There are many ways to outsmart someone in a debate. Having a compelling argument, for starters. Intelligent reasoning and rationale. Dismantling every aspect of your opponent’s view with solid facts and data. When all else fails, though, you can always just say you wouldn’t want to f*** them.
It might not sound like the smartest strategy, and yet it was the very thing employed by mediocre actor-turned-pseudo-intellectual shock jock Laurence Fox in response to a comment by political journalist Ava Evans.
Speaking to presenter Dan Wootton on his namesake GB News show on Tuesday, Fox referred to Evans as a 'little woman' before asking what 'single self-respecting man' would 'like to climb into bed with that woman ever, ever, who wasn’t an incel'. He went on to call her 'pathetic and embarrassing' before asking: 'Who’d want to shag that?'
Read Next
Both Wootton and Fox, also a GB News presenter, have since been suspended from the channel pending an investigation. Broadcasting regulator Ofcom is also conducting its own investigation after receiving more than 7,300 complaints over Fox’s remarks. After initially standing by what he said, Fox, who has been criticised by a deluge of commentators and MPs online, has now issued a video apology to Evans, saying 'sorry for demeaning' her.
There is a lot to be alarmed by with all of this. First is the fact that Fox’s diatribe was the result of a comment Evans made on Monday’s BBC’s Politics Live about the topic of men’s mental health. In response to that suggestion that a minister for men could help address men’s poor mental health, Evans explained it could 'feed into the culture war'. She added: '[Mental illness] is a crisis that’s endemic throughout the country, not specific to men. And I think a lot of ministers bandy this about to – I’m sorry – make an enemy out of women.'
Following the TV appearance, Evans rolled back on her view, tweeting: 'I was a little rash on my anti-minister for men comments, which I do regret and am actually very interested in a brief for a minister on young men’s mental health.'
None of what Evans said was particularly alarming, damaging, or concerning, nor did she appear to belittle the crisis of men’s mental health. In fact, her comments called for a more inclusive approach that would benefit all genders. But even if it they didn’t, that wouldn’t warrant Fox’s reaction, which, instead of focusing on what Evans had said, revolved entirely around her appearance and whether or not he was attracted to her.
It’s as if Evans’ words didn’t matter at all; to Fox, they were simply an opportunity to create some sort of sensationalist narrative that would enable him to spew sexist bile, earning him the online opprobrium around which his entire career revolves. It’s moments like this that are, for all intents and purposes, the only reason most people even know his name.
The most frightening aspect, however, was Fox’s defence. The day after the segment, Fox tweeted: 'If a woman wants to go on television and belittle male suicide, she is totally within her rights to do so and not apologise, just as I am totally within my rights to say that I wouldn't want to shag a hyper offended 4th wave feminist and not apologise [...] it's called free speech.'
Later that day, he went on to encourage followers to shift their focus away from his remarks and onto the stabbing of a 15-year-old girl in Croydon, who was reportedly killed by a teenage boy after her friend rejected flowers from him. 'This should be the story today,' he tweeted.
What Fox, of course, fails to recognise is how that young girl’s death is the result of the same systemic misogyny underpinning his comments about Evans. Both are the horrifying byproduct of a society that devalues and diminishes women’s lives, frequently reducing them to disposable, sex objects designed for male consumption and abuse. Our voices don’t matter, and neither do our bodies. You don’t have to look very far to see how far-reaching this is.
Look at the fact that one in four women have been raped or sexually assaulted. And the fact that, last year, fewer than two in 100 rapes recorded by police resulted in a charge, let alone a conviction. Look at how the women accusing Russell Brand of sexual assault have been aggressively slut-shamed, undermined, and attacked online, their rigorously investigated claims torn apart by people who probably haven’t even read them in full.
We cannot continue to allow people like Fox to manipulate people into thinking that brazen sexism is acceptable because it falls under freedom of expression. By that logic, what else are we excusing? Donald Trump’s comments about grabbing women 'by the pussy'? Andrew Tate’s remarks that rape survivors need to 'bear responsibility' for what happened to them?
If we align comments like this with free speech, it enables them and sets a dangerous precedent. One that feeds into a society that emboldens incel culture, victim-blaming, and violence against women. Reducing a woman to a sexual object purely because you don’t agree with her is not free speech. It’s misogyny. The sooner more people – including Fox and Wootton – accept and acknowledge this, the better.
