violence against women is absolutely connected to the fact that men are brought up to think that they have the "right" to talk to and approach women out of nowhere.

Which explains why it's so rare in cultures that strictly regulate public interaction between the sexes.

Would they have taken that shot if they expected return fire?

But don't those girls realize that they were being complimented?

I'm sure the bullet had a tag that said, "You're beautiful and I want to get to know you better."

[/sarcasm]

And that is part of the reason why street harassment is a serious issue, not just a nuisance, and certainly not a "compliment."

Thanks for posting on this. This story made me sick. Hearing stories like this make me think twice about how I react to cat callers - it makes me feel so powerless.

Alice - way to turn a story about random violence against a young woman into a rallying cry for the second amendment task force.

If I am reading Alice correctly then I completely agree.

Women, please I beg of you do society a favor and train in safety and accuracy and arm yourselves. Clearly there are a lot of people carrying the "Y" chromosome that need to be eliminated, if you could help us out with this task it would be great for all of us.

The call for women to prepare to meet force with force is not new: I am reminded of Susan Brownmiller's closing chapter of Against Our Wills, where she talks about martial arts training. But patriarchy is a social structure, not just a series of acts. In order for this woman to be protected from these men by their fear of return fire (remember, she herself could not have returned fire; it appears that she was hit with the first shot) then there would have to be a whole culture of women shooting at male aggressors. But how would our culture treat that? Would there be story after story of women shooting men who they believed were aggressors, but who the press later defends? We've all seen the culture of rape apology: How many women would shoot a man who was following them, a stalker ex-boyfriend, or even the man they just went back to their apartment with who thought "no" didn't apply to him; only to have the police and media treat it like she was in the wrong? We already see women who shoot abusive partners go to prison, and they often have documented histories. So why do we think that women responding with deadly force, absent massive social change, would work out better for women?

And if the culture changed to the point that a woman could shoot her assailant and be reasonably sure of justice, it would also have changed so much that men could not be reasonably sure that they would get away with raping and beating women.

Another reason to keep abortion legal.

And I agree with LogrusZed. I never thought that I'd see the day when a "man" would be deranged enough to shoot a woman that rejected him.

Which explains why it's so rare in cultures that strictly regulate public interaction between the sexes.

r0cket-, Are you perhaps referring to those countries that allow "honor killings"? Because that's not exactly better.

Was it Audre Lorde who said that you can't dismantle the master's house with the master's tools? Just sayin', women shooting their attackers won't change anything, it'll just make more fodder for Inside Edition.
By all means, if you are responsible and safe, arm yourself. But if you're going ot have a gun you have to be prepared to use it because it's really easy to take it away from you if you're hesitant.

I'm sorry, please correct if I'm wrong- but aren't the majority of women serving time in prison for assault there PRECISELY because they fought back in self-defense of abusive partners and went to jail for it?
As I recall seeing not too long ago, courts don't see women fighting back as self defense, and in the majority of cases, condemn the women to more jail time than their male counter parts in the system.

Why the FUCK would I shoot a man knowing that I'm 5 times more likely to be sent to prison for 20 years for a self-denfesive act, than the perpetrators of crimes such as this one? EXPLAIN THIS.

This is why feminists don't talk about "fighting bullet fire with more bullets"- because women who DO fight back GET PAID BACK with jail time instead of cookies for shooting a rapist.

I just created and ordered a custom bumper sticker that reads, "Women are not Public Property."

Can't wait to plaster that on my car.

i know this is about street harassment, and one horrible terrible example and i dont think its a "right" but i think nothing of walking up and talking or approaching anyone, man or woman, if we're out in public and they are reading a great book or a million other little things, should one refrain from doing this even if respectful and not commenting on physical attributes? Say striking up a conversation with a fellow smoker under an awning during the rain, that kind of stuff. Just seems things overall are getting so bad one cant do that anymore, what a loss, big city or not.

subgrrl8 - Do you have anything to back up those statistics?

"Latoya points out that violence against women is absolutely connected to the fact that men are brought up to think that they have the "right" to talk to and approach women out of nowhere." - Jessica

As I read it, Latoya says that the perceived right to force a woman to stop and answer them is the problem, not the perceived right to talk to or approach them in the first place (this could be debated reasonably). Events such as this may contribute to a woman’s fear when simply approached, but I don’t think an approach or remark without demands made on the woman can be connected to violence in any significant way.

Horrifying.

Now, I'm waiting for the apologists to show up and start blaming the victim.

I'm from the Orlando area. I know exactly where she was shot--I've driven through that intersection several times. This story only makes me even more afraid to drive through a LOT of Orlando alone at night. It's sadly not all that uncommon.

"think that they have the "right" to talk to and approach women out of nowhere."

We can talk to and approach men from out of nowhere, please explain to me why we should not have that right in regards to women.

The real problem is people thinking they can demand a response or that they have the right to resort to violence if they get refused.

spike the cat, the original article notes that the women had come from a night of clubbing. So the victim-blaming can't be far--how much do you want to bet the victims are decried for whatever they wore to the club?

subgrrl8 - Do you have anything to back up those statistics?

I'm not subgrrl8, but I have a citation: Beth Richie's Compelled to Crime. While it's not quantitative, it does examine women in prison and how being female, abused, and violent has affected their lives and their prison sentences. Great book.

Subgrrl8, you are so right.

Women who fight back against their attackers are not applauded or rewarded for their bravery and courage. They're treated more harshly than their abusers!!
Couldn't Keep it to Myself is another great book that addresses this phenomenon.

At the risk of stating the obvious, I'm pretty sure rocket- was being sarcastic.

Second, this is not about people thinking this was okay because they were male. It's because they were thugs.

There are plenty of men out there who think that yelling, throwing things, attempting to run a car off the road, and shooting people are completely insane. However, there is a segment of society that glorifies criminal behavior, that calls women "bitches" and "hos," and that thinks that violence is high-status because it is tough and powerful.

How do we reverse this message? Instead of glorifying it, how do we make it clear that it is the very height of stupidity?

It is so hard to decide how to respond to catcalling.

I deal with catcalls everyday, and I never know how to respond. Usually you can just ignore them, but persistent ones tend to respond best to a very strong rebuttal.

Still, there is always the fear that if I respond at all, I have personally insulted them. When someone honestly believes you to be inferior and subservient, insulting them can be very dangerous.

In my neighborhood the men don't even stop when I make reference to "my old man".

These comments absolutely remind me of the story from a few weeks ago posted here about the young woman who did fight back after being assaulted on a walking trail at her University, only to be further abused by other men that showed up on the scene. (Guess she wasn't "victimy" enough.)--/sarcasm. It depresses me to think there really is no "one answer." Every situation is so different and a true societal overhaul is needed.

I went to the original website that this story was posted on (Racialicious) and was fascinated, alarmed, and instructed by the black women's comments and responses. We really do need to hang together in this--but, I am convinced that black women have a tougher row at this point in time. I truly learned a lot.

Events such as this may contribute to a woman’s fear when simply approached, but I don’t think an approach or remark without demands made on the woman can be connected to violence in any significant way.

Yup.

And, going in a different direction with it, it's pretty easy to imagine the guys in question harassing and shooting other dudes as well, so I kinda feel like the dynamic in play here is less misogyny than it is misanthropy.

Also, I question the degree to which more general awareness about the inappropriateness of catcalling and such would have prevented this, since we already have ample prohibitions against running people off the road and shooting them.

subgrrl8:

"Why the FUCK would I shoot a man knowing that I'm 5 times more likely to be sent to prison for 20 years for a self-denfesive act, than the perpetrators of crimes such as this one? EXPLAIN THIS."

Why would a black person stand up to police, knowing that even though he or she was defending their constitutional rights in the face of corrupt civic leadership and law enforcement that the end goal was worth taking the hit.

I guaran-fucking-tee that if enough of you women would start busting caps in the asses of some of the asses which need caps busted in them, then changes would occur.

If one a few do it then it's "Inside Edition" material, agreed, but if thousands do it it's a revolution.

I'm personally up for a revolution, and I've got no problem with one led by women as long as I get to trim some Bushes.

ooops, someone is knocking at my door. hehe, I hope it's not the Secret Ser.......(disconnected from host)

Rocket,

I believe the issue is that, as a woman who has been cat called, you never know if it will degenerate into such a dangerous situation. Often times, when women complain or take action against cat callers they are considered over reacting. However, in this situation it obviously turned into something life threatening and violent. Until cat calls are taken seriously as harassment, women will not have safe recourse to prevent or prosecute it.

And yes, the laws against shooting someone hasn't stopped them. But their initial disrespect for women, and belief that women should respond to them created the situation that devolved into a shooting

Hello all,

Rocket -

It's the same stem point. The sense of entitlement to a woman, her body, and her actions that give way to this kind of violence. You see this here as well as in certain countries in the middle east. The end idea is that a woman is not an agent and she does not have the right to refuse a male directive.

Noname - Yes, exactly. There is this idea that if a man approaches me on the street I must engage with him or he has the right to insult me, touch me, restrain me, follow me, or worse. You can say hi to whoever you would like. You do not have the right to force them to engage with you and threaten violence if they do not.

@rocket (again) - Not so. I could construct a response, but may I ask your racial and social background first. I wouldn't want to assume.

@JackieKayOh -

Your response is not uncommon. When Wendi and I talk about street harassment, they are experiences completely different than what Carmen has experienced. Women are viewed in different ways and a lot of sexism is racialized - so the things one group experiences isn't exactly what another group does. It also gets a bit tricky because there isn't a consistent anti-harassment message. Some women really do respond to that ignorant mess. So, some guys learn to just keep trying.

What makes people (men, specifically) like this?

Shitty upbringing? Shitty community norms? Neuro/biochemical factors? What?

What's the source and how do we change it?

At least with reference to the abusers v. victims and changing the culture...

Victims have an incentive to protect themselves, even when they come up short (i.e. the story out of University of CT and the young woman who defended herself from the first attacker, only to be assaulted by a group once she'd escaped).

Would-be or actual rapists, shitty families raising toxic kids, nasty peer norms among adolescents, or any other (not-so-easily identified) sources of a violent mentality--what incentives do THEY have for short OR long-term change?

xxhelenaxx, it's called "patriarchy."

eh the only stats ive seen on why the majority of women are in jail has mostly to do with drugs combined with a spike in violent crime in the last decade. As far as why people do the horrible things you mentioned xxhelenaxx, well in no way am i trying to excuse or defend it but I think the patriarchy is one reason but also base human nature for lack of a better term. We've all seen the studies on experiments run when the subject thinks there are no consequences or that the consequences are worth the act. What do a lot of people do in those circumstances? In addition to that I think the glorification of violence in a lot of its forms adds significantly into the problem and could go under the phtm theme but that really doesnt get examined enough in a way that can reach the majority of society. I do wonder if the patriarchy is really a construct we can ever be rid of, it enables the strong, of either gender, to take advantage of the weak, i dont see that going away.

gah that should be phmt and sex

It's the same stem point. The sense of entitlement to a woman, her body, and her actions that give way to this kind of violence. You see this here as well as in certain countries in the middle east. The end idea is that a woman is not an agent and she does not have the right to refuse a male directive.

My problem with that reasoning is that it doesn't take into account the really obvious parallels between this incident and others that have been directed against male victims. The harass-provoke-confront-hurt/kill pattern of violence is not something that men deploy exclusively against women--it's pretty much a textbook definition of how young shitheads behave in groups. So yeah, you can say that it's an inevitable consequence of widespread male presumptions about their dominion over women, but what, then, is the explanation for essentially identical incidents of male-on-male violence? I'm not defending it in any way, I just feel like the population of dudes who shoot random women in the street has a lot more in common with the population of dudes that shoots random guys in the street than it does with the (much larger) population of dudes who might whistle at a woman, or, you know, per Jessica's definition, the population of dudes who would dare presume that they're allowed to talk to women in public. I mean, obviously there's a misogynist element to it, but I think the arch cause here is really horrible attitudes in general about power and masculinity and social hierarchy; this includes but is not exclusively limited to poor attitudes toward women.

@rocket (again) - Not so. I could construct a response, but may I ask your racial and social background first. I wouldn't want to assume.

Wouldn't want to assume? That's funny--I rather suspect you'll do a lot of assuming based on my answers, but whatever. I'm white, I'm a guy, clearly I'm speaking from a position of privilege and therefore cannot participate in this discussion unless I agree in advance with your conclusions. Etc.

The people who did this are pathetic, they belong in jail (not to punish them, but to make damn sure they don't do this again, thank you Justice Now).

BUT - making this kind of thing a statement about men in general makes just about as much sense as using the behavior of a Mary Kay Letourneau or Debra Jean LaFave to make the case that all female middle school teachers want to molest their male students.

The world would be a very different if even a significant minority of men acted like this.

violence against women is absolutely connected to the fact that men are brought up to think that they have the "right" to talk to and approach women out of nowhere.

Which explains why it's so rare in cultures that strictly regulate public interaction between the sexes.

I'll take this comment as sarcasm, although its underlying point isn't clear.

Here's why your counterexample is off-point: Men from "cultures that strictly regulate ..." *do* in fact nevertheless often seem to feel they have the right to approach and make demands of women, *if* they deem the women to be soliciting male attention (even if not particularly theirs). The issue is whether they have been raised to believe that as males they have special entitlements regarding women. The issue is *not* whether one's family chaperones one's dates or arranges one's marriage.

These kinds of incidents are so common, though. This isn't news. Isn't that sad? This atrocity isn't news. That's were we're at. Perhaps I am too pessimistic...or maybe just jaded. My sister responded as well. She threw leftover birthday cake from a party she had just left. It landed on the floor. His response was to stab her - and this was in '83. Yeah, I'll go with jaded. Sometimes, I fantasize about living in a society where women are safe with absolute certainty - and the only way it's possible is to induce as much fear upon men as it is induced unto us. It's a terrible viewpoint, I know, but it is what it is.

Lear, I don't understand your last sentence. Acted like what? Like those jerks? Are you saying the majority of men don't behave this way? A - don't presume to know what life is like for every woman. It makes you sound as if every experience of street harassment, described several times on several threads, on several feminist sites, don't count because you say so. Stop.
You are right in a way. Of course not every man behaves like those guys, taunts women, tears down their spirits, frightens them - but the thing is, those men are the outspoken ones. They make it a point to make themselves known and to be loud and to speak for all men. They make it a point to be remembered.

I honestly don't know what to say. The mind reels at the instances of inhumanity that some males are capable of. I really hope these poor excuses for men get hard jail time and have to pay for all of Beaubrun's medical bills. To say the absolute least.
Then I hope that they get to clean latrines with a toothbrush for a few good years.

"I guaran-fucking-tee that if enough of you women would start busting caps in the asses of some of the asses which need caps busted in them, then changes would occur."

Yet in some circles many, many males still "bust caps in each other's asses" despite a high likelihood of retaliation.

(I'm pulling out my evolutionary psychology card out on this one. But even 50 cent will tell you why.)

Furthermore, we don't need more people on the street with that attitude as it has fostered an environment where cops feel obliged to pump 50 bullets into unarmed people.

I believe others have expressed as much revulsion as I am capable of.

"Sometimes, I fantasize about living in a society where women are safe with absolute certainty - and the only way it's possible is to induce as much fear upon men as it is induced unto us. "

My fantasy is a society where people act decently to each other (e.g., like at a 12 step meeting), not fear each other. Why would a society where e.g., packs of armed women went around attacking random men of unknown rapist or DV status be any better? I do see justice in women shooting attempted rapists or aggressors who ignore restraining orders, however. I would love to perform jury duty in such a case.

"Furthermore, we don't need more people on the street with that attitude as it has fostered an environment where cops feel obliged to pump 50 bullets into unarmed people."

I have never understood police justification for such behavior. "Shoot until the suspect is neutralized," fine. It is not necessary for every single available officer to do so, nor to continue after the suspect is already lying on the ground, as in the Amadou Diallo case. A grand jury saw fit to indict the officers. The best I would expect at trial is a hung jury, not an acquittal. I'd like to be there as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

"'Neither the NYPD nor the city admitted any wrongdoing, but they expressed with deep 'regret what occurred and extend [our] sympathies to the Diallo family.'"

. . . . .

"Mayor Michael Bloomberg said: 'It's just not a substitute for a human life. But it was a chapter out of our history and I'm just glad that we were able to come to a financial settlement with the family and let's get on with it.'"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Gair [attorney for Diallo's family]

Let's get on with life, says a wealthy representative of the oppressors. That is so fucked.

Oh, you meant the Sean Bell case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Bell_Shooting_Incident

"Other accounts of the incident conflict with that of the undercover officers. According to Guzman and lawyer Michael Hardy, the detectives never identified themselves while they approached the vehicle with drawn weapons.[10] Another source also told New York Daily News that the officers failed to warn Bell before opening fire and started firing immediately upon leaving their vehicles.[16]"

Fucked up. This is why I respect police for the job they are expected to do, but do not like police. "Thankfully" in my community, police corruption seems to be limited to supervisory and top administrative ranks.

Sorry, but men DO have the right to talk women they do not know. We have a 1st amendment in this country. Just because you as an individual may find unfamiliar men talking to you annoying and bothersome does not make it a crime.

I eat out at least once a day and not a week pasts that I don't get a hand on the shoulder or arm, by a female waitress, hostess, or owner. This is all physical contact, not even speech.

On the extreme, I also have had my ass pinched, had "show us your cock" yelled at me on Vegas Blvd. and had extremely personal questions thrown at me about my anatomy by some female doormates.

Sometimes I was pissed off.
Sometimes I was turned on.
Sometimes I gave out my number.
Somtimes I was just annoyed.
Can't say I was ever threated, but that is beside the point.

It's a lie that most people who talk to unfamiliar members of the opposite sex want to shoot them, it's more likely that they just wanna give you their candy.

Anbody recall how much violence was caught on tape in "War Zone"?

Can't say I was ever threated, but that is beside the point.

Consider yourself lucky to be blessed with male privilege.

IQ fifty-nine, your knee-jerk defense of the indefensible is getting really tiresome. People on this board... WOMEN on this board are reacting to the very real fright and frustration they feel at being harassed on an almost daily basis by people who are, for the most part, larger and possibly stronger than they are. You have never experienced that, and to compare your anecdotes to anything discussed on this thread is obscene.

Also, read the bill of rights. It doesn't say what you think it says.

Yet another article about the horrible way men behave towards women. I can't express my own disgust in strong enough terms.

1st, violence against anyone, by anyone is a crime - there is absolutely no excuse for it, unless you are defending yourself from an attack.

2nd, violence by men against women is especially heinous, and this article describes the dregs of society.

3rd, the only way this kind of incident will ever change is for there to be a sea-change in how our society is structured. Tearing apart the patriarchal foundation the is at the base of all our societal institutions, beginning with how we view the gender roles in marriage/partnerships, workplace, politics, and religion.

Only when women are perceived as not only equal but better in many ways, only when men acknowledge their intrinsic fear of loss of control and the desperate measures they take to remain "in control" and there is a kind of power exchange, a reversal of the gender roles in many areas, will our society progress to a better, more peaceful and progressive one.

I sincerely hope these thugs are arrested, prosecuted and convicted and punished to the extent possible, and that more public awareness is the result.

david

No, no, no, "men" in general, aren't brought up to think that way. Holy shit! If that were the case, this sort of thing would be happening on every street corner every day, and it's not. The problem is that we need to involve the VAST MAJORITY of men who are repulsed by this stuff to become more active, not to shame the good men. And by the way, innocent men are far more likely to be killed and otherwise victimized on the street by the bad men than women.

Ah yes. A familiar conversation in the violence-against-women threads: Some men hurt women, but don't forget that men actually hurt more men.

You'd think we'd be allies here. But the problem is that when it's a convenient boogie man, like this bunch of thugs, then everybody's like, "Oh, yes, violence is unacceptable. Yes, we must do something. No excuses."

But when that violence is perpetrated by a college boyfriend, a fellow soldier, or men in a positions of power, then all of the sudden, we women are left holding the bag of victimhood and societal hatred.

Tiresome.

rocket--

I don't see men who aggress against other men as being the same as men who aggress (and BENEFIT from the aggression of others) against women. Here's why. When men aggress against eachother, generally, it is to assert dominance, or to test the other guy, and see if he can be dominated. I'm not saying that men think this, but if you look at the power dynamic in a group of men, even friends, that is exactly what is going on. The person who gets touched, hit, mocked, publicly embarrassed more--is lower status. This isn't the only way for men to assert dominance in same-sex groups, but it is a way. With male-female aggression, many times the aggressor does not see the person he dominates as a potential equal. Why do I think that? Because when you look at the disrespect involved in catcalling, if that same male were to come up with something equally disrespectful to a male, he would be asserting extreme dominance and would know that getting in a fight was a risk of making that move. But men who say these things to women are not expecting to get into a fight, and, as just about every woman on this board is telling you, if we respond aggressively (in other words, if we reject the show of dominance) a hefty percent of the time the male escalates.

So when men assert dominance over other men, a lot of times it is very personal, and they know they are taking a risk that they will lose. When men assert dominance over women, they do not expect an aggressive response, and they don't even have to engage in an aggressive response to trigger fear/control, because SO MANY OTHER MEN DO IT FOR THEM.

Get it? If a man catcalls a woman, he is doing it against the backdrop of men who escalate their catcalling into physical violence if the woman doesn't TAKE IT and pretend to LIKE IT. In most male-male social interactions, the other guy backing down is usually enough to prevent the fight. You don't have to pretend to like it.

And from our perspective, since so many men engage in the initial aggression (the catcalling) and since they don't where magical signs telling us how to react to BE SAFE, it is all a piece.

Ah yes. A familiar conversation in the violence-against-women threads: Some men hurt women, but don't forget that men actually hurt more men.

You'd think we'd be allies here.

Well, we might be. The problem is, your reading of the situation is something like "sexist men tried to kill her, all men are sexist, ergo all men are killers." And--go figure--that's not exactly a sentiment we can get behind.

rocket- and the other men on this board: Here's a little tip for you:

If a woman is talking about certain men (i.e. rapists, abusers, harassers, general sexist assholes) and you are not one of these men, then she is not talking about you. No reason to get offended.

If you are offened by the way we talk about sexist, asshole men, like the ones in this post, then that is your problem not ours. That is something for you to examine and deal with, don't expect us to stop voicing ourselves just to make you feel better.

We are allowed to have our experiences, thoughts, and ideas without worry about what the "poor menz" might think. We are not here to coddle you and make you feel better about feminism or feel better about being a man.

To sum up: It's not about you!

Why do I think that? Because when you look at the disrespect involved in catcalling, if that same male were to come up with something equally disrespectful to a male, he would be asserting extreme dominance and would know that getting in a fight was a risk of making that move.

Right. But you're missing the key point, which is that in most cases, he's not going to try that with somebody who might actually win the fight. To the extent that your gender makes you seem less powerful to him, and thus an easier victim for harassment, you're right, it's sexism. But that he thinks it acceptable/admirable to harass people less powerful than him in the first place is something a little bigger than that.

And, again, I'm not condoning the harassment at all. I'm just saying that you're missing a lot of the picture by looking at it purely as an issue of sexism.

ShelbyWoo wrote: rocket- and the other men on this board: Here's a little tip for you: It's not about you!

Right on.

david

rocket wrote: I'm just saying that you're missing a lot of the picture by looking at it purely as an issue of sexism.

But, why regarding a story of blatant sexism do you wish to wash it out it into a "bigger picture"?

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

david

Unfortunately, the catcalls like what these guys did to this poor girl happens a lot here in Miami and it's really sickening at times. I hate the fact that men view women as if we're something to be conquered. It makes me wonder if they really think that shouting, "HEY BABY, LOOKIN' GOOD!" will incite a response from a girl, or if it's just something they do to look good in front of the boys.

Actually that reminds me of a Sex & the City episode where Miranda was going through something similar and when she turned around and said, "alright, you want me, YOU WANT ME?! LET'S GO! RIGHT NOW! LET'S HAVE SEX!" The gus suddenly was like, "Gee lady, what's wrong with you I have a wife." Now, I've never tried this, but it'd make for an interesting sociological experiment.

Actually that reminds me of a Sex & the City episode where Miranda was going through something similar and when she turned around and said, "alright, you want me, YOU WANT ME?! LET'S GO! RIGHT NOW! LET'S HAVE SEX!" The gus suddenly was like, "Gee lady, what's wrong with you I have a wife." Now, I've never tried this, but it'd make for an interesting sociological experiment."

--Cubanfeminista

I always think of that episode.

tinfoil, no offense, that was not a helpful answer (unless you INTENDED to sound snide). You'd have to be more specific.

My point is this...victims have a stake in protecting themselves from assault...who or whatever is specifically raising these assholes or making them think behavior like this is okay.

And as for those who (legitimately) want to bring up violence against both genders, look up the book, "Self-Made Male." The author was on the Colbert Report and the book was on the bestseller list when it was published. She's an attractive woman (and a lesbian...she made that point in the book, I guess it gave her additional interest in her study) who pretended to be a man for a while. Had full make-up, a fake penis, the works...got a job as a man, bowled with co-workers, etc. etc.

One important point in the book--she didn't get catcalled. (Or mugged).

The point is--even assholes who may not be ready to mug/batter some poor guy (or girl) are comfortable following a woman alone on a dark street and screaming obscenities after her.

There are some horrific comments following articles on cat-calling (not necessarily here, but in mainstream news sources) that say "females [that sounds so f*cking uneducated...like women are animals on a nature documentary] who dress like whores/sluts" deserve it, that "uppity bitches" are just being snotty when a guy is trying to complement them, and (the worst line of comments) that women will be angry when they're NOT hissed at, cussed at, groped, etc. etc.

It floors me and saddens me that some people are so fucking DUMB. How hard is it to figure out? Are so many people really THAT stupid and sheltered? They think all "cat-calling" happens in broad daylight and is harmless, non-profane flattery?

Guys like that should experience being "cat-called" and sexually harassed on the street (either at night when they're alone, or humiliated for the benefit of an audience) by some burly thug or anyone else who could BEAT THEM UP. That's why cat-calling is no small matter.

It's not that people (including men) on this board are lost to it....but those who possess seemingly basic empathy on this issue feel like the minority.

Rocket (and the other men on this board who are having a problem grasping the concept) -

1. I asked you who you were because I assumed you were a female. Now, this is even more fun.

2. When I get into these kinds of conversations with men, I notice that men tend to normalize their own behavior. They don't do things like this. Their friends don't do things like this. Therefore, these examples are not the norm and do not happen. Wrong!

Just because you would like to acknowledge a woman on the street and you know to leave her alone if she doesn't want to speak to you, it doesn't mean that other men do.

I also asked because I have noticed a difference in experiences that tends to break down by race. If you click the link Jessica provided, you will hear the different stories from African-American women who have been in the same situation or worse. And many of us have personally experienced a catcall escalate into violence - I've been grabbed, pulled, followed, pushed, called a bougie bitch, and threatened with violence because I chose not to respond when a man approached me. One guy was so irate, he started beating on the windows of the bus I was on (because he couldn't reach my seat) until the bus driver put him off. Last week, as I was rushing to get lunch and get back to the office, a guy tried to stop me in my tracks to speak to him. I said "hi" curtly and continued on my way. Do you know this guy got the most digusted look on his face and decided to wait outside of Cosi until I came back out to ask me why I didn't want to talk to him?

That's what I am talking about - the entitlement. You talk to a stranger and you run the risk of them not wanting to talk to you. You do not have the right to act like a stalker. You do not have the right to physically restrain me. You do not have the right to try to intimidate me with the threat of physical force.

Men like to say "oh, that's a minority" but really, think about it. Most of the men I meet and date do not approach me on the street. Of the men who do approach me on the street, I may have one who is respectful and approaches me in a way where I do not feel threatened, one who approaches me disrespectfully but allows me to continue on without dealing with him, and one who escalates the situation because he feels like it.

For my safety, all men approaching me on the street are treated like a possible threat until proven otherwise.

Women do not approach men with the same numbers or tactics or frequency that men approach women. Some men can remember rude behavior by women because it happens so rarely. But with women, I am hit on so frequently in the 120 minutes I spend commuting each day, it doesn't even register with me to tell my boyfriend what's going on unless something violent happens. It's something women live with. Can you imagine trying to go about your day with a constant wave of interruptions? Can you imagine that you know every so often, one of these interruptions will become violent?

How would you approach your daily life?

rocket-

Here's the problem I have with your approach. First, you assume we are dumb, and don't understand other power dynamics at play. And yet you admit that assumptions about strength/fighting back are tied up with gender--so, wait, how are we wrong by looking at this through a gender lens? The whole idea of patriarchy is not "all the men v. all the women" it is that power is expressed in a gendered manner, with masculinity favored over femininity, and males generally valued over females, but it also has to do with how being at the top of the heap also has to do with being appropriately gendered. Second, right now, we happen to be talking about sexism, which as David, cubanfeminista and xxhelanaxx all point out, is totally fine. Second, you barge into the discussion, and it isn't just that you don't agree with the women on the board, it is that you completely disregard their lived experiences and say, this isn't about sexism, it is about gender-free power dynamics! So you aren't opening up the discussion, or expanding it by pointing out that there are parallels between males who aggress males and males who aggress females, you are telling people that they are WRONG and this isn't about sexism.

But as Helena points out, women get harassed (with the undercurrent of violence) *MORE* than men do. So there is a gender element. Plus there is an element regarding sexuality/attractiveness/sexual identity which is almost always ABSENT when males aggress other males. So if you try to analyze this story without considering sexism and gender, you miss a whole big honkin' part of the picture. Plus, you are disrespectful to people who have explained how it personally affects them.

That is why people are getting irked at you. Not because you are offering an alternative explanation, but because you are both being disrespectful and refusing to acknowledge that a sexism/gender lens is a valid way to interpret this story, even if it doesn't tell the whole story.

"harassed on an almost daily basis by people who are, for the most part, larger and possibly stronger than they are. You have never experienced that"

Sgzax:

What zip code did you grow up in? You do realize that you just described the childhood of millions of Americans including me, right? I can give you some great anecdotes about the 4th amendment if you'd like.

"What zip code did you grow up in? You do realize that you just described the childhood of millions of Americans including me, right?"

I'm pretty sure she's referring to present day, as an adult, and dealing with sexual harassment. Can you still say the same?

"What zip code did you grow up in? You do realize that you just described the childhood of millions of Americans including me, right?"

I'm pretty sure she's referring to present day, as an adult, and dealing with sexual harassment. Can you still say the same?

Why the FUCK would I shoot a man knowing that I'm 5 times more likely to be sent to prison for 20 years for a self-denfesive act, than the perpetrators of crimes such as this one? EXPLAIN THIS.

Um, because you'd rather risk spending 20 years in prison than risk being killed? Is this really so off the wall?

Also, who actually thinks about these things when they're happening to her? If some dude started assaulting me, I wouldn't passively cower while weighing how tough it might be to weather criminal charges and a prison stint; I'd instinctively fight back, using a gun if necessary and available.

Latoya-
Hell yes! And well said.

@everybodyever -

"If" is one of those words you use if you haven't been in that situation yet.

I am tall, large, strong. Solidly built woman. I take kickboxing, I hit hard, and I generally wear flats.

But I am ALWAYS thinking my way out of situations that some guy tried to put me in.

Generally speaking:

1. If a guy tries to restrain me, he is generally over 200 lbs. If I fight him, I must win. Have you ever fought someone and lost? I have. It's not a good situation. I am not throwing a punch unless I am sure I can take him.

2. If a guy is in a group, physical fighting is not the way to go. I've been jumped by a group of guys before. I only started out fighting one. I was winning, so one of his boys jumped into help.

3. If I am in a public area, I need to try to get to safety. I posted on my website about a woman on the metro who was harassed and then assaulted by a large man. He pinned her against the window and wouldn't let her go. No one helped. Finally, a teenage girl helped her break free and she managed to escape. (And when she reported her crime, metro didn't take it seriously - it happens too often.)

So not only do I have to be in a place with people, I have to be in a place where people are willing to risk their safety to help me.

4. Generally, the best way out is to talk your way out while you head to safety. And that shit sucks because this person has no right to do this, but now you have to be nice and appease him for fear of escalating the situation.

5. A gun/mace really depends. The question is not, do you have a gun. The question is how long do you have to get to it, how confident are you with pulling the trigger and ending someone's life, and how close is your attacker to you - guns and mace have been taken from women who tried to use them, you know. So again, it comes down to strength, speed, and agility, as well as having a good eye.

A lot of people rely on a gun to "scare" men into leaving them alone. But people under the influence aren't easily scared. Remember that.

And I forget where that post is about the girl who fought back to only have other guys join in, please keep in mind that once you use force, you are no longer a helpless victim. You may not be able to get law enforcement to help you. You may not be able to get other bystanders to help you.

Again, I've coped with this since I was twelve. If it hasn't happened to you, my friend, count yourself lucky.

Great, great comments, Latoya.

It's easy for people to say "Just fight back!" when they have the PRIVILEGE of being given the benefit of the doubt by law enforcement, thanks to their race and/or sex.

What Latoya said. Every bit of it. Thank you so much for your post, btw, I thought I had it bad with street harassment, but man. The guys I've faced are mostly junior league, compared to what you and the commenters had faced. (Well, except for the guy who threatened to kill me.)

And to add on--everybodyever--even if you think you're the fighting back type, you don't know. I'm ex-military, with both military unarmed combat training and martial arts training that I did on my own time. I have no problems being aggressive, physically, psychologically, verbally. But that doesn't mean I can't freeze. Once, at a friend's birthday party, a guy I had just met 20 minutes ago put his hands around my neck and squeezed. The first time, I did nothing, just leaned slightly away (we're talking milimeters, not even centimeters) and made a lame joke after he let go. The second time, I threw a block. And yet I did nothing to get anyone else's attention even though I was in a room full of my friends, who knew me better than him and who were mostly women. Then he groped my leg. That was when I removed his hand from my body, verbally chastised him, and left. Alone. And this is a guy I could have easily taken in a fight!

My aunt's good friend was a blackbelt who was abducted by an unarmed man. She froze too. Fortunately, the police officer who found her bound in duct tape and in the process of being raped didn't believe her attacker that it was consensual kinky sex.

Latoya thank you for the excellent posts.

SarahMC said. It's easy for people to say "Just fight back!" when they have the PRIVILEGE of being given the benefit of the doubt by law enforcement, thanks to their race and/or sex.

So true! Plus I wonder how many women have taken it to heart about fighting back, even in their personal lives, only to become fodder for MRAs as proof that women are just as violent as men and are motivated to commit violence for the same reasons as men.

Here's another true story from my life -

One time a guy I didn't know came up to me
and asked me for a quarter.

He then got physicaly violent with me,
broke my nose attempting to rob me
before getting himself arrested ...

These days people ask me for spare change all the time.
Am I railing against all those terrible spare changers?

Catcalling - I think it's crude.
It's sexual harrasment in many cases.
I don't do it & I never have done it.

I also don't put it in the same league as shooting somebody,
and I definitely do not conflate the two.

""Just fight back!" when they have the PRIVILEGE of being given the benefit of the doubt by law enforcement, thanks to their race and/or sex."

You mean like those duke lacrosse players were given the benefit of the doubt? Or how most men are given the benefit of the doubt in child custody cases?

Latoye no offense but unless you have numbers to back yourself up you cannot possibly know that they are the majority (maybe they are where you live who knows).

"and I definitely do not conflate the two."

OK, so what are you implying exactly? That "standard" catcalling is just fine and does not put a woman in harms way?

Yes, "standard" catcalling is not the same as getting shot. But you have completely missed the point of the post and of the comment thread.

Are the Duke men in jail or prison? Were they convicted of any crimes? Law enforcement gave them the benefit of the doubt all right. They were not even prosecuted for anything.
The media =/= law enforcement.
What does law enforcement have to do with custody standards? Do not even bring that issue into this because it's a red herring (as is Duke, but still).

You're a textbook MRA. You have not absorbed anyting that's been put forth in the post or in comments. Stop embarassing yourself.

"You mean like those duke lacrosse players were given the benefit of the doubt? Or how most men are given the benefit of the doubt in child custody cases?"

And these references are necessary in this conversation because? Street harassment and attacks get overlooked and dismissed by law enforcement all the damn time, whether people want to believe it or not. Here's a report in regards to harassment in the NYC subway, which is a major place of occurrence, where one would think there is a tighter security system in check, but obviously it's not the case. So imagine how worse the situation is outside of it.

Yes those comparisons were made rather hastily and I was just on my way to apologise for them (I wish I could delete them).

Oh and what the hell is an MRA anyway?

Father Time - MRA is a men's rights activist.

And please go back and reread my post before you get up in arms. The majority of men behave normally - that's why they find it so difficult to understand that it's the men who don't behave normally who cause all the problems.

And as I said, there are three different scenarios in a street harassment situation. Some guys are nice a respectful. They are the minority. Some guys are disrespectful and unmotivated. Some guys are disrespectful and motivated. Unfortunately, no one is wearing a "violent predator" sign when they walk up to you.

And Lear, do me a favor - use a more accurate analogy.

One spare changer is not a big deal. Six a day, every day, and one punches you in the nose about once a month, I bet you'd be singing a different tune.

Latoya:

One spare changer is not a big deal. Six a day, every day, and one punches you in the nose about once a month, I bet you'd be singing a different tune.

You're saying a catcaller shoots you with a handgun about once a month - wow, you've got it rough.

How do you manage to survive with all those bullet holes in you? And why hasn't this made the news also?

Lear -

Physical violence Lear.

Keep up.

No one is saying people get shot daily. But physical violence happens way too frequently. This is a most extreme example of the other cases we have covered and posted on at What About Our Daughters, Racialicious, Feministing, and Feministe. It's a part of the same pattern.

Ismone:
“And to add on--everybodyever--even if you think you're the fighting back type, you don't know. I'm ex-military, with both military unarmed combat training and martial arts training that I did on my own time. I have no problems being aggressive, physically, psychologically, verbally. But that doesn't mean I can't freeze.�

Latoya Peterson:
“ If a guy tries to restrain me, he is generally over 200 lbs. If I fight him, I must win. Have you ever fought someone and lost? I have. It's not a good situation. I am not throwing a punch unless I am sure I can take him.�
“ If a guy is in a group, physical fighting is not the way to go. I've been jumped by a group of guys before. I only started out fighting one. I was winning, so one of his boys jumped into help�

I am not familiar with the aforementioned attitudes of police in the US, but I very much agree with what both Ismone and Latoya have said. Being descended from a very long line of martial families/dojos and being involved in various combat programs, one thing I’ve learned is: never fight until you really, really have to (well, of course they always say it more eloquently, but that’s the gist of it).

There are plenty of real stories on women (and men) who have black belts, military training and freeze up when confronted by an assailant. No matter how good one’s training is, it is just training. Though it may be nice to think one can take on a group of attackers now that one has achieved a black belt/military training, etc….the reality of the matter is, even people who have field experience will not win a fight every single time and could very likely die while fending off assailants. I wish this was the movies and harassed women (or men) could easily slice and dice every assailant they meet, however, more than likely, one will find one’s face grounded into cement or pavement and one’s nose broken and battered and worse, and that in less than a few seconds.

In regard to Latoya’s saying she wont take on someone unless she knows she can win, this is even more important when you realize that even an unassuming person can kill or break bones if sufficiently filled with adrenaline. Real stories are out there of police officers getting maimed and wounded by one lone person jacked up on adrenaline.

I totally disagree with the cries that women should use violence to fend off their harassers. It is only acceptable if the harassers plan on physically harming their targets. If they are merely catcalling or playing around, no matter how vile or misogynistic they are, responding with violence is too dangerous and not feasible. The first instinct is always to flee…even animals know this, that is why the leopard shows its spots, and the cobra shows its hood…why would humans do something that goes against their very basic instinct?

Jessica, you say that

Latoya points out that violence against women is absolutely connected to the fact that men are brought up to think that they have the "right" to talk to and approach women out of nowhere.

This severely mischaracterizes what Latoya said. Which was:

When a man feels like he has the “right� to force me to stop and speak to him, it is a whole other game entirely.

Latoya is very clearly talking about a man forcing a woman to stop and speak to him (which implies violence or the threat of violence); You are talking about a man talking to and approaching women.

While talking to a woman on the street can be accompanied by a threat of violence, your language clearly implies that a threat of violence is intrinsic to the act of talking to a woman on the street.

What you imply is that men don't have the right to talk to you on the street. That's belittling of men and mischaracterizing of Latoya's statement (and in my opinion a totally indefensible position if we value civil rights and freedom of speech).

I can only assume that you were being sloppy with your/Latoya's language, but your stated/ implied position really requires clarification, if for no other reason that you are clearly attributing things to Latoya that she did not say.

Uplift and others have brought up the free speech issue with regards to street harassment.

If you read what Jessica said in the current context I don't think most readers took "rights" (which she did put quotes around in her original post) to mean those which are granted by the US Constitution.

And even if you do think it's a 1st amendment issue, communities make distinctions all the time with regards to what constitutes acceptable behavior in public spaces. Soliciting, bullying, panhandling and even loitering are also activities that can be considered enablers of free speech yet are activities that many communities restrict.

Whether or not you agree with restricting such activities, I think most people at least appreciate the reasoning behind the restrictions.

Furthermore the 1st amendment does not preclude individual citizens from taking certain actions against other citizens. As far as I've seen no one here has suggested the government outlaw street harassment.

But citizens are well within the frame of the constitution as individuals to look for ways to rectify the situation and to hold other individuals accountable, if necessary.

I personally want a civil and safe society where all people can feel comfortable approaching strangers AND where all people are perfectly comfortable to respond or to decline.

But that's not what we have and I'm not sure how to get there.

Heh heh...you know the first time I saw "MRA" I automatically thought "Male Rape Apologist," and I still like that better.

Dear God, I can't say how many arguments I've had with some of my male friends about this.

First I have the friends who don't catcall, think it's disgusting, but don't believe that it happens to me and other women as often as it really does.
Then I have the guy friends who catcall all the time, and tell me I should take it as a compliment "cause it just means the guy thinks I'm cute". I try to explain to them that very few women take it as a compliment, including myself, and then I get the whole "lighten up!" thing.

Also, I can honestly say that I have been approached on the street in a respectful way, and have even given my number to a guy in that situation. If a guy thinks I'm cute and actually wants to get to know me, it's not hard to approach me without being threatening (it can still be annoying though, particularly if I'm in the middle of something).
Harassment is not something you do on accident. and I'm sick of assholes trying to defend it, or tell me it's no big deal. I've been followed, I've been threatened, and I'm so fucking sick of idiots telling me to get over it.

spike the cat raises a valid point - thanks! I also was not arguing that harassment ought to be ok - I don't think spike was accusing me of that, but I just want to be clear.

I'm more interested in the word "talk" than the word "right" - my point was that the phrase

the "right" to talk to and approach women out of nowhere

is overbroad.

If there is an actual problem with "talking" to or "approaching" women it can only be because Jessica is assuming that "talk" and "approach" have implications beyond their dictionary meanings. This confuses the discussion in a not-useful way. If what Jessica means is "talk aggressively" or "approach in a way which suggests or threatens violence", then she ought to say so; in absence of these clarifications, though, her phrasing is so overbroad as to be confusing as to her actual meaning.

Or - it's possible - it's just me. Thanks.

It is odd to read so many (I guess) men defend cat-calling. Is it really so hard for you guys to *not* do this?

And to use a "free speech" argument is like saying that the Constitution protects rude and insulting speech. Yeh, well, sure - but do you really want to spend your life being rude and insulting all the while cloaking yourself in the Constitution?

For me, this is like Internet stalking - behavior which can be abusive, but usually amounts to pathetic immature behavior by lonely guys. although, contrary to Internet stalking, a woman subjected to cat-calling can be physically threatened and possibly hurt.

so of course women resent being subjected to it. Why does this surprise anyone?

And to add insult to injury, the media seems to portray this as something women enjoy as if it is some sort of compliment.

Sheesh.

david

Amazing. A post on a feminist website about a young woman getting shot after refusing to be harassed and most of the comments are all "oh noes, what about the menz!!1!1!!" Just fucking amazing.

Once again, men:
If you are not harassing women, then THIS ISN'T ABOUT YOU!!! Stop trying to derail the thread with this bullshit about you having the "right" to approach/talk women. THIS ISN'T ABOUT YOU!

This is about women being harassed in public places. This is about how, when women try to stand up for themselves, they are often met with violent behavior. Yes, we talk about men. That is because an overwhelming majority of this type harassment is committed by men (same with sexual assault and rape). If you don't like those facts, then fucking do something about them or find a different blog. Trying to stop women from voicing themselves about it is not an answer to the problem.

I think feminist blog's need their own Godwin's Law.

Godwin's Law for Feminist Websites = "As a feminist blog's comments grow longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Duke rape case approaches one."

OK--I know this isn't directly related, but since we've all been making suppositions about what would happen when men are subjected to grunting, inane, and strange calls (and outbursts,) you can check this out:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,359623,00.html

The answer is : VIOLENCE! Who knew?

And, yes, please forgive me for linking you to the Fox. ;)

On a different, and more positive note, for an ethics class today, I had to read up on MLK's "Letter from Birmingham Jail," and I gotta tell you--it is good medicine after reading through some of these frustrating comments.

It is here that he wrote, "No one is free while others are oppressed."

*Wistful sigh*

I'm transitioning male to female, and it's an eye-opening experience. I can't really think of a way to communicate to a guy what it's like to feel that threat just walking around. I know most guys aren't the problem, but I also know that I have to be on my guard in a way that I never did when I presented male. And I know that natal women have this drilled into their heads; if not by older women, then by the violence that they experience. I never understood the catcalling when I was out in boy-mode, and I get it less now. This just freaks me out, and I feel so sad for the girl.

This is one main reason I do not like to go out. As I walk around the city or just sit there, waiting for someone to pick me up, there’s always that constant whistle or shouts of perversion. Not only do I fear that they might kill me, but I mainly fear that they will abuse me, violate me, or raped me and leave me to suffer.
This shouldn’t have even happened. Those men should know better and think before they act with such stupidity. Why don’t they ever see a woman as they see their mother, sister, cousin, friend, etc.? Or is this the same way they treat the ones they care for? Because if it is, they should be held in a mental institution, where they can do no harm to others.
I hope you do get better, Mildred Beaubrun!!!

This is one main reason I do not like to go out. As I walk around the city or just sit there, waiting for someone to pick me up, there’s always that constant whistle or shouts of perversion. Not only do I fear that they might kill me, but I mainly fear that they will abuse me, violate me, or raped me and leave me to suffer.
This shouldn’t have even happened. Those men should know better and think before they act with such stupidity. Why don’t they ever see a woman as they see their mother, sister, cousin, friend, etc.? Or is this the same way they treat the ones they care for? Because if it is, they should be held in a mental institution, where they can do no harm to others.
I hope you do get better, Mildred Beaubrun!!!