From: goid@zooid.guild.ORG (Will Steeves)
Subject: Why I will *not* be wearing a white ribbon...*ever*
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Date: 17 Dec 92 17:55:59 GMT

I realise that I am taking a *very* unpopular stance (when has *that*
ever stopped me?!?!?  (-: ), and am likely to be misinterpreted as
accepting violence towards women (*NOTE MY WORDS CAREFULLY* - I chose
not to use the word "against," because I consider it to have somewhat
inflammatory cross-group connotations which "towards" does not).
However, this is not the case.  Let me explain my reasons why.

watson@sce.carleton.ca (Stephen Watson) writes...
SW> December 6, 1989.  It was a Wednesday, and I was at home that
SW> afternoon.  The radio was on.  The 5 o'clock news said that
SW> _something_ had happened in Montreal.  Over the next few hours the
SW> details trickled in, and by the time the CBC National came on the
SW> machinery of the modern media was giving us the full horror of the
SW> story, told in full colour and 30-second sound bites: an angry,
SW> frustrated, and tragically confused young man, armed with a
SW> semi-automatic rifle, had entered L'Ecole Polytechnique, the
SW> engineering school at the University of Montreal, and started shooting
SW> people.  The final toll: 14 dead, another dozen or so injured.  Now,
SW> it would have been shocking enough if that was all there was to it:
SW> such things just don't happen here in Canada, the Peacable Kingdom, do
SW> they?.

Indeed.  It too, shocked me.  I was working late (VERY
late...overnight, in fact) at the offices of the University of Toronto
Students' Administrative Council when the fax came through from the
Ecole Polytechnique - I was so horrified that to this date, I still
don't have any clear recollection of how I responded to it, during the
hours immediately after reading the fax.

I was *very* upset that fourteen women were killed, mainly because a
demented and desperate madman had felt that he had been discriminated
against by affirmative action programmes, etc., and had harboured a
great deal of resentment towards women because of a string of
unsuccessful relationships.  (I do not recall if the police EVER
released his note - I do recall people talking about him having said
these two points, in particular, though?).

I was very sad that these women had been the victims of some insane
anger toward women in general, but when I started to notice that the
country's mainstream feminist organisations (NACSW, CACSW, WLEAF,
etc.) were USING this sad event as a method of labelling all those
with philosophical objections with certain aspects of feminism, as
*sympathisers* of this raving lunatic (ie., "He killed fourteen women,
in an 'anti-feminist' rage"), and furthermore, that he was *not*
insane, but was just acting out "the anger and hatred that all men
harbour against women," as a message that all men are to some degree
misognyist and "potentially violent against women," I was absolutely
INFURIATED!

My feeling was therefore - let us mourn and remember the victims, NOT
use them as some sort of propaganda tool in order to send out the
message that ALL men are "misogynist to some degree", "potentially
violent against women" or "potential rapists".  Indeed, THE ONLY
SURVIVOR (For the life of me, I can't recall her name! - Also, I
cannot recall whether there were other survivors, but I think that she
*was* the only one - Can someone confirm or deny this?  Thanks) said
more or less the same thing, and had felt that the country's feminist
groups had co-opted the event in some larger agenda which she
*strongly disagreed with, and felt was counterproductive to the aims
of greater cooperatio and understanding between men and women.


SW> engineers.  It certainly did in our house.  Why on earth did he feel
SW> such rage against *these* women?  The answer seems to be that, he
SW> could not endure that they should be succeeding, where he, because of
                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SW> his own inadequacies, had failed.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I realise that I am risking another dangerous misinterpretation here,
but I do not recall whether he had necessarily failed from a lack of
good grades, etc, and indeed, I vaguely recall hearing something about
him being turned down for a position designated for women only, or
something similar.  (Again, can someone confirm or deny this?  I am
still VERY angry that his suicide note was covered up by the
authorities - it might have explained *something* - yes, even the
motives of madmen, no matter how insane their motives seem, *ought* to
be examined in order to help prevent similar tragedies).  In other
words, I am saying that he MAY have felt anger because of what he felt
was "feminism robbing him of a future".  Mind you, I AM NOT DEFENDING
HIM (I just wanted to make that clear...) ; I am just saying that he
may have failed for reasons other than academic ones, which he may
have perceived as "the work of feminists".

SW> In the days following the massacre, much was said about the larger
SW> social causes that produce men like Lepine, and about societal
SW> misogyny in general.  Some of it was a bit extreme should perhaps be
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SW> excused as having been said out of shock and grief.

Indeed!  Some of what was said, WAS extreme, but I would be somewhat
less willing to forgive some of the more extreme comments about men in
general, because I consider it as going *way beyond* simple grief, and
indeed, it just seemed like a good and timely excuse to hurl abuse at
all men in general.

SW> ...here in our own neighbourhood, the Peer Support Group of the
SW> Kanata, Goulbourn and West Carleton Resource Centre receives about
SW> a dozen calls per month from women who are being abused by the man
SW> they live with.

Ah, hold on a second...  I have seen statistics from Prof. Eugen Lupri
(the same person who originated the statistics on wife abuse which are
being used by many women's shelters - See _Toronto Life_, December
1992) which state that violence *AGAINST HUSBANDS*, committed by
*wives*, is only slightly less prevalent than violence by husbands
against wives, *but* that because of the strength differential between
men and women, only 1/7th of such cases result in the man being
hospitalised.  Does this make the problem nonexistent?  It sure
*seems* to be, when you consider that the focus of December 6th
memorials has gone from merely "violence against women" to "male
violence," as though only men are capable of violence, and only women
are victims.


SW> Evidently there are a lot of men out there who still see women as
SW> property to be used for their own gratification, as objects to take
SW> out their frustrations on, as obstacles to the fulfillment of their
SW> own desires.

And evidently, there are almost as many *women* who feel the same way
about men!

Do we ignore them, merely because they are not as capable of
inflicting serious harm upon men as men with such opinions are capable
of inflicting upon women??  I thought that the whole point was that
this is *still* violence, regardless of whether it causes less
physical damage, but apparently in most feminists' eyes, only *men*
are violent.

SW> And so, spontaneously, about a year ago, the White Ribbon campaign
SW> began.  In memory of the 14 students who died, and in protest
SW> against the violence and discrimination which still continue, men
SW> are asked to wear a white ribbon for the week of November 29th to
SW> December 6th, and to encourage other men to wear one, too.

I take some umbrage at the idea of ALL men being asked to wear some
sort of Scarlet Letter because of the MINORITY of men who are violent
towards women.  If my use of that terminology upsets you, then I would
humbly ask you to consider an (old) editorial by Christie Blatchford
(granted, she is with the Toronto Sun, so I'd have to send you a copy,
or transribe it here) in regards to an art contest by some women's
groups around Toronto, in memory of the fourteen women.  The contest
was open to women only, but with the proviso that men *could* submit
entries *only* if their entries showed an "appropriate level of
responsibility that all men should share for their propagation of
violence".  *THAT* clinched it for me - as far as I was concerned,
this very tragic event had been perverted by (perhaps) well-meaning
zealots who had turned it into a way of making men feel shame at their
maleness (if you dispute this, consider how many people you may have
heard, saying "I'm really ashamed that I'm a white male, because of
men like Marc Lepine" - I heard a LOT of men saying this, and I wanted
NO PART WHATSOEVER in their collective class guilt trip, because I, as
a "white male," had no more part in the Montreal Massacre than Jesus
Christ had in starting the Inquisition!  - forgive my multiple
references to this argument, but it seems to be an effective argument
against laying class blame)

SW> But this morning, I would like to invite every man here to wear a
SW> white ribbon throughout this coming week: it's not a big political
SW> statement; it doesn't mean you agree with Judy Rebick;
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I certainly do not agree with her, but I *still* wouldn't wear one, so
long as I am convinced that there is more to it than *just*
remembering the memory of the victims.  BTW, for foreign readers, Judy
Rebick is the president - ack, a PATRIARCHAL TERM, gads - of the
National Action Committee on the Status Of Women (NACSW).

SW> it simply says:
SW> you remember what happened in Montreal three years ago, and you want a
SW> society in which things like that will never happen again.

I WISH that I could believe that.  If I *could* believe that this is
ALL that is implied by wearing a white ribbon, I *WOULD*, but I think
that there is a lot more in it than just that.

I still find it unfortunate that such a tragic event as this, has been
turned into a polemic propaganda circus.

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876

"Cthulhu for President in '92 - Why vote for the _lesser_ of two evils?"
                                                          - Bronis Vidugiris
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * Scotty!!  Hurry! Beam me u... NO CARRIER

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.