He said, "I hate feminists" and the shooting started

Buffalo Springfield once sang, "There's something happening here. What it is ain't exactly clear."

That's how I feel about a certain fact surrounding the recent shootings in Colorado and Pennsylvania, where girls were singled out by the gunmen.

Why girls?

I'm sure I have no answer and will admit that maybe there's just a weird ooincidence. But I couldn't help being reminded of a story from 1989, when a man named Marc Lepine went into a Montreal university, separated the women from the men, shouted, "I hate feminists," and opened fire. When it was over, 14 women were dead.

Then I thought about a mass killing in Texas around the same time, which, my memory told me, had some contempt for women attached to it. It took some searching, but I found details. This was the guy who drove his truck through the window of a diner and then opened fire, killing 24 people. His name was George Hennard and, around the time of the shooting, he'd sent a letter to two young women in which he said, "Then the abundance of evil women that make up the worst on the other side. ... I will no matter what prevail over the female vipers in those two rinky-dink towns in Texas. I will prevail in the bitter end."

These situations seem, and are, quite different than the killings that have taken place over the last week. But the common thread remains the same. Women and girls are bound up in the psychosis that drove the men in their murderous rampage.

Should we be surprised? Of course not. Feminism has inspired hatred and violence for a long time. And there's little question that women have been among the main targets of modern republican policy decisions. They want to repress us, pure and simple. Abortion bans and restrictions on access to birth cotnrol are not about some culture of life; rather, they seek control of women Pundits are only too happy to add commentary that separates "good" women from the bad. Worst of all, under the current regime oppression is measured by little more than whether women live in a culture that forces the wearing of a burka; without that, the message is to stop your complaining because your sisters are the true victims of oppression.

Is this the sort of thought that drove that man in Colorado to take only female hostages or, in Pennsyvania, led to the death of only young girls? Not directly, I'm sure. But I am certain that among the most successful and least discussed policy successes of the 30 years of republican rule is a contempt for the female sex, a contempt that is helping produce deadly results.

•  yes....

  I had this thought too.  It may be a sin and against the law, but there are men who want to physically intimidate women for pleasure.  And when women are strong and won't cooperate, they turn to little girls.  This guy was a supposed strong Christian, but so was the Wichita BTK killer.  Did Christianity help him or make him feel rejected and wanting to kill again.

  by murrayewv on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:02:56 PM PDT

  •  And some strains of religious thought

    openly preach subordination of women.

    It saddens me deeply when I think that my daughter will become a woman in a world that's less accepting of her than it was to me.

    by VetGrl on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:06:22 PM PDT

•  a bit of a stretch

  I think.

  by Miss Devore on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:04:08 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, all those Amish feminists

    Not.

    by ChuyHChrist on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:09:22 PM PDT

  •  A stretch that I tried to work into the diary

    Like I said, it could be the product of coincidence, but I don't think there's room to dispute that animosity toward women is a hallmark of the modern republican movement.

    What do you think?

    by VetGrl on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:10:20 PM PDT

    •  hard to seperate

      rethug influence from history in general. and hostility based on fear?

      one thing I noted about the guy who killed the Amish girls--he let a pregnant woman leave the premises. So he was killing virginal girls only.

      by Miss Devore on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:17:09 PM PDT

      •  I hadn't heard that. It sort of reminds me of

        how the anti-abortion crowd tends to not care much about the babies once they're born.

        What really bothers me about the whole situation is that the MSM coverage I've seen seems to make no note of how girls have been singled out. And in the bigger picture, our lives as women just isn't a topic of societal discussion these days.

        by VetGrl on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 05:14:10 AM PDT

  •  Not that much of a stretch

    If this guy singled out girls, it's pretty clear he's taking extreme misogyny to its logical conclusion.

    by metal prophet on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:11:29 PM PDT

    •  and tying their feet

      It can't get much more obvious than that.

      by hrh on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 10:33:24 PM PDT

    •  Exactly

      There is definately a connection.  Its all in that same morbid morass of misogyny.  You nailed it here.  

      I've been talking with my mother-in-law lately and we've both been seeing so many similarities with the witch trial era of early America.  It seems to us that we're heading straight toward that same ruinous time.  

      As an anecdotal story of how far we have fallen:

      One of my students (9th grade) asked an off-hand question about Bill Clinton.  I can't remember the first question but it sparked a follow up question from a latina girl in the front row:  "Do you think Hillary Clinton will become President?"

      I responded, "Well, she will probably be running in the '08 election, but whether she will win or not is yet to be seen."

      Her response was "I hope she looses. We shouldn't have a girl as President"

      <....head....explodes...>
      <...gather my wits about me...>

      "Why?" I asked.
      "A girl wouldn't do a very good job making decisions"

      I looked at my aide (a woman) and we both stared at each other in earnest disbelief...I mean COMPLETE disbelief.

      Here's some background:
      The same student showed up to school last year with a huge shiner over her left eye, along with bruises on her throat.  We contaced the cops, CPS, counselor, parents.  Pictures were taken, etc.  She had ben preyed upon by a 17 year old drug addict who she had been "dating" for several months.  The mother had ZERO problem with her hanging out with that creep.  While we had the meeting with the mother it came out that the girl had been beaten on several occasions by this guy.

      The mom's reponse: "Your not married yet and he beats you?!"
      As in:  "Once your married, its understandable...but before?"

      I was...needless to say...incredulous.

      The story worsened when we found out she was pregnant.  Her mother did ZERO.  The girl finally had an abortion.  It kills me how she had/has no conception of what struggle and sacrifice it took to give her the right to have that safe abortion.

      I must say that over the last couple of years I have been shocked...SHOCKED at the lack of feminist backbone or understanding in my female students.  They are so wrapped up with this misogynist culture that they only see themselves as objects to be slapped, fucked, or shown off like a gold chain.  The same latina girl that was abused wore a playboy bunny jacket to school earlier in the year.  She was (of course) told to remove it.  It turned out that her mother, not only bought it for her, but bought one for her 9 year old sister too.

      I've had some girls come around.  Another girl came to school wearing a t-shirt that read "Girls Gone Wild" (A series of porn videos).  I took her outside and I gave her an earnest lecture about the problem of projecting one's self as a sexual object.  I'm proud to say that at the end of the year, when we were reading an article on the international sex slave trade, she slammed several of our boys on their giggles...she later said she understood now what I had talked about earlier, and how she had stopped wearing the shirt because she saw the truth in that.

      4 years ago I had another girl.  She was 15 years old and had been prostituting herself out to older men (30+) when she first came to us.  After months of work by my former aide (who was the most amazing woman I have ever met, besides my wife), she had cleaned herself up (both drugs and sex), and moved east to live with an aunt.  She came back a year later and dropped by to say hello.  Her face was bright and her manner strong, and I believed then, as now, that she would be one of the ones that survive.  But my, how rare those success stories are.

      Our society has really slid backwards...and I lay the blame firmly on two doorsteps:  The woman-haters within the Evangelical Christian movement, and the Self-hate-sellers on Madison Ave.  The Christo Facists are classic misogynists, hating women, the sexual power they can embody, and the self-determination they can hold.  They would rather create their own pseudo-end times than face the fact that their interpretation of Christ's teachings are fucking bullshit.  On the other hand, the Madison Ave corporatists are more modern misogynists, dedicated to systematically destroying any sense of NATURAL self-confidence within our girls (and boys).  Flooding their young minds with such FILTH that our young girls believe that they are nothing more than manequin's to be fitted with Abercrombe and Filth striptease costumes, Victoria Secret push up bras, Silicon implants, botox brains and crotchless panties...all by age 10.

      We're caught between Religious Fascist Devils greedy for a false God, and Secular Corporatist Demons greedy for a buck (which is their own vesion of a false God).

      The middle path is the way...secular or religious, it doesnt really matter. Children must be given the freedom to be, the freedom to explore, the freedom to choose, and the freedom to grow.  I KNOW, from all of my experience on this planet, that compassion, empathy, reasonable boundaries, safety, and explicit (developmentally appropriate) education is the ticket to healthy kids.  This is our only path forward, all the others are terminal.

      by Orwell1984 on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 11:01:59 PM PDT

      •  Billboard

        I was driving home today and saw this billboard, a girl, boy, and a father sitting on a couch holding signs saying things like "I'm hungry," and "When are we eating."  It was an add for a beef company, obviously pitched to female drivers on their way home to cook dinner for the family.

        Now was there some reason why the man in that picture was just sitting on the couch while his kids were begging for dinner? But of course, only women cook the dinner. It was disturbing. So many signs of regression these days.

        by wakingup on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 11:11:00 PM PDT

  •  The guy in PA doesn't fit, though.

    I speculated early on how this guy might be wired, and I wasn't far off.

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    The 'revenge' angle seemed to be a misinterpretation by the media. But we've since learned that indeed there was nothing in his known past to suggest this. I don't think you'd find that he had a grudge, either outwardly or otherwise against women, per se.

    My guess based on what we've since learned is that he had overbearing and not-emotionally attached parents. The early molestation stemmed from something at home. Maybe molestation toward him, but not necessarily. Preying on youth is usually a power and control issue (which is why molestation breeds itself). Sounds like he worked very hard to control it in the intervening years - all without assistance. Nobody in his family knew of the incident. I doubt he went to therapy either for it - that would have raised questions.

    The death of his newborn tossed one of his coping mechanisms out the window - his faith. That was 9 years ago, though - 23 at the time. Something must have happened in the last few weeks to trigger this. He's 32 with 3 kids. Odds are that at least one is a girl in the age range he targeted. Some event - probably nothing that anyone took note of - likely triggered this. His demons ultimately got the better of him. Amazing that given what he ultimately was prepared to do that he didn't give into it in a lesser way earlier. There doesn't seem to have been a ramp-up in behavior - he went from nothing to a million miles an hour in one step. But the bits that came together to cause this probably wouldn't make a lot of sense to anyone else but him - there were essentially no warnings.

    What I don't get is why he did it the way he did. It was VERY premeditated. The school wasn't just targeted because it was close, but because it was an Amish school. He had a plan - no security, no phone, no cellphones on anyone there - that bought him time. One road leading to the school was closed only on that day for bridge repairs - that would delay the arrival of the police - more time. He clearly didn't plan to get out of there alive, so I wonder why he didn't just off himself and spare the girls.

    That part hasn't clicked yet. Maybe he was out to do harm to women, but that's not usually how it connects - not to girls that age.

    by johnsonwax on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 10:07:18 PM PDT

    •  I read

      (and it disgusts me just to write this) that he was possibly planning on molesting the Amish girls before killing them.

      by tryptamine on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 08:38:56 AM PDT

      •  That's why he made the decisions he did.

        He was buying as much time as he could get before the police showed up. There are at least 3 decisions that he made specifically to buy him time. Molesting them was definitely the primary goal that day.

        And that's what I just don't get. Why give in to those demons if you know that you won't live out the day? He wasn't irrational - he planned rather well. It's almost as though he sought to do violence to truly innocent people for revenge against God for the loss of his first child.

        It's just a horrifying event in every way. Totally unpreventable, in the safest place you could be, against the least likely targets, doing the worst kinds of things. For some reason, this has really rattled me. Maybe because I used to live near there and have a daughter now - I'm not sure. But I haven't been this disturbed by an event since 9/11.

        by johnsonwax on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 09:45:35 AM PDT

•  I agree

  There is nothing that sets off a repressed individual faster than a woman (or a man) who won't conform to tranditional, expected gender roles.

  I also would agree that conservative America's aim is, in part to opress women. Also some parts of the "liberal" media do it too. Popular magazines and TV engage in this perpetual obsession with beauty as if women aren't complete human beings unless they look like images that are likely airbrushed or of very unhealthy people.

  The result? Women with perpetual low self esteem. Certainly not the kind of people who are ready to stand up for themselves and demand rights, huh? Think that result is an accedental side effect? I don't.

  by Mikesco on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:06:59 PM PDT

  •  Aw c'mon Mike.

    Not all of us have low self-esteem.

    by tryptamine on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 08:37:09 AM PDT

•  The drives for sex and violence

  are closely located in the brain.  The lizard brain.  The deep brain.

  Males, for some reason, are much more violent than females.  And for some reason males are more likely to combine sex with violence.  Both sex and violence heighten awareness, though for entirely different reasons.  Which may explain the confusion.

  It should come as no surprise that a sexually confused male would sort out females.  I would just assume that all of their sexual frustration is directed toward their inability to relate in a normal fashion to females.

  I may be wrong, but I don't think I am.

  by Ghost of Frank Zappa on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:08:40 PM PDT

  •  So why aren't men allowed out unshackled?

    Just wondering.  

    by KateCrashes on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:11:06 PM PDT

    •  Because women aren't strong enough

      to shackle us.?

      Hey, I don't make the rules.

      by Ghost of Frank Zappa on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:13:01 PM PDT

    •  Because...

      ...our sexist society would rather tell women to be very afraid at all times, not to go out at night, always have a friend with you, and marry big, scary men who will protect you from the other big, scary men.

      by metal prophet on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:13:20 PM PDT

  •  Though, there may be something to your thesis.

    Because Republicans are quite repressive when it comes to sexuality.  I'm convinced that repressed sexuality contributes to violent sexuality.

    by Ghost of Frank Zappa on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:11:40 PM PDT

    •  Violence? Sometimes.

      Sometimes just inappropriateness. It doesn't matter how hard you try and stuff that jack back in the box, it always finds some way to get back out.

      by johnsonwax on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:44:29 PM PDT

  •  I see this...

    ....as another case of male entitlement. Many men are raised with the belief that women are inferior, that women should "know their place," that women are sex objects, and that men are entitled to do what they'd like with women. Some guys overcome this. Other guys take the misogynistic messages society sends to them to heart. These are guys who feel like they are entitled to rape a woman. Naturally, they don't think of it as rape. If some woman rejects them, they feel like they're justified in using violence, even fatal violence against her. This killer in Amish country (and in those other places) was just the most extreme example of violent misogyny.

    by metal prophet on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:18:10 PM PDT

  •  women have lizard brains too

    There's more to it than that.  What's curious to me is that men, far more than women, have this fetishistic thing about sex and killing - e.g., Dahmer and his freezer full of body parts.

    The serial killer thing and the barging-into-schoolrooms-bristling-with-armaments thing appear to be exclusively male activities.

    by hrh on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 10:43:19 PM PDT

    •  women's lizard brain says: eat. snuggle. n/t

      by LNK on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 11:00:50 PM PDT

      •  Um, no.

        As the owner of one of those brains, I can unequivocally say that that is not true at all.

        by tryptamine on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 08:35:24 AM PDT

•  I think there is such a huge

  gap between the constitutional freedoms (finally) extended to women and the societal (religious) view of women that some people cannot reconcile the two. It just doesn't make sense to them.  Personally, I say it's time to chuck the Bible.  Forget Jesus Camp, how about Constitution Camp?

  by buddythedog on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:09:34 PM PDT

  •  how about Constitution Camp?

    Do it.

    by Demena on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 01:49:38 AM PDT

•  It has always been thus with males...

  how many millions of women (more than three) were burned at the stake in the Middle Ages, for being strong, for being educated, for being independant. Who was the lone female member of the library of Alexandria who was dragged from her chariot and flayed not long before the library was burned? Carl Sagan "Cosmos". Men don't give a damn about fetuses. They are far more interested in sex and death than in life. But what better way to control women than to control their reproductive processes? Are women suffering from Stockholm Syndrome? There are more woman than men in this democracy. Why don't they just outvote us?

  by Eirik Raude on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:57:43 PM PDT

•  Myth of the Boy Crisis

  Of course it doesn't help that every step women take forward becomes the excuse and the scapegoat for failures of men.

  by breakingranks on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 10:29:40 PM PDT

•  The fact that these attacks

  happened in a university classroom and in school classrooms is interesting to me.

  It seems to me that if a psycho guy just wanted to kill a bunch of females, there are plenty of easier options, e.g., a shopping mall or a beauty salon.  Why a school?  I think there's a deeper meaning to that.

  by hrh on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 10:59:01 PM PDT

  •  Hate crime. Maybe schools because

    more orderly than malls, etc.

    Sitting ducks, too.

    Now, if only we could find a way to reach out to these very troubled people before their problems and craziness go out of control.......

    by LNK on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 11:03:07 PM PDT