Last year, the Globe & Mail in Toronto, Canada, published a nice piece about International Anti-Street Harassment Day. One year later, during International Anti-Street Harassment Week, I’m very disappointed to say that they published a terrible piece written by a 58-year-old man about how wonderful it is to stare at the body parts of young women he acknowledges to be the age of his daughter, and how it’s a good thing that men like him do this.

From beginning to end, the tone of the article irked me. The entitlement. The male gaze. The age gap was plain creepy and disgusting.

No, there is nothing wrong with people looking at each other, but there is something wrong with objectifying other people and believing their purpose is to be attractive, for you. Young women are going to work, going to meet friends, going to classes, you know, doing things that people do, people who have pursuits and interests and are not just ornaments to be stared at.

I would suggest that men NOT keep staring at women, despite what the author argues. It will make us feel more comfortable in public places if we are not constantly being sized-up in a sexual way by men. Plus, added bonus, we will have time to solve problems like world hunger if we do not have to spend our time looking for escape routes and memorizing what people look like for future police reports because we’re not sure if the creep staring at us intends to try to follow us, grab us, or assault us. I often hear women say that the men who just stare at them are more scary/unnerving than the ones who yell stuff but move on because of this very reason. You don’t know what they’re plotting as they stare.

Meghan Murphy at The F Word Feminist Media Collective wrote a great piece about the article yesterday:

“…Much of the piece is dedicated to pornified descriptions of female bodies. That, in and of itself, could and should have (in my humble opinion) led the editors to question the usefulness and/or necessity of publishing the piece. The lack of thought, research, and analysis which fills in the empty spaces in between descriptions of Brown’s favorite 20 year old body parts should have been the second clue.

It’s not that Brown wasn’t able to find folks who agree with his thesis, which I summarize as such: “It is not only biologically natural for me to objectify much younger women, but they actually like it.” He does find men and even women to help ease the little guilt, shame, and uncertainty he may have around his fetishization of the female body. His male friends are, unsurprisingly, just like him. They support his hopeful thesis that says: “this is not only right and natural, but good.”

For example:

[Y] holds up his BlackBerry. “I don’t see what’s wrong with it. In a world where, thanks to this thing, I am only two clicks away from double penetration and other forms of pornographic nastiness, the act of merely looking at a girl who is naturally pretty – I mean, we should celebrate that.”

Another friend takes it further. Acting as though the objectification is a compliment:

“Beautiful women are like flowers,” W interjects. “They turn to the sun. But if they don’t receive a certain amount of attention, they wither.”

Oh dude. You are so right. If you don’t stare at my ass I will actually die.

As if the flower analogy wasn’t enough to signal red flags with “Women are not human beings, they are pretty things that exist for me to look at” written all over them, the idea that women will wither and die if old dudes stop objectifying them really solidifies the deep misogyny of these kinds of arguments and beliefs….

Though Brown claims that the intent of his article is to “investigat[e] the famous male gaze,” he has zero understanding of it. The male gaze is a concept which was explored initially within feminist film theory and has since extended into an explanation and analysis of the objectifying, disempowering male gaze. So when a 58 year old man decides that a 20 year old woman is a beautiful flower which exists in order for him to look at, he dehumanizes her. And, as many of us know already, dehumanizing a human being is a dangerous thing. It means we no longer need to treat said human being with respect. A body part is just a body part, not a whole, complex being with thoughts and feelings.

One of the most minor consequences of the male gaze is that, and I will speak from personal experience here, a lifetime of being looked at makes you feel as though your self-worth is largely dependent on your ability to be desired by men. This is not a good thing. It is something many women fight at every turn. Yet we still internalize that male gaze. This means that many women see themselves through male eyes. We also believe, to a certain extent, that we exist for your viewing pleasure. Should women really have to fight to believe that their value exists outside your desire?

I won’t speak for any other woman aside from myself at this point, but “Hi, Ian Brown! I am a woman and I don’t want you to look at my ass. It doesn’t feel flattering, it feels creepy. It makes me feel self-conscious and it makes me not want to leave my house. I may be too old for you at 32 (gross!), but many old men stare at me regardless. I hate it. It makes me want to punch them. So stop. Please. I guarantee your penis will survive.”

The fact that men believe women exist for their viewing pleasure IS A PROBLEM. It doesn’t matter how much men like it. I should be able to leave my house without feeling watched…

I’d like to be able to go to the beach without feeling as though I am on display, being judged, being sized up. I’d like to walk down the street in a dress without feeling like some 60 year old dude is fucking me with his eyes. It’s gross, not flattering. I don’t need the gaze of a 60 year old man to validate my existence. All that gaze does is make me hate 60 year old men.

I am not your right. No woman is. No matter how beautiful she is. You have no right to her. She is more than just body parts. Allow me to confirm what I assume was the fear which led you to write this piece, Ian Brown, you are a perv. Stop staring at us. We have the ability to exist without your eyes on our asses.”

If you want to write to the Globe & Mail to protest this article, please do (info via Hollaback Ottawa):

letters@globeandmail.com
Executive editor (Jill Borra): jborra@globeandmail.com
Editor of the “Life” section (Rasha Mourtada): rmourtada@globeandmail.com