Ever since the details of Ashling Murphy’s horrific murder were released last week, the phrase “she was just going for a run” has taken over social media.

Alongside sadness that another young woman has been lost to male violence – and empathy for the children who Murphy taught in her job as a primary school teacher – the idea that Murphy’s life was taken while she was completing such an ‘everyday’ activity has struck a chord.

But that initial response – and the ‘not all men’ backlash that’s come about in the days following Murphy’s death – has also become the subject of discussion.

Indeed, after a year in which the high-profile murders of Sarah Everard, Bibaa Henry, Nicole Smallman and Sabina Nessa dominated headlines, the fact that we’re still talking about what women were doing at the time of their murder, rather than what needs to happen to deal with male violence, has left many people feeling uncomfortable.  

It all started with a post from Everyday Sexism founder Laura Bates, who pointed out the issue with relying on statements like “she was just going for a run” when women are killed by men.

“I know it comes from a place of grief and rage,” she wrote in the caption of the now-viral post. 

“But it doesn’t matter what they were doing. When we say, ‘She was just doing this,’ or, ‘She was just doing that,’ it suggests that the case wouldn’t have been quite so awful or tragic if she had been doing something else. 

“Like if she was walking down an alleyway at 2am, or going to meet her married lover or a sex work client or if she was drunk or she had taken drugs… like it would be a little less awful in those circumstances. And it devalues women’s lives.” 

Highlighting how comments like “she was just going for a run” play into the narrative of the ‘perfect victim’ who deserves sympathy because they were doing all the right things (and, indirectly, implies that some women don’t deserve that sympathy), Bates continued: “[It’s] a tiny reinforcement of the rules that bind us so tightly that we can’t breathe, because if we step outside of them, we know people will think we deserved our own deaths.

“A tiny little dehumanisation on top of a million other cuts. It doesn’t matter what she was doing. It doesn’t matter. She shouldn’t be dead.”

Since the post was uploaded on Friday, many Twitter users have echoed Bates’ words – and called for greater change to stop yet another young woman losing her life. 

“Bad things happen to women and it’s like well why was she walking alone? Why was she in a taxi alone? Why was she out in the world existing as an individual?” read one response. “Until we learn how to TELEPORT we won’t be safe. RIP Ashling Murphy.”

“Just got out for a run,” read another tweet by the sports broadcaster Laura Winter. “In choosing my route, I thought, ‘don’t go through a park,’ and remembered Ashling Murphy and Sabina Nessa. ‘Main roads are best.’ And then I remembered Sarah Everard. Maybe I should have gone to a gym? Then I thought of Molly McLaren. What else can we do?” 

And journalist Ash Sarkar added: “For too long, the conversation has been dominated by women making ‘safer’ choices. But the fact is that violence is arbitrary, it can be anywhere and it doesn’t abide by rules. Women can’t eradicate it by adjusting our behaviour.”

Sarkar continued: “The challenge is dealing with the toxic web of norms, socialisation and policy that reproduces male violence on a spectrum that includes street harassment, domestic abuse and stranger attacks. I don’t think we’ve found a coherent way to do that.”

Focusing on the fact that Murphy was murdered while jogging in the afternoon is a natural response, because it feels so horrific to imagine having your life or the life of a friend stolen during a time when you’d ‘expect’ to be safe. But the fact of the matter is that women should be able to ‘expect’ to be safe at any time of the day, no matter what we’re doing.  

The ever-growing list of women who have been lost to male violence are not victims because they weren’t doing enough to keep themselves safe – they’re victims because a man decided to kill them. 

Misogynistic attitudes and the men that hold them are the issue, not women – and focusing on the decisions made by victims only distracts from this vital truth.

It goes without saying that the use of the #NotAllMen hashtag which has also been used to respond to Murphy’s murder is even more problematic. Sure, not all men are actively engaging in violence – but the fact of the matter is that male violence is driven solely by men. 

As women, we cannot tell the difference between the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ men – and focusing on the fact that some men are good does nothing to address the fact that women are losing their lives.  

The only correct way we can address the issue of male violence is to confront it head on – and that includes dealing with the attitudes that underpin it.

Installing more street lighting and backing women’s safety apps may sound like a good idea on the surface, but it’s just another way to push the onus on women to stick to well-lit areas and let people know when we’re walking home. Instead, we need the government to provide education for men of all ages, make a commitment to challenging misogyny in all its forms, and listen to women when we say an approach will or won’t work.

There are many more things that could be done to tackle this issue – but making these moves will at least get the process underway. One initiative alone is not going to end male violence – we need a concerted, long-lasting effort to deal with this problem once and for all. 

With the support of more than 60 experts and public figures, Stylist is calling on the government to launch a long-term public awareness campaign about male violence against women – aimed directly at men. Find out more about our call for #AFearlessFuture.

Images: Getty