In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

What’s Killing European Women?

Cancer? AIDS? Traffic accidents? Heart disease? Take a guess. Answer below the fold.

For European women aged 16-44 violence in the home is the primary cause of injury and death, more lethal than road accidents and cancer. Between 25% and 50% of women are victims of this violence. In Portugal 52.8% of women say that they have been violently treated by their husbands or partners. In Germany almost 300 women a year – or three women every four days – are killed by men with whom they used to live. In Britain one woman dies in similar circumstances every three days. In Spain it is one every four days. In France six women die this way every month: 33% of them are knifed, 33% shot, 20% strangled and 10% beaten (1). In the 15 member states of the European Union (before enlargement to 25), more than 600 women die every year because of sexist brutality in the family.”

I feel the need to highlight this for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the racist and orientalist views of many Westerners — views that afflict the left and the right alike (although I’m gonna put it out there that I think they afflict the right more). There is a pervasive mentality that we’re the “enlightened” ones, that we live in evolved and modern societies, and that the feminist movement has largely succeeded in securing equality and is therefore no longer useful. Any time a group like Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch criticizes the United States or Western Europe, or when feminist bloggers write about attacks on our domestic rights, there is a chorus of voices saying, “But it’s so much worse over there!” The “over there” inevitably is “somewhere east of here, where brown people live.” And certainly many things are bad “over there,” whether we’re talking about Afghanistan or Somalia or Saudi Arabia or China or Malaysia or Kenya. But there’s no hypocrisy or shame in trying to clean your own house and criticize that which is closest to you as you simultaneously examine other societies. Women in Saudi Arabia are told — and tell eachother — that it’s so much worse in Afghanistan, they shouldn’t complain. That simply isn’t an effective argument; injustice everywhere needs to be dealth with, on every level. Which doesn’t mean that we ignore the plight of women in the Mid-East and in Africa. It just means that we don’t “help” them by acting as colonizing feminist missionaries; we don’t pretend that we live in a perfect gender-egalitarian society and tell them that they should follow our example step-by-step. It means we allow them to seek equality on their own terms, as we aid them with the resources they need, no strings attached. It means that we don’t fold to cultural relativism: We recognize the importance of culture and tradition, but we also recognize that any value in that tradition is always and without exception surpassed by the importance of human dignity and the basic right to live autonomously. It means that we don’t stop when things are “good enough” or “better than they were.” And it means that we take to task those who claim to spread “freedom” worldwide, while trying to take it away from women here and there.

And because I am not nearly as eloquent as The Great Patriachy Blamer, I’ll leave you with wise words from Twisty:

Of course, you and I don’t need Ignacio Ramonet to tell us that the epidemic of violence is not just limited to bride killings by rural primitives in India and Africa; we are patriarchy-blamers, and we know what time it is. But there is no doubt that we do need loud proclamations reminding us of the suffering of non-European women whose advocates in the West are few and far between.

I say this because our racist conceits are more thoroughgoing than we care to admit. As I have oft opined, Americans display a notably high tolerance for the suffering of others, especially when those others are brown. Like white dudes and their birthright of male privilege, Westerners are indoctrinated from birth with a sort of first-world entitlement. This allows us to keep “exotic” cultures at arm’s length, to luxuriate in a cavalier unfamiliarity with their strange, primitive ways, and ultimately, to think of them as ideas rather than people, as less real than we are, and therefore less important. My own unscientific, blog-centric survey, based on the much-lower-than-average number of comments generated by posts that focus on violent misogyny in “third-world” countries, is that even seasoned patriarchy-blamers are rather less outraged by ritual stonings in Pakistan or mass rapes in Rwanda than they are by Dove soap’s attempt to pass off skinny white models as fat girls.

Educated European honkys are whacking their fair share of wives and girlfriends. Dudes in Botswana are whacking them, too. Assholes in India are trading them for goats. Godbags in Saudi Arabia are throwing acid on them. All over the world, in fact, women are getting the shit kicked out of them every single day, and the international community needs to step up and call the thing what it is: an epic human rights catastrophe. Every moment that passes without such a declaration is a moment that all women pass as marginalized, objectified, despised sub-humans.


112 thoughts on What’s Killing European Women?

  1. I agree that the numbers that start this post are scandalous. Something should be done. But it is the hyperbole in the last quoted sentence that really cracks me up.

    Every moment that passes without such a declaration is a moment that all women pass as marginalized, objectified, despised sub-humans.

    So because some (a lot) of women in Europe (and around the world) are getting beat to death all women are marginalized and despised sub-humans?

    How come that argument doesn’t apply to men? Men have certainly been beat to death (some by their domestic partners). Or, for that matter (and this will really be offensive), how come there are no rallying cries for Texas oilmen? They’ve certainly gotten a bad rap for the last six years, though, to be fair, no deaths that I know of.

    This is why “jerks” (as my roomie calls me) get turned off by contemporary feminism. It’s trying too hard to convince me that “all women pass as marginalized, objectified, despised sub-humans.”

    Just the facts, ma’am. Let’s do something to help these women. Publicizing the numbers is the first step. But they just give us more questions: how do we stop it? and why is it occurring?

  2. not the least of which is the racist and orientalist views of many Westerners

    Counter this with Multiculturalist willful blindness. Before I proceed, let me state that I’m in no way trying to minimize the import of the overall message of violence against women, it’s just that some of the assumptions in your commentary need to be challenged.

    Take a look at the ethnic breakdown of the violence within Western societies, and also look at the socio-economic strata. Certainly violence against women transcends cultures and class, but the incidence is not equal. I’m guessing that what you will find in the data will not surprise you yet you seem to avoid incorporating this into your analysis. I suppose it really could be that you don’t know.

    But there’s no hypocrisy or shame in trying to clean your own house and criticize that which is closest to you as you simultaneously examine other societies.

    I absolutely agree! No shame indeed. So why don’t you point out the higher rates of violence in certain ethnic segments of Western society? Are you afraid of being called a racist? I thought there was no shame in cleaning our own house?

    It means that we don’t fold to cultural relativism:

    If only this were so.

    to luxuriate in a cavalier unfamiliarity with their strange, primitive ways, and ultimately, to think of them as ideas rather than people, as less real than we are, and therefore less important.

    No, not Westerners, but Western Liberals, especially the wine and cheesers:

    there is a subset who I perceive do not see me as fully human on a substantive level, that is, I exist to enrich their own self-actualization and experience of life through my “Eastern” wisdom and color, I exist to validate their contempt for less educated whites or conservatives by offering up my holistic alternatives, I exist to agree with them and be a passive receptacle for their “informed” preconceptions. I have recounted in detail several experiences with these sorts who berate me for my views because I “should know better,” or, I “should not deny what is ‘natural’ because of my origin,” and so on. I have even experienced anger from individuals who assert that “Hinduism is my natural religion” that the Islam of my family is simply an “alien graft.” What do you say to someone who rejects “Western logic” and “linear thinking” and declares that it is unreasonable that that a “person of color” should valorize Aristotle, Marcus Aurelius, Newton and Hume?

  3. wtf are you trying to say mister, you have no problem with someone reporting the facts but you just don’t like what those facts point out, so you have to trot out the oh so tired ‘but bad stuff happens to men too’, yeah, that’s true but bad shit happens to men because of other men, most of the time not because of women

    why do guys always do this? why do they always have to qualify something with the tired old, ‘but men’ shit? how can you keep excusing the way men treat women because men get hurt by men too?

  4. why do guys always do this? why do they always have to qualify something with the tired old, ‘but men’ shit?

    I’ll take a stab at answering your question. It might be because it’s tiring to read agenda driven analysis regardless of perspective. Feminists are rightly concerned by violence against women because it fits in with their gender agenda. It would be refreshing to see feminists mobilizing to take action on the issue of overall violence, or why men comprise 80% of all suicides, and why young boys are 5x – 7x times more likely to commit suicide than young girls.

    Sure, I understand that this social crisis isn’t part of the feminist agenda, and other groups should really be leading the charge, but a balanced feminist agenda on the social disease instead of a lop-sided, gender focused, one would go a long ways to relieving the cynicism that greets the feminist message.

    I certainly don’t think this captures the whole dynamic of the question you pose, but I think that may be a part of it.

  5. Thank you Anashi….

    Texas oilmen? I’m not sure I understand what they have to do with any of this…it is interesting to me that you go to feminist sites even if the topic “turns you off,” and you type in comments knowing they will be offensive…

    Anyway, to your questions:
    1) How do we stop it? Well the obvious answer would be, stop beating women.
    2) Why is it occurring? Beating someone up is a physical form of dominance. It has been ingrained that men and men’s roles should always be in control over a submissive group. If a man feels like he has lost control over one aspect of his life, he will try to regain control through another avenue…..which could make Texas oilmen more relevant, I suppose 🙂

    So back to 1) We can stop it by questioning gender roles, addressing constructions of masculinity, and redefining what it means to be a man. We can restructure our society away from the individual pursuit of happiness (entitlement) to a collective, utilitarian view of social mobility. We can teach empathy at all levels – that there is no such thing as a life more or less important than your own. We can shift away from a dualistic way of understanding the world – that there is no “us v.s. them” binary that should run our lives.

    That might, at least, be a start.

  6. It would be refreshing to see feminists mobilizing to take action on the issue of overall violence, or why men comprise 80% of all suicides, and why young boys are 5x – 7x times more likely to commit suicide than young girls.

    (1) This is the “why don’t feminists address mens’ problems as well” argument, which has been well addressed elsewhere – I’ll dig around for a link for you. Why aren’t men addressing these problems? Why is it primarily the responsibility of feminists? Can’t men get involved in gender issues (apart from antifeminist backlash politics)?
    (2) Notwithstanding the above, if patriarchy-blamers were more successful in countering patriarchal social structures and attitudes, I think you would find such things as boys’ suicides in decline – a lot of them are due to the pressures of being a “traditional male” with all the shit that goes with that. So a lot of benefits for males would pop out unbidden as it were. It’s happening to a small degree already- think about the growing social acceptability of men looking after their own children – but much more is needed.

  7. It would be refreshing to see feminists mobilizing to take action on the issue of overall violence, or why men comprise 80% of all suicides, and why young boys are 5x – 7x times more likely to commit suicide than young girls.

    According to this fact sheet, men overall are four times more likely to successfully commit suicide. Three times more women than men report a history of attempted suicide. Men are apparently nearly four times as likely to attempt with a firearm than women.

  8. Feminists are rightly concerned by violence against women because it fits in with their gender agenda.

    Whoa! People who work for women’s rights pay attention to, what?, women’s rights? Say it ain’t so!

  9. This is the “why don’t feminists address mens’ problems as well” argument

    To a degree, but it’s also a “feminists assert ownership over universal problems” argument. The old joke about the NY Times headline: “Tsunami Ravages SE Asia; Women, Minorities Hardest Hit”, that sort of thing. Which is a real perception, whether its fair or not. Every time something bad happens to people, there has to be some way in which the badness is especially bad for women, in many feminists’ eyes. Or so it seems.

    It just seems somewhat parochial.

  10. And the very first comment is a troll, whining that men get hurt, too.

    Yeah, well, until men stop doing that, they can take care of themselves. Every time some guy does this, he’s saying that women just don’t matter, take care of the men first. Funny how caring about women never happens.

    You want to fix men’s problems? Get to work, champ. Meanwhile, it’s notable how few men actually do help women, as opposed to hindering them.

  11. Helen,

    which has been well addressed elsewhere – I’ll dig around for a link for you.

    Thanks, but I’m already aware of the rationale and I don’t necessarily disagree with it. Note, that in my stab at the answer I wrote: “it’s tiring to read agenda driven analysis regardless of perspective” By this I mean that it’s tiring to read Republicans arguing for tax cuts because they primarily benefit their constituency rather than reading a case for tax cuts benefiting society as a whole, which would be more refreshing. Alternatively, reading about Democrats supporting anti-merit quota systems is tiring because they benefit Black and Hispanic Democratic constituencies. It would be more interesting to read someone trying to make a case for why quota systems are actually beneficial to society as a whole. The same prinicple applies to violence. Feminists are concerned about how it applies to women, but society as a whole is impacted by violence, not just violence against women.

    The upshot is that when any self-interested group starts advocating some issue they have to deal with the baggage that goes along with their message. That certainly doesn’t make their message wrong, it just attaches the self-interest baggage to it. The message is more effective if it deals with a societal problem rather than a group problem. So, this isn’t a particular slam against feminism that’s just the example that was most obvious.

  12. I’m sorry. My comment was misunderstood. I’m not saying that “men get hurt, too, so shouldn’t you be arguing for helping men.” (Somehow, many people jumped right to that conclusion. I get the feeling that it’s something that’s come up before.)

    I’m saying that the idea that all women are “marginalized, objectified, despised sub-humans” because some get beat to death is not a good argument. It’s not a good argument because many people get beat to death. It’s also not that great of an argument because it is easy to refute. All one has to do is point to one woman who isn’t a marginalized, objectified, despised sub-human.

    In other words, it’s a rallying cry to this issue of abuse. My comment is (and I’ll quote directly here for fear of being misunderstood twice): This is why “jerks” (as my roomie calls me) get turned off by contemporary feminism. It’s trying too hard to convince me that “all women pass as marginalized, objectified, despised sub-humans.”

  13. Piny,

    Are you just broadening the parameters of the problem with additional data or attempting to refute what I wrote? If the former, terrific, if the latter then please consider the following:

    I wrote: “why young boys are 5x – 7x times more likely to commit suicide than young girls.”

    Here is the supporting data from the CDC:

    males accounted for 80% of all completed suicides in the United States.

    Among youth 15 to 19, boys were five times as likely as girls to commit suicide; among 20- to 24-year-olds, males were seven times as likely as females to commit suicide.

    I contend that I characterized the data accurately in my summary.

  14. Further thought: I don’t want to be convinced that “all women pass as marginalized, objectified, despised sub-humans.” Now, that’s a purely subjective “want” having to do with deep-seated fear that the women in my life have a horrifying existance that I don’t know about. I’d hate to think my mom or ex-girlfriend is a marginalized, despised sub-human.

  15. I’m trying to show that quoting statistics about completed suicides without mentioning suicide attempts–which you proceed to do again in your reply–is a great way to mislead people about the way gender and suicide are related. You make it sound as though suicide is a disproportionately male or teenage male problem, or that men are more likely to be suicidal. That isn’t true. I’m having trouble finding a suicide attempt cite specific to teenagers, but everything I’ve read leads me to understand that suicide attempts are disproportionately slanted towards young women as well; for example, the methods used to commit suicide are gendered for young people just as they are for adults.

  16. I’m saying that the idea that all women are “marginalized, objectified, despised sub-humans” because some get beat to death is not a good argument. It’s not a good argument because many people get beat to death. It’s also not that great of an argument because it is easy to refute. All one has to do is point to one woman who isn’t a marginalized, objectified, despised sub-human.

    Count the cliches. I really have to restrain myself when I see something this FUCKING STUPID because this fool is saying that if one woman isn’t abused, then, hell, none are! Not to mention the sly attempt to change the subject from women to ‘people’.

    Christ on a crutch, do you know anything about how women live and die aroudn the world or what? Do you have any fucking clue at all?

  17. Further thought: I don’t want to be convinced that “all women pass as marginalized, objectified, despised sub-humans.” Now, that’s a purely subjective “want” having to do with deep-seated fear that the women in my life have a horrifying existance that I don’t know about. I’d hate to think my mom or ex-girlfriend is a marginalized, despised sub-human.

    Well, by all means let’s just ignore reality so you can have your denial. I’m sure the women in your life mean a lot to you.

  18. Heck, the page you linked to says it all:

    The number of completed suicides reflects only a small portion of the impact of suicidal behavior. In 1998, an estimated 671,000 visits to U.S. hospital emergency departments were due to self-directed violence.

  19. It would be refreshing to see feminists mobilizing to take action on the issue of overall violence, or why men comprise 80% of all suicides, and why young boys are 5x – 7x times more likely to commit suicide than young girls.

    Let me get this down,

    Neccesary feminine duties;
    Cook
    Clean
    Spawn
    Deal with all the shit men do to each other
    Blow jobs
    Maybe secure reproductive freedom for ourselves
    Fetch dry cleaning
    Cook
    Wash dishes

    It must be great being one of those ultra-violent quadraplegic men, simultaneously unable to not kill women, other men, and if there’s no animals handy, themselves, while at the same time being utterly unable to help themselves in any way shape or form and relying on women to do it for them.

    I would love to just once, just once mind you, see a guy come onto a feminist forum and say “Do you know what, the way you brought to our atention issues regarding the prevelence of male on female violence made me look at the level of violence and death among men, and d’you know what? I’m going to go out and do something about it dammit, this state of affairs has gone on long enough!”

    …and a year later the first true masculinist movement, that isn’t just an extended class in all purpose woman hating, would emerge and then the feminists and the masculinists could link arms and make the world a better place for both sexes, and this time no one would have to be nailed to anything.

  20. I would love to just once, just once mind you, see a guy come onto a feminist forum

    Would this do? There was the time, right after the Marc Lapine murders, when the message of the “Take Back The Night” marches wasn’t yet well understood, where I accompanied my gf and when i arrived I was told that my support wasn’t welcome.I’d say right about that time is when the seeds of my disillusionment with feminist message integrity started. However, I wasn’t so jaded that I quit being a clinic escort.

    then the feminists and the masculinists could link arms

    You speak directly to the problem. Feminism was supposed to be about equality, so that would obviate the need for a masculinist movement. However, with Feminism morphing into rent-seeking I can certainly see why you would think that men need to develop their own rent-seeking movements and how both movements could then negotiate how to divvy up the spoils.

  21. Ah, I see some feminists rejected you and you got your fee fees hurt. Fool, go play somewhere else. No one is buying your BS.

    How does helping women in a clinic sync up with what you are saying about feminism? If you need feminists to bow down and kiss your feet to help women, wth man, that’s just sad.

  22. Yays. I’m a living testament now and my own worse enemy. Hurry someone stop me from hurting myself by telling this fool where to shove it.

  23. Tangoman: Your energy is misdirected. You were told at the Take Back the Night thing there with your girlfriend in tow, that you weren’t wanted there. It was their space to mourn for women who’ve lost their lives serving or trying to please the patriarchy.

    You are not a woman. You offered your assistance and were turned down. Those women exercised their right to define their space without a man, something very important for a feminist; to be able to define her experience and her space on her terms. Get over it.

    You were needed like I (a white female) would be needed at a Black Panthers meeting. Inclusiveness is wonderful, but groups traditionally oppressed and working toward mutual solidarity to fight against their oppression don’t need those who symbolize or are their source of oppression hanging around to ‘assist’; its rather counterproductive.

    It is a common misnomer among those who hold the lion’s share of power in a social construct to make the assumption that their ‘assistance’ or ‘guidance’ is sorely needed everywhere. Such an assumption serves the construct that benefits them does it not?

    Likewise, if I want to do something about racism, probably my job would be to get white folks talking about their issues of racism and coming to terms with those issues and finding ways among the community to root them out and be rid of them. But that first requires that those in power recognize that their power priviledge is based on an unjust and erred construct that must change. This change would involve giving up some of that priviledge.

    Too often bending down to the ‘lower’ group in the social strata helps the oppressor blind themselves to their own actions which permeate the consruct instead of taking it down. White folks often enjoy the opportunity to hang around black folks and do all kinds of good thing for black folks because it alleviates their own guilt without their having to really do any work on themselves or their own community which would probably really threaten the status quo they benefit from.

    Thus, likewise, marching in a Take Back the Night event may make you feel all hip and good and liberal and all, but it really does nothing for the gender group you identify and live in and at worst, serves only to perpetrate and infect the very purpose of the ‘event’ of empowerment, unity or healing that group seeks to address among themselves.

    Therefore: Yes, you can be working toward social justice, but if you truly want change you must go back to your ‘brothers’ and work on identifying and enlightening them on how the present social construct is flawed and that change to a more egalitarian construct would benefit them more than harm them.

    We as women can’t do that although we are constantly called to do just that as we fend off disappointed and angry men who expect us to provide all the answers not only for ourselves but for them as well.

    To liberal Robert: No, the power will not be split up and two groups will not be left to fight over the spoils. Quite the opposite. As both groups are inextricably linked to the other so neither could ever be seperate. Competition is a patriarchal construct and ideally when existing power structures are challenged and ideally more egalitarian structures are born gradually to replace them, the process will require both groups to work together.

    They must since power is already shared, it is the way it is distributed that is flawed.

  24. Don’t feed the fool; he’ll just get more obsessive. As it is, it looks like he’s bringing 40,000 extra hits to Feministe just by compulsively refreshing the page to see who he can keep boring with his rigid, indoctrinated drivel.

    He used to pester Echidne. I guess he got bored over there. Hopefully he’ll bolt out of here soon.

  25. What percentage of European women are shot? Can’t be. Everyone knows their gun control works; it’s a fullproof.

  26. Just so it’s known, Robert and I are two totally different people…

    That’s not what you said last night! You said I completed you! You lying bastard!

  27. There is a pervasive mentality that we’re the “enlightened” ones, that we live in evolved and modern societies,

    (What’s up with scare quotes?) But yes, I believe that. Evolved and modern does not mean perfect, but still.

    and that the feminist movement has largely succeeded in securing equality and is therefore no longer useful.

    No, and even if I were to think so, I would support feminists’ right to their political opinions. Freedom.

    I seperated your sentence to prove that these viewpoints are not necessarily linked.

  28. Tangoman: Your energy is misdirected. You were told at the Take Back the Night thing there with your girlfriend in tow, that you weren’t wanted there. It was their space to mourn for women who’ve lost their lives serving or trying to please the patriarchy.

    You are not a woman. You offered your assistance and were turned down. Those women exercised their right to define their space without a man, something very important for a feminist; to be able to define her experience and her space on her terms. Get over it.

    It was also created to be safe women-only space focused on the needs of survivors of male violence against women. IOW, men aren’t welcome there not because men can’t be feminists or help in the cause, but because the night was set up to allow women, survivors in particular, to walk the streets without fear.

  29. Also, this whole story depends on spin:

    From similar facts, one could come to the conclusion that European health care is good and the traffic is civilized. Thus since those sections work so well, it leaves invidual violence as the main killer.

    I hate to say it, but is 300 domestic murders a year in a country the side of Germany that huge? Someone should dig up similar stats on all countries. And… This is staggeringly un-PC, but it might be also interesting to see how much of these murders/violence is done by men with ethnic background.

    I also fail to see how this story proves that Germany, as a nation, is trying to take away rights from women. It basically just means that there are hundreds of men that are brutal and murder their gf:s, and perhaps that Germany has not been as efficient as is humanly possible in preventing this. Point to remember is that all those cases are considered illegal and is prosecuted as such. Compare to honor killings that are approved in Shari’a, stoning adulterers…

  30. And… This is staggeringly un-PC, but it might be also interesting to see how much of these murders/violence is done by men with ethnic background.

    So… all men?

  31. so… all men?

    Huh? If I understand your comment correctly, I’m not trying to imply that all violence is done by men, or all by ethnic men. I am responding in the framework provided in the article:

    In Portugal 52.8% of women say that they have been violently treated by their husbands or partners. In Germany almost 300 women a year – or three women every four days – are killed by men with whom they used to live.

    And if it is not clear:

    Of course I’m not trying to claim that European countries (and the original inhabitants therein) are devoid of problems in misogyny, or that there is no room for critical assessment of cultural norms regarding constructions on masculinity and feminity. For example, I assume that the fact that Nordic countries had much domestic violence (Finland #1, “hurray”), according to the story you linked to, has to do with the fact that masculinity here means basically “shut up, don’t show emotions, and work hard”, and there are few good outlets for emotions. Alcoholism and hard drinking are also likely culprits.

    These do not excuse any invidual case, however.

  32. You said “men with ethnic background.” My point was, all men have some sort of ethnic background. Perhaps you just meant “brown people.”

  33. *Lightbulb*

    Aa! That’s what you get when a guy from ethnically homogenous country comments. To be honest, I did have something in the manner of “brown people” in mind.

    If I can save face, let’s put it this way (For the sake of example, I don’t know what the complete truth is here): If people in Germany claim that Turkey is more misogynist than Germany, and someone then points out that no, look how much domestic violence there is in Germany, then if it would turn out that the statistics are amped up by the fact that Turkish immigrants in Germany are committing a great part of it, it would, at least partly, invalidate the defense: German culture is not really that much better than Turkish culture.

    Of course I’m aware that Turkey is quite modern and secular, btw.

  34. It was also created to be safe women-only space focused on the needs of survivors of male violence against women. IOW, men aren’t welcome there not because men can’t be feminists or help in the cause, but because the night was set up to allow women, survivors in particular, to walk the streets without fear.

    One of the ideas, if I remember correctly, was that violence affects all women, and one of the ways that it does is by making us afraid to walk the streets after dark without a chaperone. Take Back the Night, as its name implies, was going to be the one night when women could walk without fear after dark without male protection, and it was going to highlight the fact that we couldn’t do that any other night. Therefore, having men present defeated the symbolism.

    I kind of hated the TBTN rally when I was in college, but it really bugged me that the all-female march bothered men so much. It really wasn’t about hating men or equating all men with rapists or denying the reality of sexual violence against men. It was about the idea that rape culture hurts and constrains all women. It boggles my mind that so many men who claim to be pro-feminist have so much trouble seeing why it’s worth addressing that fact in particular.

    And… This is staggeringly un-PC, but it might be also interesting to see how much of these murders/violence is done by men with ethnic background.

    What I love about this is that it’s a white-supremicist notion that ends up hurting white women. One of the reasons my grandmother couldn’t ask anyone for help when my grandfather was beating her was that my entire family deeply believed that Jewish men didn’t beat their wives. That was for the goyim, who weren’t as refined or upstanding or civilized as we were. It must have been sort of comforting to think that Jews were better than the Christian neighbors who often mistreated them, but it wasn’t particularly comforting to my grandmother or my mother, who knew they’d be met with scorn if they disgraced the community by challenging its delusions of superiority.

  35. I didn’t say that you’re a white supremacist. But I do think that’s a white supremacist notion. That doesn’t make you an evil person: all of us who grow up in unequal societies have some of them.

  36. What I love about this is that it’s a white-supremicist notion that ends up hurting white women. One of the reasons my grandmother couldn’t ask anyone for help when my grandfather was beating her was that my entire family deeply believed that Jewish men didn’t beat their wives. That was for the goyim, who weren’t as refined or upstanding or civilized as we were. It must have been sort of comforting to think that Jews were better than the Christian neighbors who often mistreated them, but it wasn’t particularly comforting to my grandmother or my mother, who knew they’d be met with scorn if they disgraced the community by challenging its delusions of superiority.

    The idea that immigrants are responsible for the frightening statistics is also horseshit, as Tuomas would know if he’d bothered to read the linked article:

    A report from the Council of Europe (3) says that “it is even proved that the incidence of domestic violence seems to increase with income and level of education“. It stresses that in the Netherlands “almost half of all those who commit violence against women hold university degrees”. In France attackers are usually men whose professional status gives them a degree of power. A sizeable percentage of the attackers are management personnel (67%), health professionals (25%) and officers in the police or army (4).

    Another misconception is that violence of this kind is more common in the macho cultures of southern Europe than in northern countries. Here too the image needs adjustment. Romania is the European country with the worst record: every year almost 13 in every million women there are killed by their male partners.

    However, next on the dismal honours list come countries where women’s rights are highly respected. In Finland more than eight in every million women are killed in the home every year: the list runs on down through Norway (6.58), Luxembourg (5.56), Denmark (5.42) and Sweden (4.59). Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland in fact come at the bottom of the list.

    PC or not, it doesn’t sound like a workable theory.

    Why bother. Now I’m a white supremacist. Great.

    Uh, “brown people are more likely to murder their wives” is a white-supremacist hypothesis. You are apparently prone to making racist assumptions. Why not wonder whether, say, a willingness to attribute violence to foreign influence rather than native cultural tropes is what’s preventing these women from getting the help they need?

  37. But I do think that’s a white supremacist notion.

    How ironic. This means that you think that the result of those surveys would be that whites commit far less crimes than other ethnicities. I make no such assumption, nor do I think it really matters. Because treating people as inviduals should trump over statistics in all cases.

  38. The idea that immigrants are responsible for the frightening statistics is also horseshit, as Tuomas would know if he’d bothered to read the linked article:

    No, you check your assumptions: There was no ethnicity mentioned in the part you quoted.

  39. Tuomas, give up now. Having once taken the stand that non-white Others are in the wrong about something (riots and violence in response to cartoons), you are forevermore tainted as the Finnish Klansman.

    Progressive credentials are like virginity. You’ve lost yours; everything you say from now on is hopelessly compromised as the rantings of an arch-conservative reactionary racist.

  40. Progressive credentials are like virginity.

    What IS this right-wing obsession with virginity, anyway?

    non-white Others are in the wrong about something (riots and violence in response to cartoons)

    Since Muslims are nonwhite by definition.

  41. No, you check your assumptions: There was no ethnicity mentioned in the part you quoted.

    Exactly. It didn’t have to talk about race or ethnicity, the study itself indicates that class and economic status are a more important link to DV than race or ethnicity. Read it.

  42. What IS this right-wing obsession with virginity, anyway?

    Secretly, Rev. Faldwell has promised us the housekeeping service of 72 virgins in the afterlife. We don’t get to have sex with them (thus our resentful jealousy of the Muslims) but they do have to darn our socks and wax the kitchen floor. We tend to hyperfocus about it a little bit, frankly…there’s nothing more exciting than a freshly darned sock gliding across a newly waxed floor…excuse me, I have to go lie down for a minute.

  43. Lauren:

    Exactly. It didn’t have to talk about race or ethnicity, the study itself indicates that class and economic status are a more important link to DV than race or ethnicity. Read it.

    I did read it. It didn’t tell much (the economic status findings applied in France, more money=more violence)

    Such violence is worldwide: it happens in all countries, on all continents and in all social, economic, religious and cultural groups.

    There are no far-reaching conclusions to be drawn from it. Merely to remind people that people of all nationalities are capable of evil. No surprise there. (And here I agree.)

    Robert:

    Tuomas, give up now. Having once taken the stand that non-white Others are in the wrong about something (riots and violence in response to cartoons), you are forevermore tainted as the Finnish Klansman.

    Progressive credentials are like virginity. You’ve lost yours; everything you say from now on is hopelessly compromised as the rantings of an arch-conservative reactionary racist.

    Well, my hair was getting too long anyway.

    And I’m not even married. Sinner me.

  44. Exactly. It didn’t have to talk about race or ethnicity, the study itself indicates that class and economic status are a more important link to DV than race or ethnicity. Read it.

    The further point I was making was that the class-relationship indicated runs in the exact opposite direction you’d need to argue that immigrants are disproportionately responsible for DV murders. Who’s more likely to have wealth, cultural capital, and prestige in France, a man who emigrated from Algiers a few years ago or a man whose family has lived in France for several generations? Immigrant status is not linked to DV deaths, but it is linked to poverty.

  45. There are no far-reaching conclusions to be drawn from it. Merely to remind people that people of all nationalities are capable of evil. No surprise there. (And here I agree.)

    Well, that’s a switch from before:

    And… This is staggeringly un-PC, but it might be also interesting to see how much of these murders/violence is done by men with ethnic background.

  46. Not as such, no, but the data as related in the article suggests that there is no direct relationship between “ethnicity” quotient and immigrant status (which, in countries like yours, are very much related)–that the incidence of domestic violence may in fact be inversely proportional to immigrant status, since men with wealth and prestige are more likely to commit domestic violence than poor men without.

  47. And… This is staggeringly un-PC, but it might be also interesting to see how much of these murders/violence is done by men with ethnic background.

    I also fail to see how this story proves that Germany, as a nation, is trying to take away rights from women. It basically just means that there are hundreds of men that are brutal and murder their gf:s, and perhaps that Germany has not been as efficient as is humanly possible in preventing this. Point to remember is that all those cases are considered illegal and is prosecuted as such. Compare to honor killings that are approved in Shari’a, stoning adulterers…

    …No, your original point was about how it doesn’t make sense to attribute a scary high incidence of domestic-violence in Germany (or the rest of Europe) to a problem with German culture. Then you go on to wonder if it’s the ethnic people driving up the curve. That’s different. And like I said, if you’d read that article, you’d have reason to believe that that hypothesis makes no sense from the outset, which is why it doesn’t seem terribly reasonable for you to have held onto it.

  48. Piny:

    That is all fine and good. But for a study that would dispel common myths about the issue, like suppose that I hold a myth that immigrants are more likely to commit DV, why did it not clearly dispel that myth by measuring the factor directly?

    Being a devil’s advocate here for a chance.

  49. …No, your original point was about how it doesn’t make sense to attribute a scary high incidence of domestic-violence in Germany (or the rest of Europe) to a problem with German culture.

    I questioned whether the incidence is scary high comparatively.

  50. Tuomas: I believe the point of the post was that “but it happens in other places” is not good enough justification to ignore violence at home. And now you are attempting to counter that with a argument of, “but it happens worse in other places.”
    That’s just not a logical counter-argument.

    Oh, and:

    suppose that I hold a myth that immigrants are more likely to commit DV, why did it not clearly dispel that myth by measuring the factor directly?

    The study was not done for your exclusive perusal. It was done to measure the levels of violence against women in European states. Insisting that any study should first and foremost prove how it applies per ethnic group is down right silly.
    Are you really going to argue that a study is irrelevant if it does not first dispel any “myths” that any potential reader may hold, even if that was not the focus of the study?

  51. piny,

    The idea that immigrants are responsible for the frightening statistics is also horseshit,

    I have read the linked report, and I have some familiarity with the studies that comprise the foundation for these reports. The methodology that leads to the conclusion that propensity for domestic violence increases with income and education is what is horseshit for that conclusion is sought after in order to allay multicultural and PC sensitivities.

    What the data shows is that the reports of domestic violence increase not that the incidents of such violence do. I would think that most of us on this forum would agree that these are two different phenomona. What is left unaddressed in these reports, but is covered in other literature, is the degree to which different demographics are a.) aware of their rights, b.) classify DV as a crime and c.) how their family values intersect with broad cultural values. If one is making the assumption that rates of reporting are equal to rates of incident then all class and education differences that pertain to this issue would have to be equal. We know they’re not. This is a huge gaping hole in the credibility of the conclusion that this study reaches. It takes good data on reports and spins it to an ideologically resonant conclusion.

    Exactly. It didn’t have to talk about race or ethnicity, the study itself indicates that class and economic status are a more important link to DV than race or ethnicity.

    Allow me to point out that the study doesn’t make the conclusion that class & SES are more important than ethnicity with respect to DV. Actually, it can’t do that because, you’re right, it doesn’t talk about it.

    Keep in mind what we know from the sociologicial literature about propensity to commit crime – petty criminals have a larger chance of committing more serious crimes than do law abiding citizens. No surprise here, I hope.

    If you take a look at the ethnic composition of European immigrants and compare that to crime statistics and incarceration statistics, then you get a better picture of what is transpiring compared to agglomerating all statistics together. Consider:

    Two out of three charged with rape in Norway’s capital are immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. The number of rape cases is also rising steadily.The study is the first where the crime statistics have been analyzed according to ethnic origin. Of the 111 charged with rape in Oslo last year, 72 were of non-western ethnic origin, 25 are classified as Norwegian or western and 14 are listed as unknown.

    Rape charges in the capital are spiraling upwards, 40 percent higher from 1999 to 2000 and up 13 percent so far this year.

    Nine out of ten cases do not make it to prosecution, most of them because police do not believe the evidence is sufficient to reach a conviction.

    Police Inspector Gunnar Larsen of Oslo’s Vice, Robbery and Violent crime division says the statistics are surprising – the rising number of rape cases and the link to ethnic background are both clear trends. But Larsen does not want to speculate on the reasons behind the worrying developments.

    While 65 percent of those charged with rape are classed as coming from a non-western background, this segment makes up only 14.3 percent of Oslo’s population. Norwegian women were the victims in 80 percent of the cases, with 20 percent being women of foreign background.

    Larsen said that since this was the initial study examining ethnic make-up there were no existing figures to put the numbers into context.

    Let’s look at Sweden and Denmark:

    Statistics from Sweden’s National Council for Crime Prevention show that the number of reported rapes against children is on the rise. The figures have nearly doubled in the last ten years: 467 rapes against children under the age of 15 were reported in 2004 compared with 258 in 1995. Legal proceedings continue this week in a case involving a 13 year old girl from Motala who was said to have been subjected to a group rape by four men. (Note: These four men were Kurdish Muslims, who raped the girl for hours and even took photos of doing so)

    The number of rape charges per capita in Malmö is 5 – 6 times that of Copenhagen, Denmark. Copenhagen is a larger city, but the percentage of immigrants is much lower. And it’s not just the rape statistics that reveal a scary increase in Malmö or Sweden. Virtually every kind of violent crime is on the rise. Robberies have increased with 50 % in Malmö only during the fall of 2004. Threats against witnesses in Swedish court cases have quadrupled between 2000 and 2003. During the past few decades, massive immigration has changed the face of Sweden’s major cities, as well as challenged the viability of the welfare state. In 1970 Sweden had the fourth highest GDP per capita among developed countries with income about 6% above the OECD average. By 1997 it was at fifteenth place with an average GDP per capita 14% below average. Malmö has a heavy concentration of Muslim immigrants in particular. According to some estimates, it will be a Muslim majority city in no more then 10 years.

    Read the whole report and notice the juxtaposition of cultural values within the specific immigrant communities against the host nation’s cultural values. There is a huge gap in how Western men view and treat women compared to men from Muslim backgrounds. Also, take note of the differences in Danish and Swedish immigration rates.

    For added background on Muslim marriages within Europe, please see this Christian Science Monitor article.

    But there’s no hypocrisy or shame in trying to clean your own house and criticize that which is closest to you as you simultaneously examine other societies.

    The funniest, and saddest, aspect is the standard of open and honest inquiry that is held up as the exemplary model, but those open and honest people willing to make blanket judgements on a whole society are unwilling to look at details of problems that help to invalidate the efficacy and moral equivalence of Multiculturalism.

    Having once taken the stand that non-white Others are in the wrong about something (riots and violence in response to cartoons), you are forevermore tainted as the Finnish Klansman.

    Robert has this exactly right. A favorite Liberal tactic I run into all the time is the diversionary ad hominem attack on the charge of racism which veers the conversation away from the facts on the table. Liberals pride themselves on, and their self-image is built upon, their more evolved natures and sensabilities. They’re above such things as entertaining hypotheses that culture, race or ethnicity can have negative impacts. Race is a topic that no liberal would touch with a ten foot pole for in doing so they put one of their cherished meta-principles under the microscope and that simply cannot be allowed to happen in the “reality-based community” for that meta-principle is an article of faith.

    Feminism and Multiculturalism are at odds with each other. Which will you chose?

  52. They’re [liberals] above such things as entertaining hypotheses that culture, race or ethnicity can have negative impacts. Race is a topic that no liberal would touch with a ten foot pole for in doing so they put one of their cherished meta-principles under the microscope and that simply cannot be allowed to happen in the “reality-based community” for that meta-principle is an article of faith.

    Bullshit.

  53. Tuomas: I believe the point of the post was that “but it happens in other places” is not good enough justification to ignore violence at home. And now you are attempting to counter that with a argument of, “but it happens worse in other places.”
    That’s just not a logical counter-argument.

    You’re right. It’s not logical a logical counter-argument.What’s more, I did not claim that we should ignore violence here, which kind of makes your argument a straw man.

    I pointed out obvious flaws and lack of information in the sensationalist, relativist post by Jill.

    The study was not done for your exclusive perusal. It was done to measure the levels of violence against women in European states. Insisting that any study should first and foremost prove how it applies per ethnic group is down right silly.

    Okay. Violence happens against European women. Now what?

  54. Feminism and Multiculturalism are at odds with each other.

    I actually believe that this is true to some extent, but I’m not sure why an antifeminist would be so concerned.

  55. Lauren,

    I’m really not arguing in bad faith and am open to revising my opinion if you would be so kind as to point me to a feminist perspective that examines social malady being caused by characteristics associated with race or ethnicity rather than discrimination inflicted by the host culture.

    Take this comment thread as a little laboratory. The 2nd comment was mine, and I echoed Jill’s call for open dialogue but I pointed to breaking the societal rate of DV into racial and ethnic components so that we could tease out the varying rates. Any regular liberal commenters here back up that proposal? Nope, and we’re over 60 comments into the thread. Piny thinks its horseshit and fueled by some white supremacist tendency or something along those lines. What it looks like to me, is that the mere suggestion that such differences exist is constured to be tantamount to getting in touch with your inner Klansman. What liberal wants to be saddled with that charge?

    The data is there but the problem is that liberals don’t want to touch it and thus they prefer to aggregate the data. We saw this same dynamic occur with health warnings about salt intake and lot’s of people needlessly worried about salt intake when the didn’t have to. It would have been better to target the message to sufferers of hypertension, regardless of race, and to note that:

    The lower prevalence of hypertension seen in white women (20.5%) compared with white men (25.2%) is not seen in African American women (36.6%) versus African American men (36.7%)

    The effort expended on driving home a message to an audience that doesn’t need it is therefore wasted when that effort could have been used more effectively to help those most in need. Domestic violence is a problem and to ignore the particulars and only focus on the aggregate means that outreach effort is being expended on those who don’t need it and minimized on those who really do need more of it.

  56. I’m not sure why an antifeminist would be so concerned.

    Because I chose feminist rights over multicultural rights. For the most part feminism tries to build on Enlightenment principles whereas multiculturalism needs to subvert them. Feminism wins hands down in such a contest.

  57. Tuomas:

    What I wonder, compells you? Did a feminist scare your mommy or something? Your arguments on the issues aside, I wonder what makes your ilk tick?

    You’re like the person that crashes the party, pisses in the punch, steals the cake, tells everybody it’s really a shitty party any way, insults the host, steals the silver and exits ever so self-satisfied. Were you always the last picked for the dodge-ball team or something?

    So here’s a perfectly viable topic of DV in Europe. Men are bigger and stronger (generally) than women and some men use that in a coercive and/or violent manner. Since it is women who are the primary victims of DV it is a perfectly reasonable topic for a feminist forum. Furthermore it is a valuable component of that debate to dispell the myth that the problem doesn’t just exist in retrograde cultures.

    Then, the door crashes in and you attack the premise, feminism in general, the posters in particular, anoint yourself the caped enforcer of equality and create bad-faith mayhem. Bad faith because you don’t give a shit about this topic or any other as long as you can attack feminism—your obvious mission in life.
    Get a clue. Get a life. Get a center. When you stop being an ever so rediculous boob maybe somebody will pick you for the team.

  58. Bad faith because you don’t give a shit about this topic or any other as long as you can attack feminism—your obvious mission in life.

    Immigrants, too. He’s a multitasker.

  59. Regarding take back the night marches, and the fact that those equipped with penises aren’t allowed to take part, I thought my university came up with an interesting solution for those that couldn’t march but wanted to do something. It was called the “Men’s Vigil”, and consisted of any and all concerned male-types getting together in the courtyard and discussing rape culture, it’s effects on men’s attitudes toward women, and ways to counter it (e.g, telling your buddy that his rape jokes were unacceptable, and many other ideas, I’m sure, but I don’t remember any others I might have heard). Our Womyn’s Concerns group appreciated that the conversation was taking place among the people that needed to have it.

  60. Why is it so hard to just stop beating the hell out of women? If you men want to stop being accused of beating and raping and savaging women, STOP FUCKING DOING IT ALL THE TIME. This isn’t hard. If you’re not beating women, that’s great. Start telling your friends that it’s not ok to beat the hell out of women.

    Maybe if we started arming women and treating all men like dangerous criminals it would get the message across.

  61. But Butterfly, I’m not with *those* guys. ::points::

    (I’ve never beat the hell ot of a woman–or a man, for that matter.)

  62. If you men want to stop being accused of beating and raping and savaging women, STOP FUCKING DOING IT ALL THE TIME.

    If you muslims, if you women, if you christians, if you religious godbags, if you liberals, etc, etc. I accept the human universal need to generalize and create blanket assumptions in the absense of exculpatory evidence. It sucks to have women be suspicious of men when they’re in a situation where caution is warranted but I understand that such profiling makes a lot of sense.

    I’ve got no major point I want to make other than to point out that calls to eliminate profiling are unrealistic. We’re all saddled with stereotypes, so I’ll remember your advice even though I’ve never beaten, raped or savaged a woman. Your perspective is rational.

    Maybe if we started arming women and treating all men like dangerous criminals it would get the message across

    Here though, I think we diverge; you must be a believer in the entire case made in Michelle Malkin’s In Defense of Internment.

  63. I think blacks have hypertension not just because of high salt diets, but because they have to hear people say things that are clearly white supremacist and bang their heads against their keyboards when the preps are ‘shocked, shocked’ that they are called on their sh*t.

    I agree with the person who said the best way to not be thought of as a dangerous woman beater is not to beat the shit out of women, but also the best way not to be thought of as a racist is….say it with me fellows…not to be a racist. Thank you.

  64. Shannon,

    Unlike you, I don’t subscribe to Creationist ideas. When you equate discussion of race = racism you parade your ignorance for all to see and it’s truly mindnumbing to witness.

  65. Magis:

    I am not “my ilk”. I am a singular person. Amidst all the ad hominems that ranger from irrelevant and absurd (I tried unsuccesfully to picture my mother being scared of a feminist. Actually I chuckled a bit.) to false, there were genuine questions that I can answer. Mostly I think the insults revealed nothing but a deep divide between our respective worldviews, that is, you ended up exposing your own insecurities.

    Such as: Get a clue. Get a life. Get a center. When you stop being an ever so rediculous boob maybe somebody will pick you for the team.

    You see, I don’t much care about popular appeal. I have close friends that do truly respect me for my qualities, and am well-liked enough without actively trying. Attempting to win over people by being a sycophant, learning the correct words instead of speaking out for what I believe would make me lose the respect I hold for myself. Maybe I’m not one of the Kool Kids in your eyes. So what?

    Bad faith because you don’t give a shit about this topic or any other as long as you can attack feminism—your obvious mission in life.

    I support feminism as an egalitarian movement that seeks to remove inequalities between men and women. I support ending DV and making rape an aberrant, rare crime instead of the all-too-common source of misogynist jokes it is now. I think sexism affects both men and women, but women probably currently suffer more. Especially so in Islamic countries (but no, I don’t hold “a myth” [who does?] that women never suffer in the West.).

    I reject double-standards I see with many feminists that arise from some articles of faith leftist* ideology, while rarely outright admitting them, obviously holds. And defend with equal passion that Pat Robertson defends (select parts of) Deuteronomy. Such as:

    1) Selective collectivism:

    “The Other” are collectively not responsible for their crimes, but are instead are only invidually responsible, the “enlightened Whites/Men/Westerners” are collecively responsible for the acts of inviduals among them.

    2) Power differential morality calculator:

    Since muslims are poor, their acts of violence are seen as noble struggle to achieve equality.Or are at the very least receive amount of “nuance” that more powerful groups would never receive. (No one should receive it, IMO)

    3) Multiculturalism:

    Not to be confused with multi-ethnicity or pluralism (hey, I adore Ayaan Hirsi Ali). Outright demanding respect (gangsters demand respect, civilized people earn it) for ideologies that are incompatible with liberal values in the name of tolerance and out of paralyzing shame towards own past.

    4) “Holier than thou”, in other words, “more tolerant than thou”

    Tolerating that nice Turkish pizzeria owner is easy. Tolerating people who have sex with other consenting adults is easy (well, should be). It also fails to distinguish the tolerant person from the intolerant ones, therefore the really tolerant person must tolerate something less tolerable.

    5) Selective opposition to profiling:

    TangoMan just explained this.

    * If these do not apply to any leftist that reads this, I’m happy for you.

  66. Aargh. Bad grammar.

    Since muslims are poor, their acts of violence are seen as noble struggle to achieve equality.Or are at the very least receive amount of “nuance” that more powerful groups would never receive.

    doh.

  67. Tuomas:

    1. Brevity is the soul of wit
    2. Posters point was that perhaps Europeans should not be so smug about thinking they’re ever so progressive on DV…you blame on immigrants… defending ipso facto white euromales.
    3. Throws other grenades and says “who me?”
    4. Makes sure we know he has friends (really, honest) and defends women’s rights (really, honest)

    There, you see, dear boy, economy of words.

  68. 2. Posters point was that perhaps Europeans should not be so smug about thinking they’re ever so progressive on DV…you blame on immigrants… defending ipso facto white euromales.

    Where? I asked a question about the ethnic breakdown on DV.

    Grenades?

  69. Thanks for showing your stupidity. If with no prompting, you decide that violence is all non white men’s fault, I’m going to say, yea, you’re a white supremacist. And apparently you can’t read either. When you’re whining about how you’re not allowed into woman’s/POC space, remember your posts here. We have special spaces specifically because we don’t want to babysit morons who don’t know basic words like ‘white supremacist’ or that discussing race has many other facets than ‘people who aren’t white are bad people and beat women’. Maybe you should google a few websites and try to learn, or do something violent and possibly impossible to yourself. I’d of course prefer the latter since you’re obviously not going to do the former.

  70. I hate to admit it, but you were right.

    You’re doing what most people do when accused of harboring bigotry: you’re blaming the messenger and refusing to ask yourself whether there’s any validity to her claims. So I’ll just ask you to contemplate why you asked that question. Are you denying that you assumed that perpetrators of domestic violence would disproportionately be members of ethnic minorities? Why did you assume that? Do you have any evidence at all for it? Where do you think that assumption comes from?

    You don’t have to answer those questions here. (In fact, we’ve probably had enough thread drift, and yes, I know I’m largely responsible for that.) But I think it would be good if you’d pull back a bit from your defensive posture and give them a bit of thought.

  71. Poster:
    There’s a lot of DV in Europe; they shouldn’t get a pass because we assume they’re “cultured.”

    Even shorter Tango-Tuomasoid:
    Betcha it was them niggras and ragheads…what about them…huh…huh? An how come I can’t go to a woman’s thing just cuz I got a dick. Not fair! Mommy!

  72. Grow up, Magis.

    Sally:
    Thanks for the respectful comment. I suppose I was a bit provocative here, too. I recall some findings from a study measuring the level of fear people feel on violence (including DV and rape), and the levels were disproportionaly high in high immigration areas.

    But I’ll give it a thought. Truth is, I would really like to see a big study in the issue of DV that would not be constrained by either Nationalist or Multiculturalist agenda. That would be reported without spin. I just thought that this particular study was a bit weak for various reasons, and the reporting in Le Monde appeared partisan (why was the higher income level=more violence in France singled out? I assume in some countries low income level=more violence, because of the closing sentence Such violence is worldwide: it happens in all countries, on all continents and in all social, economic, religious and cultural groups.? Which ones? Why not be more accurate? Why only European countries [could it be that these issues can not be discussed outside democratic societies]? Doesn’t this contradict the claim in all continents[they weren’t measured]?)

    It seemed like a conscious attempt to distract from the current trend of Muslim violence (French riots, cartoon riots), by “Europeans are bad too!” A tactic that is sometimes used by Anti-Feminists (“men get abused too! What’s your problem, why don’t you want to discuss this? Ad nauseatum”)

  73. But I’ll give it a thought. Truth is, I would really like to see a big study in the issue of DV that would not be constrained by either Nationalist or Multiculturalist agenda. That would be reported without spin. I just thought that this particular study was a bit weak for various reasons, and the reporting in Le Monde appeared partisan (why was the higher income level=more violence in France singled out? I assume in some countries low income level=more violence, because of the closing sentence Such violence is worldwide: it happens in all countries, on all continents and in all social, economic, religious and cultural groups.? Which ones? Why not be more accurate? Why only European countries [could it be that these issues can not be discussed outside democratic societies]? Doesn’t this contradict the claim in all continents[they weren’t measured]?)

    The France statistic was singled out in the article reporting on the results because it was an interesting factoid, like, “Clinton Township recorded the highest number of DUI arrests,” and, “Researchers found that foods like donuts and pumpkin pie improved subjects’ test performance, but that pound cake had no measurable effect.” That’s typical, not evidence of anti-Sarah Lee bias. Le Monde, furthermore, is a French newspaper; I’d expect that focus for the same reason that a study on gas prices published in the Chronicle would focus on how much it cost San Franciscans to fill up the tank.

    The closing sentence is just repeating a truism that does tend to get ignored when people discuss domestic violence: it happens everywhere, to all kinds of women, in all kinds of marriages. It was meant to prevent readers from assuming that MBA’s are the only men to be avoided.

    If some researcher had attempted to do a study about domestic violence with a narrow focus on, say, the unemployed, would you assume that he or she were ignoring everyone else for the sake of some agenda or merely attempting to answer one question–that is, “What’s the rate of domestic violence among the unemployed?” And if the subsequent article included some words to the effect of, “We must not ignore that domestic violence occurs in all socioeconomic groups,” would you assume that they were hiding some extreme violence among some group of unemployed people?

  74. I have a little bit of basic grounding in social science, so the types of questions you ask, T. are very annoying to me. Basically, in a study, you can’t study everything. For example, I helped in research about skin bleaching in Tanzania- the researchers were not saying that people don’t bleach their skin in Asia or other parts of Africa- simply, my teacher was traveling around, noticed a problem, and decided to research it.

    That’s why I find your questions suspicious, to say the least. If you want to say whether immigrants do more domestic violence than the ‘rest’, you need a baseline to start from, but that sort of research, I not sure if that is ethically ok. I am not an advanced social scientist, but in methods, we talked about the pitfalls of having research to see which group is the ‘best’ without a good reason for it.

    I can see why that is questioned- if you like Stephen Jay Gould, you should look at his works on scientific racism- but personally, I don’t like it, either. Of course the dominant group will declare the other group inferior, but it doesn’t seem to be helpful or productive to do research of that sort.

    If one is really worried about domestic violence among immigrants, they should probably work together with immigrant communties instead of coming from the outside and judging them without knowing their situation.

  75. it doesn’t seem to be helpful or productive to do research of that sort.

    Unless “knowing what the truth is” is helpful or productive, of course.

  76. Robert,

    Unless “knowing what the truth is” is helpful or productive, of course

    It’s looks like you’re another person who espouses Liberal values.

    The climate of fear in academia is palpable. Who would have thought that Leftists would have protested against the successor project to the Human Genome Project, the Human Genome Diversity Project and killed it dead?

    Even guys with the stature of Stanford’s David Botstein, on the Nobel shortlist for his development of the microarray, has this to say about studies of genetic links to violent tendencies:

    “I think there’s more scientifically to that one, a greater likelihood of finding it, more than IQ. But it’s COMPLETELY unacceptable at the moment. You can’t even talk about it. Go to any university, research center, no one — NO ONE — will talk to you about this. Why? Simple. Because of the fear that there will be a racial correlation. And there could be. . .and I have some sympathy for this fear, mean (sic) that any scientific evidence linking some undesirable trait with black people will be used as an excuse for explicit or implicit genocide. Okay? That fear is not totally irrational. . .”

    Now it would certainly be helpful and productive to know about genetic factors, wouldn’t you think? But doing that research is impossible because of the fear of whatmight be uncovered. The more interesting question to me is why these liberal Savonarolas think that such a result is possible? Are they closet racists?

  77. Truth is, I would really like to see a big study in the issue of DV that would not be constrained by either Nationalist or Multiculturalist agenda.

    Shorter Tuomas:

    I want to see a study that agrees with me.

    First Google try:

    Certain European countries, such as Iceland, which in other ways is rather advanced from the point of view of women’s rights, the Netherlands and Greece have no specific legislation on domestic violence. It is treated as all other violence, althought it requires a specific follow-up and the specific protection of victims, since recidivism very frequently occurs, as there are close bonds between the victim and the torturer. In Greece marital rape does not expressly constitute an offence ; whereas in Italy it is considered a crime. Unfortunately, the Italian judges have not changed their attitude and rarely apply these laws. In France, rape is recognised by the law and therefore punished.

    Full text here

    2nd try: American but still valid: On sub-continent immigrants but covers others click here.

    These are, while certainly not conclusive, leading me to:

    The laws and enforcement thereof in Europe are often retrograde regardless of the race of the perp. Indeed one would not be to surprised if the laws, such as they are, are more strictly enforced against “brown” people.

    From the second we might wonder if the DV in “brown” people is highly under reported which would logically lead us to believe that most of the DV that was reported and therefor found its way into the Poster’s statistics was “white” people.

    I did grow up Tuomas and in that process I learned to play nice with other people, to respect their space and to be honest in my dealings with them.

    I still don’t believe that your underlying motivation is anything but disruption at any cost. If you’d come here with facts and figures showing that a large percentage of the problem in Europe is “brown” people, you might have been credible.

  78. One word: Tuskeegee.

    Not to mention, how much can truth matter to non evidence based people who refer to thinking before you act as a climate of fear? The same people who think whites are oppressed by minorities? (and yet expect us to believe they should be allowed to go outside by themselves, or even that they are qualified for responsible jobs) You don’t really expect us to believe you are searching for the truth, do you?

  79. I am living in France, and sent Twisty the article which she quoted and then was quoted here, “Violence begins at home”.

    It would be valuable for everyone to read the entire thing.

    http://mondediplo.com/2004/07/01ramonet

    “The profile of the aggressor is not what you might imagine. There is a public perception that these types of killers tend to be from poor backgrounds and with little education. That is not the case.”

    The article doesn’t address the issue of “ethnicity” or immigration, which I know from experience here, people are dying to pin this problem on.

  80. Magis,

    Did you bother reading the article?

    In any case, mistreatment of the wife by the husband and his family is not uncommon in India and, indeed, can take extreme forms that go under the collective title of ‘‘bride burning.’’ . . . .

    When Indians emigrate, particularly those who settle near to each other in towns or districts that become ‘‘little Indias,’’ they frequently bring many of their traditional customs with them. These customs encompass traditional arrangements for marriages, including the dowry practice. Many secondgeneration Indian young men living in the U.S. still go to India to find their brides.

    Finally, some doubt is cast on the NVAW survey results by two in-depth studies of domestic violence among South Asian women in the U.S., which both found high levels of abuse. Based on a sample of 94 subjects, Adams (2000) found a lifetime prevalence rate for domestic violence of 77 percent among Indian and Pakistani immigrants and Raj and Silverman (2002a) found that 41 percent of the 160 South Asian women immigrants (83% were Indians) they interviewed in Boston had experienced physical or sexual injury due to interpersonal partner violence. The most common forms of physical abuse reported by these women were being pushed or shoved, being slammed against a wall, or having their hair pulled and arms twisted. While the use of convenience samples makes it difficult to be confident in the results of these studies, their careful qualitative approach is more likely to uncover domestic violence in these groups than the telephone survey conducted by the NVAW. Taken together, the facts reviewed above suggest that despite the economic success and relatively crime-free record of Indian immigrants, there could be a substantial domestic violence problem within Indian immigrant communities.

    Jaylene,

    which I know from experience here, people are dying to pin this problem on.

    That’s going to be hard to do in France considering French policy of not recording race information in the crime statistics.

    The fact that people are eager to invoke race is understandable when you see that the crimes are increasing but can’t point to any sociological evidence in support of the contention that the causal factors are universal.

    The next best alternative is to look at the data from Denmark and Sweden where they are finally getting around to recording racial information in their crime reports and noting the strikingly disproportionate share commited by immigrants. Next up, look at the cultural mileau the immigrants are immersed in, paying particular attention to the role of women and how it is different from western norms. These approaches are highly suggestive of a conclusion that there are differential rates of DV taking place across demographic categories.

    Sorry to pop your Multicultural nirvana bubble.

  81. Whether more “brown” men are killing women or not, and by what pertcentage, I’d like to know. . . the fact is it is men who are doing the killing, Sweden remains a patriarchial society, just as Muslim countries do, so instead of getting all worked up over this report about European men, perhaps it would be more useful to be enraged by the killing of women partout!

    Calling my perspective a “nirvana bubble” (whatever that means) is completely counter-productive and hostile. Comparing Sweden and France is rather useless, the population is totally different.

  82. TangoMan:

    The part I was referring to was how rarely official reports are being made. If that is so (read the “could be” part of your post) then one imagines that most of those actually charged are “non-brown.”

    You and Tuomas refuse to understand the premise of the post. That being, despite a European reputation for urbanity many of the laws are retrograde or not enforced and that DV is less rare than one would immagine. Per force, many of the perps are white euromales who we expect better of. It was, until it was hijacked by you immigrant bashers, supposed to a discussion on European culture vis a vis DV.

  83. Jaylene,

    perhaps it would be more useful to be enraged by the killing of women partout!

    That fact that I’m criticizing methodology here doesn’t in any way mean that I’m minimizing the import of the underlying message of DV victims.

    What I meant by the MC nirvana bubble is just this – many people cling to the notion that to look at different cultural patterns as a means of explaining social pathology is racist, so they pretend that all groups act in the same manner. When reports of DV increase, then they assume that all groups of men are equally likely to be the tormenters. I took your comment about people in France being eager to pin this on ethnic communities to be some sort of implied insult that these people are racist. From this, I inferred that you took the position that all groups act in the same manner. Therefore, I understand you to be living in a kind of fantasy bubble in which a MC nirvana is being established.

    If I read your statements in a fashion that you didn’t intend, then I apologize for my faulty interpretation.

    Magis,

    The non-reporting issue is what I highlighted to piny. There is reporting and then there is incidence. I think we both agree that they are not the same thing.

    many of the perps are white euromales who we expect better of

    True, many are European males. The report however aggregates the data and that doesn’t help matters at all.

    Think of it this way. The US participates in an international test comparison for High School math competency. The test results show that the US isn’t doing so well. Remedy must be taken. Now surely it would help to know how the various subgroups within the US are doing so that effort isn’t wasted on trying to remedy the performance of groups who are already doing well, and shortchanging the groups who need a lot more assistance in order to raise their performance.

    If the goal is to preserve minority group feelings, then aggregating the data and saying all classes of men are equally likely to commit DV is certainly going to work to achieving the goal. However, if the goal is to reduce DV then actually targeting the groups with high incidence and working to getting the levels to at least match the lower incidence groups, is going to do more good than knocking a bit off of every group’s incidence.

    This is referencing laws of diminishing returns. In the West we’ve been working on reducing DV for a couple of generations now. The message has hit home for a good many men. They’re already on board. There is little need to waste message resources on these men and skimp on getting the message to the men who need it.

    discussion on European culture vis a vis DV.

    If it’s supposed to be about European culture then they really should restrict the sample to European males. How is it European culture when Moroccan men and their attitudes are included in the sample?

  84. Tango:

    Let’s honestly see if we can get somewhere here. K? Forget race totally. What if the question is framed to study the legal frameworks. A nation’s legal system is one expression of a nation’s culture, no?

    So we have EuroNation who has crappy DV laws and poor enforcement of the ones they do have. Let us further posit that that situation existed prior to a wave of muslim immigration. That said nation was pretty homogenous (as most were). Let’s say the rate of DV was 1 per 100 couples.

    Now we have a wave of immigration. DV rate among immigrants is 5 per 100. However, same crappy laws and enforcement.

    Now, is EuroNation any less deserving of criticism regardless of who is doing the battering or at what point in time it occurs? Is it’s self-image of being highly civilized any less deserving of criticism by feminists (or anyone for that matter)?

    I come from an area which is rich in immigrant tradition. I’m fully aware that hitting a wife is more acceptable in some cultures than others. Nonetheless, a society needs to be judged on how it deals with crime and the standards it has for civilized behavior rather than by who is committing the crimes.

  85. Magis,

    Now, is EuroNation any less deserving of criticism regardless of who is doing the battering or at what point in time it occurs? Is it’s self-image of being highly civilized any less deserving of criticism by feminists (or anyone for that matter)?

    OK, putting aside race for the moment and focusing on national laws dealing with DV. I’m can’t offer any informed opinion on how European laws could be made better on DV. I know that in the US when the police receive a DV complaint the man is removed from the house regardless of the merit or severity of the dispute. What do you suggest be improved about the official process? Can you throw some specifics onto the table?

    Further, I would say that outreach efforts to increase levels of reporting to more closely match levels of incidence would be a good step. We’d certainly see what looks to be an increase in DV over time but really it would just amount to a more honest reflection of the underlying crime rather than a real uptick in DV.

    society needs to be judged on how it deals with crime and the standards it has for civilized behavior rather than by who is committing the crimes.

    Certainly, but what does this tell us. You can focus all your effort on how police and courts deal with reported incidents and still leave the main problem, unreported cases, untouched.

    My point throughout has been to get detailed information so that the resources can be deployed to the areas that are in most need of help. Jill’s call was that we should talk about this openly and I’m saying that that same philosophy needs to tread on some sacred cows. I find it odd that it’s ok to blame all men for the problems commited by a few, yet it’s too sensitive to blame the specific communities causing disproportionate problems because that would unfairly tarnish those in the community who aren’t causing a problem. Do you see a double standard here?

  86. …blame the specific communities…

    Therein lies the rub. Communities don’t commit crimes, individuals do. Do you want me to say that some communities have higher incident rates? Consider it said.

    But no one attacked “all men.” No one defended any perps, brown or white. But anytime you attack a group rather than the bad apples in it you’ll raise ire here. There are too many who have been stereotyped (or worse) because of a condition of their birth. So, yeah, sometimes some of us can be a bit too PC. But I’d rather be too PC than a tiny bit racist.

    The point at the begining and the end, mine and the poster’s (if I may be so bold), is that Europe doesn’t get a pass and it has some house cleaning to do.

  87. Magis,

    But no one attacked “all men.”

    I don’t think that this comment is uncommen and actually reflects the thinking of many women,

    “If you men want to stop being accused of beating and raping and savaging women, STOP FUCKING DOING IT ALL THE TIME.”

    But I’d rather be too PC than a tiny bit racist.

    You realize that being too PC works against the goal of lowering DV in that problem communities are subsumed into the larger community which has a lower rate of DV. If somethings are better left unsaid, then certainly leave them unsaid but be aware of the consequences that result.

    I’m also getting an impression that your defintion of racism is quite expansive, but it’s only an impression because you’re not actually defining what comment I wrote, or you think I may have subtley insinuated, is considered racist.

  88. jaylene,

    People in France are racist, just like in America.

    Interesting observation. So, let me see if I understand you correctly.

    People in France are racist.
    You live in France.
    Therefore, you are racist.

    OK, I now understand your apparent cognitive dissonance.

  89. zuzu,

    Sure no problem, but that was quite mild compared to what’s been slopped onto my plate by others here. I just turned her own words against her. It was just the idiocy of her statement that offended me, moreso than the implicit superior attitude. Further, when you consider a statement like “People in France are racist, just like in America” and the logical implications that follow from such a statement, you realize that you, and all of you blog guests, are being blasted as being racists by Jaylene’s statement.

  90. Don’t play the “but I got worse!” card. Nobody’s called you a racist, full stop. Which is what you did to jaylene. People have called you out for the racism and ethnocentrism in your arguments, not to mention the dishonest way you present and defend them.

    Case in point re: dishonesty —

    Further, when you consider a statement like “People in France are racist, just like in America” and the logical implications that follow from such a statement, you realize that you, and all of you blog guests, are being blasted as being racists by Jaylene’s statement.

    You know very well that jaylene was not calling anyone specific a racist. That is in no way “the logical implications that follow from such a statement.” Presumably, you are a native English speaker and are aware that “people,” when used without a modifier, is indefinite. It does not mean “all people.” And it certainly doesn’t mean “you, Tango Man, are racist and so are all the people here. What it means is that there are people in France who are racist, just as there are people in America who are racist.

    Moreover, denying that racism exists in both France and America is ridiculous. Racist attitudes abound in our world, and it does no good to treat calling out racism as a greater offense than racism itself.

  91. Put all of this into context. Jaylene wrote “I know from experience here, people are dying to pin this problem on [race.]” To which I responded:

    The fact that people are eager to invoke race is understandable when you see that the crimes are increasing but can’t point to any sociological evidence in support of the contention that the causal factors are universal.

    There is a huge difference between racism and legitimately looking at race as a variable in sociological and/or genetic studies. Men in France are being tarred with reports which show DV is increasing but there is a wide spread awareness or belief that the problem is worse in some communities than in others. Many people believe that if this really is so, then we should say so, rather than hide the data through aggregation. That’s not racism.

    To this argument, Jaylene responds that “People in France are racist.”

    So, admittedly, I turned the tables on her and I apologize to you and to her. Her dishonest argumentation and her steadfast adherence to moral superiority without reliance on argumentation or evidence, I felt, warranted a comeback tailored from the same cloth.

    denying that racism exists in both France and America is ridiculous.

    I certainly don’t deny that. If you reread my comments you notice that I’m trying to argue that there is a legitimate distinction between racism and the use of race in the study of social conditions. No more, no less. Besides, I’m adhering to Jill’s maxim that there is “no hypocrisy or shame in trying to clean your own house and criticize that which is closest to you.”

  92. I think her original statement was perfectly legitimate. There are people here “dying to pin this on race.” You yourself bring race into almost every comment thread with your copious links on genetics and eugenics. Tuomas is very, very eager to slice and dice the report so that it shows that immigrants — by which he clearly means “brown people,” given his comments here and on the Danish cartoons — are worse than white Europeans wrt domestic violence. The two of you, especially, have hijacked thread after thread with this stuff.

    You *say* that you just want to use race “in the study of social conditions.” But race is a construct and changes over time. I’m Irish; not too long ago I would have been considered of an inferior race to other Northern Europeans. Now, I’m just another white woman. And, moreover, race is only one variable out of thousands that can affect rates of DV — level of education being another, one that has been identified closely with rates of DV.

    So, no, your comeback to jaylene was not “tailored from the same cloth.” I suggest you refrain from personal attacks in the future.

  93. TangoMan:

    You completely ignored my point. If the laws are inadequate or ill-enforced, the color of the perp is irrelevant. Brown perp gets off, white perp gets off. Justice wears her blindfold for a reason.

    If you were a judge and a perp was in front of you, would the incidence of occurance in his community have any bearing on the case? Would you treat him as an individual or a member of a class?

    To the extent that the Euro Nations are still overwhelming white they bear the overwhelming responsibility to fix their laws. Until that’s done, nothing else matters much.

    Any time you judge a group as a whole instead of an individual it’s racism, sexism or some kinda “ism.” Now matter how convenient it is for modeling; it is wrong.

    To the extent one community or another has a higher incidence it might tell you where you need to concentrate your enforcement or social work resources. But that doesn’t mean anybody gets a pass.

  94. Magis,

    Most certainly a judge has to treat the accused an an individual and not as a member of a class. And not just judges, but human resource people, university admissions officers, etc. Class status is irrelevent.

    Any time you judge a group as a whole instead of an individual it’s racism, sexism or some kinda “ism.” Now matter how convenient it is for modeling; it is wrong.

    OK, but there goes the policy of treating all men as though they need more information on DV, presuming that it is the man who must be removed from the household when police respond to a DV complaint, etc.

    To the extent one community or another has a higher incidence it might tell you where you need to concentrate your enforcement or social work resources. But that doesn’t mean anybody gets a pass.

    My thoughts exactly.

Comments are currently closed.