By Stephanie Van Hook (syndicated through PeaceVoice)
***
When reading about the murders in Newtown, Connecticut on Friday, one point in particular stood out to me as a woman: Adam Lanza killed his mother. This point reveals something essential about the nature of all violence and gives a clue as to why these horrific events take place. For though it is reported that Nancy Lanza taught her son how to shoot a gun and she believed in guns for “protection,” in order to kill a mother, you have to learn how to hate her. In order to learn how to hate one person, you learn hatred itself. My hope is that with the call for more responsible gun laws we might in the same courageous breath witness the misogyny of his act because it provides a key for unlocking any sense of “mystery” of how this could have happened and understand that women are often on the receiving end of hatred, however subtle or however much of an “aside” it might seem. This is an important point, I think, because if we are to rid ourselves of misogyny we have to trace it to its root cause; and when we do we find ourselves striking at the root of all acts of such violence.
Here’s what I mean: At a conference in North Carolina I had the opportunity to meet Nobel Laureate Leymah Gbowee of Liberia. A champion of women’s rights and girls’education, she galvanized a women’s movement in the 1990s in Liberia to end the civil war. Her story is well documented in the film, Pray the Devil Back to Hell. In describing women’s experiences surrounding the war, she noted that full violence would correlate with growing misogyny. She recounted the times when women would walk through their towns and hear comments such as “I can’t wait for the war to start again, and I’ll rape her.” And the women were raped—by neighbors, friends, family members, sometimes with weapons, sometimes by groups. As she tells these stories, one after another of the lives of women in a violent environment, it becomes clear that we have to pay attention to women’s lives, to small acts of hatred directed at women, growing into outright misogyny, because its logical outcome in extreme cases is murder.
Can we deny that the United States is growing in misogyny when we hear ridiculous statements by politicians our fellow citizens have helped to elect about women’s bodies and rape—statements that frequently require several “corrections” before the message happens to condemn all rape? Can we deny that the music filling the earbuds of today’s youth is full of lyrics and images that portray women as little more than their ability to perform sex acts? This marginalization is in not only in our schools and universities, our religious institutions, our popular culture; step inside more than a few households and we find women in unbalanced and unhealthy situations where the husband is consuming violent porn and he judges his wife for putting on weight or not cleaning the bathroom. Listen to the children who still expect their mothers do their laundry or wash their dishes for them but who cannot be moved from the TV screen and video games that teach them how to aim rifles domestically and wage war internationally at “enemies.” While mom turns to medication for stress, the son concludes that women are just “moody” and somehow inferior.
Misogyny has made its home in our minds. A joke about women here, a justification for rape there, a sexist comment here, a violent film here, a degrading song there. One day, we find that our minds are alienated not only from women but from ourselves and our environment.
I know a young man, a father of two. His Facebook page is full of memes which, as a woman, I would say humiliate and insult us and are a bad example to his children; he might say that they are funny, or harmless. Far from it. Another gentleman I saw in Santa Rosa, California was wearing a tee-shirt with the words across his chest “I have the [ fill in an explicit word for a male organ] so I am in charge.” He bought his ice cream, then got into his car and drove out into the world to spread that message wherever he went a little louder that day. To have it on a tee-shirt, he must have felt it was really quite harmless or funny. Or, he knew it was harmful and thought it was acceptable to offer harm in that way. If he doesn’t have a family, this man at least knows women and was born to one.
Misogyny is not funny or harmless any more than racism: it’s serious, even deadly. It’s a warning signal of more violence on the way. When we catch it, we can heal it.
With a culture that silently, and sometimes not so silently, communicates disrespect toward women, children might grow up taking for granted, in spite of our best efforts to the contrary, that it is acceptable to choose women as targets as they act out whatever violence is within them. That woman might be your mother, daughter, sister, friend or classmate. She might be you. This is not a call to find new ways of “protecting women” that draw upon an old masculinized paradigm of security. It’s a call for authentic transformation in the way we understand security from one based on domination, hatred and othering to one based on upholding our natural integrity as people in constant relationship with those around us. If, as gun advocates say, “guns don’t shoot people, people do” we really need more responsibility around guns and more education around gun safety. But let us integrate that part of the picture with an understanding of what drives a person to shoot a gun: hatred, fear and othering. Without addressing or even seeing these poisons at work, gun laws alone will never do. Nancy Lanza taught her son to use guns responsibly. It didn’t work. So what happened?
The first person Adam Lanza killed was his mother. We can choose to see this as another banal detail of yet another horrific act of violence or we can realize that it warns us to address not only our hopelessly inadequate gun laws but misogyny and other underlying conditions of such violence.
***
Stephanie Van Hook (Stephanie@mettacenter.org), Executive Director of the Metta Center for Nonviolence (www.mettacenter.org), is a feminist.
***
[…] Stephanie Van Hook notes Adam Lanza first killed his mother, From Misogyny to Murder: A Feminist Perspective on the Connecticut Shootings. […]
Yes, I totally agree with what you are saying here. Thanks for posting it, as I will share on my facebook page too and circulate it to friends.
I also want to make the point that these shootings are almost exclusively by boys…and understanding the glorification of violence and the hyper-masculine expectations for young boys puts so many of them in utter despair with fear and self-loathing. The boys who are teased and bullied in school because of their lack of so called “masculinity”, are the ones who end up shooting up schools. No coincidence there.
I’m sure you’ve heard or read about Jackson’s Katz’ work and his wonderful film “Tough Guize.” It couldn’t be more appropriate.
Thanks again for all your wonderful work,
Kathe Latham, Ph.D
Transition Greensboro
Initial Working Group
check this out
terrific article, excellent points….from a male reader.
I am also in total agreement with your essay, Stephanie, and with Kathe’s remarks about the “masculinity” that is expected of boys and men in our culture.
I think also that a very important part of the picture is the violence perpetrated by US imperialism that is routine and invisible to most. I heard Obama talking about how unacceptable the Newtown killings were, but as Commander in Chief he is responsible for routine drone attacks in Pakistan and elsewhere that often leave “collateral damage” of dead mothers, fathers and children, severely wounded innocent people, and whole villages of utterly traumatized children and others.
Why is that horror and trauma not as “unacceptable” as the horror and trauma caused by Adam Lanza? Is it just because we don’t come into contact normally with those people? That they are a different nationality? A different color?
While completely agreeing with your remarks about misogyny–and I think it is a very astute point you make that Adam’s mother taught him to use guns for protection but that did not stop him from committing the unthinkable atrocity against her, which had to come out of hate–we should also focus on the example set by our national policies and actions that routinely discount life and commit many murders; and certainly, self-defense has nothing to do with these policies and actions.
Thank you for writing your essay, Stephanie. It has really made me think more deeply about misogyny in our society, and I believe you are right.
Very Powerful Essay Stephanie!
Thank you for helping me put this together:
Male dominance=Penis=Gun=Regulation-is-emasculating-and-therefore-wrong
Female strength=Vagina+Breasts+Womb=Regulation-will-keep-women-subordinate-and-is-therefore-crucial
One major difference between men and women is what happens when the amygdala is is engaged. The amygdala is the most primitive (“reptile”) part of the brain, and it launches into action during stressful situations. When the amydala engages, the brain releases hormones that process fear, alerts us to danger, and switches on the rest of the body. Back when the amydala was invented, a “stressful situation” was being chased by a saber-toothed tiger. Nowadays, “stressful situations” include things like seeing a black teenager walking across a parking lot carrying a package of Skittles. The situation is different, but the amydala still reacts to it as if it were a saber-tooth tiger attacking. When the amygdala is fully-engaged, it is virtually impossible to reason with because it takes over the whole body.
The amygdala in men’s brains is larger than in women’s. It also produces testosterone receptors that heighten responses, providing a biological reason for why men compete with each other more aggressively than females and why men can quickly escalate situations and enjoy the fight. The more testosterone produced, the more reactive, unthinking, and aggressive a man’s response to stress will be.
A woman’s amygdala produces testosterone, too, but the testosterone flood is mediated by the production of oxytocin, a calming hormone that helps the panicky/reactive amygdala listen to the neocortex, the part of the brain that reasons. This means that, in a stressful situation, women are more likely to choose a “tend and befriend” path, rather than to rush, unthinkingly, into a “fight or flight” response. That’s why, even if women were as fiercely armed as men, “counterattack” might not be women’s instinctive reaction to an attack; a woman might be more likely to herd her loved ones into a closet and use her own body as a shield.
Men who are trained to use firearms — soldiers, police — are likewise trained to control their panic in stressful situations to reduce the likelihood that that will fire into crowds of people in a blind rage. The reason the “Stand Your Ground” laws are so scary to me is that they basically affirm that acting like an unthinking primitive creature is a good “excuse” for shooting someone in cold blood.
Along with the factors you list in your terrific essay, I think that one reason men are the mass killers is that men’s brain wiring makes them more likely to act aggressively (than women do) when they’re stressed, and our lax gun safety laws make it easier to them to take their aggression out on a lot of people very quickly when they’re in that state.
Men’s wiring makes it more difficult for them to regulate their emotions in the first place. Then we, as women and men — complicit in raising up our boys to a manhood that esteems patriarchy and advocates the suppression of “connective” feelings (tenderness, compassion, nurturing) while lauding the expression of “hierarchal” feelings (rage, revenge, domination) — stack the cards against their being able to make healthy decisions.
Other countries have many guns, watch violent movies, play aggressive video games, aggrandize male dominance. What they don’t have is Fox News, which, along with our other media outlets — most of which are owned by one of six big media conglomerates — feeds its viewers a relentless diet of fear and anger, keeping that poor amygdala in a constant state of arousal.
We teach our young men not to drive while impaired — don’t drive drunk, don’t drive tired, don’t drive mad — but there is no such education vis-a-vis firearms because the whole purpose of a gun is to hurt/kill someone in an emotionally stressful situation.