There's a huge, huge backlash against this kind of coverage, a backlash that I'm worried may make violence against women seen as even more of a "private, family" issue not worthy of public discussion than it already is. There is, of course, no similar backlash, against stories about snow-stranded families or missing Boy Scouts.

I think that publicizing these stories in and of itself does raise some awareness about violence against women, but putting them in the context you suggest would probably be a big improvement.

Bob Herbert wrote an excellent column today--"Politics and Misogyny"--http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/opinion/15herbert.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Just like that column after those horrible murders in Nickel Mines, PA and Boulder, CO, the one voice who pointed hey, "THIS IS A HATE CRIME AGAINST GIRLS, MSM!"

He discusses the jaw-dropping mentality against sexual assault victims in the military and the desensitizaiton to misogyny....allowing it to fester in the market place, through prostitution, the softcore child-porn of the fashion industry, etc.

I am LIVID about the Lauterbach cases and other cases (Jamie Jennifer Leigh) of recent, incredible cover-ups of sexual assault....

Stepha Henry is dead?

Stepha Henry is dead?

Sadly, that seems to be what the assumption is. They searched the suspect's car and found evidence of foul play.

Thank you so much for talking about this. I needed that after someone in my class last night said that the coverage of the Lauterbach murder makes our military look bad. Then after class, I heard her talking to someone about the recent media coverage of teachers who sleep with their students. "And they're always women!" she said She should turn off the Nancy Grace and tune into Dan Abrams, who always remembers to point out that the vast majority of these crimes are committed by men. Bottom line, the media really need to wake up.

A reporter at the Miami Herald was told to cancel and interview about Stepha Henry because Paris Hilton coverage was more important.

I've heard and seen a ton of info about Lauterbach but this is the first time I've heard Henry's name, or anything about her case.

What bothers me most about the MSM coverage of these stories are the comments about "how senseless" it is, how some crimes just "can't be explained," etc. etc. I can't believe with all these stories that keep coming at us, and in addition the ones that don't get as much MSM attention, I can't believe that some people are still willingly blind to society's violence against women patterns. It really boggles my mind.

The night before her body was found, they were talking about the Lauterbach case on MSNBC. Their "reporting" included an interview with her step-mother, who was very keen to point out that Lauterbach liked to "make up stories" (and then the talking heads' suggestion that this was just another "runaway bride" case). I saw read, and immediately I looked at this stepmom and wondered about all the other abuse that Lauterbach may have suffered throughout her life that her mom just dismissed out-of-hand as "making up stories." It would be really nice if someone had re-played that interview and pointed out that sometimes a family member's assertions that someone is lying isn't iron-clad evidence.

Isn't it *more* equal to simply treat it the same way as when a man is killed? The news reports a dead person? Making it a separate, special situation calls attention, and makes women a "different, other" being, instead of just being recognized as a murdered human.

If you specifically treat every murder of a woman as a specific case of a hate crime, or an act that was only done to target someone because they were a woman, all you do is draw attention to the fact that people still see women as "other".

Not every act of violence committed against a woman is done so because of her gender, just like not every act of violence against a man, or a minority, is done because of those factors.

I just think calling attention to gender in some ways only serves to make it appear separate and unequal.

Not every act of violence committed against a woman is done so because of her gender, just like not every act of violence against a man, or a minority, is done because of those factors."

That's true.

The point is--there is not enough attention being paid to cases where violence- against women and children-as-norm are related.

I suppose social class and criminality of a neighborhood is related too.

This is what pisses me off--at least in the military--is that misogyny and CONDONING IT have been big problems and our commander in chief, the Pentagon, the DoD et al are either indifferent or condone the cover-ups and patterns of abuse.

Jessica you should put up a backlink to that Bob Herbert column of the Nickel Mines and Boulder murders....that explained it well.

The problem is that society and government are not doing enough (I despair to think....how much CAN they do, at least in the short term?) to address the type of violence that does seem fall disproportionately on women and children, and the toxic environment surrounding it (again--read the Herbert column...I may be biased but it was pretty convincing and explanatory.)

P.S. I doubt anyone thinks violence against men should be ignored either, but sometimes it DOES occur under different circumstances than that which befalls women and children.

P.S. I doubt anyone thinks violence against men should be ignored either, but sometimes it DOES occur under different circumstances than that which befalls women and children.

Oh, I know that. I'm not disagreeing with that at all. I just don't think women should be made to look as "other" or separate, because it still creates that dichotomy in people's minds that there is something inherently "different/not the same/not equal" about women.

88mph, I think the problem is that in many of these cases there -are- patterns and indications of hate crimes, but that society is still pointedly looking away from the evidence of that. I agree that emphasizing those aspects could potentially "other" women, but the way that this violence is being reported now often accomplishes the same thing (emphasizing the sexualized aspects, sensationalizing the crimes, etc). I think exposing the misogyny inherent in the vast majority of these crimes is more important than the potential for othering that is already occurring.

Thanks for mentioning that, Ponygirl -- I remember hearing about the Lauterbach story for maybe a week, and it was being spun really heavily as some crazy chick who just ran off after she couldn't deal with the pressure of being pregnant. There was lots of speculation from her mom (or stepmom is it?) about why she would've run off, and statements that basically amounted to her saying that her (step?)daughter had made up the rape allegations. Then when it started looking like maybe something had actually happened, everyone shut up really quick and pretended like no one had said any of that. No analysis, no apologies, not even an "oh wow, this is more serious than we thought." Just a sudden overnight shifting of gears.

WHOA. I have heard a decent amount about Lauterbach, but have not heard of Henry. There's some lovely MSM racism for ya.

Two things that *really* irritate me about the Lauterbach murder: the MSM is constantly pointing out that she was pregnant -- and while this is absolutely a tragedy, I can't help but wonder "so... if she weren't pregnant we wouldn't care as much?" Second, the MSM is *completely* glossing over the (likely) fact that HER MURDERER RAPED HER AND SHE WAS FORCED TO CONTINUE TO WORK UNDER HIM AFTER IT HAPPENED. It mentions the rape and then moves on, like it was no big deal, and like the fact that her superior abused his authority has nothing to do with the fact that he ultimately (allegedly) murdered her. How people in the MSM cannot see the obvious, bright as day connection between rape and violence simply baffles and horrifies me.

Thanks Jessica, I hadn't heard of the Henry case either, but I've seen plenty on the other case.

Thank you so much for talking about this. I needed that after someone in my class last night said that the coverage of the Lauterbach murder makes our military look bad. Then after class, I heard her talking to someone about the recent media coverage of teachers who sleep with their students. "And they're always women!" she said She should turn off the Nancy Grace and tune into Dan Abrams, who always remembers to point out that the vast majority of these crimes are committed by men. Bottom line, the media really need to wake up."

@FEMily: No offense, but that kid (and there are probably plenty of people like her) is f*cking stupid. Really, really stupid. What an imbecile.

Maybe those around her are equally stupid...."it's always women!" Is that a joke?

And the sad thing is I wouldn't be surprised if that sort of nauseating idiocy--that which condones these crimes to continue--is not so rare.

Dammit...how can people be SO STUPID? Especially regarding that teacher thing--what is she, 12? Has she been living under a fucking rock? "

And the military thing--it looks bad because it IS bad.

Sorry but just a reminder that there seem to be more people who condone this crap--including the cover-ups in the military--makes my blood boil.

Do these people have to be skinned, murdered or brutalized themselves before they wake up and consider the prospect of empathy?

thanks for sharing this news. i have been following stepha henry's case since it broke and am extremely saddened.

i am a true crime junkie so am reading crime news stories constantly. it is disturbing the number of cases of murdered or missing women (and children) that involve repeated and ignored patterns of violence. and, as noted in the lauterbach case, the way these facts are dismissed. it makes me think about how we are taught to respond to instances of violence or signs of abuse in our lives. how we have become desensitized to calls for help and our responsibility to do so.

the MSM clearly does not advocate for victims without prejudice and systematic notions of who is worth airtime.

Might Ponygirl: My husband told me about that interview with the step-mom in the Lauterbach case. Even if it were true, it didn't change the fact that she was missing under suspicious circumstances.

I know this type of reporting occurs all the time, but another one I saw recently was about the Egyptian man in Texas who murdered his daughters in an "honor killing". There was no mention of violence against women and the patriarchal beliefs behind it.

Nne of the things that bothers me about the media's handling of the Lauterbach case is the fact that very few outlets are using pictures of Maria in uniform. She's a Marine, and that is an important part of this case. I know the media loves pretty girls who are missing, and I can see that her high school portrait (right?) is very pretty, but a big aspect of this case is sexual abuse within the military and failure of the military to provide legal and psychological counsel for it's female soldiers. I think showing a picture of her in uniform would draw more attention to those facts, and put more pressure on the military to handle to re evaluate how it handles these cases. It would also be a more balanced portrayal of the military itself. Not all soldiers are abusive, horrible people. SHE was a soldier.

I don't understand why media outlets focus so much time and attention to this cases if no focus is being put on anything other than the fact that someone is dead. More emphasis on the why, not the how, of violence in America would help this nation in so many ways.

I am really glad you posted about this. I talk about it in my sociology class and one of my assignments is that they must watch a news show and write up a commentary on how shows are presented and notice victim blaming phrases and who is interviewed vs who isn't.

88mph: I think the issue is not that it's always necessary a hate crime but that fact that any violence perpetuated by men is considered the norm. If a women commits murder you will undoubtably have a special on the rise of women committing violence. The same after a school shooting. There are always the large discussions about kid on kid violence (generally o nly in the white middle class area)

However whenver a man committs a murder,whether a male or female s a victim, noone ever comments on the fact that statistically males commit the most murders and what this says about men's violence in this society and what it says about our culture and values

I can't see anything wrong with the way these were reported. They covered the facts of the case including potential motive eg: "...vanished about a month ago, on Dec. 14, when she was about to testify in the rape case."

While the reasons behind the murders are important I don't think it's the role of a news report to speculate. Some important wider issues have been pointed out that probably do deserve more media coverage, however the place for these issues is not in a news report about a specific event.

"I heard her talking to someone about the recent media coverage of teachers who sleep with their students. "And they're always women!""
I'm not aware of the statistics of how many abusive teachers are male vs female. But what I have noticed in the numerous reports of abuse is that the female teachers generally get lighter punishment and are reported differently. The males are 'rapists' and 'abusers' while the women have 'affairs' and 'inappropriate relationships'.

Bullshit. They were eager enough to speculate that she just ran away to get attention; they actually invoked the "runaway bride" in one report.

If it helps, I think the press conference the Marines and NCIS is giving right now is pretty informative and fair. That said, I'd been in the dark about the case before I went to work out an hour ago, so I can't say how it's been covered to date. What I can say is there seemed to be a long, slow investigation, that while it was on everyone's radar, the victim indicated that she was not afraid of the person she accused, and that the rape cases and disappearance case were treated as separate, something that seems to be regrettable. There's a lot of grey area here, and I don't envy the representatives trying to get through it all.

The media was doing a pretty good job of raking them through the coals (questions like, what the fuck were you thinking when she went missing and the person she accused of rape was right there in front of you?)

Katxyz, CNN's coverage had more military pictures than glamor shots, IMO.

Nne of the things that bothers me about the media's handling of the Lauterbach case is the fact that very few outlets are using pictures of Maria in uniform. She's a Marine, and that is an important part of this case. I know the media loves pretty girls who are missing, and I can see that her high school portrait (right?) is very pretty, but a big aspect of this case is sexual abuse within the military and failure of the military to provide legal and psychological counsel for it's female soldiers."

Damn straight. Lack of counsel OR preventive protection.

There are plenty of honorable men and women in the military and they live up to the notions of bravery and sacrifice (not to mention betrayal for an asshole-filled government's folly...)but THESE cases and the fact that are a significant number of them speak volumes about the mindset of the type of people in the military, at least in the lower rankings and among those that are less educated.

It's terrifying. Talk about an abuse of power (for the alleged perpetrators...they're supposed to PROTECT our ideals and laws) and an environment that puts victims between a rock and a hard place physically (imagine having someone in your platoon attack you....where the fuck can you go in you're overseas?) or legally.

Exactly Mighty Ponygirl!

When pretty little girls make up stories, it is not speculation. When men kill and we notice it's because they believe women should be their property - why that's just opinion.

Funny how that works.

Good comment, Katxyz. I agree that showing Maria in uniform would be a potent image. Also highly relevant, since she was a Marine, worked on base, and was probably raped and murdered by a co-Marine. Hm, now I wonder why the MSM has 'chosen' not to do this?

88mph said: "If you specifically treat every murder of a woman as a specific case of a hate crime, or an act that was only done to target someone because they were a woman, all you do is draw attention to the fact that people still see women as "other"."

I don't disagree with your assessment, but I don't think that is what the post is calling for- what we're saying is there is a reason these crimes happen, and it needs to be addressed. If a person is shot due to a gang shooting, say, the story isn't complete without reference to the underlying reason for the shooting. If a person is "shot" and the incidence around the shooting are not explored, it's shoddy journalism- was he hunting? Was she in a personal altercation? Did he shoot himself?

The same applies to these "missing" women. More often than not, they don't simply "go missing" for no reason (runaway bride is an exception). Physical altercations, Domestic Violence- these are reasons for the women to be missing, and reporting them as such is important.

At least, that's my interpretation behind the post, feel free to school me, I'm only on Chapter 2 of Full Frontal Feminism :)

The truth is this: Military just defending itself. They are partially responsible for this woman's death.
Violence against women is like every other topic involving women. SILENT. Why are we so scared to scream about the rage men have for us? Why are some women so oblivious to the fact that we are always at risk?

While I don't think that this should get more coverage than similar circumstances with a man, the issue is that the media does not cover these stories as much as they should and they do not talk enough about the reasons behind it.

If a man was sexually assaulted in the military and then killed, I would hope they would make a big deal out of it, same as I would have hoped they'd make a big deal out of this. Sexual assault is not covered enough in the media unless it's regarding a minor.

Same thing for murders of minorities. I never hear about African-Americans getting killed, except a few scattered cases. People don't get outraged about murder or rape any more, and the media is part of that desensitizing.

And of course, if the reason behind it was due to their gender, or their race, or whatever, that should be brought up and it should be a hate crime. Whether these were hate crimes against women or if there were other reasons behind them, I don't know.

it's interesting that even in the slew of comments following the posting the bulk of the focus is still on Lauterbach.

Even our first poster, "the15th" voices a bizarre concern that to even question the media's inequitable focus on white women could be somehow "dangerous".

Having lived in all-black neighborhoods most of my life where numerous black women (and black men) have been killed missing, etc. I can not name a single time where their stories merited media coverage or any sense of collective "Oh My God Let's help" beyond our immediate 3 to 6 block radius. This despite the Center of Missing Children, the FBI and virtually every police force in america noting that the vast majority of people who go missing each day are neither white, nor female. (Boys of color and Girls of color are killed and go missing at a much hire rate than white women/teen females.)

But this dynamic is the result of a much bigger issue at work; an issue which is reflective in far too many posts and seemingly important issues within the feminists movement:

"Women" being coded language for White Women.

When we say, "missing woman"we are consistently referring to a white women as if the definition of womanhood is whiteness. Hilary Clinton talks of being the first woman candidate without any deference to former congresswoman Shirley Chisolm's historic "Un-bought, Un-bossed" run in 1972. Why?

Because when Hilary says woman, she only sees women who look like her. When Gloria Steinem rants about "feminism" she's talk about white women. When we say "missing woman" regardless of last name, we only see women who look like Natalee Holloway or Chandra Levy or Maria Lauterbach.

In the end "women" is still about white woman first. And until we lose the White Female Matriarchy glasses that women and feminism is fixed on being viewed through, we'll continue to have these very same problems hurting all women.

unfortunately, if you want to know about missing non-white women you have to go to the "what about our daughters" blog.

black women, and darker-skinned women just aren't worthy of coverage anywhere else.

such is life.

@FEMily: No offense, but that kid (and there are probably plenty of people like her) is f*cking stupid. Really, really stupid. What an imbecile.
Maybe those around her are equally stupid...."it's always women!" Is that a joke?
And the sad thing is I wouldn't be surprised if that sort of nauseating idiocy--that which condones these crimes to continue--is not so rare.
Dammit...how can people be SO STUPID? Especially regarding that teacher thing--what is she, 12? Has she been living under a fucking rock?
And the military thing--it looks bad because it IS bad.
Sorry but just a reminder that there seem to be more people who condone this crap--including the cover-ups in the military--makes my blood boil.
Do these people have to be skinned, murdered or brutalized themselves before they wake up and consider the prospect of empathy?

Hey, you're not offending me. I feel the same way. The discussion was about the behavior of people in authority, and I thought she was going to mention the lack of accountability when it comes to military and mercinaries. But no.

But what I have noticed in the numerous reports of abuse is that the female teachers generally get lighter punishment and are reported differently. The males are 'rapists' and 'abusers' while the women have 'affairs' and 'inappropriate relationships'.

I believe this is due more to gender stereotypes ascribed to women that keep women oppressed (e.g., women don't think, they're ruled by their emotions) than gender stereotypes that aren't as harmful (e.g. young men like to have sex with anyone who'll have them) or sexism against men in the trying teacher-student sex cases.

@h.williams: The Lauterbach case is a little different b/c someone actively tried to cover up this murder and because it wasn't just a random asshole that killed her, as with Stepha, but her fellow soldier. Those who could have helped her at every step of the way resisted and contributed to her murder.

Stepha's case is horrible, and the MSM was lacking in fair coverage, but the spate of sexual assaults and cover-ups in the military stands out (versus one more horror story about a "missing" woman whose story has a sad ending).

"Having lived in all-black neighborhoods most of my life where numerous black women (and black men) have been killed missing, etc. I can not name a single time where their stories merited media coverage or any sense of collective "Oh My God Let's help" beyond our immediate 3 to 6 block radius. This despite the Center of Missing Children, the FBI and virtually every police force in america noting that the vast majority of people who go missing each day are neither white, nor female. (Boys of color and Girls of color are killed and go missing at a much hire rate than white women/teen females.)"

I agree with this, but its not as simple as "the media is racist" (they are in their coverage) or "the audience only cares about pretty white girls."

How about all the resistance in the communities you bring up to (white) social services workers? There may certainly be racial bias, but in child abuse cases; parental kidnapping cases; and other crimes that disproportionately effect low-income adults and children/adults and children of color....who else is supposed to help? What are these agencies supposed to do?

What about when a victim lives a dangerous lifestyle (prostitute? Drug addict/dealer?) and people expect them to go "missing" because they're in prison or in rehab, not kidnapped?

In the short term, what do you expect people to do about abused/missing women and children in poor communities when poverty, hostility to the police (not all of it illegitimate, of course, but those "stop snitching" campaigns...), and conditions within those communities--unstable families for the children to grow up in, normative violence (especially among young men)?

I imagine the community you discuss was lower-income....the poor are more likely to be victimized by crime, for a number of reasons, and to know their attackers.

The problem of socioeconomics, disjointed communities, broken families, and normative violence can't all simply be pinned on racial discrimination or indifference of Middle America, can it?

It is just so sickening to hear about each case. In fact, I find it appalling that the AMBER Alert isn't used for people of all ages.

What I find really repulsive is the coverup of gang rapes in our military.

No it can't, but there's this overwhelming implicit cultural arrogance that says, "us good decent Middle Americans (white) are reaching out so you less than people of color had better appreciate it."

Fact is there's a myriad of hypocrisies from which women of color are on the receinving end that white women do nothing to fix when they're the ones best qualified to fix it if for no other reason than they have louder voices and people are more attentive if not sympathetic when there's a white face attached to the issue.

Tha someone goes on a missionary effort on the south side of chicago or in the "inner city" and should be met with rose petals and block parties simply because they're doing their job and treating people with humanity is a little bit absurd.

How would you like to live in communities where when you as a resident scream for help your cries are marginalized as ungrateful whining, but when som white person says you need help, then your issues are taken seriously?

Almost all black folks i know simply what to be taken seriously enough so that that issues affecting them are considered human issues and worthy.

That it takes a white woman to go missing or murdered for domestic violence to be an issue is as pathetic as domestic violence and missing women.

We're one step from insinuating that if no white women are reported missing, murdered or assaulted then these issues aren't happening to women at all.

and for the record only one of the communities i lived in was "lower income"--the other two were middle to upper middle class. but the treatment is the same--"you're black and if we as media, police, healthcare workers, acknowledge your missing children, abused women, etc. on par with ours, then give us a pat on the back, because we don't really have to do this."

Basiorana, if a man was raped by another man, it would get even less coverage than these two stories. If a man was raped by a woman, the media would stay silent. Same song, second verse if a man missing for days was found dead and the wife was charged in his murder.

And the on the murders of Afircan-Americans. The only time I hear about black people dying is if it is the so-called "black-on-black" crime. And if a black woman was murdered, you would hear zero coverage of it. Zero.

What all of that said, I totally agree with Basiorana. We have become desensitized. I propose a Sensitivity 101 class for our youth.

88: Isn't it *more* equal to simply treat it the same way as when a man is killed?

Maybe you're right. How about this: When a man kills his wife, this should get just as much media attention as when a woman kills her husband. And it should be reported a similar way, not "One dies in domestic dispute" vs. "Preacher's wife shoots huband."

And when a married military man rapes a female enlistee of lower rank, impregnates her, later abuducts her, slits her throat and buries her in his back yard -- Let's give that as much attention as if a married military woman raped a enlisted man of lower rank, impregnated him, then abducted him, slit his throat and buried him in her back yard.

Sounds fair to me.

I am not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but today a few hours ago I watched the live coverage of the military responding to the incident in a press conference. I was shocked. the Col. said that she was not raped and that the sex was consensual. And when further questioned about it, he said that they are treating them as two seperate investigations, so one has nothing to do with the other. this confused me - if she was not raped why is there an investigation? The Col. also said something about there not being any evidence to support the rape. It was then that a reporter in the background said in a pissed off voice: "What evidence to you need?!?! A smoking rape kit?!?" Anyway, it was very interesting and a little confusing so if anyone on here can help me make sense of the press conference please do!

@h. williams: where were you?

You're saying it was ridden w/ violent crime but stable, or that the cases you saw were just generally ignored?

Those that take domestic violence, child abuse, juvenile delinquency etc know it is not simply worthy of attention or disturbing if there is a "white" face rep'ing it.

If anything...I feel useless to really make a date in a neighborhood like the Southside.

"And the on the murders of Afircan-Americans. The only time I hear about black people dying is if it is the so-called "black-on-black" crime. And if a black woman was murdered, you would hear zero coverage of it. Zero."

Are you fucking kidding me? If black-on-black crime stories are so overrepresented you could have fooled me. WTF is the flipside of that--black-on-black crime is a myth (not that white on black crime or black on white crime is good either)?

I guess its the medias fault for covering gang members,broken families,and local norms of homophobia and misogyny among communities that happen to be nonwhite.

Every time a non-white guy butchers his girlfriend, a neighbor, a child, etc etc....he and the parents that raised him into a violent piece of shit are all victims of white America and that's it? What are you getting at?

Racism and de facto segregation exist but at what point are parents responsible for their children, individuals responsible for their own fertility, and "youths" who prey on each other to be held responsible for their own bad choices or the things they do to members of their own communities?

AP today: Marine Cpl. Cesar Armando Laurean never violated the military protective order directing him to stay away from Lance Cpl. Maria Lauterbach, continued to report for work on time in the weeks after her disappearance and denied having any kind of sexual contact with her, said Col. Gary Sokoloski, the judge advocate general officer for the II Marine Expeditionary Force.

What a load of crap! How is it that this magician of a Marine managed to slaughter, burn and bury a woman he was NEVER around?

I don't really care if he got to work on time. Did SHE get to work on time? Oh wait, I guess not.

And what is this claim about no sex? Is that before or after she "got" pregnant? Or maybe he MEANT (crossing his fingers behind his back) that he had not had sex with her in a LONG TIME... like, not since the day he killed her... or, well, definitely not after he burned the body... not after he buried her anyway...maybe?

Helena, ALL violence should be treated the same -- regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, etc.

AP today: Marine Cpl. Cesar Armando Laurean never violated the military protective order directing him to stay away from Lance Cpl. Maria Lauterbach, continued to report for work on time in the weeks after her disappearance and denied having any kind of sexual contact with her, said Col. Gary Sokoloski, the judge advocate general officer for the II Marine Expeditionary Force.

You have got to be KIDDING me. He had to violate the order. Why else did this 20-year-old pregnant Marine die? Obviously the media is trying to mainpulate what all of us here know. That she was murdered by him.

h. williams, while you have some absolutely legitimate points re feminism (insofar as white women's concerns have tended to get more "air time," so to speak, than concerns primarily affecting black women or women of color), I think you're missing the bigger picture here. I'm not sure if it's just that you have a bone to pick with feminists or if you're actually as unsympathetic to our (equally legitimate) concerns as you come off, but barging onto a feminist blog and insisting that the fact that we talk about some white women (in addition to black women) makes us racist and unconcerned about black women strikes me as a bit race-baiting. In case you didn't notice, the post gives about equal space to talking about both women, and specifically takes the MSM to task for ignoring crimes committed against women of color.

The likely reason that people are talking more about Lauterbach is because we simply know more about her. Which is wrong and sad and horrible, as it points to the paucity of information out there about her (again attributable to the MSM's obsession with pretty white girls -- of which, by the way, we white feminists are no fans either) but it doesn't mean we don't care about black women.

And, how about some specificity? I think most of the people here are pretty reasonable and will listen to a compelling argument. Do you have examples of concerns specific to black women that we're brushing over? Do you know of more stories that are being swept under the rug? If so, pleas share! I bet the editors would want to know if there are stories about women of color that the MSM is ignoring, so that they can bring them to light.

All of this is a two-way street. If black women want to reject feminists because they perceive us as unsympathetic, that's unfortunate, and probably in some instances a completely justifiable reaction -- but in the end it's their choice. I am pissed off about the way law firms treat female attorneys like me. Even the "women's committee" at my firm completely misses the ball half of the time. Sometimes I'm tempted to just plain leave and say "to hell with them, I'll go somewhere else." And I would be completely justified in doing so. But I can also stay and do what I can to make others see what's so problematic about their words and actions, and hopefully make things better for the next generation of female lawyers. This doesn't make either choice "right" or "wrong" or "better" or "worse" -- but it is a choice, even if it's not a remotely fair or easy one.

My point is that while you're right that the relationship between the feminist movement and black women has been rocky and often insensitive to issues particularly important to black women (and women of color in general), and while you're right to place much of the blame for that, historically, on the leadership of the feminist movement, that doesn't relieve women of color and their advocates of their responsibility to speak up and be heard if they want the feminist movement to listen, just as the fact that we live in a horrifically sexist society does not relieve women of our responsibility to speak out against sexism and misogyny (which is not easy, and gets really tiring, and does NOT make you popular, of that much I can assure you). And I think there are some amazing, awesome women of color who are doing exactly that, and helping bring feminists' attention to issues that white, middle-class feminists might otherwise inadvertently overlook. I mean, two of the feministing editors, Jen and Samhita, have brought up some really hard-hitting points in the past addressing exactly the sorts of problems with the feminist movement that you are alluding to -- and have occasionally caused a stir in doing so. This is good, because it forces us white feminists to stop and think for a second, after being given a specific example of a way in which we are not being fair to feminists of color. (Not that Jessica and the others don't do their part as well). And Celina has done some awesome interviews of other awesome women of color working to bring these issues to the forefront.

So I guess I'm saying I don't see your point. If you just want to rant about feminists, there's no point in doing that here. I see you have your own blog -- I would suggest you start a discussion on Why Feminism Sucks, or whatever, over there. If, however, you want to add something productive and though-provoking to the discussion, while it might not be greeted with open arms (just as it's difficult for you men -- it seems from your blog that you're a man -- to autmatically accept the realities we women bring to light, it can be difficult for us white women to automatically accept the realities that people of color bring to light), it will at least be heard and considered. Food for thought is always good and useful. Angry rants are good for blowing off steam, but are more appropriate for a more likeminded audience.

@jovan1984:

Maybe I'm missing something, but you talk about "black-on-black" crime (likely members of the same messed up neighborhood) as if it's a conspiracy manufactured by the media--that in reality it's middle class white people that are drifting into the South Bronx, Houston, Newark etc. and butchering nonwhites, raping their women, and abusing black children.

Most victims know their attackers. "Black on black crime" refers to the fact that at least SOME of the solution resolves in community members (and parents, and adolescents interacting with one another) themselves...it can't all be pinned on white America, which is what you seem to be implying.

"Helena, ALL violence should be treated the same -- regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, etc." I agree. But resolving the problem may mean (to a limited extent) pointing to patterns that make people uncomfortable.

This is why I feel weird calling myself a 'feminist,' b/c that implicitly means practicing "liberal white guilt" at the sake of all else.

xxhelena,

I've lived in black neighborhoods of varying economic backgrounds from poor to upper-middle income all my life. The types of crimes i've seen are no different than those i've seen in other neighborhoods: drug use, domestic abuse, missing children, murder...

However where there the distinctions have been most noticable is in areas of how crimes are treated not only by the press/media but by those outside the communities.

When black teens or blacks of any age are killed or victimized by crime, it becomes "a bad neighborhood" and the media throw around phrases like "black-on-black crime" is if crime and being black are one in the same. There's little if any humanizaing of the victims or understanding of the circumstances that may have motivated the victimizer. It's just "them being them" as usual.

I've seen crime in predominantly white neighborhoods and suddenly questions of "bullying" "peer pressure" along with the typical cabal of angst/mental illness/MTV/Madison Ave come into play. It's as if we're saying, "whites are inherently good, and when they do bad, there's got to be a force too strong for white people responsible for their actions."

Coverage of black women dead, abused, missing is the same. They don't matter as much. They're not as human or as "female" as the other females receiving coverage.

What if natalie holloway went to aruba because the drinking age was 18--3 years lower than the drinking age in her home state of GA and she just wanted to "get into something" that her mom would never approve of back home. What if that was the biggest factor in her linking up with/getting ambushed by her abductors/murderers?

You can best believe if natalie had been anything other than an innocent looking little blond that someone would've said that outloud.

If the accuser in the Duke LaCrosse case had been a white "dancer" instead of a black stripper, would e how different would that case have gone?

it's pretty clear that Lauterbach's BF killed her. But is his story that far-fetched? What if his motivation was actually that Lauterbach lied about the sex being consensual and said he raped her and refused to have an abortion and that was the crux of their arguments?

It wouldn't condone his murdering, burning and decapitating her, but would people be so quick to canonize her if she didn't look the way she looked? Even when black women are victimized, there's a prevailing underlying notion that somehow they played a role in it; that if they weren't so conniving or attitude-filled that somehow everybody would treat them better.

And as the Law Fairy just stated, "if black women want to reject feminists... it's their choice."

Because in the end, even though feminism was built on and contniues to have this racial hierarchy of what is and isn't womanhood, a hierarchy that puts these ungrateful black women at the bottom (backseat's them at best) then it's of course their fault.

And therein, once again lies the rub.

ungrateful black women... so unappreciative of the efforts of white women.

maybe Law Fairy is right: They're just not worth being covered like white women; they don't deserve justice--not unless white women feel its called for.

And Jovan1984, all victims of violence will never be viewed equally until all women and all people are viewed equally; and that won't happen "despite" someone's gender or ethnicity, but in concert with these parts--because these are part of what make us all human and worthy.

Mighty Ponygirl, I didn't see any of that speculation in the reports linked. I agree that such speculation on behalf of the media should not be in news reports. Of course if investigators were to offer speculation in attempts to engage the public in the effort to find a missing person, or gather information then that is a slightly different issue.

FEMily: I believe this is due more to gender stereotypes ascribed to women that keep women oppressed (e.g., women don't think, they're ruled by their emotions) than gender stereotypes that aren't as harmful (e.g. young men like to have sex with anyone who'll have them)

I realise this is derailing the thread a bit, but I hope you're not insinuating that sexual abuse of young males is any less harmful than the sexual abuse of young females. Propagating the myth that all young males want sex however they can get it, has the same potential to cause harm as propagating the myth that all young girls deserve whatever they get.

I appreciate Ms. Valenti bringing up the "missing white girl syndrome" seen in the media. Coverage of endangered girls or women of color is often sidelined or ignored. I do not know if this "neglect" is actual racism, or merely appealing to a mainly white middle class viewing audience.

88mph: "Isn't it *more* equal to simply treat it the same way as when a man is killed?"

I strongly doubt the death of the average man is like the treatment or deaths of these women. Violence against women in general, and what can be done about it, is deserving of increased media attention, certainly more than the exploits of so called celebrities.

[And if DV is the topic, I assume the roles of both men and women as equal opportunity abusers will also be discussed. Here is something I came across last night. I admit I was surprised.]

US Dept. of Health & Human Services Administration for Children & Families, _Child Maltreatment 2005_
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm05/figure3_5.htm
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm05/chapterthree.htm#figurefive

Even when black women are victimized, there's a prevailing underlying notion that somehow they played a role in it; that if they weren't so conniving or attitude-filled that somehow everybody would treat them better."

I agree with Law Fairy--what are modern feminists glossing over? From what I see there extra pains are taken to be racially conscious.

This is my point--maybe I AM wrong--however pervasive norms that condone violence against women may be throughout society, it seems correlated in part to education level and to a limited extent, what an article on African-Americans and HIV referred to as "sociocultural factors" (it was in the Journal of Black Psychology).

I think family instability (related esp. to teen pregnancy or impoverished single motherhood, popular topics on this site), crime, and the gap btw. men and women of color (those men are in the relationship pool...slim pickings) contribute to conditions that create a living hell for women and children to live/grow up in. And when I read about the preponderance of sexual abuse among women of color (ESPECIALLY as it relates to class)...what am I supposed to think?

Obviously it cannot all be attributed to "culture"--racism, disparities in education, and de facto segregation play a role, but in to a LIMITED extent, community members are responsible for one another and for how they raise their kids. (I'd say teen pregnancy plays a big role in generational de facto segregation/poverty, at least in the short-term).

I guess I'm ignorant. What exactly are "white" feminists withholding from black women? What do we misunderstand? Is it our views on prosecution in domestic violence cases? Non-white communities' alienation from the police/state powers like child services?

How many people would REALLY think, "Oh, that's just Stepha Henry, getting what she should expect...cuz she's a black woman"? Or those poor kids shot in a school parking lot in Newark? "Oh, that's just black kids, getting screwed over...that's what they get for 'choosing' to live in Newark!"?

Also, those Duke lacrosse players might have been repugnant, but the media, Jesse Jackson et al wanted to make it a "racism circus," so when it turned out that stripper was mentally ill....ennnh. Their own bullshit backfired on them. Considering how rare it is for LEGITIMATE sexual assault cases to get the attention they deserve, the notion of sending three innocent men to prison for rape--jerks of not--makes my skin crawl.

p.s. when I say "Obviously it cannot all be attributed to "culture"--racism, disparities in education, and de facto segregation play a role, but in to a LIMITED extent, community members are responsible for one another and for how they raise their kids"....if anything I feel greater pity for the students shot in cold blood in Newark or a student (especially among teenage boys) fit the ideal of masculinity among his peers, so he's isolated (until he too joins in the self-destruction).

This is my point--either I'm racist for seeing these communities/their members at least PARTIALLY responsible for the behavior they condone or perpetuate, or not. Either way I feel am extra unnerved when I read about a case who dies in part b/c of factors out of their control--the neighborhood she grew up in, the social class she was born into, the family he was born into. I know what I've escaped thus far.

P.S. Sometimes victims DO have a hand in their on (nevertheless unfortunate) deaths...certainly referenced in the uptick of NY shootings in cases where victims knew attackers and both were usually armed/fighting over a girl, a remark, etc.

There's a difference between a "victim" who--even if they don't deserve their fate--hate some hand in what happens to them, and then there are cases where victims befall horrible situations out of their control/will.

I wrote a post that touched on this in another thread (responding to someone's complaint about MSNBC's coverage of Maria Lauterbach's case), but it never showed up in the comments, and I'm not sure what was wrong with it, but whatever.

I heard about Maria Lauterbach from the Dan Abrams show, and I think he did a good job. (I haven't seen any coverage with him since her body has been found, so this is all from when she was missing.) One of his guests mentioned the fact that the #1 cause of death among pregnant women is homicide. Another guest discussed the 'bipolar' angle, pointing out that it was unlikely that she was Manic because people in that state usually end up in jail or in the hospital because of their behavior, and if she was at the depressive end of the spectrum, the assertion that she tends to lie a lot was probably not helpful. Dan Abrams was skeptical, almost annoyed by the "she's bipolar" thing that her step-mother brought up (seriously, who says that about someone who is missing and could possibly be watching?).

As for the comments about the choice of picture used by the media, keep in mind that when this story started there was still a chance that she would be found, and the police were looking for information. The photo of her in uniform does not show her hairstyle (or color), or any facial expression and she looks completely different in the other picture, which probably looks more like she does normally. (If you'll notice, she has a rather distinctive chin, which you also can't see in the military picture.) But that's just a guess. The military photo being used of the suspect is a good one for ID purposes, though. I don't know that it's an intentional thing.

I agree with much of what was said here - re the disparity in coverage between black and white crime victims, and also re the fact that "the media" is reticent in many cases to discuss rape and sexual violence honestly - ie, as a violence against women issue.

i do have several points to make re the article itself, and also to answer a question someone asked. i think the article was worth reporting, and investigating the effects of combat on veterans is critical to ensuring the health of not only those who have served in the combat but also our communities at home. the article would have made more sense in the context of comparing the rates of murder by combat veterans to the general rates of murder in our population. at this point, millions of men and women have been deployed to iraq and afghanistan - yet 121 murders have been traced. i venture to say that that is a much *lower* ratio of murders in your average population. the article would have been more telling had it made such a comparison or set such a context.

furthermore - no, military members are *not* discharged because they seek mental health services. yes, in general, it is a culture that views strength in terms of being able to bottle up emotions, but 1) that is shifting in some ways and 2) that mentality is a coping mechanism that is promoted so that military members are able to go and do some of the things required of them in their jobs, ie combat.

"When black teens or blacks of any age are killed or victimized by crime, it becomes 'a bad neighborhood' and the media throw around phrases like 'black-on-black crime' is if crime and being black are one in the same."

...and the only time I remember seeing a reference to "white-on-white" violence was in a spoof rather than about an actual case:

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/white_on_white_violence

"Because in the end, even though feminism was built on and contniues to have this racial hierarchy..."

Hold it, all anti-sexism is feminist! There's way more to feminism than one movement built with with a racial hierarcy. For example, Hatshepsut taking the throne and becoming Pharaoh was more feminist than automatically ceding it to Thuthmose III would have been...centuries-later white women's movement or no centuries-later white women's movement.

@DCsuebee:

I got that, about the fact that military members are much less likely to commit crimes than the general population, but 1) the military is choosing recruits with criminal backgrounds and 2) the military keeps COVERING UP violent crimes committed by military members.

That and PTSD is not getting enough attention either.

"What exactly are 'white' feminists withholding from black women?"

There is no need for quotes. There is a definite black feminist movement (as well as Asian-American, Hispanic, Latina, Native American, even a claimed "Native Hawaiian feminism"), which would suggest the default or mainstream in the US is white. I agree Feministing does well in spotlighting the work of feminists of color, and the needs of women of color and women in foreign countries, with a diverse readership, but despite being a non-black male non-feminist, I can read views similar to this:

http://racialrealist.wordpress.com/2006/05/04/a-new-way-forward-for-black-feminism/

[start quote]

To sum up:

1. For the black woman (while sexism is undoubtedly a serious problem in the black community) racism is still the most significant form of oppression;

2. Black women experience sexism differently from white women - which brings me to my final point:

3. Maybe black women would be better off addressing gender equality/promoting feminism internally within the black community rather than doing this in collaboration with the white feminist movement…I personally am beginning to feel that this would be better for black women, and better for black male - female relationships/ overall black unity.

[end quote]

One can see the debate that ensues when US/white/middle class culture is posited as superior to or above another in discussion of women's issues abroad, as in life under Islam, or what should be done, by whom, to help foreign Muslim women. The discussion seems to slow to a trickle when someone suggests women of that community or culture can best decide what is right for themselves, rather than having it imposed upon them from outside. Perhaps the same holds true for women of different cultures within the US, as this blogger suggests. Are NOW or the readers of Feministing, the best voice to speak for black women or Asian Americans or able to give them the individualized attention they need? If they were, I doubt there would be a need for newer movements such as Asian-American feminism or "Native Hawaiian feminism." I do not necessarily see this as a condemnation or rejection of "mainstream" feminism, just a recognition of diversity.

the 'white' part was a typo mid fluster

Or rather the quotes at all were.

"For the black woman (while sexism is undoubtedly a serious problem in the black community) racism is still the most significant form of oppression;

2. Black women experience sexism differently from white women - which brings me to my final point:

3. Maybe black women would be better off addressing gender equality/promoting feminism internally within the black community rather than doing this in collaboration with the white feminist movement…I personally am beginning to feel that this would be better for black women, and better for black male - female relationships/ overall black unity.

[end quote]"

Great. For the most part I suppose those are legitimate grievances,

If the legacy of institutional racism is de facto segregation, for WOMEN at least, and in the short term, doesn't its perpetuation relate in part to norms held WITHIN those communities (I guess that's the point about "fighting from within)....

But what happens when non-white "feminist" leaders have a bone to pick with white America, "white" institutions like the police (including non white "feminists") for not paying attention to cases like those of Stepha Henry's or that horrific case against a mother and son in the Dunbar projects in Florida?

H. williams this specifically relates to how you responded to Law Fairy--which is it?

Damned if you're do, damned if you don't.

And as for those statistics from the Children's Bureau showing mothers were the worst attackers...I wonder how many of those were the sole parent and actually INTENDED to have children (doesn't excuse it at all).

Notice the racial figures from the HHS as well

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm05/figure3_4.htm

I know, don't always believe statistics...

I don't think every ugly thing I've read about non-white/working-class and below families and communities can be attributed to fabrication or racism.

Considering how many people on this board may agree with the views in the article linked by a_male...which is it? Are we racists for demanding justice on behalf of women of color in their communities, or are we sticking are noses where they don't belong? Couldn't THAT reaction be read as, "Let those miserable self-destructing communities implode and devour its women, children, and every adolescent boy who doesn't fulfill the ideal of 'thug' alive...just glad I don't live there!!!!"

Either I'm sticking my nose in someone else's dirty laundry or I'm cold-hearted.

Take the plank out of your own eye before you point out the splinter in mine.

"And as for those statistics from the Children's Bureau showing mothers were the worst attackers...I wonder how many of those were the sole parent and actually INTENDED to have children (doesn't excuse it at all)."

That is a most valid observation, considering the proportion of single mothers (the majority of a certain ethnic group) and the vast majority of divorcees with primary/sole custody of children. I'd forgotten. Good for you. The study did report on abuse by living arrangements. Data for living arrangements in nearly 40% of cases were unknown or missing, a real disservice to the study. The largest known proportion of victims lived with both parents, however, followed by single mothers. No, it's not an excuse, but I am sure it is likely stress related or part of a psychiatric condition. I also now wonder how many of those mothers are abused by their husbands or partners in turn. That was the situation in my wife's family with her evil stepmother, and how my wife believes her abuse escalated (the new wife/stepmother was resentful of the father's love for his daughter).

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm05/table3_13.htm

"I know, don't always believe statistics..."

Coming from a business and science oriented (engineering and nursing) background, I am quite prone to believe in thoughtfully obtained statistics. The problem is how they are interpreted. It is not racist to find or point out the ethnic differences or cultural factors in child abuse. The problem is ascribing stereotypes to explain them. Why is there such a marked difference in instances of reported child abuse between major American ethnicities and what should be done about it?* I couldn't tell you offhand, and it could merit further study to find more effective measures against it.

* If race/ethnicity of victim is surveyed, race/ethnicity of perpetrator is also necessary. We cannot assume that parent/custodial figures and children are of the same background. Also multiple/mixed/unknown/declined to respond categories for race are necessary.

"which is it? Are we racists for demanding justice on behalf of women of color in their communities, or are we sticking are noses where they don't belong? "

Concern or assistance does not need to be seen in a negative light. As in the numerous threads/debates about women in Muslim/ethnic/foreign cultures, I now believe the best suggestion is find out what the people in question want done (if they indeed want something done), and how they would like to go about doing it. The suggestion that many Muslim women might actually like to keep covered (on their own terms), despite the protests of some posters, was illuminating. Imposing change or one's own culture upon people unprepared or unwilling for change, or lacking their input, would probably be offensive.

"Take the plank out of your own eye before you point out the splinter in mine."

I've always considered that a nonsensical argument, if the aim is *not* to point out which is "worse," or discussion is not hindered by being defensive; e.g. there is nothing wrong with the US and China having a *sincere* and productive discussion on human rights issues and abuses, instead of the usual finger pointing and denial. I am sure mainstream feminists and women of color/foreigners have much to learn from one another.

maybe Law Fairy is right: They're just not worth being covered like white women; they don't deserve justice--not unless white women feel its called for.

And with that, you have proven yourself a troll. That's nowhere near a borderline fair reading of what I said, and you fucking well know it. Do not fucking put words in my mouth, asshole. Go back to your own blog.

Oh yeah, and this: it's pretty clear that Lauterbach's BF killed her makes you even more of a willfully ignorant sexist asshole. He wasn't her BOYFRIEND, he was her RAPIST.

Hey, does the fact that you're a misogynist asshole mean that all black men are woman-haters? I mean, using your logic, it must...

"Take the plank out of your own eye before you point out the splinter in mine."

What I should have pointed out (thank you for humoring me in one rant after the next) is that at least part of the perpetuation of (at least seemingly) disproportionately dysfunctional families, domestic violence, and general violence (be it between adolescent men over something that isn't worth losing a life over, or men abusing women and children that are acquaintances, in their family, or in couples), in the SHORT TERM, has to do with choices that individuals in those communities are responsible for.

Granted, destructive behavior is aggravated by generational poverty and its stagnation...related to educational and job disparities. For every sociology class I've taken that discusses teen pregnancy (and what THAT means to generational poverty/dysfunctional families), "low quality" relationships between men and women as a norm (especially related to social class), and self-destructing adolescents, it is verboten to mention that in PART--in the short term--people are responsible the way they treat each other and the decisions they make. Parents are responsible for how they raise their children (hard to do if your "child" is a burden thrust into your lap because you don't use birth control, and you are likely raising the child alone and with few marketable skills), adolescents are responsible to the behaviors they punish their peers for deviating from, etc. etc.

I went off on a rant but I don't think it was entirely baseless considering some of the statements made on this board--I am sick of being guilt-tripped and being told that the existence of de facto segregation in life outcomes and here in crime victimization is SOLELY the product of white oppression in the economy and in social institutions.

That is the "plank" in reference (I know, it IS a grating argument), but my point is that the best fight in changing media coverage, legal resolution, and ideally PREVENTION of violence against women and children (and among men) is a collective one that begins in communities and is reinforced from outside by better school funding, different, more community-friendly policing, and more weight given to missing nonwhites. (By the way, despite the legitimacy of complaints against the media, alot of times the "missing" status of a person depends on the family behind them. Tamara Houston, Stepha and Chanel-Petro Nixon all had families fighting to be heard and there was STILL a shortage of coverage, I'll agree with that...but missing women and children are not always so lucky, ESPECIALLY if neglectful and/or abusive family members PLAY A ROLE in the missing person's status).

Quoting h. williams: "No it can't, but there's this overwhelming implicit cultural arrogance that says, "us good decent Middle Americans (white) are reaching out so you less than people of color had better appreciate it... the treatment is the same--'you're black and if we as media, police, healthcare workers, acknowledge your missing children, abused women, etc. on par with ours, then give us a pat on the back, because we don't really have to do this.'

That may be true often enough, but the flip side is that white people reacting to cases like the Dunbar robbery/rape and demanding to know where the parents of those TEN BOYS were are sticking their noses where they don't belong.

To hell with it. In the short term--before a social revolution that closes the life outcome gap--on some level, members of these communities are responsible for what they do to one another and how they raise their children. That doesn't make a missing woman or a boy who's beaten to death any less disturbing or offensive, PERIOD.

That and those who are serious about child neglect/abuse, juvenile delinquency, domestic violence, unplanned pregnancy, etc. are probably aware that if anything race and/or the social class one is born into makes resolution EXTRA problematic for any advocate to tackle.

Again--according to some on this board either I'm racist for asking why the hell the HIV rate is so high among African American women or I'm indifferent.

That's all, I have nothing else to say, even if the accusations of "white arrogance" may be legitimate, in some part. I STILL think the first part of the solution has to come from WITHIN communities with help from those arrogant white feminists, social workers, and a (not necessarily white) audience horrified by cases like the Dunbar project's. This started with a fight over our focus on Maria and not Stepha (someone could have HELPED Maria...Stepha's death is awful and I am going to follow this case, but once she left that night club, there wasn't much we knew).

"Take the plank out of your own eye before you point out the splinter in mine."

What I should have pointed out (thank you for humoring me in one rant after the next) is that at least part of the perpetuation of (at least seemingly) disproportionately dysfunctional families, domestic violence, and general violence (be it between adolescent men over something that isn't worth losing a life over, or men abusing women and children that are acquaintances, in their family, or in couples), in the SHORT TERM, has to do with choices that individuals in those communities are responsible for.

Granted, destructive behavior is aggravated by generational poverty and its stagnation...related to educational and job disparities. For every sociology class I've taken that discusses teen pregnancy (and what THAT means to generational poverty/dysfunctional families), "low quality" relationships between men and women as a norm (especially related to social class), and self-destructing adolescents, it is verboten to mention that in PART--in the short term--people are responsible the way they treat each other and the decisions they make. Parents are responsible for how they raise their children (hard to do if your "child" is a burden thrust into your lap because you don't use birth control, and you are likely raising the child alone and with few marketable skills), adolescents are responsible to the behaviors they punish their peers for deviating from, etc. etc.

I went off on a rant but I don't think it was entirely baseless considering some of the statements made on this board--I am sick of being guilt-tripped and being told that the existence of de facto segregation in life outcomes and here in crime victimization is SOLELY the product of white oppression in the economy and in social institutions.

That is the "plank" in reference (I know, it IS a grating argument), but my point is that the best fight in changing media coverage, legal resolution, and ideally PREVENTION of violence against women and children (and among men) is a collective one that begins in communities and is reinforced from outside by better school funding, different, more community-friendly policing, and more weight given to missing nonwhites. (By the way, despite the legitimacy of complaints against the media, alot of times the "missing" status of a person depends on the family behind them. Tamara Houston, Stepha and Chanel-Petro Nixon all had families fighting to be heard and there was STILL a shortage of coverage, I'll agree with that...but missing women and children are not always so lucky, ESPECIALLY if neglectful and/or abusive family members PLAY A ROLE in the missing person's status).

Quoting h. williams: "No it can't, but there's this overwhelming implicit cultural arrogance that says, "us good decent Middle Americans (white) are reaching out so you less than people of color had better appreciate it... the treatment is the same--'you're black and if we as media, police, healthcare workers, acknowledge your missing children, abused women, etc. on par with ours, then give us a pat on the back, because we don't really have to do this.'

That may be true often enough, but the flip side is that white people reacting to cases like the Dunbar robbery/rape and demanding to know where the parents of those TEN BOYS were are sticking their noses where they don't belong.

To hell with it. In the short term--before a social revolution that closes the life outcome gap--on some level, members of these communities are responsible for what they do to one another and how they raise their children. That doesn't make a missing woman or a boy who's beaten to death any less disturbing or offensive, PERIOD.

That and those who are serious about child neglect/abuse, juvenile delinquency, domestic violence, unplanned pregnancy, etc. are probably aware that if anything race and/or the social class one is born into makes resolution EXTRA problematic for any advocate to tackle.

Again--according to some on this board either I'm racist for asking why the hell the HIV rate is so high among African American women or I'm indifferent.

That's all, I have nothing else to say, even if the accusations of "white arrogance" may be legitimate, in some part. I STILL think the first part of the solution has to come from WITHIN communities with help from those arrogant white feminists, social workers, and a (not necessarily white) audience horrified by cases like the Dunbar project's. This started with a fight over our focus on Maria and not Stepha (someone could have HELPED Maria...Stepha's death is awful and I am going to follow this case, but once she left that night club, there wasn't much we knew).

Lawfairy: I agree with 99.9% of what you've typed up there. This though:

He wasn't her BOYFRIEND, he was her RAPIST.

It IS possible he was both. Boyfriends can turn into rapists. And back into boyfriends, sometimes, though we'd all agree that's ill advised.

I think we're also completely neglecting the point that this is a military murder- potentially on base, between two military members. While I'm not even going to pretend that there isn't a "missing white woman" trend in news reporting, this shit all hit the fan because they are military, and we're finally addressing the idea that the military doesn't deal well or appropriately with rape cases.

Fair enough, lilianna, but given his generally flip attitude about women's issues, I think it's reasonable to infer that isn't how he meant it.

But yeah, absolutely boyfriends can be rapists. It just bugs me a little, I guess, when people still use JUST the term "boyfriend," as though the scumbag lower-than-dirt waste-of-air belly-crawling creature deserves to be called anyone's "boyfriend" anymore.

How would you like to live in communities where when you as a resident scream for help your cries are marginalized as ungrateful whining, but when some white person says you need help, then your issues are taken seriously?

I do live in a community like that. I am a woman. So instead of "white person" it's "male person."

But I didn't realize feminists were taken seriously by the MSM or society-at-large at all. As far as I'm concerned, nobody's listening to any of us, let alone white vs. black.

I hear you Law Fairy, you're right :) I was skipping his posts anyway.

I'm probably being way too fair about trying to give the military the benefit of the doubt going into this whole sad mess.

"I STILL think the first part of the solution has to come from WITHIN communities with help from those arrogant white feminists, social workers, and a (not necessarily white) audience horrified by cases like the Dunbar project's."

Good points.

Meanwhile, remember that this type of discussion sometimes disintegrates into "it's the majority's fault" vs. "it's self-destruction." One side practically excuses attackers who are minority, the other practically blames victims who are minority, and neither side gets the point about how one individuals's life can be ruined by the bad decisions of *another* individual in the same community.