The sound and silence of the 'C' word: why such hatred for women?

A London Magistrate's Court has acquitted England's former football captain, John Terry, of race vilification. Accused of having called rival Queens Park Rangers (QPR) player Anton Ferdinand a 'f…… black c…' in a game where Terry's team Chelsea challenged QPR, Terry's defence was that he had not committed a racially aggravated public order offence, because he 'was sarcastically repeating words he believed' Ferdinand had spoken to him.

Having found Terry had a case to answer, the Chief Magistrate presided over a five-day trial where the case for the prosecution was that the words did not constitute '"banter" on the football pitch' so the allegation 'should be judged by a court'. Following the acquittal, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) was quoted as saying 'justice had been done' and the CPS 'respect[ed] the … decision'.

United Kingdomlaws define 'racially aggravated offences' as those in which the offender 'shows or is driven by racial hostility', covering offences where:

• at the time of committing the offence, or immediately before or after doing so, the offender demonstrates hostility towards the victim base don the victim's membership (or presumed membership) of a racial group; or
• the offence is motivated (wholly or partly) by hostility towards members of a racial group based on their membership of that group.

Assaults, criminal damage and harassment can be 'racially aggravated' so long as the elements are proven, as can public order offences, including:

• fear or provocation of violence;
• intentional harassment, alarm or distress; or
• harassment, alarm or distress.

Responsibility lies with police to inform the CPS if there 'appears to be' racial aggravation, whilst the CPS role is to 'make sure that the racial or religious element of the offence is taken into account appropriately'. This means bringing a racially aggravated charge as an alternative to the basic charge, or together with the basic charge. Proof beyond reasonable doubt results in a heavier sentence, with the court's being obligated to state openly that the offence was 'racially aggravated'. The maximum penalty is higher than the penalty for the basic offence.

Does this have resonance for Australia?

Australian footballers have been accused of racial vilification on the field, cases gaining widespread publicity. Back in March 2002, following one nationally reported incident, a 'code of conduct' governing language on the field was introduced. This was a laudable step, yet it focuses on 'race' and 'racist' comments, when the language used – and in constant use, as it appears - was the common football field expression 'black c…' Thus in Australia, as in the Terry case, the resounding silence is remarkable.

Silence surrounds the one word in the terminology that is invariably represented by its first initial – the great silence of the 'C' word. This, despite the fact that, according to Terry, in his 'repeating to Ferdinand' words 'he thought the opposing player had said to him', the exchange involved 'normal football verbals'.

As with Australian media in such instances, in the lead-up to the Terry verdict newspaper coverage consistently spelled out the word 'black', equally often declining to refer, in full, to the immediately following word, cunt. Thus, on 11 July 2012 The Times had Terry saying he 'knew he was innocent' in having been 'accused of calling Anton Ferdinand a "fblack c" during a Premier League game …'.

More extensively, the Independent on 12 July 2012 reported:

'Terry admits that he said the words "f****** black c***" during the Premier League game …

'Cole, 31, who was, he said, just "a car's length away" from Terry when the alleged incident between the two men took place, said he "could make out" Ferdinand saying "Bridgey" and "black" and "c***" in the eight-second episode …

'The prosecutor Duncan Penny replied: "But if he [Terry] had said f****** black c***" [as an insult]?" Cole said: "I don't think racial abuse should be tolerated." …

'Penny said: "Did you not say "And yours, you f****** black c***", as in "I have shagged your missus as well"?'

On that same day, again in the Independent, footballer Ashley Cole's evidence once more had the 'c' word obliterated, apart from its first letter. The practice was followed in The Times, Daily Mail, Daily Express, Telegraph and Evening Standard, as in other print and online media outlets. An exception lay in the reporting of the decision in full, several days later, where 'cunt', along with the other words allegedly used, was spelled out. The Telegraph,Scotsman and Guardian, as with others advising of an 'in full' decision, were constrained not to 'launder' the Chief Magistrate's words.

In trial coverage, at least one CNN story contained the warning: 'Editor's note:This report contains offensive language' yet it, too, declined to record the word in full, whilst reports made apparent, through numerous exchanges, the crucial nature of the word:

'When Cole first had to utter the word c*** he hesitated and instead spelled it out one letter at a time. Riddle instructed him that he should say the word in its entirety. "You don't have to be shy," he said, in an attempt to be reassuring. Smiling, Cole replied, "I'm not shy."'

The lip-readers faced a similar dilemma:

'… then there were also the two lip-reading experts … who were forced to pick their way through the "industrial language" of the two Premier League footballers for the benefit of the court. The first … Susan Whitewood, instinctively said "Excuse me" before she first uttered the phrase "black c****".'

Meanwhile:

'Ferdinand told … Chief Magistrate Howard Riddle that the four-letter abuse … began to fly freely. He said: "He called me, excuse my language, a ****. I called him a **** back and he gave me a gesture as if to say my breath smelled.'

So what is it about 'cunt' that propels it into the ionosphere in the media and now, as it appears, when referred to by the biological term, to be worthy of banning from legislative debate?

On 14 June 2012, Michigan news media reported upon the expulsion, from the Michigan legislature, of Rep. Lisa Brown. Her offence? Using the word vagina.

In a House debate on a Bill seeking to further regulate abortion providers and outlaw all terminations after 20 weeks, Rep. Brown referred to her Jewish faith, saying:

'Wherever there's a question of the life of the mother, or that of the unborn child, Jewish law rules in favour of preserving the life of the mother. The status of the fetus as human life does not equal that of the mother. I have not asked you to adapt and adhere to my religious beliefs. Why are you asking me to adapt to yours.'

In closing, she uttered the crucial word: 'And finally, Mr Speaker, 'I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my vagina, but no means no.'

Apparently 'vagina' is not to be said anywhere, unless it is in male company alone. According to Republican Rep. Mike Callton:

'What she said was offensive … It was so offensive, I don't even want to say it in front of women. I would not say that in mixed company.'

Initially failing to advise for how long the banning would last, ultimately the Legislature relayed to Rep. Brown that she could return after one day's 'time out'. That, at least, was how it was described by another member of the House, Republican Rep. Wayne Schmidt: 'As I said to someone up north here, it's like giving a kid time out for a day, you know. Hey, time out.'

Thus it seems that speaking women's body parts – or a most particular part – is placed in the category of 'kids' uttering 'dirty words behind the bike sheds'. Perhaps if the altercation on the British playing field had occurred in the safety of the locker room, it would never have gone beyond the categorisation of the players (as reported in the Terry trial) as 'what happened was handbags' or 'handbag stuff'.

Well before the latest revelations of female-body-part-abuse on the playing (sic) field, in her book How to Be a Woman, journalist Caitlin Moran projected another point of view. Reflecting upon the need for a woman to have 'the words to say it' when it comes to describing our bodies ourselves, and in particular that most intimate of body parts – intimate insofar as women are concerned but apparently very much less so when it comes to the men of the football field – she says of discussion between herself and her sister:

'Certainly the solution to [the] problem was realising that – when it came to both breasts and vaginas – language wasn't really necessary. After a short period of referring to them, jokily, as "Upstairs, Downstairs" – which had the additional benefit of making them sound like a classy BBC production … it dawned on us that we could simply point at the relevant areas, whilst mouthing "there", extravagantly, in the manner of Les Dawson. "There" and "there" worked by way of a holding operation until we finally felt worldly and louche enough to use the words "tits" and "cunt" – for me, 15, and for Caz, around 27 …

Back on the British playing ground, the Professional Footballers Association (PFA) has been urged to send off players 'for X-rated rants'. Its chair, Clarke Carlisle, is reported as saying the PFA should 'consider major changes to the sanctions for swearing' and it is suggested that the John Terry case 'looks likely to bring major changes' to English football with the players' union 'calling for their own members to receive red cards if they use foul and abusive language to each other', Carlisle saying:

At present a red card for foul and abusive language is shown only when a player abuses match officials. What the [PFA] should … do is order referees to show the red card even when players abuse each other.

Notably, as with the Australian Rules 'code' on racist language, there is no reference to the sexism or, bluntly, some may say woman hatred that lies in the use of the 'c' word. Of course it would be wrong to suggest that racism is absent. Indeed, an exchange in the Terry trial may be seen as confirming this with high resonance. In testifying, Ferdinand said 'he did not hear the comments Terry made at him'. However:

… he would have been "hurt and disappointed" if he had heard Terry call him a "black c---". "When someone brings your color into it, it takes it to another level and it's very hurtful," Ferdinand said.

Although he doesn't realise it, Ferdinand is articulating clearly and objecting to a negativism which is racist sexism, namely the abuse of women of colour: Afro-Caribbean British women, Indigenous Australian women, African American women and women nationals or descendents of nationals from the countries of the African continent, Indian subcontinent and Asia-Pacific states. The racism, as with the sexism, lies in the 'c' word, the word that cannot be spoken except on the football field and amongst men.

The women of Michigan saw this, in the contretemps (albeit so much more than a spat) occurring in the Legislature, and the gross denial of free speech, when a woman is speaking it, that lies in the banning of Rep. Lisa Brown. Cladding themselves in T-shirts bearing the word 'VAGINA', waving banners and holding aloft placards repeating it, they supported their Representative in her right to utter the 'unspeakable'. Staging massive protests, they came in their thousands to the rally held on the Legislature's steps, where playwright Eve Ensler spoke from her renowned work, The Vagina Monologues,along with Brown and other women from the House who refused to be silenced.

Caitlin Moran has adopted the Anglo-Saxon word as her talisman in the fight back against the hatred of women too often expressed in the word that can not be spoken out loud – except amongst men and, then, in derision.

When those in authority recognise that it is not racism, but sexism – indeed, misogyny – lying at the heart of the abuse which confronts them, perhaps they may go beyond the non-racism codes to codes that affirm and uphold the rights and dignity of women. When all on the sporting field embrace such a code, it may be hoped that those elected to represent women (as well as men) can bring themselves to understand that a woman is the sum of all her parts, and those parts have names and titles that can be spoken out loud, without scorn, when the woman who make up the sum are admitted to their rightful place in humanity.