The responses to the recent Pennsylvania shooting speaks volumes about how we view (or ignore) misogyny.
In the aftermath of George Sodini's horrific crime, I took some solace in the fact that the media was covering the crime as one targeted towards women. (Something they failed to do several years ago when similar shootings occurred.) And this weekend, I was even more heartened - and not at all surprised - to see Bob Herbert of The New York Times link the shooting to our culture's hatred of women:
We have become so accustomed to living in a society saturated with misogyny that the barbaric treatment of women and girls has come to be more or less expected.We profess to being shocked at one or another of these outlandish crimes, but the shock wears off quickly in an environment in which the rape, murder and humiliation of females is not only a staple of the news, but an important cornerstone of the nation's entertainment.
Yet despite the links being made in the mainstream media, and the numerous bloggers and reporters who have shown that Sodini had ties to the "pick up artist" community and probably would have fit in well with the "Nice Guy" sect as well - some people are aghast that anyone would link Sodini's crime to a larger culture of misogyny.
Take, for example (and this is just one of many), conservative anti-feminist blogger Cassy Fiano - who after a roundup of feminist blogger responses to the shooting, writes:
...To say that it is a "culture-wide problem" because America is apparently just still so misogynistic is ridiculous and wrong. And feminists know that. Most men do not harbor secret fantasies of forcing women to have sex with them whether they want to or not, nor do most men dream about enacting violence against women. Yet it doesn't keep feminists from labeling men this way.What I think it boils down to is that feminists no longer have anything to fight for. And so, a movement that once was dedicated to fighting for equality between sexes has now resorted to slandering all men as angry, violent, women-haters in order to further their own feminist agenda. George Sodini is a sick, evil man who I hope rots in hell for what he's done. And while I don't think feminists are evil, they should still be ashamed of themselves for exploiting a tragedy of this nature in order to continue to smear men.
I genuinely find this kind of reasoning completely fascinating. Calling feminists opportunists and conflating cultural criticisms with man-bashing seems to serve only one purpose - denial. (And some head-patting from misogynists, of course - but that's a post for a different day.) Seriously, I have often wondered why anti-feminists spout what they do. The only answer I've been able to come up with is denial, and an extreme desire to believe that if they're not one of those women (feminists, sluts, etc) then they will be safe. If they can separate themselves from the reality of most women's lives, and the terrifying culture that is misogyny in America, then somehow they will be immune to it all.
Part of me gets it, truly. Opening your eyes to the way that U.S. culture views women - and hates women - is not pleasant. It's scary and unsettling and makes you question...well, everything. But the sad fact is, you can't wish misogyny away. It exists whether you believe in it or not.
And when you rail against feminists, or the idea that misogyny is a culture-wide problem - you are enabling misogynists. That's why I wasn't surprised to see that this was the first comment to Fiano's post:
There is no 'culture of misogyny' at all. The feminists are, as usual, unhinged. to a point, I think Mr Sodini had a few valid points. I'm not the most attractive guy in the world, and have experienced downright offensive rejections when I attempted to approach an 'attractive' girl. The women viewed me as completely beneath them, and how DARE I approach them, since i clearly was not up to their standards. These were the same girls that cried and whined when they had sex with a guy that never called them back. So from one perspective, I can relate to his feelings. He simply took it to a serious extreme.If the feminists want to blame anybody, they should be blaming themselves for how so many of them treat men in today's modern society.
Another commenter calls Sodini "a victim of the women who dismissed him." One person even singles out me:
If sex is but a good time, it's a real insult to not sleep with a man; you are denying himself and yourself a fun, healthy time. If sex is special - if chastity means something more than just a way of life to be shunned - then not having sex with a guy is normal.Once you criticise chastity, you reverse the default position from not sleeping with someone to sleeping with them. So, Jess, author of The Purity Myth, how do you feel about the logical consequences of your politics?
These commenters blame everyone from the women who rejected Sodini to feminist authors - but never the culture of misogyny, and rarely Sodini himself. Because for the men who benefit from this culture, recognizing that misogyny exists would mean having to change. And for the women who live in this culture, it's just easier - and less painful - to believe that the widespread acts of violence against women are simply anomalies that could never happen to them.
But as Herbert writes, "we would become much more sane, much healthier, as a society if we could bring ourselves to acknowledge that misogyny is a serious and pervasive problem." Because maybe then, we could start figuring out ways to end it.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Why ignore misogyny? (Because it hurts less.).
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15422
I think you hit the nail on the head, Jessica. I think anytime people wildly point to anything except what it really is, it's an attempt to avoid painful introspection.
My mom, when my dad left her, pointed her fingers at EVERYONE else. It was my dad's fault for not being happy enough, it was my now-stepmom's fault for daring to date my dad, it was my mom's parents' fault for not teaching her how to love someone, it was the marriage therapist's fault for not listening to her, it was my dad's mom's fault for...well, you get the point. My mom never once said, "Okay, maybe I had my share of the blame, too," because that would be the ultimate painful defeat for her. To this day, she hasn't grown, hasn't examined her faults and quirks and become a better person.
If we hide from these things, we'll never be able to fix them. It's not like we're a bunch of feminists who just love talking about all this stuff and get our shits and giggles out of pointing out what's wrong. In an ideal world, we really would be a post-feminist society. I'd love to not have to worry about this shit. Hiding from it won't do a damn thing to move society forward.
Along the same lines, it'd be nice to see someone here on Feministing acknowledge the racism that was tied up with Solini's misogynistic rants. I think it's clear all his hatred was twisted up together and stemming from the same source.
This is a minor issue, but I find her use of not just your first name but a diminuitive variant thereof to refer to you offensive. But then, I supppose we know she's being intentionally dismissive.
A larger issue is that she apparently doesn't get the idea of women as sexual beings. We either have to say no to all men or say yes to all men? Hasn't anyone explained the Madonna/whore complex to her?
The person referring to the Purity Myth and Jessica is one of Fiano's commenters. I know I'm being nitpicky, but I just wanted to clarify in case there was a mistake. I didn't read the comments, but I assumed the quoted commenters were men.
I feel weird making assumptions about Fiano's motivations. I'd like to think she's looking for head pats, because I don't understand her and it's easy to think that, but I worry that it might elide more important influences and reasons that she may have for thinking what she does. Maybe that's just who she is. I don't agree with her, and I can't expect other people who don't agree with her to pretend she may be right, but I'm more comfortable just meeting her arguments head on than speculating about her motives.
What's that quote about how fish not being able to see water?
Arg, and by that I mean "about fish not being able to see water?"
Heh.
I almost prefer the Discworld variant, actually.
"'Slave' is an Ephebian word. In Om we have no word for slave."
"I imagine fish would have no word for water."
Scary. That first commenter quoted by Jessica could easily become a mass murderer himself someday -- just like Sodini, he blames "women" as a vast, single entity for his own failures in life and makes the usual insane Nice Guy(R) conclusion that he DESERVES to sleep with women. He manages to prove Jessica's and Bob Herbert's point better than anyone else could.
All I can say right now is thank you for this post.
I think part of the problem is separating individuals from dominant cultural attitudes. I think this is something we practice a lot in academia and in feminist, anti-racist etc. forums and places. What I mean by this is when I say something like (for a less-triggery example) that our culture is too reliant on cars, I'm not saying that every car-owner is a lazy, thoughtless, anti-community, polluting a*hole, but I am saying that culturally we do overvalue cars which we can see by our infrastructure, where tax dollars go, public transport funding, lack of bike lanes etc. But it seems to me that conservatives are often blaming the individual instead, so when they read this commentary they think 'I'm a man (or my bother, dad, husband is) and I don't hate women,' the same way many white people say 'I'm not racist, but....' I think this is a really difficult point to make with people who already feel defensive and don't feel personally responsible. The same way (to finish the metaphor) people say, 'But I NEED a car to...' which is at times correct because the infrastructure just doesn't support something else - and my metaphor starts to break down here i realize.
how do you get people who ARE of the dominant power group in this country to realize that these issues are pervasive? Then all they hear is us saying 'you're wrong, look what you do, you hate women' (which I mean...is kind of true) Sigh, I just don't know.
I wanted to make the same point. I think it's possible to say our culture is misogynist, but I and those I associate with don't personally hate women. Or that I participate in a racist, heteronormative culture. My own success in career, relationships, etc and the social approval thereof is a result of my own work AND social forces that make it more possible for me than for someone else.
Lots of people, though, can't acknowledge that they benefit from racist, misogynistic, heteronormative without thinking that it means they are responsible for not opting out. Hence, if you treat black and white people the same, you're not racist and not responsible for the problem.
I don't know what we can do as activists to help people think systemically instead of personally. If you think these problems are all about individual choices, you never see the forrest for the trees.
There's really a strong, almost fundamental desire in America to believe that life is basically fair and that individual effort and willpower can trump social patterns/adversities.
e.g., in the book _Why Americans Hate Welfare_, Martin Gilens quotes some interesting studies where study participants were presented with pairs of people involved in social interactions - I think like problem-solving or job-interview-type interactions - or perhaps with stories about people (I can't quite remember) and informed that one of the pair would be randomly chosen to "win" some money (or to get the job), and the other would not. The pairs performing the interactions both did things about the same, said qualitatively similar things, and came up with equally average or equally good/bad ideas.
After watching this, the participants were aked who they thought "did better" and why, and people consistently thought that the person randomly rewarded the money did better, and actually came up with "reasons" why the person indeed "deserved" to win the randomly awarded money.
So I guess my point is, Americans still strongly want to believe that bad things don't happen to good people. When bad things happen to you, it's because you're a bad person. When good things happen to you, it's because you're a good person. It's a logic that actively denies the influence of larger abstract entities like "culture." A lot of victim-blaming results from this sort of mindset, especially when speaking about the poor.
and, of course, there is commentary at DoubleX about how US feminists are just grasping at straws with our over-stated claims of misogyny:
http://www.doublex.com/blog/xxfactor/america-saturated-misogyny-oh-please
This is a great post. It's frightening how many people are willing to turn a blind eye to the problems with our society as long as it doesn't mess with their daily lives. Do they think we're making stuff up for the hell of it? Why would we still be fighting for our cause if wasn't necessary? I hardly think a movement for equality that achieved its goal would get bored with success and pretend it still had things to do.
Still waiting for that tidal wave of equal rights to wash in.
"They" believe/fear that feminists want to castrate/murder/enslave/render obsolete all men.
That's why "they" think we're still around. They think we think women are just inherently better.
Of course, "they" have always thought that, and will continue to think it, until equality is a reality.
What I think it boils down to is that feminists no longer have anything to fight for.
Huh?
I suppose I must have imagined being gang-raped, then. Just as I imagined being groped at work. And imagined walking down the street in broad daylight--wearing a t-shirt and jeans and pushing my child in a stroller--only to have a carload of guys slow down and shout "Oh my GOD, look at those titties! That lucky fucking baby! Sss-sss-sss!"
The fear I feel if I find myself alone in a parking garage is all a figment of my imagination--that's it.
I'm forty-eight. The sexism and sexual harassment situations are a little, tiny bit better than they were when I was first out of college, looking for a job (thanks, Anita Hill!) and working and living in a world where patriarchy rules, but they're not *that* much better, and patriarchy still rules.
But hey, it's good to be told I don't have anything to fight for, right?
I find the claim that criticizing chastity means you have to sleep with any man who wants to fuck you to be deeply troubling, because I'm sure that commenter is far from the only person who thinks that.
They really cannot conceive of female autonomy and self-determination, can they?
Yeah, that is one of those comments that simultaneously makes me cringe because it is so woman hating, but kind of gives me hope that it is only a matter of time before feminism ultimatley defeats people so stupid.
Lots of things are fun and largley unobjectionable. Soccer, dancing, reading, pick one. That does not mean the default it to do them all of the time with anyone who wants to. Doing anything all of the time gets tiring, including I assume, though I have never tried it, servicing the needs of woman-hating men.
Seriously Jessica, thank you for this post. Ever since last week the normal catcalling and stares have struck me as really scary, and not just annoying. I am so grateful for your commentary.
Fantastic post Jessica! I wrote a post about why modern Feminism exists ( as we all know some assume that all work for women's equality has been and everything is fine in the U.S., so why complain?) Heres the post http://logicgod.com/2009/08/why-theres-still-modern-feminism/
I received a comment saying that I was making " a hasty generalization about men". The point is that misogyny is highly prevalent all around us ( hello, examples aren't hard to come by....) NOT that all men are somehow similar to Sodini.
This whole thing got me thinking that perhaps the hatred some men feel towards women just stems from their sexual frustrations and loneliness, so when I see those creepy men in sky masks replying to feministing videos on youtube...perhaps they are just painfully, utterly rejected in the dating scene. I've talked to some men that perceive women as the choosers or pickers in the dating scene and the men are the one's vying for their attention and acceptance, which leaves them powerless and neurotic individual's like Sodini become terribly spiteful.
How does the fact that 99% of similiar shootings are not gender related or do not target a specific gender fit into the statement that "We have become so accustomed to living in a society saturated with misogyny that the barbaric treatment of women and girls has come to be more or less expected ?"
I do not know about America, but we arent Afghanistan. And while America has its faults (like a secret service that runs uncheked in foreign policies and acts unchecked like a monarcy resulting in incidents like, say, the vietnam war) I doubt that American culture sanctions violence against girls and women and as far as culture goes, while there are good rappers and bad rappers I doubt it was the fault of lil John those women got shot.
I do not like that kind of discussion, those women died because of one man. It was his decision to shoot those women. The fault rests with him, not "society".
So far I haven't seen you post one thing that actually makes you sound like you are a proud feminist. If you WERE a proud feminist, you'd know that feminism is sociology.
First you are not the judge of mine. And I would be really surprised if you would be an expert feminist. So back off.
I do not see why countries like Idk, America and England deserve to be beat up over misogynie. Because of rap videos, or music videos ? Or rap, or hip hop ?
Why not make computergames responsible for shootings period, like they do in Germany.
That guy decided to kill women, because he is sick or an a++hole or twisted or all of the above, but it aint certainly "societies" fault. It was his decision, so it is his responsibility.
I think you're confusing *institutional* sexism and *cultural/societal* sexism.
For example, there is no law that says I can't major in engineering because I'm a woman; in fact, I've benefited from a number of programs specifically geared towards girls interested in pursuing high tech careers that are stereotypically masculine and largely dominated by men.
However, that doesn't stop Barbie from saying things like "math class is hard!" and the American Girls' favorite school subjects being things like English and history, not math or science. It also didn't stop the boys in my class from asking what, exactly, I thought I was doing in a web design/computer animation program or the assignments being tailored to stereotypically "manly" interests.
None of that has ever lead to any violence done to me, thank God, though I did receive more than my fair share of intimidation when I dared to impose on them with my girly presence, or something.
It *was* this guy's decision and he *is* responsible for his actions. However, his decisions were based off a culture of misogyny that encouraged him to believe that women are supposed to "put out" for him because he showers, works and owns a home or something. He believed that women didn't have the right to turn down his offers or requests. This lead to anger on his part, justified (in his mind) by his idea that women owed him something and were holding out.
So he killed people.
Now, most people don't take it that far. In that respect, the guy was just a nut job with anger problems and a few screws loose and he went off the deep end.
However, the rage and resentment he felt was rooted in the idea that women's bodies are available for public consumption. It's the same thing that fuels things like cat calling and sexual assault; the idea that women don't have a right to autonomy over our bodies, and that they are, in a sense, public property to be looked at, commented on or touched and our permission is not required. Even if we're given the option to say no, women are "supposed" to say yes to sexual encounters (or are supposed to be the Virgin Mary, but that's another issue entirely).
tl;dr: even crazies get their ideas somewhere.
I am aware that we are not talking about if laws are sexist or not.
That barbie says math class is hard surely is not the reason that more women than men take english class, or that there are fewer women in math class.
Who are you going to blame for the numerous classes where women outnumber men ? G.I. Joe ?
I am sorry you made that experience, but you made that experience after you signed up, there was no flood of women making their way into those subjects with you. I doubt that is because they felt discouraged by society, seen as women do study, they just pick subjects they like and think they can handle, like most people who study.
You can not deduct sexism from an outcome alone, you need to investigate and see if sexism is actually the reason of an outcome, you can not just assume it to be.
For whatever reason beyond socialisation and outside influence, more men than women gravitate torwards hard science fields, not just in America, its the same in England Iran Italy Iraq Japan Argentine India, it would be quite the conicidence if all those societies have something about them that discourages women from taking math.
We really do not know why. Some say women all over the globe are discouraged by society to take math and math related fields, others say the reason is biological.
I can only repeat what I said. I can see how afghanistan has a culture of mysogynie and violence against women, but not the us. Some explicit material putting women down does not mean there is a culture of mysogynie against women. I doubt they have that much power and I do not think 2 isolated incidents in a timespan of 3 or more years when 40.000 or so Americans died to shootings in that timespan is a sign that mysogynie is rampant. I could understand you if out of those 40.000 shot 10.000 or even 2000 died because of the culture of mysogynie in your countrie, but not if it was the case when you have 13 victims and 2 perpetrators with that motivation.
Every time I read "mysogynie" I twitch a little.
I am sorry you made that experience, but you made that experience after you signed up, there was no flood of women making their way into those subjects with you.
Are you trying to say that it's a woman's fault if she feels frustrated in a field dominated by men... because she chose to enter that field knowing that there were not very many women? How are we ever going to reach parity in science, government, and business if men say "sorry the environment is hostile for you, but you should have known what you were getting yourself into" ? The problem isn't that women are trying to enter male-dominated fields. The problem is that those fields remain hostile environments, even for the women who manage to overcome social messages they receive almost from birth that those fields are not for them.
You can not deduct sexism from an outcome alone, you need to investigate and see if sexism is actually the reason of an outcome, you can not just assume it to be.
Obviously nobody is arguing with you on this one. But there is a wealth of hundreds of years worth of research and lived experience which shows the sexism inherent in many aspects of our culture, including barriers to women in science and technology fields.
We're not feminists because it's convenient to blame all our problems on sexism. We're feminists because sexism is an undeniable reality in our daily lives.
We're not feminists because it's convenient to blame all our problems on sexism. We're feminists because sexism is an undeniable reality in our daily lives.
THIS. Though you'd sure think otherwise reading Cassy Fiano and so many others like her.
But the field is dominated by men, BECAUSE less women than men sign up for those fields. Not because there are "barriers".
How would you explain the conicidence that there are barriers in the fields women take less interest in, but no barriers in the fields women dominate.
Doesnt that mean that there are no barriers, but that those fields are male dominated, because more men than women take an interest in those fields ?
Are you really going to blame men, or society, that there is no gender parity in certain fields ?
Why should I lose sleep over the fact that certain fields are dominated by women and other fields are dominated by men, cant we just deal with sexism IF sexism is present and accept the fact that more women than men like subject x and more men than women like subject y ?
If somebody finds out, why more men than women take an interest in anything math related throughout space and time, that would be awesome, another mistery solved.
But I really do not see gender parity as a worthwhile goal, what good is it doing to anyone to read on paper that 50% of programmers are female or 50% of firefighters that died in 911 are female, or 50% of dogcatchers are female ?
I do not see men complain that women dominate field X or Y I do not see why I should complain.
To me a worthwhile goal is that every girl gets to study and later work in a field of her choosing, or live whatever life she wants to live.
To say 50% of women should live that life, is just as much choice as saying 0% of women should live that life, or 100% of women should live that life. The free decisions of men and women will probably never lead to gender parity in most fields and frankly myself I do not feel obligated to enter any field just to contribute torwards gender parity.
Oh geez. Where to begin?
Historically women were offered fewer educational opportunities than men. My grandmother loved school and probably would have gotten a Phd if her parents had let her. But they didn't. Because high school would be good enough for a mere woman.
You can say, "Well, that was the 40s," but there are still people who think that education is wasted on women. So some women are disadvantaged educationally right from the start.
Because math and science programs are dominated by men, women may feel uncomfortable going into those fields because of the intimidation factor. There are likely to be fewer female role models for young women in those fields, fewer female advisers, and then you never know if your adviser is going to be one of those choads who thinks that women aren't good at math and science (hint: there are many of these choads). Women have to work twice as hard to be taken seriously in math and science programs. If a man does poorly in math, it's because he had a bad day on the test day or he's so tired or busy. If a woman does poorly it's because women are bad at math.
And then there's the fact that when men enter into female dominated fields, salaries go UP. When women enter male dominated fields, salaries go DOWN. Funny how that works. Men aren't complaining about female dominated fields (except kindergarten teachers--I've heard lots of complaining from men about that field) because when they enter into those fields, things get BETTER. And then a woman who goes into a field that is predominantly male, she has to deal with threats, intimidation, and harassment. Just look at the military. Maybe women aren't going into "male" fields because men will do horrible, horrible things in order to hold onto their power in those fields.
I mean ... come on. You can't keep women out of the educational system for centuries and then argue, "But look! Most of the important historical inventions were by men! That means men are smarter!"
All of that.
If you would like to see papers published in academic journals that describe some of the barriers that women face in science and technology fields, including ones that Kurumi & Cheese mentioned, start here and here.
I don't really know why I'm replying to you. It seems completely useless, as you have shown your entire lack of understanding on how social conditioning works. BUT, I'll have a go anyway.
First, I agree with everything Kurumi & Cheese said.
Second, from a young age, girls are taught that they may not be good at math, but if they aren't, its ok, because it is a boy's subject anyway. So if a girl performs poorly its not because she hasn't tried hard enough, it is because of her silly girl brain.
Third, girls are socialized to believe that they will never get boyfriends if they are smarter than boys. The girl nerd never gets the boy, its always the pretty but stupid girl that gets attention.
Fourth, there are very few visible female role models in those fields. Trail-blazing is hard, and the feeling that one must do it is daunting, especially when one begins to consider the sexism and possible harassment one may face for being in the minority.
The point is, there are still remnants of sexism that hinder women in certain fields, such as engineering, physics and computer science. The sexism starts so early, that by the time a female has to choose a career, she has long since given up on math and has already started grooming herself toward another field.
You get a round of applause for this comment. That was awesome, and you worded it perfectly.
Sadly, it is a fairly common troll tactic for anti-feminists and male-rights-activists such as our little friend here to call themselves "feminists" and refer to "we feminists" in order to try to rile up this site.
I know, but I always feel like it's better to let them know we know their game, rather than letting them think, "tee hee! I am so clever!"
Please do tell me, how did I rile up the site ? America is not Afghanistan, America is together with other first world countries one of the countries which embraces feminism on all levels and puts a lot of emphasis on not only educating, but encouraging women.
The majority of people seeking higher education being female speaks volumes. I really question that there is a culture of misogynie in America that leads to deadly violence against women, when there have been only very few isolated incidents so far which do not even dent the statistics.
I can really only think of Sweden, who did more for women, but I doubt it is because the country embraces feminism more, I think its because that country has a high rate of employment and their goverment has more involvement and can therefore render more services to women, like daycare, something that in America would be seen as socialist and probably is socialist, but not necessarily evil and wrong, although that is the mood torwards socialism in America.
You haven't riled up the site. But the fact that you ask that question when I didn't even mention it suggests what your agenda is.
And whoever you are behind that mask, stop fucking focusing on Afghanistan! What is your hard-on about Afghanistan? It's coming off as incredibly racist. Like you're saying, "Those OTHER PEOPLE, those MIDDLE EASTERNERS, they're teh worst misogynists evah!!!"
I hate to put it this way, but you're a freaking moron. Somebody had to say it.
"I really question that there is a culture of misogynie in America that leads to deadly violence against women, when there have been only very few isolated incidents so far which do not even dent the statistics."
http://www.now.org/issues/violence/stats.html
"Very few isolated incicents"? Yeah fucking right. Mass shootings are isolated incidents, but rape, domestic violence, and MURDER perpetrated against women by men happen EVERY FUCKING DAY.
Totally agree. This poster has also written some other anti-feminist statements on other posts and I have found it completely confusing. Maybe the name is a cover for some MRA ranter or something?
I agree. I had seen a few of her/his postings elsewhere, and I wondered the same thing.
No... this isn't Afghanistan, but have you heard about some of the things that some American soldiers do in Afghanistan? And I doubt they're learning how to rape women just 'cause they're in the Middle East.
The argument that the "here" is misogyny-free just because it's somewhat safer for a woman to live "here" rather than "there" doesn't make any sense. Especially when "there" hasn't got a stable government. It's an extremely ill advised argument when your own country's army is there, doing as much raping and pillaging as any army does during times of war.
Whilst I realize you are nothing but a troll masquerading as a feminist, I will bite. Can you provide a source for your claim that 99% of "similar shootings" (what do you mean by that?) are not gender-related? Male violence against women is extremely common.
And why the focus on rappers? In your follow-up comment you mention rap again. It sounds like you are preoccupied with misogyny in rap music, and misogyny in other countries. Like - oh, those men hate women but not men like me.
... I doubt that American culture sanctions violence against girls and women...
Tell this to:
-- the man who raped me
-- the medical professionals who told me it "looks like [I] like rough sex"
-- the police who ignored physical evidence and refused to make an arrest
-- the former friends of mine who sided with my rapist
"--the medical professionals who told me it "looks like [I] like rough sex"
-- the police who ignored physical evidence and refused to make an arrest
-- the former friends of mine who sided with my rapist"
Fuck them all. Pieces of shit.
More or less.
I think -- explaining more now that my reaction is not quite so knee-jerk -- it was not entirely difficult for me to come to terms with the concept of one single person violating someone else's sexual boundaries.
It was a lot more difficult (and given the number of PTSD triggers I have that are related to the aftermath of the assault rather than the rape itself, one could say I'm not there yet) to come to terms with the fact that people who I thought would be on my side (or at least remain neutral) and in some cases whose job it was to help me implicitly and explicitly sided with my attacker.
Whether the people in question would openly admit to it or not, that is sanctioning violence against women. And granted, I realize that not every rape survivor experiences that from friends, health care providers, or the law enforcement system -- but I also know that I'm not the only one who's had similar experiences.
Oh man, I know just how you feel. The mental health "professionals" that were supposed to help me did far more damage than my rapist ever did.
Ahem.
Thank you Jessica!
Proudfeminist has never posted a single positive comment on this blog. Now, maybe they truly truly just do not understand feminism at all, but I'm not buying it. I'm glad people are finally pointing it out.
That being said, loved this post Jessica. :)
"How does the fact that 99% of similiar shootings are not gender related or do not target a specific gender fit into the statement that "We have become so accustomed to living in a society saturated with misogyny that the barbaric treatment of women and girls has come to be more or less expected ?""
Because this guy was specifically targeting WOMEN, just like the Amish shootings and the school shootings. We took misogyny for the norm that they didnt even mention the fact that the shooters only targetd women. In gender neutral shootings there is no targeting of females, just anyone. Where'd you get the 99% statistic? Its interesting to note that I bet the shooters in your 99% were about 99% male. That also ties into unhealthy masculine constructs.
92% of people who commit murder by shooting someone are men, while only 83% who are murdered by shooting are men. Overall, men commit about 90% of murders, and are about 80% of murder victims, so shooting/being shot isn't any more gendered than murder as a whole. But yeah, murdering and being murdered are essentially male activities.
Link
I'm curious where you're getting your statistics. While it's true that the majority of violent crime is committed by young men against young men, it seems like you're ignoring the huge problem of intimate partner violence which often results in dead women. Because women were there, and men who wanted to hurt them did. As the daughter of an abusive father, perhaps I'm more keenly aware of this kind of violence.
I'm not one to question your feminist credentials, but you call yourself a "proud" feminist. Yet you seem pretty ashamed of the rest of us.
Say I walk into a gym and shoot several strange guys at random. Then it comes out that I resent men because I can't get a guy to date me and pay my way. In the meantime a plethora of top 40 hits are constantly harping on about useless men who don't make enough money and how women should physically abuse them. There is also a plethora of violent porn where young men, many of them trafficked, are dehumanized and beaten by women. All the while our society’s major religions say that men should submit to women and their purpose in life is to serve and pay for women because of men’s original sin. Would you say the culture played a role in my deranged state and the deaths of the guys in the gym? I think any observant person of reasonable intelligence would say yes.
By the way the assessment that because it is worse somewhere else therefore it is not real here is really stupid.
I feel that the people who dismiss feminism and think that "we don't need it anymore" are people who are privileged or think that just because they treat women equally....they think that that's everyone's experience.
I think you're exactly right. Yes, Jessica is right that we don't want to believe the uncomfortable, but it's all too easy to disbelieve when you haven't seen really overt examples of misogyny in your own life. I will admit that when I read litbrit's comment above, I was horrified. Nothing that awful has ever happened to me or in front of me. But how could anyone who has experienced that deny the culture of misogyny?
It's the same situation when you hear people claim that racism is not a problem anymore. It's real easy for someone living in an almost all-white area to say that.
an extreme desire to believe that if they're not one of those women (feminists, sluts, etc) then they will be safe.
And for the women who live in this culture, it's just easier - and less painful - to believe that the widespread acts of violence against women are simply anomalies that could never happen to them.
Jessica focused on anti-feminists responding to the feminist analysis of the event, but I think the characterization of Sodini as a lone wingnut or as mentally ill (which happened even here) also helps us to believe that this was an anomaly rather than part of systemic misogyny. It's easier, and less painful, to regard Sodini as different from all the other men around us than to acknowledge that there are a whole lot of guys who have the same thoughts about women that Sodini expressed in his writing.
he WAS mentally ill, as evidenced by the fact that he committed suicide after the killings.
ignoring misogyny is just as harmful as ignoring the fact that american culture and its "pick yourself up by your bootstraps" attitude has led to a dearth of help for the mentally ill.
two shitty social systems are at play here, both of which our culture at large is ignoring.
So you are his psychologist? You saw him over a period of time? You treated him? No? Then you can't diagnose mental illness.
Indeed, you are enabling misogynists by disbelieving in the non sequitur that the actions of a lone psychopathic serial killer accurately reflect the views of "American culture" whose breadth is simplified into the opinions of a few batshit bloggers who hold a minority, extremist opinion.
So on the one side I understand, how the murder of women at a gym can be seen as illustrative of a society in which women aren't valued as individuals. On the other hand it's easy to see how some people believe that a crituque of larger forces in society are attacks against them.
I mean no one is saying that because society at large is mysoginistic every man will become a serial killer. However it is easy for a certain type of person to feel like attacks against attitudes held unconsciously by many people are attacks against them personally. At a certain point in my education I was unable to seperate the two.
I mean that it's really easy to misunderstand sometimes as a decent dude who tries to be understanding and kind that when people say society is F**ed up they don't mean that you are F**ed up. I used to believe that is what people meant. I don't anymore, and I realize that I still have issues, that unconsciously I need to deal with. However for those who aren't willing to self-examine I can see how it is much easier to believe that when people have a problem with the mysogyny inherrent in society that the real is other people's perception not how they are contributing to the condition.
Thanks for this. Sorry to ramble.
I love how the misogynist argument is "if all you women had would just continuously give this guy pity fucks, he'd be a decent, normal guy".
Sadly, I wish I could say that I think feminism is no longer relevant. It's actually very disturbing how necessary and relevant feminism still is. But I guess thousands of years of ownership over and entitlement to women's bodies is hard to let go of.
Hell. Effing. Yes.
I have nothing more to add except: Thank you, Jessica Valenti, for keeping it real.
That one hit me in the gut. Have sex with every guy who hits on you because otherwise he might be justified in killing you because you dissed him? Some people's "reasoning" is just scary.
December 6th will be the 20th anniversary of the massacre at École Polytechnique in Montreal. Thankfully, that was always covered as a mass murder directed at women.
Hell. Effing. Yes.
I don't know what else to say but: Thank you, Jessica Valenti, for keeping it real.
That one hit me in the gut. Have sex with every guy who hits on you because otherwise he might be justified in killing you because you dissed him? Some people's "reasoning" is just scary.
December 6th will be the 20th anniversary of the massacre at École Polytechnique in Montreal. Thankfully, that was always covered as a mass murder directed at women.
I'm probably in the minority here but i can't help but agree with you. The whole "blame society" was bad enough when the right wingers were doing it, now the left is started doing the same. The guy was a lonely, twisted, fucked up individual who is (thankfully) dead, he wasn't apart of some big conspieracy or growing movement to opress women.
Cassy Fiano sorta has a point,(which isn't easy to say), not every guy in the world wants to rape & cause you harm. Believe it or not, their just not all like that. So comparing all men to this maniac is just generalization
That this is what you took away from Jessica's post is proof you do not understand the concept of "patriarchy."
An amorphous constantly changing unfalsifiable concept which has been fingered for every single one of societies quirks, faults, wrongdoings or atrocities? I'd say that'd be quite difficult to pin down, especially when the mere act of disagreeing with someone will have your lack of knowledge of "the patriarchy" criticized.
"If the feminists want to blame anybody, they should be blaming themselves for how so many of them treat men in today's modern society."
That sentence freaks me the eff out. So, you know, it's MY fault that some girl, somewhere, was rude to a guy who hit on her? Cry moar, plz.
And my own theory (I'm not a psychologist, so feel free to poke holes in my argument):
Sodini was a deeply, deeply disturbed and unhealthy individual, as are most murderers. I can't say if he committed his crime because of misogyny, but it surely gave him an outlet for his destructive behaviors, the same way that many violent people use their religion as an outlet. Misogyny is horrible and needs to end, but I don't know that we can necessarily blame it for the crimes of this one individual in and of itself, although is was a contributing factor, no question.
That said, the media is empathizing WAAAY to much with this guy. IMO, it has a lot to do with his race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. The same thing happened with the "Craigslist Killer." People saw that a middle-class white guy killed a bunch of people, and they went nuts.
rant over.
Suuuuuuch a good point about Sodini's race and SES. Had he been a black man, I imagine the same men defending him now would either be silent or critical of "their culture."
you may be correct, but i'm not sure how that sort of bigotry is a positive for your point. these men may indeed feel a black man should fry if he was the perp, especially if the victims were white women. but is it right. and if it isn't, why is it ok to stereotype an entire gender for the nutty behavior of one
Nobody has stereotyped an entire gender. There is a difference between stereotyping a gender and identifying cultural misogyny.
Many men identified with Sodini, which is why they defend him. Had he been of a different race, those same men would not identify with him as much, and might even jump to point a finger at black men and criticize them (the Other) for their misogyny.
I don't know if you can really say that this is case of misogyny. The guy was mentally ill and killed himself along with those women. If he hadn't of killed himself and just killed the women than I can see this as a case of misogyny. What does he get out of killing women and then killing himself?
The fact is both misogyny and misandry exists. Believe me there are ways in which men are discriminated against. I don't understand if the 'patriarchy' is so intent at establishing a society in which men are at the top and women are at the bottom, why there are so many more men than women in the drugs of society in the US? Why are more men in prison? Why do more men commit suicide and live on the streets? I agree that the majority of CEO's senators, congressmen, are white men and I completely agree that we should have more women and minorities in those spots, but I don't see the whole men on top, women on bottom in our society. Women seem to mostly be in the middle.
It's very common for men to kill themselves after they've disposed of the women they hate. If it weren't, "murder-suicide" wouldn't be such a commonly understood phrase in law enforcement.
For those who don't know it's short for "shot the bitch then shot himself".
"What does he get out of killing women and then killing himself?"
A cowardly escape.
Unequal treatment of men and women is our judicial system is one.
"A Justice Department study of domestic homicides in 1988 found that 94 percent of men who were convicted of (or pled guilty to) killing their spouses received prison sentences, but only 81 percent of the women did. The average sentence was 16.5 years for husbands and a mere six years for wives."
Maybe because a lot of women who kill their husbands do so in self-defense (the man was actually the initiator of the violence)?
That might explain the conviction disparity, but not the sentencing disparity. Or quite frankly the sentencing/conviction disparity in every other crime. Even paired-t tests comparing people who were convicted of essentially the same crime with the same results always ended up with the women getting a lesser sentence.
Can you link me to that study? That's really interesting.
But even if a man and a woman were convicted of the same crime (say, first degree murder of their spouse) I bet that a significant amount of the time, the woman got a more lenient sentence because she was suffering some sort of abuse (emotional or physical) from her husband, even if her murder was not directly self-defense.
The sentencing disparity exists across all crimes, however, and a lot of it does come from the expectation that women can't really do anything bad, which is problematically infantalising.
There's a good study here: for instance, that also looks at income, educational and racial sentencing disparities. To gauge the magnitude, the difference between the typical sentence you get if you're black vs if you're white is comparable to the difference between being a man and being a woman.
That's fascinating, thanks for sharing. Definitely looks like the courts go easier on women across the board.
I stand by my guess that part of the disparity in spouse murder cases is related to domestic violence, but that certainly doesn't explain the broader difference in sentencing.
Is there any feminist scholarship or blog posts or other writings about this disparity in sentencing? I'm really curious if other folks have thought about this issue.
Sorry, I'm not aware of anything detailing this from a feminist perspective, nor have I been able to find anything of interest. You might try gathering a few resources and posting something to the community area if you're particularly interested.
"misandry exists"
I disagree. In order for misandry to exist, it has to be unprovoked within a matriarchy like misogyny. Because its not, then it doesnt exist. Anyways, I bet you cant give me even one type of semblance of an example of misandry.
Please don't go there. Obviously misandry DOES exist. There is nothing to gain by denying it, in fact it HURTS feminism to deny it.
Obviously it isn't as prevelant but to say it doesn't exist is only serving to fulfill what people already think about feminists. It hurts us to deny it.
Your logic is fundamentally flawed anyways. By your logic only white people can be racist but that is obviously completely untrue.
Multiple oppressions work in concert.
"I don't know if you can really say that this is case of misogyny."
Except for the part of his blog where he said he hated women.
I think we need to look at the bigger picture here. What he did was the largest act of sexism and misogyny that could ever possibly come to form. This is our chance, while the country is still reeling from this, we need to point it out to the rest of the world. We need to say "look we are not a bunch of crazy and hysterical women. This is the kind of thing we have been talking about for years. He essentially did the opposite of what he intended, if we use the oppertunity that has presented itself. Yes this is terrible and it is tragic. But do we want these women to have died in vain? Or do we want to step up beyond what happened and use it as an oppertunity to concur violence against women. To show the world that we aren't going to take any more. I think its time to rise up, become truly active again. Write out senators/representatives and tell them that there needs to be an anti-violence law that will consider crimes against women as hate crimes. We need to tell them that we don't want this to happen to us. We need to use the countries fear right now and get some legislation up there to prevent this from happening again.
Dear everyone who is still trying to argue that this killing was not related to misogyny:
There have been several feministing threads about this topic over the past week. Before we spend this thread just going over the same ground, pleaseat least read this main discussion.
If you've read all those comments and still think you have a new point that needs to be discussed in good faith about why misogyny has nothing to do with Sodini, go ahead... but this discussion is getting frustrating and repetitive.
Can't we actually discuss the topic of Jessica's post -- the way that conservative and misogynistic bloggers have attempted to distort the debate around this issue?
"I'm probably in the minority here but i can't help but agree with you. The whole "blame society" was bad enough when the right wingers were doing it, now the left is started doing the same."
I have to agree with this comment.
I'm just curious--Why are anti-feminist women always conservative/Republican? How did a conservative political ideology somehow become aligned with not caring for the equality of the sexes and the rights of women? I have heard of so many women who decline to call themselves feminists, simply be cause they hold conservative political ideology. That kind of alienation contributes to the misrepresentation of feminism and the acceptance of misogyny, because brutal acts like this are suddenly condoned because of "differing political ideologies". The fact is that there is no alternative perspective you can bring to mysogyny, just like there's no other way to like euphemize racism. (but people try, don't they?)
I keep going back to the fact that no one was having these arguments about the Holocaust Museum shooter. No one was saying, "Sure he was a virulent bigot, but I don't think his crime is a reflection of the racist and anti-Semitic subculture he was part of and the persistent problems with racism and anti-Semitism in the larger culture. He was just crazy. Isolated incident. Nothing to see here." No, people said he was crazy AND his environment contributed to whom he chose as a target. Both/and, not either/or.
Certainly no one (that I'm aware of) said anything along the lines of, "Oh of course I don't condone what the Holocaust Museum shooter did but I can understand it. The guy spent years trying to earn money, and he really, really desperately needed money. But those Jews would never give any of it up. No wonder he snapped!"
Actually, I did get a lot of the "oh no, that was just a sad isolated incident, good thing Jews in this country are completely free from discrimination other than random crazy people" vibe. People tend to write off anti-Semitism as a fringe thing for neo-Nazis and not acknowledge that it's still a pretty big problem, much in the same way they are willing to believe that there are a few crazy men out there who rape and kill women but misogyny isn't really a systematic problem.
Same. As a Jew, I get VERY upset when people act as though Jewish people have overcome all obstacles in the world. Sure, we've made progress, but, as my father says, if you scratch a bigot deep enough, you'll find an anti-Semite.
Excellent point - bottom line is these discussions hurt foolish men’s pride. There is not a bigger, more destructive, non-issue in the history of humanity than the collective pride of foolish males.
Actually, I read a lot of the opposite, and the working theory on a lot of blogs at the time it happened was that his status as a white male was what prevented him from being viewed as part of an anti-semetic culture.
I think that when someone has privilege, their actions against a minority are often viewed as single, isolated incidents. Whereas, part of the disadvantage of being in the unprivileged group is that one person acting out is almost always viewed as a stand-in for the entire group - sort of an 'othering' technique. The result of those two facts is a strange mix of compartmentalization and generalization that doesn't provide very useful analysis of what's really going on.
I find it odd that so many women are viewing this crime as a insult to all women and ignoring the people who are actually grieving for the deceased- their husbands and children. What if one of those husbands or little boys were to read what some of you are writing? Right now, there are several husbands who just lost their wives and to lump them together with their wives' murderer just because they are men smacks of blaming the victim. After paying such a price, if anyone could answer the question whether "misogyny is a serious and pervasive problem," it would be them.
Also, we should all remember that if the victims in this crime had not been middle class, it is likely that none of us would have ever heard of it. It is not that women in the highest class are denying misogyny to feel safe, they actually are safer. A morning at your local municipal court will give you an idea of what the average domestic violence victim looks like, and an afternoon at your local common pleas court will give you an idea of what the average rape victim looks like. See for yourself.
After paying such a price, if anyone could answer the question whether "misogyny is a serious and pervasive problem," it would be them.
Yep.
The rest of your post was crap but that one point was a gem.
Re: "I find it odd that so many women are viewing this crime as a insult to all women and ignoring the people who are actually grieving for the deceased- their husbands and children."
That's a false and unfair criticism. These women & their families are very much on the minds of all of us here. Why else would we be discussing the crimes and surrounding issues in depth? Oh, perhaps we should just not talk about it and hope nothing like this ever happens again.
Goodness knows ff my mother, sister, friend, neighbor were one of those victims I'd want people to start talking and keep talking about what we as a society can learn from this and how we can go about changing! That's compassion.
"Also, we should all remember that if the victims in this crime had not been middle class, it is likely that none of us would have ever heard of it."
That's why I visit this website. I think Feministing does a darn good job of highlighting unreported crimes & issues affecting women!
I meant to type "underreported" crimes not unreported.
However, it appears that you are using this tragedy as an excuse to complain about feminists. And, my dear, I have been called to jury duty three times now. I have seen what victims of rape and domestic violence look like. A diverse group that includes white middle class women.
Denial - I completely agree.
I'm also thinking that conservatives' crazy talk about feminism and feminists is very much connected to their religion. Consider that there are *no* female divine powers or gods in Judeo-Christian religions. (Mary, mother of God, is not Divine.)
Conservatives worship a male god, the god of patriarchy. Feminine/female power is not tolerated! Of course such people will deny that misogyny exists. In the collective mind of conservatives women are nonpersons.
Thank goodness for Feministing! And thank you Jessica for this terrific article.
(**Ecofeminist Monica Sjoo's writings on the subject of religion are brilliant.)
hey before you make comments about that you need to consider that feminists can be Christians too. In all actuality most christians believe that because we are all equal in the eyes of God we should all be equal here. Its mostly the evangelicals aka crazy fundamentalists who say that women are not equal. Please remember that before you make something like this about religion, because its not in any way. My savior did not command this man to go shoot a bunch of women, on the contrary he preached against violence towards women in a time when that was simply not acceptable.
Do you have an actual report or poll supporting what you just asserted?
Because, I don't believe you can actually make a claim about what "most Christians" believe based on what you observe around you. Just because you may be around Christians that view men and women as equals, doesn't mean "most" do.
I agree, but to make a blanket statement that implies that most Christians are hidden misogynists, and want to oppress women, isn't fair either. Rebekah had a good point. I'm a Christian as well, and while I don't agree with everything, I have been around enough fellow Christians to know that this type of behavior isn't something that would be condoned. I think you are letting a few extremists dictate, and muddy your view of Christianity. I suggest you take the time to talk to other Christian women who identify as feminists before you come to such base assumptions.
In my statement, I have not made ANY assumptions about Christians (women AND men). Based on my OWN experience in the church, I am certain that people who seem perfectly nice would have some fucked up views about women’s equality, views which are, most certainly, influenced by their religion. My point, though, was that if a Christian woman considers herself a feminist, she my gravitate more toward people who are like minded and never actually get a balanced view of what all Christians think about equality. Thus, a poll or study would be the best objective way to back up ones assertions rather than personal experience.
Hey rebekah, I do realize there are Christians as well as adherents of other patriarchal religions amongst the feministing readership.
I would *hope,* however, that such feminists know I mean nothing personal when I express my views about patriarchal religion and misogyny. It's just my opinion, which I am free to express.
Please do not attempt to silence me because you disagree. If I have been offensive to you personally, please state how so.
"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and for my part I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel."
-Thomas Paine.
Feminine/female power is not tolerated!
I like to tell the invariably male Mormons who accost me on the street occasionally that, I'm sorry, but I believe God is a woman. You should hear them stutter and see their eyes bug.
But the field is dominated by men, BECAUSE less women than men sign up for those fields.
Are you really going to blame men, or society, that there is no gender parity in certain fields ?
Why should I lose sleep over the fact that certain fields are dominated by women and other fields are dominated by men, cant we just deal with sexism IF sexism is present and accept the fact that more women than men like subject x and more men than women like subject y ?
If somebody finds out, why more men than women take an interest in anything math related throughout space and time, that would be awesome, another mistery solved.
But I really do not see gender parity as a worthwhile goal, what good is it doing to anyone to read on paper that 50% of programmers are female or 50% of firefighters that died in 911 are female, or 50% of dogcatchers are female ?
To me a worthwhile goal is that every girl gets to study and later work in a field of her choosing, or live whatever life she wants to live.
To say 50% of women should live that life, is just as much choice as saying 0% of women should live that life, or 100% of women should live that life. The free decisions of men and women will probably never lead to gender parity in most fields and frankly myself I do not feel obligated to enter any field just to contribute torwards gender parity.
At this point, I have to agree with everyone and say that you have to be a troll. Because I can't see how a person who calls themselves a proud feminist, is so blind to the obvious misogyny that lies in this unfortunate incident. Women aren't creating the sexist environment in very male dominated careers such as engineering. The sexist attitudes are already there before a woman even opens the proverbial class door. All of this is based upon how society rears us to think that science, math, etc, are solely men's work and not a woman's place. And to shame and blame women for the problems that they face in said field, is ass backwards.
Fiano's criticism seems valid when one considers the evidence that informs it. The overwhelming majority of violence committed in the United States is committed against males, not females. If there was a culture of misogyny, one would expect that the vast majority of victims of intentional and random violence, particularly random violence committed by men, would be against women. One would also expect to see a general cultural condoning and ignoring of violence against women. Yet, that is not the case.
Contrary to how feminist portray it, our culture considers the victimization of women far more important than any other group. The bulk of the innocent victims on TV police dramas are female. The media only reports missing blond-haired, blue-eyed white women. The overwhelming majority of the discussion about violence centers around women. The vast majority of victim services are for women, often excluding even boys who have been physically and sexually abused (or framing their victimization as lesser or unimportant). All of this occurs despite the statistics demonstrating that male victims, be they men or boys, represent the largest portion of victims of violent crimes.
The feminist myth that there is a culture of misogyny is simply a extension of a particular agenda. That many feminists have convinced themselves that they are under a constant threat is sad (not because of the effect it has, but because of the amount of paranoia require to bolster such an opinion), but fortunately it is not true. There is no culture of misogyny and to this point only a handful of people have blamed anyone other than Sodini. The vast majority of people have placed the blame solely on him, and a few people have asked whether his experiences with women played a role in what he did. Comparing this to anti-Semitism is both egregious and woefully misguided as history shows that the few people like Sodini who specifically targeted women usually had very horrible, abusive experiences with women. Understanding the potential ways that can effect someone is the best way to prevent other Sodini's from acting on their anger. However, falling back on misandry and androphobia and blaming all men is much easier and comforting, and ironically very similar to the views Sodini held about women.
Men are more likely to be murder victims than women, but the fact that 1/3 of female murder victims are killed by an intimate partner (includes spouses and boyfriends) while just 3% of men are ... says something to me.
Because it's not "random violence" against women. It's "I own you, bitch, and I can kill you if I want to." You don't have to kill a lot of random women to hate women. Whereas, as someone pointed out, women who kill their intimate partners are often acting in self defense. Which, once again ... shows there is a problem.
This guy killed women because he thought he deserved something from them. And until men as a collective group can understand that women owe them NOTHING, violence against women will continue to be a problem.
It's also funny to me that "misandry" didn't exist until feminists wanted equality. And that it seems to mean not a deep-seated hatred of men, but any questioning of patriarchial values. YOU DON'T WANT RANDOM MEN TO SHOOT AT YOU?? WHY DO YOU HATE MEN SO MUCH?? It's so easy to call a woman a man-hater and "androphobe" when men are committing acts of terrorism on women. Hint: We would stop fearing men if men would stop raping, abusing, and shooting us. Feminists are supposedly man-haters and yet somehow we manage to not shoot tons of men or kill our partners when they break up with us. It's fucking amazing.
I find it interesting that as a man, i have a statistically much bigger chance of getting gunned down than a woman, but YOU feel threatened and targeted.
quote : "It's also funny to me that "misandry" didn't exist until feminists wanted equality..."
Well it did, but we used to call it 'chivalry'
Ummm..no.
I was teasing with that last one, its not the same, but chivalry did lead to instances of misandry that where seen as culturally acceptable.
To give you an example: the white feathers given by women to men who didn't want to fight in WWI.
I find it really interesting that you consider the white feathers an instance of misandry, but you don't seem to understand the subtleties of misogyny. In both cases, freedom of choice and agency is being taken away from the other either by shame, force, or institutionalized sexism.
right, and how do the acts of one psycho crazy guy, denounced by everyone in society no matter what creed, color or gender, amount to evidence of "a culture of misogyny" ?
I do admit that it was an instance of misogyny, perpetrated by that one guy. But it is NOT seen as acceptable or encouraged by our culture. The white feather instance, on the other hand, was very much culturally driven.
Troll alert. Do not feed.
You're right, that was kind of trollish.
Here is my opinion on the article: if MRA's can be accused of denying misogyny in our society like this, feminism can be accused of doing exactly the same with instances of misandry.
Fair enough, although I wouldn't argue that those are parallel processes at all.
Maybe you should be afraid of men too.
Nice try, but I'm not the one claiming that the whole of society is misandric and out to kill my gender. Its the writer Jessica and the feminists here who infer that society is misogynistic because some nut targeted women.
My response to this is that, if we take the murder of members of a gender as a sign that society hates that gender, then society is far more misandric than it is misogynistic. Because far more men get murdered than women. And my point is that is it ridiculous to claim that a "culture of misogyny" is terrorizing women all over western society.
As for being afraid, sure, I know I should be afraid of SOME men, just like I should be afraid of SOME women.
Nobody is saying that the society is misogynistic just because one guy targeted a bunch of women. Please read what people are actually saying.
The claim is that he killed a bunch of women for reasons that reflect the misogyny present in society, as demonstrated by his blog where he expressed the opinion that he hated women, felt entitled to sex, and saw women as objects.
And yes, the fact that men make up the vast majority of both the murderers and murder victims does say that there's something wrong with society. It's not misandry, the "hatred of men" -- if men are mostly killing each other, how could it be misandry? -- but rather a culture that values violence as a legitimate form of masculinity. That is dangerous for both men and women!
Well, men and women are both far more likely to murder men than women (Men make up three quarters of victims of male murders, and fourth-fifths of the victims of female murders.) For whatever reason, both men and women choose to murder men more often than women. It's more complicated than just "masculinity is violent".
Well, it can be misandry the same way that those few percentage points of women who are murdered represent misogyny.
Clearly society isn't doing enough to save all these men, so its a clear sign that men are hated...
is the sarcasm and the irony getting through yet ?
And I very much dissagree with that claim. This guy does NOT represent anything that is seen as acceptable by our culture. Neither the entitlement of owning someone of the opposite sex, nor hatred towards the other gender.
The media where the first to hype this up into some sort of hate-crime against all women, and the feminists couldn't wait to jump on that bandwagon.
This guy was crazy, an individual who could not operate within the boundries of society. He doesn't represent it just because he had a freakin blog.
From my own life, I've been the target of men's violence multiple times, enough that it needs to be counted on at least two hands. I don't think that my own experience is at all exceptional among women.
I hope you didn't mean to imply that women feeling threatened or targeted by violence from men is irrational -- because in a lot of cases, that feeling is formed from the evidence of our lives and the lives of those around us.
It may be statistically more likely for a man to be "gunned down" than it is for a woman to be the victim of the same crime. However, I think it's not at all unlikely for some women to see this same misogyny as manifesting in assaults, abusive relationships, workplace and street harassment/assault, etc., or to see many facets of society as more or less accepting those crimes as the norm.
No, I did not mean it is irrational of women to feel threatened in certain situations. But it would be if your mind jumps to 'rape, murder, HELP' at the first sign of any man.
I'm only saying that women do not have a monopoly on being the victims of crimes, assaults and murders, and that with regards to violent murder its actually men who make up the vast majority of victims. So it strikes me as rather silly to infer from a violent murder of 8 women that society has a "culture of misogyny"
And please dont take this as a sign that I accept these murders as OK, or the norm. I'm as disgusted about this as everyone else. But I do not accept that this crime is evidence of wide spread hatred towards women. Nor is critisism of feminists who do make that claim.
So it strikes me as rather silly to infer from a violent murder of 8 women that society has a "culture of misogyny"...
I agree this would be true if this single incident were the sole event informing this inference. Unfortunately, for a lot of us, while it is an extreme example, it's far from the only -- or the closest-hitting -- example.
THIS. And your comments above. Gosh, you're my new hero. Seriously, I don't know why you're responding to folks who've demonstrated their aggressive ignorance (like proudfeminist) or who are arguing that feminists are misandrists... but your responses make it almost worthwhile to plow through their bullshit. Thank. You.
Hint: We would stop fearing men if men would stop raping, abusing, and shooting us.
Exactly. I work in the downtown area of a city, and when walking around by myself I'm pretty aware of my surroundings, particularly of other people. I've mentioned to friends that I am generally wary of all men I see, but of very few women (and they'd have to exhibit pretty odd behavior for me to feel wary). Further, all I'd fear from a woman would be them doing something like stealing my purse. With dudes, I worry about things like sexual assault as well as robbery. Yet when I say this to a dude, am I complimented for my vigilance and non-naivete and awareness and all those things misogynists will often accuse rape victims of not having enough of after they are raped? No, of course not, I'm a crazy man-hating feminist due to my wariness of strange men who I have absolutely no reason to trust.
If I didn't read about murder/rape/kidnappings perpetrated by men against women so often (and if they didn't happen so often), maybe I wouldn't be so wary.
Your patience and restrain are amazing. There are some words I'd say to this... person but I don't trust myself not to say something nasty.
That a portion of women are killed by their partners does not alter the fact that the majority of people killed, either by strangers or people whom they know, are male. Likewise, there is no statistical evidence or research supporting the claim that women who abuse or kill their intimate partners are often acting in self-defense. That said, Sodini did not kill an intimate partner. He killed random women in a gym, so the use of intimate partner violence is not applicable.
What Sodini thought as an individual does not represent the opinions of all men. More so, violence in and of itself stems from the position that one is owed something by others, so your own argument can be reversed and applied in this fashion: until women as a collective group can understand that boys and men owe them nothing, physical and sexual violence against boys and men will continue to be a problem. The point is that both genders commit acts of violence, but even in those instances the people who commit such acts represent a small portion of the total population. It is therefore unfair to hold men collectively responsible for one man's random actions just as it is unfair to hold women and feminists collectively responsible for the women who rape and abuse children.
Misandry has always existed in some form or another. The extent to which it became socially acceptable as it is now is a direct result of feminist rhetoric and actions. That one misperceives genuine concern about views that push and perpetuate the hatred and irrational fear of men lies primarily in one's own political views, not in the views of others.
As for feminists not committing acts of violence, as you noted one does not have to kill a lot of random boys and men to hate them.
Until you can say that you fear going out at night, until you fear going to a bar because you feel like someone is going to slip something into your drink, until you can't listen to a certain song because it triggers memories of your sexual assault, until you fear walking a block down the street even in a nice area, until you get your ass grabbed by a stranger at a concert for no reason than you are a piece of ass to a man, until you get called a skank or a slut because you have sex, until you get called a skank or a slut for your clothing, until you get cat called for no reason other than walking down the street, you have no idea what we are going through. I am not making light of male assault victims, I know several, including one perpetrated by a woman, but you have no idea the hatred this culture has for women. Songs written about killing and raping women like it's no big deal, women who are told they deserved to be raped because of x, y, and z. Anti-choice advocates who embrace gender stereotypes. Need I go on?
Sorry if this is poorly written. It's almost 6 and I can't sleep so the tired is getting to me
Contrary to how feminist portray it, our culture considers the victimization of women far more important than any other group.
Nah. We give first priority to those men who have died honorably in defense of this great nation, right? Let's see, we have 2 holidays and countless monuments and ceremonies, right?
It goes like this:
#1 warrior male deaths
#2 aborted fetuses
#3 attractive child-bearing aged women deaths
#4 cute kids (who will either grow up to be attractive child-bearing women or warrior males)
#5 everybody else
The bulk of the innocent victims on TV police dramas are female.
I consider Law&Order, et. al, a drop in the bucket compared to the popularity of violent adult content, don't you? At least Law&Order pretends to be balanced, by addressing moral questions and showing that actions have consequences---in essence you rape someone, you go to jail
vs
you gang rape someone and the stupid bitch enjoys it = harmless good-natured fantasy fun for all.
Understanding the potential ways that can effect someone is the best way to prevent other Sodini's from acting on their anger.
I'm pretty sure that you don't prevent irrational crimes this way.
Comparing this to anti-Semitism is both egregious and woefully misguided as history shows that the few people like Sodini who specifically targeted women usually had very horrible, abusive experiences with women.
By people, I assume you meant, straight men?
Cause, according to your logic, we should be having about 1 nightclub shooting per week by angry gay folks. Trans folk should be rampaging. Certain clergy members should need police protection... But nope. None of this has come to fruition. Why?
It goes like this:
#1 warrior male deaths
#2 aborted fetuses
#3 attractive child-bearing aged women deaths
#4 cute kids (who will either grow up to be attractive child-bearing women or warrior males)
#5 everybody else
I love you for this.
(And the rest of your comment, too.)
In the grand scheme of things, I think monuments to the men who gave their lives, particularly those dedicated to the men and boys who were drafted and forced to fight in a war they had no desire to participate in, are fine. Those men died to protect your right to seemingly trash their sacrifices has wholly unimportant. They deserve the recognition, particularly since they were willing to do what most people, including feminists, would not: die for someone else's sake.
As for Law and Order, while it may be a drop in the bucket, it is a fair representation of how our society views victims. Police dramas overwhelming use female victims because no one would care if a man or boy was killed, assaulted or rape (the latter would most likely prompt laughs).
In regards to addressing crimes, the way one addresses them is by prevention. Simply waiting until something happens does nothing, and neither does treating a person after he or she has committed an act. Pretending to know the reason something happens without ever speaking to those who commit the acts is no different than treating a seizure with an exorcism. While one may believe the person is inhabited by a demon (as ludicrous as that is), the best way to address the problem is by noticing what may prompt the seizures and what symptoms occur before a seizure happens.
Statistically speaking, males experience the same proportional rate of emotional, physical and sexual violence as females. The overwhelming majority of them never assault anyone. Only a handful of women and men who were abused go on to abuse others. However, it would be misguided to simply ignore those people's history of abuse, particularly if they victimize people who remind them of their abusers. Coincidentally, the majority of male victims of child abuse and sexual abuse are not gay or trans, so your implication that heterosexual boys and men are never abused is insulting and inaccurate.
Umm... also want to thank the rest of y'all... SarahMC, Lily, Vwom, Rebekah and so on... you know who you are...
I'm kind of disgusted by some of the stuff written on here, so here's to y'all having the stomach to respond and respond well!
Of the inevitable "experts" trotted out post-tragedy to proffer facile analysis, J. Reid Meloy, a forensic psychologist and clinical professor of psychiatry at UC San Diego, made a remark which, in its radical naivete - or, if one prefers, willful ignorance - perfectly attests to this phenomenon:
"The concept here is really, really hard for most people to grasp, and that is the sense of entitlement, that 'I have a right to murder all of these women because of my personal frustration,' " Meloy said. "It's absolutely astonishing that a person can come to that mind-set."
Yes, I can see how "absolutely astonishing" it is. After all, it's not as though we live in a world in which, alongside occasional conscious directives about women and their civil rights, everyone receives, from birth on, a _non-stop_ stream of tens of millions of images and intersubjective cues which baldly contradict the former and reify that masculinity is x and femininity is y, and that masculinity is based on ____, and entitles men to ___, ___, ___, etc.
Cassy Fiano and co. are exemplars of what I refer to as the culture of disavowal:
http://jouis-sens.livejournal.com/27852.html
When you have people insisting that "There is no 'culture of misogyny' at all" you are no longer in the realm of mere "backlash"; we've graduated to the arena of ethicopolitical emergency - no different from that of the emergence and spread of holocaust denial, and in no less urgent need of sustained, highly visible, widespread countering (including from those in authority - are you listening, Mr. President?).
Thanks for this. Great post.
I feel like there has to be more reasoning behind the deniers than "If I can distance myself from it, it won't happen to me." Because I get this same type of refusal to connect one's experiences up with the social theory/patterns from, say, my father. He works for the state; taxes pay his salary. He's been in the state union (AFSCME, probably the most-hated union in this country) since he started the job and is a strong supporter and acknowledges that the union has done much to help him and his colleagues get the pay and benefits they deserve for their hard work. In spite of all this, he regularly votes Republican for the absurd ideological reason that "government screws up everything it gets involved in" and "big government is terrible." It leaves me baffled that he doesn't realize the same politicians he votes for wouldn't bat an eye at eliminating his job and putting the work up for bid by private contractors, or cutting his pay in half. In fact, they'd like it. He pays no attention to the party's platform and history of and RELISH for union-busting. He KNOWS "it could happen to him" because the state's already attempted to slip in laws allowing some of his department functions to be put up for private bid, and he had to go out of his way to speak out against them.
On another note, I sense the "Jeez, I just want some no-strings sex, what's the big deal" vibe from men ALL THE FLOCKING TIME, like women are supposed to put out because it's "not serious, no big deal, it'll just take a second for you to do this big favor for me." If only men would follow this logic when you asked them to do something around the house: "Jeez, I just want you to vacuum and pick up after yourself and feed the dogs, what's the big deal? It'll just take you a second to do this big favor for me." I don't even know how this "please just do me a big favor and let me fuck you" logic has come about. I'm sorry, people's ownership over their own bodies and their own time IS a "big deal."
So I think most of this - Sodini, the deniers - comes down to a male sense of entitlement to women's bodies more than anything (e.g., Erin Andrews), and I don't doubt at the spectacles of porn and sexualized advertising/media contribute to it. People who had full respect for others would not even CONCEIVE of this shit. They wouldn't need to annoyingly beg and bribe women for sex, they wouldn't need to rape, they wouldn't feel entited to take women's lives.