We Need To Talk About Stokes

First things first, this isn’t a climbing blog. Narrowly speaking, this is a cricket blog (the other sport I follow messianically), but more broadly its about when violence is justified or not. Bear with me here.

If you follow sport, you’ll have seen Ben Stokes, England allrounder and possibly the best player in the world right now, was arrested about a month ago on suspicion of ABH. The raw facts are available all over the internet, just google it, but briefly there was a fight on the street of which video footage exists showing Stokes first being hit with a bottle and then brawling with two other men, one of which he knocks out after scuffling for a while. At this point, the footage ends.

Stokes’ private defence, it seems, is that he confronted two blokes who were shouting homophobic abuse at a gay couple. One thing led to another, Stokes is threatened with a bottle, he gets hit and then proceeds to lay the other chap out. As he put it – ‘they started it, and I finished it.’ It took a while, but the gay couple have been traced and fully backed up his story. They call him a ‘hero.’ Others in the media/twittersphere/circle of friends disagree. Stokes is ‘a thug, an animal, theres no excuse for violence in any circumstances.’

I don’t buy it. Its not ok to walk away when someone is being threatened with a bottle; taking a stand is what everyone should do if they see it. I certainly hope I would, and I hope someone would step in for me if I was being threatened. I am not a violent person, frankly I’m not physically equipped to deal with it, but you have to have your principles. Everyone has a line at which point violence becomes acceptable, whether its someone threatening family, friends, or yourself. I think walking on the other side of the road is avoiding the issue.

Its been very frustrating to me, as a cricket fan who wants to see Stokes in the Ashes this winter, but also just as a person, to see people not seeing this, because I just don’t get it. To me, the guy did what everyone should do if they see someone being threatened or abused based on their sexuality, gender, race, whatever. If Stokes had been defending a woman under attack or a man being racially abused by a neo-nazi there would be no debate I don’t think. If my dad/brother/friend had been arrested and this was the scenario, I’d be proud of them. 

Working on the assumption it went down the way the witnesses say, I think we as a society should be proud of Stokes. Defending people from prejudice shouldn’t be seen as an optional extra. We’re going down a very dangerous road if people genuinely think we should just let it happen. For me, that’s acceptable use of violence. It frustrates me greatly that more people don’t see it that way, and I would be interested to know why.

Rant over!