More to fear than the big bad wolf whistle

Sir, – Spot fines for wolf whistles? What next? (“Call for wolf whistle on-the-spot fines”, The Courier, December 7).

Are those who have raised this aware of what they’re suggesting, or are they simply looking for any scrap which would give emphasis to the “Me too” movement?

I know several attractive women – the one I know best would have laughed at the idea that such behaviour should be seen as abusive, and seen it as rather a compliment.

However, there is a serious point to be made here. I am a “superfeminist”. I totally abhor the idea of women being abused in any way, or of their being regarded as in any way inferior to males, other than in physical strength in most but by no means all cases. There is a totally justified case to be made for women to feel free from all kinds of gender abuse.

To suggest that the good and fully justified case for strong measures to be taken against abusers of women is now being asked, by some, to include wolf-whistling, simply trivialises the case against real abuse, which must certainly be rigorously dealt with.

The case against abuse of women is serious for most of us, so why dilute it with such nonsense as wolf-whistling?

On this matter, I, who have never wolf-whistled in my life, would advise, get real, folks, and don’t prejudice an important social campaign by bringing this triviality into the mix. By so doing you run the risk of having the real issues set alongside it and treated as equally trivial. Which they certainly are not James Thomson. Vardon Drive, Glenrothes.

Picture: George Mcluskie. There are worse things to be concerned about than wolf-whistles, argues one correspondent.