Here at Cru-blog we don't like Rowan Pelling. And I'm tempted to write something witty about the fact that I was bewailing her copy in the Daily Mail a few days ago and today she has a piece in The Independent. But I'm going to hold back for the moment and just say:
THIS is probably the most offensive piece you'll read in a long time.
I could very easily line-by-line it as I sometimes do with pieces that really rile me. But I don't want to distract you with some witty remarks about the introduction into missing the piece that really makes my blood boil:
"When a lady says no, she means maybe; when a lady says maybe she means yes; and when a lady says yes, she's no lady."
Yes, that's a direct quote. In The Independent. No means maybe. Maybe means yes. Clearly Pelling's target audience has been found - it's rapists! And notice how there is no option left for the "lady" to say when she means "no, fuck off, you horrible creep or I'll call the police".
This is the same paper that only a few weeks ago was questioning why multiple rapist John Worboys behaved the way he did and why the police had failed to take his early victims complaints seriously and taken him off the streets before he could commit more crimes. I'll tell you why! Because newspapers like yours continue despite years of campaigning from women's groups to put out rubbish like this that effectively tells men it's ok to rape women. Tells men that they don't need explicit consent, that every woman wants to sleep with them and that they can ignore a woman's refusal, however clear and adamant.
Remember that Rowan Pelling's claim to fame and to her spot in the national press is that she is a former editor of a magazine called Erotic Review. I don't find rape very erotic myself. I find it more disgusting and criminal.
A few paragraphs later out of the blue she calls Hillary Clinton a "bitch" and rattles on about how much she prefers Michelle Obama and Sarah Brown - two women without high profile careers. Ironically Rowan herself has a high profile career and uses in her piece offensive language of the very kind she insists "real" ladies don't. So I find it hard to imagine she actually believes a word of it, or if she does she's at risk of being washed out to sea at any moment in a tsunami of hypocrisy.
But that said I'm not that surprised by her saying these things, she's a Daily Mail writer, they love that sort of stuff. I'm surprised and disgusted that no-one on the editorial side at The Independent thought it was worth double-checking the team policy on rape apologists.
And in case you were wondering the address to contact at The Independent to give them a little feedback is email@example.com.