I realize i have been neglecting this blog for a while (i have recently been neglecting the internet in general, too). Today, though, i read a post about violent crime prevention over at Feministing that i thought was worth mentioning.
Instead of tackling the real causes of violent assault (such as poor anger management skills; underlying misogyny, homophobia, or racism; a lack of respect for oneself or one's environment; etcetera), the majority of our crime prevention programs focus on the victim. Self defense classes, exhortations to women not to dress 'provocatively' or drink too much alcohol, and other advice, while valuable, place the entire burden on potential victims to avoid attacks. Who speaks to the perpetrators? The criminal justice system might roll into action after the attack happens, but what about before?
The Feministing post brings attention to an article published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune that discusses a recent university crime prevention program: "Instead of teaching women not to walk alone at night or to carry Mace, some colleges are trying something much harder -- changing college men." The quotation that really stood out to me was:
"The fact of the matter is that prevention comes down to, largely, males. Because males are primarily the ones perpetrating these crimes," said Lauren Pilnick, sexual violence education coordinator at Minnesota State University, Mankato.
Why does this sound like an epiphany? It shouldn't, should it? I know it isn't one to me, but why has it taken so long for people to understand this?
I don't have any answers to my questions, so i'm trying to decide if this article pushes me further along my road to misanthropy or makes me take a step back.
Recent Comments