You may think The New Misogyny (as, I’m told, David Futrelle calls it) and the harassment and threats and sometimes plain old violence that go with it are a problem, but there are those who think the problem is instead noticing the link between misogyny and harassment—>violence.
Steve Zara @sjzara
That video seems thoughtful and describes real problems for women, but I think the leap from masculinity problems to murder is too much.
Miranda Celeste Hale @mirandachale
What angers me re: that video & the hashtag &Valenti’s op-ed etc. is the cruelty of the women who think this tragedy is about *them*
Steve Zara @sjzara
I think you are homing in on what disturbs me – it’s about trying to spin tragedy for political purposes.
Steve Zara @sjzara
. I get deeply uncomfortable when it’s put to me that a view or campaign position is beyond any criticism, any discussion.
Melynie Withington @MelynieAZ
Same thing with gun control campaigners.
Andreas Draganis @ADraganis
to play devils advocate here: when are they allowed to weigh in, only after directly affected by tragedy?
Steve Zara @sjzara
Surely, all the time, because their issues are general. It’s the linkage with tragedy that seems odd.
So what is happening here is that women or feminists are “trying to spin tragedy for political purposes.” So Rodger’s murder-spree was a simple tragedy, it was in no way political, and it’s bad, suspect “spin” to view it as political.
Why?
Why would that be the case? How could that be the case? Given the manifesto and the videos and especially the just-pre-murder video, how can his murders not be political? I suppose it’s conceivable that he just felt like murdering some totally random people and the pre-murder video was a misdirection…but it’s not very plausible.
I think when somebody makes a video announcing a plan to murder and reasons for the murder, and then commits the promised murder(s), we’re allowed to take that announcement at face value.
We do that when jihadists make pre-murder videos, I think.
Even without videos and manifestos, certain kinds of murder are pretty unmistakably political. The murder of James Byrd, the guy in Texas who was dragged behind a truck and battered to death, was pretty unmistakably political, despite its random quality. The murder of Matthew Shepard was pretty unmistakably political.
Or take the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1963. Would a Steve Zara frown in concern at people who “spin” that particular “tragedy” as political? Would a Miranda Hale express anger at the “cruelty” of the black people who think this tragedy was “about *them*”? I hardly think so.
But when it’s women? Oh that’s different.
Why is it different?
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)