This was the third case where a woman was murdered in Minnesota in recent months after getting an order for protection. One of the others was in October right before the Minnesota Men's Action Network conference on engaging men in the prevention of sexual and domestic violence.
These cases highlight the absurdity of those who blame victims of domestic violence for staying rather than blaming those who choose to be violent for their actions and for their choice to stay and abuse or to hunt down victims who do leave.
I view these murders as a big deal and each one is a reminder that preventing domestic violence is an urgent need. My opinion would be the same if the murderers in those cases had been women and if all the victims had been men.
This latest crime reminded me why it is so important to call out MRA propaganda which makes excuses and baseless accusations while they seek to undermine current protections for victims of domestic violence and to block any effort which might have saved the lives of these murder victims.
In response to my post An Alienated Man the man in question, Gogonostop, responded to the official intimate partner murder statistics which show that women are murdered at a significantly higher rate than men with a comment which was a massive MRA propaganda piece complete with links and therefore rejected. In light of these recent murders it is important to highlight comments which accompanied that propaganda.
We do not know if men are more likely to be the murderer, for this reason: women are more likely to use poison or hire a contract killer, which is not registered as intimate partner homicide, but as a murder/heart attack, or a multiple offender/multiple assailant homicide. Furthermore, there are many more unsolved murders of men each year than women. Not only that, intimate partner homicide is a very rare occurrence - less than 1500 in 2005, according to BJS stats. A problem? Yes - but not epidemic.He uses baseless conjecture to minimize the confirmed murders of more than a thousand women each year in the US while declaring that all unsolved murders of men and all deaths of men not identified as homicides must be viewed as possible intimate partner murders. This is sloppy methodology but is positioned as more credible than all the scientific research he rejects.
Notice also that in this speculation that men are by default positioned as never hiding the murders they commit and are positioned as never hiring a contract killer. Since it is very easy to find proof that men do commit murder in these ways, pretending they don't exist is either deliberate dishonesty or a sloppy disregard for the murder of women.
I don't know what the statistic is for wives and girlfriends who have disappeared with no credible indicators that they are still alive, but if every remotely possible murder is what should be measured then all those missing women must be counted.
His definition of very rare is interesting. When MRAs can find far less than these numbers for anything they view as harming men, such as false police reports claiming rape or abuse or a man exonerated for a rape or murder someone else committed, they don't call that very rare and don't say, "A problem? Yes -- but not epidemic."
In another rejected comment Gogonostop called feminism a "false accuser's lobby" in part for not requiring the dismissal of all testimony of those who report domestic abuse without corroboration. As this latest case showed, the corroboration too often comes in the form of murder.
In support of this accusation he wrote:
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution: "No state shall...deny to any person the equal protection of the laws."The problem with this is that the corroboration requirement seeks to explicitly deny most victims of domestic and/or sexual violence equal protection under the law. If lack of corroboration violates people's constitutional rights as he alleges it does then corroboration must be required for all sworn testimony from everyone.
Labels: Violence Against Women