Author: has written 1136 posts for this blog.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

169 Responses

  1. Molly
    Molly July 28, 2006 at 10:54 am |

    If the photo on the Post’s site is the original, then her eyes do in fact look to be blue. Her eyes look darker because her pupils appear larger…but you can still see the blue around them.

    I do, however, understand what you are getting at. What struck me was how the article in the Post referred to her as a girl and not as a woman (as you did in your post)…

  2. rebecca
    rebecca July 28, 2006 at 11:16 am |

    I don’t know about the whole race thing you’re getting at, but I agree that the coverage seems to be trying to force her into the victim role. It’s tragic what happened, but Jennifer made a number of really stupid decisions that are not terribly sympathetic (to me, at least). Driving into manhattan to get tanked (while underage no less), then not calling parents or authorities for help when she and her friend got stranded was profoundly bad judgment.

    I shudder when I see these girls all over new york getting blackout drunk…don’t they know that they are putting themselves in horrible danger? Beyond alcohol poisoning, they’re basically hanging a “fuck with me” sign on their backs. It’s unfortunate that we always have to be cautious, but I firmly believe women should never get so drunk that they cannot take care of themselves–no matter who they are with. It’s incredibly stupid and I get so angry when I see it.

  3. ThePinkSuperhero
    ThePinkSuperhero July 28, 2006 at 11:36 am |

    Someone in the NY Times put it best:

    “The drug most implicated with violence is alcohol,” Professor Karmen said. “Being under the influence of alcohol has been shown over and over again to heighten the risk of being ether a victim or an offender.”

  4. Jenny
    Jenny July 28, 2006 at 11:43 am |

    I shudder when I see these girls all over new york getting blackout drunk…don’t they know that they are putting themselves in horrible danger? Beyond alcohol poisoning, they’re basically hanging a “fuck with me” sign on their backs. It’s unfortunate that we always have to be cautious, but I firmly believe women should never get so drunk that they cannot take care of themselves–no matter who they are with. It’s incredibly stupid and I get so angry when I see it.

    I understand how you feel–but which is worse behavior? getting blackout drunk or raping and killing someone? It’s obvious which behavior deserves the most censure. Why do we keep posthumously beating up victims who have already paid for their misbehavior with their lives?

  5. ThePinkSuperhero
    ThePinkSuperhero July 28, 2006 at 11:54 am |

    Because it seems like the only thing one *can* do, Jenny? Nobody understands why someone would kill someone they had never met before after finding them on the street (at least, I don’t). We can’t understand why they do it, so we don’t know how to stop it. But we *can* urge others to learn the lesson from this poor girl’s story.

  6. Sally
    Sally July 28, 2006 at 11:58 am |

    Well, look. I agree that nobody should get so drunk that he or she doesn’t know what he or she is doing. (Bad things happen to guys too.) But the way American society is set up, a lot of kids get to late adolescence without having a clue about their limits when it comes to alcohol. I knew a ton of kids who got mind-bogglingly wasted once or twice without even intending to get drunk, because they didn’t realize that a fruity drink is still a drink or that there was going to be a lag between when they drank something and when they started feeling it. I think we’d see a lot less of that if kids were introduced to alcohol in a healthier manner.

    But it’s irrelevent. She did a lot of dumb things. If the car hadn’t been towed, they could have killed someone driving home drunk. But there is nothing a person can do that’s so dumb that it makes them deserve to be raped and murdered.

  7. the15th
    the15th July 28, 2006 at 12:01 pm |

    “Being under the influence of alcohol has been shown over and over again to heighten the risk of being ether a victim or an offender.”

    Yeah, if Jennifer hadn’t been killed that night, she could have just as easily found herself abducting and murdering someone.

    Maybe the professor was quoted out of context, but this comes pretty close to equating a violent criminal and his victim.

  8. Dennis
    Dennis July 28, 2006 at 12:03 pm |

    Question:

    Why are youthful, male sports stars given the benefit of the doubt when accused of raping the crap out of a stripper at their party, yet when a young woman doesn’t plan her entire life around avoiding potential rapes, she’s careless and got what she had coming?

    I agree, there are ways to lessen the risk of getting raped. Everyone acknowledges that.
    However, there are also ways to avoid identity theft… yet when someone has their identity stolen they aren’t put on trial: “well, why didn’t you shred everything that ever had your name on it? Why did you subscribe to every seedy porn site that showed up in your email? Why did you buy prescription drugs from questionable online retailers?”

    But, let a girl get raped and killed, and everybody forgets that there’s a friggin’ rapist on the loose, because we all know the real problem is that there are drunken girls in short skirts running free.

  9. The Happy Feminist
    The Happy Feminist July 28, 2006 at 12:06 pm |

    So what’s the lesson? Never go out? Never get drunk? Where is the line drawn?

    Don’t get me wrong. I think there are steps women can take to minimize the risks. I would urge women (and men) not to get blackout drunk (although it’s not clear to me whether that was in fact what occurred with this victim). But we can’t dictate to women where the line should be drawn as to what level of risk they should be allowed to take. Because there is always some risk. There is a risk anytime I go out and about on my own in a city. There is even risk when I am not alone. There is risk if I have a couple drinks. There is risk if I am ever alone with a man. But at some point (and every person, male or female needs to decide for himself or herself what that point is), it is not worth limiting oneself in order to avoid risk.

    Many years ago, when I was 19, 20, 21 years old, I had many a lovely night bar hopping around New York. I like to think that I was relatively careful, avoiding dangerous and isolated areas, staying in groups, and using cabs when possible. But there was of course, no matter what precautions I took, some degree of risk to being young, female, and occasionally tipsy in New York City. But to me, it was worth the risk rather than locking myself away.

    (And to harp on one of my favorite topics, there is a lot of risk too for young men who go out and get drunk in public. Probably more risk than for young women, who are less likely to get into bar fights, or try daredevil stunts.)

  10. ThePinkSuperhero
    ThePinkSuperhero July 28, 2006 at 12:14 pm |

    Here’s the quote in better context:

    Alcohol and murder are not newly met. “About a third of all victims of murders in New York City had alcohol in their blood,” said Andrew Karmen, a sociology professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, who has researched the city’s homicides and crime rate in recent years. “About half of all murders involve somebody drinking, the victim or the offender or both.”

    Manhattan has been marked by a sharp growth in bars and nightclubs, but a majority of homicides occur in the other boroughs. Shootings on Saturday nights outside nightclubs in poorer neighborhoods in Queens, Brooklyn and the Bronx remain regular events.

    “The drug most implicated with violence is alcohol,” Professor Karmen said. “Being under the influence of alcohol has been shown over and over again to heighten the risk of being ether a victim or an offender.”

  11. Anna Phor
    Anna Phor July 28, 2006 at 12:21 pm |

    Rebecca, why is it only young women who need to be constantly reminded of how vulnerable they are? You are much more likely to be assaulted or murdered by a stranger if you are a man, but we never hear these kinds of warnings targeted at young men. Why is it so important to keep women scared?

  12. human
    human July 28, 2006 at 12:22 pm |

    the coverage seems to be trying to force her into the victim role.

    As opposed to what? The attacker role? The murderer role? The slut role?

    It’s tragic what happened, but Jennifer made a number of really stupid decisions that are not terribly sympathetic (to me, at least). … bad judgment. …I shudder when I see these girls all over new york getting blackout drunk…don’t they know that they are putting themselves in horrible danger? … It’s incredibly stupid and I get so angry when I see it.

    Why, exactly, are you angry that a woman got drunk, and not that a man abducted, raped, and murdered her? Looks to me like your priorities are out of whack.

  13. Lizzard
    Lizzard July 28, 2006 at 12:33 pm |

    I don’t think that was the point for that quote. I think what should probably be taken from it is that alcohol is known to lower a person’s inhibitations and judgment. So, whether you’re of the demeanor that will make you either a victim or an offender, you’re more likely to be that way when you’re drunk & your sense of judgment is not working so well.

  14. Les Faits de la Fiction » Is there a ‘whiteness’ slider in the toolbar?

    [...] gorized, Current Events, Race, Media, Design Feministe’s Zuzu offers an interesting comparison of two treatments of the same photo of thi [...]

  15. the15th
    the15th July 28, 2006 at 12:50 pm |

    I know that the quote probably wasn’t really supposed to mean that everyone in this scenario is equally culpable, but this kind of thinking leads to the idea that the criminal and his victim are both people who stupidly had too much to drink, and they both should have realized that this is just the kind of thing that happens when you get intoxicated.

  16. Hestia
    Hestia July 28, 2006 at 12:54 pm |

    Her Tragic Last Steps
    Jennifer’s night on the town ends in abduction and gruesome murder

    ‘There’s a guy following me…he won’t leave me alone’
    LAST CALL
    Teen beauty’s horror murder

    I know better than to expect responsible headline text from these kinds of papers, but I’m fascinated by how they differ here. One references Jennifer’s “night on the town;” the other doesn’t. One refers to “Jennifer;” the other refers to a “teen beauty.” One begins with “her tragic last steps,” whereas the other begins with a quote referring to the “guy.”

  17. rebecca
    rebecca July 28, 2006 at 12:58 pm |

    OBVIOUSLY I think it’s horrible what happened. No one should get beaten up and killed. OBVIOUSLY I think everyone should be careful.

    My point with respect to this particular story is that Jennifer showed massive poor judgment similar to what I see women exhibit every weekend at bars. In Jennifer’s case, she paid with her life, and that is a horrific tragedy. The man who killed her is evil and should be severely punished. Nonetheless, I think one of the many lessons about our fucked up society that this story teaches is that girls/women should be cognizant that they are putting themselves at risk when they get drunk.

    Women shouldn’t live in fear, Anna Phor, but frankly they’d be stupid not to be aware of the dangers of this world.

  18. Bryan
    Bryan July 28, 2006 at 1:03 pm |

    My point with respect to this particular story is that Jennifer showed massive poor judgment similar to what I see women exhibit every weekend at bars.

    I don’t think anyone would argue that as a girl, getting drunk in a potentially vulnerable situation is a dangerous idea. But just pointing fingers in that direction looks like blaming the victim to me. Telling girls to wise up and stop drinking is just like putting a band-aid on the open, festering wound of sexual violence. Women shouldn’t have to moderate their behavior because some men think it’s okay to violate their implicit trust. It’s certainly easier to tell girls to quit drinking so much, but is it the right solution to a much bigger problem?

  19. Gordon K
    Gordon K July 28, 2006 at 1:04 pm |

    Rebecca, why is it only young women who need to be constantly reminded of how vulnerable they are? You are much more likely to be assaulted or murdered by a stranger if you are a man, but we never hear these kinds of warnings targeted at young men. Why is it so important to keep women scared?

    As a college student (male) who went through the campus orientation thing more than once in the last few years, men are warned about these things. My campus had a death my freshman year due to drinking – not even alcohol poisoning, but a freshman got drunk enough to do some risky climbing, and ended up falling to his death. The campus newspaper – and the administration – treated it as the tragedy it was, but also used it as an opportunity to remind students that they need to be careful when they drink, that it’s wise to have a sober friend or two around to watch you, etc., etc.

    In addition, I know our frats (and probably frats at other universities) are required to go through “alcohol training” that involves educating them about not only how to drink safely themselves, but how to keep an eye out for the students they are serving. The dorms will be required to have such training as well within the next year or two.

  20. Sally
    Sally July 28, 2006 at 1:08 pm |

    Women shouldn’t live in fear, Anna Phor, but frankly they’d be stupid not to be aware of the dangers of this world.

    I really don’t see why this applies especially to women. It’s a bigger story when a middle-class white girl from the suburbs gets murdered by a stranger, but if you read the back pages of the local news section, you’ll see lots of instances of drunk teenaged boys getting into moronic bar fights or crashing their cars or falling into drainage ditches and drowning. The special emphasis on women’s vulnerability is completely out of proportion to the extra threats that women actually face.

    It’s not a smart idea for anyone to be stumbling around the West Side highway alone and drunk in the small hours of the morning. But I bet you’re a lot more likely to be hit by a car and killed in that situation than to be murdered.

  21. Sheelzebub
    Sheelzebub July 28, 2006 at 1:10 pm |

    Right. Women shouldn’t live in fear, but we should live restricted and curtailed lives. So if I have a few drinks with a friend in the city, I’m being stupid if something bad happens to me. A guy does it and something bad happens to him, and we simply shake our heads and wonder at the state of the world.

    As to the referral of “girls in New York getting ‘blackout’ drunk”–I doubt very much this woman was ‘blackout’ drunk, as she had the presence of mind to call someone and knew that a worthless piece of dumpster cheese was following her.

    You know what? The ONLY FUCKING TIME I hear someone go on about bad choices is in conversations/threads about rape. In any other crime, it’s a non-issue. In crimes where men are targeted, it’s a non-issue. And for all of the protestations to the contrary, I’ve yet to see anyone pop up in a discussion about, say, a guy who got mugged or jumped while drinking with his buddies, and preach about the terrible judgement he displayed and the bad choices he made.

  22. Sheelzebub
    Sheelzebub July 28, 2006 at 1:14 pm |

    Gordon, those warnings weren’t used to excuse the assualt of men, however. They were very basic “getting shitfaced all the time is really bad for you” arguments. There’s a world of difference between: “Alcohol poisoning, driving while drunk, and risky stunts are no joke and can kill you,” and “If you get jumped when you’re drunk, you showed massive poor judgement.”

    Again. I don’t see this type of hectoring when it comes to male victims of crime, or crimes that aren’t sexual assaults.

  23. Shelly
    Shelly July 28, 2006 at 1:43 pm |

    rebecca Says:
    It’s tragic what happened, but Jennifer made a number of really stupid decisions that are not terribly sympathetic (to me, at least).

    [...]
    Beyond alcohol poisoning, they’re basically hanging a “fuck with me” sign on their backs. It’s unfortunate that we always have to be cautious, but I firmly believe women should never get so drunk that they cannot take care of themselves–no matter who they are with. It’s incredibly stupid and I get so angry when I see it.

    Stupid behavior is stupid behavior, and should be discouraged because it is generally in no one’s best interests. However, what happened to this woman, and zillions of others, could just as easily have happened if she had not been drinking or doing anything else “stupid.” Would you have found her more “sympathetic” then? Why does the addition of alcohol automagically make the victim more deserving of being harmed?

    This whole “You shouldn’t have been behaving in X fashion” crap seems to me to skirt dangerously close to Napoli-ing the victim. If the victim is righteous and pure, then she is a sympathetic character. If she’s not righteous and pure, then she’s a dirty whore and she deserves whatever she gets.

  24. Dianne
    Dianne July 28, 2006 at 1:43 pm |

    Yeah, if Jennifer hadn’t been killed that night, she could have just as easily found herself abducting and murdering someone.

    She could easily have found herself running someone over while driving home drunk. Maybe she didn’t intend to get drunk. Maybe she had no idea about her alcohol tolerance or how much alcohol was in the fruity drinks she may have been drinking. But driving while drunk and setting up a situation where you know you are going to be driving while drunk is as good as saying that you don’t care whether or not you kill someone.

    While we’re passing blame around, though, how about the EMTs who picked up her friend (who was passed out drunk) but left an obviously inebriated young woman standing around by herself in a car pound. Why didn’t they take her to the hospital too? If her friend was drunk enough to pass out she was very likely to be in bad shape as well? Or, if she didn’t seem in need of evaluation, offer to help her find a cab? Why didn’t the police offer to help her find a cab? (Or did she wander off while they were trying to deal with her friend’s collapse? It’s unclear to me from the articles.)

  25. Blitzgal
    Blitzgal July 28, 2006 at 1:46 pm |

    Here in Madison WI there have been a string of brutal muggings in the downtown area. Small groups of people are targeting visibly drunk young men around bar time, stopping them to ask for directions, and then viciously attacking them before robbing them. We’re talking broken bones, missing teeth, many folks knocked unconscious, etc. What’s so interesting about this is that the majority of victims are men and I’ve seen more than one local commentator scratching his/her head and making comments like, “Ordinarily we tell young women to avoid this sort of behavior,” etc. While the police have made several public statements urging students to stay in groups, and to be careful when approached by strangers, I have not seen any public blaming of the mugging victims. On the one hand, folks are so clearly unsettled that it’s men being attacked, but on the other hand I haven’t heard any sort of blaming the victim that I KNOW I’d see if it were young women being attacked. Of course there is another facet to this situation because the majority of attackers have been people of color, so we are also hearing all sorts of hand wringing and fear about gangs coming up from Chicago and the like.

  26. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite July 28, 2006 at 1:52 pm |

    My point with respect to this particular story is that Jennifer showed massive poor judgment similar to what I see women exhibit every weekend at bars.

    Actually, if she’d stayed at the bar, she’d probably be alive today.

    Moore and her friend made a lot of mistakes that night, but getting drunk at a bar was pretty low on the list. They parked illegally in a tow-away zone. They went to the impound lot drunk instead of dealing with the car the next day. They arrived at the lot without a backup plan for getting home if they couldn’t get the car out. After her friend was taken to the hospital, Moore wandered off into a low-traffic neighborhood she didn’t know, instead of staying in the safety of the impound lot — apparently because she was worried about the cops.

    I think one of the many lessons about our fucked up society that this story teaches is that girls/women should be cognizant that they are putting themselves at risk when they get drunk.

    I think everyone here understands that someone who’s drunk is more likely to be the victim of crime or other mishap than someone who’s sober, all things being equal. But if this had been a guy who’d been killed in exactly the same way, would you be saying that he’d put himself at risk by getting drunk? Or would the moral of the story be a different one?

  27. Sally
    Sally July 28, 2006 at 1:56 pm |

    (Or did she wander off while they were trying to deal with her friend’s collapse? It’s unclear to me from the articles.)

    Apparently she left because the cops were there and she was afraid she’d be busted for underage drinking. I don’t think anyone realized that she was going to leave, and they dealt with her passed-out friend before dealing with her.

    But if this had been a guy who’d been killed in exactly the same way, would you be saying that he’d put himself at risk by getting drunk? Or would the moral of the story be a different one?

    I think the story would be getting a lot less play. Dead guys just aren’t as titillating.

  28. Rhiannon
    Rhiannon July 28, 2006 at 2:03 pm |

    But at some point (and every person, male or female needs to decide for himself or herself what that point is), it is not worth limiting oneself in order to avoid risk.

    Right. Women shouldn’t live in fear, but we should live restricted and curtailed lives. So if I have a few drinks with a friend in the city, I’m being stupid if something bad happens to me.

    Please excuse the crappy quoting, but here are my 2 cents.

    After being molested by the son of my caregiver at the age of 5 and then later by my mother’s brother (same year)… then again by the grandfather of a neighbor in the apt complex in which I lived (5-6), stalked by some creep who saw me walking home when I was 12 and decided I looked like his next girlfriend even though I did not say or do anything to attract his attention, then at 15 I was raped when I ran away from home by 3 truckers as I hitch-hiked accross the states… (there’s more, but this is too long already)

    After suffering all that crap, I came to the revelation that innocence, cynacism, stupidity, carelessness or even paranoia, caution, etc… it doesn’t matter what you do, if some creep is out there looking for a victim they will find one. Shit, women are raped in their own homes for crying out loud. The problem is NOT the behaviour of women, it is the behaviour of some sick-twisted f*cks with some serious mental issues who need to be culled from our gene pool. End of story.

  29. Regina
    Regina July 28, 2006 at 2:31 pm |

    I completely agree with Rhiannon that even if you don’t go looking for trouble, trouble is perfectly capable of finding you. Being the victim of a violent crime is not a punishment for one’s behavior.
    At the same time, I think giving up one’s own ability to control/handle situations one might find oneself in can give someone else a chance to step in and control the situation, and one cannot depend on someone else to act in one’s best interest. It’s sad and it’s fucked up, but it’s true.

  30. Regina
    Regina July 28, 2006 at 2:37 pm |

    I also think it’s really sad that the reason she called her boyfriend in New Jersey (who was not in any position to do anything to help her) rather than calling 911 is probably the same reason she left her friend alone with the EMTs, and the reason they tried to get the car out of impound that night instead of waiting until the next morning when they had both sobered up– a combination of alcohol-induced bad logic and not wanting to get in trouble.

  31. ginmar
    ginmar July 28, 2006 at 2:41 pm |

    Being drunk didn’t lead to her rape and murder; the guy who raped and murdered her did. And Gordon, did you notice that the tragic death of that young man didn’t involve somebody pushing him off a ledge or something. In raped there are two people. One of them never gets mentioned or criticized, and he’s the one who’s putting the victim in danger. If he weren’t there, she wouldn’t be in danger. Period.

  32. Jenny
    Jenny July 28, 2006 at 2:42 pm |

    If someone lifts a heavy box incorrectly and throws out his back, I’m going to ask him if he’s okay, not snap, “You should have been lifting with your knees! Why didn’t you lift with your knees? God, this makes me so angry!”

    What I mean is that we don’t usually criticize people who were hurt or killed–even if there’s something that they could have done to avoid it, unless the person is a woman, and she’s been raped. Why, why, why is that?

  33. Vanessa
    Vanessa July 28, 2006 at 2:44 pm |

    Remember people that only one person can prevent an assault: the assaulter. The survivor/victim can certainly reduce their risk of being assaulted, but no matter what precautions they take, if they are assaulted it is not because they did anything wrong. Remember, all kinds of people (children, the elderly, disabled, big buff men, and “teen beauties”) are raped in all kinds of places (their cribs, their kitchens, the school library, and in army barracks.) Alcohol and drugs are used by the perpetrator and/or the victim/survivor in a tremendous number of sexual assaults (50% is my most reliable statistic) but certainly not all.

    Moral of the story is that we can and should discuss ways individuals can reduce their risk of being assaulted. But, as Bryan most eloquently said, there are much bigger societal issues (sexism, racism, classism, violence-positivity) that are more important to address. Girls getting blackout drunk are not the reason there are rapists. There will be rapists as long as we fail to acknowledge and overcome the real roots of violence.

  34. Rhiannon
    Rhiannon July 28, 2006 at 2:45 pm |

    I agree Regina that no one should allow anyone to control them.

    Jenny, I think maybe it has something to do with the guilt the victim (of rape not murder) themself usually feels.

  35. belledame222
    belledame222 July 28, 2006 at 2:51 pm |

    Excellent question.

    or, well, if it’s a guy who’s been raped, then inevitably it comes around to the rapee’s sexuality, which is immediately suspect. or if it’s a man who’s been gay-bashed; then it’s the bashee’s fault, usually for “coming onto” the basher.

    or black-on-black male violence which is inevitably chalked up to gangbangers, tsk, ain’t it awful, if it’s noticed at all.

    but yah: your average mugging, no one goes, “god, man! why were you out around that part of town? and flaunting your wealth like that! were you wearing that expensive suit? did you (*gasp*) go to an ATM? well, hate to say I told you so, but…”

  36. ginmar
    ginmar July 28, 2006 at 2:53 pm |

    ONly if the muggee is male. There’s a powerful prohibition against blaming men in this culture. Women, however, are fair game.

  37. Marcella Chester
    Marcella Chester July 28, 2006 at 2:55 pm |

    I think one of the many lessons about our fucked up society that this story teaches is that girls/women should be cognizant that they are putting themselves at risk when they get drunk.

    I think one of the many lessons that our society teaches is that girls who put themselves at risk are automatically less sympathetic and therefore it’s easier for men to rationalize raping and murdering them.

  38. ginmar
    ginmar July 28, 2006 at 3:07 pm |

    being a woman is enough to put you at risk.

  39. carpundit
    carpundit July 28, 2006 at 3:09 pm |

    Not as many comments as I thought you’d get about the eyes.

    I think you’re jumping to conclusions about the Post‘s handling of the photo. On the NY Times web site, her eyes appear to be blue.

    CP

  40. Regina
    Regina July 28, 2006 at 3:34 pm |

    Regarding Vanessa’s comment (#34), I agree that the assailant is the one person responsible for assaulting someone, and I agree that if someone is assaulted it is NOT because they did something wrong. I also agree that there are far-reaching societal attitudes that underpin violence against women, and that those attitudes have not been adequately addressed at all.

    But I don’t see any reason not to work from both ends– to address the sexism, the racism, the classism, the violence-positivity, while at the same time schooling ourselves in self-defense and at least elementary measures of self-care. I don’t think that qualifies as blaming the victim.

    That said, I think most victim-blaming is an attempt to create distance away from the victim, an attempt not to identify with the victim. You know, standard “I would NEVER do THAT, so I can’t POSSIBLY EVER become a victim!” baloney.

  41. Sierra
    Sierra July 28, 2006 at 3:40 pm |

    I read most of the comments and didn’t see this pointed out, so I thought I’d mention it:

    WHY does it matter that she was drinking? She was grabbed while WALKING DOWN THE STREET. What does her blood alcohol have to do with that? What, she could have run away faster if she hadn’t had anything to drink? Are we assuming the raping murdering evil man who did this watched sober woman after sober woman walk by before seeing her and thinking, “I bet she’s got a positive BAC! PERFECT!”?

  42. poorgirl
    poorgirl July 28, 2006 at 3:40 pm |

    the reality is, if she wasn’t drunk, they would be blaming her for:

    walking late at night in a short skirt
    wearing a halter top
    being so “stupid” as to get lost
    for going out with a female friend instead of a male protector
    for not calling…the police, her parents, someone
    for not screaming louder for help
    for…take your pick in the latest blame the victim before you mention anything about the sole responsibility of the attacker.

    no matter what the circumstances, our society will always look for a reason to blame the “temptress” for “getting herself in trouble”

    i just hate it when it comes from women…

    we really, really should know better…

    i think the best reminder of culpalbility is something i read at the carnival of rape survivors i can’t remember the exact phrase but basically:

    i went to a bar looking for anonymous sex, got drunk, met a man, agreed to have sex, went back to this strangers house, went into his bedroom, proceeded to become intimate *CHANGED MIND*

    ONLY REASON NOT RAPED –
    ********************************HE*****************************
    WAS NOT A RAPIST

    PERIOD

    STOP BLAMING THE VICTIMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOMEN, HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO FIGHT THIS IF WE, AS WOMEN, AREN’T ADVANCED ENOUGH TO CHANGE THE DIALOGOGE ON THIS VIOLENT CRIME THAT IS NOT ABOUT SEX BUT POWER AND VIOLENCE???!!!

  43. Raven's Star
    Raven's Star July 28, 2006 at 3:41 pm |

    I see, Rebecca – being a young woman who has a few drinks and walks around in public is a horrible crime, and thus is grounds for execution at the hands of any random male who wants to get a piece of ass first. Because of course we all should understand the streets are crawling with men who are only too happy to take any opportunity to rape and murder, and thus all women should walk around in a state of full alert all the time with one hand on the gun in their holster, without which, of course, they are obviously just asking to be raped.
    There is no other way to interpret your comment. You say nothing about the horrendous nature of the criminal who would take advantage of a young woman’s temporary distress, therefore you must believe it is not noteworthy. What you are saying is that women must expect all men to be this way, and if a woman slips up and fails to make a continual effort to protect herself, we must talk about how stupid she was to have tried to relax and have a little fun, instead of being angry with the criminal who does such a thing or the fact that society doesn’t care enough about women being raped to take any steps to stop it.
    So by all means, ladies, let us lock ourselves in our homes and never have a drink or go anywhere new where we might get lost – living as if we are free human beings is dangerous, and we could get raped and killed for being so uppity!

    Excuse me?
    Why is her behavior even being mentioned? It shouldn’t be! Her bahavior had nothing to do with what happened to her. Women get raped every day, in broad daylight and at night, on the street and at home, while drunk or while sober, at any age from infancy to the very elderly, while wearing anything from nothing at all to full burqas. When are we going to stop posthumously analyzing every single thing a woman did “wrong” when she is raped or killed, and focus on stopping the rapists and killers?

  44. Sierra
    Sierra July 28, 2006 at 3:44 pm |

    Just to clarify: I understand the ‘she shouldn’t have been drinking!’ knee-jerk when it comes to date-rape, but she wasn’t raped after passing out.

  45. poorgirl
    poorgirl July 28, 2006 at 3:44 pm |

    ps, was she raped? i have not read that she was raped in any of the media accounts, only that she was strangled…are they not mentioning it or are we sure she was raped?

  46. Regina
    Regina July 28, 2006 at 3:45 pm |

    I agree that her eyes look lighter in the Post cover. Actually, I think she looks lighter all over in the Post cover. Even her hair, she looks washed out compared to the other printing.

  47. poorgirl
    poorgirl July 28, 2006 at 3:46 pm |

    actually, followed the link to the post, that does say she was raped, when i google it (google news) i’m not sure any of the accounts mention she was raped, they all say strangled…hmmm

  48. wolfa
    wolfa July 28, 2006 at 3:48 pm |

    I think schooling ourselves in the basics of self-defence and self-care is a good idea. However, I think that timing is crucial. Immediately after something like this happens is not the time to tell someone that they should have done x or y instead — that is the time for help and support, and not an implicit “you did something wrong, so some part of this is your fault”.

  49. Feministe » Just Goes To Show, You Can’t Win For Losing

    [...] bout Piny
    About Zuzu
    Vintage
    Advertise

    « The Making of a Proper Victim

    Home

    7.28.2006

    [...]

  50. ginmar
    ginmar July 28, 2006 at 3:54 pm |

    It’s all very well and good to talk about women defending themselves. How about somebody picks up the slack and trains men not to be rapists or rape-apologists?

  51. Esme
    Esme July 28, 2006 at 3:59 pm |

    I do not in any way wish to reduce the amount of blame, shame, and punishment that should be heaped onto the rapist, but the race issue is one that I can’t avoid mentioning

    How often is the photo of a white rapist or murderer (or any criminal really) used, or used front page? Ok, how about if the perpetrator is Black or Hispanic? If the perp is Black or Hispanic, they are identified as such either by photo or by text, but a white perp is usually only identified as white if giving a description to help find a suspect at large.

  52. Regina
    Regina July 28, 2006 at 4:06 pm |

    I’ll reiterate that I’m not victim-blaming. Nobody deserves that. Nobody, and not for anything.

  53. ginmar
    ginmar July 28, 2006 at 4:10 pm |

    Because newspapers are run by old whtie farts who have no compunction about both victim-blaming and race-baiting? They get to scare women and ignore white rapists at the same time. It’s win win for them. Then there are some segments of the population wihch believes interacial rape cases all involve lying victims.

  54. Raven's Star
    Raven's Star July 28, 2006 at 4:14 pm |

    Back to the picture – something seems really – off – in the second picture. her face shape seems different somehow. I’m not sure what the motivation is, really. It seems they are trying to make her look more glamorous so that people will think it is more horrible she got killed. Ever seen a photo of a female crime victim who was not considered attractive by current standards?

  55. Natalia
    Natalia July 28, 2006 at 4:28 pm |

    Hmmm… In patriarchal societies, be they as tough as rural Iranian communities or as seemingly easy to navigate as Manhattan, women will jostle for power by blaming the female victims of sexual violence and violence in general. This, they believe, will help them claw their way up the hierarchy, and be, if never as powerful as the men on top, then at least way above the other women, particularly the ones who slipped up and broke one of the many invisible rules of womanhood.

    Also, and this is something I noticed while growing up female in Eastern Europe, blaming the victim is the perfect antidote to the stress of being female in a community that’s dangerous for females. You can’t deal with the fact that this could happen to you, so you invent excuses: “She was drunk. She was alone. She was stupid.” By distancing yourself from the victim’s behaviour, and by convincing yourself that she alone was the cause of the tragedy that befell her, you create a false sense of safety. “It will never happen to me, because I’m never drunk/alone/stupid.”

  56. Sailorman
    Sailorman July 28, 2006 at 4:41 pm |

    I can assure people here that ‘blame the victim’ is not women-only.

    If bill goes to a biker bar and gets the shit beat out of him, someone’s going to say ‘what the fuck were you doing in a biker bar?” or at least will say that to someone else when bill’s not there.

    Then you might say “damn, I”M sure not going to go into a biker bar wearing a “bush sucks” t shirt”

    Of course the fault would lie in the bikers who attacked Bill. But you’d talk about Bill anyway.

    Personally, when I hear about someone drunk, making bad decisions over and over, I DO try to learn something from it. I’d tell my kids: “This could happen to you if you do that. It might happen to you anyway, but why be a fool and increase the chances? Don’t do what she did.”

    If you want to consider that as a sexist blame-the-victim, well, i can’t help you there. I have seen really violent crime cases and i even though I despised the criminals I sometimes couldn’t help but think “that the fuck was that guy doing walking around such an incredibly bad section of (unnamed city) at 2AM, in those clothes, talking on a $300 cell phone, wearing a Rolex? He should of known better. What an idiot.” And then proceed to try to convict and jail his assaulter. It has nothing to do with sex and everything to do with someone acting in a way that WE wouldn’t act, I think.

  57. Dianne
    Dianne July 28, 2006 at 5:13 pm |

    I think Sailorman’s got a certain point: I’ve certainly heard men criticized for acting foolishly after they were victims of a crime. However, I think the threshold is lower for women. A man might get blamed for getting mugged if he (to use a slightly altered real life example) took out his wallet and counting $20 bills while riding the subway through the south Bronx. On the other hand, a woman would get blamed for just being in the south Bronx, regardless of how discretely she behaved.

  58. azzy23
    azzy23 July 28, 2006 at 5:15 pm |

    Umkay.

    The person responsible for rape is the rapist. Period. There is no “But gosh… blah blah blah.” Period.

    That girl was walking down the street. What she was wearing, had drank, was doing… that’s all irrelevant. The problem is not that “stupid girls” or “foolish women” are “putting themselves into stupid situations”… the problem is that men who rape are walking the streets. That girl could have been dead sober, and she would still be raped and dead. She could have been wearing a skirt to her ankles, and she’d still be raped and dead. That girl (I call her a girl because she was underage) is raped and dead because she happened to be on the street where a rapist was waiting for a victim. It wasn’t anything she did, he was looking to rape.

    We live in a world where women can’t go anywhere or do anything without keeping an eye over their shoulder. We’re encouraged to curtail ourselves. The statement this makes is that the only way to avoid being raped, is to avoid being in that place at that time… but that place and time is infinitely variable. That statement absolves us of our guilt as a society by making rape the nature of man, and unavoidable… thus it is the victims responsiblility for her own death. We do this so we can sleep at night, secure in the knowledge that *we* would *never* do such a stupid thing, and thusly, *we* won’t get “punished.”

    There is no safety…. unless we stop the rapists. The only things we should be discussing here is 1) the race intensification issue with the pictures, and 2) how awful it is that some girl was raped and murdered by some monster in a man suit. No buts.

  59. The more choice you grant, the more responsibly people act  at  PunkAssBlog.com

    [...] a woman, Human Rights

    Women have it tough here. When a woman gets raped and murdered, even commenters at Feministe bre [...]

  60. Therapist1
    Therapist1 July 28, 2006 at 6:43 pm |

    Azzy, I agree with you that she could have been raped whether she is drunk or stone sober. The problem is that we have predators walking the streets, so be responsible and be alert. If you give yourself a fighting chance then you may be able to ward off the sociopath that stalks victims whether they be men or women. That is the lesson learned here, whether a man or a woman you place yourself at risk by drinking to excess where you can neither function well, fight or run.

    “the problem is that men who rape are walking the streets” and “We live in a world where women can’t go anywhere or do anything without keeping an eye over their shoulder.” I think every woman is agreeing with you and I as a man who deals with the worst society can offer agrees. If this is true, teach women to know there are evil men out there and to not place themselves in a position where they can be more easily victimized. I know that is not the answer you want to hear, it is not the world I think SHOULD exist, but a world of shoulds is a pipe dream. The reality is that rapists, murderers, child predators exist and we should ALL look over our shoulders to make sure the beast is not lurking. I know my wife does, and I know that as a man who has been victimized, I do as well.

  61. Lorelei
    Lorelei July 28, 2006 at 6:50 pm |

    I hate how they refer to her as a ‘teen beauty.’ Because, you know, her being pretty is why she was raped. Because rape is about sex, didnchaknow? Her being raped and murdered had nothing to do with the fact that we live in a rape culture, and there are no steps being taken to prevent rapists from raping, or that some guy decided to have himself a little fucking power trip! Nope. It’s because she was pretty and drunk.

    >:|

  62. Lorelei
    Lorelei July 28, 2006 at 6:54 pm |

    I can assure people here that ‘blame the victim’ is not women-only.

    If bill goes to a biker bar and gets the shit beat out of him, someone’s going to say ‘what the fuck were you doing in a biker bar?” or at least will say that to someone else when bill’s not there.

    Then you might say “damn, I”M sure not going to go into a biker bar wearing a “bush sucks” t shirt”

    Of course the fault would lie in the bikers who attacked Bill. But you’d talk about Bill anyway.

    Yeah, you know Sailor, that’s fine and dandy and all, but you know what? Bill goes to criminal court to charge for assault, NO-ONE is EVER going to say, ‘Well, ya know Bill, you shouldn’t have been in a biker’s bar with an anti-Bush shirt… so your assailant will not go to prison. Sorry pal.’

    HOWEVER, if a girl is drunk and is raped, and she goes to court to file a rape charge, they WILL most likely say to her, ‘Well, you shouldn’t have been drunk, so this gentleman is free to go.’

    Yes, victim-blaming language perpetuates this lack of justice. This lack of justice causes more rape. And so it goes…

    Think about that next time you try and say shit about a rape victim, hmm?

  63. Claudia
    Claudia July 28, 2006 at 7:07 pm |

    I also think it’s really sad that the reason she called her boyfriend in New Jersey (who was not in any position to do anything to help her) rather than calling 911 is probably the same reason she left her friend alone with the EMTs, and the reason they tried to get the car out of impound that night instead of waiting until the next morning when they had both sobered up– a combination of alcohol-induced bad logic and not wanting to get in trouble.

    Not to mention anticipating sermons about how stupid she was to be there in the first place.

    There were a few times in my formative years when, at the time, I knew I should call a parent for a ride home. I didn’t because I’d maybe had some alcohol or something, or was somewhere I shouldn’t have been and didn’t want to be lectured on my stupidity. For this reason my much younger sister knows I am always on call as a totally non-judgemental ‘rescue’ if she requires. She has taken advantage of this only twice, and both times we have had productive discussions on the situation and the importance of trusting one’s instincts. She has also told me she’s glad I explicitly told her she could call me, as she wouldn’t have otherwise.

    And finally, to adapt a common meme – If I live in fear, the rapists have already won.

  64. Esme
    Esme July 28, 2006 at 7:29 pm |

    I was doing a favor for a friend at one point, following her out to an unfamiliar part of town so I could drive her home after she dropped off her boyfriend’s car. Sitting in the parking lot waiting for him, we got bored and went for a walk. Further down the road, the neighborhood grew less welcoming, and when we started to walk back to the car found ourselves being followed, and then chased, by a really creepy guy. Finally getting back to the car to find her boyfriend there, we were told that we had no business, as girls, walking around the neighborhood.

    I spent the summer canvassing door to door for a rape crisis center, asking for donations and handing out information, and I cannot begin to count the number of people who told me that I was going to be raped because I was out. The neighborhoods I canvassed were middle and upper middle class, and most were well lit. I was not dressed in any way revealingly, my neckline was high and my skirts past the knee, and yet I had elderly women telling me that because they could see my cleavage, I was going to be raped, or men telling me that I need to carry mace, or asking where my partner was. My male coworkers never got comments like that. Never.

    It doesn’t matter what we do, how we’re dressed, what we’ve had to drink, or where we are. This is why rape is about power, not sex. It’s about controlling women. Stay inside or you’ll be raped. Stay a virgin until marriage or no one will believe you when someone rapes you. Stay completely sober or you’ll pass out and be raped. And all of these myths focus on the idea of the man haunting the shadows, black strangers, being raped on the streets or in parking lots. 30% of rapes occur in the woman’s home, and (conservatie estimate) over 70% of rapes are perpetrated by someone the woman knows. And women are usually raped by someone of their own race, and socioeconomic status. But society still insists on telling me that I need to have a man with me when I walk the street, or better yet not leave the house at all. I’m supposed to place my trust in male friends to protect me, those most likely to rape me.

    People who talk about women preventing their own rapes aren’t doing it to help women. They do it to reinforce their ideas about the place of women, or to convince themselves that if only “those women,” those “other women” had behaved themselves, they would have been safe because they want to believe that they, or their wives or daughters, are safe as long as they can be controlled.

  65. AW
    AW July 28, 2006 at 8:06 pm |

    “(And to harp on one of my favorite topics, there is a lot of risk too for young men who go out and get drunk in public. Probably more risk than for young women, who are less likely to get into bar fights, or try daredevil stunts.)”

    “If someone lifts a heavy box incorrectly and throws out his back, I’m going to ask him if he’s okay, not snap, “You should have been lifting with your knees! Why didn’t you lift with your knees? God, this makes me so angry!””

    “but yah: your average mugging, no one goes, “god, man! why were you out around that part of town? and flaunting your wealth like that! were you wearing that expensive suit? did you (*gasp*) go to an ATM? well, hate to say I told you so, but…” ”

    “ONly if the muggee is male. There’s a powerful prohibition against blaming men in this culture. Women, however, are fair game. ”

    I collected the above quotes before I got down to the posts nearer the bottom, where some people disagreed, but I’ll add my voice to theirs anyway;- I know of loads of cases where guys, or drunk guys have been blamed for their own stupidity, and in fact, where I come from it’s more common than blaming women. Guys between the ages of 16-25 are expected to be idiots and get themselves in trouble, and everyone says ‘what an idiot look what trouble he got himself into’
    I got in a fight when a random bunch of guys jumped me in the centre of town when I was very very drunk. That was my own fault, I shouldn’t have been that drunk, I shouldn’t have been alone (having lost my friends by being too drunk) and I shouldn’t have been in that area of town. Especially not with long hair.
    Now of course I did not cause myself to get attacked, nor should I be blamed for it, but this world is not perfect and I should have been more careful, I could have predicted and avoided it but I didn’t and that is my fault.
    Now no-one except the exceptionally stupid would try to pin the blame on women who get raped, but when someone gets attacked when engaging in risky behaviours, and someone says ‘boy that’s some risky behaviours they shouldn’t have been doing’ that’s not neccesarily them trying to blame the victim. They could well just be talking about why you should be careful. As with Rebecca above.
    And yes, I would definitely say to someone ‘you should have lifted with your knees’, they really should have.

    Raven’s Star said:

    I see, Rebecca – being a young woman who has a few drinks and walks around in public is a horrible crime, and thus is grounds for execution at the hands of any random male who wants to get a piece of ass first. Because of course we all should understand the streets are crawling with men who are only too happy to take any opportunity to rape and murder, and thus all women should walk around in a state of full alert all the time with one hand on the gun in their holster, without which, of course, they are obviously just asking to be raped.
    There is no other way to interpret your comment. You say nothing about the horrendous nature of the criminal who would take advantage of a young woman’s temporary distress, therefore you must believe it is not noteworthy. What you are saying is that women must expect all men to be this way, and if a woman slips up and fails to make a continual effort to protect herself, we must talk about how stupid she was to have tried to relax and have a little fun, instead of being angry with the criminal who does such a thing or the fact that society doesn’t care enough about women being raped to take any steps to stop it.
    So by all means, ladies, let us lock ourselves in our homes and never have a drink or go anywhere new where we might get lost – living as if we are free human beings is dangerous, and we could get raped and killed for being so uppity!

    Excuse me?
    Why is her behavior even being mentioned? It shouldn’t be! Her bahavior had nothing to do with what happened to her. Women get raped every day, in broad daylight and at night, on the street and at home, while drunk or while sober, at any age from infancy to the very elderly, while wearing anything from nothing at all to full burqas. When are we going to stop posthumously analyzing every single thing a woman did “wrong” when she is raped or killed, and focus on stopping the rapists and killers

    That’s just a load of bullshit. That’s not the only way her comment can be interpreted, it’s just your framing of what she has said. To me she appears to have said “it’s a tragedy. She was engaging in these risky behaviours, that is risky. People should avoid risk.” Either one of us or many other interpretations could be correct, so don’t try to pigeonhole and then lambast her.
    There is risk in this world. Nothing is perfect. If you ignore this and walk in bear infested territory, drunk, waving slabs of meat, during cubbing season (or whatever it’s called) and a bear kills you, then you are putting yourself in danger, which is never the sensible choice. Yes, the bear killed you, yes it must be shot , but yes you could have seen it coming.
    And yes, my metaphor is very weak, particularly in the areas that (a) there’s not neccesarily a good reason for shooting the bear, whereas there’s no good reason not to shoot the rapist, and (b) in the case of the bear is pretty much is the victim’s fault,- stupid meat carrying bastard. But unless you’re deliberately trying not to get it, my point should be clear.

  66. StarWatcher
    StarWatcher July 28, 2006 at 8:48 pm |

    Sally said, …if you read the back pages of the local news section, you’ll see lots of instances of drunk teenaged boys getting into moronic bar fights or crashing their cars or falling into drainage ditches and drowning.

    Notice — most of those dangers are because of what the guys did. THEY got into bar fights, THEY drove drunk and crashed their cars. It was not a WOMAN who made them fight. It was not the CAR that took advantage of their drinking.

    The special emphasis on women’s vulnerability is completely out of proportion to the extra threats that women actually face.

    Bullshit. Rape is not something that a woman does; it’s something that a man does TO her. She thought she was being responsible — got into a cab for safety. But the MAN took advantage of the situation.

    In short, both women and men can get mugged, or drive drunk. But in these situations, only the women get raped — and then people blame her instead of the man. We damn well need a “special emphasis on women’s vulnerability” until the MEN quit acting like sexual predators.

  67. ginmar
    ginmar July 28, 2006 at 9:01 pm |

    AW, are you trying to be stupid, or are you just talented? Your survey size is….yourself.

  68. Sierra
    Sierra July 28, 2006 at 9:05 pm |

    The problem is that we have predators walking the streets, so be responsible and be alert. If you give yourself a fighting chance then you may be able to ward off the sociopath that stalks victims whether they be men or women. That is the lesson learned here, whether a man or a woman you place yourself at risk by drinking to excess where you can neither function well, fight or run.

    According to the article:

    An ex-con allegedly lured her into a cab early Tuesday, took her across the river, then raped and strangled her in a seedy Weehawken, N.J., hotel.

    If you’re walking down the street at night in NYC, drunk, knowing you’re being followed by some crazy guy offering to buy you drugs, you wouldn’t hail a cab if you could?

    And we know she didn’t fight HOW? You can be overpowered by someone stronger even if you’re sober.

  69. kate
    kate July 28, 2006 at 9:09 pm |

    In #29:

    The problem is NOT the behaviour of women, it is the behaviour of some sick-twisted f*cks with some serious mental issues who need to be culled from our gene pool. End of story.

    My sentiments exactly.

    Our society loves the story of the helpless woman struggling for her life and beaten and raped savagely. THe public can’t get enough of the stories of serial rapists, love to read the sordid details of a rape crime.

    This serves many purposes that many have hit on already. Women have the opportunity, like another poster said so well, to prop themselves into a comfortable position of judge, to deny the validity of the woman’s experience and to affirm her belief that playing ‘by the rules’ of the patriarchy will keep her out of similar trouble.

    Also, it serves as tittilation for many men, who for various reasons, fantasize about ‘taking’ a woman, but won’t cross that line. They identify deeply with the rapist, see him as a man first, as an attacker last.

    Conversely, the woman is a victim first, person last or never.

    Feminists should be up in arms not about whether young women drink too much in bars and thus make bad decisions, but that our society will do absolutely nothing to find out what drives these men and how to stop the behavior.

    Right now as we speak, thousands of young men are dreaming of, practicing or learning how to brutalize and rape women. And no one cares to find out why.

    But we’ll spend hours and hours talking about how millions of women should curb their behavior because those a few out of those thousands of young men are running loose on the streets, looking for their next victim.

  70. Sierra
    Sierra July 28, 2006 at 9:10 pm |

    and both headlines referenced the frantic call she had placed to her boyfriend as the man who would abduct, kill and rape her was stalking her on 12th Avenue.

    Actually, the man who abducted, raped and kill her was the driver of the taxi she got into on the advice of her boyfriend to get away from the guy stalkiner her on 12th avenue.

    Trouble followed her in the early-morning hours along a quiet stretch of 12th Avenue. Scared and confused, she called her boyfriend, who advised her to catch a cab.

    She apparently caught one with her killer.[...]

    Coleman allegedly raped the intoxicated girl, who fought back. Coleman then beat and choked her, and, convinced Moore was dead, stuffed her into a laundry bag, police said.

  71. StarWatcher
    StarWatcher July 28, 2006 at 9:10 pm |

    Therapist 1 says The problem is that we have predators walking the streets, so be responsible and be alert. If you give yourself a fighting chance then you may be able to ward off the sociopath that stalks victims whether they be men or women.

    She was 5-foot-2, 105 pounds. He is 6-foot-2, 240 pounds. I don’t care how “responsible and alert” the smaller person is; with those odds, your “fighting chance”, drunk or sober, is effectively zip. (Unless you have a black belt in martial arts. Maybe. Practice is not the same as a real life-or-death situation.)

    It is NOT the drinking, it is the conscienceless PREDATOR that causes rape.

  72. Sierra
    Sierra July 28, 2006 at 9:12 pm |

    stalkiner

    Where the hell did that spelling come from?

  73. Esme
    Esme July 28, 2006 at 9:24 pm |

    Nothing is perfect. If you ignore this and walk in bear infested territory, drunk, waving slabs of meat, during cubbing season (or whatever it’s called) and a bear kills you, then you are putting yourself in danger, which is never the sensible choice. Yes, the bear killed you, yes it must be shot , but yes you could have seen it coming.

    It is in the nature of bears to eat meat, and kill to get it. But this analogy says that a) we give bears the same rights and responsibilities not to kill or be killed as humans (we don’t) and b) likens the instinct of a bear to eat or protect its cubs to men raping and killing. Are you saying that the nature of men is to rape and kill, so it’s the job of women to protect themselves because the nature of men cannot be stopped? Because that’s the only interpretation of your statement I can find.

    You say that your point is “avoid risk,” but quite obviously that’s not the case. We don’t tell all people not to drive, though driving carries with it serious risks. We assess risks (what are my odds of getting grabbed on the street by a complete stranger, and being raped and killed) versus the benefit (live a life unrestrained by oppression of fear of rape) and then decide on our actions. You know, the person most likely to rape me is an intimate partner or acquaintance, by far in fact, but that doesn’t mean that I isolate myself in a society full entirely of women to avoid rape. It doesn’t mean I don’t date, doesn’t mean that I never allow myself to be alone with a man or several men.

    Shaming this woman, who was grabbed by a complete stranger, raped, and killed, serves to benefit no one except those who seek to control women with the threat of rape.

  74. Marksman2000
    Marksman2000 July 28, 2006 at 11:18 pm |

    Driving into manhattan to get tanked (while underage no less), then not calling parents or authorities for help when she and her friend got stranded was profoundly bad judgment.

    shudder when I see these girls all over new york getting blackout drunk…don’t they know that they are putting themselves in horrible danger? Beyond alcohol poisoning, they’re basically hanging a “fuck with me” sign on their backs.

    It never fails. Always will there be someone who wants to blame the victim. Yep. Young, dumb, drunk tramp got herself killed. Sure.

  75. Jannia
    Jannia July 29, 2006 at 12:06 am |

    It never fails. Always will there be someone who wants to blame the victim. Yep. Young, dumb, drunk tramp got herself killed. Sure.

    It never fails. There’ll always be someone who wants to pretend that we live in an ideal world without sociopaths. Nothing that young, dumb, drunk woman could have done to lower her chances of being raped and killed by a stranger. Nope, nothing at all.

    There have been assholes among us since the dawn of time. There’ll be assholes among us until we wipe ourselves off the face of the planet. Trying to pretend that if we just lecture the sociopaths enough they’ll behave the way we want them to is stupider than claiming this woman is responsible for being killed, or that she in no way increased the risk to herself by making idiotic decisions.

  76. Esme
    Esme July 29, 2006 at 12:36 am |

    Trying to pretend that if we just lecture the sociopaths enough they’ll behave the way we want them to is stupider than claiming this woman is responsible for being killed, or that she in no way increased the risk to herself by making idiotic decisions.

    Ah yes, those idiotic decisions of hers. Last year a teen I knew drank too much and never woke up. Every article about the death didn’t even mention the drinking, and none blamed the teen for it, despite binge drinking throughout highschool, and having consumed all the alcohol last night of their own free will. The alcohol was the direct cause of the teen’s death, and yet no one blamed them for it. Guess the gender of that kid.

    Meanwhile, a young woman who gets separated from her friend in an unfamiliar place, calls someone she trusts for help because she fears for her life, takes his advice, and entrusting that her cab driver will not be a killer (a reasonable assumption), is brutally raped and murdered. Ah yes, those idiotic decisions, truly she is deserving of shame, blame, and harsh punishment. Stone her to death! Oh, wait, that’s right, she’s dead. And why is she dead? Because a man, acting of his own free will, chased her down, lured her into a cab, raped her, and strangled her to death!

    She could have been walking down the street buck naked, or even walking around the man’s hotel room, screaming “lookit me, i’m a naked white drunk girl” and it would in no way excuse her rapist/murderer’s actions. Why? Because even if he was aroused, even if she was vulnerable, he still made the choice to rape her, and to kill her. And being vulnerable is not a crime, and it does not make you to blame for things that happen to you, unless you’re about to start blaming kids for being so danged enticing to pedophiles when they know better. Or the disabled, or the mentally handicapped, or elderly, or any of the many groups which are particularly prone to rape.

    Those of you saying we aren’t in touch with reality because we don’t think it’s a woman’s job to spend her life trying to prevent other people from assaulting are dead wrong. We know that there are f*cked up people in the world, cruel people, sociopathic people, misogynists, etc. Why do you think we’re not acknowleging the existence of these people by saying that those people are to blame?

  77. Sierra
    Sierra July 29, 2006 at 1:32 am |

    And trying to pretend that all rapists are just sociopathic Others completely distinct from Normal Men is in all likelihood the stupidest comment of all. When 70~% of rapes are committed by friends and relatives, you can’t simply say that we all just *happen* to know incurable inexplicable sociopaths.

    If you insist on saying that, perhaps we should consider routinely interning men until they’re past puberty to make sure they aren’t sociopaths. The length beyond puberty can be related to the country of origin, with those hailing from higher-rate-of-rape countries staying longer.

    She got in the cab to get AWAY from the creepy guy following her down the street. Would you have done differently? And if she had refused the cab before being murdered by the creepy guy on the street, would she be an idiot for missing her chance to get out of that situation?

  78. Jannia
    Jannia July 29, 2006 at 4:23 am |

    When 70~% of rapes are committed by friends and relatives, you can’t simply say that we all just *happen* to know incurable inexplicable sociopaths.

    Which is irrelevant to this story, where a woman was attacked and killed by a complete stranger.

    If you insist on saying that, perhaps we should consider routinely interning men until they’re past puberty to make sure they aren’t sociopaths.

    Why focus on men? It’s not like women can’t be sociopaths. And with 3% of men and 1% of women having some degree of ASD, there are a hell of a lot of them out there. Maybe we should lock everyone up. Now all we need is a reliable test. Guess we’re all going to be locked up together forever. That’ll be fun. Hey! The sociopaths are in here with us! How’d that happen? Or are women somehow special and never criminals in your world?

    Would you have done differently?

    Yes, actually.

    I don’t park my car in tow zones.

    I go barhopping with friends I can trust to watch my back, not get so drunk they’re going to get hauled off in ambulances.

    If I’m with someone I don’t know won’t get blind drunk and be unable to watch my back, I don’t drink.

    I don’t get seriously drunk, even if I am with someone I know and trust. Especially if someone has to drive home afterward. Double especially if I’ve parked my car in a tow zone and am likely to have to handle it being impounded, since that involves interacting with cops, who tend to frown on things like drunk driving and public intoxication.

    I wouldn’t have gone to get a car out of the impound lot in the middle of the night when I was still obviously drunk. I’d go to a hotel and sleep it off instead. (The nice thing about not parking in no-parking zones in the first place? You can afford to stay overnight in a hotel because you don’t have to pay impound fees.)

    If I had tried, and failed to do so, because I was still obviously drunk, I would have asked the nice police officer to arrange for me to get someplace safe. Even if it involved the drunk tank. Because …

    I would NOT, under any circumstances, go wandering around alone in an unfamiliar neighborhood in the middle of the night, obviously intoxicated. Because you know, 4% of the people I meet are as likely to try to mug/rape/kill me as they are to walk past. And since most crimes against strangers are crimes of opportunity, I try to avoid intentionally offering those opportunities.

    Because I’m not stupid, I try not to make obviously stupid decisions. And if I realize I’ve made a stupid decision, I sack up and accept the consequences now, before trying to avoid the consequences of that one stupid decision leads to a whole bunch of other stupid decisions that end up with getting me hurt.

    It’s like running out into a crosswalk without bothering to check traffic. Legally I have the right of way, since drivers are supposed to stop for pedestrians, but if I get run over, it’s kind of ingenuous to say “there was no way to avoid it”. Yeah, the driver should have stopped. They didn’t, I’m dead, and if I’d bothered to check and make sure the driver knew I was there, it wouldn’t have happened. The driver broke the law and can be charged with manslaugher or murder, and I was an idiot.

  79. ginmar
    ginmar July 29, 2006 at 8:42 am |

    t never fails. There’ll always be someone who wants to pretend that we live in an ideal world without sociopaths. Nothing that young, dumb, drunk woman could have done to lower her chances of being raped and killed by a stranger. Nope, nothing at all.

    Ah, the famous “You silly fools! This is just part of life, deal iwth it!” advice. So remind me again how feminists are the ones who say all men are rapists?

    Oh, yeah, and bonus points for implying that we’re precious little Pollyannas who believe in a perfect world against all reality. The idea that a woman could actually go out on the town and not get raped and killed and then blamed is evidently so outlandish that it can only be explained by drug-induced euphoria or something.

    You live in a world where women should expect to get raped by any man any time they show some vulnerability. Yet supposedly I’m the one who belongs to the political affiliation that hates men.

  80. ginmar
    ginmar July 29, 2006 at 9:45 am |

    Oh, by the way, this?

    Which is irrelevant to this story, where a woman was attacked and killed by a complete stranger.

    It’s relevant to reality, where women get blamed for not being cautious enough to avoid all the freedoms that men have—-including the freedom to assault women at will without being mentioned more than vaguely.

    So, let’s talk about this rapist. Anybody want to? He’s the least-discussed person on this thread. I’ve heard about the victim’s safety habits over and over again but if I hadn’t read the newspaper article I wouldn’t know anything about him because we’re too busy fending off attacks on a dead girl. Takes a lot of bravery to attack a dead girl—almost as much as it does for some guy double her size to attack her. How come nobody wants to touch his character issues? Maybe if we gave that a shot, the next guy would think twice.

  81. Sierra
    Sierra July 29, 2006 at 10:14 am |

    I don’t park my car in tow zones.

    Neither did she. Her friend parked illegally. Are you saying there’s a reasonable relationship between ‘parking in tow-away zones’ (which are not necessarily always clearly marked or uniformly enforced) and ‘being raped and murdered?’

    I don’t get seriously drunk, even if I am with someone I know and trust.

    I bet you did when you were eighteen (or whenever you first discovered alcohol) and didn’t know your limits. Our laws say she’s too young to be responsible around alcohol, yet obviously she brought her rape on herself for not being responsible around alcohol (never mind that what precipitated her rape was NOT the fact that she was drunk, but that she got into a cab with someone looking to rape and murder). Shouldn’t the bartender have refused her?

    Why focus on men? It’s not like women can’t be sociopaths.

    Because we’re talking about rape, last time I checked, and according to you, rape can be adequately explained by ‘there are sociopaths in the world.’

    I wouldn’t have gone to get a car out of the impound lot in the middle of the night when I was still obviously drunk. I’d go to a hotel and sleep it off instead. (The nice thing about not parking in no-parking zones in the first place? You can afford to stay overnight in a hotel because you don’t have to pay impound fees.)

    And I suppose you’d walk to the hotel alone and drunk, especially if you knew a crazy guy was following you? You’re not so stupid as to hail a cab, right?

    If I had tried, and failed to do so, because I was still obviously drunk, I would have asked the nice police officer to arrange for me to get someplace safe. Even if it involved the drunk tank. Because …

    So we can trust police officers, but not cab drivers? What, police officers are immune to sociopathy? No one has ever been raped by a police officer?

    It’s like running out into a crosswalk without bothering to check traffic. Legally I have the right of way, since drivers are supposed to stop for pedestrians, but if I get run over, it’s kind of ingenuous to say “there was no way to avoid it”. Yeah, the driver should have stopped. They didn’t, I’m dead, and if I’d bothered to check and make sure the driver knew I was there, it wouldn’t have happened. The driver broke the law and can be charged with manslaugher or murder, and I was an idiot.

    Except that there’s not a reasonable connection between ‘get into a cab because you’re scared of some crazy guy stalking you’ and ‘being raped and murdered,’ while there’s a pretty reasonable connection between ‘running into the street’ and ‘getting hit by a car.’

    And funny thing, when we hear about someone getting hit by a car, very rarely do we have people falling over themselves saying, “What an idiot! How could someone just go into the street like that? I’m glad I’m not that stupid!”

  82. Lesley
    Lesley July 29, 2006 at 10:37 am |

    And if I realize I’ve made a stupid decision, I sack up and accept the consequences now, before trying to avoid the consequences of that one stupid decision leads to a whole bunch of other stupid decisions that end up with getting me hurt.

    Hard to “sack up and accept the consequences” once you’ve been raped and murdered, isn’t it? I also presume that you’re older than 18 and probably learned a lot from stupid decisions you made when you were younger, none of which wound up with the “consequence” of you being murdered. Lots of people make stupid decisions and don’t wind up dead in a hotel room after being brutally beaten and raped. Those are NOT the natural consequences of making stupid decisions. The natural consequence of getting too drunk? Having a hangover; maybe vomiting. The natural consequence of parking in a tow zone? Having to pay a lot to get your car released. The natural consequence of wandering around an unfamiliar neighborhood? Not knowing anyone. [Since she was from the NYC metro area, it probably wasn't all that unfamiliar an area anyway. It's pretty damn close to the Lincoln Tunnel entrance. It's also right by the Javitz Center and a ferry stop from Weehawken and Hoboken to New York.]

    BTW, of course we don’t live in an ideal world. Not one person here ever pretended we did, despite the pretty little strawman. Nonetheless, every day, people go out and get drunk. The vast, vast, vast majority of them do not get abducted, raped, and murdered. So if you want to restrict your life out of fear of something that’s very unlikely to occur, by all means, live your life how you see fit. The sad thing is that if, despite your precautions, you were to get raped (and maybe you have been, I don’t know), someone just like you would come along and nicely point out all the things you should have done differently. Because, you know, if you had just not done this or that, well…

    If someone dies in a plane crash, do you blame them for having the poor judgment to get on an airplane? Sure, planes aren’t likely to crash, but if they do, your chances of survival are pretty low. And, really, the vast majority of us can easily live our lives without ever having to get on a plane; it’s definitely a choice. Anyone who does fly knows the risks and willingly accepts them. So if the plane crashes, hey, they knew the risks. Sack up and accept the consequences, right? Or do you recognize that an equipment malfunction or a pilot error are out of the control of the passengers, so if they occur, they’re not the fault of the passengers? Even though the passengers knew that they might happen and could have completely avoided the risk by just not getting on the plane in the first place. If someone decides to commit a crime against you, it’s out of your control. It would be damn nice if it weren’t, but it is. Are there things you can do to mitigate the risk? Sure. Don’t get on a plane. Don’t walk in an unfamiliar neighborhood. We don’t blame the passengers for dying when the plane crashes. We recognize it was out of their control. We put the blame on the airlines and expect them to increase their standards. When it comes to rape and murder, though? No, somehow, that the victim was supposed to control. Care to speculate why?

  83. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite July 29, 2006 at 10:48 am |

    And funny thing, when we hear about someone getting hit by a car, very rarely do we have people falling over themselves saying, “What an idiot! How could someone just go into the street like that? I’m glad I’m not that stupid!”

    Funny you should mention it. In this morning’s New York tabloids, there’s an article about an oldish couple who were struck and killed by a car as they were leaving a restaurant on Long Island the night before last. They were crossing a five-lane highway on foot in the dark in the rain.

    When I read the article, I did think to myself, “well, that was stupid of them,” in that way that you sometimes do. I had pretty much the same reaction to Jennifer Moore’s behavior before she was murdered.

    So it’s not that none of us judge people who are hit by cars. It’s more that those of us who do judge people who get hit by cars rarely frame those judgments as urgent warnings to an entire gender and age cohort, and that we rarely feel compelled to post our judgments on our own or others’ blogs.

    I’m not particularly bothered by the fact that people read a story like Moore’s and think, “she should have been more careful.” As you suggest, it’s the spectacle of people falling over themselves to express those sentiments, as if they offered profound and rare insight, that’s odd.

  84. Lesley
    Lesley July 29, 2006 at 11:15 am |

    On the car thing, I would like to point out that if you step in front of a speeding car, there may well be no time for the driver to react and avoid hitting you. Further, if you are crossing in front of oncoming traffic in the dark, there may well be no way for the driver to see you in time to react and avoid hitting you. Therefore, your actions may well have put the driver in the position of not being able to avoid hitting you. NEVER does a person’s actions put a rapist in a position of not being able to avoid raping. The two are not comparable situations.

  85. car
    car July 29, 2006 at 11:54 am |

    It’s obvious, isn’t it? People blame the victim because it makes them feel safer. “Well, SHE got raped and killed because she was stupid, but I’M not that stupid, so I don’t have to worry about being raped or killed.” It lets them not think about the fact that the rapist/murderer is still out there and might come across them next, and feel somehow empowered that it can’t happen to them because they are too smart/clever/alert for that to happen. Of course, then they don’t do anything to try and change the system, and the victim/victim’s family feels even worse.

  86. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite July 29, 2006 at 1:11 pm |

    In the Daily News this morning, Jennifer Moore’s father Hugh is quoted saying that she made “a terrible mistake,” and that he wishes that she’d called to ask him to pick her up, as he’d previously encouraged her to do if she got into a jam:

    Hoping that other teens may learn from his family’s pain, Moore said he would have told his daughter: “You may get a penalty. You may get a lecture. You may get grounded.” But at least you get to come back home.

    Moore’s father also made it clear, apparently, where he thinks culpability lies:

    He refused to blame NYPD employees for his daughter’s death. He also would not blame his daughter’s friend Talia Kenan, who had gone clubbing with his daughter before passing out at the impound lot. [...] Hugh Moore said the only person at fault is 34-year-old Draymond Coleman, the ex-con accused of kidnapping, raping [and] killing [his daughter].

    I don’t find much to argue with in Moore’s statements. I don’t think it’s always victim-blaming (or perpetrator-exonerating) to wish that someone who was the target of a horrible crime had been more cognizant of the risks he or she faced.

    That said, though, there’s a lot of difference between Hugh Moore encouraging young people to reach out to people who care about them if they find themselves in danger and someone posting a blog comment saying that women who get drunk in public are “basically hanging a ‘fuck with me’ sign on their backs.”

  87. Sally
    Sally July 29, 2006 at 1:30 pm |

    People blame the victim because it makes them feel safer.

    That’s a big part of it. But in this case, I think she’s also catching some of the resentment that city people have for suburbanites who think they can come to the city and act like idiots and assholes. Because when push comes to shove, she tried to drive through Manhattan drunk off her ass. The only reason she didn’t do it is because some alert lot attendant didn’t let her. She could very well have been the murderer that night. This is like the perfect storm of a story: it allows suburban parents to do the “look what happens when your sweet, innocent daughter goes to the big, bad city” thing, and it simultaneously allows New Yorkers to shake their heads at the dumb-ass things that rich kids from New Jersey do.

  88. Impulsivecompulsive
    Impulsivecompulsive July 29, 2006 at 1:30 pm |

    So, let’s talk about this rapist. Anybody want to? He’s the least-discussed person on this thread. I’ve heard about the victim’s safety habits over and over again but if I hadn’t read the newspaper article I wouldn’t know anything about him because we’re too busy fending off attacks on a dead girl.
    Yeah, I have a question. Given that she wasn’t raped and killed by a bottle of gin, as some here seem to beleive, but by a man driving a cab, I kinda gotta wonder how the hell he ended up behind the wheel of a taxi. Did he steal the car? Was he working for the company? How the hell did he manage to weasel his way into a position where some poor woman would be forced to be at his mercy?

  89. Sally
    Sally July 29, 2006 at 1:33 pm |

    Do we know that he was driving the cab? I got the impression that he was in the cab and either grabbed her or convinced her that she could share the cab with him. They’re apparently looking for the cab driver.

  90. Sally
    Sally July 29, 2006 at 1:36 pm |

    ETA: when I was in high school, I did know someone who was raped by a cab driver. She was passed out drunk, her friends put her in the cab and gave the driver some money and her address, and he took her back to his apartment and raped her. She woke up the next morning in his empty apartment and called the cops. As far as I know, cab companies don’t screen for criminal record, and it’s not like it would mean anything even if they did.

    Which goes to show that you can do the right thing and still get raped. Because I don’t think it would ever have occurred to her friends in a million years that taking a cab wouldn’t be safe.

  91. Brooklynite
    Brooklynite July 29, 2006 at 1:36 pm |

    Yeah, I have a question. Given that she wasn’t raped and killed by a bottle of gin, as some here seem to beleive, but by a man driving a cab, I kinda gotta wonder how the hell he ended up behind the wheel of a taxi.

    I don’t think he was behind the wheel. News reports suggest that he somehow managed to get her into a cab that someone else was driving, but the driver of the cab hasn’t yet been identified.

  92. Impulsivecompulsive
    Impulsivecompulsive July 29, 2006 at 1:48 pm |

    News reports suggest that he somehow managed to get her into a cab that someone else was driving, but the driver of the cab hasn’t yet been identified.

    My bad, I was under the impression that he was the driver.

    ETA: when I was in high school, I did know someone who was raped by a cab driver. She was passed out drunk, her friends put her in the cab and gave the driver some money and her address, and he took her back to his apartment and raped her. She woke up the next morning in his empty apartment and called the cops. As far as I know, cab companies don’t screen for criminal record, and it’s not like it would mean anything even if they did.

    And then there’s that. Just freakin’ lovely.

  93. ginmar
    ginmar July 29, 2006 at 1:54 pm |

    Yeah, that cab driver ought to be charged as an accessory.

    I once called a cab company to bitch after a cabbie followed me for a block while hte passenger hooted and hollered at me from the back window. The hell? The drive didn’t see anything wrong with it when I chewed him out and I’m not sure about his boss. They sure took it seriously when another cabbie used a racial epithet later, though.

  94. kate
    kate July 29, 2006 at 3:32 pm |

    Janina, the girl was 19 years old, a kid and probably a middle class white kid at that with no street smarts whatsover.

    The judgement calls you describe come from someone either far older than that girl, or far more experienced in navigating their way through the city.

    Why focus on men? It’s not like women can’t be sociopaths. And with 3% of men and 1% of women having some degree of ASD, there are a hell of a lot of them out there.

    Because men committ 90% or more of violent crimes and last I knew, far over 90% of the violent crimes directed toward women and those resulting in death and/or serious injury. In fact, serial rape and murder so far has been the career path of men only.

    Why do you accept the presence of Anti-Social Disorder, or Psychopathology and not wonder why we as a society do not do more to control its development?

    I mean, you seem to have no problem with women modifying their behavior and how they are taught, so you must be willing to consider that a group that does the majority of violent acts in a society should at least be looked at and maybe serious consideration given to what causes their behavior and making social modifications/controls to stop it?

    Possibly the status quo affords the path of least resistance eh? People will cry that men cannot be controlled or their behavior modifed — the animal is as the animal does! And that women, being the weaker and easier party to control, remain the controlled party.

    Or could it be that some women really need other women to sacrifice themselves to the patriarchy, to be offered up as examples of ‘foolishness’ debauchery to afford women and girls a good lesson in proper behavior.

    So when we look at what these women died for at least we don’t have to weep that they died for nothing. At least we can see their martyrdom for the patriarchy and remember that since there are sharks in the sea, we shan’t even place our little toes too close to the tide.

  95. Esme
    Esme July 29, 2006 at 5:21 pm |

    Amen kate.

  96. Fingal
    Fingal July 29, 2006 at 7:53 pm |

    What I mean is that we don’t usually criticize people who were hurt or killed–even if there’s something that they could have done to avoid it, unless the person is a woman, and she’s been raped. Why, why, why is that?

    Really? when somebody stands on the top step of a ladder and falls off and breaks his arm, I think we *do* say that guy was a dumbass. If he breaks his neck, then I think we soften our criticism to something more like, geez, y’know, you really need to not stand on that top step, ’cause it’s dangerous. Then we might begin to think geez, didn’t that guy’s father teach him anything about life?

    Saying she could and should have avoided the situation is entirely separate from the question of the rapist’s guilt. I haven’t heard anyone say that the rapist’s lawyers should argue that going into Manhattan underage, female, with drunkenness on the agenda, and without a plan B, makes you fair game for rape.

    And the reason nobody says anything about the rapist is, what is there to say? Whether or not the cops have the right guy at this point, whoever *is* the rapist is an asshole and everybody knows it, it’s not at issue.

    -F.

  97. Fingal
    Fingal July 29, 2006 at 8:21 pm |

    Why focus on men? It’s not like women can’t be sociopaths. And with 3% of men and 1% of women having some degree of ASD, there are a hell of a lot of them out there.

    Because men committ 90% or more of violent crimes and last I knew, far over 90% of the violent crimes directed toward women and those resulting in death and/or serious injury. In fact, serial rape and murder so far has been the career path of men only.

    Yes, when you’re physically strong, and mentally unbalanced, you may tend to do a lot more physical acting out. But who is it who’s been saying for decades that employment decisions should be made gender-blind? Not the patriarchy.

    Still, the odds are still pretty good that any random male human you meet isn’t a psychopathic rape-murderer.

    Possibly the status quo affords the path of least resistance eh? People will cry that men cannot be controlled or their behavior modifed — the animal is as the animal does! And that women, being the weaker and easier party to control, remain the controlled party.

    This is silly. Nobody is throwing up their hands and saying to let boys just be boys and rape as they see fit. The patriarchy has a category called capital rape. Applied more often, no doubt, when the accused is ethnically different from the ruling class, but there’s no doubt that rape is considered a very serious crime. And your sentence about women, weakness, and control sophomorically equates physical with social power, or I might bother to disagree with it.

    So when we look at what these women died for at least we don’t have to weep that they died for nothing. At least we can see their martyrdom for the patriarchy and remember that since there are sharks in the sea, we shan’t even place our little toes too close to the tide.

    Quick, bring me my tiniest violin.

    -F.

  98. R. Mildred
    R. Mildred July 29, 2006 at 9:11 pm |

    I think Bensays got this one down pat, if this woman didn’t want to get raped, she shouldn’t have joined the military in the first place, she has no one to blame but herself.

  99. gw
    gw July 29, 2006 at 10:11 pm |

    For fuck’s sake, people! Deliberately getting so drunk or high that you are impaired is dangerous. Period. It shows bad judgement. Whether the danger is operating machinery and cutting your hand off by mistake, driving your car into a tree, acting reckless and falling to your death by climbing, or allowing yourself to be victimized by a killer. She could have walked off a cliff — I doubt anyone would take issue with someone saying she should have shown better judgement.

    In fact, our society is often quite good about trying to protect foolish, impaired people from danger. The fact that Ms. Moore’s companion and another drunk lady were cared for and hospitalized when they were at the towtruck office is an example of that.

    I am sorry for her, sorry for her family. If the guy they are charging is guilty, he should suffer the penalty for her murder, the bastard.

    But I also am experiencing a little bit of “there but the grace of God go I”, remembering my youth. I was lucky. Or maybe I stepped back from the brink in time. However, I am not willing to advocate a world where it is improper to bring up responsiblity when people who do foolish and risky things suffer for their actions.

    Boys and men are in the same category, as someone pointed out; the particular manner of the dangers that face them may be different, but it is still foolish and risky to become impaired.

  100. Natalia
    Natalia July 30, 2006 at 12:36 am |

    ***or allowing yourself to be victimized by a killer.***

    How does one allow oneself to be victimized by a killer exactly?????? Rape and murder are defined as acts that occur against the victim’s will. The victim doesn’t “allow” anything. The victim has no choice in the matter.

  101. Norah
    Norah July 30, 2006 at 2:19 am |

    gw, that was the most unsympathetic, dickwaddish comment I think I’ve ever read on this particular subject.

    I am not willing to advocate a world where it is improper to bring up responsiblity when people who do foolish and risky things suffer for their actions.

    An 18 year old girl is responsible for her own rape and murder because…she drank too much? Behaved foolishly? Is that really what you’re saying here? Jesus, I hope your kids, if you have any, have someone to call if they get in trouble.

  102. Lorelei
    Lorelei July 30, 2006 at 2:43 pm |

    You know what, this is what we do in a world that ISN’T ideal and DOES have sociopaths (even though most rapists have no mental disorder whatsoever, they’re just privileged) but STILL keep the world safe for women so they can actually leave their damn house:

    Actually make sure the justice system works!!!

    That’s right, folks… if we actually imprisoned rapists, life would be much easier, wouldn’tcha think?

    But no. People who keep saying that it’s the girl’s fault, it’s the alcohol’s fault, it’s David Hasselhoff’s fault… you people are half the reason rapists DON’T GET IMPRISONED. Because while you perpetuate these rape myths and prejudices, people in the courts also hold these beliefs… and that’s why no-one wants to convict a rapist. Rapist sympathizing makes sure rapists are on our streets.

  103. Fingal
    Fingal July 30, 2006 at 4:50 pm |

    Because while you perpetuate these rape myths and prejudices, people in the courts also hold these beliefs… and that’s why no-one wants to convict a rapist. Rapist sympathizing makes sure rapists are on our streets.

    Which rape myths? The one that says women secretly want to be raped, I don’t think anyone with an IQ over 25 has believed for decades. Ditto that a woman’s short skirts or bralessness or not veiling her face can morph Dr. Jekyll into (SCHWINNNGG!!!) Mr. Hyde. Or maybe people are even stupider than I think, but if that’s the case, please point me at the court records or the media accounts of this kind of idiocy.

    In cases of acquaintance rape, there is always the question of consent, which, myths or not, can be difficult to answer definitively, as the crime usually starts out as a consensual association that becomes non-consensual after the witnesses are gone. And I hope you aren’t saying that you refuse to believe that a woman would never, ever, be a willing partner until after the fact, then have an attack of shame and guilt, leading her to misrepresent what happened, even if it means sending an innocent guy to jail.

    This is, of course, pretty clearly not what happened to Jennifer Moore. Nobody (that I’ve heard) suggests that this was even marginally consensual.

    -F.

  104. Fingal
    Fingal July 30, 2006 at 4:53 pm |

    my bad: “never, ever” should be “ever

  105. Lorelei
    Lorelei July 30, 2006 at 5:02 pm |

    Way to miss the point, Fingal.

    First of all, there are PLENTY of people (dare I say, a majority) who believe that believe that women who wear short skirts are asking for it somehow. I’m not doing your googling for you.

    And there are definitely still people who think that women secretly want to be raped, as if it means anything.

    NOT ONLY THAT, but there are more than two rape myths, buddy.

    I didn’t say that people didn’t think it was consensual. What I said is that everyone is much more willing to blame, like I said, her or the alcohol. This misplacement of blame is a big problem in our society, and because everyone wants so badly to blame everyone BUT the perp, it DOES affect our justice system.

    You know, there *are* women who do that, Fingal. However… you have a 2% chance of that happening, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER CRIME. But it’s not like 95% of rape charges end in conviction anyway.

    We are so careful to make sure we don’t offend or hurt the poor wittle menses that we give them permission to hurt women.

    We have an even bigger problem with the ‘perfect victim’ mentality here. Jennifer Moore was not the perfect victim, even though she’s dead (which does increase her good victim points). Because she wasn’t the perfect victim, we’ve had all of… what… ten comments talking about the rapist.

    Good God, I should start drinking or something. I can’t deal with hearing and reading myself say/type the same things over and over and OVER again.

  106. Claudia
    Claudia July 30, 2006 at 6:02 pm |

    Fingal: Do some learning. Google rape myths, or just read this thread. Don’t claim they don’t exist, it’s just not true.

  107. Natalia
    Natalia July 30, 2006 at 8:04 pm |

    All of this reminds me of the night my mother was attacked in the stairwell of our building in Kiev. I was running a high fever and my father was working late, and she nipped out to the 24-hour pharmacy a couple of blocks away. The lock on the front door had malfunctioned, and when she got back, a beer-scented thug followed her inside.

    Thank God she had our Doberman with her. The dog had run ahead, then sensed the presence of the would-be rapist (although at that point my mother didn’t even have time to scream), ran back, and threw him down the stairs. She would have killed him too, if my mother had given the command.

    Naturally the local apologists started buzzing with outrage the next day: “What was my mouther doing out so late???” “Didn’t she realize it was dangerous?” And, my favourite “The poor man thumped his head pretty badly. Didn’t my mother have any heart?”

  108. ginmar
    ginmar July 30, 2006 at 8:53 pm |

    That’s because women are shit, and are supposed to accept it. In fact, having any form of self esteem, rebelling at all, is considered a form of revolution, of revolt, and that by a creature that’s revolting and disgusting.

    Sexism: it’s what brings nations together. It’s so touching.

  109. Therapist1
    Therapist1 July 30, 2006 at 10:36 pm |

    I agree that it is the fucking predator that causes the rape. What frustrates me is that had she not been drunk she might be alive, and just raped. Maybe not raped and just beaten. Most defense studies show us that most of these guys do not want a girl who will fight!!! A student I knew used to teache ground fighting to women. In his thought process, it is going to be hard to keep a determined predator from you once he has you on the ground unless you know what you are doing. Sure as hell one of his students did it in a date rape situation, and it worked. None of you have one time denied the fact that predators exist, and we can’t get them out of our “gene pool”, so understand and wisen the fuck up and do not walk home drunk. Jesus, I am 6’0 190 and do not do that for fear of being jumped, robbed, raped or killed. Live in the reality we have not the one you want. Even the female police I work with ask, what was she thinking going down there this time of night alone? Sometimes there is nothing you can do, I realize this, but at least give yourself a fighting chance. Then you at least come to my office with a fearful story, not one with such a traumatic ending.

  110. Lorelei
    Lorelei July 31, 2006 at 12:56 am |

    Sexism: it’s what brings nations together. It’s so touching.

    But the real question is: Is it for breakfast?

    Honestly, though, the bonding over sexism… it brings a tear to my eye.

    >:|

  111. Q Grrl
    Q Grrl July 31, 2006 at 9:32 am |

    Then you at least come to my office with a fearful story, not one with such a traumatic ending.

    Yeah, ’cause it’s all about keeping the men feeling safe and happy. Even the men that rape us.

    p.s. you’d be the last one I came to with a “story” about rape. Who are you to judge the depth of trauma on your terms?

  112. Thomas
    Thomas July 31, 2006 at 10:22 am |

    do not walk home drunk

    She didn’t. She got a cab.

    Is there absolutely nothing a woman can do that, if she is raped, won’t be called stupid in hindsight? That’s a rhetorical question. In fact, I have never seen a discussion of rape where the non-feminists didn’t blame the victim. It’s either just-world thinking or protecting the patriarchy; and usually some of both.

  113. Sierra
    Sierra July 31, 2006 at 10:51 am |

    What frustrates me is that had she not been drunk she might be alive, and just raped. Maybe not raped and just beaten. Most defense studies show us that most of these guys do not want a girl who will fight!!!

    See, this is why it’s helpful to actually RTFA before you go a-victim blaming.

    Coleman allegedly raped the intoxicated girl, who fought back. Coleman then beat and choked her, and, convinced Moore was dead, stuffed her into a laundry bag, police said.

    But the teen began to move inside the bag and Coleman choked her to death, police sources said.

    None of you have one time denied the fact that predators exist, and we can’t get them out of our “gene pool”, so understand and wisen the fuck up and do not walk home drunk.

    As has been pointed out, she didn’t just say to herself, “I’m gonna go get drunk and walk home!” Her friend’s car was impounded, and she hailed a cab on the advice of her boyfriend because some guy was following her. Walking home alone drunk might have saved her life. The fact of the matter is, you DO NOT KNOW whether any given man is going to hurt you, and no matter how reasonable your choices are (like hailing a cab because you’re out late in an unfamiliar area being followed by some creep), you could still be attacked.

    And Fingal,

    Let me be the first to say emphatically that if anyone is misrepresenting what happened after witnesses were gone, it is most likely the man saying “She consented!” Women really have very little to gain by pressing charges of rape, ESPECIALLY in cases of date-rape, and a hell of a lot to lose. Look at this thread if you don’t believe me. This girl is DEAD and people still want to fault her, so just imagine how much worse (well, you don’t really have to imagine: just pay attention next time you hear about a date-rape) it would be if Jennifer were alive and not visibly harmed, alleging rape against someone she had gone on a date with.

    but there’s no doubt that rape is considered a very serious crime.

    Yes, there is. There’s a whole lot of doubt. Watch, I’m doubting right now as I read your comments.

  114. Claudia
    Claudia July 31, 2006 at 11:05 am |

    What frustrates me is that had she not been drunk she might be alive, and just raped.

    This made me a little sick. Therapist1, please never use the phrase ‘just raped’ if anyone ever comes to you for support.

  115. wumhenry
    wumhenry July 31, 2006 at 2:59 pm |

    The problem is not that “stupid girls” or “foolish women” are “putting themselves into stupid situations”… the problem is that men who rape are walking the streets.

    And that women are walking the same streets with no effective means of protection.

    That girl could have been dead sober, and she would still be raped and dead. She could have been wearing a skirt to her ankles, and she’d still be raped and dead.

    But would she have been raped and murdered if she’d been carrying a concealed handgun?

    Venting anger at all the identified and unidentified perps who have preyed upon women, or at Society for “failing to address root causes” won’t save you, or anyone else, from being raped, kidnapped, and/or murdered.

  116. Sheelzebub
    Sheelzebub July 31, 2006 at 3:12 pm |

    So now we’re to blame for not packing heat. Lovely. Fuck off.

    It’s not “venting anger”–it’s putting the blame where it belongs, on the asshole shithead perp, NOT the victim.

  117. ginmar
    ginmar July 31, 2006 at 3:21 pm |

    Oh, fucking A, as if any of these trolls would accept a woman’s statement that the guy was going to rape her and she had no choice to kill the bastard. We don’t believe them now why on earth would we believe them when they kill a guy?

    I love how everybody assumes that guns are so easy to get, maintain, and fire accurately. There’s a reason people tell you to run from a guy with a handgun: they’re not that accurate. Also, some people don’t like guns. HOw about we just lock up the rapists, huh, sport? How about we put them away, okay, Sparky?

  118. ginmar
    ginmar July 31, 2006 at 4:01 pm |

    Not only that, it puts the onus on women yet again to defend ourselves and takes men out the equation entirely. It’s the Wild West and we don’t get to demand that the rules change or else. It’s like a video game.

  119. Sailorman
    Sailorman July 31, 2006 at 4:14 pm |

    # Lorelei Says:
    July 28th, 2006 at 6:54 pm
    Yeah, you know Sailor, that’s fine and dandy and all, but you know what? Bill goes to criminal court to charge for assault, NO-ONE is EVER going to say, ‘Well, ya know Bill, you shouldn’t have been in a biker’s bar with an anti-Bush shirt… so your assailant will not go to prison. Sorry pal.’

    Nope. They’ll say it behind his back though. And the judge may well tell him so as well (though he shouldn’t) I’ve seen it happen myself.

    HOWEVER, if a girl is drunk and is raped, and she goes to court to file a rape charge, they WILL most likely say to her, ‘Well, you shouldn’t have been drunk, so this gentleman is free to go.’
    Hmm. Do you want a honest answer to that? Oh hell, why not…

    First: The girl’s actions can never excuse the rapist’s behavior. That much is clear. I am, personally, not talking about the rapist mostly because why do i need to? He’s a sick fuck; he’ll go to prison; perhaps he’ll die there for all I care.

    The problem with drunk victims and rape is that unless it was a violent rape or unless there is some other “indicator” of nonconsent… it is more difficult to get a conviction. The perp can claim consent, he gets the presumption of innocence, and… it’s a harder case to win if your star witness was shitfaced at the time of the rape.

    It DOESN’T mean she “deserved it” because nobody deserves to be raped. It doesn’t mean she “led him on” because that is no excuse. However, it might be enough to weaken the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

    This is a LEGAL problem, not a moral one. What he did was wrong. The law doesn’t make his actions any better. But it is, in fact, extremely hard to try to maintain protections for innocent people and also convict a good number of actual rapists in he said/she said situations. Writing the law is very difficult to get right. I do not do rape law now but I have worked rape cases; if you want to talk about some of the legal problems I’d be happy to.

    Yes, victim-blaming language perpetuates this lack of justice. This lack of justice causes more rape. And so it goes…

    Think about that next time you try and say shit about a rape victim, hmm?

    Hmm. I will concede it’s possible that discussing the issues of the girl (even while condemning the rapist) may have a broader effect that is negative. I, personally, haven’t “said shit” about the girl though, but nonetheless I will consider that next time.

  120. Sierra
    Sierra July 31, 2006 at 4:19 pm |

    But would she have been raped and murdered if she’d been carrying a concealed handgun?

    Here’s the thing about handguns: sure, a gun might be an effective anti-rape weapon, but it could quickly become a very effective pro-rape weapon, too, and now you’re not only fighting against a rapist, but you’re fighting against a rapist with a gun. That, along with all the other problems others have pointed out, would lead to far more victim blaming.

    This is why I can’t wait until Rapex comes to the US. It’s amazing how many men are against it that I’ve talked to, usually citing some variation on the “Some Conniving Bitch will trick me into sleeping with her” or “ALL VAGINAS MUST BE SAFE FOR ME THE ENTITLED MAN!” themes.

    While I don’t dispute that, were every woman armed with a concealed weapon that she had been trained to fire accurately, the number of rapes (or at least, the number of rapists) might go down, I doubt that’s going to happen any time soon, and it’s a bit unreasonable to blame an 18 year old for not carrying a concealed handgun. I don’t know about New York, but in California, it is illegal for anyone under 21 to even purchase a handgun, let alone get a permit for a concealed weapon.

    And I’m going to go ahead and disagree with you regarding what reduces rape. Rape is a crime committed by and large by men against women, in large part because attitudes, like yours, condone and legitimize the act of rape by shifting responsibility for the rape off the rapist and onto the woman. It’s not some natural thing for which there are no root causes against which we can fight.

    There’s a reason that lynching is rather rare today compared to a eighty or a hundred years ago, and there’s no reason we can’t make rape as rare here as it is in, say, Japan. Treating rape as though it’s some mysterious ineffable phenomenon that cannot be predicted or prevented will not help anything, nor will threatening us (perhaps this could be better termed as pre-emptively blaming us for any future attacks?) with rape and murder if we continue fighting against the root causes of rape.

  121. ginmar
    ginmar July 31, 2006 at 4:55 pm |

    Rape isn’t reported in Japan, Sierra. Don’t make the mistake of equating low rates of reports with low rates of rape.

  122. Sailorman
    Sailorman July 31, 2006 at 4:58 pm |

    (FYI other folks: I think Rapex was invented in Africa and I know it’s sort of like a needle-filled female condom. see rapex.co.za for more) Certainly it’s not too much punishment for a rapist. And I think one could deal with the occasional misuse through the existing court system. It’s a nifty invention.

    Sadly though it probably won’t be an effective deterrent until/unless it is worn with some reasonable frequency and publicized as such. And maybe not at all… If a rapist knows it’s there I’m assuming it could be removed without a whole lot “more fuss” than the rape itself? That would change things a lot…. And if they don’t know it’s there it won’t stop them from the initial penetration though it may, one hopes, make them leave pronto when they get the device stuck on them.

    A lot of the stuff I was reading when it first came out was concerned about the device changing rapes into violent (fatal?) assaults because of the ‘fight back’ problem. Any word on whether that’s been a real risk?

  123. wumhenry
    wumhenry July 31, 2006 at 5:02 pm |

    as if any of these trolls would accept a woman’s statement that the guy was going to rape her and she had no choice to kill the bastard. We don’t believe them now why on earth would we believe them when they kill a guy?

    You’d rather be murdered than face a risk that a prosecutor wouldn’t believe a self-defense plea?

    I love how everybody assumes that guns are so easy to get, maintain, and fire accurately.

    They’re hard to get in some places and easy to get in many other places. A .38 revolver requires no maintenance whatever, aside from cleaning it after use, which is not rocket science. Firing a handgun accurately enough to hit a man-size target at self-defense range, ten feet or less, is a piece of cake, even for somebody who never practices.

    HOw about we just lock up the rapists, huh, sport? How about we put them away, okay, Sparky?

    If the day ever comes when jailing rapists reduces the incidence of rape to zero, I’ll retract my recommendation.
    BTW, do female participants here have free rein to use contemptuous anti-male epithets like “sport” and “sparky” when addressing someone who has posted a non-insulting comment?

  124. Sheelzebub
    Sheelzebub July 31, 2006 at 5:22 pm |

    Sierra, as somone who’s lived in Japan, I can tell you that rape is common. It isn’t acknowledged or reported, but it is common (there have been studies/polls done).

  125. Sheelzebub
    Sheelzebub July 31, 2006 at 5:29 pm |

    I don’t particularly want to carry a gun. I don’t want someone to be able to take it from me and turn it on me. I don’t want to be the cause of someone’s injury or death–even if it was accidental. I don’t want to lose a gun and possibly allow it into the hands of someone who would use it for a crime.

    Ya know what? I still don’t think that I should be the subject of Monday-morning quarterbacking if I were raped.

  126. ginmar
    ginmar July 31, 2006 at 5:30 pm |

    Wow, Sailorman, that is the single most offensive defense of sexism I’ve ever seen. Her being drunk makes it rape, and you don’t even have a fucking clue.

  127. wumhenry
    wumhenry July 31, 2006 at 5:31 pm |

    it’s a bit unreasonable to blame an 18 year old for not carrying a concealed handgun

    Perhaps it wasn’t feasible for the victim in this case to have equipped herself with a concealed handgun, and I’m not blaming her. I’m merely suggesting that those of you who can do so give it serious consideration.

    Rape is a crime committed by and large by men against women, in large part because attitudes, like yours, condone and legitimize the act of rape by shifting responsibility for the rape off the rapist and onto the woman.

    To recommend that women take steps to protect themselves from rapists is to condone rape? Not!

    Treating rape as though it’s some mysterious ineffable phenomenon that cannot be predicted or prevented will not help anything, nor will threatening us (perhaps this could be better termed as pre-emptively blaming us for any future attacks?) with rape and murder if we continue fighting against the root causes of rape.

    Nothing I”ve said implies that rape is either mysterious or unpredictable. It seems unlikely to me that rape will be radically reduced, let alone completely eliminated, in this country any time soon. If you can think of a way to pull it off, more power to you, but for as long as the risk continues at anything like the current level, I think it would be better for women to provide themselves with an effective means of self-defense than merely kvetch about the problem.

  128. Nomie
    Nomie July 31, 2006 at 7:20 pm |

    Except that a handgun wouldn’t have helped in this case: New Jersey law forbids the selling of handguns to those under 21, and limits the allocation of concealed weapons permits. So she wouldn’t have had a gun, unless it was illegal.

    We don’t know enough details about that cab ride yet. It could be that the cab driver was paid off. It could be that the second Jennifer got into the cab, Draymond Coleman held a gun to her head or a knife to her neck and told her that if she moved or said anything, he’d kill her. He could have physically overpowered her – she was 5’2 and 105 pounds, he was 6’1 and 240 pounds. Unless she was trained in judo, the fight would have been a wash. And why should she have to learn judo? Why couldn’t he be a decent human being instead of a rapist and murderer? Nobody has released details, as far as I’ve been able to find on Google News, of exactly what he did. All we have is “lured or forced into a cab.” Would a handgun have helped, even if she had one? I somehow doubt it.

  129. Raging Moderate
    Raging Moderate July 31, 2006 at 7:26 pm |

    Her being drunk makes it rape

    I’ve heard this before; if a woman who is drunk has sex, it is rape because she could not consent. Sounds fair enough. But what if both the man and woman are drunk and they have sex? Is it still rape? If so, who is the rapist?

  130. Chris Clarke
    Chris Clarke July 31, 2006 at 8:01 pm |

    contemptuous anti-male epithets like “sport” and “sparky”

    Oh, thanks for calling this line to my attention zuzu. Missed it the first time around. What a fucking reach. Hilarious!

  131. ginmar
    ginmar July 31, 2006 at 8:14 pm |

    Christ, RM, do you get out AT ALL? That question’s been answered over and over again. Who got penetrated? Did he?

  132. Esme
    Esme July 31, 2006 at 9:02 pm |

    I think it would be better for women to provide themselves with an effective means of self-defense than merely kvetch about the problem.

    Because obviously, none of us are doing anything about the problem. Obviously none of us take self-defense courses, obviously none of us encourage assertiveness for women and girls, obviously none of us are seeking to dispel rape myths, obviously none of us are working for social equality which might actually, you know, prevent rape. Because of course, all we do is “kvetch.”

  133. Lorelei
    Lorelei July 31, 2006 at 9:08 pm |

    wumhenry,

    You know what?

    I’m seventeen, unemployed, etc and there are few things I can do about things at the moment. What I do instead is talk to any man that I can on my campus about rape, rape myths, and how to prevent rape. Mind you, it’s not like I’m part of a club or group on my campus, so I’m really going out on a limb here when I do this.

    Somehow, I doubt you even do that.

    So don’t tell me about kvetching.

  134. Sierra
    Sierra July 31, 2006 at 9:51 pm |

    Perhaps it wasn’t feasible for the victim in this case to have equipped herself with a concealed handgun, and I’m not blaming her. I’m merely suggesting that those of you who can do so give it serious consideration.

    Yea, because we don’t give rape as much serious consideration as men, who grow up being told to plan their every move around the very real possibility that a woman will force themselves upon them, and that they’ll be blamed for it and not believed.

    To recommend that women take steps to protect themselves from rapists is to condone rape? Not!

    Yea, we know. Really, we do. We’ve gotten enough “recommendations” to know when advice is legitimate, straight-forward, and appropriate, and when it’s just gussied up rape victim-blaming.

    Nothing I”ve said implies that rape is either mysterious or unpredictable. It seems unlikely to me that rape will be radically reduced, let alone completely eliminated, in this country any time soon. If you can think of a way to pull it off, more power to you, but for as long as the risk continues at anything like the current level, I think it would be better for women to provide themselves with an effective means of self-defense than merely kvetch about the problem.

    Or you and your buddies could stop raping us. Just a thought.

  135. Sierra
    Sierra July 31, 2006 at 9:53 pm |

    It isn’t acknowledged or reported

    Point well taken. I hadn’t even thought of that possibility. Do you know whether the survey results are as high as the US?

  136. Casey
    Casey July 31, 2006 at 10:46 pm |

    Most defense studies show us that most of these guys do not want a girl who will fight!!!

    Do you have a cite for this?? I actually think that we don’t know what MOST of these guys want, becuase they are all different. It just as often happens that fighting makes the guys angrier and more violent. This is what happened to me, and I got “Why did you fight him? Maybe if you just did what he said in the first place you wouldn’t of gotten hurt.” There really is nothing we can do. If we are raped, we are always blamed.

  137. Natalia
    Natalia July 31, 2006 at 11:33 pm |

    This is what happened to me, and I got “Why did you fight him? Maybe if you just did what he said in the first place you wouldn’t of gotten hurt.”

    Exactly, Casey! If you lie there and take it, you’re wrong. If you fight back, you’re also wrong.

    This makes me think of Biblical times, when women who were raped were simply stoned along with the rapist to “cleanse” their community.

  138. Catty
    Catty August 1, 2006 at 3:13 am |

    I gotsa say that she was probably close to sober by the time she got into the cab… have you ever been borderline tipsy and when you see a cop’s light flashing in the rearview mirror, you’re sober as fuck all of a sudden? It’s happened to me. nothing like a scare to sober ppl up quick.
    She was possibly alert by the time she was walking around and the adrenaline rushing through her system when she realized a creepy guy was following her, since she was cognizant enough to realize that some stranger was following her.

    What she did may not have been the smartest thing, but it’s common mistakes that any of us could fall into. I don’t always pay attention to parking if my friend’s driving. I’ve had my car towed before. That’s why tow yards are full of cars- cars get towed all the time. Many of us have stepped into an unfamiliar neighborhood and wandered about for a multitude of reasons. So by all means, it’s not a horrid thing to tell people that they shouldn’t get piss drunk in public, park their cars in no-park zones, not wander about in unfamiliar places- but you do that for a multitude of reasons, not just rape and murder. Rape is not about the victim- it’s about the sick fuck who needs to take his anger and control out on someone else.

    I swear to god- if she wasn’t raped but just plain killed or shot by a stray bullet, ppl would have so much sympathy for her. Ppl would be laying down teddy bears and flowers where she was shot. Why is it that a woman is raped, and suddenly, no matter what or why, she’s suddenly less deserving of sympathy?

  139. Catty
    Catty August 1, 2006 at 3:21 am |

    Ah, late night ramblings. I always leave stuff out.

    Anyhoo…

    Getting your car towed, getting drunk, getting lost in an unfamiliar town- none of them are good things, especially to the person that’s having to go through that experience (clue: which isn’t us keyboard jockeys safe at some locale typing away). That’s right. None of them are smart things. i don’t think most ppl need to told of that. However, what does all of those have in common? None of them means that a victim is more deserving of rape because of any of the above actions.

    None of us are able to be on high alert 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. It’s just not possible. I know that I’ve accidentally left a window open at night. If I got raped, it was too bad that I was putting in long hours at the office- what was uppity me thinking? How dare I want a promotion (scoff)? I should have known my place and come back home early so I wouldn’t be so tired to forget closing her window, so I wouldn’t have gotten raped. I was another stupid bitch that deserved to get raped.

  140. ginmar
    ginmar August 1, 2006 at 8:57 am |

    The thing about not fighting/fighting depends on what type of rapists you’re dealing with—stranger rapist, that is. No one seems to have classified acquaintance rapists.

    There’s a type of rapist who will absolutely kill you out of rage if you fight back. There’s a kind of rapist who will let you go if you fight back. How do you tell the two of them apart? Well, I suppose you could get raped and then see if they let you live. Fighting back can mean merely being so uppity as to have a pulse and a vagina to exchanging blows.

    Of course, this doesn’t say anything about the majority of acquaintance rapists, who as far as I know have not been typed and classified beyond sole rapists and gang rapists. Why bother with the majority, after all?

  141. Q Grrl
    Q Grrl August 1, 2006 at 9:41 am |

    Wumhenry wants us all to carry guns and to use them.

    Does this mean we get to view all men as rapists wumhenry? Most men don’t like that. Most men get quite irrationally upset when women take proactive measure against rape and assualt.

    They like to go into long, rambling dialogues about how “they’re not that kinda guy.”

    I reckon if I pulled out my gun every time I found a man’s actions threatening (and when *exactly* is that point determined?), I’d be locked away for public nuisance at best, inducing mass hysteria at worst. Really, does the threat being with “Hey baby, let me walk you home”, or does it only really count when he’s pinned me back, fumbled for his erection, and is proceeding to choke me?

    Really guys, wouldn’t it just be easier to give us a handbook to male approved social behavior for women? Oh, wait. That’s been tried.

    Women still got raped.

  142. Q Grrl
    Q Grrl August 1, 2006 at 9:50 am |

    If you can think of a way to pull it off, more power to you, but for as long as the risk continues at anything like the current level, I think it would be better for women to provide themselves with an effective means of self-defense than merely kvetch about the problem.

    ?

    And encouraging men not to rape is kvetching?

    Interesting. Most people would call it socializing.

    Raising boys and men to respect women IS a form of self-defense. Arming all the women in the US with small hand guns is lunacy — and a tacit acceptance that men are incapable of acting like human beings.

  143. wumhenry
    wumhenry August 1, 2006 at 9:58 am |

    Or you and your buddies could stop raping us.

    Baselessly accusing people of rape — which gives real perps a break by diluting the blame — isn’t going to help your cause, though it might feel good to you. FYI, I haven’t raped anybody, and AFAIK I don’t have any friends who’ve raped anybody. Although I don’t have much sympathy for contumacious man-haters, I’m very concerned about the welfare of my two sweet daughters (ages 12 and 20) and others like them. Which is why I wish more women packed heat; if getting shot by an intended victim became a major job hazard for rapists rape would be far less prevalent than it is now, and I don’t believe that any other anti-rape measure would prove nearly as effective.
    I’ve had enough of this dialog, but here is a final bit of advice for anyone with an open mind: read Ms. Paxton Quigley’s classic *Armed and Female* — presumably available through alibris or amazon.com.

  144. Q Grrl
    Q Grrl August 1, 2006 at 10:20 am |

    At the risk of repeating myself:

    They like to go into long, rambling dialogues about how “they’re not that kinda guy.”

    Good one wumhenry. Didn’t even take you a half hour to come up with that.

    Yet you’re the one that suggests we women all arm ourselves. Who exactly are we arming against, if not men like you whose intentions are not readible in public? Do you intend to wear a placard, a sandwich sign, 24/7, that states “I AM A GOOD GUY. I DON’T RAPE. DON’T SHOOT”.

    ’cause really, how are we going to *know*?

  145. Sierra
    Sierra August 1, 2006 at 11:06 am |

    Baselessly accusing people of rape — which gives real perps a break by diluting the blame — isn’t going to help your cause, though it might feel good to you.

    Neither will blaming 18-year-old murdered rape victims for not carrying a handgun.

    FYI, I haven’t raped anybody, and AFAIK I don’t have any friends who’ve raped anybody.

    Q Grrl so called this.

    But seriously, why are you telling me this? You know that I couldn’t possibly verify this. Do you expect me to just take your word for it – give you the benefit of the doubt – because assuming you, a man I don’t know, might rape me or someone else is just inconceivably rude? Or what? What if I saw you in a cab – should I get in with you, so I don’t insult you, or stay out, so I don’t get raped and murdered? Or should I just shoot you for good measure?

    I mean, you say that we shouldn’t be out “walking the streets” if we’re not armed and ready to shoot, yet you’re just shocked – shocked! – that I’d have the audacity to ask you and the rest of your gender to stop raping us. Why is that?

    You know what? It’s really amazing. I’ve spoken to a lot of guys about rape, and not a single one has ever raped anyone, scout’s honor. And none of their friends – “afatk” – ever have either.
    I wonder how women keep getting raped?

    Although I don’t have much sympathy for contumacious man-haters,

    Yep, we’re man-haters! We’re supposed to CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUNS EVERYWHERE and assume that any man has the potential to rape us, but clearly I’m a man-hater for assuming that you or any man you know could rape me. Oh, I love the mindgames of the patriarchy!

    I’m very concerned about the welfare of my two sweet daughters (ages 12 and 20) and others like them. Which is why I wish more women packed heat; if getting shot by an intended victim became a major job hazard for rapists rape would be far less prevalent than it is now,

    Yea, and if we shot lasers out of our eyes when and only when a man was about to violently sexually assault us, rape would probably go down too.

    However, there are plenty of problems with your suggestion. First, which has been brought up, you really think the ‘he was gonna rape me’ defense is going to hold up in a court system that ALREADY doesn’t believe rape victims? Second, don’t you think a victim would be blamed EVEN MORE if she were carrying a gun that was used against her? Third, do you realize that most rape victims knew their attacker, either socially or intimately? Do you expect women to carry guns with them at all times and shoot their boyfriend? Do you think the ‘He was gonna rape me’ defense will work better or worse when the victim was regularly sleeping with her attacker, or at least dating him? On top of all that, handguns are expensive and many states have very restrictive laws. Plus, there’s the huge potential for accidentally shooting someone else.

    So perhaps, instead of scolding women for not carrying guns, you and your buddies could stop raping us? If you’re so against rape and so concerned for your daughters, instead of telling women that we’re wrong for going and letting ourselves get raped, perhaps you should tell men to stop raping. There are plenty of anti-feminist blogs out there on which to comment, or you could even start your own. Better yet, bring this up with people you know, and realize the same entitlement that allows you to ride in and save us silly females from our kvetching about rape -a subject we’ve obviously given less thought to than you – allows men to ignore a woman’s lack of consent.

  146. Lorelei
    Lorelei August 1, 2006 at 11:37 am |

    Oh, wumhenry, I am SO FUCKING GLAD that you possess the MAGICAL PENIS so that you can tell me how to PROPERLY be a feminist and WHICH PROPER FEMINIST BOOKS TO READ.

    Go to hell.

  147. Kat
    Kat August 1, 2006 at 11:53 am |

    Raising boys and men to respect women IS a form of self-defense. Arming all the women in the US with small hand guns is lunacy — and a tacit acceptance that men are incapable of acting like human beings.

    Yes. My boys (3 and 9) already know the term “no means no”. Right now in their lives, it means if their playmate says he/she doesn’t want to join a game, then they respect that and won’t coerce, stamp feet or otherwise badger or force the kid to play along. Later, it will mean much more. Likewise, we talk about how being bigger/stronger does not give you entitlement, but gives you a responsibility to help others. We talk about appropriate ways to express anger/frustration. Its never too early to start teaching respectful behavior.

    As for carrying a gun. I won’t. I believe the risk to my children is higher from me carrying a gun than the rape/attack risk it reduces (and I’m not sure it really does). So, no guns in my house. Besides, the lesson I want my sons to embrace is that they will be respectful, civil human beings because its the right thing to do, not because someone may pull a gun on them if they don’t.

  148. wumhenry
    wumhenry August 1, 2006 at 1:24 pm |

    I didn’t want to get dragged back into this, but the best-laid plans of men and mice …

    But seriously, why are you telling me this [that I, wumhenry, have never raped anyone]? You know that I couldn’t possibly verify this. Do you expect me to just take your word for it – give you the benefit of the doubt – because assuming you, a man I don’t know, might rape me or someone else is just inconceivably rude?

    Right, you can’t verify that I haven’t raped anyone. On the other hand, you have absolutely no basis whatever for accusing me of having done it, yet you did accuse me of it, slyly, by telling me to stop doing it. Nice little game you’re playing: baselessly insinuate to somebody that he’s guilty of committing a heinous crime, and when he denies it, slam him for asking you to take something for granted that you can’t verify. If you really need to be told have to behave with ordinary common courtesy, here’s the skinny: no, you are *not* required to take it for granted, until proven otherwise, that every man you meet is “not that kind of guy”. It’s not rude to harbor suspicion. What common courtesy *does* require is that you refrain from telling somebody you’ve just met that you think he’s a rapist when you have no reasonable basis to conclude so. And it’s pointless to make such a baseless accusation (unless, of course, you enjoy spiteful little games), because no matter what the guy’s moral character and past history may be, he’s going to respond in the same way, which, of course, as you have noted, tells you nothing.

    What if I saw you in a cab – should I get in with you, so I don’t insult you, or stay out, so I don’t get raped and murdered?

    Err on the side of caution.

    you say that we shouldn’t be out “walking the streets” if we’re not armed and ready to shoot

    I didn’t actually say that. I merely said that I wished more women would pack heat. Not necessarily that every woman should. It’d probably be better from an overall public-interest standpoint for those who are unusually suspicious and anger-prone to stay disarmed.

  149. Nomie
    Nomie August 1, 2006 at 2:04 pm |

    It’d probably be better from an overall public-interest standpoint for those who are unusually suspicious and anger-prone to stay disarmed.

    And yet it’s probably the women who are suspicious who would arm themselves. You’ve backed yourself into a nice little catch-22 there, wumhenry.

  150. Katie
    Katie August 1, 2006 at 2:45 pm |

    So, wumhenry, what exactly makes these “man-haters” “contumacious”?

    Are they insubordinate for suggesting that a woman should be able to go out at night without the fear of being raped? Or the fact that they are asserting that women are, in fact, human?

    You’ve used a $1,000 synonym for “uppity.” I’d be careful of my vocabulary around here if I were you.

  151. Mighty Ponygirl
    Mighty Ponygirl August 1, 2006 at 2:48 pm |

    If fear of being caught, tried, and convicted of a violent crime isn’t enough to deter a rapist, then I highly doubt “she has a gun” will deter them. Instead, rapists will take measures to ensure that she doesn’t have a chance to go for her gun — by making sure she’s incapacitated before the rape attempt. This won’t mean a decrease in the number of rapes, this will mean an increase in the number of rape victims who are beaten to within an inch of their life or murdered before the rape occurs.

    We have already seen this trend in response to the expanding prosecution of rape. Roofies haven’t been around forever, but then again, neither has the prosecution of Date Rape.

    I’d also like to ask how our justice system would correct for self-defense. As it is, shooting someone in self-defense is a hard enough defense (unless you live in Florida). In such an instance, you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the person was going to murder you. Not rob you, not beat you, murder. you.

    But all of this is willfully ignoring the fact that justice dept statistics have proven time and time again that people who arm themselves without undergoing serious training on gun use and safety just end up as victims. It’s not enough to be a crack shot with a 9mm, you have to know not to panic at the slightest provocation and break it out. You have to know that if you draw your gun, you have to be willing to use it, and use it with confidence that the person you’re aiming at is the one who’s going to be shot. So, unless we can vouchsafe that every single woman in the USA is going to spend 24 hours a day in a state of readiness that we train law enforcement agents in (even in the company of their boyfriends, male friends, and fathers), the “arm every woman” theory just doesn’t have legs.

    I think it’s far more reasonable to get men to stop raping. Part of that is admitting that sometimes people who we don’t want to think of as rapists might actually fit that descriptor.

  152. wumhenry
    wumhenry August 1, 2006 at 2:53 pm |

    You’ve used a $1,000 synonym for “uppity.” I’d be careful of my vocabulary around here if I were you.

    Well, that’s not what I meant. The word that conveys the intended meaning is “contumelious”. Please pardon the solecism.

  153. Chris Clarke
    Chris Clarke August 1, 2006 at 2:57 pm |

    Right, you can’t verify that I haven’t raped anyone. On the other hand, you have absolutely no basis whatever for accusing me of having done it, yet you did accuse me of it, slyly, by telling me to stop doing it.

    And so another man makes a rape thread all about being fair to men.

    You may not have ever harmed a woman physically, but you’re helping to perpetuate a climate in which such assaults are possible. That’s called complicity.

  154. Mr from Minnesota
    Mr from Minnesota August 1, 2006 at 3:55 pm |

    Is there any way that a man can suggest a different approach to dealing with the problem of rape and not be a rapist or a rapist’s valet to you all?
    Changing the collective male psyche, while the only way to eliminate rape long term, is a long process. It will take generations – and obvisouly you agree because you cite raising male children with respect for women’s rights as part of defense. When someone suggests that short term actions, like arming women, will help, that does not mean that it is not understood that longer term solutions are on the table. But to look only long term means lots of rapes in the short term. To embrace only short term defensive thinking is to do exactly as some of you have suggested – to imply that overall men can’t be trusted or changed and that women should surrender some of their rights for the right of safety. I don’t see that being what has been suggested thus far in this exchange. Isn’t the right approach to teach men new attitudes and teach women defensive skills while those attitudes permeate the society?

  155. Sierra
    Sierra August 1, 2006 at 4:11 pm |

    Right, you can’t verify that I haven’t raped anyone. On the other hand, you have absolutely no basis whatever for accusing me of having done it, yet you did accuse me of it, slyly, by telling me to stop doing it. Nice little game you’re playing: baselessly insinuate to somebody that he’s guilty of committing a heinous crime, and when he denies it, slam him for asking you to take something for granted that you can’t verify.

    Hey look, I’m playing the world’s tiniest violin over here.

    I didn’t insinuate that you were guilty of rape: I said that you and your buddies – or “all men,” for the Englishly-challenged –

    If you really need to be told have to behave with ordinary common courtesy,

    I’m sorry, I was too busy kvetching and ‘walking the streets’ to remember my manners. What am I thinking, blaming men for rape? How silly of me. Could you recommend any more books so that I might learn how to better myself in the “common courtesy” department?

    here’s the skinny: no, you are *not* required to take it for granted, until proven otherwise, that every man you meet is “not that kind of guy”. It’s not rude to harbor suspicion. What common courtesy *does* require is that you refrain from telling somebody you’ve just met that you think he’s a rapist when you have no reasonable basis to conclude so.

    So when I said that maybe you and your buddies could stop raping us, did you really think I was accusing you personally of raping me personally? In all seriousness, this remarkable knee-jerk “But I’m not like that! How dare you insinuate that I’m like that!” defensiveness really isn’t helping your “I’m not nor do I share any similarity with a rapist” argument.

    And it’s pointless to make such a baseless accusation (unless, of course, you enjoy spiteful little games), because no matter what the guy’s moral character and past history may be, he’s going to respond in the same way, which, of course, as you have noted, tells you nothing.

    Perhaps you should take that lesson to heart, and realize that very few women, much less women posting on a thread about a brutal rape and murder on a feminist blog, are going to react nicely to your insinuation that if only we armed ourselves we wouldn’t let ourselves get raped so damn often, and your daughters would be safe from rape victims.

    Err on the side of caution.

    And that would be…?

    I didn’t actually say that. I merely said that I wished more women would pack heat. Not necessarily that every woman should. It’d probably be better from an overall public-interest standpoint for those who are unusually suspicious and anger-prone to stay disarmed.

    So you need to be suspicious enough of men to carry a gun around to avoid rape, but not “unusually suspicious”? What? And how can anyone discuss rape and the fact that men rape so damn much that we actually get suggestions to carry guns around to fend off men and not get angry?

  156. wumhenry
    wumhenry August 1, 2006 at 4:19 pm |

    And yet it’s probably the women who are suspicious who would arm themselves. You’ve backed yourself into a nice little catch-22 there, wumhenry.

    Cute. But all women should be wary, particularly when encountering strangers in lonely places. The outstanding common character trait of those who carry concealed handguns, I should think, is self-reliance.

    If fear of being caught, tried, and convicted of a violent crime isn’t enough to deter a rapist, then I highly doubt “she has a gun” will deter them.

    I’m quite certain that the typical perp would much prefer to be arrested and do time that be shot dead on the spot. Anyway, perps pick their times and places and strike when they’re confident they can get away with it. It’s not difficult for them to ascertain that no cops are around but isn’t so easy for them to know whether a woman is carrying a concealed handgun.

    rapists will take measures to ensure that she doesn’t have a chance to go for her gun — by making sure she’s incapacitated before the rape attempt. This won’t mean a decrease in the number of rapes, this will mean an increase in the number of rape victims who are beaten to within an inch of their life or murdered before the rape occurs.

    A rapist who has reason to fear that an intended victim is armed would not need to incapacitate her to avoid being shot; it would be easier, and less risky, to overpower her, by pinning her arms, and disarm her. In either case, the need to disarm or incapacitate the victim in advance raises the bar for the perp. For a perp to sneak up behind a woman who is alone and more or less in full possession of her faculties without her becoming aware of it till he’s within grabbing distance is no mean feat! If she’s armed and sees the perp approaching she might refrain, for any of a number of possible reasons, from drawing the weapon before it’s too late, but at least she’ll have the option.
    BTW, is non-resistance any guarantee against murder? Don’t rapists commonly murder victims, compliant or otherwise, in order to eliminate the witness?

    As it is, shooting someone in self-defense is a hard enough defense …. you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the person was going to murder you.

    As a practical matter, you simply need to convince a majority of jurors, no matter how the judge formulates the “standard of proof”. A juror who believes that you acted in self-defense will vote for acquittal even if he recognizes a possibility that a reasonable doubt could be entertained. And I don’t believe it’s correct that you have to convince the jury that the person you shot would have murdered you. Rather, I believe that, at least in most states, you would need to convince the jury that you had good reason to fear that he would have inflicted grave bodily injury. Anyway, if you had a gun and ultimately decided that you’d rather let the guy do whatever he had in mind — accepting the risk that it includes witness-suppression murder — than face the risk of prosecution, you could throw the gun away or hand it over. But at least you’d have another option.
    Anyway, the chances are good that if you drew the gun and warned the guy that you’d shoot if he took one more step in your direction, he’d flee without you having to fire a shot.

    But all of this is willfully ignoring the fact that justice dept statistics have proven time and time again that people who arm themselves without undergoing serious training on gun use and safety just end up as victims.

    Are you aware of the study by Gary Kleck that estimates that two million crimes are prevented every year by firearm use by intended victims, which in the vast majority of cases goes no farther than pointing the weapon and threatening to use it? Several years ago, I found a published statistical analysis that showed that of all possible victim responses to assault, the one that resulted in injury to the victim the lowest percent of the time was defensive firearm use. In second place, by a considerable margin, was offering no resistance whatever.

  157. Sierra
    Sierra August 1, 2006 at 4:28 pm |

    Is there any way that a man can suggest a different approach to dealing with the problem of rape and not be a rapist or a rapist’s valet to you all?

    Yea: realize that we’re the ones taught to be scared of everything, and we’ve probably all been told more times than we can count that we should [do x] to avoid rape, whether x is ‘walk in pairs’ or ‘carry a gun’ or ‘take a self-defense class’ or what have you.

    It gets old really fast to see clueless dude after clueless dude saunter up to us and say, “If only you gals would watch your drinks or not go out alone at night, rape would go down.” And they’re always shocked – with their best “I was just trying to help! Why won’t you man-hating feminazis listen to my thoughtful and totally original advice!?” expression – when we don’t fall to our knees and rejoice at the end of sexual violence. Not only does it insult our intelligence (and quite often place blame on the victim), it tends to focus completely on all the ways women could be different, instead of the ways that society enables rapists, both the guy hiding in the bushes and the male relative/friend kind, and the things men could do differently. For instance, we often hear that alcohol is a factor in many rapes, yet only women are told to abstain. What if men were constantly told, “Don’t drink so much – you might end up raping someone”? Would you be offended if someone said that to you? If so, why?

  158. Gillo
    Gillo August 1, 2006 at 4:56 pm |

    Jeeeeesus I’m reading this thread with my mouth hanging open.

    Is there any way that a man can suggest a different approach to dealing with the problem of rape and not be a rapist or a rapist’s valet to you all?

    How about, since this is a feminist blog and all……

    you listen to what women have to say about a crime that they live in fear of, committed overwhelmingly against them and by men, and suppress the urge to barge in and make the discourse all about you? Men, by a huge majority, make and enforce the laws which deal with rape, and judging by the discrepancy between rapes and convictions, they are making a fucking pig’s ear out of it all so far. So why not shut the fuck up for five minutes and let women have our space and our say about it?

    The entitlement shown by the male comments here absolutely takes my breath away: the relentless insistence on their right to have their smug, ill-informed victim blaming acknowledeged, affirmed and welcomed as a jolly sensible solution, their attempts to derail the thread….

    Rest in peace, Jennifer. I hope Draymond Coleman gets what’s coming to him.

  159. Mr from Minnesota
    Mr from Minnesota August 1, 2006 at 4:58 pm |

    “Don’t drink so much – you might end up raping someone”? Would you be offended if someone said that to you? If so, why?

    Men willing to engage in this conversation get called rapists or potential rapists all the time for sharing their ideas. It’s happened in this post thread. It wouldn’t offend me if someone said that to me because much worse gets said all the time.

    How do you propose engaging in a conversation on this topic? I have already granted that it is clear that long term thought change engineering needsa to be done on male society. When I suggest short term safety precautions in addition you say I am calling you a Feminazi, etc.? How is that dialogue? The men who are willing to read your lines of thought, agree to some, and suggest others in combination are what you call clueless. I don’t understand how you think you’ll make progress on these issues wihtout finding ways to engage the apparent enemy when they’re willing to take a good deal of crap from you to continue the dialogue.

  160. Mr from Minnesota
    Mr from Minnesota August 1, 2006 at 5:11 pm |

    Read ‘em all thanks zuzer! Agree with your premise.

Comments are closed.