Body Politik: School Shootings Target Women By Denise Brunsdon
It’s time to start facing facts. When school shootings occur, it’s usually women who die.
I’m tired of feeling like a bitch after tragedies simply because I’m more angry than I am sad. Below is a poignant letter from The New York Times, published October 5, that is a far clearer explanation than I’m capable of writing as to why I’m so viciously pissed off.
To the Editor:
In the last five and a half weeks, five schools in the United States and Canada have suffered the invasion of gunmen: Aug. 24, Essex, Vt.; Sept. 13, Montreal; Sept. 27, Bailey, Colo.; Sept. 29, Cazenovia, Wis. And now, Oct. 2, Nickel Mines, Pa.
In four of these five incidents, the gunman targeted girls and women.
At what point do a country and its news media note this lethally combustible cocktail of gender and guns?
Men and boys with guns are stalking and hunting women and girls in schools repeatedly. Until we see “the gun problem” as equally a problem of violence against women, nothing will change, and I fear that the mourning and shock will continue.
Daniel Moshenberg
We’ve talked about trench coats, video games, and gun control. Let’s talk about the elephant in the room, gender-based violence.
Recognized as a serious problem in all parts of the globe by the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations, women’s organizations, and academics, statistics abound to prove its prevalence and its acuteness. According to the UN, around the world as many as one in every three women has been beaten, coerced into sex, or abused in some other way.
But too often gender-based violence focuses on domestic violence. Domestic violence is one subset of gender-based violence, and triumphs or hindrances in the fight to end domestic violence don’t equal triumphs or hindrances in the fight to end all gendered violence.
Just as talking about specific forms of gendered violence cast too narrow a focus on one aspect of the problem, so does harping on statistics. The statistics put forward by the UN and WHO are clear, and having validated their existence, we must understand what they mean, and focus on how to improve them. In other words, we’ve got to stop talking and start acting.
Never one for the blame game, I believe the key lies in a system of accountability between the government, the media, and the public. Each must be responsive to the actions of the other two.
Firstly, more citizens such as Mr. Moshenberg need to hold the media accountable in their coverage and analysis of violence, be they in schools or elsewhere. During last year’s shooting sprees in Toronto, for example, far too little discourse addressed the issues of poverty and lack of opportunity leading to the gang violence.
Similarly, citizens need to hold the government to account in their treatment of gender inequality in our country. Eradicating the fear of, or discrimination toward a particular gender will go a long way toward eradicating the violence. In Canada, much of the criticism has been directed toward lax gun control policy, but little protest followed this month’s cuts to Status of Women Canada (SWC) or the removal of promotion of “equality” from SWC’s mandate.
Finally, we must all remain vigilant in our fight against gendered violence, and for gender equality. As with any rights, they must not only be obtained, but constantly defended.
The minute we let news coverage ignore the gendered affects or meanings of current events, or the minute we let the government put gender equality on the backburner, is the minute we begin to lose equity rights.
A frightening example of this is in the words of Diane Watts, a representative for the conservative, anti-feminist interest group REAL (Realistic, Equal, Active, for Life) Women Canada.
“I think we’re seeing a bit of fresh air,’’ she proclaimed following the reduction in funding and mandate of SWC. “Times are changing.’’
Well I think this fresh air stinks.