standard, he is ‘former king’s son’. She has a title, and does not need to be introduced by her association with her brother, father or husband. The primary subject of the story is a woman with a name and title. Your headline reduces her to an extension of the king, and gives her no autonomous identity.”

At first it seemed to me to be less clear-cut. In describing her as “Spanish king’s sister”, the subeditor was making the importance of the story clear, because it reached right to the top of Spain’s establishment. The problem with describing her as Princess Cristina is that she is less well known. I thought the story was about making clear the alleged corruption at the heart of the Spanish establishment, rather than her as a person.

After I’d conceded that I might be wrong, the reader came back to agree on that at least: “I think ‘Spanish Princess Cristina’ would well convey the extent of her royal highness. Short of being queen, there is no more elevated position or rank for a royal woman in Spain’s establishment. By your logic, Prince Charles should be called ‘son of Queen Elizabeth’ and the poor wee baby George would be unfamiliar to your readers unless described first as ‘great-grandson of Queen Elizabeth’. Will I be seeing those references in your headlines soon?”

Fair point, well made. When the princess was next in the news my subeditor colleagues plumped for “Spanish government drops support for Princess Cristina over tax fraud charges”.

Another, even clearer example of an ill-considered usage came early in the new year from a reader: “Today’s headline, ‘Dozens killed in stampede at Shanghai celebration’ (front page of the website, 1 January) has the strapline, ‘At least 36 people die, including 25 women, in Shanghai waterfront new year crush’.

“Nobody would write the strapline ‘At least 36 people die, including 11 men …’, so why point out the number of women? In what way is it of any interest to anyone that, of the 36 people killed, 25 are women? It’s not as though it’s at all surprising or remarkable that there were women present at a new year’s celebration.

“This is not mere pedantry. Pointing out the number of women in this kind of situation suggests that women are somehow intrinsically more precious or defenceless or less deserving of (say) being killed in a stampede than men – something that we should be especially sad or shocked about. This is obvious from the fact that ‘women’ is almost always closely followed by ‘children’ (as in the first bullet point when you click through to the article: ‘At least 36 people have died, including 25 women and some children.’ Pointing out the number of women is, frankly, just sexist. It’s not an especially pernicious form of sexism, and I’m sure it’s unintentional – but it’s still sexism ... It’s 2015, not 1915.”

That’s so well put that there is little to add other than that I agree.

Finally, a colleague came to me to protest that a headline in G2, “As the years go by, I enjoy my sexuality more”, above an interview with Caroline Quentin (21 January), who is appearing in a remake of Fanny Hill, was not a true representation of what the piece was actually about. She said that the article was really about the reality of life as a prostitute, sexual abuse and images of older women in the wider world.

The quotation used for the headline comes in the last paragraph – maybe a point too far? I don’t think so; this is a piece that covers sexuality in many different ways. Headlines are meant to grab the attention, but perhaps not like the early suggestion for that story – hastily rejected by editors – which included a couple of references, from the play, to “flesh brush” and “love truncheon”.

Contributor

Chris Elliott

The GuardianTramp

Related Content

Open door: Chris Elliott: The readers' editor on… the ratio of men to women in the birthdays column
Open door: Chris Elliott: The section editor has worked hard to increase the number of women appearing, but the imbalance remains

Chris Elliott

03, Feb, 2013 @7:00 PM

Article image
The reader's editor on… the online abuse that follows any article on women's issues | Chris Elliott

Chris Elliott: Perhaps it is time to assess whether online anonymity should be an option rather than the default position

Chris Elliott

10, Aug, 2014 @6:21 PM

Article image
The corrections column co-editor on... women's sport in the Guardian
Barbara Harper: Open door: The sports desk used to run a weekly women's football report but dropped it because of lack of interest

Barbara Harper

10, Mar, 2013 @7:30 PM

The readers' editor on… coverage of extravagance in times of austerity
Chris Elliott: Open door: The difficult economic times have prompted readers' questions about our coverage of food, fashion, gadgets and cars

Chris Elliott

29, Jan, 2012 @7:00 PM

Open door: The readers' editor on… avoiding stigmatisation in illustrating obesity stories
Letters: A picture editor's best endeavours can backfire for those who take a different view of what obesity means for an individual

Chris Elliott

14, Apr, 2013 @6:00 PM

The readers' editor on… how too much coverage of some people can annoy
Chris Elliott: Open door: The prominence given to Christopher Hitchens, the Duchess of Cambridge, Fabio Capello and Harry Redknapp irked readers

Chris Elliott

26, Feb, 2012 @7:00 PM

Open door: The readers' editor on clouding the issue

Chris Elliott: Open door: The association of Mugabe with the idea that he was an 'ambassador' in the eyes of the UN drew readers' criticism

Chris Elliott

17, Jun, 2012 @5:59 PM

Article image
The Guardian readers’ editor on Scottish independence coverage
Chris Elliott: Open door: By the end of the process the Guardian had deployed 14 journalists on the campaign trail but it was an editorial that drew most criticism – not the reporting

Chris Elliott

28, Sep, 2014 @6:30 PM

Article image
The readers' editor on… representing the Guardian's journalists too

Chris Elliott: On occasion, and to paraphrase CP Scott, the voice of the journalists no less than that of readers has a right to be heard

Chris Elliott

30, Jun, 2013 @6:30 PM

Open door: The readers' editor on… reporting Julian Assange's extradition battle

Chris Elliott: Open door: It is always important for journalists to report with precision when dealing with criminal allegations

Chris Elliott

01, Jul, 2012 @6:00 PM