Outrageous

Today's treeware column was a riff on last week's massacre at a health club in the US.

Here it is, with links and annotations:

"There's not enough outrage," lamented one women's rights activist at a candlelight vigil for the three women cut down last Tuesday night in a Pittsburgh-area aerobics class.

As the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette noted, only 75 people showed up to mourn Heidi Overmier, 46, Elizabeth Gannon, 49, and Jody Billingsley, 38, massacred by a man, who didn't know them, simply because they were women.

That's unusual as the vast majority of femicide victims are killed by their intimate partners or male relatives.

But, as Toronto author Brian Vallee points out in his 2007 book The War on Women, nobody counts the dead, nobody connects the dots, nobody calls out the problem.

"Compare the raw numbers," he writes of the period 2000-06. "In the same seven-year period when 4,588 U.S. soldiers and police officers were killed by hostiles or by accident, more than 8,000 women – nearly twice as many – were shot, stabbed, strangled, or beaten to death by the intimate males in their lives. In Canada, compared to the 101 Canadian soldiers and police officers killed, more than 500 women – nearly five times as many – met the same fate."

There's not enough outrage.

As we all know now, George Sodini, 48 – whose racist and misogynist online diary reads like a terrorist manifesto – couldn't get a date, couldn't get sex, couldn't lure any women to his modest side-split furnished with, as he points out in a spooky video, "Couch and chair; they match. The women will really be impressed."

Well, they weren't.

And so Sodini's "exit plan" was to go down in history in a blaze of gunfire, taking as many women with him as he could.

Just like Marc Lépine, who hated "the feminists" so much he slaughtered 14 women at Montreal's École Polytechnique in 1989, just like Charles Carl Roberts who executed Amish school girls three years ago, and, arguably, even like Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho, a reported stalker of female students who took up-the-skirt photos, yet another violent act of misogyny takes place.

No, no, we say. They were just loners, losers, crazies with guns.

There's not enough outrage.

That only feminist bloggers and a very few mainstream pundits called last week's fitness club massacre the hate crime it was should jolt us out of our sexist complacency.

"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," The New York Times's Bob Herbert noted on Friday.

"The mainstream culture is filled with the most gruesome forms of misogyny, and pornography is now a multi-billion-dollar industry – much of it controlled by mainstream U.S. corporations."

When I blogged about the massacre last week, my "men's rights activist" regulars – whose comments did not get past the goderators – expressed little or no sympathy.

 Instead, they complained that "feminists" demand special treatment for female victims of crime.

(Here's one comment that did get through.)

 Two blog readers even pointed to the recent Wisconsin episode of the philandering husband – who has since been charged with child and sexual abuse – whose penis was glued to his abdomen by a trio of vengeful women as somehow having equivalence to the Pittsburgh massacre.

Cruise the men's rights forums and you'll be shocked by the sickening posts calling for the legal and sexual subservience of women and praising Sodini as a "hero" and "for being a symbol for the consequences of denying men sex ... But something like this has to happen, perhaps hundreds of times over again, before feminists get the message."

There's not enough outrage.

A couple of things to add to the column.

First, I really don't think that there's much space between a George Sodini and a Scott Roeder, the guy charged with assassinating Dr. George Tiller, not to mention Roeder's fans and supporters. All are white. All have racist streaks. All are misogynistic. All want to control women. All have guns.

They are bloody scary and they seem to be, in the current climate, unstoppable.

Second, as Red Jenny notes:

(C)an you imagine if the gunman was Arab, Muslim or black. The news would be filled with analyses of black violence or Muslim misogyny or whatever. Just look at how some people try to make Mark Lepine into a secret Muslim, so that the violent impulses can be blamed on his Algerian-ness instead of his male-ness. Why is it when a white man commits a similar act, neither whiteness nor maleness are examined?

Can you shriek ''honour killings?''

Indeed, one Montreal radio talk host wrote to me this morning asking ''How come you made no mention of the women killed in the so-called 'honor killings' in Kingston?''

My reply: ''How come when white men kill women it gets no coverage but when brown men do we're all over it?''

There's not enough outrage.

Comments

[Kat]

There's a documentary out there (I want to say as a DVD featurette on The Thin Blue Line, but that might not be right) where a specialist in serial murderers says, wincingly, that it's true that feminism has caused an increase in these incidents.

BUT ONLY because before second-wave feminism, one woman would be stuck married to a guy like Sodini with no way out, taking all the crap on her own. The specialist wasn't saying we should go back in time, only that we still have a ways to go.

[sooey]

All kinds of rightwing pundits think that very same thing. That fighting for women's human rights has damaged society by alienating men. It says a lot about what they think of men, too, when you scratch the surface of their scribblings. People aren't people, they're biblical stereotypes.

[glenfitz]

Here's an outrageous thing to say. In so far as they love their wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters, shouldn't all men want the women in their lives to be regarded as highly as themselves? Men truly rooted in love of their female partners and family members have to support feminist causes, by and large.

[deBeauxOs]

Kat, it's a harsh observation but it makes some sense. Take for example Jean-Guy Tremblay, a serial abuser/batterer of women. In the past, his sociopathic behaviour might have been considered unpleasant, but not all that far from the norm.

Because of his notoriety, because criminal charges against Tremblay have made public headlines, society now recognizes that women don't have to put up with such men.

Thus they've become rogue elements, with their resentment building and fed by the likes of 'dating guru R. Don Steele' until one such as Sodini explodes in a public spectacle of femicide.

[Bill L.]

Clearly, not all men are like the others. One counter example is a recent case where two men drowned trying to save a female (she lived). So what is the difference? Some studies suggest that it might have something to do with self-confidence: there seems a fine line between that and narcissism. The case discussed here, involved a loner. But in my surveys, contrary to fiction, most serial killers are not loners: Paul Bernardo, Clifford Olson, and Dennis Rader, to name a few, were all married. Most people 'lacking' self-confidence actually have greater empathy for others. Who'd a thunk it? So maybe self-confidence itself is bad despite what the popular media has told us to think. At the very least, it may have a dark side. Am I making excuses or trying to find causes? Consider this item: "Why no three-year-old should think he's special" (http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/631589). See also the article in Scientific American magazine, 2005 January: "Exploding the Self-Esteem Myth", (beginning at: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=exploding-the-self-esteem), which says in part: "For decades, psychologists believed that low self-esteem was an important cause of aggression. One of us (Baumeister) challenged that notion ..." Further studies suggest that most of those in prison are narcissistic. Knowing your enemy better can surely help.

[MensRightsNow]

How come when women murder their children mental illness is a valid excuse. However, when this guy goes on a rampage with an obvious personality disorder, you call it misogyny?

Antonia...where is your compassion for this guy? Are you a hypocrite?

[Antonia]

@BillL
Those poor men were trying to save a niece/daughter. It's a different situation and hardly comparable. Of course, not all men commit or have the potential to commit femicide.

@Men's Rights Now
Women who kill their children often do it soon after giving birth, when their hormones are way out of whack, when they are mentally and physically exhausted, when there is no support system for them.

They do not hate babies, blame babies, plot and plan for months, write online diaries detailing their hatred for women (and African-Americans), rehearse the murders, target nurseries just because they are filled with babies ...

Infanticide is a terrible and tragic crime. But it is not a hate crime, cheered on by women's rights groups, as Sodini's act has been by men's rights activists.

Did he need help? Obviously. Even he thought so. But he should have sought it from a psychiatrist, psychologist, pastor, professional instead of a dating guru.

I notice *you* have yet to express any compassion for his victims or their families.

[deBeauxOs]

MensRightsNow - that is a deliberate bullshit comment and you know it.

When Joshua Lall savagely butchered his family (except for an infant) and a tenant, everyone expressed horror at the tragedy and compassion for his mental illness. He had an untreated medical condition. No one blamed it on misogyny.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=525ca266-5ffe-42bb-8462-e5ebe46a5f11

[MensRightsNow]

Antonia,

Maybe we should have a Minstry for Men that deals with men's health issues as well as the tiny issue of family law?

Maybe we can invest $200 million dollars in mental health support and general health support to draw attention to men who may be on the brink? Right now it is at $0.00!!

Where is the compassion? Come on, you're a lefty Antonia...the question really isn't one of compassion, but what were the "root causes" of his rage, isn't it?

By the way, your hormone excuse is lame. I don't buy it as it is another pathetic excuse by feminists to absolve themselves of responsibility.

[Antonia]

Hmmm, Men's Rights Now. I am concerned about YOUR mental well-being now. Perhaps you might email me, and I can direct you to some places where help is available? I understand there are plenty of anger management classes for example.

As for deBeauxOs example, here's another, more recent case ...

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Money+woes+blamed+northern+Alberta+murder+suicide/1838900/story.html

''Money was getting increasingly tight for Ian Paget.

''Financial pressures may have caused the Smith, Alta., man to snap Sunday when he apparently killed his wife, daughter and granddaughter and then himself, his former son-in-law says.''

[sooey]

The Canadian murderer of (ex)wives, (ex)girlfriends and children is almost always excused from responsibility on the grounds of depression or desperation due to financial/emotional circumstances. Most women are well aware of the inability of some men to cope in situations of financial or emotional stress and of the danger they can present, particularly if they have access to guns.

Some of the commenters here are just your run-of-the-mill backlashers to women's rights - as if they represent an oppressed minority and not the well-entrenched anti-Feminist establishment still in ample evidence everywhere in politics, the media, the corporate world, and the church. I shall henceforth ignore them entirely.

So spaketh Sooey.

[MensRightsNow]

Antonia can't debate so you question my "anger" and "mental health". Feminists are so predictable.

debeaux...relax with the cursing kid. Thanks for the ONE example....now how about that $200M for a Minstry of Men's Issues. How about it???? Hmmmm?

You're all about equality right feminist??

[Ashley]

Re: MensRighstNow

"How come when women murder their children mental illness is a valid excuse. However, when this guy goes on a rampage with an obvious personality disorder, you call it misogyny?"

Well its pretty clear why we (and many other people) are calling it misogyny. This man said on his website that all women (30 million women he said) were to blame for all his problems. He had planned this months in advance. Also he chose an aerobics class (which generally-speaking more women than men go to) and he shot 9 women, killing 3. No one is denying that he was psychologically unwell, but the fact of the matter is that he targeted WOMEN. If he had targeted African Americans we would call it a Racial Hate Crime, if he targeted Muslims we would call it a Religious Hate Crime, if he targeted employees of IKEA we would call it an extreme dislike for Slavic-made furniture store workers. We're just looking at the facts here, and it's pretty clear he was a misogynist.

[PaulR]

"Well its pretty clear why we (and many other people) are calling it misogyny. This man said on his website that all women (30 million women he said) were to blame for all his problems". - Ashley
------------------------
Yes. Are his writings credible though, enough to use them as an extreme manifestation of some general feeling of misogyny latent in all men, but barely controlled? Of course he was a misogynist - he killed a bunch of women on purpose and wrote about it. The objection here is that his misogyny is being cast as some kind of "tip of the iceberg", rather than being isolated as the freak occassion that it was.

Let's put this in another context.

Consider the number of people who kill others because "voices" told them to - which they interpret as God, or angels or celebs talking to them directly throught their TV. If you are quick to hold this femicide example as some kind of "tip of the misogynist iceberg", then are you just as apt to take THOSE examples to the Church or to Big Media as evidence of some latent hostility within those institutions?

[Ashley]

PaulR,

I didn't say anything referring to "an extreme manifestation of some general feeling of misogyny latent in all men" and I do not believe that is true at all. In fact, I don't think anybody has made a statement like that in all the comments above, where did you get that idea?

It was not a "freak occasion" at all, it's already been discovered that he planned this shooting and targeted women. End of story.

And comparing Sodini's acts with those of people who commit murder because the "voices" told them to is not at all viable. Sodini probably suffered from a personality disorder, whereas the people who hear "voices" probably suffer from Paranoid Schizophrenia or Psychosis. The two are not the same, and should not be compared as such. If Sodini had killed 3 women because "the voices" told him to (and was diagnosed as a Paranoid Schizophrenic) I for one would not be calling it misogyny because A) it would probably not have been planned to the extent that it was and B) he would have been in a mental state that left him incapable of controlling his thoughts and actions.

By the way, why is it that anytime there is a discussion of misogyny someone always pulls out the "Feminists hate all men, they think we are all misogynistic jerks" comment? Feminists do not hate men nor do they assume all men hate women either.