« Douglas Bowman asks "Who/Where Are the Women?" | Main | flying »
December 08, 2003
The Montreal Massacre
From the comments to the previous post, a reminder of the anniversary of the Montreal Massacre:
The case study on the Montreal Massacre over at gendercide.org has more details. Also, the story from the CBC News Archives.
Posted by Gina at 03:50 PM in Events | Permalink
Comments
This is too weird. Were you on Undernet #political last night? Because I was and someone brought this up!
One thing it makes me wonder about: why were none of the men, including the male professor, willing to stand up to the guy? I know it would have meant that one person would have been killed, perhaps, but the sacrifice would have saved several lives.
The mean comment someone made on the channel in response to this thought was that we were dealing with engineers -- men who were largely in the field for the money they could make from it. Selfishness trumped community responsibility.
Posted by: Joel at Dec 8, 2003 6:47:58 PM
Gina, thanks for posting on this. I should have, but frankly, it wouldn't have been heard.
Joel, why were none of the 'people' willing to stand up? Threats should be met by a determined people, not just men. This has nothing to do with the men there, I don't understand why you brought this event around, this event, to what the men should have done.
These women died because one man blamed his difficulties on them, and their 'infringement' of what he perceived to be his male perogative. Though we, their sisters, are not under this horrible threat, we're still under that same barrier of male priviledge. Except that the men we face aren't insane, they're just determined. They don't shoot us, but they shut us down.
If only we could honor these women's memories -- the memory of all women oppressed -- by showing that things are different. If only.
So let's remember this event, but can we please, for once, focus on the women?
Posted by: Shelley at Dec 8, 2003 11:07:51 PM
With all due respect, IMHO I don't think Joel's comment was quite so deliberately gendered. It was the men who were taken from the room and the women left behind -- so it is fair to ask in this case, why did the men do nothing? The answer I think is basic human nature -- it happened quickly, the students were undoubtedly in severe shock, and finally, it takes great courage to decide you will be the one that will sacrifice your own life for others, especially people you may not know very well. Would you, any of you reading this, have intervened, in their place? I doubt I would have been able to, if I were a man.
And just to be somewhat provocative -- I do think one must remember that usually the opposite happens in hostage situations -- the women are released and the men are shot. Also, there are far more men killed by other men then women by men (or men by women, or women by women). Indeed, we can be thankful that events such as this -- where women have been deliberately targetted en masse in a group killing-- have been extremely rare.
While recognising the full horror of this event and of violence to women in general, I worry about taking a single, loathsome event and seeing it as representative of a more general societal stance. This kind of massacre was extreme and I, for one, cannot accept it as a metaphor for broader male/female relationships or for other oppressions linked to gender. Just my personal stance. May the victims of this terible shooting be remembered and honoured and rest in peace.
Posted by: Karlin Lillington at Dec 9, 2003 9:21:09 AM
The reason why the men didn't stand up for the women is simple.
The women were all probably going out with econ majors and didn't give the time of day to any of the engineers.
What goes around comes around.
Posted by: Julius at Dec 9, 2003 7:59:02 PM
Julius, I *totally* know what you mean. I remember this girl I liked in college wouldn't go out with me. I didn't feel bad about it all when I shot her.
Posted by: Stewart Butterfield at Dec 9, 2003 11:00:34 PM
That's dumb, because in your hypothetical, you're sacrificing your own life (either in the electric chair, or behind bars) just to take hers.
In the above situation, the men are choosing not to sacrifice their own lives in order to save the lives of people who don't like them anyway.
The two situations are complete opposites.
Posted by: Julius at Dec 10, 2003 12:01:22 AM
Most likely the men didn't do anything because they couldn't sort out what was happening. Having a gun pointed at you is a powerfully confusing experience.
Posted by: Teresa Nielsen Hayden at Dec 10, 2003 12:22:44 PM
I'm not thrilled with all the bashing of the male students as "engineers". Without any evidence that a different group of men would react differently, I think these criticisms are unfair to people who probably sincerely regret their lack of action (whether it was due to cowardice, or shock, or a belief that the women wouldn't be shot).
When we ask men to treat us like equals within our professional lives, the traditional responsibility of men to "protect women" falls away. I expect no more courtesy and assistance from a man than he would give to a less strong male collegue. Had the situation been reversed, and the women had been asked to leave and did, I doubt anyone would have questioned their decision.
I will remember the event, will honour those women, and will attempt as much as I can to change the world we live in until gender truly is not an issue within our careers.
Posted by: trish at Dec 11, 2003 3:21:13 PM
The question why someone didn't intervene to stop the massacre is a good one. The best explanation that comes to mind is the oppressive Quebecois gun control laws. If the laws provided for concealed carry lives could have been saved.
Massacres are bad, so bad that we should try to understand what happened and why. The normal way to understand why things happen is to look for things of the same general type and find common factors. Massacres of women are rather uncommon. On the other hand, massacres of people with names like Bergeron or Klucznik by people with names like Mohammed Atta, John Mohammed (the Washington sniper), or Gamil Gharbi (the name M. Lepine went by until he was 18) have been rather common in recent years. So how should we classify the Montreal Massacre -- a massacre of women by a man or a massacre of Westerners by a resentful Muslim?
Posted by: Charles Martel at Dec 13, 2003 9:43:05 PM
Shelley, what in my post makes you believe that I don't believe in honoring the women's memories?
Posted by: Joel at Dec 14, 2003 12:08:57 AM
The point is, no one could have changed the outcome of this tragedy. If the guns laws where different, this phyco would of come up with a different way to kill them. If those guys wheren't engeneers, the same thing would've happened. Even if those people where some sort of super-athletic people, chances are, they wouldn't have been able to act against a gun. When someone points a gun at your head (from a distance so you can't reach him and fight back) and tell you to leave, your going to leave, I don't care who you are.
Although this guy was obviously pissed off at women, everyone has to realise and get it into their head for the last time that this is only ONE guy and not EVERY MAN ON THE PLANET. In our age, women and men are as equal as they will probably ever be.
This event is very tragic and honestly makes me sad for how stupid some people's actions are. This cost many people their lives for no reason. But just because it was the women who died, I don't want to hear people's stupid complaints about how women are controled and treated unfairly by men (based on this incident). Any vulgar comment towards men from this event is irrational, and quite frankly, ignorant.
Posted by: Lucas at Jan 6, 2004 11:34:26 PM
i cant believe someone could actually do that to another human being. i dont understand what drove Marc Lepine into doing something that dimening to women. all women should have the same rights as men do. what makes men different or better then us? what people don't realise about Marc is that he had mental problems. many things had happened in his life that lead up to his breaking piont. the only thing i dont understand is how he had the nerve to do that to 13 innocent women.
Posted by: sara at Dec 1, 2004 6:46:51 PM
It wasn't the the man had "the nerve" to do that to the women he attacked. He hated women, the same as a racist hates people of colour, the same as homophobics hating gays, the same as all hate hate hate. It's completely lodged in our society and it's tragic and sad and horrible.
Everyone is a part of society and therefore everyone has a responsibility, not only to not be violent or hateful, and not only to not laugh at racist/sexist/etc jokes, but to educate themselves and the people around them.
I think the situation would have been horrifying for the men at the school. I don't think they didn't do anything because they resented the women in any way. They didn't know what to do. They were afraid. Maybe they didn't think the man was going to kill the women. It's impossible to speculate on the exact situation and on what each man was thinking during the attack. But it is possible to draw the links between the mysogyny of our history and our present society and that attack. "I hate feminists". This man's motives were clear. It was an attack on women. All women are affected by violence against women and all women are targets.
How many more women have to be raped, beaten, harassed, attacked, put down, abused or murdered before we figure out that there's a serious and undeniable problem in the mindsets of the people in our society, in ourselves?
Posted by: shmoo at Dec 3, 2004 3:29:03 AM
"So how should we classify the Montreal Massacre -- a massacre of women by a man or a massacre of Westerners by a resentful Muslim?"
Marc Lepine said that he hated feminists, and while I have no knowledge of where his hatred for women stemmed from and perhaps his dislike for feminists was rooted in his religious beliefs, to turn the classfication of a gender based crime into a fundamentalist religious and cultural one is simply perpetuating stereotypes and this circle of hate. Has it ever occurred to you, Mr. Martel, that pehaps these "resentful Muslims" don't appreciate the assumption that they, as Muslim men are inherently violent or that they oppress the women in the society? Now, I don't wear a burka and I enjoy the freedom to walk unaccompanied by a man, I am also not the product of a society in which such behavior is expected. Modesty isn't a terrible thing and there are many Muslim women in the diaspora who wear Burkas and other clothing that covers more than much mainstream fashion today because they (not their husbands) agree with ideals promoting modesty. There are so many stereotypes within "western" society today stemming from orientalism that much of the time we don't even notice them. But it is these stereotypes, just like most stereotypes, that fuel racism and cultural wars. Educate yourself before you attempt to throw religious and racial weight behind issues unrelated. (for more information on Orientalism, as defined by Edward Said, go here)
Don't undermine the severity of gender-motivated violence by proposing reasons based on racist beliefs and untrue stereotypes. (please, don't take this as me accusing you of being racist, I have nothing upon which to base that accusation. Rather, the foundation of many widely-held beliefs similar to the one you proposed are racist in nature. This is not a reflection of you personally, but rather the society we are all part of, and thus all responsible for and to.)
Posted by: Jo at Dec 7, 2004 3:50:37 AM
That was a bunch of bull crap. Marcs got big balls to do that.
Posted by: Michael Malin at Jan 1, 2005 12:34:27 PM
This man came from a society where Donkeys are considered a higher class than women. Instead of banning guns, let's ban middle easterners.
Posted by: Joe at Feb 18, 2005 3:53:02 AM
Some men did do something about it. A rarely mention fact is that Lepine shot and injured 4 men who risked their lives trying to stop him.
I've been trying to find the names of these fellows for a long time but can only usually find reference to 4 injured men.
BTW: a male, off-duty paramedic also tried to help the victims. He later committed suicide over his experience that day. He's rarely mentioned in reports.
http://www.nst.com.my/Weekly/yquake/Friday/Anything/20031212144312/Article/index_html
Posted by: Cory at Jul 8, 2005 6:47:48 PM
