/
    Skip to main content
    Advertisement
    Support Casa LA
    register free
    Polly Toynbee
    Support fearless, open, independent journalism
    Polly Toynbee
    Become a member of the Guardian for free
    When you register free or sign in to theguardian.com, we’re able to give you a better experience on our website. It also helps to support our journalism.
    sign in
    You are signed out of the Guardian. Sign In

    Aintree is right to clamp down on 'negative shots' of female racegoers

    Newspapers and photographers have been humiliating women with ‘badly dressed’ galleries for years. I’m thrilled Aintree is threatening to kick them out
    Ladies Day at Aintree racecourse in April 2011.
    Ladies Day at Aintree racecourse in April 2011. Photograph: Andrew Yates/AFP/Getty Images
    Bethany Rutter
    In the annual British news cycle, nothing is more certain than galleries of “badly dressed” women at the Aintree races.
    Sunrise, sunset. Time is a flat circle. Year in, year out, they’re there. But no more! John Baker, the managing director at Aintree, has decided to call time on the photographers who are on a mission to humiliate racegoers. He told the Liverpool Echo: “We have talked about trying to monitor those photographers, so if we see any element clearly looking for a negative shot and we can identify that, we will take their accreditation off them and we’ll kick them off the site.”
    I can’t think of another sporting or public event where photographers specifically turn up to humiliate female spectators, or specifically turn up to take photos of tipsy women wearing heels. It is a genre of its own.
    In our era of kneejerk bleating about censorship, this will ruffle a few feathers. Why shouldn’t accredited photographers be allowed to photograph and sell photos of whatever the hell they want? Well, because asking photographers not to make women feel exposed, intimidated and unsafe at an event they’ve paid good money to attend doesn’t seem too unreasonable to me. One might wonder why any woman would attend Aintree in the first place, in the knowledge that if her dress is deemed “too tight” or her fascinator “too trashy” or her fake tan “too deep”, she’ll be splashed all over Mail Online. Baker’s desire to highlight the positive of Aintree is, of course, not purely selfless – I wouldn’t be surprised if women stopped coming to Ladies’ Day because of this harassment – but the overall effect is positive.
    This is a major victory for women. Being photographed, publicised and humiliated in the mainstream media is barely something that famous women should have to put up with, let alone non-celebrities. There’s something additionally and especially cruel about the Aintree genre of photographic shaming: these aren’t women who look bad because they’ve been caught, bleary-eyed and hungover, without makeup, hair like a bird’s nest, taking out the rubbish. They’ve made an effort, and whether they end up looking like Kim Kardashian or Beyoncé in the end is irrelevant. At the moment they left the house, I would guess that they felt good about themselves, and that’s a precious and rare moment for many when the media is so often complicit in creating a bleak self-image. Behaviour that robs women of a chance to hold on to that elusive good feeling should be snuffed out at the earliest opportunity.
    In this kind of coverage of Aintree, more than at any other racing event, there is an overwhelmingly classist element. The implication is that you can tell these women are working class, or at best “new money”, and that’s what makes them especially deserving of derision. That’s not to mention the patronising and, again, classist view that London and its media often takes of anywhere else: Aintree’s Ladies’ Day is mainly attended by Liverpudlians, rather than demure home counties ladies who lunch.
    While it clearly won’t solve cultural classism and misogyny, it is a relief to know that somewhere in the British sporting world, respect for female attendees is a priority.
    Advertisement
    Your browser does not support the video tag.

    Featured comment

    Finally, how would you feel if it was your daughter or wife, mother, who had got up in the morning, spent a few hours on her make-up, dressed up and gone to the races, and woke up the next day to a text message telling her that she was in the Daily Mail and the paper said she looked like shit
    I would sit them down, and seeing as they are obviously into racing, I'd go through the odds with them. I'd outline the number of people at the races, the approximate number of photographers, and explain that out of all the people there, only a handful have been deemed worthy of publishing. I'd leave it up to them to determine whether that's a good thing or a bad thing.
    Read more
    IndigoMontoya's avatar
    IndigoMontoya
    See more comments

    comments (230)

    Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
    This discussion is closed for comments.
    We’re doing some maintenance right now. You can still read comments, but please come back later to add your own.
    Commenting has been disabled for this account (why?)
    • Guardian Pick
      Finally, how would you feel if it was your daughter or wife, mother, who had got up in the morning, spent a few hours on her make-up, dressed up and gone to the races, and woke up the next day to a text message telling her that she was in the Daily Mail and the paper said she looked like shit
      I would sit them down, and seeing as they are obviously into racing, I'd go through the odds with them. I'd outline the number of people at the races, the…
      Jump to comment
    1 2 3 4 5
    Loading comments… Trouble loading?
    • 0 1
      Misogyny? Just for the record 99% of people who read those articles are women.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      Women dress for other women. It's other women who drive the demand for this and every other type of coverage of female fashion. Stop blaming the men.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      Here are some comments from Daily Mail readers to the linked to article.
      Most of them are hideous.
      What a load of old TRASH!
      Aside from the grotesque beasts, the short little lady in red - hilarious!!
      Gawd help us, it's that time of year again. It's like watching sausages burst out of their skins. Cheap sausages that is.
      Just in case that's not enough to show what these articles are all about, this is the comment that Daily Mail readers gave the thumbs down to most, they really didn't like this comment....
      I think they all look Fab!!
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      I was expecting mych worse from the Mail - if you click on the link at the beginning of this article, the captions are largely complimentary: 'romantic', 'jolly', I've seen worse captions about outfits worn to the Grammys and Oscars.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      I hope we'll still get the obligatory pictures of the Birkenhead Tranny* dolled up at Aintree this year. It's about time she won the best dressed award too !
      *Before anyone gets offended this is what she calls herself and uses as her Twitter name.
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      let the women wear their hats as they please
      Reply |
    • This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
    • 0 1
      You wear silly hat - you get laughed at.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      Do away with Ladies Day. Problem solved
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      Surely it's not about taking pictures of women dressed in a certain way and worse the wear for drink, rather it's the fact that our press - and the Guardian is included in this - insists on publishing photos of women simply to illuminate a puff-piece story. A-level graduates jumping and waving their certificates is in exactly the same category as an advert for a car having a bikini clad woman draped across the bonnet, or these racegoers, or for that matter, page 3. Pathetic and base.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      In next weeks Graun, read how Cheryl & Jay of Bucks Fizz now pulling their own skirts off on stage is an historic piece of female empowerment.
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      The only time the guardian cares about the working class is when they can patronise us, or call us ignorant/racist/misogynist.
      This article is a prime example of a two-fer.
      Reply |
    • 4 5
      Anyone who has been to Aintree on Ladies Day will know that the reality is far worse than anything seen in newspapers. Instead of trying to censor coverage of this wretched spectacle, the racecourse should set a reasonable standard of dress and behaviour and boot out anybody who doesn't adhere to it.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      so its only OK to photograph the pretty well dressed ones?
      Sounds good to me. Bring it on.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      an opinion piece in the guardian sticking up for the white working class!?
      whatever next ?!
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      I do think there is an issue here which is wider than Aintree. For years now magazines have shown photos of women they regard as newsworthy from all walks of life marked with a tick or a cross by some journalist who feels free to comment on their dress sense or lack of it.
      Many often also show photographs when famous women have been caught unaware with circles and arrows to draw attention to cellulite/ underarm hair etc. How this is newsworthy I fail to understand. Personally I don't see why just because you are famous (or with someone who is famous) you should be scrutinised in this way. Nor do I see why it should happen to women who are not famous who just happen to be in that place, or indeed any women at all.
      There ought to be more important matters to concern ourselves with, and our value as people should not be assessed on such ridiculously trivial matters. I wouldn't wish it on men either. It's shallow and stupid, and doesn't say much for our values as a society at the moment. Public humiliation on grounds of appearance alone should not be confused with entertainment or journalism.
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      What's the difference between people getting dressed up, looking a bit stupid and drinking too much at Aintree to that of, say, Ascot?
      Reply |
    • 0 1
      Woman buys hat costing some some unspeakably colossal sum of money.
      Woman proudly wears hat to race course.
      Rest of humanity knows hat is monstrous.
      Photographer takes picture of woman in hat for many to laugh at.
      This sounds like democracy to me - the Emperor's new clothes, the Empress's new hat.
      Reply |
    • 2 3
      So, when woman are photographed at major events like this and everyone says how lovely they look, that's just dandy.
      But, if you say anything critical, it's a form of misogyny and a major victory?
      Jesus.
      I'd also add I don't know any men who look at women and go "Lord, she's badly dressed". God forbid women do anything even against their own sex.
      Reply |
      • 0 1
        I'm sure that saying they look lovely is misogyny too.
        Reply |
      • This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
      • 0 1
        I read the piece of sh*** written by the loooooovely Daily M.: what really annoyed me was the condescending/sarcastic tone used by the "journalist", deliberately not very subtly hidden. In the end, it was someone taking the p*** out of working class masses.
        Just so you know, as a woman, I do feel uncomfortable when I see a lady "misbehaving". But why judge on class backgrounds? I've seen in London upper middle class/very very posh ladies behaving probably worse than the Liverpool ones. But I bet the Daily M. would never acknowledge that.
        Reply |
    • 1 2
      Thinking outside the box a bit here, but .... Maybe politicians should be banned from taking photos of working class houses with flags, in case someone interprets that as an attempt to shame the owner.
      There's a whole lot of hidden judgement going on in both cases, being passed of as political correctness.
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      The actual Mail article linked too seems good natured enough.
      Some of the accompanying comments, not so much
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      On the one hand, I agree that it isn't right to broadcast this kind of shaming in any media.
      On the other hand, the ladies look daft whether they're photographed or not. And, men can't answer the question "how do I look" honestly without being told that they're wrong to say "you look like a fucking idiot."
      Reply |
    • 1 2
      I still haven't forgotten the notorious PaddyPower ad asking viewers to guess whether a female race goer is transgender or not!
      Reply |
    • 5 6
      It's a sad day when taking the piss out of a stupid hat is classed as misogyny.
      Reply |
    1 2 3 4 5
    SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.
    SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.
    desktop
    ×
    donotlink.com
    In one click, how would you describe this theguardian.com page or article?


    0%
    10%
    20%
    30%
    40%
    50%
    60%
    70%
    80%
    90%
    100%