Pennsylvania shooter targeted women

On Tuesday, George Sodini opened fire in a gym outside Pittsburgh, killing three women at injuring at least ten others. It was a crime he had planned for months – and it was a crime that targeted women.
The New York Post has published the full text of Sodini’s blog (read with caution), where – in addition to racist ramblings – he writes about his disdain for women and his plan to kill them.

Time is moving along. Planned to have this done already. I will just keep a running log here as time passes. Many of the young girls here look so beautiful as to not be human, very edible.
…I dress good, am clean-shaven, bathe, touch of cologne – yet 30 million women rejected me – over an 18 or 25-year period. That is how I see it. Thirty million is my rough guesstimate of how many desirable single women there are. A man needs a woman for confidence.

This isn’t the first gender-based misogynist shooting in recent years – in 2006 a gunman went into an Amish schoolhouse (also in Pennsylvania), sent the boys outside and opened fire on a dozen girls, killing three. That same year in Colorado, a shooter sexually assaulted six female high school students he had taken hostage, before killing one of them. When these shootings happened, the only person making the misogynist connection was Bob Herbert at The New York Times.
I’m at least glad to see that the mainstream media is reporting this as a crime against women. The Christian Science Monitor even discusses misogyny as a factor in the crime (can’t remember the last time I saw that word in a mainstream news outlet):

While the gender-equality movement has made strides in the past century when it comes to some of the more blatant forms of societal misogyny, such as banning women from academic and professional settings, misogyny persists in American and other cultures around the world, according to historians.
“This killer fits into a long pattern of males who harbor hatred towards all women, the image of ‘woman,’ and towards individual real women, and who take out their frustration on a female scapegoat,” says David Gilmore, an anthropology professor at Stony Brook University in New York and author of “Misogyny: the Male Malady.”

It’s also important to remember that Sodini’s crime is not so different from the misogynist violence that women face every day. As Amanda writes:

George Sodini was angry at the entire world of “desirable” women for not up and volunteering to have sex with him, and every day anonymous men around the country and world beat, rape, and even kill women because said women were also considered insufficiently compliant, often to unstated demands that women were supposed to just anticipate and fill without complaint.

As ill as Sodini may have been (and it seems clear from his blog and videos that he was indeed sick), we can’t separate this from the larger culture of misogyny and sexism. And also like Amanda, I find it disturbing – and downright frightening – to see how similar Sodini’s writing is to a lot of MRA/NiceGuy ramblings we see so often online. Anna at Jezebel even finds some bloggers in the “pick up artist” world who say if women would have just fucked Sodini, he never would have killed.
So yes, let’s continue to talk about this horrible shooting as a crime against women. But let’s also make sure that we’re discussing this not as an isolated crime – but as one part of an incredibly dangerous, culture-wide problem.

More at The Pursuit of Harpyness, WIMN’s Voices, and Feministe.

Image via Jezebel

and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. vwom
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

    Excellent point!
    If you don’t mind, I’d like to relay a relevant personal experience….
    I had a horrible encounter this summer with a cyclist (a very large guy, a person I had never seen before).
    I was at a stop light as he pedaled by and shouted into my car window (note: my infant child in the back). “Thanks for the F—– edge!” I honked my horn at him and then he yelled F—— Slut!! I did not deliberately not “give him the edge,” so I was furious.
    I’m convinced it was a meeting meant to happen (a la Prof. Gates & police sgt. – small time.) I pulled over and told him exactly what I thought. Dangerous? Uh, yeah! I’d never do it again, that’s for sure. He could have easily beat me to a pulp — probably could have paralyzed me w/ one punch.
    Anyway, I gave him a good talking to and I’m sure he’ll think twice before he ever calls another woman a slut. (Or so I like to think & hope.)
    So, yeah. Biology. Domination. We live with it.

    Posted August 6, 2009 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

    Oops, this was supposed to be a reply to something VickyinSeattle said about hate crimes. Oh well.

  3. Lynne C.
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

    “Women were not at all what he saw as the problem. Read the diary carefully, and you will see many comments about his lack of ANY interpersonal interactions.”
    But women were the only ones he targeted to kill. That makes it about women. If he felt that people in general did him wrong by ostracizing him, then why did he only choose to kill women?

  4. Magdalene
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

    I agree so hard. I went to Virginia Tech and had class with Seung-Hui Cho. A year or two before the shooting he requested to be my friend on Facebook, but having never really spoken to him I declined. I *actually* had people tell me that if I had just been his friend maybe things would have turned out differently. The mind boggles.

  5. Veronica
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

    I notice this in all kinds of relationships: if you’re not choosing the society proscribed role then there are scads of people getting angry and jealous a la “I have to be in here, so do you!” I’ve lost so many “friends” because I decided to take a different route in life, or quit a job that didn’t suit me, like I was personally insulting all my co-workers or acquaintances with similar positions. I wanted to yell, “I’m not deeming it less-than, it’s just not for me!”
    I’m so sick of people trying to shove me into a compartment.

  6. Jen
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:12 pm | Permalink

    Actually, in my experience they’re not all that representative. It seems like there’s a lot more shallowness on dating sites, from what I’ve seen, than IRL. And I live in Orange County, lol.

  7. leah
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

    “Men are taught to take their own lives primarily, not others’”
    From the Department of Justice Crime Statistics: “Males were almost 10 times more likely than females to commit murder in 2005.”

  8. Kate
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

    In his diary, he wrote that he attended at least one party and recently went on a date. So, I don’t know if saying “lack of ANY interpersonal interaction” is all that accurate.

  9. leah
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

    Oh they know it. They just only know it when one uses the adage “Lipstick on a pig” in reference to John McCain’s proposed policies and assume there’s some sort of attack on Ste. Sarah.

  10. leah
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

    Go read Renee’s link. It IS relevant. Very relevant.

  11. leah
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

    Ha! Yeah that’s why he specifically targeted an all-women aerobics class. Had it circled on his calendar. *facepalm*

  12. A male
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:32 pm | Permalink

    “Right – but they don’t go shooting up gyms. So I’m not sure how useful your caveat is on a thread about a terrorist, hate fueled mass murder.”
    If I am to believe what I read about is the difference between men and women on this blog, it is socialization, not an inherent difference between men and women.
    Therefore any comments re: “women don’t do this” are fairly meaningless. If women were socialized like men were, more would. And if men were not socialized as they are, fewer would. And most don’t.

  13. ekpe
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

    pretty disgusting how this incident is used as an example of so called male entitlement. The guy was sick and is an aberration, not typical. If this site posted something on the woman that killed steve mcnair i missed it. I’d be curious to see how her reaction explains the larger female sense of entitlement

  14. SarahMC
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:40 pm | Permalink

    Patriarchy is a harsh mistress, ain’t it? Boys are raised to bottle their emotions. They are basically taught that romantic partners are the only people to whom they’re supposed to emotionally connect. I imagine a break-up WOULD be pretty devastating to someone who had nobody else to open up to, no other shoulder to cry on…

  15. vwom
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

    What an excellent point.

  16. SarahMC
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

    And an untold number of women have suffered molestation, abuse, rape, DV, etc., but they very rarely hate men – as a class – as a result.
    This guy COULD have killed strange men out of anger at his brother or father, who he admitted were terrible to him. But no, he did what men usually do in these situations. He killed random women.

  17. VickyinSeattle
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

    You’re right that men have a much higher rate of suicide than women, but I don’t think it’s because they get “more hurt” by rejection than women.
    Rejection hurts plenty for women, and I hope you aren’t diminishing the pain women experience by claiming that men suffer more. We’re all social creatures for whom rejection or ostracism is extremely painful.
    Perhaps women have better outcomes because: 1) Society allows women to express sadness, pain, grief and vulnerability much more than men, who’re supposed to buck up and not cry. Bottling up your emotions can lead to feeling like you “have no hope” and therefore “life is not worth living.”
    2) There have been recent studies that women have more friends than men, while men’s friends tend to be their wives. Having friends is a huge indicator in overall health as well as longevity. I think society’s disapproval of men freely expressing their emotions impedes many of them from having meaningful relationships–whether with other men or women.
    Finally, suicide and murder are both forms of violence, and society has viewed violence as a natural expression of masculinity and testosterone. Men tend to commit suicide via more violent means–shooting themselves, jumping off a bridge–whereas women tend to use methods such as overdosing on medication.

  18. Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

    Besides the misogyny, yes the first thing I thought of, especially after reading his journal, was that if we didn’t have such a societal stigma attached to mental illness, maybe he would have sought help for his depression-induced distorted thinking and gotten the mentoring he needed as well. (Even he realized that lack in his life.)
    I feel strongly that this angle needs to be talked about in the interest of preventing future tragedies like this.
    It’s also clear that depressed people (I’ve been one) do respond to people being friendly and taking an interest in their lives–his neighbor being nice was something he had to resist to carry this out. That doesn’t mean we’re responsible when we don’t make that effort–but what is the real cost of a smile, a hello, a short conversation when you see someone isolated and hurting? (I’m not directing this to women as the eternal caretakers of all around them, but to everyone in general.)
    Finally, it is risky (as those of us who are lesbian or bi have learned) to have to do the asking. I asked my husband out; he admitted he was too shy and would not have asked me or anyone else out. Feminism means to me that both genders in heterosexual dating share this difficult task.

  19. VickyinSeattle
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

    We were writing the same thing at the same time, only you were more succinct. :-)

  20. Brian
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:53 pm | Permalink

    The murder rate in the United States is something like 6 per 100 000 people per year. (e.g. it was 5.6 in 2007 The suicide rate in the United States among men was 17.7 per 100 000 per year (in 2005 ) So men are more likely to kill themselves than other people, by something like a factor of 3.
    Women’s suicide rates were 4.5 per 100 000 per year, so figure women are more likely to kill themselves than other people by more like a factor of 10.
    Women are more like to than men to kill themselves than other people. But both women and men are more likely to kill themselves than other people. The dichotomy being presented is a false one.

  21. SarahMC
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:55 pm | Permalink

    First of all, it’s not exactly true that he “couldn’t get laid.” He was rejected by the kind of women HE wanted: young and hot. I guarantee there were plenty of women who’d have been interested in him, but they were invisible to him.
    Second, nobody here has said he killed because he couldn’t get laid. He killed because he hated women and was probably depressed.

  22. vwom
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 7:57 pm | Permalink

    Huh? Let me guess, you’re a male.

  23. Brian
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

    This is really on target and insightful, though a man who’s wife is his only friend really does lose more in a divorce than a woman with other friends. Not only his lover, but also his entire circle of friends.
    There’s an excellent discussion on a lot of the associated problems here:

  24. Tapati
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:07 pm | Permalink

    Because other men think they are losers if they can’t get a woman. It’s a status thing, a sign of your success and efficacy as a man. He feels like a failure for not achieving these basic social status requirements, even besides the loneliness he talks about. In a society with strict gender roles, men compete with each other just like women do. His bullying brother and distant father contributed to his sense of being a failure. Therapy might have turned it around but the stigma against seeking therapy, again especially among men, seems to have made it an option he didn’t consider.

  25. SarahMC
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:12 pm | Permalink

    Good point about “success” at suicide, though. Women ATTEMPT suicide even more often than men do. Men just succeed more.

  26. magi
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:16 pm | Permalink

    vwom: That is an incredibly rude statement. And I think he has a valid point. Men do not, as a matter of practice, behave this way. Mentally ill people behave this way.
    And I am a woman.

  27. magi
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:18 pm | Permalink

    Also I made a mistake, I should have said ‘they.’ I don’t if ekpe is a man or woman.

  28. vwom
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

    LOL! Yes, women often have different “criterion.”
    But while 99.9999% would never open fire w/ an intent to kill, I have known countless men who believe good/desirable women must be pretty, young, and passive — except in the bedroom, naturally. Of course they do not usually come out and say it.
    And while we’re at it, heaven help the pretty women. They not only have to put up with crap from males, but they also frequently have to work much harder at finding friendships with women. (There are all too many women competing for male attention.) Just a *general* observation. The female public-at-large revel in news that, for examples, Jessica Simpson has gained a few, or Victoria Beckham has cellulite. Women we love to hate?
    Stop the madness!
    A man can be below-average in looks, yet have a great personality — all types of women will love him. Conversely, most men will not love a below-average looking woman w/ a sense of humor. A woman’s **value** is determined by her level of desirablity to males — that’s our culture. We, however, are the sub-culture!
    I may not be making much sense. I’m feeling upset over this incident not thinking all too clearly.
    Please correct me if I’m wrong.

    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

    Unfortunately I had the bad luck of being forced to study suicides for 2 years of my life, but its coming in handy in this instance.
    In sociology we separate suicide and attempted suicide as 2 separate phenomenon.
    The reason is that we actually know that most (almost all) attempted suicides were actually meant to fail. They are usually used as a way of getting help/compassion.
    Its extremely, extremely rare for a person to really want to take their own life and not succeed.
    The other point about specifically romantic rejection is even more telling. Over there the difference is tenfold. Men take romantic rejection 10 times as severely which is probably caused by the false-expectations the patriarchy puts on men.

  30. Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:23 pm | Permalink

    Religion also fed into the whole thing, his involvement in a fundie (by his own description) church and his justification that he would go to Heaven because Jesus already paid for his sins.
    There is no doubt that there were a complex web of societal issues involving race, sexism, misogyny, religion, the stigma against mental illness preventing him from getting treatment, distant father, bullying from brother and in school, and so on. We can probably analyze this for years to come since he gave us so much material.

  31. rcmann
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

    Not yet. “Gender” isn’t in hate crime legislation on the federal level (but would be with changes currently proposed). PA law, likewise, only covers crimes motivated by “race, color, religion or national origin.”

  32. vwom
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

    Wow, well said!

    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

    I agree Sarah! Very well put.
    In fact, I may be so bold to say that 99% of gender-problems arise from men repressing their emotions.
    The way the patriarchy works (and patriarchs gain power) is by:
    - Teaching men to repress their emotions, and giving them a false sense of “masculinity”
    - Teaching men the false notion that the way to happiness is through “getting ‘hot’ women”… with of course, them defining some really stupid definition of what “hot” is supposed to be
    - Teaching women to harshly reject any men who do not fit some fake ideal of what a “real man” is supposed to be like (think romance novels)
    In the end, both men and women are unhappy and in a constant conflict, and the only people who gain from it are the patriarchs.
    My only issue is… (and not everyone is gonna like me saying this)… That the only organizations who are fighting the patriarchy… Are at the same time organizations who ignore half of the patriarchy’s victims.
    The only reason why the patriarchy is still alive is because we’re ignoring half the issues.
    My belief is that the old gender roles are a *loop* where the old male role creates the old female role.
    We have tried to get rid of patriarchy much more by dismantling the female role, but we’ve left men with their old male role… We’re not telling boys that the old notion of a “real man” is false… and we’re not teaching girls not to fall for hollywood’s idea of a “real man”.

  34. vwom
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

    I know it’s not meant to be funny, so why did I laugh.

    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

    Hey vicky, awesome summary!
    We actually agree. I’m sorry if I miss-communicated my point.
    I did not mean to imply that women are not hurt by rejection. :) In fact, they’re just as hurt by rejection in terms of a rejection in itself.
    I was talking about *lifetime rejection*… I.e. the culmination of the effects of rejections.
    Men simply get hurt more by rejection (overall, during a lifetime, not any one rejection)… because:
    - Patriarchy teaches men this **false** notion that they need to get “notches” in order to be “real men”
    - This leads (ironically) to men doing the exact thing that leads to rejection (objectifying women)
    At the same time:
    - We still expect men to do take most of the risks in courtship, and expect them to risk most of the rejection
    This leads to men experiencing a lot more rejection in their life-times. I don’t think we’ll ever kill of the patriarchy until we kill of the old-notion of “masculinity”.

  36. vwom
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    Excuse me, magi? But to enter a discussion such as this calling it disgusting is rude and insensitive. Do not discuss “mentally ill” people as if they are some sub-class. I know FULL fucking well about mental illness, so don’t you tell me what’s rude.
    You want rude? This is rude. There, now you can complain.

    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:45 pm | Permalink

    Well put Brian.
    I wasn’t trying to prove that men are “angels” who sacrifice themselves for the greater good or anything like that… just to push the balance a bit to the other side.
    You did a very nice analysis there proving that men and women are about equally as likely to take it out on others (in terms of ratios).

  38. SarahMC
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 8:53 pm | Permalink

    Are you talking about feminists? Because many feminists acknowledge the damage patriarchy does to boys and men and work to undo / prevent it.
    The real question is why more men are not interested in dismantling patriarchy, since it’s such a detrimental force in their lives. Probably because, whilst they’d benefit in some ways, they’d also have to give up privilege…

  39. magi
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 9:02 pm | Permalink

    I didn’t say the discussion was disgusting, I said you were rude. I also said that there was a valid point to separating the fact that this was not a sane man from the idea of male privilege. Cuss me out again, and I will stop being nice.

  40. VickyinSeattle
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

    Thanks! You’re so right that men are expected to take the risk in initiating a relationship with a woman. I try to make things easier for the guys by asking them out. And yeah, it’s nerve-wracking, and rejection is a pooper.
    Your comment: “Patriarchy teaches men this **false** notion that they need to get “notches” in order to be “real men.”"
    Yeah, when I get rejected by a man, I don’t see it as a threat or insult to my femininity. But men are expected, as you said, “to get notches.” So a man who buys into that notion would see a rejection as an affront to his sexuality and masculinity.

    Posted August 6, 2009 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

    “”Because many feminists acknowledge the damage patriarchy does to boys and men and work to undo / prevent it.”"
    I recognize that many feminists do good work in tackling the damage that patriarchy is causing to boys.
    However, here’s the thing I’m pointing out…
    Its my perception (I might be wrong) that its dis-balanced work… in that there is far more work invested in undoing the damage on girls, then there is done in undoing the damage on boys.
    And why is that not ideal? Simply goes back to my theory about the loop. If you remove girls’ damage, but don’t remove boys’ damage in an equal level… the boys simply oppress the girls back in the old roles.
    We actually let these boys grow up into men who oppress women back into the old roles. We then ostracize and demonize these men for it… instead of taking responsibility for having let them grow up into that kind of a man in the first place.

  42. VickyinSeattle
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

    Thanks. This story really ate me up, so I’m so glad that there’s this prolific discussion going on. It’s really comforting when there are men and women discussing what’s so disturbing about this incident.

  43. Tapati
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 9:22 pm | Permalink

    I see a lot of back and forth over whether Sodini was only mentally ill or a misogynist or ???
    It’s obvious that he was mentally ill and may have had other conditions that exacerbated his social ineptness. But the attitudes about women, men, race, religion, and what he would need in order to gain status with other men (a young, pretty woman by his side) came from society. Mental illness was the fuel and our culture was the vehicle leading him to his final, explosive crash.
    A good therapist able to both treat the mental illness and challenge the distorted thinking (which is a hallmark of depression and other mental illnesses) while countering the cultural message could have turned it all around.
    But men who admit they need therapy run counter to our serious stigma against mental illness and against men admitting they are “weak” in some way. It doesn’t seem to have crossed his mind even as he talks about being a malfunction. The closest he gets is thinking he might need a personal coach. But he feels so much shame at his lack that he doesn’t want to tell anyone about it.
    When I was training to volunteer on a suicide crisis line (another thing that might have helped him), we were taught that the more isolated people are, the higher their lethality. While I’m not saying that women should have taken it upon themselves to let him extensively proposition them, it is clear that neighbors and others could and did sometimes have a positive impact. Neighbors noticed his deterioration as well. It can be helpful to ask, “Are you OK? Do you need to talk?” And when you discover how troubled someone is, “Are you having thoughts about suicide?” If yes–”Let’s call the hot-line together.”
    Or, if you are fearful of getting that involved, at least put the number of the suicide hot-line in their mailbox with a nice card, anonymously. At least he (or she) will know you cared enough to do so. That can mean a lot. You can see the ambivalence about what he was planning in his diary–this kind of back and forth is typical of a suicidal person as well. Positive interactions, even a friendly “Hi” in passing, can help tip things back to the positive.
    TTY: 1-800-799-4TTY (4889)

    Posted August 6, 2009 at 9:29 pm | Permalink

    Yep, exactly.
    A man is taught to see rejection as a challenge to his entire status and reputation as a person… Which again is a false notion, it just means she’s not interested… But the patriarchy teaches men to invest their entire being and self-worth into their “notches”.
    “”I try to make things easier for the guys by asking them out.”"
    I wish I could capture how much I respect you for this. But I couldn’t through text. If were making this discussion real life you’d be able to tell, because I really, really, really respect you for that.
    To me, that is the definition of a truly empowered woman. Not just talking the talk, but walking the walk (and there’s a lot of people who just talk).

    You do realize though that are you still very rare and special though?
    I think this is the part of the phenomenon we’re missing on. We’re not investing anywhere nearly as much effort into liberating women sexually.
    - We ostracize men for objectifying women and counting notches (which we should continue doing)… and for judging their worth on their number of women
    - But at the same time we mostly ignore that most women still encourage this behavior in men, whereas women refer to inexperienced men as “losers” and a worrying amount of women still judge men’s viability by his number of previous partners
    We can’t solve the issue if we ignore half of it. The reason our re-educating of men isn’t working, is because we fail them.
    We tell men “just be good, just listen to women and be kind and caring and women will come to you”… but we forget to inform *women* that the rules have changed… So the man goes out into the world as this new-age man, and all the women he meets still play by the OLD rules. So he just feels lied to, cheated to… and eventually turns misogynist.

  45. Tapati
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 9:47 pm | Permalink

    On the other hand, my natural anger at this attack on women makes me think, “Where is Hothead Paisan when you need her?”

  46. vwom
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 10:05 pm | Permalink

    Oh, clearly you know something about rudeness then. That is just plain stupid, sorry, magi. Your comments make very little sense to me. My reply to ekpe was sarcastic not “incredibly rude.” Please re-read epke’s post and then my post and think again — but put a little more effort into this time.
    My comment to epke wasn’t rude. Sarcastic, maybe, but not rude. But now *I am feeling incredibly rude* and I’m not going to let you intimidate or bully me.
    “Cuss me out again.” Let me guess, you’re from the south.
    You have created this little drama over nothing. I will ignore you now. If the administrators find my behavior rude or unacceptable, so be it!

  47. alixana
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

    Good points about how it’s not an either/or situation.

  48. Mina
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

    “I didn’t say the discussion was disgusting…”
    vwom didn’t say that you said the discussion was disgusting.

  49. SarahMC
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 10:28 pm | Permalink

    Are you suggesting that feminist women must invest the same amount of time assisting boys as they do attempting to empower girls and women?
    I cannot agree with that. Women and girls are an oppressed class in this world. Patriarchy primarily benefits men and harms women. The whole reason feminism exists is to end oppression against women – patriarchal oppression. In ending patriarchy, boys and men will benefit too, even if most don’t see that. But it is not feminist women’s responsibility to devote an equal amount of time to helping the marginalized and the privileged. If more men got on board with feminism this “imbalance” would right itself quickly.

  50. jeana
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 10:48 pm | Permalink

    Most men do not murder women. And I don’t think they’re socialized to do so. They may be socialized (by men) to think they have a right to do what they want to women’s bodies, though. But I still wonder why virtually NO women murder stranger men.
    Since feminists are so evil, one might expect them to murder men. And yet they do not.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

230 queries. 1.232 seconds