Virgina Tech Massacre: Blame Feminism!
|
Posted by Andi Zeisler April 22nd, 2007 |
Add “mass murder” to the ever-growing list of societal problems that can be pinned on feminism. In this appalling article from the UK’s Times Online, Sarah Baxter posits quite confidently that last week’s carnage is the fault not of Cho Seung-hi, but of the shameless hussies that comprised Virginia Tech’s female population — women who dared to have sexual relationships, spurn the advances of creepy dudes, and speak their minds when they felt harassed. Those uppity little sluts! Of Cho’s first victim, Emily Hilscher, Baxter writes:
“Perhaps there was something about her that reminded Cho of another girl he had fancied — the one he had sneaked into the women’s dorm to see but, as a roommate recalled, “When he looked into her eyes, he saw promiscuity.”
Such assertions wouldn’t be complete without the rubber-stamp of an expert, of course—and whaddya know, here’s Camille Paglia, bringing her characteristic brand of victim-blaming “logic” to an explanation of why the slaughter of Emily and 31 others really isn’t Cho’s fault:
“Cho is a classic example of “someone who felt he was a loser in the cruel social rat race”, Paglia says. The pervasive hook-up culture at college, where girls are prepared to sleep with boys they barely know or fancy, can be a source of seething resentment and alienation for those who are left out.
“Young women now seem to want to behave like men and have sex without commitment. The signals they are giving are very confusing, and rage and humiliation build up in boys who are spurned again and again.”
Elsewhere, Paglia posits that Cho is “emblematic of the crisis of masculinity in America”:
“Women have difficulty understanding the mix of male sexual aggression with egotism and the ecstasy of self-immolation,” she says.
Well, when it involves the murder of dozens of innocent people, is that really any surprise? (It should be noted that this statement is very similar to one Paglia made years ago about feminism’s inability to understand “what is for men the eroticism or fun element in rape, especially the wild, infectious delirium of gang rape.”)
What have we learned, ladies? Well, apparently, it’s that if you’re not going to smile through your heebie-jeebies and give your violent-poetry-writing, awkward-love-note-passing stalker a chance, you might as well march him right down to the gun shop and purchase your murder weapon yourself.
April 23rd, 2007 04:17
[…] No surprise here, I’m sure everyone who reads this blog is savvy enough to understand that the real cause of the Virginia Tech killings was the proverbial F word. Yes, that’s right, it all happened because of feminism. Kudos to Andi Zeisler for her fine analysis of The Times Online’s revoltingly misogynist commentary that proclaims, “the horrific slaughter revealed not only the poisons lurking in popular culture but the crisis of young males in a feminised society.” […]
April 23rd, 2007 07:55
“The wild, infectious delirium of gang rape”?!? No, I would have to disagree. Anyone who says that would not support women carrying guns. I submit that Camille would then blame feminism for “murdering nice young rapists.”
April 23rd, 2007 14:19
Unbelievable, and props to Andi Z. for calling this out. To counter this nonsense, James Ridgeway has a very good piece in Mother Jones (”Mass Murderers and Women: What We’re Still Not Getting About Virginia Tech”) in case anyone needs the antidote.
http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2007/04/virginia_tech_women.html
April 23rd, 2007 14:22
Paglia posits that Cho is “emblematic of the crisis of masculinity in America”:
“Women have difficulty understanding the mix of male sexual aggression with egotism and the ecstasy of self-immolation,” she says. Oh, those poor babies…since when is it women’s responsibility to understand that sometimes fatal cock-tail? the real problem here - and we dare not speak its name - is a culture, and a global one at that, that refuses to address or even acknowledge that the majority of violence is perpetrated by men, and that much of America still condones and absolves males from true responsibility for predatory, aberrant, misogynstic, and all too often lethal behavior.
April 23rd, 2007 17:24
It is a shame that instead of interviewing any number of domestic violence, mental health, or gun control experts, Baxter felt the need to give column space to Camile Paglia’s conservative lunatic theories that men are turned on by gang rape and that women are wanton sexual predators. If there is a crisis of masculinity, perhaps it lies more in a culture that trivializes menacing and stalking behavior and seeks to explain mass murder as a result of a bruised ego and rejection.
April 24th, 2007 08:34
Wow! I just love it! It seems like they’re advocating an all or nothing system here- ie: “Either don’t have sex or all, or if you must be a dirty dirty whore, you should sleep with every creepy dude who stalks you, so he won’t feel ‘discriminated’ against” Ugh.
April 24th, 2007 10:40
[…] Let’s blame feminism. […]
April 24th, 2007 14:38
Man I am really sorry to read this.
April 24th, 2007 17:32
[…] Virgina Tech Massacre: Blame Feminism!Add “mass murder” to the ever-growing list of societal problems that can be pinned on feminism. In this appalling article from the UK’s Times Online, Sarah Baxter posits quite confidently that last week’s carnage is the fault not of Cho Seung-hi, but of the shameless hussies that comprised Virginia Tech’s female population… […]
April 24th, 2007 20:00
Oh yeah, ’cause that totally makes sense.
Let’s see, a MALE decides he’s entitled to a woman’s affection, goes ballistic when she doesn’t behave the way HE wants her to, and then shoots a bunch of people.
Totally feminism’s fault.
Next thing you know, they’ll be blaming rape on feminism too. Oh wait.. they already do.
April 24th, 2007 21:43
[…] And the Times (UK) cites Paglia in its article blaming the Virginia Tech massacre on women who didn’t give the gunman mercy fucks. […]
April 24th, 2007 22:56
[…] “Virgina Tech Massacre: Blame Feminism!” by Andi Zeisler, WIMN’s Voices […]
April 25th, 2007 10:44
[…] Are hussies to blame for Virgina Tech? Not so much, no. […]
April 26th, 2007 00:54
Virgina Tech is the same school that let two rapists remain enrolled and on the football team after at least one, Antonio Morrison, bragged about rape afterwards on campus and admitted the rape to school authorities. Virginia Tech refused to take the case to the local police, persuaded the young woman not to do so either, told the 18 year old victim the men were suspended and then readmitted them without telling her. The best summary of the facts is here:
http://www.law.emory.edu/4circuit/dec97/961814.p.html
Just one of many relevant quotes from that decision:
“Rape of a female student by a male student is the only violent felony that Virginia Tech authorities do not automatically report to the university or town police.”
That case became U.S. v. Morrison, used by the Supreme Court to gut the Violence Against Women Act in 2000.
The sorry reasoning of that opinion is here:
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-5.ZO.html.
Violence against women is Virginia Tech’s legacy to women in the U.S.
This is the connection the media should be making. Why do they ignore this and publish ridiculous idiots like Baxter? The question is not rhetorical - we need to stop the media’s complicity in male violence.
April 26th, 2007 23:16
“this statement is very similar to one Paglia made years ago about feminism’s inability to understand “what is for men the eroticism or fun element in rape, especially the wild, infectious delirium of gang rape.”
What? Source please. And why the hell are feminists missing such an excellent quote to roast the witch with, every time her name comes up?
Found it. The above quote comes from her book “Greece; Sex, Art, and American Culture” (1992)
“[feminism] does not see what is for men the eroticism or fun element in rape, especially the wild, infectious delirium of gang rape.
.
April 29th, 2007 23:57
[…] But that wasn’t the point. The ‘news’ article and the comments made in it by Camille Paglia are discussed in a few different blogs: here, here, and here. I’m sure there are others as well, but that’s what I’ve come across. Is she aware how much it sounds like she’s trying to blame Cho’s actions on the women who wouldn’t sleep with him? Obviously, she doesn’t state that explicitly, she’s talking about larger social trends and their general effects. And yet… […]
April 11th, 2009 04:59
I just found your blog on the google search engine and saw a few of your other posts that you had done . I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the great work. i will Look forward to reading more from you again.