Outraged in Stepford

I quite often read the BBC website. It’s the only place I seem to find any news that tells me what is going on outside the USA, and quite often the only place that tells me what’s going on inside the USA without spectacular Op Ed bias.  There are also frequently very interesting stories on all sorts of subjects which I browse through and I usually find Auntie to be a comforting and reassuring measure upon which I can rely for relative neutrality and the upholding of general standards.

But not always.

Today, as I was clicking through the Science and Environment section, I chanced upon this story:

‘Old maid’ butterflies fly more frequently

I beg your pardon?

Old Maid?  I thought we only used that term these days when talking about an antiquated Victorian card game.

The article reported that a group of scientists had published a study claiming that older virgin speckled wood butterflies appeared to fly around in the sun more than younger, unmated females. The males sat in sun spots watching them. The deduction – the first of its kind – was that as the females potential egg-laying span dwindles, she will work harder to  gain the attention of a prospective mate.

Okay. That’s quite interesting. It was actually more complex than that and I really enjoyed reading about the animal behaviour.

What I did not enjoy quite so much was the layering of these findings with sexist and recidivist anthropomorphism, calling the displaying insects  ‘old maids’ to grab a bit of attention and a cheap laugh at the expense of an entire gender.  Despite decades of women’s liberation it still seems to be the case that any female who is not paired off or procreating by a certain age is judged, however subtly, and society encourages us to look upon her with pity, ridicule or possibly both ( I don’t think we’re allowed to admit envy).

Steaming about the ears, it was time for an “Outraged in Stepford”

Dear Sir/Madam,
I am offended by use of the term ‘Old Maid’ in your headline for this story. It is cheap, sensationalist and utilises outmoded and sexist terminology that is inappropriate and I would have thought beneath the general standards of the BBC. If you MUST draw parallels between another species and the human race in order to illustrate an interesting scientific finding (and why must you?), could you at least do so in a way that is not demeaning to half of your readership?
I don’t think you’ll find there is a s imilarly denigrating term for older, unmarried males.

Regards,

MTFF

It seems a small thing. But it’s not. It’s a big thing. If it was race that was at stake there’d be a big hoo-ha. So there aren’t racist headlines, at least on the BBC.

The article’s still there. I expect people are still reading it. And I’m still offended.

Tweet