Britain apparently, is more sexist than Azerbaijan, India, Italy, Bosnia, or Algeria, just to name a few. That was the explosive first report of the UN special rapporteur, Rashida Manjoo, who did a 16-day, fact-finding mission across Britain about violence against women. Submitting her findings, South African professor Manjoo — an independent, UN-authorised auditor — said Britain had a “sexist boys’ club culture” that’s more in your face than anything she has seen in other countries.The report, of course, kicked up a huge row, that most favourite activity of the British media and establishment. Everyone outraged piled on to Manjoo, pointing out that she’s from Cape Town, the rape capital of the world. A former minister, female, said Manjoo should look at countries like Saudi Arabia, where women aren’t allowed to drive. This tirade of hurt national sentiment was countered by equally irate feminist writers who pointed out sexism exists, trashing Manjoo isn’t changing anything, and Saudi Arabia isn’t exactly the best example of gender equality. That boys club, they accused, was closing ranks.Clearly, Manjoo was hoping to make a big splash. She obviously did. As usual, the row has lost sight of the point she was making. Never mind her scathing comments about the prevalence of violence against women, the sexualisation of women in the media, or outright criticism of Tory budget cuts that have left vulnerable women more at risk.That would be expected to outrage the establishment. The thing is, Manjoo is the first such rapporteur to be appointed by the UN to inspect Britain. According to reports, the establishment didn’t find her welcome at all. A few months ago, another UN envoy recommended the Tories scrap a controversial bedroom tax, and ended up being labelled a “loony Brazilian leftie” by ministers.UN inspectors are supposed to find faults and warts. Or, is that valid only for Syria and Iraq? Sigh. I have to say I can’t really, from personal experience, agree with Manjoo. Wherever she went in India, she didn’t take a ride on a crowded bus or train, or even walk down a market street at rush hour. I can take the occasional patronising comment from a plumber, as long as I don’t constantly have to use my elbows to stave off gropers. But then, she didn’t say Britain is the most sexist country in some international league tables; that’s just what the headline writers did.Two weeks, however packed, isn’t enough to dissect a society, but while her comments have the Brits either baffled or angry, I can make a very educated guess as to where she’s coming from. If she spent even half her time with the mandarins of upper-class Britain, even when inspecting care homes and women’s shelters, I’m not surprised she felt the overbearing presence of the boys’ club culture. I’m not privy to her agenda, but I’d be very surprised if she wasn’t met by various tall white men in old Eton school ties, pontificating about poor, abused, poverty-stricken women.If I have to be British about it, sexism is more widespread and “pervasive”, the higher up in the class system you go. In the rarefied atmospheres of Whitehall, or British officialdom, boardrooms and high-powered newsrooms, boys’ club is very much in your face. Even the few women in it. And that club can come across as annoyingly insular, patronising and smug, especially to notvery-welcome UN inspectors asking difficult questions.I suspect she got a dose of UK officialdom’s usual habit of stonewalling without actually addressing any of issues being raised. Consider the Home Office response to this controversy — there’s a standard statement that says nothing about Manjoo’s accusation: that she was deliberately barred by the Home Office from visiting a controversial immigrant detention centre, where a woman died last month.That Britons are mad about having their country trashed by an outsider is understandable. What I find curious, is why a highly developed country, with a pretty decent social record, should be so insecure that they can’t let UN inspectors in to their immigrant prisons, or be reduced to attack them personally, whether South African or Brazilian. Why can’t the British establishment (or media) take on board a dose of healthy criticism from an established outside expert, the same kind they’re constantly offering the rest of the world?