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. JoanOfArc
    Posted August 6, 2009 at 11:49 pm | Permalink

    But the form his mental illness took was to choose to shoot women- mental illness does not make one hate a particular group. Society in some way conditioned and shaped his opinions about women. His anger against women as a class was not caused by his mental illness, but by a society that encourages men to feel they have a right to women’s bodies.

  2. Kate
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 12:18 am | Permalink

    “”Cuss me out again.” Let me guess, you’re from the south.”
    By which you mean to imply….what?

    Posted August 7, 2009 at 12:21 am | Permalink

    Its precisely this short-sightedness that ends up hurting *girls* in the end.
    ===Let me rephrase===
    1) If we ignore boys then the patriarchy gets them.
    2) The patriarchy then turns these boys into men who then work to oppress women
    3) All the work done on the girls is now lost
    Either we get to the boys first, or the patriarchy does. If we (in our short-sightedness)… leave the boys out, we’re shooting ourselves in the foot… Because if we don’t get the boys. The patriarchy does.

  4. bifemmefatale
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 12:24 am | Permalink

    Some people who suffer in childhood gain empathy. A whole lot of them go on to become abusers themselves.
    I own porn. I’ve never shot anyone. Correlation does not equal causation. For example, one criminal expert once said that almost every murderer in America had a copy of one particular book in their houses. Surely we should ban this book, right? What was this terrible tome? The Bible, which millions of perfectly law-abiding people have in their homes too.

  5. A male
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 12:27 am | Permalink

    “Most men do not murder women. And I don’t think they’re socialized to do so.”
    I did not claim men were socialized to murder women, and you are correct to point out that most do not. Men are more likely to kill themselves than someone else.
    “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.”
    You said it yourself, as have numerous others. Men are socialized X. Women are not socialized X. If men and women were both socialized X, they would show more similarities. To point out with what I perceive do be a certain smugness these few days, “women don’t do X,” is meaningless. So how do you think women would be, if women were taught from childhood that they were entitled to men’s bodies, to blame men for their own failures, or to use aggression, violence, and guns? Might you not see more violence by women? Or do you claim some inherent superiority?
    Feminists don’t murder random men, because that is not a symptom of being raised X. And if this man had been raised feminist, unless he had a sufficiently serious condition, he would not have done it.

  6. Devonian
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 1:51 am | Permalink

    It finally dawned on me that the moniker “whore” contains the idea that the woman has no loyalty, as indeed an actual whore has no loyalty, since she’s all about the money. (and I’m not slamming that, to be clear. A lady’s got to put bacon in her skillet somehow.) That’s why she’s a whore when she refuses to sleep with him — he perceives her as being disloyal.

    Never thought I’d get a chance to use this quote I saved…

  7. Marc
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 2:07 am | Permalink

    Here’s the thing, folks: it’s undeniable that many of the factors feminists have been talking about for the last few decades, have a role in this incident.
    Misogyny, objectification of women and the comodification of women’s bodies, hyper-masculinity, porn culture (let’s not pretend even for a second that the whole “whites hoes getting fucked by black brothers” isn’t a result of porn), male entitlement and such, are all contributing factors. In fact, even an issue of accessible healthcare, as he was clearly very ill, should be brought into the discussion.
    But I do wonder: could this have been prevented had we taken threats and jokes about violence against women more seriously? How often do we hear these jokes everyday and just look the other way? How often do we brush off bitter comments of doing something to that “bitch,” “whore,” “cunt,” and whatever else and not say anything? Silence, in this case, is acceptance.
    We are taught that if a person makes suicidal comments, we should take them seriously, and try to ensure they do not go forth with it. But we’ve gotten to a point in society where violence against women is so comment that we’re neither shocked nor appalled by comments of potential violence against women.
    A simple “Dude, that’s not cool,” would suffice. At least these people would have gotten the message that it might not be acceptable, ill or not. The silence is deafening.

  8. Marc
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 2:11 am | Permalink

    I am not saying that men aren’t hurt by patriarchy, nor am I saying that men’s issues ought not be important in feminism.
    But since we men are the ones with male power and privilege, and often less hurt by patriarchy than are women, how about we start policing ourselves and helping save our brothers, rather than just complaining that women do not care enough – thereby implying that somehow, along with enhancing their own lives, women are supposed to, at the same time, care for privileged males?
    There are organizations out there comprising of male feminists working to dismantle gender roles and patriarchy, for both women and men, and focusing solely on masculinity and how men relate to the world. All you have to do is be a part of it, rather than simply saying, “Well, women do not care enough about and ignoring half of patriarchy’s victims.”

  9. Devonian
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 2:12 am | Permalink

    “I wonder if it’s not *partly* biology. Isn’t it true, for example, that most female animals will not fight unless it is absolutely necessary. (I’m not sure if this is actually fact, I read it somewhere though!)”
    It’s somewhat true. Males are almost always more aggressive (and often physically larger) than females. That’s not to say females don’t fight, but I believe they usually do less of it.
    Generally, iirc, the bigger the male is relative to the female, the more aggressive he is relative to her…

  10. Marc
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 2:18 am | Permalink

    This may be coldhearted to say, but I do not feel sorry for him.
    To whom he’s attracted and wants to date is none of my damn business. But let me be clear: if you want a high-quality partner, you better have something to offer in return. What did this guy possess characteristic wise that would make women want to date him? Nothing!
    If I were a woman, I wouldn’t have given him a second look. Want to date intelligent, educated, “hot” women? He should have stopped his misogynistic rants and actually give a shit about them.
    Misogyny just isn’t a characteristic a lot of women are attracted to. So in the end, it’s his own fault.
    Another misogynist bites the dust. Good for him.

  11. Devonian
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 2:52 am | Permalink

    “I agree with you that women are *conditioned* to question themselves/their appeal while some men will never, ever ask: “Am I actually desirable?”"
    On the contrary, I believe most men are conditioned to believe they’re NOT desirable. Ever (this plays into that “women don’t want sex” trope).

  12. baddesignhurts
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 3:45 am | Permalink

    no question. i 100% agree with you.
    my point is that millions of men live in this society with all its misogyny, yet very few of them kill, which indicates other factors are at play. the fact that this guy lived a long time with mental illness, and no one seemed to notice. (alternately, one could say *everyone* noticed, which is why he seemed to have had crappy relationships.) but there either seems to be a poor or a nonexistent social system to find and treat these sick people, and this had deadly consequences. THIS is just as much a societal failure as widespread sexism and racism.
    because this man was clearly mentally ill, i don’t think it’s right to discuss this case only by analyzing the social factors. this wasn’t a drug dealer shooting someone to protect his territory.

  13. Kat
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 4:51 am | Permalink

    Yeah. I told my (pretty feminist) dad about that the other night and he got angry about that and said that my friend is an idiot.

  14. lost_calendar
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 6:50 am | Permalink

    Erm how about levels of testosterone?

  15. SarahMC
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 7:07 am | Permalink

    Thank you. This is what I was saying. Because to me, it sounded like the other poster (I am not trying to type out his handle) was saying that female feminists weren’t working hard enough to heal boys’ and mens’ wounds. If that was not the point, then I misinterpreted.
    “We” as a society, need to stop oppression before it starts – and that means “we” must teach equality early, to kids of both sexes. It doesn’t mean feminists are responsible for ending all the oppression in the world whilst others stand on the sidelines and bark orders and demands.

  16. vwom
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    Aha! Most definitely.

  17. vwom
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 8:58 am | Permalink


  18. vwom
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 9:25 am | Permalink

    bifemmefatale: “Some people who suffer in childhood gain empathy. A whole lot of them go on to become abusers themselves.”
    Exactly, there’s a choice.
    bifemmefatle: “I own porn. I’ve never shot anyone. Correlation does not equal causation.”
    I’m not following you here, because that’s not what I was thinking when I replied. But I’m convinced regularly viewing porn creates a “mindset.” If a man is viewing porn involving young (sometimes VERY young) women, everyday…
    Nevertheless, in my view, porn is selfish. There are untold numbers of children and women who suffer horribly in the name of porn. Why would anyone defend it?!
    Now, erotica (for mature adults!), that’s something else, obviously.

  19. FrumiousB
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 9:39 am | Permalink

    Alright, buddy, man up. Stop whining about how feminists aren’t doing anything and start your own goddam movement. You’ve made some good points, but you are moving into whiny douchebag territory.

  20. Lily A
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    Come on, enough with the personal insults, especially the creepy gendered ones (“douchebag” and “man up.”). If you have a problem with the argument, address it directly.

  21. FrumiousB
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 9:48 am | Permalink

    Not necessarily. Production of testosterone is only have the equation, there is also uptake of testosterone and metabolism of testosterone. In addition, the difference between men’s and women’s biology, even if you limit the comparison to only hormones, encompasses way way more than just testosterone levels. I don’t think you can take a single biological factor and say “aha, this is the sole cause of the difference b/t aggression in men and women.”

  22. FrumiousB
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    I’m uncomfortable diagnosing mental illness without actually examining the patient. You can’t make a diagnosis from a journal. Labeling him as mentally ill is great way to set up a difference between him and “normal” guys/gals. It makes us feel good about ourselves and the people we interact with on a daily basis. We’re/they’re not like him. We/they won’t go on a killing rampage. Truth is, his only “illness” might have been deep, abiding bitterness.

  23. ikkin
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    Did you just say “man up” to someone else on a feminist forum?

  24. Lucy Gillam
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 10:11 am | Permalink

    Because we all know that when three women are dead and nine others wounded, the most important thing in any discussion is to make sure that we don’t hurt men’s feelings.

  25. ikkin
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 10:16 am | Permalink

    Normally, I do not like to entertain such reflection on those I consider to be privileged, but I will say as a girl who is a 5 or less on the hotness scale, I have met a disconcerting number of women who are probably considered very attractive by most who don’t have any real friends and attempt to create lasting friendships with me. Sadly, most of these relationships come to an end rather quickly because our entertainment interests are very different and their boyfriend/male friends are generally not pleased when I am around.
    They divide us so we fight each other and never end up fighting them.

  26. Alex Catgirl
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 10:25 am | Permalink

    let’s not pretend even for a second that the whole “whites hoes getting fucked by black brothers” isn’t a result of porn
    I’d be interested to hear how you came to that conclusion
    It’s not,btw and it’s a huge point of rage on the marginalized white guy’s list of grievances against adult teen/young 20-something girls, the college and “daddy” context in his rant are dead give aways.
    Like many disaffected average white guys(tm),Loser George had been trolling the club/social circuit where everybody thinks they are players looking to score on the prettiest/youngest girls , who either play along or out play the players.
    Nice Guys(tm), who never win, take great offense to being “beaten” by “ghetto dwellers” (meaning black guys), but as they respect the game, and the black guys did win, it’s the girls fault…whom they begin refering to as as hos,sluts, skanks,ghetto fuckers, n*gger fuckers,teflon, Bitches, Miss America,Princess, Paris Hilton and even more terms that don’t make sense – to their faces.
    Which just makes the girls mean…er, and vola a prophesy is fulfilled – Those stuck up little whores had it coming! They ignored and/or treated me like shit.

    Posted August 7, 2009 at 10:37 am | Permalink

    I have a female rabbit and oh boy is this untrue, haha. When I am putting food in her dish she snarls at me because she thinks I am trying to take it away.

    Posted August 7, 2009 at 11:01 am | Permalink

    As a young woman just out of high school, I thought I should mention that nowadays– at least where I lived– girls and boys BOTH do the initiating and BOTH do the asking out.

  29. bifemmefatale
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 11:28 am | Permalink

    I do have a lot of issues with the porn industry. I think a lot of it is misogynistic crap. But not all porn is. There are some companies putting out amateur and/or women-focused stuff that does not exploit the actresses.
    Ah, the old distinction between “porn” and “erotica”, which is in the eye of the beholder and seems to slide around a lot. Softcore can be just as exploitative and reinforcing of harmful stereotypes, and hardcore can be sexy and egalitarian when done right. Gauzy or less-gauzy focus on the genitalia doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with whether a certain film is unfeminist or disrespectful to women.
    Take a look at this link as far as your belief about porn-watching and crime goes.
    Why would anyone defend porn? Because I believe in freedom of expression. Because sex is an important part of human life and deserves to have art made about it just as much as birth, death, food, etc. Because watching other people gets me off and does not necessarily harm anyone. Because there are many countries in which porn is illegal and yet the society is horrible towards women. I could go on, but we’ve derailed enough.

  30. vwom
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    Re: Sex hormones
    FrumiousB, I typed “Aha” as in Ah, yes, hormones! I did not type, “Eureka! We discovered the missing piece.” (Which is the meaning you seem to have inferred.)

  31. vwom
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    Let’s clarify something…
    No-one has said sex hormones are the *single* factor. There are no doubt many biological/physiological factors, obviously.
    FrumiousB: ,i>”I don’t think you can take a single biological factor and say “aha, this is the sole cause of the difference b/t aggression in men and women.”,

  32. vwom
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    bifemmefatale: “Ah, the old distinction between “porn” and “erotica”, which is in the eye of the beholder and seems to slide around a lot.”
    I started working on an essay about this (I’ve since abandoned it because I can’t be bothered!) There actually is a distinction. It has to do with intent. The intent of the creator(s) …

    Posted August 7, 2009 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    Psychotic people are actually much less likely to commit acts of violence than “mentally stable” people.

  34. vwom
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

    I’d like to add one more thing. I stated in my OP that I wonder if the Pittsburgh shooter was a “porn aficionado.” Apparently for many people porn is viewed as a convenient/safe way of expressing themselves sexually. OK. But that’s not what’s at issue here.
    I raised the question specifically in regard to **this** case of the Pittsburgh shooter.
    Anyone who reads the Pittsburgh shooter’s blogs can see he lived in some kind of fantasy-land.
    Doesn’t male hetero porn = fantasy-land? (not a place I’d ever want to visit!). Diseased minds have difficulty separating fantasy from reality. If there is such a thing as a sexual appetite, then feeding a diseased mind a daily feast of blond, buxom, YOUNG, pretty girls is only going to INCREASE his appetite. Just because a food tastes good, doesn’t mean it’s healthy or that one should eat it every day! So again, I’m questioning the Pittsburgh shooter’s mindset — why did he so insanely desire “young” pretty women? Did male hetero porn fantasies-R-Us contribute at all? Just asking, that’s all.

  35. VickyinSeattle
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think you’re being coldhearted at all.
    You’re right to point out: What did this guy have to offer women? Here’s what he thought: “I owe nothing to desirable females who ask for anything, except for basic courtesy – usually.”
    So why did he think they owe HIM anything–other than basic courtesy, I suppose?
    And what’s up with this “desirable females” thing? Right, he felt he was owed someone from his narrow definition of “desirable”:
    “I just looked out my front window and saw a beautiful college-age girl leave Bob Fox’s house, across the street. I guess he got a good lay today. College girls are hoez. I masturbate. Frequently. He is about 45 years old. She was a long haired, hot little hottie with a beautiful bod.”
    I’m sure Bob Fox is creeped out that his former neighbor had been watching him from his window. And, for all we know, that “hot little hottie” could have been Fox’s daughter.

  36. VickyinSeattle
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

    Thanks so much for that link, Brian. I had no idea who Hugo Schwyzer was.
    It made me sad that men feel so emotionally “bottled-up” that they have few with whom they can truly express themselves. And Schwyzer’s analysis on how that can create resentment toward the person with whom they confide is spot-on.
    I once knew someone–a woman, actually–who had problems confiding. Whenever she did burst out and share some deep assessment about herself or her upbringing, she would later be resentful at the friends who were there to listen. Intimacy makes you vulnerable, and on a crass level, information is power.

  37. Terrils
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 1:48 pm | Permalink

    I always figured men called a woman who refused them “whore” because of course ANY proper woman would gratefully accept the gracious gift of their penis … unless she was a woman who only did it for money.

  38. Terrils
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

    “[0+] vwom replied to bifemmefatale :
    bifemmefatale: “Some people who suffer in childhood gain empathy. A whole lot of them go on to become abusers themselves.”
    Exactly, there’s a choice.”
    I think you’re discounting what seems to me at least to be a very strong possibility of mental illness. Serious mental illness. It’s easy to say a mentally balanced person has choice – we do. It’s not so easy when a person is mentally (or for that matter, physically) unwell.

  39. Terrils
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    I agree (I think most commenters here probably do too). It’s not that it isn’t about women. It obviously is in part. But it’s far more complicated than just “women” – he had various psychological issues. It’s reasonable on this site to focus on the misogynist aspects of both his nature and society’s nature – but for him as an individual, it wasn’t as simple as just hating women.

  40. vwom
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

    Wait a second. Would you *please* take the time to read the original post that I replied to, the one that lead to this discussion?
    The post I replied to stated something to the effect that the Pittsburgh shooter had a horrible childhood, so no wonder he had problems/issues (again, something to that effect.)
    I am not, as you claim, discounting mental illness at all. I just replied as such because I know of many men & women who suffered terrible events and abuse as children but developed empathy and compassion as a result. That’s all I was saying.
    Why twist my comments? Seriously, why? It’s terribly frustrating. And why doesn’t everyone just read the posts thoroughly before going on offence. Gee whiz. Thanks.

  41. voiceofreason
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 11:32 pm | Permalink

    Seems to me like the fact that women are socialized to be passive and take abuse with a smile on their face has a shitload to do with it.

  42. voiceofreason
    Posted August 7, 2009 at 11:32 pm | Permalink

    Seems to me like the fact that women are socialized to be passive and take abuse with a smile on their face has a shitload to do with it.

    Posted August 8, 2009 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    At the risk of giving TMI I use porn every day.
    And I’ve never shot anybody (male or female) or committed any act of violence against another person (and that’s after 23+ years of regular porn use)
    As for the Porn vs “Erotica” thing, could you be more specific?
    What makes some pornography “good” (and worthy of the brand name “Erotica”) while some other pornography is dirty, bad and selfish (and branded as “porn”)?

  44. Lisa_G
    Posted August 8, 2009 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

    I wonder if a fat lonely girl would do the same thing, or they might just eat alot.

  45. vwom
    Posted August 8, 2009 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

    I admire your candor. It’s not that I would necessarily associate violence with porn use (although I recall reading something about rapists/serial killers are often porn aficionados — however I have nothing readily available that substantiates that claim.
    The specifics about erotica v. porn really cannot be addressed here in this little box (not by me, anyway!). I don’t mean to be evasive, I just never finished the article and while the idea is fully formed, the explanation isn’t.
    But for what it’s worth, I simply do not think it’s possible for a person to view male hetero porn on a daily basis and that *not* affect his/her thinking and mindset in a deeply profound (possibly unconscious) way. My goodness, just surfing the net you can see porn ads for “teens.” “Girls Go Wild.” It’s Girls, Girls, Girls who are the focus and target of mainstream male hetero porn, which has thoroughly saturated our culture. Can anyone refute that?
    Did I say porn is “dirty” and “bad”? No, I said I believe it is selfish. But upon reflection, I don’t know if that is the correct phraseology. I don’t like porn because I can’t help but think of all the women — both young & old — and children who are terrorized by the industry.
    It has been my experience that some of the most intelligent, successful, and all-around dandy people turn into major hypocrites on the subject of pornography. They are so liberal about protecting human rights but don’t seem to give a damn about human trafficking & the absolute terror those involved in the porn industry create.
    Incidentally, probably every friend I’ve ever had has used porn, so I know I’m in the minority. I have absolutely no desire to convince anyone of anything. I’m merely expressing my own thoughts.
    I think if the porn industry were *highly* regulated (not likely!), that if women were directing things, and if there were absolute laws forbidding anyone under the age of, say, 21 — for f’s sake a girl can’t even buy alcohol till that age, but if she’s a “hottie” she can sell her body for use in Playboy or what-have-you. Does that make **any** sense whatsoever?!
    We must eradicate women’s sex class status before we can even begin to talk about porn being a good thing.

  46. A male
    Posted August 9, 2009 at 3:53 am | Permalink

    A fat lonely girl would do what she was socialized to do, dependent on the situation and her state of mind, the same as this man, and for those women who do kill unprovoked.

  47. vwom
    Posted August 9, 2009 at 7:56 am | Permalink

    I know. I just re-read my post and it sounds a bit ridiculous to bemoan the plight of Jessica Simpson & Victoria Beckham. Someone’s been watching too much Access Hollywood. (actually, I boycott that kind of program as well as fashion and most women’s magazines.)
    I suppose it was an attempt to address how, generally speaking, women treat each other & compete for male attention.
    “Sadly, most of these relationships come to an end rather quickly because our entertainment interests are very different …”
    I can empathize. I have difficulty finding female friends that share any of my interests.

  48. vwom
    Posted August 10, 2009 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

    Oops. The above post was meant as a reply to – it’s out of order.

  49. Meep
    Posted August 10, 2009 at 9:02 pm | Permalink

    Questioning whether this would have run a parallel course if the shooter was a straight female is a valid and, in my opinion, fairly interesting question, owing to the differences in socialization of men and women in regards to sexuality, entitlement, violence and so on.
    However, the fat phobia doesn’t need to be thrown in for good measure.

  50. Javalover
    Posted August 10, 2009 at 9:03 pm | Permalink

    It’s just a simple fact that BOTH misogyny and misandry exists and unfortionately will probably always exist in some degree or form.

Feministing In Your Inbox

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

242 queries. 0.965 seconds