“What’s all the fuss about — can't you take a joke?"

Press, 17 November 1981, Page 14

“What’s all the fuss about — can't you take a joke?"

By

KATHARINE WHITEHORN

In Italy, if the redoubtable Signora Rottari has her way, any male so rash as to pinch a female bottom may soon face a six-months jail sentence.

In the United States — at least in theory — any boss who insinuates that a woman will get on quicker in the company if she meets him after hours can already be taken to court by her — and one lady, executive stands to win $2O million in such a case if she wins it. In Britain, of course, things are quieter, but EPOC (the Equal Pay and Opportunities Campaign) are trying to get at the Institute of Personnel Managers and at the labour unions to make them take a firm stand on such things before we face an epidemic of sexual harasment.

They reckon that a few fiery threats may work wonders, where an out-and-out law suit would not. What makes the kind of thing Signora Bottari is enraged about so irresistibly nasty is exactly the same thing that can make school teasing bad enough for a few teenagers to commit suicide every year.

To the tormentor, it’s just a laugh. “What’s all the fuss about? It was only a bit of teasing; can’t you take a joke? Sign of interest really; plenty wouldn’t mind at all. Can’t think why she’s taking it all so seriously." Only, the victim doesn’t know it’s all going to stop at teasing; the victim doesn’t think its only a joke; to her it can spoil the whole atmosphere at work, can make every trip to the washroom an ordeal, if she has to pass a set of men who cat-call and reach out octopus arms to touch her.

'And things which may be merely intensely annoying in a busy office with lots of people around, can seem like the beginning of a rape in a quiet street or a deserted factory yard/ The trouble, as I see it, is that although a lot of this kind of thing is no laughing matter for the victims, an actual prison sentence — or even a hefty fine — would seem to most male jurists far too harsh a punishment. It would be as it is with motoring offences, .’, only worse; far too many men would see themselves in the man’s position. OK,. they’ll think, he shouldn’t have done

it, but isn’t this using* a sledge-hammer to crack‘ a nut? Drag a man to court for what will seem like a trivial offence, and I’d have thought that nine times out of 10 he’d simply swagger out again untouched;

But I think I see a way out. There is one judicial weapon we haven’t used in recent times that was effective enough in the middle ages: ridicule. Then, you put someone in stocks for bad behaviour, and everyone could come and throw eggs at him; if they didn't think he deserved it or the hens weren't laying, he just sat there until bedtime feeling foolish. .'■ Could we not work, out a system for making the man who harass women feel as irritated and foolish as they’d made the women feel?

They could be made to parade around a typing school all day carrying a banner with the words “I can only get my kicks by pinching typists’ bottoms.” They could be made to. stand on a street corner taking off their hats cereal o n i . -

dusly to every woman that passed. Maybe we should make them wear a petticoat' over their work clothes for a day; or even revive the stocks themselves; then the girls could come and write rude things on them with lipstick. They say the law is an ass but it could make much better sense if, as a penalty for pinching someone else’s, a man should make an ass of himself. Copyright — "Observer” Syndication Service.